I'm looking for some opinions from the DM Hive Mind.
So in last night's session, the Monk of the group wanted to use his Quarterstaff to trip up an Animated Armor and make it prone. From a Monk point of view using a preferred weapon, I could see that as a possibility. Though time was running short I used the basics for the "Shoving" rule for the Tripping Rule.
As a refresher
Shoving a Creature
Using the Attack action, you can make a special melee attack to shove a creature, either to knock it prone or push it away from you. If you're able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them.
The target must be no more than one size larger than you and must be within your reach. Instead of making an attack roll, you make a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target's Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). You succeed automatically if the target is incapacitated. If you succeed, you either knock the target prone or push it 5 feet away from you.
So fundamentally the rule could work as a Shoving action masked as Tripping. Though with a Monk it could easily be a combination of 'Tripping', Prone target (if it misses their check) and then Bonus Action Unarmed Strike taking in the prone conditions of advantage on the attack roll.
So my question is am I interpreting the quarterstaff 'Tripping' action accurately and is there any thoughts of could this be abused against humanoid (large or smaller) sized creatures.
Rules as written, a shove doesn't use your weapon, so no, the monk doesn't get their bonus action unarmed strike. They're not attacking with a monk weapon or unarmed strike when they shove.
Rules as fun, it's hardly game-breaking to allow them to shove prone with weapons you think are well-suited for that. I house rule grapples and shoves as technically being unarmed strikes so that monks get their bonus action in my own games. Many monk players intuitively expect the two to work together, and if it sounds perfectly reasonable and doesn't make your encounters less fun, why disappoint them over a bit of legalese?
Rules as written, a shove doesn't use your weapon, so no, the monk doesn't get their bonus action unarmed strike. They're not attacking with a monk weapon or unarmed strike when they shove.
Rules as fun, it's hardly game-breaking to allow them to shove prone with weapons you think are well-suited for that. I house rule grapples and shoves as technically being unarmed strikes so that monks get their bonus action in my own games. Many monk players intuitively expect the two to work together, and if it sounds perfectly reasonable and doesn't make your encounters less fun, why disappoint them over a bit of legalese?
Thanks. I appreciate the feedback. I came down to paralysis by analysis and making sure I was looking at the rule correctly before I tried to make up my own rule/interpretation. I'm getting back into the game from taking many years off from 5e so I'm trying to get the rust off and hoping as more games are played my reasoning to rules becomes more solid.
I do like your unarmed rule with grapples and shoves and it may be something I consider adopting for what my player was attempting to do.
First, shove is absolutely the rule to use. It specifically says you knock someone prone, which is tripping them. Im not sure about the question, though. If it was just a flavor thing, then certainly it’s fine. Did the monk want to use an attack roll in place of an athletics check?
The problem I’d have with it would depend on the kind of monk they are. Open hand monks have a subclass feature that lets them (attempt to) knock a target prone whenever they use flurry of blows. If this is an open hand monk, it’s a power they already get, as long as they are level 3. If it’s not an open hand monk, I’d be hesitant to give them goodies from a different subclass — which would be in addition to what they can already do. It would be double-dipping. I’m not worried about them offending other monks in the party, I just don’t like the idea of giving features from multiple subclasses.
First, shove is absolutely the rule to use. It specifically says you knock someone prone, which is tripping them. Im not sure about the question, though. If it was just a flavor thing, then certainly it’s fine. Did the monk want to use an attack roll in place of an athletics check?
The problem I’d have with it would depend on the kind of monk they are. Open hand monks have a subclass feature that lets them (attempt to) knock a target prone whenever they use flurry of blows. If this is an open hand monk, it’s a power they already get, as long as they are level 3. If it’s not an open hand monk, I’d be hesitant to give them goodies from a different subclass — which would be in addition to what they can already do. It would be double-dipping. I’m not worried about them offending other monks in the party, I just don’t like the idea of giving features from multiple subclasses.
This is a 1st level Monk at the time he was trying to trip up an Animated Armor. His reasoning to perform this action was not 100% clear but he was curious about the principal idea of using the Quarterstaff as a tripping mechanism. I had forgotten about the Shove action so I said at the time he couldn't do that BUT I would research for him and see if there was a valid rule or something that could be housed. Hence here I am getting everyone's opinion.
Based on the feedback I think I'm going with the Shove action but the flavor of using the Quarterstaff as the means to either knock the target prone or the back peddle five feet and not allowing unarmed bonus attack.
