Monks and Polearm Master

[Mr.Spastic]

So I play in a game that removes the restrictions on weapon choices for Kensei Monks. I want to use a Halberd or Pike as my weapon of choice. The Martial Arts ability for monk states that you can replace the damage of monk weapons with your Martial Arts Die. Does that mean that a level 5 Kensei Monk can use a d6 on the bonus action attack granted by Polearm Master?

[AdAstra]

Depending on your interpretation of the "normal damage" of the weapon, but I would be inclined to say yes. Unless you take Great Weapon Master, it's not going to be any more powerful than your normal bonus action Unarmed Strike. If you did, then it might start getting dicey, but otherwise you should be fine.

[Zhorn]

I would have thought the official ruling would have been 'no', but I would house rule it as 'yes' at my table.
Like AdAstra says, it all comes down to nailing down that 'normal damage' term.
Being that the 1d4 for the bonus action attack is listed in the feat (specific ruling), while the weapon's normal usual damage is listed on the weapons table.

Outside of magic weapons and niche ability combinations, it shouldn't break anything. You'd get to use a martial arts die to attack with an unarmed strike without the feat anyway, so most of the time it should only be a thematic difference.

[sithlordnergal]

So I play in a game that removes the restrictions on weapon choices for Kensei Monks. I want to use a Halberd or Pike as my weapon of choice. The Martial Arts ability for monk states that you can replace the damage of monk weapons with your Martial Arts Die. Does that mean that a level 5 Kensei Monk can use a d6 on the bonus action attack granted by Polearm Master?

I don't think you would, because the Feat specifically states that you only do a d4. Otherwise using a one handed Quarterstaff and Shillelagh with PAM would have you do 1d8 as your bonus action damage.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I don't think you would, because the Feat specifically states that you only do a d4. Otherwise using a one handed Quarterstaff and Shillelagh with PAM would have you do 1d8 as your bonus action damage.

Why wouldn't it do 1d8?

It is a question of which one is more specific.

[sithlordnergal]

Why wouldn't it do 1d8?

It is a question of which one is more specific.

I'd assume that the d4 is more specific case. It supersedes any of the base weapon damage, and both Monk damage and Shillelagh change out base weapon damage.

[Khrysaes]

I'd assume that the d4 is more specific case. It supersedes any of the base weapon damage, and both Monk damage and Shillelagh change out base weapon damage.

Shillelagh says " the weapon's damage die becomes a d8. "

PAM says "The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4, and it deals bludgeoning damage."

PAM doesn't supersede weapon damage it is additional. It isnt like shillelagh which changes the damage die, it is an entirely new attack using the blunt end of the polearm.

Based on the wording of the two, I think shillelagh would be dominant. Additionally, Shillelagh is a temporary effect while PAM is permanent, so it would be a d4 THEN i cast Shillelagh and it BECOMES a d8.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I'd assume that the d4 is more specific case. It supersedes any of the base weapon damage, and both Monk damage and Shillelagh change out base weapon damage.

The biggest problem of a specific beat general is to much specific and no guidelines for what is more specific then what.

[Zhorn]

The biggest problem of a specific beat general is to much specific and no guidelines for what is more specific then what.

the way I've been told to understand it is:
"Specific beats general" =/= "specific beats specific"

When you have two specific rulings, you use the dominant one for the situation.
So for Shillelagh the d8 overrides the attacks made in the Attack Action as they are general, but the Bonus Action attack made with Polearm Master is specific to Polearm Master so that's still a d4 as per the wording of the feat.

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/02...-quarterstaff/
Q: If I cast Shillelagh on my quarterstaff and have Polearm Master feat, does the bonus attack deal d4 or d8?
A: The bonus attack would use a d4. I like it: druid master of polearms!

Using that as a basis, the same could be said regarding Martial Arts and Polearm Master.
Still, I'd allow it at my table, but I firmly believe that is a table ruling and not an official way to do it.

[Khrysaes]

the way I've been told to understand it is:
"Specific beats general" =/= "specific beats specific"

When you have two specific rulings, you use the dominant one for the situation.
So for Shillelagh the d8 overrides the attacks made in the Attack Action as they are general, but the Bonus Action attack made with Polearm Master is specific to Polearm Master so that's still a d4 as per the wording of the feat.



Using that as a basis, the same could be said regarding Martial Arts and Polearm Master.
Still, I'd allow it at my table, but I firmly believe that is a table ruling and not an official way to do it.

I could see the argument that you are making regarding Shillelagh.

