Shillelagh is General. It says all attacks with the quarterstaff use 1d8 for weapon dmg. This would apply to Attack as part of action, opportunity attack as part of your reaction, and if you can get a BonusAction to "attack" you could use Shillelagh wespon damage there too.
But PolearmMaster doesnt say you get a BonusAction attack.
Polearm Master is much more specific than that. It says if you make an Attack with the Polearm during your Action, then you can use BonusAttack to PoleAttack and the weapon damage is 1d4 (and you can add abilitt modifier to damage).
So the specific 1d4 polearm weapon damage overrides the general 1d8 for all attacks ik Shillelagg.
It's a bit more involved than that. Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy. Normally, I believe the active player decides the order of operations, which would allow for Shillelagh's damage to apply to the Polearm Master's attack. The Sage Advice ruling then says Polearm Master overrides Shillelagh.
However, the ruling then introduces other problems. If I use Polearm Master with +X Quarterstaff, do I get the +X to hit and damage? The Sage Advice sets the standard that "the other end" has different properties that are maintained independently (like 3.x's Double Weapons) and the +X would not apply to hit and damage rolls with the Polearm Master attack.
It's a bit more involved than that. Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy. Normally, I believe the active player decides the order of operations, which would allow for Shillelagh's damage to apply to the Polearm Master's attack. The Sage Advice ruling then says Polearm Master overrides Shillelagh.
However, the ruling then introduces other problems. If I use Polearm Master with +X Quarterstaff, do I get the +X to hit and damage? The Sage Advice sets the standard that "the other end" has different properties that are maintained independently (like 3.x's Double Weapons) and the +X would not apply to hit and damage rolls with the Polearm Master attack.
In what universe does a determination of what effect sets the base weapon damage also determine whether or not a +X weapon's effects apply?
"Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy."
Shillelagh says it affects "attacks" lower case. Thats a generic "all attacks" call out.
PAM says if you do your normal Action(Attack) this turn, you get a special BonusAction immediately after that attack that does 1d4 for weapon damage. Thats a very specific, in this one situation, you get a specific pole strike attack that does specific damage.
The wording for this could definitely benefit from clarification, (as is true of much of the phb) but it seems sufficient as it is to determine PAM is muxh more specific than shillelagh
It's a bit more involved than that. Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy. Normally, I believe the active player decides the order of operations, which would allow for Shillelagh's damage to apply to the Polearm Master's attack. The Sage Advice ruling then says Polearm Master overrides Shillelagh.
However, the ruling then introduces other problems. If I use Polearm Master with +X Quarterstaff, do I get the +X to hit and damage? The Sage Advice sets the standard that "the other end" has different properties that are maintained independently (like 3.x's Double Weapons) and the +X would not apply to hit and damage rolls with the Polearm Master attack.
In what universe does a determination of what effect sets the base weapon damage also determine whether or not a +X weapon's effects apply?
In the same universe that a change to the base weapon damage of a quarterstaff doesn't affect the damage when you strike "with the opposite end of the weapon".
If I cast Shillelagh on my Quarterstaff and have the Polearm Master feat, does the bonus attack use a d4 or a d8 for damage?
The benefit from Polearm Master applies to the opposite end of the weapon and always uses a d4 for damage rather than the weapon’s normal damage die. This is true for a Quarterstaff enhanced with Shillelagh just as it is for a normal one.
When you are attack with a Quarterstaff, you are attacking with both ends. One-handed like an oversized club is not the traditional method of wielding a quarterstaff, but Sage Advice treats it like the other end is a separate end that is not affected by Shillelagh. They didn't defend the position based on a generic vs specific ruling. They said it was because you were striking with the other end, like in 3.x where double weapons needed each end enchanted separately.
"Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy."
Shillelagh says it affects "attacks" lower case. Thats a generic "all attacks" call out.
Not exactly. It says that attacks can use your spellcasting modifier for attacks. The damage die change is separate. You could make a case for Shillelagh changing the weapon damage die versus PAM changing the damage die for that attack, but I think it's still muddy, in particular because Sage Advice did not base their ruling on that order of operations.
It's a bit more involved than that. Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy. Normally, I believe the active player decides the order of operations, which would allow for Shillelagh's damage to apply to the Polearm Master's attack. The Sage Advice ruling then says Polearm Master overrides Shillelagh.
However, the ruling then introduces other problems. If I use Polearm Master with +X Quarterstaff, do I get the +X to hit and damage? The Sage Advice sets the standard that "the other end" has different properties that are maintained independently (like 3.x's Double Weapons) and the +X would not apply to hit and damage rolls with the Polearm Master attack.
