Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback SHOOOOOOOVE

Yeah I think the issue I'm thinking is more the fact that an 11th level Fighter can do 6 whatever attacks with Action Surge before the target gets to react. 6 attacks or 6 5' Shoves is a lot of actions. Or 15' Pushing Attacks.

With how surprise works in BG3 currently and with how abundant Haste potions are.. that can amount to 12 attacks before the enemy gets a turn if you win initiative. It's not about Shove anymore.

Hold up. This is how Shove is supposed to work:

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.

Note: 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). If you win the contest, you either knock the target prone or push it 5 feet away from you.

So it doesn't matter how many Actions you get, you can only Shove once per round. Once again, WotC thought of these things. If they'd just actually implement it, Shove would not be broken in BG3. Again, it was never meant to be that a player, like me currently with my present Barbarian Dwarf playthrough, could go through the game only shoving and throwing and killing everything. You shouldn't be able to Throw an intellect devourer over the railing of the top deck of the nautiloid, sending it flying 20 feet-ish before plummetting to the deck below, and it was certainly never meant to allow me to shove a thrall 10 feet to the railing, another 20 feet across a staircase leading up, and then over THAT railing on the far side of the staircase from the lower deck over the railing of the nautiloid to send a thrall plummeting into the Hells. In other words, I should NOT be able to yeet a fully grown butt human being 30+ feet so that he flies over two railings from an upper deck over a lower deck and off a ship to be a one-hit KO.

If they would implement the proper 5e rules, Shove would be exactly what it was meant to be - a useful combat option for:

1. Shoving creatures on the very edge off the edge.
2. Shoving creatures prone so melee allies can get Advantage on their attack roll.
3. Shoving creatures 5 feet so they are no longer within melee attack range of an ally so that ally doesn't have to disengage. They can, instead, Dash to get away (because the prone person must spend movement to stand, so even if they Dash also they can't catch up), or they can move away and still attack without initiating an Attack of Opportunity.

That's pretty much it. I'm sure there are maybe a few more creative things you could do with it, but being that it should only be 5 feet at most per round (because you can only Shove once), it keeps Shove from becoming, even at higher levels, a tool to shove people endlessly until you push them off cliffs or into lava pits.

As for Throw, the rules state:

Battle often involves pitting your Prowess against that of your foe. Such a Challenge is represented by a contest. This section includes the most Common Contests that require an action in combat: Grappling and Shoving a Creature. The GM can use these Contests as models for improvising others.

So, Larian implementing a Throw system especially for Barbarians, makes sense and is well within the confines of the RAW 5e rules. However, the implementation should be something similar to Grapple.

When you want to grab a creature or wrestle with it, you can use the Attack action to make a Special melee Attack, a grapple. If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this Attack replaces one of them.

So, again, only once per round and it is an Attack Action, not a Bonus (but Larian is already doing that, so at least that's good).

The target of your grapple must be no more than one size larger than you and must be within your reach. Using at least one free hand, you try to seize the target by making a grapple check instead of an Attack roll: a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target’s Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you succeed, you subject the target to the Grappled condition (see Conditions ). The condition specifies the things that end it, and you can release the target whenever you like (no action required).

Soooo, it is VERY similar to Shove. You make the same exact roll to initiate it, and both should cost an Action so you cannot do both in the same turn UNLESS you get multiple Actions per turn such as with Action Surge or if you are a higher level and get more than one Action per turn. It doesn't say you can either Shove OR Grapple, it just says you can only do each one once per turn. So, it makes sense that at higher levels, or if you're a fighter, you might be able to do both in a single turn by expecting 2 Actions. Thus, again, there's a difference between being a Rogue and a Fighter. If it is an Action, the Fighter can do both in a single turn, but a Rogue can't, which makes sense.

Now, I won't get into the rest of the Grapple rules because we're talking throw here. Notice that it says that you can "release the target whenever you like (no action required)." This would imply that you can Throw something you're grappling without expending an action on the same turn you did the Grapple. Therefore, the Improvised Weapon rules would apply.

This is what the Improvised Weapon Rules state:

Sometimes Characters don’t have their Weapons and have to Attack with whatever is at hand. An Improvised Weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, OR A DEAD GOBLIN.

That would mean that a living goblin should apply as well, right? It then continues to say:

Often, an Improvised Weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM’s option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her Proficiency Bonus.

So, you would NOT use Proficiency Bonus when throwing a goblin or other creature. They do not resemble weapons.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object).

So, when throwing a monster, bludgeoning type makes the most sense for most creatures since you aren't likely throwing a sharp creature.

If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee Attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.

