Dual Wielder vs. Polearm Master

[ECMO3]

So, I was thinking: AC bonus aside, is there any mechanical reason to take the Dual Wielder feat instead of Polearm Master?

(If your response to this is "Because you want to play a dual wielder and you should only care about concept and not mechanics"... well, post that if you must, but don't expect a response, at least from me. I'm interested in mechanical balance here.)

For a character with Extra Attack, the damage dice are the same: 3d8 for Dual Wielder, 2d10+1d4 for Polearm Mastery, both averaging 13.5. However:

Advantages of Polearm Master

• Adds your stat bonus to the "off-hand" attack.
• [Edited, per Caliban] All of your attacks have reach.
• Free opportunity attack when a foe enters your reach.
• Can be used with Great Weapon Master.
• Front-loads your damage into your "main-hand" attack, so if you need to use your bonus action for something else, you don't sacrifice as much damage output.
• You only need one magic weapon to boost all of your attacks.

Advantages of Dual Wielder

• +1 AC.

Am I missing something here? I mean, I know Polearm Master is a powerhouse feat and Dual Wielder... isn't, but this seems really extreme.

Yes you are missing a couple things.

1. Weapon options:

Here are the list of weapons that work with polearm master:
Glaive
Halberd
Pike (does not allow bonus action attack)
Quarterstaff (does not work with the first half of GWM, does not have reach)
Spear (does not work with the first half of GWM, does not have reach))

Dual Wielder works with any combination of the following weapons:
Club
Dagger
Handaxe
Javelin
light Hammer
Mace
Sickle
Spear
Quarterstaff
Battleaxe
Flail
Lance (mounted)
Longsword
Morning Star
Rapier
Scimitar
Shortsword
Warhammer
War Pick
Trident
Whip

So from a mathematical point of view there are 5 different options you can use with PAM. There are 441 different combinations you can use with Dual Wielder. This is particular import when it comes to magic items. Your chance of finding a magic Halberd or Glaive is near 0. You may, depending on the campaign be able to buy or make a magic Halberd. In a few tables the DM might drop one for you because you chose this feat, but that is rare I think. On the other hand, in most campaigns finding magic items usable with dual wielder is extremely high and if there are legendary magic weapons on hand, it is much more likely to be used with dual wielder


2. Damage is substantially better with Dual Wielder
Using defense fighting style and the best PAM weapons (Halberd or Glaive) will net you damage of 3-24+3*strength each turn using your bonus action and defense fighting style or 2-20+2*strength when you don't get your bonus action.

With dual wielder, two weapon fighting and optimal weapons (mounted Lances) you have the same AC and are doing 3-36+3*strength with your bonus action or 2-24+2*strength without. You aren't getting the reaction attack, but you are doing a lot more damage on your turn.

Even if you can't use Lances or when you are knocked off your mount, damage with any D8 weapon is going to do the same damage as PAM. So it is A LOT better when you can use your lances and equal is can't use your Lances.


3. GWM is overrated
GWM is not a great feat. GWM/PAM limits you to 3 weapons and only 2 if you want to make a bonus action attack. Compared to an ASI you either have a -1 to hit and damage or a -6 to hit and +9 in damage. With the penalty it is not far ahead in damage on most foes. If you have extra damage from things like smite or hex or subclass damage it can actually be behind, while also having worse skills and worse saves. On top of that, if you combine it with PAM you can't even use the best heavy weapons.


I am not saying dual wielding is a better feat than PAM, but if you optimize your character around this specifically I think it will do more damage and have more flexibility with Dual Wielder on most classes and in most games.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yes you are missing a couple things.

1. Weapon options:

Here are the list of weapons that work with polearm master:
Glaive
Halberd
Pike (does not allow bonus action attack)
Quarterstaff (does not work with the first half of GWM, does not have reach)
Spear (does not work with the first half of GWM, does not have reach))

Dual Wielder works with any combination of the following weapons:
Club
Dagger
Handaxe
Javelin
light Hammer
Mace
Sickle
Spear
Quarterstaff
Battleaxe
Flail
Lance (mounted)
Longsword
Morning Star
Rapier
Scimitar
Shortsword
Warhammer
War Pick
Trident
Whip

So from a mathematical point of view there are 5 different options you can use with PAM. There are 441 different combinations you can use with Dual Wielder. This is particular import when it comes to magic items. Your chance of finding a magic Halberd is near 0. You may, depending on the campaign be able to buy or make a magic Halberd. On the other hand, in most campaigns finding magic items usable with dual wielder is extremely high and if there are legendary magic weapons on hand, it is much more likely to be used with dual wielder


2. Damage is substantially better with Dual Wielder
Using the best PAM weapons (Halberd or Glaive) will net you damage of 3-24+3*strength each turn using your bonus action and defense fighting style or 2-20+2*strength when you don't get your bonus action. With dual wielder, two weapon fighting and optimal weapons (mounted Lances) you have the same AC and are doing 3-36+3*strength with your bonus action or 2-24+2*strength without. You aren't getting the reaction attack, but you are doing a lot more damage on your turn.

