Which is best of these two feats if only taking one of them?

[Spacehamster]

Great weapon master and polearm master are both great, one heavily increasing damage at cost of accuraccy and giving a chance of a bonus attack, the other giving a guaranteed weaker bonus attack and
a fair chance of a decent amount of reaction oppurtunity attacks.

Which one do you guys and gals think hold up the best on its own? PAM seems
stronger to me since it guarantees an extra attack and gives a chance of a 2nd extra attack
as a reaction. :)

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I think that GWM is better because the damage it brings.
I also assume it is not a solo game and that you have a party and a way to generate advantage as a team.

[HappyDaze]

Great weapon master and polearm master are both great, one heavily increasing damage at cost of accuraccy and giving a chance of a bonus attack, the other giving a guaranteed weaker bonus attack and
a fair chance of a decent amount of reaction oppurtunity attacks.

Which one do you guys and gals think hold up the best on its own? PAM seems
stronger to me since it guarantees an extra attack and gives a chance of a 2nd extra attack
as a reaction. :)

In part, it depends on how many attacks you already have. A high-level (11+) Fighter might be able to do more with GWM (which can also grant a BA attack if you drop an opponent) than an extra BA attack from PAM. Barbarians using Reckless Attack get a lot of mileage out of GWM too. Lastly, consider what else you have available to do with your BA. If you have other good options that compete with the BA attack from PAM, then it loses some of its luster.

[Eldariel]

You definitely want both as they are force multipliers (more attacks for extra damage). Nevertheless, PAM is better on low levels: extra attacks are extra valuable there, while GWM is often overkill. Action economy on low levels is also less tight generally meaning you more often have your Bonus Action and Reaction to spare for value. Finally, attack bonuses are lower, making the opportunity cost of using GWM much higher.

The higher you get, the better GWM gets by comparison. On level 10, I'd assume most characters have competition for their Bonus Action and ready access to Advantage/bonuses, not to mention extra attack(s) making GWM already quite strong. It really depends on the class, the party and the level range though.

[beargryllz]

Which class? Which race? What level?

A half orc barbarian or a champion probably wants GWM because it's very nice to combine with reckless attacks or a wide critical range and more kills snowballing into more bonus action economy attacks

Anyone who can also get sentinel probably (read: variant human) wants PAM because it grants immense battlefield control while also dealing very high DPR

PAM I think is biased towards lower level content because there is less competition for a bonus action attack and having 2 attacks near level 1 is much more significant

[HappyDaze]

PAM I think is biased towards lower level content because there is less competition for a bonus action attack and having 2 attacks near level 1 is much more significant

Add to that magical polearms being rather less common than other magical weapons, and at higher levels magical weapons are expected.

[pr4wn]

As many others have said, it depends on the class and the level. Generally for martials, GWM is the better choice once you are getting to multiple attacks, especially if you have some other use for your bonus action. If you only have one attack, the benefit from PAM (bonus attack, possible opportunity attack as a reaction) can easily outweigh the benefit from GWM. This brings me to what I think is often overlooked...

PAM can be extremely useful on a caster. Almost all the magic staffs count as a quartestaff. That is where your magic polearms are hiding. PAM on a druid can be a lot of fun. Shield + Staff + PAM + Guardian of Nature: Primal Beast will usually yield better average damage than GWM (or the Druid attack cantrips). You also get two chances to crit. Add Circle of Spores: Symbiotic Entity for even more melee shenanigans... 1D8 + 1D6(force) +1D6(poison) + STR (and attack at advantage) + bonus 1D4 + 1D6(force) +1D6(poison) + STR (and attack at advantage) vs 1D8 + 1D6(force) +1D6(poison) + STR + 10 (and attack at advantage, but with a minus 5).

-pr4wn

[LudicSavant]

Which is mathematically best depends on the particulars of your build. For example, the more attacks you have, and the higher your hit and crit rate, the better GWM is for you. The bigger your damage-per-hit is, the worse GWM is for you.

[BoringInfoGuy]

Speaking on weapon availability, if something happens to your pole arm and you need to use another type of weapon, then PAM grants no benefit.

GWM requires a heavy weapon for the -hit +damage mechanic, but the bonus attack can trigger with any melee weapon. So it gives you some benefit regardless what melee weapon you may come across.

If your DM favors curated loot drops for your party, that won’t matter much. But if you have a DM that either rolls loot on the spot or decides the treasure before season zero, it’s something to consider.

[Keravath]

1) The -5 to hit for GWM or SS is a significant consideration. It does more damage but misses more often. Advantage helps to mitigate this but I have seen both GWM and SS used with advantage and both miss while the attack would otherwise have hit. Even if you only need to roll a 2 to hit ... turning on SS/GWM means you will still miss much more often.

