D&D 5E Sentinel+Polearm Master+Quarterstaff+Lance+Mount?

[sulimo0310]

I am pretty positive that RAI, they want you to use the polearm to make the opportunity attack. RAW, I guess it works since you are technically welding both weapons, and the target enters your reach at 10 ft. The bullet does not specify it must come from one of the mentioned weapons.

As for the second point there is no debate. Handedness is not a thing in 5e. So regardless of which hand is welding the quarterstaff, you get the bonus action polearm master attack since you are not two weapon fighting. You simply take an attack action and get the triggered bonus action.

 

[sulimo0310]

For what it's worth, as a DM I would rule the lance is a polearm anyway and allow it to be the trigger of the first bullet point, making this whole thing moot. You could simply switch weapons when they enter 5 ft, and gain the added benefit of a sheild.

 

[zaratan]

Wow, this kinda blew up. They were 2 separate questions. I'll rephrase to clarify.

1) If your reach is 10ft from the Lance, and you're also wielding a Quarterstaff, and you have the Polearm Master feat, can you OA them at 10ft range with your Lance instead of your Quarterstaff to trigger Sentinel? Or does the Polearm Master feat require the OA be done with one of the polearms it mentions? The feat doesn't mention specific polearms in the OA part of it so I think this would work RAW.

2) As your action on your turn (not OA on their turn), you'll probably just attack them with the Lance. But if they get into 5ft range somehow, can you attack them with Quarterstaff (instead of Lance because Lance gets disadvantage in 5ft range) and also get the bonus action 1d4 attack too? I think this is ok too RAW.

The point of this combination of unusual weapons is to profit from the high hit die of a Lance, but never be stuck with Lance's disadvantage at 5ft range. Polearm Master+Sentinel is a known fantastic combo, but you can't do it with Lance...unless you're also wielding one of the specified weapons in the Polearm Master feat. Dual wielding allows us to fulfill this requirement. Now we can stop people with our Lance+Sentinel at 10ft range thanks to the OA provided by Polearm Master while also doing acceptable damage at 5ft range if an enemy makes it past our 10ft Sentinel.

1- RAW will work. RAI no: http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/03/27/war-caster-feat/

2- In that case, remember that a lance do 1d12+str, a glaive will do 1d10+ str + 1d4+ str with your bonus action, don't have desadvantage at 5ft and have reach (but is heavy and you can't use as a halflig beast master).

The advantage in your bulding is to attack if the enemy go out of your reach or if he get close, but in that last case, he still will enter in 5ft reach and make his melee attack. With a glaive + sentinel, you would stop him at 10ft.

the only advantage of being a beast master is attack and them flying alway to avoid attacks (important since your beast have low HP and you can prone), not staying at reach as a tank. Mounted combatant feat solve that problem, but you lost the great part of advantage in attacks having a medium mount.

as a concept is a valid, but if you're looking for optimization, isn't a good option.

 

[faria]

I agree it's not ideal for anyone with access to Heavy polearms. But for Small size Beastmasters who can't use Heavy polearms, this circumvents that. I realize it's not RAI, but some DMs only care about RAW.

 

[zaratan]

yes, but as a small beast master, you should stay away of the enemy's reach, preferably with a ranged weapon in the most distance possible from the enemy. If you want stay melee with a mount palis have more damage, more defense, more utility for the party. a bard or/and fighter multiclass is good to.

even at range wouldn't be the most optimized, but it is a cool building

 

[bid]

The point of this combination of unusual weapons is to profit from the high hit die of a Lance, but never be stuck with Lance's disadvantage at 5ft range.

Ah, ok. On your turn it works great.

If you allow PAM's OA with the lance, all other attackers can still reach range 5'. And even then the stopped attacker will move in next round. So it's either lance and disengage, or stay and drop lance to grab staff.

 

[famousringo]

yes, but as a small beast master, you should stay away of the enemy's reach, preferably with a ranged weapon in the most distance possible from the enemy. If you want stay melee with a mount palis have more damage, more defense, more utility for the party. a bard or/and fighter multiclass is good to.

even at range wouldn't be the most optimized, but it is a cool building

The reason it's important to melee with your beast companion is so you can protect it with feats like Sentinel and Mounted Combatant. That's why you choose to be small, so you can ride it. Ranged beastmasters pretty much have to watch their companion die and their damage boost and battlefield control die with it.