However, conversely with a similar single feat cost, and specifically applicable to quarterstaves, a character could take Dual Wielder and use shillelagh on them both for a d8 as a bonus action attack.

Polearm master does have an advantage over Dual wielder though if the D8 is applied to the bonus action attack in that a Quarterstaff can still benefit from a shield AND the opportunity attack when something enters your reach. So +1 AC over dual wielder, quicker setup(dont need to cast it twice) and an easier opportunity attack.

And then again as I mentioned earlier. Polearm master is permanent d4 bonus action attack. Shillelagh is a temporary effect that is applied AFTER the permanent effect. A quarterstaff is one item that the shillelagh applies to, as opposed to a glaive's blade and blunt end, so I would think that the entire quarterstaff is affected by shillelagh.

Therefore, you have a bonus action attack with PAM where the weapon's damage is d4, THEN cast Shillelagh affecting the entire quarterstaff, THEN the weapon's damage dice BECOMES d8.

I think I am thoroughly fed up with Jeremy Crawfords sage advice. Especially as he contradicts himself.

[Fnissalot]

I would argue that an attack is more specific than a weapon. Permanence or temporary effects have nothing to do with this, according to me at least? I am AFB but I cannot think of anything that it says about permanence and temporary effect.

[NNescio]

The biggest problem of a specific beat general is to much specific and no guidelines for what is more specific then what.

Use Primary vs. Secondary then. And PAM is the primary source (on how the attack works), because the bonus action attack is enabled by PAM.

the way I've been told to understand it is:
"Specific beats general" =/= "specific beats specific"

When you have two specific rulings, you use the dominant one for the situation.

Exactly.

Using that as a basis, the same could be said regarding Martial Arts and Polearm Master.
Still, I'd allow it at my table, but I firmly believe that is a table ruling and not an official way to do it.

Agreed. I don't think it's RAW, I don't think it's likely RAI either, but I see no harm allowing the monk to have its fun.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

the way I've been told to understand it is:
"Specific beats general" =/= "specific beats specific"

When you have two specific rulings, you use the dominant one for the situation.
So for Shillelagh the d8 overrides the attacks made in the Attack Action as they are general, but the Bonus Action attack made with Polearm Master is specific to Polearm Master so that's still a d4 as per the wording of the feat.



Using that as a basis, the same could be said regarding Martial Arts and Polearm Master.
Still, I'd allow it at my table, but I firmly believe that is a table ruling and not an official way to do it.

I never wrote that specific beat specific, I just wrote that there is no way to know what to do in case of two or more specific rules beating the general and still try to beat each other.

Use Primary vs. Secondary then. And PAM is the primary source (on how the attack works), because the bonus action attack is enabled by PAM.



Exactly.



Agreed. I don't think it's RAW, I don't think it's likely RAI either, but I see no harm allowing the monk to have its fun.

How can you tell which one is primary and which on is secondary?
One can say the the cantrip in the primary for rolling damage and that PAM is primary for the ability to make that attack.

You can argue for ages and still find different opinions on which one is stronger/have more weight/more ways to say the one you should use.

I don't say I know which one is right because I can see too many right options.

[Zhorn]

I never wrote that specific beat specific, I just wrote that there is no way to know what to do in case of two or more specific rules beating the general and still try to beat each other.

No, you didn't, nor did I say you did. No accusation was being made. I apologise if you took the wrong meaning from me using your quote as a launching point.
What I was getting at regarding the comment you had about what to do when there are so many specific rulings is to not think of them competing in the same fashion as the 'specific beat general' mindset.
In the case of Shillelagh and Polearm Master, it is pitting two specific rules against one another to get that d8 on the Bonus Action attack. Saying the Bonus Action Attack becomes a d8 because of Shillelagh would be a case of 'specific beats specific' in order to work, because it would be overruling the specific ruling of what the feat says what damage die is used. It doesn't work that way though because the two abilities are not directly pitted against each other by their own wording.

How can you tell which one is primary and which on is secondary?
One can say the the cantrip in the primary for rolling damage and that PAM is primary for the ability to make that attack.

You can argue for ages and still find different opinions on which one is stronger/have more weight/more ways to say the one you should use.

I don't say I know which one is right because I can see too many right options.

Shillelagh to start with doesn't grant a Bonus Action attack on its own, it has no specific ownership over that type of action. To make a bonus action attack with Shillelagh, you need to piggyback it off another feature (it is the secondary).
Polearm Master does grant the Bonus Action attack as part of it's specific wording (it is the primary), so if the weapon you were using was eligible for Polearm Master's Bonus Action attack before Shillelagh was cast, then it is valid to use so after it is cast. BUT the d8 still does not apply. Shillelagh specifically changes the weapon's damage die too a d8, but Polearm Master doesn't say it uses the weapon's damage die for the Bonus Action attack, it specifies a new value for the that particular attack.

