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. This attack uses the same ability modifier as the primary attack. The weapon’s damage die for this attack is a d4, and it deals bludgeoning damage.
What is interesting is that Quarterstaff and Spear are very different from Glaive or Halberd in two important respects: first, they have the Versatile quality, and second they are both Monk Weapons.
Versatile. This weapon can be used with one or two hands. A damage value in parentheses appears with the property — the damage when the weapon is used with two hands to make a melee attack.
The weapon damage die for both of these weapons is ordinarily a d6. Polearm Master wants to transform that into a d4 when used for its bonus attack, but Versatile wants to transform that into a d8 when the bonus attack is made while holding it in two hands. Which wins out?
Same question for Monks with Polearm Master. A Monk's Martial Arts ability provides in relevant part:
You can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your unarmed strike or monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table.
Polearm Master wants to transform the Spear or Quarterstaff damage die into a d4 for its bonus attack. Martial Arts wants to transform the damage die into [a d4, d6, d8, or d10 depending on level]. Which wins out?
I don't know that specific > general can truly answer this question, because in any event we have "general" being "Quarterstaffs and Spears do d6" and "specific" being three different abilities which all claim that they change that d6 to something else.
I would say that versatile's "the damage when the weapon is used with two hands," and martial arts's "in place of the normal damage," both referring to the general damage of the weapon is superseded by PAM's "The weapon’s damage die for this attack," which is specific to that 1 attack.
Just my interpretation anyway, and I believe it is RAI as well.
Here's a ruling from the Sage Advice Compendium that I feel is relevant to this discussion:
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.
The feat itself is setting the damage die of the bonus attack to be a d4, regardless of any other effect that would change the damage die of the quarterstaff.
You still benefit from whichever ability modifier you use for attacks with a quarterstaff with the feat's bonus action attack, including damage:
Can I add my Strength modifier to the damage of the bonus attack that Polearm Master gives me?
Yes. If you have the feat and use the Attack action to attack with a glaive, halberd, or quarterstaff, you can also strike with the weapon’s opposite end as a bonus action. For that bonus attack, you add your ability modifier to the attack roll, as you do whenever you attack with that weapon, and if you hit, you add the same ability modifier to the damage roll, which is normal for weapon damage rolls.
A specific rule, such as the rule for two-weapon fighting, might break the general rule by telling you not to add your ability modifier to the damage. Polearm Master doesn’t have such a rule.
This question has been asked similarly about shillelagh and PAM. Jeremy Crawford has weighed in on it. You assume that the bonus action that PAM gives you tries to transform a property of the weapon, but that isn't what it is doing. It is giving you a new bonus action that is an attack that is defined by what is written in the text of the feat (1d4 + mod). Properties that affect the weapon attacks do not affect that new bonus action attack.
I should have included Shillelagh in the original post, good catch.
To me, reading PAM's d4 bonus attack to not be enhanceable by Shillelagh/Versatile/Martial Arts essentially requires viewing that d4 bonus attack to not be an attack made "with" the weapon, but rather an attack made with the feat that just sort of fluffily includes the weapon. If the d4 bonus attack can still benefit from the attack being made with a +1 weapon to become a d4+1, then I don't know why it wouldn't benefit from other magic or features that enhance the weapon too.
Weapons like a flame tongue or a frost brand specify that they deal their extra damage when an attack with the weapon itself hits. Assuming you had a flame tongue polearm, the PAM attack would still deal the extra damage on top of the d4 damage if the attack hits.
I should have included Shillelagh in the original post, good catch.
To me, reading PAM's d4 bonus attack to not be enhanceable by Shillelagh/Versatile/Martial Arts essentially requires viewing that d4 bonus attack to not be an attack made "with" the weapon, but rather an attack made with the feat that just sort of fluffily includes the weapon. If the d4 bonus attack can still benefit from the attack being made with a +1 weapon to become a d4+1, then I don't know why it wouldn't benefit from other magic or features that enhance the weapon too.
You're reasoning from the premise that Shillelagh/Versatile/Martial Arts, which say the damage die is whatever, are more specific than the feat, which says the damage die is a d4, which is, and I always relish the chance to apply this appropriately, begging the question.
The answer to the question "why wouldn't the bonus action attack benefit from Versatile or whatever else" is "because PAM is a more specific rule than those other rules." Is PAM a more specific rule? Who even knows, man. The rules are bad sometimes. This isn't a question that can have a RAW answer precisely because the issue you raise in the OP: there are three different specific rules, and the rules writ large provide exactly zero means of arbitrating which ultimately has priority.
To me, reading PAM's d4 bonus attack to not be enhanceable by Shillelagh/Versatile/Martial Arts essentially requires viewing that d4 bonus attack to not be an attack made "with" the weapon, but rather an attack made with the feat that just sort of fluffily includes the weapon.
In a sense it is. Does that help any?