2) It depends on level. As you get into tier 3 with maxed attack stat and increased proficiency, the target AC typically doesn't increase as quickly and as a result both GWM and SS become better choices. Before about level 8 you can use GWM/SS to get a big hit with more damage but against typical AC 15-17 targets you are likely better off without it on average ... it certainly doesn't increase your average damage. In addition, this assumes that you have a good way to reliably generate advantage on the attacks.

3) Does the class have a damage modifier that scales number of attacks? If you are a level 11 paladin with polearm master, a shield, the dueling fighting style and improved divine smite ... you not only have a high AC but also 3 attacks each of which does an extra d8 radiant damage.

Anyway, at lower levels I would go with polearm master all the time. Higher levels (eg. tier 3), add in GWM for the synergy depending on attack stat and build. Polearm master also gives the extra op attack when an opponent moves into range.

[Keravath]

Speaking on weapon availability, if something happens to your pole arm and you need to use another type of weapon, then PAM grants no benefit.

GWM requires a heavy weapon for the -hit +damage mechanic, but the bonus attack can trigger with any melee weapon. So it gives you some benefit regardless what melee weapon you may come across.

If your DM favors curated loot drops for your party, that won’t matter much. But if you have a DM that either rolls loot on the spot or decides the treasure before season zero, it’s something to consider.

However, since PAM works with any decently long stick (ie staff/quarterstaff) or a spear ... it is unlikely that you will be without a polearm for very long even if you somehow lose your glaive/halberd.

[CheddarChampion]

If you have bonus damage on each hit then PAM might be better than GWM.

A Paladin with Improved Divine Smite and Divine Favor/Elemental Weapon/Holy Weapon gets anywhere from +1d8+1d4 to +3d8 per hit.
Getting one or two more attacks with that kind of damage can beat out losing 5 accuracy for +10 damage and maybe one extra attack.

Spoiler: Math

Show

Level 12 GWM Paladin with Bless: +6.5 to hit, 2d6+1d8+15 (26.5) damage twice, maybe three times.
Level 12 PAM Paladin with Divine Favor: +9 to hit, 1d10+1d8+1d4+5 (17.5) damage twice, maybe three times. 2d4+1d8+5 (14.5) damage once.
If we go with a 'standard' accuracy of 50%, every +1 lost is a 10% reduction in expected damage. So after Bless (+2.5) and GWM (-5), 25% reduction.
Without the crit trigger or the approach trigger, that puts our numbers at 39.75 for GWM and 49.5 for PAM. With both triggers, 59.625 for GWM and 67 for PAM.

[LudicSavant]

You can also compare GWM against getting a primary stat increase. GWM is basically -6/+9 compared to doing so.

[Tes]

PAM
- is subjectively more flexible without further dependencies. Having the choice in between a Spear/Quarterstaff + Shield or a Glaive is nice
- Reach is generally stronger than the better damage die for other GWM weapons. The option to stack it with Sentinel for a pretty powerful mundane crowd control combo that requires your AoO to hit enemy AC rather than fail a save is a massive. GWM alone doesn't give the same incentive to pick up a Glaive over another two-hander.
- reliable use for your Bonus action
- pretty reliable use for your Reaction
- GM dependant but the majority of magic weapons are not PAM compatible, you're probably gonna be stuck with a +X Weapon unless your GM feels generous
- especially at low levels rolling for 3 attacks a turn rather than one is a massive boost compared to GWM users barely benefitting from -5/+10 without a source of Advantage
- more attacks = more chances for shoves, rider effects and Crits to Smite off

GWM
- locks you into a heavy two-hander, pretty much no way back
- -5/+10 is mostly reliant on Advantage, can't really use the damage component on a low level character until you have access to an enabling feature like Samurai or Vengeance Paladins
- +10 is a bit less damage than it looks in between overkill, no Crit scaling and flat out misses from the -5
- two-handers are iconic but oddly enough not very common as magic weapons, similar to a poleram GM dependant, might end up stuck with a plain +X Weapon


Overall PAM wins handily before Extra Attack is a thing at low level, afterwards it depends on how busy your Bonus Attack and Reaction are as well as your other ASIs. You can obviously just pick both anyway by the time you get your second chance to pick up a Feat.

[FabulousFizban]

all depends on the rest of the build

[OzDragon]

Add to that magical polearms being rather less common than other magical weapons, and at higher levels magical weapons are expected.

Comments like this never cease to amaze me. Any DM can/should add these to games with a character specializing in a certain weapon.

[HappyDaze]

Comments like this never cease to amaze me. Any DM can/should add these to games with a character specializing in a certain weapon.