[Khrysaes]

Shillelagh specifically changes the weapon's damage die too a d8, but Polearm Master doesn't say it uses the weapon's damage die for the Bonus Action attack, it specifies a new value for the that particular attack.

No, but PAM does say "The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4"

Since as you say, Shillelagh changes the "weapon's damage die" to d8, and "the weapon's damage die" is d4 from PAM, not d8, Shillelagh should change the PAM attack

[Zalabim]

The way I parse it is that you cast shillelagh on the quarterstaff so the weapon's damage die is now d8. Then you use the bonus action from PM and now the damage die for this attack is d4. It comes after, it's the most recent effect, so that's what gets used. PM's bonus action attack would always come after shillelagh.

[Zhorn]

"The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4"

emphasis mine

We have a feature specifying a precise value used, which when using the same consistent reasoning as other features with specified values - such as the case with unarmored defense (monk, barbarian) and natural armor (lizardfolk, loxodon) for example - it doesn't get mixed and combined with the values of other features just because you like them more.
We also have a reference from the lead rules designer over the medium they use for official rules Q&A saying how the interaction works.

I think I am thoroughly fed up with Jeremy Crawfords sage advice. Especially as he contradicts himself.

Whether you like it or not, we have a clear cut and dry answer of how the interaction official works.

But the more important part is: you don't have to use that ruling. It's ok to prefer a house ruling. Your preferred ruling does not need to be instated as THE official ruling to be acceptable. There's a fair lot of text at the start of the Dungeon Master's Guide encouraging people to make the game their own, and change and alter rules to taste.

Like I've said above, I would allow Martial Art and Shillelagh to override that d4 in the games I DM, but I recognise that it is not the official ruling on the matter.

[Keravath]

No, but PAM does say "The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4"

Since as you say, Shillelagh changes the "weapon's damage die" to d8, and "the weapon's damage die" is d4 from PAM, not d8, Shillelagh should change the PAM attack

I'm not sure I see the reasoning here.

Shillelagh turns the weapons damage die to a d8.

PAM comes along and explicitly states ... the weapon's damage die for THIS attack is a d4. Whatever the base weapon's damage might be d6, d8, d10, d12 ... determined by whatever method or affected by whatever magic ... the weapon's damage die has no effect since the feat simply says that

"When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, spear, or quarterstaff, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon. The weapon's damage die for this attack is a d4, and the attack deals bludgeoning damage."

IF you attack with one of the specific weapons (and only with that weapon - which means a monk can't mix polearm and unarmed strikes as part of the attack action and still get a bonus action attack) ... THEN you can make a bonus action attack and FOR this attack the damage die is a d4.

So, if a character obtains a bonus action attack due to the polearm master feat then the damage die IS a d4. The damage die of the weapon, however determined or affected by magic, is not relevant since the feat explicitly states the damage die used for the bonus action attack by the butt end of the polearm.

RAW, I think this would extend to monk martial arts die as well if they were making a bonus action attack with a polearm so that it would still be with a d4.

However, as a DM, I don't think allowing it would be any sort of balance issue since the damage increase is 1/increased die and it is only one attack/round .. so at most it would be an average increase of 3 damage/round if the monk was using d10 vs d4.




"The weapon's damage die for this attack is a d4, and the attack deals bludgeoning damage."

[Vogie]

So I play in a game that removes the restrictions on weapon choices for Kensei Monks. I want to use a Halberd or Pike as my weapon of choice. The Martial Arts ability for monk states that you can replace the damage of monk weapons with your Martial Arts Die. Does that mean that a level 5 Kensei Monk can use a d6 on the bonus action attack granted by Polearm Master?

Depending on your interpretation of the "normal damage" of the weapon, but I would be inclined to say yes. Unless you take Great Weapon Master, it's not going to be any more powerful than your normal bonus action Unarmed Strike. If you did, then it might start getting dicey, but otherwise you should be fine.

This is basically it - Quarterstaves can be used with PAM, and are already monk weapons... Most DMs would allow even a non-kensei, non-PAM monk to use the butt of the weapon as their 'unarmed strike', allowing them to attack twice with their shortsword, then do a bonus action attack with the scabbard. Mechanically, it's the same as a bonus action unarmed strike, but changed in fluff only. Adding PAM doesn't actually change anything here.

