D&D 5E Does a sentinel attack interrupt a charge?

[Sezarious]

A human fighter has the sentinel feat and a whip. He stands in a dungeon corridor 25ft wide in the centre. Any enemy that moves down the left or right hand side, trying to get past the fighter will provoke an attack of opportunity from him unless they choose to disengage right?

Lets say though that the enemy is a Minotaur and decides to try and charge the fighters wizard companion who is positioned down the corridor on the left with the fighter between them. Declaring a charge is a bonus action, so it needs it's action to attack at the end of the charge. The Minotaur can either disengage from the fighter as it passes him, but then it has used all it's actions, or it can let the fighter try to hit. If the fighter misses, Minotaur proceeds as normal. If the fighter hits though, he reduces it's speed to 0.

My question is, in the above scenario if the Minotaur decides to risk being hit, would it also lose it's action, which was declared in its bonus action as a charge, or could it potentially turn and try and hit the fighter with its action?

Sorry about the wording all. I felt that painting a scenario was the best way to ask the question and even then. :/

 

[Leatherhead]

The Minotaur's Charge is not a bonus action. It is a non-action that triggers from using a move action (by moving at least 10' in a strait line) and using a Gore attack action on the same turn.

The Minotaur can still Gore after having their movement reduced to 0, therefore they can still get the benefits of the Charge.

However, a DM would note that in order to trigger an opportunity attack from the Fighter, the Minotaur would need to leave the Fighter's reach. Because the Fighter is using a whip, the fighter's reach is 10', while the Minotaur's reach is just 5', leaving the Fighter out of range. Likewise, if the Fighter was using a dagger, the Minotaur would be within 5' of reach, but the last 10' of movement would not have been in a strait line towards the Fighter, so the Charge bonus would not apply against the Fighter.

To make it more clear, yes the Minotaur can still get off the Charge bonus, but only against a 3rd party member who happens to be along the strait-line path between the Fighter and the Wizard. Otherwise the Minotaur can still attack normally, using the Gore with non-boosted damage, or more likely with the Batteaxe because it deals more normal damage than a Gore.

And incidentally, disengage doesn't work against the sentinel feat if the enemy is within 5'.

 

[Fanaelialae]

However, a DM would note that in order to trigger an opportunity attack from the Fighter, the Minotaur would need to leave the Fighter's reach. Because the Fighter is using a whip, the fighter's reach is 10', while the Minotaur's reach is just 5', leaving the Fighter out of range. Likewise, if the Fighter was using a dagger, the Minotaur would be within 5' of reach, but the last 10' of movement would not have been in a strait line towards the Fighter, so the Charge bonus would not apply against the Fighter.

I believe your response is mostly correct, except for this part. Aside from when attacking with the whip, the fighter's reach is 5 ft.

PHB 147 (emphasis mine)

Reach. This weapon adds 5 feet to your reach when you attack with it.

Since the opportunity attack is triggered while the fighter isn't attacking, it uses the fighter's innate reach (5 ft) rather than the fighter's extended whip reach. In other words, OAs almost never use extended reach unless a creature has natural reach.

 

[Leatherhead]

I believe your response is mostly correct, except for this part. Aside from when attacking with the whip, the fighter's reach is 5 ft.

You could rule it that way, but you could also rule it the other way. In fact, the different devs have "clarified" it being both ways.

http://www.sageadvice.eu/?s=reach

Personally, I run with it being "always on". It's a bit easier to visualize, and allows pole-arms to actually work in a formation. But if you don't, the dagger example should still work for the non-reach whip.

 

[Fanaelialae]

You could rule it that way, but you could also rule it the other way. In fact, the different devs have "clarified" it being both ways.

http://www.sageadvice.eu/?s=reach

Personally, I run with it being "always on". It's a bit easier to visualize, and allows pole-arms to actually work in a formation. But if you don't, the dagger example should still work for the non-reach whip.

Interesting!

Even if they didn't though, you're free to run the game as you choose. I was just pointing out the RAW. It also should be noted that "always-on" reach weapons make the Polearm Mastery feat weaker, since granting an attack on enemies moving in on you is one of the feat's major features.

 

[Sezarious]

Interesting!

Even if they didn't though, you're free to run the game as you choose. I was just pointing out the RAW. It also should be noted that "always-on" reach weapons make the Polearm Mastery feat weaker, since granting an attack on enemies moving in on you is one of the feat's major features.

Yeah, in a way it weakens the polearm mastery feat, but ONLY if you feel that allowing it is a house rule and NOT as intended. Given the above article with clarification from devs, I'm satisfied, when they've said 'attacks, they've meant ALL attacks. The thing I like about it is it mechanically enhances the humble whip, which I would now consider using. It gives the whip a nice combat flavour really.

 

[Dausuul]

You could rule it that way, but you could also rule it the other way. In fact, the different devs have "clarified" it being both ways.

http://www.sageadvice.eu/?s=reach

I don't see the contradiction. Crawford says that polearms only increase your reach when attacking. Mearls says you get an OA when something leaves your reach, whatever that reach is. So if you're armed with a polearm and not attacking, your reach is 5 feet and you get an OA when the enemy leaves that range.

(It would help if they had chosen a term other than "reach" to describe polearm-type weapons. That creates a lot of confusion with the more general concept of reach.)

 

[Leatherhead]

I don't see the contradiction.

Mearls on July 20/21.

Yeah, in a way it weakens the polearm mastery feat

make the Polearm Mastery feat weaker, since granting an attack on enemies moving in on you is one of the feat's major features.

Polearm Mastery triggers when they enter reach as opposed to leave, it could be argued that it makes the feat stronger in a way.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

OH, WOW, this makes Sentinel / Polearm master a LOT more balanced than I thought it was!!!

 

[miniaturehoarder]

I don't see the contradiction. Crawford says that polearms only increase your reach when attacking. Mearls says you get an OA when something leaves your reach, whatever that reach is. So if you're armed with a polearm and not attacking, your reach is 5 feet and you get an OA when the enemy leaves that range.

(It would help if they had chosen a term other than "reach" to describe polearm-type weapons. That creates a lot of confusion with the more general concept of reach.)

Fully agree with you there! My whole table screwed this up.