This does NOT differentiate between throwing an axe or throwing a goblin, BUT this calls for common sense. You can certainly throw a 2-3 pound axe further than a 40-45 pound goblin. So, if you can throw an axe 20 feet, and receive disadvantage beyond that to a max range of 60 feet, and a goblin is at least 10 times heavier, you should probably only be able to throw a goblin 5 feet before receiving disadvantage and 10 feet max. I would then also say that it makes sense that you can only throw a creature that is of the same size category as you.

Now, smaller size categories, I could see that for both Shove and Throw, one could implement a tweak to the rules and say that if you are shoving or throwing a size category smaller, you should be able to shove or throw an extra 5 feet. So, human shoves halfling, they go 10 feet instead of 5. Human throws halfling, they can throw them 10 feet to a max of maybe 15. 15 even seems too much to throw a 40-45 pound creature, so 20 feet seems way too far. Tiny creatures could maybe be thrown 20 max or maybe even 25.

I can even see the argument for higher strength, greater distance, but it should be more for creatures/characters with +4 or more strength. Like maybe every +4 of Strength Modifier, you gain an extra 5 feet to Shove distance and Throw distance. So, character with 0 Strength can only shove 5 feet, but character with +4 Strength can shove 10, etc.

That way, creatures with super high strength and large, like ogres, could conceivably throw goblins and halflings and such a considerable distance. Normal throw is maybe 10 feet max. Because they are throwing 2 sizes smaller, they can throw an additional 10 feet for a total of 20 feet. Then, because their strength is +4, they get another 5 feet added for a total of 25 feet (maybe 30). That makes sense. Ogres throwing goblins in barrels 100 feet from the ground up onto a 30 foot high wall, doesn't make a lot of sense. If they were maybe right up to the wall, that would make more sense.

All this to say, once again, that they wouldn't have to get rid of Shove or Throw. They'd just need to tweak the rules a bit that they've already implemented to make them less OP. Nerf distance to 5 feet for shove and make it an Action you can only do once per round. Also add Prone option. Then, for Throw, keep relatively as is but limit the distance you can throw AND apply No Proficiency when attempting to throw one enemy into another so that the Ranged Attack roll is without Proficiency. If beyond a range of 5 feet, Disadvantage should apply to the attack roll so that it is hard to throw a goblin 10 feet into another goblin. Not only would you NOT be proficient, you would gain Disadvantage. Making it possible, but not 90% chance of success like it is now.

Then, if you hit, both take 1d4 damage only. Like an Improvised Weapon, you don't add your Strength or Dex bonus to the roll. 1d4 is it. And if you don't throw an enemy into another enemy, the thrown enemy still only takes 1d4 damage. Bludgeoning.

THAT should fix both mechanics and make them less OP and more of a fun supplement to standard combat mechanics - keeping it well-balanced without all this shoving into lava pits or off nautiloids business.

You are incorrect in both cases. Shove and Grapple replace ONE of your attacks, and they are not capital-A "Attack Actions." They are attack-equivalent actions, which is a separate thing.

When you take the Attack Action, you are allowed to make X attacks depending on your class abilities. E.g., a level 5 fighter can take 2 attacks with a single Attack Action due to their Extra Attack ability. Each of these lower-case-a attacks can be replaced with a shove or grapple attempt. So a level 5 fighter can make 2 attacks, one attack and one shove/grapple, or two shove/grapples.

If this fighter has an additional capital-A Action (Action Surge), they can again take the Attack Action, which will give them another 2 attacks in this case for a total of 4. A level 4 fighter, however, only gets one attack for every Attack Action, so if they had 2 Actions they could only make 2 attacks/shoves/grapples.

tl;dr: According to 5e RAW, you can make as many shove/grapple attempts as the # of attacks you have. It is not limited to 1x per round.

I have over 200 hours gameplay of BG3 and how could shove possibly be the problem that is reported here+ I have never seen anything close to it. Sure AI uses it a few times but it's really really not that much. Just use better positioning if you want to avoid getting pushed into lava, really. It adds a new tactical layer whcih is just good, and the AI definitely doesn't spam it like you make it seem, or I'm playing a whole different game.

If I am standing 30 feet or more from an edge, and I get shoved off the edge with one shove, and that shove throws me into lava for a 1-Hit KO, that's broken. And, again, this was with Lae'zel, the one who should be able to resist Shove the most.

I've had members shoved off ledges in the Underdark by Drow Mages, 30 feet or so to the edge and then another whopping who knows how much all the way to the bottom near the Torchstalks area from the Spectator Zone.

I am literally doing a playthrough with just Shove and Throw, and I shoved the Bugbear about to attack Nadira, the pink-haired Tiefling, from where you meet Nadira all the way down to where Orm the bear is fishing on the beach, some 60+ feet of distance, killing him, naturally.

