Grapple and Shove are actually both described as a "special melee attack". RAW you can make a single melee attack as an opportunity attack, so go ahead and grapple
Grapple and Shove are actually both described as a "special melee attack". RAW you can make a single melee attack as an opportunity attack, so go ahead and grapple
You grapple as part of an Attack action, not a reaction, so no OA grapple RAW.
1) a grapple is an Action (capitalization intended), a shove is an Action (capitalization intended), disarm just uses a weapon attack (no capitalization); an attack of opportunity is a reaction. So: you can't grapple as an attack of opportunity (nor as a readied action).
2) the PHB is in need of a rewrite with technical terms being more clearly defined (bolded / italicized, whatever!) and clearly stating which technical term is being referred to while explaining rules, with sidebar examples. Other games do this. Hopefully this is what happens when they reissue the rules in 2024.
1) a grapple is an Action (capitalization intended), a shove is an Action (capitalization intended), disarm just uses a weapon attack (no capitalization); an attack of opportunity is a reaction. So: you can't grapple as an attack of opportunity (nor as a readied action).
This isn't quite right. Both Grapple and Shove are defined as "special melee attack" that you can make in place of an attack when you take the Attack Action. An Opportunity attack allows you to make a melee attack using your reaction. The Ready Action lets you choose an Action to do at a later time.
So readying an attack action to make a grapple/shove is allowed but doing a grapple/shove with your opportunity attack isn't.
AFAIK there is no feature that would allow you to turn your opportunity attack into a grapple/shove (like how Warcaster allows you to cast a spell in place of the melee attack). IMO it would make for a good addition via a Feat or class feature.
2) the PHB is in need of a rewrite with technical terms being more clearly defined (bolded / italicized, whatever!) and clearly stating which technical term is being referred to while explaining rules, with sidebar examples. Other games do this. Hopefully this is what happens when they reissue the rules in 2024.
Yea the whole rules system could do better in that respect. Having clear terms for all base rules that other rules/concepts can refer back to would help a lot.
Rules simplification is something I can totally endorse. An attack is an attack is an attack, whether it's a regular attack on your turn or a reaction/opportunity attack. By allowing all of the above it would open up a lot more options and interesting tactical play to martials. Spell casters already have an edge, especially at higher levels, and adding in war caster just makes it that much more apparent: Hold person, Command, suggestion...just to name a few already open up a whole series of options not allowed to martials in any way shape or form. I think it's dumb and unnecessary so I allow it in my games.
1) a grapple is an Action (capitalization intended), a shove is an Action (capitalization intended), disarm just uses a weapon attack (no capitalization); an attack of opportunity is a reaction. So: you can't grapple as an attack of opportunity (nor as a readied action).
This isn't quite right. Both Grapple and Shove are defined as "special melee attack" that you can make in place of an attack when you take the Attack Action. An Opportunity attack allows you to make a melee attack using your reaction. The Ready Action lets you choose an Action to do at a later time.
So readying an attack action to make a grapple/shove is allowed but doing a grapple/shove with your opportunity attack isn't.
AFAIK there is no feature that would allow you to turn your opportunity attack into a grapple/shove (like how Warcaster allows you to cast a spell in place of the melee attack). IMO it would make for a good addition via a Feat or class feature.
2) the PHB is in need of a rewrite with technical terms being more clearly defined (bolded / italicized, whatever!) and clearly stating which technical term is being referred to while explaining rules, with sidebar examples. Other games do this. Hopefully this is what happens when they reissue the rules in 2024.
Yea the whole rules system could do better in that respect. Having clear terms for all base rules that other rules/concepts can refer back to would help a lot.
Honestly, if they just updated dndbeyond to do what you just did with your comment where every technical term is linked to what its referring to, that would pretty much cover it. reading through the combat rules right now, a few like 'incapacitated' are linked, but thats about it. itd clear up pretty much all of this discussion and a bunch of others, honestly
If you think about it a turn in 5e takes 6 seconds during which time available attack actions are taken .a grapple is a full attack action that can be augmented by characters abilities to perform additional actions on their turn . An opportunity attack is a reaction and therefore a single action and therefore one that does not allow a full attack action . Shove and disarm are more complicated and should be left to the DM to judge. Disarm would more often be not possible as an opportunity attack often fulfills the criteria of its predecessor, the fleeing attack. the reason sage advice says that a held attack is an exception to this is presumably because the instigator can set theirselves to perform the action, much like a wrestler .
