dnd-5efeatsmagic-items
I am currently playing D&D 5E and have the Shield Master Feat. I was wondering if I could use all of the Feat's abilities while having the Animated Shield floating around me.
The shield leaps into the air and hovers in your space to protect you as if you were wielding it, leaving your hands free.
I know that it counts as wielding it for Unarmored AC calculations, I just cant figure out if it counts for the spell dodge and shove/prone bonus action.
The Animated Shield says that it
protects you as if you were wielding it.
This strongly implies that you aren't wielding it.
The Monk's Unarmored Defense feature works
while you are wearing no armor and not wielding a shield.
So the use of an Animated Shield shouldn't interfere.
As for proficiency, the only requirement for using an Animated Shield is that you're attuned to and holding one, so this shouldn't be an issue. There is an argument against this, though:
The Animated Shield protects you as if you were wielding it.
Luckily, wielding a shield with which you're not proficient doesn't affect how it protects you; all it does it give you a bunch of penalties to other things.
Since the Animated Shield "protects you as if you were wielding it", and doesn't "give you penalties as if you were wielding it", this isn't an issue.
By strict rules as written, you are correct. The feat is written poorly and has been discussed ad nauseum on the official Paizo forums, with many folks arguing both sides. There are two factors to consider that allow you to clarify the intent of the feat.
First, removing all penalties to hit provides an overly large benefit in comparison to other feats. Most GMs would agree that this is clearly out of line and would not read the feat this way or allow players to use it in this fashion.
Second, (and perhaps more importantly) there is a feat table in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook where this feat was originally printed. I've provided a tiny excerpt of the table below, where the Shield Master feat is listed (pg 116 in the 5th printing). You'll note that the condensed benefit for the feat is listed as "No two-weapon penalties when attacking with a shield". While this benefit description is by no means the be-all-end-all rules source for the feat, it does clarify the intent of the author.
For the two reasons above, it is likely that this feat was only intended to remove the two-weapon penalties when attacking with a shield along with another weapon (options 2 and 5 from your list above).
EDIT: Thanks to SevenSidedDie for bringing to attention the fact that we also now have an official FAQ Answer on this topic which reads:
Shield Master allows a character to ignore the Two-Weapon Fighting penalties on attack rolls with a shield while wielding another weapon, but not any other penalties.
Best Answer
As if
The “x will happen as if y were true” construction is used several times in the rules, to lay out specific cases for a rule to come into effect. In all these cases, a particular thing can be done as if a prerequisite were true - but that prerequisite remains false.
Anything not specifically covered in the “as if” statement remains covered by the general rules.
Jeremy Crawford tweet calls out the “as if” statement in his clarification that it is possible to use feats/abilities that tie into the "as if" statement:
Spell Dodge and Bash: A Split Decision
Protect is not a well-defined term in the rules, so I would rely on its everyday definition: keeping you from getting hurt.
If you were wielding the shield, you could protect yourself from spells (since you have that feat). So the animated shield can enable Spell Dodge.
Shoving or bashing is not, strictly speaking, protecting yourself (your vice principal never accepted that, and neither to do I). So the shove/prone bonus action cannot be used through animated shield.
Further Reading: Examples of “as if” in the rules
I get my understanding of the “as if” clause from other cases in the rules, including the following examples.
For darkvision, the two cases are carefully laid out.
D&D Basic Rules, p. 4
The rules don't say, “for a monster with dark vision, darkness is dim light, and dim light is bright light” — because that would equate darkness with bright light.
An elf can see in darkness as if it were dim light, but it doesn’t make the area dim light. Creatures (including those with darkvision) that have powers which works in darkness can use them, whether or not someone can see them. Darkness doesn’t “become” dim light for an elf, only the specific case of vision is affected.
For multi class spell users, the as if clause covers two cases that are delineated: spells known and spells prepared. The other facets of the spell casting rules (spell slots, etc.) are described elsewhere in the section.
PH, page 164