And, interestingly, I just got done with several attempts to Shove/Throw against Harpies. I will say, this battle, solo, is not really possible. Well, actually, I almost succeeded in it because of glitchy Luring Song where once the harpies start singing they just sit there and do nothing else. I was able to shove around only one harpy at a time because the other three were singing.

That said, IF my Barbarian was slightly stronger, like Lae'zel strong, I could probably lift the harpies and throw them around, so even this battle, I believe, is possible to win just by throwing people and enemies.

On another note, and I will post this in the appropriate thread as well, I am now all for Camp Kill Tiefling Children. Why? Because I am able to use Mirkon, the boy tiefling down by the river with the harpies, as an Invincible throwing projectile. I throw him, he dies. He is immediately resurrected. I throw him again. He dies. He is immediately resurrected, free of charge. In fact, the harpies killed him and I resurrected him by throwing him at a harpy, dealing damage to him, and bringing him back to life while damaging the harpy.

Resurrection by throwing! Now that's a new one.

Anyway, if I can do fairly well with one character against four harpies just by throwing and shoving, that's, again, broken. Imagine if I just had a party of 4 running around shoving and throwing the whole game. Nothing would stand in our way.

BG3's new Title: Throw/Shovefest 2023!!!

I think I'm done with the shove/throw run. It's seriously getting tedious and boring, and I think the point is made already. Over and over again, I can literally just shove/throw my way through the game and need nothing else.

OK. Had to do more research on that one. I found several sights that said what I did, but apparently Jeremy Crawford said something else to clarify the issue.

Yeah, that wasn't worded particularly clear. See, I and others took it to mean, "If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this Attack replaces ONE of them," meaning only one of your attacks during your Attack Action can be a Shove/Grapple. Not that you could replace ALL of them if you want with Shove/Grapple. So, if you have 3 attacks total per Attack Action because you have Extra Attack, you can shove 3 times. I have not been playing it that way, but I guess it makes sense. If you can swing a sword 3 times, why not shove someone 3 times?

That makes the need to limit shove range and throw range even more important. If at later levels I can throw 3 or more - or shove 3 or more - enemies 30 feet or more in the same turn, off cliffs or ledges into lava or down hundreds of feet to their deaths, that is going to make Shove/Throw even more ridiculous. Yeah. That's REALLY bad game design. As it is, someone with 3 Attacks per Action can shove someone 15 feet if they succeed in pushing them back 5 feet per attack. BUT, at least that makes sense. You become a tough enough fighter and you too can shove someone 15 feet in 6 seconds.

Again, no one is asking to remove Shove, just to balance it. The complaint is exactly that positioning doesn't help as it should because the distance is so over the top. And from an offensive point of view, combat revolves way too much around shoving your enemies and luring the clueless AI to ledges for easy wins. Or waiting for them to walk on a bridge you can collapse like they were made of paper. The exploits are too easy and too powerful to be interesting tactically.

I find the fact that the bulk of the argument that is actually taking place here is: "I want BG3 to adhere as strictly as is computer-ly possible to the 5e rules as written," versus "I like some of the things Larian made that aren't according to 5e," extremely important. It tells me that the simplest and best solution for Larian would be to make "strictly 5e" a game setting, one that can be slid on and off. Then both audiences are happy. Adjusting the existing Shove, Throw, and spell casting mechanics to fit with strict 5e RAW cannot be that difficult. The fact that there are essentially just two different viewpoints here: "I like the non-5e stuff," and "I don't like the non-5e stuff," is the most clear indication that these two audiences are the audiences that bought this game. There's really only one way to keep both happy. The question now is, does Larian care enough about both segments of their consumer audience to do what's necessary to make them both happy?

Probably not. In his own words he only bought into DnD to expose more people to his other games by introducing them to his ideas, not to make an actual DnD game of any ruleset flavor. It is a choice. An unfortunate choice, imho. But a choice. I bought the game strictly because of the Baldur's Gate and DnD promise. Not because I enjoyed D:OS (Which I did D:OS 1, but not so much D:OS 2.)

Joe

This is not the argument. Many people (myself included) are not arguing for 5e rules for the sake of it; we are arguing for 5e rules in certain cases because we think those rules are better balanced/more fun/more interesting than Larian's homebrew rules. See @1varangian's post above where his arguments are based in improving game balance, reducing exploits, and more focus on tactical combat, rather than "it should match 5e rules because."

Personally, I'm fine with Larian homebrew as long as it's implemented well. E.g., I'm like the concept of special weapon attacks that give martial characters more options. High Ground giving a +2 bonus is good. BA Shove would be ~fine if it was restricted to 5 feet and Throw would be less egregious if you didn't have a 100% chance to pick someone up.

