we have startet a new campaign (Waterdeep: Dragon Heist) a while ago and I am playing a Lvl 4 Variant Human Vengeance Paladin with a waterdeep-noble background. My charakter has Polearm-Mastery & Sentinel Combo (yeah-yeah....keep them stereotypes coming! ;-)). My DM recently pointed out, that PAM&Sentinel-Combo will not work, if the opponent uses the disengage-action offensiv (rogue's cunning action), Opponents use just ranged attacks, have reach etc.. My DM really took his time to spot ways to cancel the benefits of this feat-combo. Secondly, he pointed out, that I will have a very hard time to find any proper Polearm-Weapons in his game (we use Player's Handbook & DMG only) and he is not going to allow homebrew rules like "reforging" weapons (it will be impossible to reforge a Holy Avenger Greatsoword into a glaive for example).
I am glad, that my DM pointed that out early in the campaign and gives me the opportunity to change my feats. Right now, I am pretty unsure which route to go with my pally. Do you guys have any suggestions regarding my problem?!
Yeah, your DM is already throwing you a bone by allowing you to alter your feat and 4th level ASI.
What are your stats? Because your 4th level ASI should be used on CHA, or rounding out odd numbers. Your 0 level Feat, that depends somewhat on your initial stats.
Note that Sentinel specifically permits you to attack-of-opportunity even if your opponent takes the Disengage action - that's one of its most important features. That said, it seems clear your DM doesn't want to deal with the admittedly super aggravating Mega Turbo Ultra Cheese of SentiPAMs, which is fair enough. That combination is incredibly aggravating from the DM side of the table, and some DMs aren't as good as others at letting go and allowing the players to do their thing.
if you're expecting a holy avenger, then obviously you'll want a sword-based build, but I wouldn't be expecting the DM to hand out legendary weapons at all, let alone on the regular. What I would consider is A.) as VInce said, seeing if an ASI at 4th would let you round off some numbers. As for 1st level...what about Slasher? Slasher lets you reduce an enemy's speed by 10 feet when you hit them with slashing damage, which includes attacks of opportunity and lets you sorta get some of your Sentinel-based battlefield control back. It also gives you an extra point of Strength, and if you crit something it has disadvantage on all attacks until your next turn. Best part - it works with any slashing weapon, including most polearms and greatswords, so it's more weapon-agnostic. You can use combat sticks until/unless you get a better option in slashing sword. That wouyld be my best bet, for trying to get back a little of the SentiPAM Turbo Muenster without actually using SentiPAM and pissing off your DM.
Whoops. Forgot. No Tasha's Cauldron. Yeah, never mind. There's no good combat-feat option at that point outside the bog-standard Great Weapon Master, which is overhyped as it is. Mleghm. Pick something fun and flavorful, I suppose?
Note that Sentinel specifically permits you to attack-of-opportunity even if your opponent takes the Disengage action - that's one of its most important features. That said, it seems clear your DM doesn't want to deal with the admittedly super aggravating Mega Turbo Ultra Cheese of SentiPAMs, which is fair enough. That combination is incredibly aggravating from the DM side of the table, and some DMs aren't as good as others at letting go and allowing the players to do their thing.
if you're expecting a holy avenger, then obviously you'll want a sword-based build, but I wouldn't be expecting the DM to hand out legendary weapons at all, let alone on the regular. What I would consider is A.) as VInce said, seeing if an ASI at 4th would let you round off some numbers. As for 1st level...what about Slasher? Slasher lets you reduce an enemy's speed by 10 feet when you hit them with slashing damage, which includes attacks of opportunity and lets you sorta get some of your Sentinel-based battlefield control back. It also gives you an extra point of Strength, and if you crit something it has disadvantage on all attacks until your next turn. Best part - it works with any slashing weapon, including most polearms and greatswords, so it's more weapon-agnostic. You can use combat sticks until/unless you get a better option in slashing sword. That wouyld be my best bet, for trying to get back a little of the SentiPAM Turbo Muenster without actually using SentiPAM and pissing off your DM.