In what universe does a determination of what effect sets the base weapon damage also determine whether or not a +X weapon's effects apply?
In the same universe that a change to the base weapon damage of a quarterstaff doesn't affect the damage when you strike "with the opposite end of the weapon".
If I cast Shillelagh on my Quarterstaff and have the Polearm Master feat, does the bonus attack use a d4 or a d8 for damage?
The benefit from Polearm Master applies to the opposite end of the weapon and always uses a d4 for damage rather than the weapon’s normal damage die. This is true for a Quarterstaff enhanced with Shillelagh just as it is for a normal one.
When you are attack with a Quarterstaff, you are attacking with both ends. One-handed like an oversized club is not the traditional method of wielding a quarterstaff, but Sage Advice treats it like the other end is a separate end that is not affected by Shillelagh. They didn't defend the position based on a generic vs specific ruling. They said it was because you were striking with the other end, like in 3.x where double weapons needed each end enchanted separately. [...]
"When you are attack with a Quarterstaff, you are attacking with both ends"
For normal artacks, that isnt specified in the rules anywhere.
I disagree, if you attack with a quarterstaff you get one attack. That means you hit with one end.
If you have two attacks, then it is not so clear that you use one end or both ends.
That assumes that one attack represents one physical strike, which in an abstraction isn't necessarily a given. Second, if it is one end and one end versus the other end matters, which end is it?
"If you have two attacks, then it is not so clear that you use one end or both ends."
But it is clear that Poleaem Master actually does specify you use the "opposite" end of the weaoon. No rule anywhere under Qusrterstaff says anything about using any particular end.
And in DnD rules, if the rule does NOT say it somewhere, then its generally not raw.
So, under normal rules, all quarterstaff attacks happen with one end of the wespon. Amd polearm master always uses the other end.
If the description of Quarterstaff said something about how every attack uses the "opposite" end of the previous attack, then the "opposite" end mentioned in polearm master would have something to hang its hat on.
No rule anywhere under Qusrterstaff says anything about using any particular end.
And in DnD rules, if the rule does NOT say it somewhere, then its generally not raw.
So, under normal rules, all quarterstaff attacks happen with one end of the wespon.
No rule says a quarterstaff uses one end of the weapon. And in D&D rules, if the rules do not say it somewhere, then it's not RAW, but it may be RAI. It is not RAW that quarterstaff attacks happen with one end of the weapon. It is not RAW that a Handaxe attack happens with the blade of the weapon. It's not actually RAW that bow attacks happen with the arrow and not the bow. These are things left to the understanding of how the weapons are used in real life because there is no RAW indication of how they are used. Quarterstaffs are traditionally gripped with two hands striking with either end of the quarterstaff in Western styles. Here is a more serious reference to one particular quarterstaff fighting style where you can see both ends used, but the shifting of the hands means that both ends will have similar force. Other styles may have hands evenly placed equidistant from the ends more like the first reference.
"When you are attack with a Quarterstaff, you are attacking with both ends"
For normal artacks, that isnt specified in the rules anywhere.
I disagree, if you attack with a quarterstaff you get one attack. That means you hit with one end.
If you have two attacks, then it is not so clear that you use one end or both ends.
That assumes that one attack represents one physical strike, which in an abstraction isn't necessarily a given. Second, if it is one end and one end versus the other end matters, which end is it?
I was replying to the post that says it is not specified in the rules anywhere. If you want to state that a single attack is both ends, then that shuts down PAM as you are know making a "third" attack.
RAW doesn't elaborate on how weapon deals their damage specifically;
Damage. The table lists the amount of damage a weapon deals when an attacker hits with it as well as the type of that damage.
A Handaxe deals 1d6 Slashing damage, which Damage Types for example refers as cutting object, presumably from it's edge part though a DM's ruling can always differ.
No rule says a quarterstaff uses one end of the weapon. And in D&D rules, if the rules do not say it somewhere, then it's not RAW, but it may be RAI. It is not RAW that quarterstaff attacks happen with one end of the weapon.
If you had HuntersMark going, you could add the D6 for all of those attacks because Hunter'sMark is stackable damage.
but when two different features specify different weapon damage and nothing in the rules points to which one takes precedence, the only thing to fall back on is that specific overrides general, and Shillelagh is very general (discussing all attacks) whereas PAM is very specific (discussing a specific "pole strike" that occurs immediately after a normal attack/action, and uses your bonus action, with a 1d4 for weaopn damage).
