Yes, i know this is a very common build. However, i ask your help for a future subclass. Currently i'm playing a level1 fighter, variant human, with the Polearm Master feat. My gear is a heavy Armor, Shield and Spear. And my stats (standar array) are: Str: 16, Dex: 8, Con: 15, Int: 13, Wis: 12, Cha: 10
My fighting style is Dueling.
Is this a correct Build for a Polearm Fighter? My DM allow us to exchange two stats at lvl 2, so if there are something wrong I still have time to change it.
But, my main cuestion is: Which subclass suits me more at level 3? My idea was to go for the Rune Knight, but a party mate tell me that this is a bad idea. Their argument is that the rune knight use a lot reactions, and that collides with the PAM feat. Is it so bad to use the rune knight with the PAM feat? What subclass do you recommend? I've been thinking of an eldritch knight, but I think I would have a hard time having both hands full. I think the most obvious option is the Battle Master, but in another game that I play with the same group there is already one. So, if I can, I prefer another option. But if it is the only viable option for a figther with PAM feat, I would go for that. How about an Echo Knight? I think is bad idea because the Echo Knight use a lot of bonus actions. Psy Warrior maybe? I don't know.
And one last question. What do I do in lvl4? Raise the constitution, or should I buy another feat? (i'm thinking in Heavy Armor Master, because i have a relatively low cons).
The campaign is up to level 6, by the way.
Thank you very much for your help. I never play fighters, and I'm a bit lost.
The thing about rune knight is that their reaction is only valuable if you take the cloud rune, which is honestly pretty mandatory to take when you get it. You redirect an attack. I tend to save it for crits. Psi warrior does something similar, but for lowering damage for 1d6+INT mod.
It's not that big a deal, honestly. However, it does require that you think twice before hitting something that enters your range. You'll have to consider the layout of the battlefield, and determine if your squishier companions are at risk. If so, you may want to hold off on using your PAM reaction. Otherwise, go on ahead. I'd be fine with that, but if youre not used to playing fighters, i'd recommend to stray away from the more complex decision making involved in weighing opportunity costs for your reaction.
Other fighters might use your bonus action and reaction in other ways. For that reason, I'd recommend either champion or cavalier. Go for champion if you wanna increase DPR, or cavalier if you want to be more of the tank of the party.
Also, I'd changing your stats around so that your CON is 14. Standard array means you can't have two stats starting at 16 as a v.human, so, you might as well start it at 14. Probably set it to 13, and add the +1 to it for 14. Then move stats around to make your mental saves a bit better. 16/8/14/10/14/12. a 2 CON modifier is not so bad. You're proficient in the saving throw, and you have a d10 hit die, and you'll be donning your heavy armor+shield. Your HP'll be fine.
Since you're a fighter and you're going to six, I'd recommend you increase your STR score every single time. By the time you reach lvl 6, your STR will be at 20, and that's a huge advantage. Assuming no advantage, you'd be doing approximately 20 DPR. Under the same conditions, a GWM+GWF+greatsword fighter with 20 STR is pulling 18.6 DPR, so that's really nice for your build. If you went cavalier, increasing STR allows you to mark more targets per long rest, so you can better fulfill that "tank" role.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
In the real world, you are right. But DnD isn't the real world, is the best answer imo. It doesn't make sense, but it does to Jeremy Crawford, apparently. It's the RAW, so just roll with it! :) lol
The thing about rune knight is that their reaction is only valuable if you take the cloud rune, which is honestly pretty mandatory to take when you get it. You redirect an attack. I tend to save it for crits. Psi warrior does something similar, but for lowering damage for 1d6+INT mod.
It's not that big a deal, honestly. However, it does require that you think twice before hitting something that enters your range. You'll have to consider the layout of the battlefield, and determine if your squishier companions are at risk. If so, you may want to hold off on using your PAM reaction. Otherwise, go on ahead. I'd be fine with that, but if youre not used to playing fighters, i'd recommend to stray away from the more complex decision making involved in weighing opportunity costs for your reaction.
Other fighters might use your bonus action and reaction in other ways. For that reason, I'd recommend either champion or cavalier. Go for champion if you wanna increase DPR, or cavalier if you want to be more of the tank of the party.