The problem here is that Calivar stated that his table only uses the PH and DMG, so I am not sure Tashas is on the table for something like Slasher
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Note that Sentinel specifically permits you to attack-of-opportunity even if your opponent takes the Disengage action - that's one of its most important features.
Whoops. Forgot. No Tasha's Cauldron. Yeah, never mind. There's no good combat-feat option at that point outside the bog-standard Great Weapon Master, which is overhyped as it is. Mleghm. Pick something fun and flavorful, I suppose?
There's nothing wrong with Mage Slayer or Resilient. I really like Ritual Caster, and if the campaign isn't too hack&slashy Skilled can be amazing.
Whoops. Forgot. No Tasha's Cauldron. Yeah, never mind. There's no good combat-feat option at that point outside the bog-standard Great Weapon Master, which is overhyped as it is. Mleghm. Pick something fun and flavorful, I suppose?
There's nothing wrong with Mage Slayer or Resilient. I really like Ritual Caster, and if the campaign isn't too hack&slashy Skilled can be amazing.
The big thing with many subclasses of Paladin's, and Vengeance is one of them, is that they have features (Channel Divinity) that trigger off of their spellcasting ability = CHA. Plus, of course, the general awesomeness of the 6th level Paladin feature. 2 points in CHA at 4th level = +1 in ALL Saves for everyone within 10 feet. That is huge.
I really want to see the initial stats of this char, before diving into Feats at 0 level.
we have startet a new campaign (Waterdeep: Dragon Heist) a while ago and I am playing a Lvl 4 Variant Human Vengeance Paladin with a waterdeep-noble background. My charakter has Polearm-Mastery & Sentinel Combo (yeah-yeah....keep them stereotypes coming! ;-)). My DM recently pointed out, that PAM&Sentinel-Combo will not work, if the opponent uses the disengage-action offensiv (rogue's cunning action), Opponents use just ranged attacks, have reach etc.. My DM really took his time to spot ways to cancel the benefits of this feat-combo. Secondly, he pointed out, that I will have a very hard time to find any proper Polearm-Weapons in his game (we use Player's Handbook & DMG only) and he is not going to allow homebrew rules like "reforging" weapons (it will be impossible to reforge a Holy Avenger Greatsoword into a glaive for example).
I am glad, that my DM pointed that out early in the campaign and gives me the opportunity to change my feats. Right now, I am pretty unsure which route to go with my pally. Do you guys have any suggestions regarding my problem?!
Sentinel works against Disengage and PAM does not, but if your DM is telling you your setting is bizarrely low on polearms, it's best to listen. Did your DM specify any other weapons that are missing?
If none are missing, keep your feats and switch from a glaive to a shield and a spear.
If more are missing, I suggest you lean hard into crit-fishing. You're stuck with your race and a dearth of feats due to having access to no sourcebooks, but you can swap PAM+Sentinel for Shield Master+Lucky, and your weapon hand can wield any of the many 1d8 one-handers in the PHB, so even if your setting is also missing, I don't know, battleaxes, you can swap to a longsword or a rapier or a warhammer. You won't be very good at knocking things over - you have to take Lucky rather than Skill Expert - but you can knock things over every turn, and you can get super-advantage at will 3x per day.
Whoops. Forgot. No Tasha's Cauldron. Yeah, never mind. There's no good combat-feat option at that point outside the bog-standard Great Weapon Master, which is overhyped as it is. Mleghm. Pick something fun and flavorful, I suppose?
There's nothing wrong with Mage Slayer or Resilient. I really like Ritual Caster, and if the campaign isn't too hack&slashy Skilled can be amazing.
The big thing with many subclasses of Paladin's, and Vengeance is one of them, is that they have features (Channel Divinity) that trigger off of their spellcasting ability = CHA. Plus, of course, the general awesomeness of the 6th level Paladin feature. 2 points in CHA at 4th level = +1 in ALL Saves for everyone within 10 feet. That is huge.
