'When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, quarterstaff, or spear, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon'.
If the opponent is at the far end of your reach, can you still use the 'opposite end'? Seems kind of silly that you spin your 10ft halberd around and whack them with the handle while holding the sharpened end of your weapon (while I am absolutely at ease with a butt-stroke in close combat). I know that physics and game mechanics often do not jive.... RAW and all, I let it roll but wanted to get an opinion from the knowledge base.
The weapon still has the reach property so yes, you can hit them with the haft at 10 ft away.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
The rules do not specify any change in the weapon's properties, besides the damage die being 1d4 for this attack, so yes, you can still use the bonus attack at extreme range.
Thematically, while it's often portrayed as "spinning the polearm around and smacking with the butt", the rules only say you hit them with the opposite end, not that you spin the weapon around. So there's no built-in limitation of being unable to use it in tight spaces (not that you mention that, but it's been brought up), and no need to describe it as spinning the weapon around. You could describe it as the character stepping forward and doing a half turn while jabbing backwards with the butt into the target, and still keep to the strict letter of the rule. You could also ignore the "with the opposite end" part (which is mostly flavor... rules-wise it explains why it's bludgeoning damage and not slashing (for glaives and halbers) or piercing (for spears)), and just describe it as a smack with the blunt part of the "head".
Also keep in mind that while you are not using any of your movement in game mechanic terms, you are moving, unless you imagine everyone as having lead feet and being stuck in one position. When you fight (or even do some other things) you move around, maybe taking a step back or a couple of feet forward, even sidestepping on occasion. So long as you stay in the 5 foot area you control and don't use any movement to change to a different 5 foot area nothing changes in relation to game mechanics, but flavor wise you can say you did a cartwheel and then attacked with the other end of the weapon.
I have a paladin with pole arm mastery and a glaive as one of the characters in my campaign. I allow him to make the bonus attack "butt strike" at full reach. It seems a little weird, but is in the rules. It could be seen as striking with another portion of the weapon than strictly the butt. The glaive was rated very highly for personal combat by George Silver in his "Paradoxes of Defense", I have a facsimile copy somewhere, this is an Elizabethan fencing manual, so the pole arm mastery feat has some historical basis.
To my frustration the rules contain no restrictions on using an 8 1/2 foot polearm inside, or with low ceilings. I tend to assign disadvantage to weapons with the "two-handed" property when in confined spaces. This covers most of the weapons with "reach". It is possible to use a pole arm in a room with a low ceiling, but it is definitely an impediment.
To my frustration the rules contain no restrictions on using an 8 1/2 foot polearm inside, or with low ceilings. I tend to assign disadvantage to weapons with the "two-handed" property when in confined spaces. This covers most of the weapons with "reach". It is possible to use a pole arm in a room with a low ceiling, but it is definitely an impediment.
While you are certainly free to add whatever house rules you feel are beneficial to the game as DM, bear in mind that two-handed weapons already bring a limitation with them that balances them out. Also, while in real life attacking with a halberd or glaive while inside with low ceilings might be difficult, there is no need to include that specific bit of realism in the game: you can thrust with the glaive, or make short slashing motions, rather than a full overhead swing. Or you can just flavor misses as the effects of said difficulty, without introducing Disadvantage (which really puts two-handed users at a disadvantage, since now their weapons are less useful in some situations, without a corresponding increase in usefulness in others).
This has seemed strange to me as well. In most videos I've seen covering historical pole arm fighting you keep the business end pointed at the enemy and keep the reach to your advantage. Unless another target is behind you or to the the side of you it seems like it would actually take more time to swing the butt end around for an extra attack as opposed to an additional end with the sharp end.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello,
'When you take the Attack action and attack with only a glaive, halberd, quarterstaff, or spear, you can use a bonus action to make a melee attack with the opposite end of the weapon'.
If the opponent is at the far end of your reach, can you still use the 'opposite end'? Seems kind of silly that you spin your 10ft halberd around and whack them with the handle while holding the sharpened end of your weapon (while I am absolutely at ease with a butt-stroke in close combat). I know that physics and game mechanics often do not jive.... RAW and all, I let it roll but wanted to get an opinion from the knowledge base.
Thank you for responding,
SirEvangelos
The weapon still has the reach property so yes, you can hit them with the haft at 10 ft away.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
The rules do not specify any change in the weapon's properties, besides the damage die being 1d4 for this attack, so yes, you can still use the bonus attack at extreme range.
Thematically, while it's often portrayed as "spinning the polearm around and smacking with the butt", the rules only say you hit them with the opposite end, not that you spin the weapon around. So there's no built-in limitation of being unable to use it in tight spaces (not that you mention that, but it's been brought up), and no need to describe it as spinning the weapon around. You could describe it as the character stepping forward and doing a half turn while jabbing backwards with the butt into the target, and still keep to the strict letter of the rule. You could also ignore the "with the opposite end" part (which is mostly flavor... rules-wise it explains why it's bludgeoning damage and not slashing (for glaives and halbers) or piercing (for spears)), and just describe it as a smack with the blunt part of the "head".
Also keep in mind that while you are not using any of your movement in game mechanic terms, you are moving, unless you imagine everyone as having lead feet and being stuck in one position. When you fight (or even do some other things) you move around, maybe taking a step back or a couple of feet forward, even sidestepping on occasion. So long as you stay in the 5 foot area you control and don't use any movement to change to a different 5 foot area nothing changes in relation to game mechanics, but flavor wise you can say you did a cartwheel and then attacked with the other end of the weapon.
I have a paladin with pole arm mastery and a glaive as one of the characters in my campaign. I allow him to make the bonus attack "butt strike" at full reach. It seems a little weird, but is in the rules. It could be seen as striking with another portion of the weapon than strictly the butt. The glaive was rated very highly for personal combat by George Silver in his "Paradoxes of Defense", I have a facsimile copy somewhere, this is an Elizabethan fencing manual, so the pole arm mastery feat has some historical basis.
To my frustration the rules contain no restrictions on using an 8 1/2 foot polearm inside, or with low ceilings. I tend to assign disadvantage to weapons with the "two-handed" property when in confined spaces. This covers most of the weapons with "reach". It is possible to use a pole arm in a room with a low ceiling, but it is definitely an impediment.
While you are certainly free to add whatever house rules you feel are beneficial to the game as DM, bear in mind that two-handed weapons already bring a limitation with them that balances them out. Also, while in real life attacking with a halberd or glaive while inside with low ceilings might be difficult, there is no need to include that specific bit of realism in the game: you can thrust with the glaive, or make short slashing motions, rather than a full overhead swing. Or you can just flavor misses as the effects of said difficulty, without introducing Disadvantage (which really puts two-handed users at a disadvantage, since now their weapons are less useful in some situations, without a corresponding increase in usefulness in others).
I should clarify that the standard ten-foot dungeon ceiling is high enough to use two-handed weapons without disadvantage.
This has seemed strange to me as well. In most videos I've seen covering historical pole arm fighting you keep the business end pointed at the enemy and keep the reach to your advantage. Unless another target is behind you or to the the side of you it seems like it would actually take more time to swing the butt end around for an extra attack as opposed to an additional end with the sharp end.