Also, I'd changing your stats around so that your CON is 14. Standard array means you can't have two stats starting at 16 as a v.human, so, you might as well start it at 14. Probably set it to 13, and add the +1 to it for 14. Then move stats around to make your mental saves a bit better. 16/8/14/10/14/12. a 2 CON modifier is not so bad. You're proficient in the saving throw, and you have a d10 hit die, and you'll be donning your heavy armor+shield. Your HP'll be fine.
Since you're a fighter and you're going to six, I'd recommend you increase your STR score every single time. By the time you reach lvl 6, your STR will be at 20, and that's a huge advantage. Assuming no advantage, you'd be doing approximately 20 DPR. Under the same conditions, a GWM+GWF+greatsword fighter with 20 STR is pulling 18.6 DPR, so that's really nice for your build. If you went cavalier, increasing STR allows you to mark more targets per long rest, so you can better fulfill that "tank" role.
Thanks a lot. I'll rearrange the stats in the way you suggested. I think is a very good perspective. I'm used to playing classes with little health, and I have the chip to increase it as much as possible. But you are right, it is important to have some good saves on mental attributes. In this case, a +2 might be sufficient, and there is no reason to leave it at 15 for a future raise. The champion seems a bit boring to me. I will look the cavalier, that never caught my attention. But it could be okay.
And a sweet 20 str at lvl6 is very tempting. I will go for it.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
I don't think a rune knight is so bad with the PAM, to be honest. You will need to know when to use your reaction for one thing or another, yes. But I don't see a big problem with that. You will have good options both for action, as for your bonus action and for your reactions. You just have to decide when to use what.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
That paltry 1d6 of a spear 1h is a "no-go" for me. Even the 1d4 of the reverse end attack won't make up for something like that. With a halberd or glaive you can have PAM and GWM, which is a killer combo. Remember, the reverse end attack can also get the +10 damage of GWM.
I think a spear 1h with PAM might be ok for a paladin, who is looking for extra attacks that can crit and then put a smite on. But not as fond of it with a fighter. But to each his/her own. :)
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
That paltry 1d6 of a spear 1h is a "no-go" for me. Even the 1d4 of the reverse end attack won't make up for something like that. With a halberd or glaive you can have PAM and GWM, which is a killer combo. Remember, the reverse end attack can also get the +10 damage of GWM.
I think a spear 1h with PAM might be ok for a paladin, who is looking for extra attacks that can crit and then put a smite on. But not as fond of it with a fighter. But to each his/her own. :)
I'm surprised you'd come to that conclusion in your comparison of fighter vs paladin. Paladins have a few more innate options to increase their to-hit either from blessing or channel divinities or both. Fighters don't.
But it should be noted that the duelist beats the GWM user in cases where there is no advantage. Now, how often the OP will be able to earn advantage on his attacks is beyond me. If he plays with a caster that likes using faerie fire, or his campaign includes the flanking rule, or plays with a wolf totem barbarian, then I'd totally suggest he throw away the shield and pick up GWM. Otherwise, it can be hard to come by, and I'd wager over the lifetime of this campaign a duelist would surpass a GWM user in terms of DPR.
We've not even touched upon lasting power, which the shield totally grants! Certainly, I'd also wager the duelist would be standing a lot longer. I don't even know how I'd quantify the damage gained by the duelist, and the damage lost by the GWM user, when considering turns of lost consciousness, but it'd certainly make the disparity more notable in the duelist's favor.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
That paltry 1d6 of a spear 1h is a "no-go" for me. Even the 1d4 of the reverse end attack won't make up for something like that. With a halberd or glaive you can have PAM and GWM, which is a killer combo. Remember, the reverse end attack can also get the +10 damage of GWM.
I think a spear 1h with PAM might be ok for a paladin, who is looking for extra attacks that can crit and then put a smite on. But not as fond of it with a fighter. But to each his/her own. :)
I'm surprised you'd come to that conclusion in your comparison of fighter vs paladin. Paladins have a few more innate options to increase their to-hit either from blessing or channel divinities or both. Fighters don't.