I really want to see the initial stats of this char, before diving into Feats at 0 level.
Ritual Caster can let you cheese a familiar for perma-advantage on your melee attacks. Resilient provides an extra save proficiency. Mage Slayers lets you largely shut down casters. Skilled would bring this character's number of proficiencies from 5 to 8. All of these can be huge.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
also for a flavor reason, polearms were the weapons the peasants who couldn't afford the fancy training and sword itself.
Not actually true. Yes, some pole weapons were the arms given to cheap conscripts - spears and pikes were the order of the day for conscripts - but things like halberds, glaives, billhooks, and other such weapons? They were manufactured for use by heavily armored knights that largely discarded the use of the shield since their armor rendered shields mostly* unnecessary, using the massive advantage in reach and leverage a polearm gives you to dominate open battlefields. The sword was a medieval knight's equivalent of a sidearm - a backup weapon in case your primary weapon is rendered unusable for whatever reason. It was also generally a symbol of status, since a good sword was a very expensive item that required the services of an expert swordsmith.
All of which goes to say that a heavily armored soldier who specializes in the use of pole weapons is perfectly valid archetype, historically as well as fantastically. After all, it wasn't a conscript farmer that invented the halberd and created the techniques to use it.
First off, kudo's for using the 27 point buy system. I like that someone is playing this straight up.
Now, based on those stats I see no reason not to take a +2 in your 4th level ASI. As I have stated before, the benefits it gives your char's Channel Divinity and the overall group's Saves makes getting that to 18 = +4 a big deal.
As for the 0 level Feat, the world is your oyster. There are a myriad that you can look at. Though consider a couple things:
1. Your channel divinity feature already roots a target in place, in total terror of you, if it fails the save (see above why a high CHA is good). That is duplicated somewhat by Sentinel, so that Feat may not be your best option.
2. IF your DM lets you also alter your starting stats, and IF you want to tank with this char, Heavy Armour Master adds one to your Str. You can back that off to 15 with your original point allocation, then take that Feat to push it back to 16, and you still have one or 2 points to put into Int or Wis.
JC's saying you don't get an Attack of Opportunity but you still get to attack them as you have Polearm master which alllows you to attack when they enter reach...you just do not get to shut their movement down?
As is ******* typical of Sage Advice, the ruling is kind of a mess. In this case, no - Disengage means you cannot be targeted by attacks of opportunity, while Sentinel allows you to target a creature leaving your reach with AoO. PAM allows you to AoO when a creature enters your reach. Sentinel negates Disengage when a target leaves, but technically not when a target enters reach. It's rules parsing and hair-splitting, but by the strictest read of RAW, Crawford is correct.
What that says to me is that Calivar's DM is basically telling Calivar "if you use this on me I will ensure you live to regret it". I hate when a DM doesn't have the guts to just outright say "these feats/spells/effects/abilities are banned from my table" and let the players know ahead of time what they can or cannot use.
Polearm Master is still valid, in that it allows a bonus action attack and also forces most enemies to choose between "offensive Disengage" or attacking that turn, as most enemies are not rogues. Enemies can use "Offensive Disengage" to approach the paladin freely, though a SentiPAM could still stop enemies from fleeing the paladin to chase down squishier teammates behind the character.
Heh. The minxish troublemaker shit in me honestly almost wants to recommend keeping SentiPAM. be all "Okay, Mr. soft-ban DM. Come at me with your "Offensive Disengage", your ranged weapons, and your reach shit. Offensive disengage wastes actions, ranged critters are always bad for paladins anyways, and shit with Reach still provokes an attack of opportunity if it doesn't Offensive Disengage first. You don't want to give me magic weapons? I don't need 'em. Next time be straight with me the first time."
However, the Rei that knows better than to challenge the DM to a game of rules chicken says keep Polearm Master for the bonus action attack and trade Sentinel for either an ASI or an amusing feat. A good way to fox a DM insistent on screwing with a melee paladin would be Spell Sniper: Warlock with Eldritch Blast. Ranged attackers trying to avoid the glaive would then be faced with a 240-foot range 1d10 force poke from the "helpless" paladin. it's not by any means a Super Heavy Optimizer's choice, but it's the sort of thing I could see myself picking in this situation specifically to poke a DM who didn't bother telling me my character was banned before I made it.