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
D&D vet. Played and Dmed since 1982. Got mountains of stuff for 2e and 3.5e . Skipped 4e as no one wanted to play it. Now back running a 5e campaign with the original group back together which includes my wife.
Top character f/mu/cl 19/21/10 high elf Demi power(earned properly!) 2e called Astrarn Mindsinger.
now have a tabby cat called Astrarn (not in the pic) and use Mindsinger as my gaming handle
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This, exactly.
Grapple and Shove are actually both described as a "special melee attack". RAW you can make a single melee attack as an opportunity attack, so go ahead and grapple
You grapple as part of an Attack action, not a reaction, so no OA grapple RAW.
All very interesting. My conclusion is twofold:
1) a grapple is an Action (capitalization intended), a shove is an Action (capitalization intended), disarm just uses a weapon attack (no capitalization); an attack of opportunity is a reaction. So: you can't grapple as an attack of opportunity (nor as a readied action).
2) the PHB is in need of a rewrite with technical terms being more clearly defined (bolded / italicized, whatever!) and clearly stating which technical term is being referred to while explaining rules, with sidebar examples. Other games do this. Hopefully this is what happens when they reissue the rules in 2024.
I would not allow any of those as an opportunity attack, only a single melee weapon attack, per the rules on opportunity attacks.
This isn't quite right.
Both Grapple and Shove are defined as "special melee attack" that you can make in place of an attack when you take the Attack Action. An Opportunity attack allows you to make a melee attack using your reaction. The Ready Action lets you choose an Action to do at a later time.
So readying an attack action to make a grapple/shove is allowed but doing a grapple/shove with your opportunity attack isn't.
AFAIK there is no feature that would allow you to turn your opportunity attack into a grapple/shove (like how Warcaster allows you to cast a spell in place of the melee attack). IMO it would make for a good addition via a Feat or class feature.
Yea the whole rules system could do better in that respect. Having clear terms for all base rules that other rules/concepts can refer back to would help a lot.
Rules simplification is something I can totally endorse. An attack is an attack is an attack, whether it's a regular attack on your turn or a reaction/opportunity attack. By allowing all of the above it would open up a lot more options and interesting tactical play to martials. Spell casters already have an edge, especially at higher levels, and adding in war caster just makes it that much more apparent: Hold person, Command, suggestion...just to name a few already open up a whole series of options not allowed to martials in any way shape or form. I think it's dumb and unnecessary so I allow it in my games.
Honestly, if they just updated dndbeyond to do what you just did with your comment where every technical term is linked to what its referring to, that would pretty much cover it. reading through the combat rules right now, a few like 'incapacitated' are linked, but thats about it. itd clear up pretty much all of this discussion and a bunch of others, honestly
If you think about it a turn in 5e takes 6 seconds during which time available attack actions are taken .a grapple is a full attack action that can be augmented by characters abilities to perform additional actions on their turn . An opportunity attack is a reaction and therefore a single action and therefore one that does not allow a full attack action . Shove and disarm are more complicated and should be left to the DM to judge. Disarm would more often be not possible as an opportunity attack often fulfills the criteria of its predecessor, the fleeing attack.
the reason sage advice says that a held attack is an exception to this is presumably because the instigator can set theirselves to perform the action, much like a wrestler .
D&D vet. Played and Dmed since 1982. Got mountains of stuff for 2e and 3.5e . Skipped 4e as no one wanted to play it. Now back running a 5e campaign with the original group back together which includes my wife.
Top character f/mu/cl 19/21/10 high elf Demi power(earned properly!) 2e called Astrarn Mindsinger.
now have a tabby cat called Astrarn (not in the pic) and use Mindsinger as my gaming handle