The Shove maneuver doesn't require an empty hand, so it's entirely legal with a staff (in fact, it appears to benefit from reach with a reach weapon, though that isn't relevant to a monk unless you're a kensai using a whip), but it's not a strike so you cannot make a bonus attack with Martial Arts unless you have multiple attacks and your other attack triggers the requirement. You can, however, use Flurry of Blows, as that merely requires you take the attack action, with no restrictions on what attacks you can use.
The Shove maneuver doesn't require an empty hand, so it's entirely legal with a staff (in fact, it appears to benefit from reach with a reach weapon...)
This is a pretty big leap of logic. It doesn't require an empty hand because you can literally just ram into someone to shove them. The shoving rules never even mention using a weapon, so that's strictly up to the DM to allow. If the DM says it's ok, then you could benefit from your weapon's reach.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Forum Infestation (TM)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm looking for some opinions from the DM Hive Mind.
So in last night's session, the Monk of the group wanted to use his Quarterstaff to trip up an Animated Armor and make it prone. From a Monk point of view using a preferred weapon, I could see that as a possibility. Though time was running short I used the basics for the "Shoving" rule for the Tripping Rule.
As a refresher
So fundamentally the rule could work as a Shoving action masked as Tripping. Though with a Monk it could easily be a combination of 'Tripping', Prone target (if it misses their check) and then Bonus Action Unarmed Strike taking in the prone conditions of advantage on the attack roll.
So my question is am I interpreting the quarterstaff 'Tripping' action accurately and is there any thoughts of could this be abused against humanoid (large or smaller) sized creatures.
Rules as written, a shove doesn't use your weapon, so no, the monk doesn't get their bonus action unarmed strike. They're not attacking with a monk weapon or unarmed strike when they shove.
Rules as fun, it's hardly game-breaking to allow them to shove prone with weapons you think are well-suited for that. I house rule grapples and shoves as technically being unarmed strikes so that monks get their bonus action in my own games. Many monk players intuitively expect the two to work together, and if it sounds perfectly reasonable and doesn't make your encounters less fun, why disappoint them over a bit of legalese?
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Thanks. I appreciate the feedback. I came down to paralysis by analysis and making sure I was looking at the rule correctly before I tried to make up my own rule/interpretation. I'm getting back into the game from taking many years off from 5e so I'm trying to get the rust off and hoping as more games are played my reasoning to rules becomes more solid.
I do like your unarmed rule with grapples and shoves and it may be something I consider adopting for what my player was attempting to do.
First, shove is absolutely the rule to use. It specifically says you knock someone prone, which is tripping them.
Im not sure about the question, though. If it was just a flavor thing, then certainly it’s fine. Did the monk want to use an attack roll in place of an athletics check?
The problem I’d have with it would depend on the kind of monk they are. Open hand monks have a subclass feature that lets them (attempt to) knock a target prone whenever they use flurry of blows. If this is an open hand monk, it’s a power they already get, as long as they are level 3. If it’s not an open hand monk, I’d be hesitant to give them goodies from a different subclass — which would be in addition to what they can already do. It would be double-dipping. I’m not worried about them offending other monks in the party, I just don’t like the idea of giving features from multiple subclasses.
This is a 1st level Monk at the time he was trying to trip up an Animated Armor. His reasoning to perform this action was not 100% clear but he was curious about the principal idea of using the Quarterstaff as a tripping mechanism. I had forgotten about the Shove action so I said at the time he couldn't do that BUT I would research for him and see if there was a valid rule or something that could be housed. Hence here I am getting everyone's opinion.
Based on the feedback I think I'm going with the Shove action but the flavor of using the Quarterstaff as the means to either knock the target prone or the back peddle five feet and not allowing unarmed bonus attack.
The Shove maneuver doesn't require an empty hand, so it's entirely legal with a staff (in fact, it appears to benefit from reach with a reach weapon, though that isn't relevant to a monk unless you're a kensai using a whip), but it's not a strike so you cannot make a bonus attack with Martial Arts unless you have multiple attacks and your other attack triggers the requirement. You can, however, use Flurry of Blows, as that merely requires you take the attack action, with no restrictions on what attacks you can use.
This is a pretty big leap of logic. It doesn't require an empty hand because you can literally just ram into someone to shove them. The shoving rules never even mention using a weapon, so that's strictly up to the DM to allow. If the DM says it's ok, then you could benefit from your weapon's reach.
The Forum Infestation (TM)