"When you are attack with a Quarterstaff, you are attacking with both ends"
For normal artacks, that isnt specified in the rules anywhere.
I disagree, if you attack with a quarterstaff you get one attack. That means you hit with one end.
If you have two attacks, then it is not so clear that you use one end or both ends.
That assumes that one attack represents one physical strike, which in an abstraction isn't necessarily a given. Second, if it is one end and one end versus the other end matters, which end is it?
If we're talking RAI, the whole "attack with the opposite end" language in PAM, along with the damage die, is a strong suggestion that you are not taking a full swing with the weapon, but are instead just making a short reverse thrust or catching someone with your follow-through, something along those lines -- regardless of what weapon you're using
So there's zero reason RAI for it to do the same amount of damage a normal attack with the weapon would do
Of course, shillelagh allows you to hand-wave that away with a "but MAGIC" argument, but suggesting that a stick with shillelagh on it is going to do full damage every time you simply tap someone with it is probably going to be a hard sell for a lot of DMs
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
However, the ruling then introduces other problems. If I use Polearm Master with +X Quarterstaff, do I get the +X to hit and damage? The Sage Advice sets the standard that "the other end" has different properties that are maintained independently (like 3.x's Double Weapons) and the +X would not apply to hit and damage rolls with the Polearm Master attack.
The Sage Advice official ruling only covers the damage dice used; the Bonus Action Polearm Master melee attack with the opposite end of a +1 Quarterstaff deals 1d4 +1 + STR mod Bludgeoning damage.
However, the ruling then introduces other problems. If I use Polearm Master with +X Quarterstaff, do I get the +X to hit and damage? The Sage Advice sets the standard that "the other end" has different properties that are maintained independently (like 3.x's Double Weapons) and the +X would not apply to hit and damage rolls with the Polearm Master attack.
The Sage Advice official ruling only covers the damage dice used; the Bonus Action Polearm Master melee attack with the opposite end of a +1 Quarterstaff deals 1d4 +1 + STR mod Bludgeoning damage.
Let me ask a different question that hopefully illustrates the point, whether or not your answer is the same. I throw a +1 Greatsword. I even have the Tavern Brawler feat, so I am proficient in throwing Greatswords (don't ask me what taverns I frequent where that comes up). Do I get the +1 to hit and damage?
Let me ask a different question that hopefully illustrates the point, whether or not your answer is the same. I throw a +1 Greatsword. I even have the Tavern Brawler feat, so I am proficient in throwing Greatswords (don't ask me what taverns I frequent where that comes up). Do I get the +1 to hit and damage?
I'd have to say yes on this one. The rules on Improvised Weapons cover using weapons contrary to their design and alter the damage dice. The rules say nothing about magical modifiers, so I'd rule they still apply as long as the item was already a weapon (so we're not applying it to items like a +1 Wand of the War Mage).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's a bit more involved than that. Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy. Normally, I believe the active player decides the order of operations, which would allow for Shillelagh's damage to apply to the Polearm Master's attack. The Sage Advice ruling then says Polearm Master overrides Shillelagh.
However, the ruling then introduces other problems. If I use Polearm Master with +X Quarterstaff, do I get the +X to hit and damage? The Sage Advice sets the standard that "the other end" has different properties that are maintained independently (like 3.x's Double Weapons) and the +X would not apply to hit and damage rolls with the Polearm Master attack.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
In what universe does a determination of what effect sets the base weapon damage also determine whether or not a +X weapon's effects apply?
"Shillelagh and Polearm Master are both specifics overriding the general rules of the Weapon damage. There is no clear hierarchy."
Shillelagh says it affects "attacks" lower case. Thats a generic "all attacks" call out.
PAM says if you do your normal Action(Attack) this turn, you get a special BonusAction immediately after that attack that does 1d4 for weapon damage. Thats a very specific, in this one situation, you get a specific pole strike attack that does specific damage.
The wording for this could definitely benefit from clarification, (as is true of much of the phb) but it seems sufficient as it is to determine PAM is muxh more specific than shillelagh
In the same universe that a change to the base weapon damage of a quarterstaff doesn't affect the damage when you strike "with the opposite end of the weapon".
When you are attack with a Quarterstaff, you are attacking with both ends. One-handed like an oversized club is not the traditional method of wielding a quarterstaff, but Sage Advice treats it like the other end is a separate end that is not affected by Shillelagh. They didn't defend the position based on a generic vs specific ruling. They said it was because you were striking with the other end, like in 3.x where double weapons needed each end enchanted separately.
