is Polearm master just stupidly good?

[Merudo]

Familiars, shoving prone, and (for melee attacks) Mounted Combatant come to mind.

E.g. you could do Sharpshooter, Crossbow Expert, Prodigy (Athletics) and Elven Accuracy for Dex 18-20 by Fighter 12. Shove somebody prone with Athletics +10ish, then fire three attacks into them at trivantage for 40-50 points of damage, and optionally Action Surge another three attacks for a total of 80-100 damage.

If you want to do this at level 8 you need someone else to do Athletics work, but teamwork is a good thing.

Without Elven Accuracy your damage in this situation will go down a bit to probably the 35-45 range.

Thank you for your advice. Elven Accuracy does make a nice feat to get at level 12+ for a fighter. I'm less convinced of its value for other classes though, as they tend to be more starved for feats.

The main problem I see is that Elven Accuracy is typically not a priority for most ranged characters: Crossbow Expert & Sharpshooters are so amazing, plus you typically need an extra feat to secure advantage. So you often get Elven Accuracy very late - meaning you spend 2 points to start at 17 dex instead of 16 with no advantage until high levels. The alternative is to spend the 2 points elsewhere, and get potentially higher stats for most of your adventurer's career.

I'm aware you play higher level characters than most so that might not be a problem for you, but for many others, Elven Accuracy will only kick it at the very end of a campaign, if at all.

I'll add that my original message was in response to Millface suggesting that Elven Accuracy should be taken instead of PAM, which I find even harder to justify mechanically.

Technically true but not universal. No magic item exists without the DM's permission. When the DM is ready to hand out magic weapons to the party, if a PC has been using a glaive or halberd since the game started there's no reason for a DM forever to deny a magical one even beyond a mere +#. It may or may not be based on the iconics of holy avenger/frost brand/sun blade, but it could still be something nice.

The point is the existence or not of magical pole arms in published works is not a strong argument on the strength or weakness of Pole Arm Mastery feat.

In my experience most DMs either stick to official published content, or use the "Sane Magical Item Prices" guide on this site. Neither has cool magical Halberts or Glaives to offer.

Frankly, I don't think it's fair to expect the DM to create homebrew content just to ensure your already above average PAM + Sentinel build dominates in all circumstances.

It's well known that polearm users tends to be min-maxers. DMs typically tweak the rules to bring the unoptimized PCs up to par with the other players (i.e. Ranger/Sorcerer tweaks); they often are reluctant to change the rules just so the munchkins become even stronger.

[Pex]

Ah good catch, especially sense wording is so important in 5e. I would still use "make" for two reasons.
First because it would only be used with the the attack action as your focus is on attacks that turn.
Second because it will interact with things like Haste.

You should also specify that the extra reactions may only be used for opportunity attacks since other class features can use reactions. You may also need to specify that a character may only use one reaction effect per reaction so he can't make two opportunity attacks nor use a class or feat feature and make an opportunity attack on the same opportunity attack.

[Merudo]

I'm generally known as an optimizer and I've never been able to bring myself to take PAM.

I do play point buy, though. And we have all the books.

Elven Accuracy, ASIs, and situational feats are just better, IMO. You want to ASI your attack stat to 20, that's 2 if you don't take an appropriate half feat and start with point buy. If you don't multiclass that ends at 8, if you do it could be 10 or 11. If you're gish, you want warcaster, which is a 3rd ASI.

If you roll your stats and get lucky, sure, PAM and GWM are good together, but... realistically you only have room for 1 feat pre-tenth level in point buy, two if you're V human, but then... you can't start at a 17 in your attack stat and take the wonderful elven accuracy to get trivantage and 18. You just have to take an ASI.

Long story short, in point buy, PAM is largely useless.

Since Elven Accuracy doesn't work with strength weapons, I assume you are comparing a PAM user to a duel wielder with two scimitars or shortswords?

Duel wielding + EA does have the potential to do more damaging than PAM. It's in part because of fighting styles: TWF typically adds +3/+4 to the bonus action attack, while GWF is quite inefficient with polearms, adding .8 damage on average to each main attack, and .5 to the bonus attack. At level 5 that's 2.1 extra damage total, a bit more than half what TWF would give.