A vengeance paladin getting three attacks all with advantage can smite on all three potentially, especially if one of them crits. The more attacks you have, the better chance you have to crit. The math there is undeniable. ;) In this case, the weapon damage isn't doing the heavy lifting, but the smite is. And yes, paladins have better options to generate advantage and hit. This doesn't change my thought that PAM and shield strikes me as kind of wasting it on a fighter.
Unless I am planning on being a pure tank, I'm not going with a shield anyway, as a fighter though. I'd rather be an archer or have a 2h melee weapon.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
In the real world, you are right. But DnD isn't the real world, is the best answer imo. It doesn't make sense, but it does to Jeremy Crawford, apparently. It's the RAW, so just roll with it! :) lol
You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. You gain the following benefits:
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.
While you are wielding a glaive, halberd, pike, quarterstaff, or spear, other creatures provoke an opportunity attack from you when they enter your reach.
The fact that they seem to have had reach weapons in mind and that they then mentioned glaive, halberd and pikes first makes me think that RAI might originally have been for this feat to apply to polearms when used two-handed.
A DM can either go with RAW or a potential interpretation of RAI.
I'm not sure what was making sense to Jeremy Crawford at the time.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
In the real world, you are right. But DnD isn't the real world, is the best answer imo. It doesn't make sense, but it does to Jeremy Crawford, apparently. It's the RAW, so just roll with it! :) lol
You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. You gain the following benefits:
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.
While you are wielding a glaive, halberd, pike, quarterstaff, or spear, other creatures provoke an opportunity attack from you when they enter your reach.
The fact that they seem to have had reach weapons in mind and that they then mentioned glaive, halberd and pikes first makes me think that RAI might originally have been for this feat to apply to polearms when used two-handed.
A DM can either go with RAW or a potential interpretation of RAI.
I'm not sure what was making sense to Jeremy Crawford at the time.
A quarterstaff isn't truly a 1h weapon, historically. It's a 2h weapon. Some of the staff fighting forms, have single strikes that are made with a single hand, but then go back to using both hands. Honestly, even the reverse attack with a shield and spear/quarterstaff is questionable. Polearm fighting forms came out of staff fighting forms, so the reverse attack while using both hands makes sense. It doesn't make as much sense with a shield. Quarterstaff and shield was not a thing.
But DnD is a fantasy game, not a reality simulator. It would do a terrible job as a reality simulator. So just go with the RAW imo.
p.s. what's even worse, to me, is the concept that a quarterstaff, a long bit of wood, does the exact same damage as a "long bit of wood" with a metal sharpened point on the end! In the real world, spears are some of THE most used and useful items ever invented! Quarterstaffs are not! That the quarterstaff does the same damage is silly! But again, DnD is a game, not a reality simulator. Just let it go! :)
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
In the real world, you are right. But DnD isn't the real world, is the best answer imo. It doesn't make sense, but it does to Jeremy Crawford, apparently. It's the RAW, so just roll with it! :) lol
You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. You gain the following benefits:
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.
While you are wielding a glaive, halberd, pike, quarterstaff, or spear, other creatures provoke an opportunity attack from you when they enter your reach.
The fact that they seem to have had reach weapons in mind and that they then mentioned glaive, halberd and pikes first makes me think that RAI might originally have been for this feat to apply to polearms when used two-handed.
A DM can either go with RAW or a potential interpretation of RAI.
I'm not sure what was making sense to Jeremy Crawford at the time.
A quarterstaff isn't truly a 1h weapon, historically. It's a 2h weapon. Some of the staff fighting forms, have single strikes that are made with a single hand, but then go back to using both hands. Honestly, even the reverse attack with a shield and spear/quarterstaff is questionable. Polearm fighting forms came out of staff fighting forms, so the reverse attack while using both hands makes sense. It doesn't make as much sense with a shield. Quarterstaff and shield was not a thing.
But DnD is a fantasy game, not a reality simulator. It would do a terrible job as a reality simulator. So just go with the RAW imo.
p.s. what's even worse, to me, is the concept that a quarterstaff, a long bit of wood, does the exact same damage as a "long bit of wood" with a metal sharpened point on the end! In the real world, spears are some of THE most used and useful items ever invented! Quarterstaffs are not! That the quarterstaff does the same damage is silly! But again, DnD is a game, not a reality simulator. Just let it go! :)
RAW can certainly take leaps away from reality but with some of them potentially being averted by a little optional consideration of RAI.