Best not to say what other "should" do. I am stating that the treasure section of the DMG doesn't have very many exciting magical pole arm options.

[Keravath]

Best not to say what other "should" do. I am stating that the treasure section of the DMG doesn't have very many exciting magical pole arm options.

True. However, magical staffs are one of the most common magical weapon types and work perfectly with polearm master along with providing other useful benefits. Glaives may be uncommon on the tables (though some of the tables just list +1,+2,+3 weapon leaving it up to the DM to choose) but staves certainly are not and are far more common than magical weapons usable with GWM.

[Deathtongue]

There are two considerations.

1) Magical item access. I have been in exactly zero games in which some manner of two-handed magical weapon hasn't been available after level 6 or so. But I have been in many games in which an appropriate magical stave that can be used as a quarterstaff (Staff of Striking, Power, of the Magi, Spider, Thunder and Lightning Withering; Guthias technically but hardly counts) has not been available despite other magical items being available. Alternatively, if magical shields -- which are quite a bit more common than staves but not as much as weapons -- drop then PAM + Quarterstaff becomes superior to GWM.

2) Bonus action clog. PAM was largely a non-starter for me as a Sorceradin who started with Resilient: CON. Even with Quicken Spell, I had so many good options for my bonus action (Wrathful Smite, Misty Step, Expeditious Retreat, Shield of Faith, activating my Flametongue Greatsword) that I hardly got to use Quickened Booming Blade. And there are definitely some characters who have less bonus action clog than others, such as Champion Fighters. Still, it's a pretty big concern. If you have three or more good options to regularly use your bonus action with, I would think long and hard about grabbing PAM.

[Tes]

Magical Item access is the tiebreaker for me. I have been in exactly zero games in which some manner of two-handed magical weapon hasn't been available after level 6 or so. But I have been in many games in which an appropriate magical stave that can be used as a quarterstaff (Staff of Striking, Power, of the Magi, Spider, Thunder and Lightning Withering; Guthias technically but hardly counts) has not been available despite other magical items being available.

Magical greatweapons(at least swords or axes) are kind of a natural trope almost every DM is organically going to include into a treasure hoard at some point. At least if the party has someone who uses that kind of weapon. No need to remind him.

A Fighter using a "Wizard"-Staff is in comparison unintuitive, while mechanically sound.

Playing "RAW" (random loot tables or whatever) you'd have a good chance to get your hands on a magical Quarterstaff. But you'd still be stuck with plain +X for several types of weapons.
In a homebrew game you might have zero problems getting a Flametongue Glaive or OathCrossbow.

Statistically "guaranteed Magic Weapon by level 6" is a pretty hot take. That would put it around the same level DMs appear to give access to mundane Plate. I'd agree that most tables have or have seen a Magic weapon by then. But not everyone in the party is gonna have one and a good chunk of the early magic weapons I've seen included were cursed ones - so YMMV.

Pretty sure your particular games would have inlcuded something like a Staff of Striking if there was a staff using Fighter PC in them.

[Deathtongue]

Statistically "guaranteed Magic Weapon by level 6" is a pretty hot take. That would put it around the same level DMs appear to give access to mundane Plate. I'd agree that most tables have or have seen a Magic weapon by then. But not everyone in the party is gonna have one and a good chunk of the early magic weapons I've seen included were cursed ones - so YMMV.

CR4 is when monsters resistance to nonmagical weapon damage start showing up in force and resistance is so overpowering in 5E D&D that I consider it kind of a jerk move not to have magical weapons available to the martials by then. I can take or leave other magical items not showing up -- 2/3rds of my characters are (almost) single-classed wizards and the number of games where I never get to copy spells for several levels are reasonably common -- but you gotta make magical weapons available unless you the DM just like putting martials in their place.

[Democratus]

CR4 is when monsters resistance to nonmagical weapon damage start showing up in force and resistance is so overpowering in 5E D&D that I consider it kind of a jerk move not to have magical weapons available to the martials by then. I can take or leave other magical items not showing up -- 2/3rds of my characters are (almost) single-classed wizards and the number of games where I never get to copy spells for several levels are reasonably common -- but you gotta make magical weapons available unless you the DM just like putting martials in their place.

There's no real need for magic weapons in 5e. That's part of the design philosophy.

Monsters with resistance have this resistance calculated into their CR. They are more dangerous to PCs because they are harder to damage. If it was an assumption that the PCs have weapons that make the resistances irrelevant then the exercise would be a bit pointless.

Resistant monsters also give spells like Magic Weapon (bypass resistance) or Haste (increase damage) a great workout.