Even if you can't use Lances or when you are knocked off your mount, damage with any D8 weapon is going to do the same damage as PAM. So it is A LOT better when you can use your lances and equal is can't use your Lances.


3. GWM is overrated
GWM is not a great feat. GWM/PAM limits you to 3 weapons and only 2 if you want to make a bonus action attack. Compared to an ASI you either have a -1 to hit and damage or a -6 to hit and +9 in damage. With the penalty it is not far ahead in damage on most foes. If you have extra damage from things like smite or hex or subclass damage it can actually be behind, while also having worse skills and worse saves. On top of that, if you combine it with PAM you can't even use the best heavy weapons.


I am not saying dual wielding is a better feat than PAM, but if you optimize your character around this specifically I think it will do more damage and be more flexible on most classes and in most games.

CoS our rogue splashed fighter level and dual wields. Think he has two magical shorts words.

Magic pole arms visually don't exist except DMs discretion. Have a friendly generous artificer handy or are a hexblade?

That rogue out damages GWM via order cleric as well. Dex based better skills, initiative and ranged option.

PAM user sad panda at range. Dual wielder RAW can carry 1 blade and draw another or switch to bow as required.

PAM has to have 0 weapon or lose a turn stowing the pole arm Then has to draw a bow.

 

[Blue]

Dual Wield additional considerations

1. Need to wield limited weapons for class features (finesse for sneak attack, etc.)
2. Have a feat (Piercer/Crusher/Slasher) for a particular damage type, and don't want to use the quarterstaff. (All of the other have a different damage type than the off-end Bludgeoning.)
3. Want to be able to throw weapons and still get the extra attack. (You can throw a spear, but not make the off-end attack as a thrown attack.)
4. Find powerful 1H magic item that isn't a spear or quarterstaff in a game with little chance to exchange.
5. Flip side, in a high magic item game and want two "slots" for magical weapons that do cool things instead of one.

But yeah, PAM beats Dual Wielding except in extremely limited circumstances. But that's because the whole TWF thing is mostly a trap in 5e. There are some uses for it (like levels 1-4 or rogues) but generally it's inferior.

 

[Mort]

Yes you are missing a couple things.

1. Weapon options:

Here are the list of weapons that work with polearm master:
Glaive
Halberd
Pike (does not allow bonus action attack)
Quarterstaff (does not work with the first half of GWM, does not have reach)
Spear (does not work with the first half of GWM, does not have reach))

Dual Wielder works with any combination of the following weapons:
Club
Dagger
Handaxe
Javelin
light Hammer
Mace
Sickle
Spear
Quarterstaff
Battleaxe
Flail
Lance (mounted)
Longsword
Morning Star
Rapier
Scimitar
Shortsword
Warhammer
War Pick
Trident
Whip

So from a mathematical point of view there are 5 different options you can use with PAM. There are 441 different combinations you can use with Dual Wielder. This is particular import when it comes to magic items. Your chance of finding a magic Halberd or Glaive is near 0. You may, depending on the campaign be able to buy or make a magic Halberd. In a few tables the DM might drop one for you because you chose this feat, but that is rare I think. On the other hand, in most campaigns finding magic items usable with dual wielder is extremely high and if there are legendary magic weapons on hand, it is much more likely to be used with dual wielder


2. Damage is substantially better with Dual Wielder
Using defense fighting style and the best PAM weapons (Halberd or Glaive) will net you damage of 3-24+3*strength each turn using your bonus action and defense fighting style or 2-20+2*strength when you don't get your bonus action.

With dual wielder, two weapon fighting and optimal weapons (mounted Lances) you have the same AC and are doing 3-36+3*strength with your bonus action or 2-24+2*strength without. You aren't getting the reaction attack, but you are doing a lot more damage on your turn.

Even if you can't use Lances or when you are knocked off your mount, damage with any D8 weapon is going to do the same damage as PAM. So it is A LOT better when you can use your lances and equal is can't use your Lances.