When I computed the numbers, I found that at level 5 TWF + EA is roughly equivalent to PAM + GWF while attacking without advantage. With advantage, TWF + EA is better, especially against creatures with high AC. However, PAM has the advantage of providing an excellent reaction attack, which can offset this. Having PAM trigger a single time during a combat was often all that was needed to make it the superior option.

So it's really a question of how often you have advantage against high AC creatures VS how often you expect the reaction attack of PAM to trigger.

[R.Shackleford]

Do you realize that PAM and Shield Master are basically equivalent when it gives to shoving? You spend your action and bonus action to get a shove prone and two(ish) attacks, at advantage. Then you retreat far enough that they can't attack you back next turn, and you take one opportunity attack at disadvantage from the prone target but then zero attacks instead of a full Multiattack on the enemy's turn. (And if you're PAM you'll also get a reaction attack when they do close with you.)

The biggest difference between them is that Shield Master is compatible with maxing AC and PAM is compatible with GWM for maxing damage.

No, PAM doesn't let you shove with a bonus action. It specifically gives you a melee attack that deals 1d4 base damage. It doesn't let you switch what type of attack it is.

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/10/13/6052/

Mike said yes, but the official ruling is No via JC.


Edit: When you take the attack action, you can replace the attack with a special melee attack but when you get a bonus action attack, you aren't taking the attack action with said attack and thus can't switch it out.

5e could be so much simpler if they made it flexible.

[Ruebin Rybnik]

You should also specify that the extra reactions may only be used for opportunity attacks since other class features can use reactions. You may also need to specify that a character may only use one reaction effect per reaction so he can't make two opportunity attacks nor use a class or feat feature and make an opportunity attack on the same opportunity attack.

I agree I'll have to work on the wording, but can you give me an example of a class reaction feature. I AFB and cant think of one and I want to implement this in my next campaign.

[Pex]

I agree I'll have to work on the wording, but can you give me an example of a class reaction feature. I AFB and cant think of one and I want to implement this in my next campaign.

Battle Master's Riposte maneuver

Shield Spell

Bard's Cutting Word

Light Cleric's Warding Flare

[R.Shackleford]

Battle Master's Riposte maneuver

Shield Spell

Bard's Cutting Word

Light Cleric's Warding Flare

Hellish Rebuke is my favorite.

I also like Defensive Deulist on a caster.

[Pex]

In my experience most DMs either stick to official published content, or use the "Sane Magical Item Prices" guide on this site. Neither has cool magical Halberts or Glaives to offer.

True, but as I said it's not a universal thing.

Frankly, I don't think it's fair to expect the DM to create homebrew content just to ensure your already above average PAM + Sentinel build dominates in all circumstances.

It's well known that polearm users tends to be min-maxers. DMs typically tweak the rules to bring the unoptimized PCs up to par with the other players (i.e. Ranger/Sorcerer tweaks); they often are reluctant to change the rules just so the munchkins become even stronger.

I had a feeling that was where this is going. He should have been a good warrior player and taken Skilled (Medicine, Weaving Tools, Brewing Tools) instead like a proper superior roleplaying focused character. What was I thinking.

[MaxWilson]

Thank you for your advice. Elven Accuracy does make a nice feat to get at level 12+ for a fighter. I'm less convinced of its value for other classes though, as they tend to be more starved for feats.

Sure. I'd say the same thing about Sharpshooter though: if you can't get Archery style and 3 or more at-will attacks eventually, maybe you shouldn't even bother with it.

Fighters rock.

I'll add that my original message was in response to Millface suggesting that Elven Accuracy should be taken instead of PAM, which I find even harder to justify mechanically.

I expect Millface was comparing builds, not just feats. E.g. Str-based PAM GWM Mounted Combatant vs. Dex-based Sharpshooter Crossbow Expert Elven Accuracy.

