In one of our campaigns I'm a Barbarian and another player is a Paladin. I had an idea that we both thought was amusing:
Sentinel
You have mastered techniques to take advantage of every drop in any enemy’s guard, gaining the following benefits:
When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, the creature’s speed becomes 0 for the rest of the turn.
Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving your reach.
When a creature within 5 feet of you makes an attack against a target other than you (and that target doesn’t have this feat), you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against the attacking creature.
Level 4 we both take the sentinel feat and routinely charge into combat shoulder to shoulder. Every time an enemy strikes one of us, the other pops them in the head. Every round. Like a Three Stooges act. Has anyone tried this? I'm wondering how it works practically as opposed to theory. Thanks! :)
The line you have in red disqualifies your tactic from working because the paladin and the barbarian both have the feat.
Ohhhh (I don't know how to make a facepalm emoji on a desktop) I did not read it carefully enough. I thought the "target" was the enemy you're attacking. My bad. I guess they thought of that tactic and wanted to avoid us using it... :(
Womp womp. However, there are still plenty of hypothetical shenanigans. You could have your entire party consist of sentinel paladins and one patsy who draws aggro.
Target hits the patsy, and you get a 5-7 player game of Divine Smite Whack-a-mole.
That tactic won't work in that way sadly, but you can do a tag team style with one guy with a polearm and sentinel(and preferrably Polearm Master) in the "second row" and one guy with more tankiness in the first one
It's kind of lame they have that stipulation in there IMO. Setting up tactical dilemmas like OP's example is fun and should be rewarded. It's limited by your Reaction so would be in no way broken, especially as tank builds often have other things that eat their Reaction as well.
It's kind of lame they have that stipulation in there IMO. Setting up tactical dilemmas like OP's example is fun and should be rewarded. It's limited by your Reaction so would be in no way broken, especially as tank builds often have other things that eat their Reaction as well.
I agree! And also, it's not always realistic to be right next to each other on the battle field. Sometimes things are chaotic. Sometimes the Barbarian needs to go take care of this - while the Paladin is taking care of that.
I think there's a good chance I would house rule to allow this, although I'd have to monitor it to make sure it didn't unbalance things too much. It sounds like a lot of fun, though!
I don’t know what’s the sub-class of your Barbarian fellow, but you can do amazing things by leveraging a Paladin with Sentinel + Ancestral Guardian Barbarian.
Enemies “marked” by the Ancestral Guardian ability will attack your Paladin with disadvantage and hopefully miss because he should have a consistent AC. If they decide to attack the Barbarian instead, they will be punished by the Sentinel ability.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In one of our campaigns I'm a Barbarian and another player is a Paladin. I had an idea that we both thought was amusing:
Sentinel
You have mastered techniques to take advantage of every drop in any enemy’s guard, gaining the following benefits:
Level 4 we both take the sentinel feat and routinely charge into combat shoulder to shoulder. Every time an enemy strikes one of us, the other pops them in the head. Every round. Like a Three Stooges act. Has anyone tried this? I'm wondering how it works practically as opposed to theory. Thanks! :)
???
The line you have in red disqualifies your tactic from working because the paladin and the barbarian both have the feat.
Ohhhh (I don't know how to make a facepalm emoji on a desktop) I did not read it carefully enough. I thought the "target" was the enemy you're attacking. My bad. I guess they thought of that tactic and wanted to avoid us using it... :(
Womp womp. However, there are still plenty of hypothetical shenanigans. You could have your entire party consist of sentinel paladins and one patsy who draws aggro.
Target hits the patsy, and you get a 5-7 player game of Divine Smite Whack-a-mole.
That tactic won't work in that way sadly, but you can do a tag team style with one guy with a polearm and sentinel(and preferrably Polearm Master) in the "second row" and one guy with more tankiness in the first one
It's kind of lame they have that stipulation in there IMO. Setting up tactical dilemmas like OP's example is fun and should be rewarded. It's limited by your Reaction so would be in no way broken, especially as tank builds often have other things that eat their Reaction as well.
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
I agree! And also, it's not always realistic to be right next to each other on the battle field. Sometimes things are chaotic. Sometimes the Barbarian needs to go take care of this - while the Paladin is taking care of that.
I think there's a good chance I would house rule to allow this, although I'd have to monitor it to make sure it didn't unbalance things too much. It sounds like a lot of fun, though!
I don’t know what’s the sub-class of your Barbarian fellow, but you can do amazing things by leveraging a Paladin with Sentinel + Ancestral Guardian Barbarian.
Enemies “marked” by the Ancestral Guardian ability will attack your Paladin with disadvantage and hopefully miss because he should have a consistent AC. If they decide to attack the Barbarian instead, they will be punished by the Sentinel ability.