Maul and PAM - Oil and Water?

[ZorroGames]

Okay, it is D&D more than a simulation but the wargamer, White Box DM, computer simulation programmer, historian, and ex-SCA devils inside me are bickering about PAM and Maul.

BLUF: Maul is a Great Weapon for GWM (especially second bullet) usage but since it is not a Glaive, Halberd, Quarterstaff or Pike there is no applicability for PAM if I am reading the Feat correctly? :smallconfused:

Rules are rules but it seemed odd.

Comments? Corrections?

[Lombra]

You are correct. You may notice that spears are also not included in PAM.

[Koren]

I don't see what's odd about it, Polearm Master is for Polearm weapons, which the Maul is not. I'm a bit more surprised the Spear doesn't count for a Polearm.

[mephnick]

You are correct. You may notice that spears are also not included in PAM.

Yet the quarterstaff is. Spear not being included is probably one of the dumbest things in the edition and the sage idiots won't admit it.

[JackPhoenix]

Yet the quarterstaff is. Spear not being included is probably one of the dumbest things in the edition and the sage idiots won't admit it.

Correction: spear not being included in the second bullet (unlike QS) of PAM is dumb, spear not being included in the first bullet (like QS) is perfectly fine.

[Findulidas]

Yet the quarterstaff is. Spear not being included is probably one of the dumbest things in the edition and the sage idiots won't admit it.

Yeah. There are several logical problems with this. Its hard to justify when you think about it. Specially when they for some reason added quarterstaves but not spears.

[Armored Walrus]

Bullet 1: Because if you only have simple weapon proficiency you aren't spinning a spear around and getting fancy with it. You're just holding it in front of you and thrusting with it, or throwing it. If you want to get fancy with a spear-like weapon, you have the training to use a glaive. On the other hand, any peasant knows how to pick up a stick and hit you with either end; they probably have quarterstaff competitions at village holidays.

Bullet 2: Because if you only have simple weapon proficiency, you aren't aware enough on the battlefield to take advantage of a new enemy coming within range right away. Thus neither spear nor quarterstaff work.

I'm not advocating that the logic above is without question, just giving you something to hang the rules on; and I realize I don't address a character who has martial proficiency wielding either of those weapons. Seems a simple enough house rule to say if you have martial weapon proficiency and for some reason lost your glaive, you can use PAM with spears and QS.

From a game design standpoint? If they let spear be used with it, there would never (ok, not never, you want a QS if you're fighting skeletons) be a reason for a non-shillelagh character to use a QS over a spear. Even if you never throw your spear, having the option is better than not having it.

[Vorpalchicken]

I would have difficulty visualizing someone using a maul to intercept a charge or getting a good swing with the butt end (since all the weight is in the hammer end.)
Besides, mauls do 2d6 and that would make it overwhelmingly popular with PAM. It would become almost as annoying as one handed staff PAM.

[Tanarii]

You are correct. You may notice that spears are also not included in PAM.
Not surprising. A one handed spear is probably only about 4ft long. Think Zulu spear. Those were 3ft long total. 2ft of shaft and 1ft of blade. Since the D&D spear is versatile it's probably not that short. But since it can be used one handed it's clearly not 6-7ft long either, there's no way you could get leverage, barring formation fighting. IMO Pike is better to represent a 6ft spear, except for the weight. (Which would be stupid even if it were a 10ft spear.)

OTOH they did make a quarterstaff usable 1H, which is also impossible leverage unless it's a short staff.

Edit: On topic ... why on earth would the Maul be usable with PAM? A Maul is a sledgehammer or warhammer, not a polearm.

[Kryx]

On topic ... why on earth would the Maul be usable with PAM? A Maul is a sledgehammer or warhammer, not a polearm.
Exactly. If you have some kind of bludgeoning hammer polearm in your games surely include it with PAM, but maul is not a polearm or anything close and shouldn't be included.

Quarterstaff shouldn't be either, but that's not really the question here.

[Armored Walrus]

Quarterstaff shouldn't be either, but that's not really the question here.

