D&D 5E the dex warrior - why make a strength based one?

[Ninja-radish]

How do OAs interact with reach weapons in 5th?

I rarely see people in the games I've been in use reach weapons, so I'm not well-versed in how it plays out.

As I understand it, 5E OAs only trigger when leaving a creature's threatened area. Is this still the same when a creature has reach? In other games/editions, you would someone approaching a PC with reach would take attacks while trying to get close. How does it work in 5th?

Yes it still works the same way with reach weapons, unless you have the Polearm Master feat. With that feat, you get an OA when they enter your reach.

 

[Argyle King]

Yes it still works the same way with reach weapons, unless you have the Polearm Master feat. With that feat, you get an OA when they enter your reach.

So, does that mean that having a reach weapon makes you less capable of making OAs by virtue of having a bigger threat window in which a target can stay?

 

[MrHotter]

So, does that mean that having a reach weapon makes you less capable of making OAs by virtue of having a bigger threat window in which a target can stay?

By the rules, you can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach.

That should mean that if the hostile creature moves from 5 foot to 10 foot away from you then you would not get an attack of opportunity.

 

[Argyle King]

By the rules, you can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach.

That should mean that if the hostile creature moves from 5 foot to 10 foot away from you then you would not get an attack of opportunity.

Right...

...which seems a little strange.

Having a reach weapon means that an opponent has an easier time moving around me and attacking my allies without me being able to do anything about it?

In the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure how much value that adds or subtracts from the argument that a STR-based character is on equal footing with a DEX-based character.

 

[Hillsy7]

Right...

...which seems a little strange.

Having a reach weapon means that an opponent has an easier time moving around me and attacking my allies without me being able to do anything about it?

In the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure how much value that adds or subtracts from the argument that a STR-based character is on equal footing with a DEX-based character.

With Polearm Mastery, you get your OA attack when they Enter your reach range. So you basically get a free attack when something runs up to you, or runs past you. However, if he moves just 5ft away, you can still hit him, therefore losing no combat effectiveness (And now he can't hit you!)

 

[Ninja-radish]

Right...

...which seems a little strange.

Having a reach weapon means that an opponent has an easier time moving around me and attacking my allies without me being able to do anything about it?

In the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure how much value that adds or subtracts from the argument that a STR-based character is on equal footing with a DEX-based character.

Well first, reach weapons really aren't worth using without feat support, either Sentinel or Polearm Master. However, both of those feats greatly increase the number of times you can OA. My favorite is Polearm Master because it lets you OA any time someone enters your reach, meaning when they get within 10' of you. If you're playing a Battlemaster Fighter, that means you can trip them, or frighten them or whatever, before they even have a chance to hit you.

That's a heck of alot of free damage you're able to dish out. Now, there's nothing wrong with playing a Dex fighter, Dex is great. Personally, I'll take polearms any day.

 

[MrHotter]

Right...

...which seems a little strange.

Having a reach weapon means that an opponent has an easier time moving around me and attacking my allies without me being able to do anything about it?

In the grand scheme of things, I'm not sure how much value that adds or subtracts from the argument that a STR-based character is on equal footing with a DEX-based character.

I like that rule. When fighting someone with a polearm you want to be in close so you are not so close to the pointy end. I'm pretty sure that 'setting the spear' used to be a standard ability with pole weapons in D&D (my memory may be off on that).

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm pretty sure that 'setting the spear' used to be a standard ability with pole weapons in D&D (my memory may be off on that).

You could 'set to receive a charge' or something like that with a variety of pole-arms, though not nearly all of 'em. You could still do it with a couple in 3.

 

[Argyle King]

I like that rule. When fighting someone with a polearm you want to be in close so you are not so close to the pointy end. I'm pretty sure that 'setting the spear' used to be a standard ability with pole weapons in D&D (my memory may be off on that).

With Polearm Mastery, you get your OA attack when they Enter your reach range. So you basically get a free attack when something runs up to you, or runs past you. However, if he moves just 5ft away, you can still hit him, therefore losing no combat effectiveness (And now he can't hit you!)

I understand the argument in favor of the rule. It still seems somewhat strange though.

Imagine using a reach weapon while trying to protect other members of the party. Let's say there is a two-square gap between myself and a squishy party member.

022222
021112
S21x12E
021112
022222

Assuming I have a polearm, the enemy (E) is able to walk by me without any problems.
In contrast, if I have a dagger, the enemy needs to avoid any of the 1s if he wants to reach S without being attacked during movement.

I can buy the argument of wanting to be close to someone using a polearm. In fact, that is an issue which is addressed by the rules of some other games I play. However, in the context of D&D, it seems a little bit strange. I suppose it does make some amount of sense if I change how I'm looking at it, but it's still a little odd at first glance.

With this in mind, if I ever play a character focused on a polearm, it looks as though readying an action to attack is the better tactical option.

 

[Hillsy7]

I understand the argument in favor of the rule. It still seems somewhat strange though.

Imagine using a reach weapon while trying to protect other members of the party. Let's say there is a two-square gap between myself and a squishy party member.

022222
021112
S21x12E
021112
022222

You're not totally wrong: wielding a sword once you and the monster contact, he has to take an OA to get to the squishy (S). Which is why using a reach weapon without feat support is generally not a great defensive tactic (Reach is great for hit and run battlemasters or rogues though).

However, with polearm mastery the trade off here is before he gets to the Squishy he's got to go within 10 feet of you, triggering the OA. So in this instance, you're "Fending him off" with the threat of an OA (As soon as he steps on any 2, you attack), rather than "Locking him down" with the OA threat. It's essentially where the monster pays the Pain toll.

Now where the Polearmer really shines is multiple enemies: no one can run around him because he's got such a huge hit box....again, they all have to pay the Pain toll to get by (Unless they all charge at once). Again in your example you are right that the monster only pays the pain toll once. However, if your squishy takes a 5 foot step back, now they are paying twice if they don't move fast. Take the Sentinel feat instead of GWM and your reaction is pretty much getting used every turn because, with good positioning, everything need to run past you and you stop them dead. 5 feet away. Then you attack with reach and move backwards. It can be pretty devastating.