 

[zaratan]

The reason it's important to melee with your beast companion is so you can protect it with feats like Sentinel and Mounted Combatant. That's why you choose to be small, so you can ride it. Ranged beastmasters pretty much have to watch their companion die and their damage boost and battlefield control die with it.

I know, but you need polearm master + sentinel + mounted combatant + str + dex 14 + wis (if you want to cast something beyond hunter's querry), to that start to work, how you're not human v. we are talking about lvl 12. And at that point, many enemies with resistance or imunity to non magical damage, so your beast attack isn't really helpfull. If you compare with other melee options, isn't a good idea build a melee small beast master.

A paladin human v paladin at lvl 12 could have the same PAM + Sentinel + mounted Combatant + GWM, plate, advantage in 90% of attacks because his mount is large, auras, smite and better spells.
A fighter would have trip attack with sentinel to keep target proned + PAM + GWM and str 20 at lvl 12. 3 attacks or 6 with action surge.
A rogue with mobile could attack with sneak attack and dash away.
a barbarian could attack with rage and advantage with the open chest because high HP and damage resistance.

but as a ranged beast master, you can fly at low levels and stay way of damage while you spam your attacks, only ranged/area attacks will get you, and at lvl 7 your beast can dodge, that's a way better option to protect your beast. Still sharpshooter + crossbow expert + mounted combatant is expensive, but at least you only need to max dex. Still, other range options would shine more at high lvls.

 

[famousringo]

I know, but you need polearm master + sentinel + mounted combatant + str + dex 14 + wis (if you want to cast something beyond hunter's querry), to that start to work, how you're not human v. we are talking about lvl 12. And at that point, many enemies with resistance or imunity to non magical damage, so your beast attack isn't really helpfull. If you compare with other melee options, isn't a good idea build a melee small beast master.

A paladin human v paladin at lvl 12 could have the same PAM + Sentinel + mounted Combatant + GWM, plate, advantage in 90% of attacks because his mount is large, auras, smite and better spells.
A fighter would have trip attack with sentinel to keep target proned + PAM + GWM and str 20 at lvl 12. 3 attacks or 6 with action surge.
A rogue with mobile could attack with sneak attack and dash away.
a barbarian could attack with rage and advantage with the open chest because high HP and damage resistance.

but as a ranged beast master, you can fly at low levels and stay way of damage while you spam your attacks, only ranged/area attacks will get you, and at lvl 7 your beast can dodge, that's a way better option to protect your beast. Still sharpshooter + crossbow expert + mounted combatant is expensive, but at least you only need to max dex. Still, other range options would shine more at high lvls.

Yeah, I wouldn't build my beastmaster with strength and polearms, either. What's the point of beastmaster if the beast doesn't fight? At level 12 you're leaving out a bonus attack with a cool special effect if you're just using the beast as a mobility buff. Build Dex sword and board to avoid the MAD and be a tougher tank. Take a crab or frog companion for the comedy value and because even most damage resistant enemies need to contend with grapple and restrain conditions.

Hunter's Mark is crap because you're only making one attack per round. Instead use Beast Bond to give beast advantage, or Entangling Strike to restrain two targets on your turn with frog, one restrain and two grapples with crab.

Unlike other grapple builds, which first establish the grapple, then later do damage with spells or followup attacks, beastmaster can damage and grapple at the same time. Hard to escape, despite the low Athletics, because unless the target has a bonus Disengage, the beast can snare its quarry again with its OA. You actually want them to try to escape, since that gets you five attacks per round.

 

[zaratan]

let's agree that the DC to get out of the grapple is ridiculous at mid levels, but ok, the target lose one action to leave (but he can stay and attack you). You still lose one action to shove prone, and that is the big deal of grapple (but the enemy probably will succeed to leave the grapple in his turn). A fighter can shove and damage at same time with trip attack, and the damage is bigger than the beast. An open hand monk would have 2 attacks of flurry blow to do this, and can stun the targets. And we don't need to compare with the efficiency of a barbarian grappler or a moon druid.

If you get a grappler beast, you don't fly and need to stay in melee as a tank, that you're not. So you need to choose.

Beast master is a cool building, but we need to admit that comparing his efficiency with other it is hard to find a worse option.