JC's saying you don't get an Attack of Opportunity but you still get to attack them as you have Polearm master which alllows you to attack when they enter reach...you just do not get to shut their movement down?
The argumentation from the DM is silly. "Offensively disengaging" does nothing vs a character with PAM (you still provoke the AoO) and is irrelevant vs Sentinel (because you're not moving away, so Sentinel wouldn't be triggered anyway). If you are disengaging away from a character with Sentinel and PAM you provoke an AoO (and possibly have your speed reduced to zero) from Sentinel because it trumps disengaging and PAM is irrelevant because you're not entering reach.
As is ****ing typical of Sage Advice, the ruling is kind of a mess. In this case, no - Disengage means you cannot be targeted by attacks of opportunity, while Sentinel allows you to target a creature leaving your reach with AoO. PAM allows you to AoO when a creature enters your reach. Sentinel negates Disengage when a target leaves, but technically not when a target enters reach. It's rules parsing and hair-splitting, but by the strictest read of RAW, Crawford is correct.
Why get wound up over this? It's simply clarifying exactly what the rules say. It's nothing new, it's not splitting hairs, it's simply following the rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Sage Advice in general annoys me, because Crawford goes back and forth on his rulings all the time. Yet people still slavishly adhere to it and cite SAC all the time as a Definitive Perfect Source of All Rules Ever, the RAWest RAW that ever RAWed a RAW, and castigate any DM who tells their players that Crawford's rulings apply to Crawford's table, not their own. As if SAC overrode every last thing in every last D&D book ever printed, including Rule Zero. It's cool that SAC is there for people that want it, but it's no more valid for any particular table than Crawford's Twitter feed. Or Mercer's Twitter feed, for that matter.
Sage Advice in general annoys me, because Crawford goes back and forth on his rulings all the time. Yet people still slavishly adhere to it and cite SAC all the time as a Definitive Perfect Source of All Rules Ever, the RAWest RAW that ever RAWed a RAW, and castigate any DM who tells their players that Crawford's rulings apply to Crawford's table, not their own. As if SAC overrode every last thing in every last D&D book ever printed, including Rule Zero. It's cool that SAC is there for people that want it, but it's no more valid for any particular table than Crawford's Twitter feed. Or Mercer's Twitter feed, for that matter.
You're entirely entitled to that opinion, but at least in this case he's just confirming what the rules say. It's not a hidden erratum, it's not even some weird interpretation of the rules or an unnecessary leap in logic. It's like he's saying 2+2=4. It's what anyone looking at the question rationally would expect him to say, it's 100% what he should say.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
JC's saying you don't get an Attack of Opportunity but you still get to attack them as you have Polearm master which alllows you to attack when they enter reach...you just do not get to shut their movement down?
The argumentation from the DM is silly. "Offensively disengaging" does nothing vs a character with PAM (you still provoke the AoO).
I don‘t see why the Char with PAM still gets an AoO. Disengage lets you move freely without provoking AoO while moving. Therefore you don‘t trigger the PAM AoO when you enter the reach of the Polearm-Bearer.
My DM recently pointed out, that PAM&Sentinel-Combo will not work, if the opponent uses the disengage-action offensiv (rogue's cunning action), Opponents use just ranged attacks, have reach etc.. My DM really took his time to spot ways to cancel the benefits of this feat-combo.
Just to reiterate what others have said, if you're forcing enemies to waste entire actions on preemptive disengaging and staying away from you, that's still an effect that you can use. Significant battlefield control.
I DM for a Sentinel/Polearm Master Paladin and I can say it's limited hard by the 1/round restriction on Reactions. He often declines OAs because he might need his Reaction for more defensive-type things later in the round. Is is extremely easy to overwhelm the defensive aspects of this build with many weaker monsters.