The only difference in this question is that if you're allowed to use a weapon with reach, which would then give your bonus action attack reach, as that would fall into "Otherwise this attack functions just as if you attacked with the weapon in question" category.

[Khrysaes]

We have a feature specifying a precise value used, which when using the same consistent reasoning as other features with specified values - such as the case with unarmored defense (monk, barbarian) and natural armor (lizardfolk, loxodon) for example - it doesn't get mixed and combined with the values of other features just because you like them more.
We also have a reference from the lead rules designer over the medium they use for official rules Q&A saying how the interaction works.
.

This, and keravath's post below yours are the strongest argument i have seen for not using shillelagh on the PAM BA attack. And while i think which effect applies could still be debated based on the wording i dont want to do it on my phone. Mainly it would boil down to how constqntly is the effect of shillelqgh applied, if it is only once at the cast then your argument is correct.

I also agree with you that i do not have to listen to JC, i dont. However i do not think that my interpretation of the rules as i have argued means it needs to be made official.

I also dont think that you unarmored defense and natural armor example was the best suited example to use. It just felt out of place as i didnt see the connection.

[GlenSmash!]

Shillelagh says " the weapon's damage die becomes a d8. "

PAM says "The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4, and it deals bludgeoning damage."

PAM doesn't supersede weapon damage it is additional. It isnt like shillelagh which changes the damage die, it is an entirely new attack using the blunt end of the polearm.

Based on the wording of the two, I think shillelagh would be dominant. Additionally, Shillelagh is a temporary effect while PAM is permanent, so it would be a d4 THEN i cast Shillelagh and it BECOMES a d8.

I read it as the exact opposite. Specifying the d4 as for just the bonus attack is more specific than shillelagh modifying the weapons base damage.

Since as you say the feat's attack does not use the weapon dice at all, changing the weapon dice through shillelagh or some other means like monk damage dice leaves this bonus action attack completely unchanged.

Edit: or I should have just said I agree with Keravath.

[Khrysaes]

Okay not on my phone. So last evidence based argument I can come up with and it is less a matter of mechanics and more of a perception of mechanics application order and update rate.

So shillelagh says "For the duration, ..... the weapon's damage die becomes a d8. "

Which COULD be read as:

"At every moment in time for the duration of the spell the damage die of the weapon is becoming a d8."

I am thinking of this as something being updated every frame in a video game.

Otherwise I would have worded the spell as "The weapon's damage die becomes a d8. This lasts for the duration of the spell." But this is not how it is stated.

As one should not be able to refute, Shillelagh is cast on the quarter staff. A quarter staff is from wikipedia: "a shaft of hardwood from 6 to 9 feet (1.8 to 2.7 m) long"

So, a quarterstaff is one piece of wood(or at least can be)

Then, when you trigger PAM,

"When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, quarterstaff, or spear, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon."

Therefore, if Shillelagh applies to one end of the single piece of wood, it should apply to the other end as well.

However, as pointed out, "The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4."

So, while I will agree that, as I missed it before, the specific of the feat applying to specifically the this attack may superscede the shillelagh;

The specific of shillelagh is that "For the duration, ..... the weapon's damage die becomes a d8."

Or: as above "At every moment in time for the duration of the spell the damage die of the weapon is becoming a d8."

Finally, PAM triggers the attack with the other end of the quarterstaff when you hit it, applying shillelagh to the initial attack. But as the magic of shillelagh is being applied to the single piece of wood weapon, therefore both ends, when the bonus action attack is used, for which "the weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4" the effect from shillelagh which has the damage die of the weapon becoming a d8 at every moment for the duration of the spell could take effect and thus a d8 be used.

To conclude, if the magic of shillelagh is constantly making the damage die for the weapon "become a d8" then shillelagh may, by raw, superscede PAM. If shillelagh is applied once, and doesn't constantly apply the "become a d8" then PAM superscedes Shillelagh.

When I was making this argument I was thinking in terms of programming. I.e. something applied every frame vs setting a value in one frame until it changes at another frame. I know D&D pen and paper does not work like this.

[tieren]

If you re using your BA for a PAM attack you are monk-ing wrong.

[Spo]

It's a game that people play differently.

Some read the PAM feat as written and are satisfied with taking a bonus action 1d4 damage when a creature comes within 5 feet. Some players want to do more damage than what is written in the rule book and look for ways to either justify their actions or come to the boards for its blessing on their interpretation of the rules.

