Polearm Master

[Narren]

Quick question....does the Polearm Master feat allow you to use your strength bonus on your 1d4 attack?

[Forrestfire]

Yes. This was also confirmed to be the RAI (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/24/polearm-feat-and-strength/).

[Narren]

Yes. This was also confirmed to be the RAI (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/24/polearm-feat-and-strength/).

I knew it'd be somewhere! Thanks.

[Luriant]

Sigh.... my DM think is a bonus attack as TWF off hand..., so no +Stat for me (Wisdom, im using shillelag)

[Kryx]

Sigh.... my DM think is a bonus attack as TWF off hand..., so no +Stat for me (Wisdom, im using shillelag)

It is d4, but it does allow wisdom and is not a TWF attack - it is justa bonus attack.

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/02/shillelagh-on-quarterstaff/ covers the damage die.


For the duration, you can use your spellcasting ability instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of melee attacks using that weapon

No idea how a DM could misinterpret that.

[Person_Man]

No idea how a DM could misinterpret that.

Meh, I'd say its pretty easy to misinterpret, especially in a new edition.

If you're going to have an exception based rule system (where any specific class ability/feat/spell/etc trumps a general rule) then those exceptions need to be written clearly, and should include examples when possible. You shouldn't have to cross index the exception with the general rule and think through how it works - you should be able to just use the ability/feat/spell/etc in front of you as exactly as written.

[Luriant]

It is d4, but it does allow wisdom and is not a TWF attack - it is justa bonus attack.

http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/02/shillelagh-on-quarterstaff/ covers the damage die.

No idea how a DM could misinterpret that.
3.5 DM in 5e... if doubt, use 3.5e rules.

So Polearm Master is a double weapon (that don't exist in 5e), that uses the rules of TWF of 3.5e in 5e (no stats to off hand attack). So, resuming the rules in my board.

1: :smallwink:Quarter staff bonus attack of Polearm Master can be used with a shield (one handed).
2: :smallmad:Bonus Damage is D4, without stat (TWF of 5e and double weapon of 3.5e)
3: :smallwink:With Shillelagh: Bonus stat is wisdom
4: :smallannoyed:With Shillelagh: Bonus damage is now a D6 (well, better than nothing)
5: :smalleek:With Shillelagh: ¿Bonus damage is magical? I don't have Polearm Master yet (waiting for cleric 8, to have a second chance to land Divine Strike D8) but talking with my DM (and other DM, now a player in my group) 3.5e double weapons need a enchantment with each "head", but the actual DM upgrade D4 to D6 with Shillelagh, so I think the damage is magical.
6: :smallannoyed:The Divine Focus in the shield are a Material Component, but the hand with the Shield can't make somatic. so O pick warcaster as Human feat.

I know the sage advice, and "9 more fifth-edition D&D rules answered by de desginers"
http://dmdavid.com/tag/9-more-fifth-edition-dd-rules-questions-answered-by-the-designers/
With divine casters using a shield and casting spells (and not the only 2 spells [light cantrips and Tongues]) that don't include Somatic, i think is ALL the spells that don't need costly Material Components.

I have a good DM, with decades of experience, but decades in AD&D to 3.5e, and is to dificult for they to ignore the rules of 3.5e (that i never played, only L5A D20, SWD20...), and pick 5e as a new and complete book. If 5e don't solve the doubt, think, but no pick rules of other games.

ps. Sage advice have enough problems, with contradict designers, as with Crossbow Expert feat.
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/22/golden-rule-ix/

[Kryx]

ps. Sage advice have enough problems, with contradict designers, as with Crossbow Expert feat.
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/22/golden-rule-ix/

Ha, I'm very surprised how popular my tweet w/ them is.

They don't have contradicting problems: In that very tweet Mearls says how he would rule it and Crawford is saying how the rules works.

In my experience I've tried to do my best to remove all old editions from my mind when adjudicating rules. All DMs should do this. It isn't always easy, but to depend on old rules can cause problems with a new system.
This is especially important once they've had a chance to review the rules. I can understand it before that point.