It's hard to read the subtext here. The least generous interpretation is that the DM is just saying they will passive-aggressively make you regret your choices if you choose those feats. I mean there's no reason at all to assume that polearms would be somehow rare compared to all other weapons. If that is indeed the case you might need to have a more in-depth talk. DMs who have the mindset that they need to actively work against player choices are likely to shut you down no matter what you choose to do.
Hi Folks,
we have startet a new campaign (Waterdeep: Dragon Heist) a while ago and I am playing a Lvl 4 Variant Human Vengeance Paladin with a waterdeep-noble background. My charakter has Polearm-Mastery & Sentinel Combo (yeah-yeah....keep them stereotypes coming! ;-)). My DM recently pointed out, that PAM&Sentinel-Combo will not work, if the opponent uses the disengage-action offensiv (rogue's cunning action), Opponents use just ranged attacks, have reach etc.. My DM really took his time to spot ways to cancel the benefits of this feat-combo. Secondly, he pointed out, that I will have a very hard time to find any proper Polearm-Weapons in his game (we use Player's Handbook & DMG only) and he is not going to allow homebrew rules like "reforging" weapons (it will be impossible to reforge a Holy Avenger Greatsoword into a glaive for example).
I am glad, that my DM pointed that out early in the campaign and gives me the opportunity to change my feats. Right now, I am pretty unsure which route to go with my pally. Do you guys have any suggestions regarding my problem?!
Yeah, your DM is already throwing you a bone by allowing you to alter your feat and 4th level ASI.
What are your stats? Because your 4th level ASI should be used on CHA, or rounding out odd numbers. Your 0 level Feat, that depends somewhat on your initial stats.
Note that Sentinel specifically permits you to attack-of-opportunity even if your opponent takes the Disengage action - that's one of its most important features. That said, it seems clear your DM doesn't want to deal with the admittedly super aggravating Mega Turbo Ultra Cheese of SentiPAMs, which is fair enough. That combination is incredibly aggravating from the DM side of the table, and some DMs aren't as good as others at letting go and allowing the players to do their thing.
if you're expecting a holy avenger, then obviously you'll want a sword-based build, but I wouldn't be expecting the DM to hand out legendary weapons at all, let alone on the regular. What I would consider is A.) as VInce said, seeing if an ASI at 4th would let you round off some numbers. As for 1st level...
what about Slasher? Slasher lets you reduce an enemy's speed by 10 feet when you hit them with slashing damage, which includes attacks of opportunity and lets you sorta get some of your Sentinel-based battlefield control back. It also gives you an extra point of Strength, and if you crit something it has disadvantage on all attacks until your next turn. Best part - it works with any slashing weapon, including most polearms and greatswords, so it's more weapon-agnostic. You can use combat sticks until/unless you get a better option in slashing sword. That wouyld be my best bet, for trying to get back a little of the SentiPAM Turbo Muenster without actually using SentiPAM and pissing off your DM.
Whoops. Forgot. No Tasha's Cauldron. Yeah, never mind. There's no good combat-feat option at that point outside the bog-standard Great Weapon Master, which is overhyped as it is. Mleghm. Pick something fun and flavorful, I suppose?Please do not contact or message me.
The problem here is that Calivar stated that his table only uses the PH and DMG, so I am not sure Tashas is on the table for something like Slasher
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Quoted for truth.
There's nothing wrong with Mage Slayer or Resilient. I really like Ritual Caster, and if the campaign isn't too hack&slashy Skilled can be amazing.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The big thing with many subclasses of Paladin's, and Vengeance is one of them, is that they have features (Channel Divinity) that trigger off of their spellcasting ability = CHA. Plus, of course, the general awesomeness of the 6th level Paladin feature. 2 points in CHA at 4th level = +1 in ALL Saves for everyone within 10 feet. That is huge.
I really want to see the initial stats of this char, before diving into Feats at 0 level.