3. GWM is overrated
GWM is not a great feat. GWM/PAM limits you to 3 weapons and only 2 if you want to make a bonus action attack. Compared to an ASI you either have a -1 to hit and damage or a -6 to hit and +9 in damage. With the penalty it is not far ahead in damage on most foes. If you have extra damage from things like smite or hex or subclass damage it can actually be behind, while also having worse skills and worse saves. On top of that, if you combine it with PAM you can't even use the best heavy weapons.


I am not saying dual wielding is a better feat than PAM, but if you optimize your character around this specifically I think it will do more damage and have more flexibility with Dual Wielder on most classes and in most games.

PAM also allows you to get in an opportunity attack when an enemy ENTERS your reach.

I've seen this come up a lot and it REALLY increases the damage output.

 

[FrogReaver]

The other benefit of Dual Wielder, you potentially get to be good with bows, stealth, initiative. PAM and GWM don’t work with any finesse weapons so require boosting str.

 

[jgsugden]

....
3. GWM is overrated
GWM is not a great feat. GWM/PAM limits you to 3 weapons and only 2 if you want to make a bonus action attack. Compared to an ASI you either have a -1 to hit and damage or a -6 to hit and +9 in damage. With the penalty it is not far ahead in damage on most foes. If you have extra damage from things like smite or hex or subclass damage it can actually be behind, while also having worse skills and worse saves. On top of that, if you combine it with PAM you can't even use the best heavy weapons...

If you're fighting low AC enemies, GWM is phenomenal. If your DM tends to use higher ACs, it has reduced effectiveness.

It is also often not a battle between ASI and GWM due to the commonality of strength items. I'm not saying that every GWM character finds a belt of giant strength ... but a lot do. The ASI spent on strength at that point becomes a waste. To that end, I see a lot of strength builds ignore ASI in strength in favor of other abilities when they assume they'll be able to locate strength items.

 

[Zardnaar]

If you're fighting low AC enemies, GWM is phenomenal. If your DM tends to use higher ACs, it has reduced effectiveness.

It is also often not a battle between ASI and GWM due to the commonality of strength items. I'm not saying that every GWM character finds a belt of giant strength ... but a lot do. The ASI spent on strength at that point becomes a waste. To that end, I see a lot of strength builds ignore ASI in strength in favor of other abilities when they assume they'll be able to locate strength items.

Bears me why tge would assume tgat unless the DM funnels them what they want.

Magic two handed weapons and things like hand crossbows are fairly rare. Unless the pre published adventures have them or a +1 greatsword you're probably not finding one.

 

[ECMO3]

PAM also allows you to get in an opportunity attack when an enemy ENTERS your reach.

Yeah but you are giving up the extra damage you get with dual wielding

I've seen this come up a lot and it REALLY increases the damage output.

It does come up certainly, but not enough to cover the damage difference when you are that far behind.

 

[jgsugden]

Bears me why tge would assume tgat unless the DM funnels them what they want.

Magic two handed weapons and things like hand crossbows are fairly rare. Unless the pre published adventures have them or a +1 greatsword you're probably not finding one.

In most games there are ways to get items you want to have. Either you tell the DM and they place them (as is one suggestion in the DMG), they craft them (as there are rules in the DMG to provide), or the DM just has magic markets built into their setting. Not all DMs do, but between the DMs that use one of those three approaches, and the additional situations in which players think they're in playing in a game with one of those situations ...

It is fairly common.

I've played in a fair number of games in 5E that lasted at least 5 levels, and almost all of them provided a route to purchase magic items.

 

[ECMO3]

If you're fighting low AC enemies, GWM is phenomenal. If your DM tends to use higher ACs, it has reduced effectiveness.

It does give you some flexibility in this regard, but it is not "reduced" effectiveness agaisnt high AC enemies, you are doing significantly less damage against them then you would if you took an ASI, due to both the reduced chance to hit and the reduced ability damage on a hit.

It is also often not a battle between ASI and GWM due to the commonality of strength items. I'm not saying that every GWM character finds a belt of giant strength ... but a lot do. The ASI spent on strength at that point becomes a waste. To that end, I see a lot of strength builds ignore ASI in strength in favor of other abilities when they assume they'll be able to locate strength items.

I've played around 100 characters in the past three years on numerous tables and I have only had one with a belt of giant strength, and I need to point out that requires attunement. I have had several with gauntlets of ogre power, but they don't give you a 20 and are again attunement, limiting other magic options.

Further if we are looking at magic items, magic heavy weapons are not common at all, so compare GWM with a non-magic greatsword against what you woudl otherwise have at the level you are going to get a belt of giant strength.