Not exactly. It says that attacks can use your spellcasting modifier for attacks. The damage die change is separate. You could make a case for Shillelagh changing the weapon damage die versus PAM changing the damage die for that attack, but I think it's still muddy, in particular because Sage Advice did not base their ruling on that order of operations.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
It was asked in the next thread, and there was agreement that it should apply: Polearm Master w/magic weapon and weapon mastery
"When you are attack with a Quarterstaff, you are attacking with both ends"
For normal artacks, that isnt specified in the rules anywhere.
I disagree, if you attack with a quarterstaff you get one attack. That means you hit with one end.
If you have two attacks, then it is not so clear that you use one end or both ends.
That assumes that one attack represents one physical strike, which in an abstraction isn't necessarily a given. Second, if it is one end and one end versus the other end matters, which end is it?
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
"If you have two attacks, then it is not so clear that you use one end or both ends."
But it is clear that Poleaem Master actually does specify you use the "opposite" end of the weaoon. No rule anywhere under Qusrterstaff says anything about using any particular end.
And in DnD rules, if the rule does NOT say it somewhere, then its generally not raw.
So, under normal rules, all quarterstaff attacks happen with one end of the wespon. Amd polearm master always uses the other end.
If the description of Quarterstaff said something about how every attack uses the "opposite" end of the previous attack, then the "opposite" end mentioned in polearm master would have something to hang its hat on.
All Extra Attack with either ends of a Quarterstaff deals 1d6 Bludgeoning damage, or 1d8 when imbued with Shillelagh spell.
The Bonus Action Polearm Master attack with the opposite end of the Quarterstaff always deal 1d4 Bludgeoning damage.
No rule says a quarterstaff uses one end of the weapon. And in D&D rules, if the rules do not say it somewhere, then it's not RAW, but it may be RAI. It is not RAW that quarterstaff attacks happen with one end of the weapon. It is not RAW that a Handaxe attack happens with the blade of the weapon. It's not actually RAW that bow attacks happen with the arrow and not the bow. These are things left to the understanding of how the weapons are used in real life because there is no RAW indication of how they are used. Quarterstaffs are traditionally gripped with two hands striking with either end of the quarterstaff in Western styles. Here is a more serious reference to one particular quarterstaff fighting style where you can see both ends used, but the shifting of the hands means that both ends will have similar force. Other styles may have hands evenly placed equidistant from the ends more like the first reference.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
I was replying to the post that says it is not specified in the rules anywhere. If you want to state that a single attack is both ends, then that shuts down PAM as you are know making a "third" attack.
If you had HuntersMark going, you could add the D6 for all of those attacks because Hunter'sMark is stackable damage.
but when two different features specify different weapon damage and nothing in the rules points to which one takes precedence, the only thing to fall back on is that specific overrides general, and Shillelagh is very general (discussing all attacks) whereas PAM is very specific (discussing a specific "pole strike" that occurs immediately after a normal attack/action, and uses your bonus action, with a 1d4 for weaopn damage).
If we're talking RAI, the whole "attack with the opposite end" language in PAM, along with the damage die, is a strong suggestion that you are not taking a full swing with the weapon, but are instead just making a short reverse thrust or catching someone with your follow-through, something along those lines -- regardless of what weapon you're using
So there's zero reason RAI for it to do the same amount of damage a normal attack with the weapon would do
Of course, shillelagh allows you to hand-wave that away with a "but MAGIC" argument, but suggesting that a stick with shillelagh on it is going to do full damage every time you simply tap someone with it is probably going to be a hard sell for a lot of DMs
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The Sage Advice official ruling only covers the damage dice used; the Bonus Action Polearm Master melee attack with the opposite end of a +1 Quarterstaff deals 1d4 +1 + STR mod Bludgeoning damage.
Let me ask a different question that hopefully illustrates the point, whether or not your answer is the same. I throw a +1 Greatsword. I even have the Tavern Brawler feat, so I am proficient in throwing Greatswords (don't ask me what taverns I frequent where that comes up). Do I get the +1 to hit and damage?
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
I'd have to say yes on this one. The rules on Improvised Weapons cover using weapons contrary to their design and alter the damage dice. The rules say nothing about magical modifiers, so I'd rule they still apply as long as the item was already a weapon (so we're not applying it to items like a +1 Wand of the War Mage).