Sentinel works against Disengage and PAM does not, but if your DM is telling you your setting is bizarrely low on polearms, it's best to listen. Did your DM specify any other weapons that are missing?
If none are missing, keep your feats and switch from a glaive to a shield and a spear.
If more are missing, I suggest you lean hard into crit-fishing. You're stuck with your race and a dearth of feats due to having access to no sourcebooks, but you can swap PAM+Sentinel for Shield Master+Lucky, and your weapon hand can wield any of the many 1d8 one-handers in the PHB, so even if your setting is also missing, I don't know, battleaxes, you can swap to a longsword or a rapier or a warhammer. You won't be very good at knocking things over - you have to take Lucky rather than Skill Expert - but you can knock things over every turn, and you can get super-advantage at will 3x per day.
Ritual Caster can let you cheese a familiar for perma-advantage on your melee attacks. Resilient provides an extra save proficiency. Mage Slayers lets you largely shut down casters. Skilled would bring this character's number of proficiencies from 5 to 8. All of these can be huge.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
also for a flavor reason, polearms were the weapons the peasants who couldn't afford the fancy training and sword itself.
Not actually true. Yes, some pole weapons were the arms given to cheap conscripts - spears and pikes were the order of the day for conscripts - but things like halberds, glaives, billhooks, and other such weapons? They were manufactured for use by heavily armored knights that largely discarded the use of the shield since their armor rendered shields mostly* unnecessary, using the massive advantage in reach and leverage a polearm gives you to dominate open battlefields. The sword was a medieval knight's equivalent of a sidearm - a backup weapon in case your primary weapon is rendered unusable for whatever reason. It was also generally a symbol of status, since a good sword was a very expensive item that required the services of an expert swordsmith.
All of which goes to say that a heavily armored soldier who specializes in the use of pole weapons is perfectly valid archetype, historically as well as fantastically. After all, it wasn't a conscript farmer that invented the halberd and created the techniques to use it.
Please do not contact or message me.
I was thinking of the spear/pike, not the fancier ones, thanks for the clairification :O)
Thanks a lot for all your input so far. I will add two items to the thread/discussion:
1.) My charakter: https://www.dndbeyond.com/profile/Calivar_the_Eternal/characters/30528248
2.) Sage Advice to the topic "PAM&Sentinel vs. offensive Disengage-Action": https://www.sageadvice.eu/how-does-a-character-with-polearm-master-and-sentinel-interact-with-an-approaching-creature-that-used-the-disengage-action/
First off, kudo's for using the 27 point buy system. I like that someone is playing this straight up.
Now, based on those stats I see no reason not to take a +2 in your 4th level ASI. As I have stated before, the benefits it gives your char's Channel Divinity and the overall group's Saves makes getting that to 18 = +4 a big deal.
As for the 0 level Feat, the world is your oyster. There are a myriad that you can look at. Though consider a couple things:
1. Your channel divinity feature already roots a target in place, in total terror of you, if it fails the save (see above why a high CHA is good). That is duplicated somewhat by Sentinel, so that Feat may not be your best option.
2. IF your DM lets you also alter your starting stats, and IF you want to tank with this char, Heavy Armour Master adds one to your Str. You can back that off to 15 with your original point allocation, then take that Feat to push it back to 16, and you still have one or 2 points to put into Int or Wis.
JC's saying you don't get an Attack of Opportunity but you still get to attack them as you have Polearm master which alllows you to attack when they enter reach...you just do not get to shut their movement down?
As is ******* typical of Sage Advice, the ruling is kind of a mess. In this case, no - Disengage means you cannot be targeted by attacks of opportunity, while Sentinel allows you to target a creature leaving your reach with AoO. PAM allows you to AoO when a creature enters your reach. Sentinel negates Disengage when a target leaves, but technically not when a target enters reach. It's rules parsing and hair-splitting, but by the strictest read of RAW, Crawford is correct.
What that says to me is that Calivar's DM is basically telling Calivar "if you use this on me I will ensure you live to regret it". I hate when a DM doesn't have the guts to just outright say "these feats/spells/effects/abilities are banned from my table" and let the players know ahead of time what they can or cannot use.