[Citan]

I´m playing 2 campaigns at the moment:

Neither of the above players picked Polearm master, but as far as I can tell in both cases they would have doubled(or tripled) their damage with one feat. Neither of those players optimize much: one DM´s a lot and is pretty good at it, the other tries but hasn´t grasped it quite yet(literally his second dnd character).

Why aside from fluff reasons wouldn´t a strength based melee character take polearm master?

Also and this might be the reason why: Has anyone ever seen a magical polearm in dnd in a module or adventure, that is one not crafted by another player?

Hi ;)

On topic: no, imo, PAM is not "stupidly good". I find it overall much better than GWM though that's for sure, mainly because you get all benefits whatever AC enemy has, and the fact you get OA when enemy enters reach means higher chance (as little as may be in reality) to kill it next round, which is imo the prime benefit, and not the bonus action attack.

Because let's be honest, barring pure non-EK Fighters, there are not many classes which don't have enough consistent use of their bonus action.
You can already push aside Monks (Martial Arts + everything else), Rogues (Cunning Action), Rangers (bonus action spells and some features IIRC) and mostly Paladins (bonus action smites, some archetype features or spells).
For all those classes, you can easily dual-wield instead to "fill up" turns in which you don't have use for bonus action, which should not come up too often. No special need to invest in feat for that.

Now Barbarians: at high level, few Barbarians are looking for some (of course at low levels it's a different story, once you activated the rage, except if you're Storm Herald). And I'd argue that while PAM is certainly a great feat for them, due to their usual role of "drawing aggro" I'd say picking Sentinel first is better.

Now Fighters: barring EK which get consistent bonus action at level 7, and enough useful spells after level 11, others may certainly like PAM. But again, mainly for the "OA when entering reach" thing. Because otherwise picking up Dual Wielder is plain better overall: you can still use reach weapons, but you can also mix in thrown weapons, and since Fighter has so many feats you can mix it with either Sentinel (more offense) or Defensive Duelist at high level (more defense).

IMO PAM is great mainly...
- Used in combination with other features to achieve a specific goal (like with Sentinel to lock down, or GWM to get consistently better damage, which are the main -only?- uses I see to be honest)
- Or if you wanted initially to pick Shield Master for offense but your DM followed the stupid useless nerf.
- Or if you just want a martial feat that enhances both offense and (indirectly) defense at the same time, and you planned on using quarterstaff for other reasons anyways (looking innocent, using Shillelagh, etc).

But it's far, far from being "stupidly good". :)

Also...

Polearm Master + GWM is the best DPR.

Not necessarily.
- Barring the fact that usually Sharpshooter + Crossbow Expert is plain better (but I suppose you were restricting your assertion to melee comparison)...
- Barring all the "get into melee reach" challenges that sometimes make two-hander melee useless or too risky compared to dual-wielding (-hence why Sharpshooter is better- but I know those kind of considerations are never taken into account around here although it really should for any analysis to be any valid)...
Elven Accuracy really reshuffled the cards. As well as spells like Shadow Blade.
GWM's main benefit is the +10 when applicable.
PAM's main benefit is providing another weapon attack.
But Elven Accuracy doesn't work with STR attacks.
While it does work with everything else.

Meaning you can Shillelagh PAM + Elven Accuracy after landing a Faerie Fire or with friends shoving prone.
Meaning you can Shadow Blade + Elven Accuracy after shoving prone with Shield Master (stupid ruling aside) or with friends.

"Yeah, with Elven Accuracy requires advantage, so you have to assume then advantage is enabled on GWM holder side".
Certainly. And it does help in making it kinda accurate.
Except it's not enough. Not again AC 16+ targets. Not if you want to use the -5+10 feature. And if you don't use it, GWM is useless.
Not saying it's a bad choice though: it can be a perfectly fine decision to say "I'll pick it for all those creatures against which my chances to hit are usually good enough".
But it's not the best whatever kind of situation is, contrarily to (mostly) Sharpshooter + Crossbow Expert...
Or Elven Accuracy provided of course you have sustainable ways to generate advantage, because then basically every attack you make is a guaranteed hit, mostly.
Or even PAM which is consistently good as long as you meet the unavoidable prerequisite "get near melee reach".

