Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General A case for shove as a bonus action

As with all things, this is an open forum, and everyone here is entitled to hold and to voice their own opinions on matters. I wasn't really seeking to debate with you, or convince you - I was just illustrating to you the ways in which your suggestion was a non-starter, so that, if you felt so inclined, you could improve upon it. You're free to think what you want, but do not be surprised if you find no traction.

You say you don't really know how it would work, and how it would play into or affect balance of other things - take your own admission to heart, and work it out, before pushing for an idea and maintaining that it is good. You might discover that it's not, and then be better able to amend it, or start over with something better.

You admit that your suggestion results in something with more steps than it needs to have - So why put it forward in that state? Fix it before putting it forward... if it is clumsy and inelegant, and has excessive steps, then fix it and get it right before arguing for it... or be prepared to take on board and listen to others pointing out why it isn't acceptable.

You say that weight of a character should account for their gear and pack - maybe so, that doesn't change the fact that bringing character weight into the equation in the first place is a terrible and needless move that adds complexity without benefit to the entire suggestion, and which runs counter to 5e's design philosophy to begin with.

You suppose that your dual ability score requirement would limit the usefulness of shove to only specific niche circumstances... but you're apparently failing to see why that's a bad thing, and not at al a good way of reducing or limiting its value. Moreover, you're not acknowledging that it means that anyone who wishes to have any hope of successfully shoving anyone at all, needs to have BOTH good strength, AND good Dexterity, in your suggestion - which is not a realistic ask, especially not for competency at a standard combat action.

You suggest that maybe players could choose whether to shove prone or to shove away, as a solution to the complaint about the variable outcome with very different effects that, in your suggestion, would be out of the player's hands... but you're pushing back against simple 5e rules for shove, which include exactly that; player choice.

You seem stumped at the contention that you can't realistically miss with a shove - as a justification for your multi-layered checks - The fact is, you are NOT going to miss a shove. That is not within the practical realms of possibility. They are there, and you are there, and you are shoving them; you're not going to simply miss them. Either they will resist your attempt to shove them, OR they will avoid the force of your shove, by ducking out of the way in some fashion... You will not 'Miss'; your target will respond to counter you. That's why it's an opposed check. Armour Class is not the correct stat to be using for something like this. These are just facts about the way the system is designed.

No, 5e rules are not what we have in BG3 currently; BG3's shove throws enemies miles away, and you also cannot choose to knock prone. It is coded to work 100% of the time fully effectively if you shove from hiding; it doesn't care about size category - you can shove anything, as long as it has not been given independent specific shove immunity, which in BG3 is a thing that some creatures have been given. Shoving characters only appear to use strength, not athletics, when shoving, and it's deeply unclear what defenders use, but it certainly does not seem to be using the target's best choice between athletics or acrobatics, and of course, Shove in BG3 is a bonus action, not an attack action... So in short, Shove in BG3 only very vaguely, and distantly, resembles 5e shove; it's just like it, except for being different from it in almost every single comparable way.


So, again, you are very much free to think and believe as you please - I was only offering some supporting information to your efforts.

Edit: Having had a night's sleep and not being over-exhausted now, I do wish to say that I apologise if this post comes off as overly condescending - it's not my intention to take that tone.