Question about Attack of Opportunity with War Caster and Polearm Master

[LorinSilver]

So I'm an Eldritch Knight who has the Polearm Master and War Caster feats, wielding a quarterstaff (normal 5ft reach).

When an opponent leaves my reach, I get an Attack of Opportunity, which I can replace with a spell targeting him. Since I'm attacking as he is leaving my reach, he'll still be close enough that if I cast a ranged spell, I get disadvantage.

Now because I have Polearm Master, when an opponent gets in reach, I also get an Attack of Opportunity. Again I want to target him with a ranged spell. As he is getting in my reach (the opposite from above), does that mean that a ranged spell would not get disadvantage?

[Corran]

You make the attack after the opponent has entered your reach, so when the opponent is within 5 feet of you. So if you use a ranged cantrip because of warcaster, you will have disadvantage on your attack roll.

[Keravath]

In either case, if you use a ranged attack roll spell, you roll to hit at disadvantage since the target is considered to be within 5' whether coming or going. Your best bet in this case is usually either casting the booming blade cantrip which does extra damage + melee attack, use a melee cantrip like shocking grasp, or use a save cantrip like toll the dead.

[Edenbeast]

So I'm an Eldritch Knight who has the Polearm Master and War Caster feats, wielding a quarterstaff (normal 5ft reach).

When an opponent leaves my reach, I get an Attack of Opportunity, which I can replace with a spell targeting him. Since I'm attacking as he is leaving my reach, he'll still be close enough that if I cast a ranged spell, I get disadvantage.

Now because I have Polearm Master, when an opponent gets in reach, I also get an Attack of Opportunity. Again I want to target him with a ranged spell. As he is getting in my reach (the opposite from above), does that mean that a ranged spell would not get disadvantage?

As far as I know the attack of opportunity triggered by polearm master can only be done with the weapon that is triggering it.

[Man_Over_Game]

As far as I know the attack of opportunity triggered by polearm master can only be done with the weapon that is triggering it.

This is true, based off of what Mearls said in 2014 (http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?1923-SPELL-CARDS-Delayed-Until-September!-MONSTER-MANUAL-Review-Plus-26-More-Qs-As-from-Mike-Mearls!#.VEmr_fldV8F). I don't think there's any clarification from Crawford (the lead designer of 5e), but Mearls said that in order for Polearm Master to trigger, you have to include attacking with the weapon for the trigger to be legal.

Now, based off of what he said, you should be able to use a Sword Coast cantrip, like Booming Blade, since you're still attacking with the required weapon, but it's all ambiguous and none of it confirmed by Crawford.

[Avonar]

This is true, based off of what Mearls said in 2014. I don't think there's any clarification from Crawford (the lead designer of 5e), but Mearls said that in order for Polearm Master to trigger, you have to include attacking with the weapon for the trigger to be legal.

Now, based off of what he said, you should be able to use a Sword Coast cantrip, like Booming Blade, since you're still attacking with the required weapon, but it's all ambiguous and none of it confirmed by Crawford.

This.

It's called Polearm Master for a reason, doesn't make a lot of sense it there's no polearm involved.

[LorinSilver]

It's called Polearm Master for a reason, doesn't make a lot of sense it there's no polearm involved.
That... actually makes sense.
I guess I'll stick to Booming Blade, which still seems to fit.

Shame, that means I'll have to use SCAG as my +1, and won't get access to Absorb Elements...

[OvisCaedo]

This.

It's called Polearm Master for a reason, doesn't make a lot of sense it there's no polearm involved.

On the other hand, Crossbow Expert is very deliberately the feat to take if you want to use a regular bow or even ranged spell attacks in melee, and that's confirmed to be intentional.

edit: Mearls also isn't really the hard rules guy, and looking at that linked thread, glancing over it at least one of his clarifications seems to be flat-out wrong for the released state of the game. It sounds like this might have been a pre-release Q&A session, though, so perhaps the Hex spell he claims ends if you don't have it 'on' someone at all times WAS true for some older version of it.