If the d4 bonus attack can still benefit from the attack being made with a +1 weapon to become a d4+1, then I don't know why it wouldn't benefit from other magic or features that enhance the weapon too.
Because that is bonus damage. PAM specifically makes the damage die a d4. It doesn't remove any other bonuses, just sets the die. Bonus damage from dueling, +X magic weapons, rage damage, even flame tongue or frost brand still get added. (You can also still use DEX with martial arts).
I think the intent about the weapon damage of the bonus attack from PAM is clear about being a d4 no matter what. You may not know this, but spears weren't included in the first printing of the feat; they later added in with errata. That means the designers had not one but two opportunities minimum to include any kind of wording that specifies that Versatile damage could supersede the d4 damage from PAM, and they didn't.
The d4 attack is basically using the non-weapon end of a pole weapon as an improvised weapon. It's probably not intended to work with one handed weapons at all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Polearm Master provides in relevant part:
What is interesting is that Quarterstaff and Spear are very different from Glaive or Halberd in two important respects: first, they have the Versatile quality, and second they are both Monk Weapons.
Versatile provides:
The weapon damage die for both of these weapons is ordinarily a d6. Polearm Master wants to transform that into a d4 when used for its bonus attack, but Versatile wants to transform that into a d8 when the bonus attack is made while holding it in two hands. Which wins out?
Same question for Monks with Polearm Master. A Monk's Martial Arts ability provides in relevant part:
Polearm Master wants to transform the Spear or Quarterstaff damage die into a d4 for its bonus attack. Martial Arts wants to transform the damage die into [a d4, d6, d8, or d10 depending on level]. Which wins out?
I don't know that specific > general can truly answer this question, because in any event we have "general" being "Quarterstaffs and Spears do d6" and "specific" being three different abilities which all claim that they change that d6 to something else.
How would you rule?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Hmm. An interesting thought.
I would say that versatile's "the damage when the weapon is used with two hands," and martial arts's "in place of the normal damage," both referring to the general damage of the weapon is superseded by PAM's "The weapon’s damage die for this attack," which is specific to that 1 attack.
Just my interpretation anyway, and I believe it is RAI as well.
Here's a ruling from the Sage Advice Compendium that I feel is relevant to this discussion:
The feat itself is setting the damage die of the bonus attack to be a d4, regardless of any other effect that would change the damage die of the quarterstaff.
You still benefit from whichever ability modifier you use for attacks with a quarterstaff with the feat's bonus action attack, including damage:
This question has been asked similarly about shillelagh and PAM. Jeremy Crawford has weighed in on it. You assume that the bonus action that PAM gives you tries to transform a property of the weapon, but that isn't what it is doing. It is giving you a new bonus action that is an attack that is defined by what is written in the text of the feat (1d4 + mod). Properties that affect the weapon attacks do not affect that new bonus action attack.
I should have included Shillelagh in the original post, good catch.
To me, reading PAM's d4 bonus attack to not be enhanceable by Shillelagh/Versatile/Martial Arts essentially requires viewing that d4 bonus attack to not be an attack made "with" the weapon, but rather an attack made with the feat that just sort of fluffily includes the weapon. If the d4 bonus attack can still benefit from the attack being made with a +1 weapon to become a d4+1, then I don't know why it wouldn't benefit from other magic or features that enhance the weapon too.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
What if it was something like a flaming weapon? Would the PAM attack get the extra damage die? The way I read JC’s answer is no.
Weapons like a flame tongue or a frost brand specify that they deal their extra damage when an attack with the weapon itself hits. Assuming you had a flame tongue polearm, the PAM attack would still deal the extra damage on top of the d4 damage if the attack hits.
You're reasoning from the premise that Shillelagh/Versatile/Martial Arts, which say the damage die is whatever, are more specific than the feat, which says the damage die is a d4, which is, and I always relish the chance to apply this appropriately, begging the question.
The answer to the question "why wouldn't the bonus action attack benefit from Versatile or whatever else" is "because PAM is a more specific rule than those other rules." Is PAM a more specific rule? Who even knows, man. The rules are bad sometimes. This isn't a question that can have a RAW answer precisely because the issue you raise in the OP: there are three different specific rules, and the rules writ large provide exactly zero means of arbitrating which ultimately has priority.
In a sense it is. Does that help any?
Because that is bonus damage. PAM specifically makes the damage die a d4. It doesn't remove any other bonuses, just sets the die. Bonus damage from dueling, +X magic weapons, rage damage, even flame tongue or frost brand still get added. (You can also still use DEX with martial arts).
I think the intent about the weapon damage of the bonus attack from PAM is clear about being a d4 no matter what. You may not know this, but spears weren't included in the first printing of the feat; they later added in with errata. That means the designers had not one but two opportunities minimum to include any kind of wording that specifies that Versatile damage could supersede the d4 damage from PAM, and they didn't.
The d4 attack is basically using the non-weapon end of a pole weapon as an improvised weapon. It's probably not intended to work with one handed weapons at all.