I also feel it is better from a storytelling standpoint. "The monster's skin was magically toughened against our weapons, so we struggled to overcome it." is a much better story to me than "the monster had magically toughened skin, but it didn't matter". YMMV

[Tes]

CR4 is when monsters resistance to nonmagical weapon damage start showing up in force and resistance is so overpowering in 5E D&D that I consider it kind of a jerk move not to have magical weapons available to the martials by then. I can take or leave other magical items not showing up -- 2/3rds of my characters are (almost) single-classed wizards and the number of games where I never get to copy spells for several levels are reasonably common -- but you gotta make magical weapons available unless you the DM just like putting martials in their place.

My personal take on that
a) You as the DM are not forced to start running stuff resistant/immune to nonmagical BPS as soon as it becomes available
b) With Extra Attack around the corner Martials can stand a bit of a damper around level 5. Sure the Mage gets Fireball, but he gets to use that once a day till 6.
c) There's a Spell for precisely that problem and the guys who get it could always do magic damage as well. Sure it costs the Cleric a high level spellslot for that point in time, but teaching the players to work as a team is pretty much never a bad idea.

So for me it's primarily a tool for the DM to play with, not a restriction for the PCs or an incentive to hand our rewards.

Spoiler: Spoiler for Dungeon of the Mad Mage

Show

SPOILER: There's a cursed sword on the first level of DMM and a bunch of Gricks that really would hate the Barbarian or Fighter to do the dumb thing and pick it up. After running into the first Gricks, we went back to get that Sword and our Zealot Barbarian absolutely creamed a deadly encounter with Grick Alpha + buddies thanks to it. I'm well aware that Magic Weapons make a massive difference, but there's a point in time where that makes for a great opportunity to play with for both DM and players before you eventually end up worrying what to use your Attunement slots for. Have the party focus on keeping the Rogue alive for an encounter where his Dagger that glows in the dark on command makes the difference in between TPK and challenging.

If I were to hand out early magic weapons I'd make sure they're a hint at what's to come and most likely have a penalty/curse or need to be restored for a bucket of money to add a level of challenge and some sort of quest that makes their first magic weapon more than a glowy sword that sometimes hits twice as hard as a normal one.
But that's definitely my personal preference.

[Willie the Duck]

Comments like this never cease to amaze me. Any DM can/should add these to games with a character specializing in a certain weapon.

There seems to be no particular agreement on whether a DM ought to modify the treasure distribution based on what a character chooses to do with their character.

True. However, magical staffs are one of the most common magical weapon types and work perfectly with polearm master along with providing other useful benefits. Glaives may be uncommon on the tables (though some of the tables just list +1,+2,+3 weapon leaving it up to the DM to choose) but staves certainly are not and are far more common than magical weapons usable with GWM.

It's really going to depend on how frequent the treasure drops are and how much the DM crafts things (and, of course, what the PCs want to do). Sure a magical glaive/spear/staff/halberd/pike is likely to show up, but it might not be the first magic weapon to show up, and it might not be the best magic weapon to show up. That is a (very campaign-dependent) opportunity cost to PAM, just like heavy weapons is to getting the most out of GWM. In theory, a fighter who takes the Defensive fighting style and spends their ASIs on getting both STR and DEX up to competitive levels has an advantage in being able to adapt to whatever magic weapon (or armor) shows up in the loot. In practice, feats like PAM and GWM (and SS/XBE) are so powerful that specialization is usually a good choice.

To the OP: it all depends. If you are going to get multiple attacks, and have any common method of getting advantage (Samurai, Barbarian's Reckless Attack, Warlock with Darkness/Devil's Sight combo, etc.) or a massive plus to to-hit rolls (Battlemaster Fighter with Accurate maneuver, Bless-happy cleric in the party, etc.), then GWM probably will benefit you more. If not, PAM may well be better. If you have other routine uses for either bonus or reaction actions, then this also changes the mental calculations.

[Joe the Rat]

Polearm Master has more guaranteed utility, and flexibility in weapons for the full set of features. The inbound OA will get triggered often. If you do not have heavy use of bonus actions, and especially at low levels, I'd pick PAM.

But I love a Guan Dao.


GWM is more of an options Feat - you can take a -5/+10, but you don't necessarily need to (or want to) use this feature. The cleave function - BA attack on drop/crit - is usable with any weapon, on the off chance you aren't using a Heavy.

It's also good with most polearms.

Ultimately I think it will depend on what else is going on - in your build, and in your team. If you are carrying a lot of rider options dependent on hitting, PAM will be a more reliable option. If you can get reliable Advantage (Reckless, Trip, Help) or attack roll boosters (Bless, Bardic Inspiration, Precision), the extra damage from GWM will pay out.