The simplest solution (besides leaving the game as-is) may be for Larian to make a "strictly 5e" game setting, but the best solution is for Larian to make a game where any changes from 5e are balanced and improve gameplay, rather than being vastly overpowered and/or cheesy. 5e definitely has problems as a rule system that BG3 could fix.

If I had to split the player population into 2 categories, I'd split it into players who want a immersive tactical gritty game, vs those who want a more fun, whimsical, power-fantasy game. Both are completely valid desires for a game, but yes satisfying both populations might require different difficulty modes (or a plethora of difficulty sliders).

Good point. I suppose I did boil down the "balance this so it isn't awful" argument into, "make it more like 5e." I guess in my head making the primary targets of argument more like 5e would balance them. You're right, though, there is definitely a distinction. Sorry I muddied that.


Again, very salient clarification of the point I was trying to make. Certainly not everyone who wants changes is coming at those changes from a strictly "5e or nothing" mindset. Your estimation of the two large umbrella categories of consumers of the game smacks of the largest truth. It still, though, speaks of the truth that there are two fairly disparate consumer audiences of this game, and in its current iteration, Larian is alienating one of those audiences. Maybe the game is targeting the only audience they ever really cared about? Maybe basing the game on 5e setting lore and ignoring a whole bunch of the mechanics was their plan all along, hoping, for no other reason, than to tap into the hugely growing population that is the D&D 5e player base. If that's the case, I'll be more than a little upset, because I feel like there will have definitely been a bait and switch sales tactic undertaken for maximum profit.

This sums up very well my opinion about mechanics like shove or dipping (still not sure about throwing because it hasn't look OP in my playtrough... though I haven't tried a lot tbh).
I'd love to use shove more often. But I never use it because it's always a too easy and OP option...

Great points.

Joe

^_^ Thanks @Temohjyn and Joe
I don't think Larian maliciously or greedily decided to work on this game for the D&D brand-money alone (obviously money is at least partially the reason; they are a company after all). I think they were excited to create their take on an Adventure in the Forgotten Realms. They were always intending to change some mechanics, which by itself isn't a bad thing. And honestly I'm not sure they even really knew what audience they were targetting - when they released BG3 EA, so many players tried to buy it that Steam crashed for a couple hours. I don't think Larian was anywhere near prepared for that level of excitement about BG3.

That said, this EA process - Larian's responsiveness and their decisions - have been fairly disappointing. And I agree that Larian does need to choose (if they haven't already) what genre/tone/seriousness level of game they're going for, or decide what is needed to please both. But until that conclusively happens, I'll keep providing feedback. Some things have been toned down after all, so there's hope!

Meh. I think at this point it is pretty much a distinction without a difference in his eyes as is made clear in how he has designed the game. If he were honest it would have been titled "Something XX... inspired by Baldur's Gate, Forgotten Realms, and DnD 5-ish". That would have been cool and clear. Maybe he could have called it "Hairless Fence", a "Remembered Lands" adventure based on the game Tunnels and Trolls.

Joe

This. This right here. Exactly.

You are absolutely right.

The level of exaggeration about how bad Shove is has reached a comical level, in my opinion. It's not unbalanced or game breaking.

To listen to some of these folks, I'm surprised they ever finished getting off the Nautiloid, much less defeating Nere.

Of course, in my opinion, the anti-shove stuff is all nosebleed hyperbole and rhetoric.

You're making this unnecessarily tribal. Please don't.

Okay, this is a legitimate question, and I'm being completely sincere.

The comments against shove keep getting repeated. I can point out the same exact people saying the same exact things over dozens of posts over the last year alone.

How can I respond that I think those comments are off-base and exaggerated without coming across as tribal? I'm really sincere here. I'm not trying to be tribal. I'm trying in full faith to express an honest opinion.

In the meantime, I get personal attacks telling me I don't even believe what I'm saying. I've made several points, even going so far as to outline a chronological series of encounters and showing that shove isn't terribly effective in those encounters. In return, no one has tried to counter my points. They've simply presumed my motive and said that I'm arguing for the sake of arguing.

In other words, I get the sincere feeling that people here can shit on me all day long, but if I disagree, I get accused of being tribal.

Again, I'm not trying to be combative. I'm 100% sincere.

It becomes pretty dodgy to talk about "correct positioning" when occasionally freaking half of your battle arena puts you in a spot where you are vulnerable to being YEEETED half a football field away, down a precipice or thrown into a lava pool.

Thank god GRYM has yet to master the art of shoving players, otherwise his fight wouldn't last two turns.