D&D 5E the dex warrior - why make a strength based one?

[Argyle King]

You're not totally wrong: wielding a sword once you and the monster contact, he has to take an OA to get to the squishy (S). Which is why using a reach weapon without feat support is generally not a great defensive tactic (Reach is great for hit and run battlemasters or rogues though).

However, with polearm mastery the trade off here is before he gets to the Squishy he's got to go within 10 feet of you, triggering the OA. So in this instance, you're "Fending him off" with the threat of an OA (As soon as he steps on any 2, you attack), rather than "Locking him down" with the OA threat. It's essentially where the monster pays the Pain toll.

Now where the Polearmer really shines is multiple enemies: no one can run around him because he's got such a huge hit box....again, they all have to pay the Pain toll to get by (Unless they all charge at once). Again in your example you are right that the monster only pays the pain toll once. However, if your squishy takes a 5 foot step back, now they are paying twice if they don't move fast. Take the Sentinel feat instead of GWM and your reaction is pretty much getting used every turn because, with good positioning, everything need to run past you and you stop them dead. 5 feet away. Then you attack with reach and move backwards. It can be pretty devastating.

I'm not disputing any of that is true with the feat.

I was clarifying my own understanding of what happens without the feat.

With the feat, I can see the appeal of being able to use a trip to knock the opponent down and cause them to waste movement.

 

[Caliban]

I'm not disputing any of that is true with the feat.

I was clarifying my own understanding of what happens without the feat.

With the feat, I can see the appeal of being able to use a trip to knock the opponent down and cause them to waste movement.

The real power is Polearm Master + Sentinal. OA as they close, and if you hit, their movement is reduced to zero. If they don't have Reach or a ranged attack, they are unable to attack you.

Granted, it's only one opponent a round, but it can be a game changer.

 

[Hillsy7]

I'm not disputing any of that is true with the feat.

I was clarifying my own understanding of what happens without the feat.

With the feat, I can see the appeal of being able to use a trip to knock the opponent down and cause them to waste movement.

Then yes - a reach weapon without feat support is not great too close to the squishies. Not a bad offensive option, but defensively not as strong as a normal melee weapon.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Imagine using a reach weapon while trying to protect other members of the party. Let's say there is a two-square gap between myself and a squishy party member.

Yeah, I immediately wondered about that, as well. It's surprisingly easy to just 'run around' would-be blockers in 5e, as it is. But, if reach lets you 'threaten' (I don't recall if 5e uses that term but I'm used to it from playing reach fighters in 3e) a wider frontage, it can still be quite worth it - it just means your allies are going to have to stand further back from you to receive what protection you offer. If it means you can use a 25' wide gap as a choke-point...

I can buy the argument of wanting to be close to someone using a polearm. In fact, that is an issue which is addressed by the rules of some other games I play. However, in the context of D&D, it seems a little bit strange. I suppose it does make some amount of sense if I change how I'm looking at it, but it's still a little odd at first glance.

Part of it was the way we played fighters with polearms in 3e. You could go a little crazy with combat reflexes and a reach weapon and maybe the occasional Enlarge potion - and Spring Attack, Great Cleave or Whirlwind Attack. 4e over-reacted to those 'exploits' (it's not like the resultant builds catapulted the fighter to tier 1 or anything) and relegated a profoundly nerfed version of such things to a feat that wasn't available until 11th level. 5e barely pulled back from that injustice with its polearm feat (and also went and made charging a feat!). Both seem just silly: if you have a long-pointy, people coming towards you had best beware of it, even if you're not 4th level to get the feat yet - heck, even if you're not proficient.

With this in mind, if I ever play a character focused on a polearm, it looks as though readying an action to attack is the better tactical option.

One thing to consider is that any enemy trying to 'run past' you is likely to burn off your PM reaction upon entering your threatened area, so it won't matter if the ally you're protecting is within/adjacent to that area or beyond it, when he runs past you, you won't have a reaction left to take the opportunity attack with, anyway. Likewise, if you ready, that burns your reaction.

Protecting allies means being a meat-shield or old-school 'fighter wall,' you have to find a choke point, like a doorway, narrow enough that you physically fill it and enemies can't just all stream past you after one of them risks your one-and-only OA.

 

[Argyle King]

Protecting allies means being a meat-shield or old-school 'fighter wall,' you have to find a choke point, like a doorway, narrow enough that you physically fill it and enemies can't just all stream past you after one of them risks your one-and-only OA.

If the enemy could manage to jump 5' and stay within your threat area, it seems that the rules would technically allow them to pass you without a problem.

In actual play, I suspect most DMs would likely make a judgement call there and say that doesn't seem to be the intent of the rules, but... well, then again, a flying creature could float over you and not take an OA as long as they didn't leave your threatened area.

While a somewhat silly tactic (and one which I imagine players might balk at the DM using), I can imagine at least one or two of the people I have gamed with while doing Adventurer's League trying to rules lawyer that the party can make a human pyramid so that their character could hop over the Ogre (who is protecting the squishy evil wizard) without getting attacked.

 

[Ancalagon]

I still want to know why this thread was necroed

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

 

[Tony Vargas]

If the enemy could manage to jump 5' and stay within your threat area, it seems that the rules would technically allow them to pass you without a problem.

Obviously wouldn't work in a doorway, but why go through something cheesy like staying within the threat area, when you and all your buddies can just stream past the poor sucker, anyway. One of you might get tagged, but the rest might as well be strolling on the beach for all the danger their in. When you don't outnumber the would-be 'tank' you're probably more than tough enough to take one melee attack - it's Extra Attack that gives the melee types (the STR melee types, anyway, the rogue is a different story if he has Adv) their full damage potential.

 

[Argyle King]

Obviously wouldn't work in a doorway, but why go through something cheesy like staying within the threat area, when you and all your buddies can just stream past the poor sucker, anyway. One of you might get tagged, but the rest might as well be strolling on the beach for all the danger their in. When you don't outnumber the would-be 'tank' you're probably more than tough enough to take one melee attack - it's Extra Attack that gives the melee types (the STR melee types, anyway, the rogue is a different story if he has Adv) their full damage potential.

Why would I bother? Most of the time, I likely wouldn't, but it's somewhat interesting to consider the rules implications of how things work.

Bringing up the rogue is an interesting addition as well. In some of my hypothetical situations, a rogue could enter threat range, walk around the meat shield, and then disengage as a bonus action to just keep going as though the meat shield wasn't even there. This is something which may come into play for non-good or non-lawful PCs trying to avoid the town guard and escape. Though, in the context of this thread, I'm sure many would argue that the PCs are better off just using ranged weapons anyway.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In some of my hypothetical situations, a rogue could enter threat range, walk around the meat shield, and then disengage as a bonus action to just keep going as though the meat shield wasn't even there.

Yes, certainly. Cunning Action /is/ a good ability, that way, and most melee types have no answer to it.

Though, in the context of this thread, I'm sure many would argue that the PCs are better off just using ranged weapons anyway.

Or that the Rogue counts as a 'DEX warrior.' :shrug:

 

[BookBarbarian]

I still want to know why this thread was necroed

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using EN World mobile app

Why are threads ever necroed? Because someone feels they have something to say on the subject. And oftentimes because they don't look at the dates, which is even more likely if they've come to the thread directly from a search engine.