D&D 5E Polearm Master + quarterstaff...+ shield?

[GlassJaw]

On a more serious note, the “quarterstaff” of 5e is really more like a jo. A quarterstaff should really be a 2-handed reach weapon IMO.

Well I also think the quarterstaff should be a finesse weapon.

Note that has nothing to do with historical accuracy and everything to do with martial arts movies.

 

[tetrasodium]

I don't understand why this is a topic of debate in a game where you can nearly die after being dropped repeatedly from 200 feet by a dragon only to swim away in plate mail & sleep it off with less lingering effect than the 1.75L bottle of high proof alcohol you drank before bed. If there was a specific cane weapon as displayed in the videos I linked earlier or any of the more advanced examples on youtubr or I could see the justification, but not as things are.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well I also think the quarterstaff should be a finesse weapon.

Note that has nothing to do with historical accuracy and everything to do with martial arts movies.

I get you. But personally I’d give finesse to the versatile staff for that reason. Meanwhile the quarterstaff should be emulating something more like Little John.

 

[Horwath]

to put a little awkwardness aside, what do you really get and what you lose vs using a 2Handed reach weapon...

1d6 vs 1d10 damage,
+2 AC vs +0 AC
5ft vs 10ft reach

So for extra 2 AC you lose 2 damage with your primary attack(s) and opportunity attacks, lose 5ft reach and with that battlefield control and lots of opportunity to trigger reaction attack from PAM feat.

seems OK to me.

 

[Helldritch]

to put a little awkwardness aside, what do you really get and what you lose vs using a 2Handed reach weapon...

1d6 vs 1d10 damage,
+2 AC vs +0 AC
5ft vs 10ft reach

So for extra 2 AC you lose 2 damage with your primary attack(s) and opportunity attacks, lose 5ft reach and with that battlefield control and lots of opportunity to trigger reaction attack from PAM feat.

seems OK to me.

You got it wrong.
The right question is what do you gain vs someone that uses a similar weapon that does not have polearm master?
A druid with Shillelagh will win an attack with his bonus action for the cost of one feat, yes. But the Shillelagh can now be used twice instead of once. Not game changing but a net gain nonetheless.

An eldritch knight gains the same thing so does a blade singer. Any classes that uses shield and board that can use a melee weapon but no acces to more than one extra attack will benefit from that little shenanigan and at no loss as they can always fall back to a polearm if the need arise.

But the real shine is a paladin. A smite spell will allow 3 attacks doing an additional die of smite. And this is not counting their smite features. 3 opportunities instead of two. It can mean the difference between a BBEG lasting enough time to be a treath or being a simple hindrance.

Sometimes, it is not about what you lose but what you gain.

 

[Horwath]

You got it wrong.
The right question is what do you gain vs someone that uses a similar weapon that does not have polearm master?
A druid with Shillelagh will win an attack with his bonus action for the cost of one feat, yes. But the Shillelagh can now be used twice instead of once. Not game changing but a net gain nonetheless.

An eldritch knight gains the same thing so does a blade singer. Any classes that uses shield and board that can use a melee weapon but no acces to more than one extra attack will benefit from that little shenanigan and at no loss as they can always fall back to a polearm if the need arise.

But the real shine is a paladin. A smite spell will allow 3 attacks doing an additional die of smite. And this is not counting their smite features. 3 opportunities instead of two. It can mean the difference between a BBEG lasting enough time to be a treath or being a simple hindrance.

Sometimes, it is not about what you lose but what you gain.

we are talking about PAM users here, so only relevant question is: Is qstaff+shield too powerful vs. let's say halberd.
and if that +2 AC is worth losing damage and reach.

and yes getting 1d8/1d8 with Shillelagh might seem like some cheap cheese, but it's only relevant for a level or two.
when you get to extra attack, it's worse again and it uses your bonus action if you do not manage to cast it before combat.

 

[tetrasodium]

we are talking about PAM users here, so only relevant question is: Is qstaff+shield too powerful vs. let's say halberd.
and if that +2 AC is worth losing damage and reach.

and yes getting 1d8/1d8 with Shillelagh might seem like some cheap cheese, but it's only relevant for a level or two.
when you get to extra attack, it's worse again and it uses your bonus action if you do not manage to cast it before combat.

Once you factor in a feat it's not even the only way of getting 1d8/1d8 & there are ways to get more than a 1d8/1d8

Spoiler: phbstuff

Is there something dramatic a shield enables other than a +1ac over any of those?

 

[Aaron L]

I think it is totally fine, especially with a spear, but with a staff as well. You can strike with the point, and then smack them with the haft. In real life every surface of a weapon was used in combat, not just the striking surface. Look up images from some of the fechtbuks to see how swords were used to strike hammer blows with the hilt.

As for using shillaelagh on a staff used one-handed, why not? The spell works on one-handed clubs too, so there's no reason it should force you to use two hands when cast on a staff.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

By RAW it's legal. As a house rule I ban it because I think it's stupid.

I agree, but refluffing the bonus action attack as a shield bash makes no difference mechanically.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Well I also think the quarterstaff should be a finesse weapon.

Note that has nothing to do with historical accuracy and everything to do with martial arts movies.

The Monk uses the Quarterstaff like a finesse weapon. So done!