Striking with the other end of the quarterstaff as a bonus action makes more sense than doing the same with a halberd. It's exactly how a quarterstaff is meant to be used. If the second bullet of PAM is meant to reflect setting a polearm to receive a charge, then it doesn't make sense for it to be there, I agree.

Edit: Sorry, On topic, I agree that trying to strike someone with the butt of a maul probably means you're using it wrong. All the weight is in the head. Try driving a nail with the handle of your hammer sometime. At best, you could parry with the haft, but a butt strike would at most be a distraction.

[Tanarii]

If you have some kind of bludgeoning hammer polearm in your games surely include it with PAM, but mail is not a polearm or anything close and shouldn't be included.Other than the Lucerne Hammer, were hammer polearms a thing?


Quarterstaff shouldn't be either, but that's not really the question here.is that an argument from mechanics, or visualizing?

I'm willing to be being able to fight with both ends of a (2H) staff about the height of a person "makes sense" to most people. Just as it undoubtably does for a spear that length. Its certainly common in Asian martial arts practiced forms, for both weapons.

Of course, since both the 5e quarterstaff and 5e spear are one-handed weapons, they already don't "make sense" to begin with.

Edit: oops, forgot the entering range thing applies to quarterstaff as well. Yeah, that doesn't make a lot of sense.

[Kryx]

Other than the Lucerne Hammer, were hammer polearms a thing?
In actual history it seems there are very few cases of a bludgeoning polearm so I'm not missing them in D&D personally


is that an argument from mechanics, or visualizing?
Let me clarify: PAM applying to certain weapons or not is a tiresome conversation that comes up weekly since 5e came out. In it's current form the first bullet should surely apply to spears. What I actually meant about quarterstaff is that the bullet should apply only when it is used in 2 hands.

Though beyond all that PAM shouldn't give an extra attack at all imo. It takes away so much of TWF's niche and the flavor isn't great for long polearms (it works for spears and quarterstaffs).

The design seems to have desired to keep the idea of a double weapon in 5e, but put it behind a feat. I think this should definitely not apply to glaive, halberd, and pike. Mechanically spear and quarterstaff should probably be fine with the first bullet in balance terms. Overall the feat is split focused and suffers from the large size of feats in 5e imo.

[ZorroGames]

I agreethat a Maul is not a polearm actually, though pole-arm bludgeoning weapons rarely existed in combat form (as opposed to the lucern hammer which is pretty much to my understanding an exceptional case,) but some of my younger fellow players are pointing to their stereotypically ridiculously large fantasy weapons on their figures and saying, "It's as long as a glaive/Halberd!" Sigh.

Thank you for supporting my argument that a Maul is a Great Weapon but not a Polearm.

[Tanarii]

but some of my younger fellow players are pointing to their stereotypically ridiculously large fantasy weapons on their figures and saying, "It's as long as a glaive/Halberd!" Sigh.A Maul is a 10lb sledgehammer. Those are quite small, practically speaking.

If they want anime-sized or WoW-sized hammers, multiple it's weight by 5 and tell them they attack with Disadvantage due to the unwieldy weight. :smallamused:

[ZorroGames]

A Maul is a 10lb sledgehammer. Those are quite small, practically speaking.

If they want anime-sized or WoW-sized hammers, multiple it's weight by 5 and tell them they attack with Disadvantage due to the unwieldy weight. :smallamused:
I like it! Filed for future use! :smallcool:

[ZorroGames]

A Maul is a 10lb sledgehammer. Those are quite small, practically speaking.

If they want anime-sized or WoW-sized hammers, multiple it's weight by 5 and tell them they attack with Disadvantage due to the unwieldy weight. :smallamused:

I actually used a maul for one say on a project. I discovered muscle pain for muscles I missed learning about in A&P classes! Some of the fantasy miniatures weapons (hell some historical ones) just make me smile cynically. It reminds me of a tunnel fight in a fantasy novel where the "pseudo" Samurai character looked at the swirling packed figures in the hole, laid his sword aside, cursed, drew a dagger, and jumped into the fray.

Right tool for the job and all that IRL stuff.