Some DMs let players ignore core rules for fun and some DMs are more strict with following the rules. The OP just has to ask himself what kind of DM does he have and accept their rulings.

[Zazamori]

Shouldn't it work similarly to choosing between 2 different effects that "set" your base armor to a certain value??

If you have Mage Armor in affect while wearing leather armor, you have 2 different effects that set your AC differently, you must choose which one you want to use. Both effects are a case of specific overriding your default AC set by the more general rule of 10+dex. Both are equally valid choices. One is clearly better than the other. It's an easy choice.

For MA vs PAM, you've got two different effects that independently set your damage for that same attack to different values. Both effects are a case of specifically setting your "weapon damage" to a certain die size. Both are equally valid. One is clearly better than the other. It's an easy choice.

...eh??



Edit:

If you re using your BA for a PAM attack you are monk-ing wrong.

Also this. Isn't is really just a flavor difference at this point?? If you don't let him call it a weapon attack with the butt of his weapon, he can just call it a regular weapon attack via his monk Martial Arts feature bonus action. Come to think of it, that would be a d10 anyway if he's allowed to use a halberd/pike as a kensei weapon.

[Zhorn]

I also dont think that you unarmored defense and natural armor example was the best suited example to use. It just felt out of place as i didnt see the connection.

The comparison on that was the set values and the conditions they are tied to.
Lets take a lizardfolk barbarian. A common question asked is if they would get to stack their Unarmored Defense on top of their Natural Armor for an AC of 13+Dex+Con. The answer is 'no' because each Unarmored Defense and Natural Armor have a value as part of the feature (10+Dex+Con and 13+Dex respectively). You don't get to cut out part of the feature and insert in part of another feature in its place.
The equivalence on the ruling is setting a value for the feature to work off, only instead of the static number, it's a die size.
Polearm Master doesn't care what damage die the weapon being used would deal for another other attack (the value Shillelagh changes), only that it is a valid weapon to use with the feat, and has value of the Bonus Action attack's damage die set to the value determined by that feat.

Feature effect using Feature value
Adding Dex and Con modifiers to AC from a base value of 10 for Unarmored Defense
Adding Dex modifier to AC from a base value of 13 for Natural Armor

Bonus action attack using 1d4 damage die for Polearm Master

[AdAstra]

For the Shillelagh-PAM question, one could look to another thing that changes the damage die of an attack, namely the Versatile trait. With a quarterstaff, the damage die is a d8 when wielded with two hands. One would be hard-pressed to argue that that supersedes PAM's d4. Now Shillelagh is a spell with a temporary effect, which could be argued to take precedence over PAM's "always-on" rule, but I would disagree for the following reason:

PAM does not give you a bonus action attack at all times. It gives you the ability to make a bonus action attack when you make the Attack action. Thus, there is no situation where Shillelagh is the last effect placed upon the weapon. You can cast it as a bonus action (can't make a BA attack on the same turn), then next turn take the Attack action, and only then would you be able to take your PAM attack, which sets the weapon's damage die as a d4 for that attack.

Basically, you have to order it as:
1. Quarterstaff damage die is 1d6 (1d8 versatile)
2. Shillelagh sets damage die to 1d8
3. Take Attack action
4. PAM gives you a bonus action attack, with a damage die of 1d4.

[Zhorn]

Isn't is really just a flavor difference at this point?? If you don't let him call it a weapon attack with the butt of his weapon, he can just call it a regular weapon attack via his monk Martial Arts feature bonus action.

As long as the monk is only using a mundane weapon, or isn't stacking special features that work off attacks with that weapon and not with Unarmed Strikes, then yes it is mostly just cosmetic flavor.

It starts to become something to rule more strictly on when you start pairing in all those pluses. Say is was now a +1 (or better) weapon, the weapon allowed for some rider effect, something like the Dueling Fighting Style was involved. It ceases to be cosmetic flavor.

[Bigmouth]

It seems pretty clear to me that Shillelagh doesn't effect PAM's bonus attack damage.

The off end of a quarterstaff is not a weapon. You can't be proficient with it. You can't declare it as a monk weapon. The quarterstaff is a weapon.
Even if the PAM bonus attack was a weapon, it isn't a weapon listed under Shillelagh. Shillelagh can be cast on a club or a quarterstaff. You are changing the weapon die of a club or a quarterstaff to 1D8. The bonus attack from PAM is not effected by or derived from the base damage of the weapon being used. It is a D4 bludgeoning.

RAW and RAI agree and so does Jeremy Crawford/Sage Advice.

If you want it, ask your table for a vote. It's your game.