D&D 5E Can a character tell when they are in danger of drawing an Opportunity Attack, notably in regards to Sentinel & Polearm Master?

[KarinsDad]

I have to ask the question "Do the PCs know all of the abilities of the NPCs?".

If a given DM tells the players what the NPCs can do, then the answer is yes.

If a given DM lets the players find out at the table what the NPCs can do, then the answer is no.

Personally, I vote no. I have no clue how skilled some opponent is in combat until that opponent uses a given martial ability.

 

[Skyscraper]

I think a character can't tell, but when he rushes towards an opponent with reach, he should know that it's a possibility. As for disengaging from a fighter or other creature with a special power, I think that the surprise is part of it.

This means that, for PCs, I wont hint at the fact that the creature "appears able to attack you if you disengage" or some such obvious declaration. I'll let the players figure it out. I don't think I would describe an opponent as being obviously expert in combat, because this can mean many things: does he hit hard, does he hit often, is he good at dodging, does he have other special abilities, etc... or does he have Sentinel or Polearm Master. I'll just let the players be surprised. After one OA connects with one PC, all the players will know, so it's no big deal, it's a one-timer in an entire battle. And since this kind of ability is rare, allowing the players to know advance kind of blows it.

For NPCs, unless they know the PC for having seen him in combat, I would probably send the NPC against the PC knowing that he'll suffer an OA because I consider that Sentinel and Polearm Master feats are rare and unusual and one would not expect such abilities in most opponents. In a given battle, once one NPC suffers the OA, I'll assume that all NPCs know about this, unless the PCs are facing constructs or other mindless creatures. Even animals would learn quickly about something like that IMO.

 

[aramis erak]

I voted yes. I'll note that I'd allow a PC to conceal their Polearm Mastery (by not using it), but after using it for either benefit, it's obvious.

Same for the Sentinel.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Whatever answer you go with, it has to be the same for NPCs and PCs.

I will note that a similar mechanic from 4e (the various "mark" powers) was entirely dependent on the opponent knowing about it. I'm also a fan, in general, of giving the players as much info as possible. So my answer is, yes, the character knows about the potential opportunity attack. The usefulness of the ability is not that it lets you attack people who run from you; the usefulness is that they won't run from you because they know you'll hit them if they do.

 

[Mercule]

My real answer is "sometimes". I lean somewhat towards favoring the PCs, in this regard, especially the fighters.

There's always an argument to be had, but I think opportunity attacks are generally caused by something obviously dangerous or someone obviously skilled. If it's a wizard or the bad guy has Deception, then I might mess with the PC.

 

[Scorpio616]

And that way makes for more interesting choices, not just a 'gotcha'.

Fully agree.

Wow, poll wound being pretty even so far.

 

[Unwise]

My old rule from 4e was "Yes- if it is a defender ability designed to influence behavior. No- if it is a striker ability designed to do damage". I think this can still be used in 5e to an extent.

Sentinel should definitely tell the enemy what will happen. I think that RAI it is designed to focus their attention on to you, more than being a sneaky DPR boost. It is hard to protect the party if every time you fight a new enemy they ignore your mark the first time or two.

Polearm Mastery is less clear cut. Everybody knows just by looking that it is a possibility at least. I would lean towards it not being readily apparent. I would say that anybody with that feat themselves knows, any fighter with that "know your enemy" thing knows, anybody that succeeds on a skill check to view their weapon style likely knows, I might even say that anybody with say 7 levels in a martial class knows as well.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

My default would be "Yes," but if the combatant were trying to hide it I'd make it an opposed Dexterity (Deception) check vs. Wisdom (Perception).

 

[Valador]

Necro thread... I only read the OP and I'm not going to read all the replies, but in my opinion a character is unable to tell if an enemy has the polearm master feat and is unable to tell what skills the enemy has outside of the normal assumptions.

If I was a character and ran into a guy with a reach weapon, seeing how much range their weapon grants them, it could be a common sense assumption that the person could possibly strike me as I approached, so I would probably approach with caution.

As a DM I'm not going to spell out an enemies every skill and ability for a player. I would let them speculate and come to their own conclusions, otherwise the whole thing feels very meta gamey. You can't always tell what a person can or cannot do in combat just by looking at them... They can assume an enemies abilities and said ability can be confirmed or debunked in combat. I'm not going to spoon feed meta game tactics to a player by telling them "You get the feeling that might be a bad idea if you do this this and this... so you would probably wanna do this instead..."

 

[hejtmane]

I a dumb monster would have no clue but a NPC fighter would know of the tactics he may not know for 100%fact but he would most likely engage assuming this is the case. Any fighter that does not take this approach tend not to live to long and or no longer fighters they are worm food.

A vet warrior or humanoid creature that would be aware of this tactic would approach the fight assuming this tactic.