[Koren]

I'm rusty on my Hammer type weapons (mostly because, as mentioned, they were generally uncommon) but no matter the size hammers would not support the style necessary for PAM to work. A longer handle for a maul would be for control, not reach, making any size inconsequential for the comparison.

[ZorroGames]

In actual history it seems there are very few cases of a bludgeoning polearm so I'm not missing them in D&D personally

Snip



Having tried to DM with the wall chart of weapon characteristics in AD&D/1st myself, I totally agree with this sentiment.

[ZorroGames]

I'm rusty on my Hammer type weapons (mostly because, as mentioned, they were generally uncommon) but no matter the size hammers would not support the style necessary for PAM to work. A longer handle for a maul would be for control, not reach, making any size inconsequential for the comparison.

Quite agree but between IRL and in fantasy players minds sometimes there are... disconnects...

[ZorroGames]

Striking with the other end of the quarterstaff as a bonus action makes more sense than doing the same with a halberd. It's exactly how a quarterstaff is meant to be used. If the second bullet of PAM is meant to reflect setting a polearm to receive a charge, then it doesn't make sense for it to be there, I agree.

Edit: Sorry, On topic, I agree that trying to strike someone with the butt of a maul probably means you're using it wrong. All the weight is in the head. Try driving a nail with the handle of your hammer sometime. At best, you could parry with the haft, but a butt strike would at most be a distraction.

I actually held and swung (well a controlled monitored by the owner/maker slow speed swing) :smallbiggrin: a historical recreation of a RW halberd. Different physics than I expected. Like most melee weapons I expect IRL versus fantasy "use." Rifles, shotguns, pistols, batons, knives I have used on range and/or in training but what few recreated RW historical pre-gunpowder melee weapons I have held were completely different than media presented them.

I totally do not "get" the butt strike thing in the rules but since I am not DM'ing since AD&D/1st days - not my call.

[JackPhoenix]

I agreethat a Maul is not a polearm actually, though pole-arm bludgeoning weapons rarely existed in combat form (as opposed to the lucern hammer which is pretty much to my understanding an exceptional case,) but some of my younger fellow players are pointing to their stereotypically ridiculously large fantasy weapons on their figures and saying, "It's as long as a glaive/Halberd!" Sigh.

Thank you for supporting my argument that a Maul is a Great Weapon but not a Polearm.

I'd say this: http://nd01.jxs.cz/866/010/7cac065d90_34448150_o2.jpg should definitely count as polearm... the haft was certainly long enough, and the use was similar.

[ZorroGames]

I'd say this: http://nd01.jxs.cz/866/010/7cac065d90_34448150_o2.jpg should definitely count as polearm... the haft was certainly long enough, and the use was similar.

Whoa! Mega-flail...

[Cybren]

Other than the Lucerne Hammer, were hammer polearms a thing?


"Other than the term contemporary historians use to describe a hammer polearm, were hammer polearms a thing" is a weird question to ask dude. yeah, hammer pole-arms were a thing. The examples that people immediately go to are the lucerne hammer and the bec de corbin, but it's not like in the middle ages they could go to Medieval Ikea and get pre-fabricated boxes of murder implements all to similar specifications. The length of the handle of various weapons could vary greatly, and the head of a weapon could be mounted on differently sized handles. pole-hammers existed, yes.



I'm rusty on my Hammer type weapons (mostly because, as mentioned, they were generally uncommon) but no matter the size hammers would not support the style necessary for PAM to work. A longer handle for a maul would be for control, not reach, making any size inconsequential for the comparison.

You do realize that the same amount of materiel used to construct an axe head for a halberd could be used to make make a hammer, right? The weapons wouldn't handle -that- differently than any other pole weapon

[Tanarii]

"Other than the term contemporary historians use to describe a hammer polearm, were hammer polearms a thing" is a weird question to ask dude. yeah, hammer pole-arms were a thing. The examples that people immediately go to are the lucerne hammer and the bec de corbin, but it's not like in the middle ages they could go to Medieval Ikea and get pre-fabricated boxes of murder implements all to similar specifications. The length of the handle of various weapons could vary greatly, and the head of a weapon could be mounted on differently sized handles. pole-hammers existed, yes.
On some brief digging, it looks like to me the lines D&D (and other TRPGs) has drawn at times between bec de Corbin, Lucerne hammer, warhammer and horeseman's pick are pretty much artificial/historian nomenclature. They all appear to be a variant of a warhammer ... small hammer head on one side, decent spike on the back, possibly blade or spike on top, with a handle of variable length.

Seems like a 'historically accurate' warhammer should be a B/P melee weapon, possibly with reach. (Ie two sets of weapon stats, one polearm and one not.) and the War Pick should be eliminated, since that's just another name for Warhammer.

In other words, pretty much all modern fantasy Art depicting warhammers is terrible. Especially Warhammer or WoW art. :smallamused:

[Cybren]

On some brief digging, it looks like to me the lines D&D (and other TRPGs) has drawn at times between bec de Corbin, Lucerne hammer, warhammer and horeseman's pick are pretty much artificial/historian nomenclature. They all appear to be a variant of a warhammer ... small hammer head on one side, decent spike on the back, possibly blade or spike on top, with a handle of variable length.

Seems like a 'historically accurate' warhammer should be a B/P melee weapon, possibly with reach. (Ie two sets of weapon stats, one polearm and one not.) and the War Pick should be eliminated, since that's just another name for Warhammer.

In other words, pretty much all modern fantasy Art depicting warhammers is terrible. Especially Warhammer or WoW art. :smallamused:

pop-culture depictions of weapons are pretty poor in general in terms of representation, which is fine because it's not like pop culture has some duty to be historically accurate or model physics to the satisfaction of pedants like myself, but it makes these sorts of discussions hard because you have a segment of people who are thinking of museum pieces, a segment that are thinking about HEMA reproductions, a segment thinking about the art in the PHB, and a segment thinking about how the weapons work in other games they've played

[Koren]

You do realize that the same amount of materiel used to construct an axe head for a halberd could be used to make make a hammer, right? The weapons wouldn't handle -that- differently than any other pole weapon

While this is true, you swing a hammer different than you would an axe. Maybe it wouldn't handle any different at all, and a person could reasonably perform the same actions. It still wouldn't be as effective depending on if you were trained for a halberd or a maul.

[Cybren]

While this is true, you swing a hammer different than you would an axe. Maybe it wouldn't handle any different at all, and a person could reasonably perform the same actions. It still wouldn't be as effective depending on if you were trained for a halberd or a maul.

Sure but in a practical sense we don't _actually_know how many battlefield weapons were used. We have some guesses but not every weapon has a manuscript, leaving us to lots of guessing

[Koren]

Sure but in a practical sense we don't _actually_know how many battlefield weapons were used. We have some guesses but not every weapon has a manuscript, leaving us to lots of guessing

That's true.

Still, to try and classify a Maul as a Polearm just doesn't make sense to me. RAW, RAI, or otherwise I'm not sure where the topic question is originating from.

[ZorroGames]

Sure but in a practical sense we don't _actually_know how many battlefield weapons were used. We have some guesses but not every weapon has a manuscript, leaving us to lots of guessing

Too true. What little research in closer to original resources (I was more Revolutionary France than Crusades oriented) I was allowed to do left me wondering how fragile such "everybody knows" information was in reality.

Knowledge taught in person was less often written down because of pre-printing press costs, frequently low priority to recorders in times of limited literacy, "every fighter knows" syndrome, and it probably required people to get their lazy ass out if the library and get dirty doing field research.

[ZorroGames]

That's true.

Still, to try and classify a Maul as a Polearm just doesn't make sense to me. RAW, RAI, or otherwise I'm not sure where the topic question is originating from.

The source of my OP:

A discussion with another player who felt the uber-hammer on their PC figure should be considered a polearm. This person would be age-wise my middle child if I had 5 instead if 4; my youngest is 24 and my oldest is 45 if that helps with understanding the player's generation. This person (avoiding gender stereotyping) has an avid RP and Fantasy skirmish gamer background and a vivid imagination. Good player but this discussion 1 on 1 went in circles. So I broached it here.

[Quoxis]

Afaik as a non-professional in medieval weapon usage:

The attack stance and mechanics of a quarterstaff, glaive and halberd are to hold them somewhere around the middle and swinging one end towards the enemy in a more or less sideway-slashing motion. It would be rather easy to use the momentum of that motion to smack the other end against the opponent as well, simply by making a swift turn or whatever.

A spear isn't used to slash, but to pierce (see it's damage type), so that momentum isn't there and it would be a weird thought to fling it forward just to pull it back, turn it around and whack it over the stabbed opponent's head.

A maul can be used similarly to the "polearm mastery polearms", but a) as has been said before, a maul is way heavier and simply not built to be used that way, and b) the way i remember you hold a maul/battlehammer etc. kinda like a wood axe, with one hand close to the end of the (arguably way shorter) handle. Most would also haul it from up above their head downwards onto the opponent's for more damage (gravity and all that).

That might be the thought behind the seemingly random choice which weapons to include in the feat: their usage, as opposed to their classification as polearms. The feat was poorly named.

[Koren]

The source of my OP:

A discussion with another player who felt the uber-hammer on their PC figure should be considered a polearm. This person would be age-wise my middle child if I had 5 instead if 4; my youngest is 24 and my oldest is 45 if that helps with understanding the player's generation. This person (avoiding gender stereotyping) has an avid RP and Fantasy skirmish gamer background and a vivid imagination. Good player but this discussion 1 on 1 went in circles. So I broached it here.

Thanks for the perspective!

To be honest with that it seems more like they saw a feat they liked and wanted to abuse it more than anything else. You could try offering them a halberd (fluff it as a Lucerne that deals bludgeoning damage if they are set on a hammer) as loot. It's still two handed and fits GWM so I doubt it would clash with their character.

EDIT: that is, assuming you even want them to be able to use it.

[Tanarii]

The source of my OP:

A discussion with another player who felt the uber-hammer on their PC figure should be considered a polearm. This person would be age-wise my middle child if I had 5 instead if 4; my youngest is 24 and my oldest is 45 if that helps with understanding the player's generation. This person (avoiding gender stereotyping) has an avid RP and Fantasy skirmish gamer background and a vivid imagination. Good player but this discussion 1 on 1 went in circles. So I broached it here.
Despite my tongue in cheek response about warhammer RPG or wow-like weapons, if they want a polearm hammer it should be easy enough to make one.
Martial Melee Weapon 1d10 Reach Bludgeoning

[ZorroGames]

Thanks for the perspective!

To be honest with that it seems more like they saw a feat they liked and wanted to abuse it more than anything else. You could try offering them a halberd (fluff it as a Lucerne that deals bludgeoning damage if they are set on a hammer) as loot. It's still two handed and fits GWM so I doubt it would clash with their character.

EDIT: that is, assuming you even want them to be able to use it.

If I was the DM then this would be satisfactory but I am just a fellow player. Since every other (slight exaggeration) player has been a full caster I want to encourage a damage machine to join my one dwarf wall. 😉

It just seemed odd (though I understood the computer game background/logic) and I want to know what to say that would sound reasonable for the me, the DM and the player. Any reach weapon backing me up while the rain of Eldritch Blast, Fire-bolt, and Magic Missile rains death around us is good.

Edit I undestand the casters being 10 plus hexes/squares behind and to the side of me but it is lonely when you are a one figure wall. And a Monk to boot!

[ZorroGames]

Despite my tongue in cheek response about warhammer RPG or wow-like weapons, if they want a polearm hammer it should be easy enough to make one.
Martial Melee Weapon 1d10 Reach Bludgeoning

Right, KISS and meets the player's need to hammertime things.

Good idea.

[Koren]

If I was the DM then this would be satisfactory but I am just a fellow player. Since every other (slight exaggeration) player has been a full caster I want to encourage a damage machine to join my one dwarf wall. 😉

It just seemed odd (though I understood the computer game background/logic) and I want to know what to say that would sound reasonable for the me, the DM and the player. Any reach weapon backing me up while the rain of Eldritch Blast, Fire-bolt, and Magic Missile rains death around us is good.

If the argument Sparks up again just throw the suggestion out there. There's already the Glaive and Halberd for two different mechanically identical weapons, adding one with Bludgeoning damage wouldn't be game breaking. If Hammer Time insists the shift from 2d6 to 1d10 is a deal breaker, then they're just being detrimental to the game at that point.

[ZorroGames]

If the argument Sparks up again just throw the suggestion out there. There's already the Glaive and Halberd for two different mechanically identical weapons, adding one with Bludgeoning damage wouldn't be game breaking. If Hammer Time insists the shift from 2d6 to 1d10 is a deal breaker, then they're just being detrimental to the game at that point.

I think it is flavor driven honestly but maybe it is growing into, "Ooh, a DPR edge." Not that it would bother (first thought) my character to have an armored death machine up in the wall with me. The precedent might be set for who knows what else was my second thought. :smallbiggrin:

[Cybren]

Afaik as a non-professional in medieval weapon usage:

The attack stance and mechanics of a quarterstaff, glaive and halberd are to hold them somewhere around the middle and swinging one end towards the enemy in a more or less sideway-slashing motion. It would be rather easy to use the momentum of that motion to smack the other end against the opponent as well, simply by making a swift turn or whatever.

A spear isn't used to slash, but to pierce (see it's damage type), so that momentum isn't there and it would be a weird thought to fling it forward just to pull it back, turn it around and whack it over the stabbed opponent's head.

A maul can be used similarly to the "polearm mastery polearms", but a) as has been said before, a maul is way heavier and simply not built to be used that way, and b) the way i remember you hold a maul/battlehammer etc. kinda like a wood axe, with one hand close to the end of the (arguably way shorter) handle. Most would also haul it from up above their head downwards onto the opponent's for more damage (gravity and all that).

That might be the thought behind the seemingly random choice which weapons to include in the feat: their usage, as opposed to their classification as polearms. The feat was poorly named.
Were fairly confident spears can and were used to slash. Spear heads were often fairly broad and long

[Koren]

Were fairly confident spears can and were used to slash. Spear heads were often fairly broad and long

Generally they were designed to thrust, if the blade is made for slashing I think that would make it a Glaive.

That doesn't mean they can't be USED to slash, of course.

[Cybren]

Generally they were designed to thrust, if the blade is made for slashing I think that would make it a Glaive.

That doesn't mean they can't be USED to slash, of course.

Look up Viking spears, which were very often cut and thrust weapons, and certainly closest to the spear than then glaive in d&d terms in that they were used one or two handed and thrown

[Koren]

Look up Viking spears, which were very often cut and thrust weapons, and certainly closest to the spear than then glaive in d&d terms in that they were used one or two handed and thrown

The websites and images I found looked fairly standard as far as design goes. Still looks like it was primarily designed for thrusting. The pages did verify they were used to slash as well as thrust.

I honestly think their not being included was either in preparation for Spear Master (or a feat like it) or because of the Piercing damage property implying players use the spear specifically to thrust.

[Zalabim]

Were fairly confident spears can and were used to slash. Spear heads were often fairly broad and long

This is true, but Pikes are also excluded from that part of the feat and I can't help thinking that's the reason. At least I can point to game balance and "it can be thrown" for why the spear is excluded.

[Quoxis]

Were fairly confident spears can and were used to slash. Spear heads were often fairly broad and long

In real life? Undoubtedly. You could also poke someone with a glaive if you wanted, most axes also had a spike on the other side, there are flails with spikes or razors on them... But this is DnD. A glaive slashes, a spear pierces.

[Cybren]

In real life? Undoubtedly. You could also poke someone with a glaive if you wanted, most axes also had a spike on the other side, there are flails with spikes or razors on them... But this is DnD. A glaive slashes, a spear pierces.

I consider this an incredible failure on D&D's part, especially in 5E where your actual damage type almost never matters.

[Lombra]

Something weird happened ad there was a clone of the below post here.

[Lombra]

I consider this an incredible failure on D&D's part, especially in 5E where your actual damage type almost never matters.

I think they did this to improve newb-friendlyness and to avoid the focus on the combat pillar. Which still is the focus anyways, so yeah, at least they tried.