That's why, conversely, as an exception to the previous statement, the Hexblade Warlocks have come right on the top podium of melee damage dealers (if you put aside the survivability ^^) since you can, theorically, stack up GWM + Elven Accuracy + PAM, with pre-setup of Darkness or Greater Invisibility. Long road to go though. ^^

No, PAM doesn't let you shove with a bonus action. It specifically gives you a melee attack that deals 1d4 base damage. It doesn't let you switch what type of attack it is.

MaxWilson is still right though, but he should have been more explicit in reasoning that's for sure.
Thing is: with PAM and Extra Attack, you get a total of three weapon attacks.
2 of which can be replaced by a Shove.
So, yeah, it can be *exactly* like Shield Master, except in that you deal a bit less damage: "Extra Attack" attack 1 (Shove) attack 2 (weapon attack) -> bonus action PAM weapon attack.
Even "worse", with the stupid nerf of Shield Master, now PAM or dual-wielding are the only ways to get consistent option to generate advantage for remaining attacks.

[R.Shackleford]

MaxWilson is still right though, but he should have been more explicit in reasoning that's for sure.
Thing is: with PAM and Extra Attack, you get a total of three weapon attacks.
2 of which can be replaced by a Shove.
So, yeah, it can be *exactly* like Shield Master, except in that you deal a bit less damage: "Extra Attack" attack 1 (Shove) attack 2 (weapon attack) -> bonus action PAM weapon attack.
Even "worse", with the stupid nerf of Shield Master, now PAM or dual-wielding are the only ways to get consistent option to generate advantage for remaining attacks.

Then no. You can not use the extra attack from PAM for a shove. What you are getting into is what you can do with the Attack Action and not what we can do with the feats. So the answer is still a no.

Technically you can shove a creature that is prone, I think, so you could shove the same creature twice... Or just move away and shove a second creature after you make a weapon attack. The Attack Action + Extra Attack is what is being flexible and doing the work.

Attack Action: Shove a creature prone, move, weapon attack another creature, bonus action shove that creature prone.

Shield Master didn't get a nerf, it always worked that way, we just tried to give it a buff... Which it still is a great feat as it is very team work friendly and helps keep a target contained or in position.

[MaxWilson]

MaxWilson is still right though, but he should have been more explicit in reasoning that's for sure.

Everyone I don't have on Ignore got the point, so I have no regrets about not being more explicit.

Edit: Apparently R. Shackleford still didn't get it even after you explained in more detail. You'd probably have it list it something like this to make the point:

Polearm Master:
Attack action: Shove prone, attack at advantage for d10+STR
Bonus action: attack at advantage for d4+STR
Total: d10+d4+STR*2 at advantage

Shield Master, pre-nerf:
Bonus action: shove prone
Attack action: attack at advantage for d8+STR, twice
Total: 2d8+STR*2 at advantage

They're basically equivalent w/rt bonus action attacks, but PAM can benefit from GWM and also comes with a reaction attack.

[Pex]

Everyone I don't have on Ignore got the point, so I have no regrets about not being more explicit.

Edit: Apparently R. Shackleford still didn't get it even after you explained in more detail. You'd probably have it list it something like this to make the point:

Polearm Master:
Attack action: Shove prone, attack at advantage for d10+STR
Bonus action: attack at advantage for d4+STR
Total: d10+d4+STR*2 at advantage

Shield Master, pre-nerf:
Bonus action: shove prone
Attack action: attack at advantage for d8+STR, twice
Total: 2d8+STR*2 at advantage

They're basically equivalent w/rt bonus action attacks, but PAM can benefit from GWM and also comes with a reaction attack.

Shield Master benefits from +2 AC for having the shield, frees up an ASI for whatever choice you want instead of Great Weapon Master, and pseudo evasion.

Both options are good. It's only a matter of personal preference.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: C'mon people. After the first person notes the thread is too old, please stop posting in it. Also, please see the Forum Rules on Thread Necromancy.