Polearm Master is still valid, in that it allows a bonus action attack and also forces most enemies to choose between "offensive Disengage" or attacking that turn, as most enemies are not rogues. Enemies can use "Offensive Disengage" to approach the paladin freely, though a SentiPAM could still stop enemies from fleeing the paladin to chase down squishier teammates behind the character.
Heh. The minxish troublemaker shit in me honestly almost wants to recommend keeping SentiPAM. be all "Okay, Mr. soft-ban DM. Come at me with your "Offensive Disengage", your ranged weapons, and your reach shit. Offensive disengage wastes actions, ranged critters are always bad for paladins anyways, and shit with Reach still provokes an attack of opportunity if it doesn't Offensive Disengage first. You don't want to give me magic weapons? I don't need 'em. Next time be straight with me the first time."
However, the Rei that knows better than to challenge the DM to a game of rules chicken says keep Polearm Master for the bonus action attack and trade Sentinel for either an ASI or an amusing feat. A good way to fox a DM insistent on screwing with a melee paladin would be Spell Sniper: Warlock with Eldritch Blast. Ranged attackers trying to avoid the glaive would then be faced with a 240-foot range 1d10 force poke from the "helpless" paladin. it's not by any means a Super Heavy Optimizer's choice, but it's the sort of thing I could see myself picking in this situation specifically to poke a DM who didn't bother telling me my character was banned before I made it.
Please do not contact or message me.
The argumentation from the DM is silly. "Offensively disengaging" does nothing vs a character with PAM (you still provoke the AoO) and is irrelevant vs Sentinel (because you're not moving away, so Sentinel wouldn't be triggered anyway). If you are disengaging away from a character with Sentinel and PAM you provoke an AoO (and possibly have your speed reduced to zero) from Sentinel because it trumps disengaging and PAM is irrelevant because you're not entering reach.
Why get wound up over this? It's simply clarifying exactly what the rules say. It's nothing new, it's not splitting hairs, it's simply following the rules.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Sage Advice in general annoys me, because Crawford goes back and forth on his rulings all the time. Yet people still slavishly adhere to it and cite SAC all the time as a Definitive Perfect Source of All Rules Ever, the RAWest RAW that ever RAWed a RAW, and castigate any DM who tells their players that Crawford's rulings apply to Crawford's table, not their own. As if SAC overrode every last thing in every last D&D book ever printed, including Rule Zero. It's cool that SAC is there for people that want it, but it's no more valid for any particular table than Crawford's Twitter feed. Or Mercer's Twitter feed, for that matter.
Please do not contact or message me.
You're entirely entitled to that opinion, but at least in this case he's just confirming what the rules say. It's not a hidden erratum, it's not even some weird interpretation of the rules or an unnecessary leap in logic. It's like he's saying 2+2=4. It's what anyone looking at the question rationally would expect him to say, it's 100% what he should say.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I don‘t see why the Char with PAM still gets an AoO. Disengage lets you move freely without provoking AoO while moving. Therefore you don‘t trigger the PAM AoO when you enter the reach of the Polearm-Bearer.
Just to reiterate what others have said, if you're forcing enemies to waste entire actions on preemptive disengaging and staying away from you, that's still an effect that you can use. Significant battlefield control.
I DM for a Sentinel/Polearm Master Paladin and I can say it's limited hard by the 1/round restriction on Reactions. He often declines OAs because he might need his Reaction for more defensive-type things later in the round. Is is extremely easy to overwhelm the defensive aspects of this build with many weaker monsters.
It's hard to read the subtext here. The least generous interpretation is that the DM is just saying they will passive-aggressively make you regret your choices if you choose those feats. I mean there's no reason at all to assume that polearms would be somehow rare compared to all other weapons. If that is indeed the case you might need to have a more in-depth talk. DMs who have the mindset that they need to actively work against player choices are likely to shut you down no matter what you choose to do.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm