Double sided glaive

[Great cthulhu]

My 1rst level character is really rich, so he wants to pay an extra 5 gp to the normally 25 gp glaive, to make it double sided. While completely useless in the beginning, the glaive, it could become very powerful when purchasing the pole arm master feat, allowing me to strike for 2d10 damage! What do you think of this?

[Deox]

My 1rst level character is really rich, so he wants to pay an extra 5 gp to the normally 25 gp glaive, to make it double sided. While completely useless in the beginning, the glaive, it could become very powerful when purchasing the pole arm master feat, allowing me to strike for 2d10 damage! What do you think of this?

Not sure on this at first glance. Personally, I would just fluff a quarterstaff, possibly change the damage type to slashing.

I guess my question is, what is the purpose for this weapon?

[2D6GREATAXE]

PAM specifically states the damage is a D4 from the pommel end. So RAW I would say no, however, your DM will let you know if they will ok the rule variant.

"Polearm Master

You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. You gain the following benefits:
◾When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, or quarterstaff, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon. This attack uses the same ability modifier as the primary weapon. The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4, and the attack deals bludgeoning damage.
◾While you are wielding a glaive, halberd, pike, or quarterstaff, other creatures provoke an opportunity attack from you when they enter the reach you have with that weapon. "

[GlenSmash!]

This would beef up the PM bonus action attack to full damage, or as good as a Berserkers frenzy but without the exhaustion, or better then the second part of the GWM feat, since it happens every round.

I would probably allow it, but 5gp is way too low. This would essentially make it as good as many magic items.

1500gp is closer to what I would think is reasonable.

[sophontteks]

RAW you can't and practically you can't. Putting a pointy end on the other side of the stick changes the weapon entirely. It wouldn't even be a polearm anymore. Imagine bracing a charge when the pointy end is facing you and your handle is a blade.

[Eric Diaz]

My 1rst level character is really rich, so he wants to pay an extra 5 gp to the normally 25 gp glaive, to make it double sided. While completely useless in the beginning, the glaive, it could become very powerful when purchasing the pole arm master feat, allowing me to strike for 2d10 damage! What do you think of this?

A quarterstaff deals 1d10 damage with two hands. With the feat, 1d4 damage with a bonus action. Both ends of the quarterstaff are identical. The difference is not because one end of the quarterstaff is different, it is because you are attacking with a bonus action.

So, I'd say if you want a "double" glaive, I'd allow it, but it would cause 1d4 slashing damage.

EDIT: here are some thought about "double weapons" in 5e, FWIW:

http://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com.br/2018/01/d-5e-fighting-styles-double-weapons.html

This is how a "double" weapon properties would look like in 5e:

Double. When you take the Attack action and attack with a double weapon that you’re holding in both hands, you can use a bonus action to attack with the other end of the weapon, causing 1d4 damage. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.

If used this way, double weapons seem a bit better than TWF - mostly because of how they interact with things such as multiple attacks, magic item attunement, object interaction, spells such as Magic Weapon and Shillelagh, etc. - but they cannot be thrown or used with finesse, which balances things a bit.

[LordEntrails]

Fluff and flavor is awesome, but I suggest not trying to out perform or break the rules just so you can do more than someone else. All the PC's are heroes and can do more than a regular person, don't compare your character to another character, compare them to a villager or commoner.

[Xihirli]

Whenever you add a benefit to a weapon, by following the guide of weapons in the PHB you decrease the damage die. For example, a dagger has the Finesse, Light, and Thrown properties and it’s a d4 damage die compared to
a rapier’s d8 when the rapier only has finesse.. Polearms have the Reach property, and other two handed heavy weapons can go to 2d6 or 1d12 while the most damaging polearms only reach 1d10.
If I allowed the Double weapon property outlined above your base damage die would drop to a d8.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Fluff and flavor is awesome, but I suggest not trying to out perform or break the rules just so you can do more than someone else. All the PC's are heroes and can do more than a regular person, don't compare your character to another character, compare them to a villager or commoner.

This. I might allow a D12, maybe after seeing if u were proficient in a d12 weapon.

[Rusvul]

For my game, I've homebrewed in double weapons.

"Double. A double weapon has two ends. Each end counts as a light weapon for the purposes of two-weapon fighting, and most magical effects (such as item enchantments). Each end of the weapon has a separate damage die. For the purposes of drawing a weapon, being disarmed, and being broken, a double weapon counts as one weapon."

I would rule a double Glaive as a 1d6s/1d6s Double, Reach, Two-Handed weapon. Reduced damage die both for balance purposes (no other light weapon has a damage die above d6) and for sensibility: when you add another blade, you can't use the weapon like you used to be able to. I also wouldn't rule it as an acceptable weapon for Polearm Master, because 1) it's dramatically different from a single-ended polearm, and 2) it doesn't have a haft to smack with (a glaive slash is a totally different motion). Because it's a very unconventional weapon, I'd probably also require the character to train with it for a while before allowing them to add their full proficiency bonus, but only because my games have a fair amount of downtime.

So while I would allow a character to make a double-bladed glaive, it probably wouldn't be an ideal weapon for the kind of character who'd normally be inclined to use a glaive.

[WereRabbitz]

.... don't compare your character to another character, compare them to a villager or commoner.

This should be in Large Red Words on the first page of the players handbook...


For my game, I've homebrewed in double weapons.

I would rule a double Glaive as a 1d6s/1d6s Double, Reach, Two-Handed weapon. Reduced damage die both for balance purposes .

I disagree only because the bonus damage will always be the same, but your hurting the main attack damage which scales as your character gets extra attacks.

If you get Polearm Master Feat and 2 attacks with Normal Glaive:
1d10, 1d10, 1d4 (bonus)
3-24 damage possible

With the modified version
1d6 1d6 1d6 (bonus)
3-18 damage possible

1d8's would give you a 3-24 damage range, but if they are a fighter that gets 3 or 4 attacks it drops off again and a normal glaive is better still.

I would go with Raw and say it's 1d4 damage instead of 1d10 because your throwing in a quick swipe at the end not a precision strike like your normal action attacks.

[Rusvul]

Again, I'd rule that the damage of the primary attack decreases because the blade is necessarily lighter and cannot be used as precisely as it could be if the second blade weren't there. That's mostly a justification for keeping it in line with other light weapons, since that's essentially what a two-headed glaive is: two light weapons. It's no longer the "one big weapon" fighting style, it's two-weapon fighting with a different visual flair. (Hence why I said I wouldn't allow PAM to apply.)

The reason the character with two attacks and Polearm Master outperforms the character with a double-headed glaive is because a polearm with PAM is mathematically better than two-weapon fighting without any feats. I think the solution to this is not to improve double weapons specifically, or to treat them like something other than two-weapon fighting, but rather to make two-weapon fighting more effective in general.

If a player in my games wanted a smaller blade on the haft of their glaive just for cool factor (or to change the damage type of their PAM attack), though, I'd probably allow that.