I agree, "It would do a terrible job as a reality simulator." If it tried PAM might risk sending a pike wielding fighter's allies flying, but that's RAW. :D
All the same, in various cases where I think that an interpretation of RAI makes sense, I may choose to go with that.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
That paltry 1d6 of a spear 1h is a "no-go" for me. Even the 1d4 of the reverse end attack won't make up for something like that. With a halberd or glaive you can have PAM and GWM, which is a killer combo. Remember, the reverse end attack can also get the +10 damage of GWM.
I think a spear 1h with PAM might be ok for a paladin, who is looking for extra attacks that can crit and then put a smite on. But not as fond of it with a fighter. But to each his/her own. :)
I do not agree.
At level 1:
- Fighter with dueling + PAM and spear is doing 1d6 + 5 and 1d4 + 5. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 12.
- Fighter with PAM and halberd or glaive is doing 1d10 + 3 and 1d4+ 3. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 8.
And you also have a +2 AC. I think spear + shield is better.
At level 4, if you go to GWM, you can't get the ability score increse. And, if you use the GWM damage, you are hitting with a -5. You need something like vengace paladin to make this work.
I think PAM + GWM is a good option at higher levels, when you've raised your strength enough to mitigate the -5 on the attack. Or if you can attack with two dices.
Anyway, you can always use a halberd at higher levels. You will lose your fighting style, yes, but since Tasha's that is no longer a problem.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
That paltry 1d6 of a spear 1h is a "no-go" for me. Even the 1d4 of the reverse end attack won't make up for something like that. With a halberd or glaive you can have PAM and GWM, which is a killer combo. Remember, the reverse end attack can also get the +10 damage of GWM.
I think a spear 1h with PAM might be ok for a paladin, who is looking for extra attacks that can crit and then put a smite on. But not as fond of it with a fighter. But to each his/her own. :)
I do not agree.
At level 1:
- Fighter with dueling + PAM and spear is doing 1d6 + 5 and 1d4 + 5. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 12.
- Fighter with PAM and halberd or glaive is doing 1d10 + 3 and 1d4+ 3. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 8.
And you also have a +2 AC. I think spear + shield is better.
At level 4, if you go to GWM, you can't get the ability score increse. And, if you use the GWM damage, you are hitting with a -5. You need something like vengace paladin to make this work.
I think PAM + GWM is a good option at higher levels, when you've raised your strength enough to mitigate the -5 on the attack. Or if you can attack with two dices.
Anyway, you can always use a halberd at higher levels. You will lose your fighting style, yes, but since Tasha's that is no longer a problem.
Vengeance is only advantage against one creature per short rest. Which is better in boss fights, than just against lower trash mobs who die before you get to use it more than one turn! Trust me...on that one! Very frustrating! lol
I always use a shield at lower levels, just because your chance of dying is probably highest there. Heck, at 1st level, any crit stands a good chance of putting you down! At 4th level, PAM is worthwhile with a spear and shield, if you have a magic weapon. Otherwise, it's glaive or halberd for me. The 1d10 of the halberd is more to my liking. Throw in GWM at level 6 and now you start rocking!
For a paladin, the 1d6 isn't great for PAM. I would go glaive or halberd. But I can see the allure, it gives the paladin one more attack which can potentially crit. If you crit, you smite. Unless the foe is unworthy of a smite! :)
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
That paltry 1d6 of a spear 1h is a "no-go" for me. Even the 1d4 of the reverse end attack won't make up for something like that. With a halberd or glaive you can have PAM and GWM, which is a killer combo. Remember, the reverse end attack can also get the +10 damage of GWM.
I think a spear 1h with PAM might be ok for a paladin, who is looking for extra attacks that can crit and then put a smite on. But not as fond of it with a fighter. But to each his/her own. :)
I do not agree.
At level 1:
- Fighter with dueling + PAM and spear is doing 1d6 + 5 and 1d4 + 5. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 12.
- Fighter with PAM and halberd or glaive is doing 1d10 + 3 and 1d4+ 3. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 8.
And you also have a +2 AC. I think spear + shield is better.
At level 4, if you go to GWM, you can't get the ability score increse. And, if you use the GWM damage, you are hitting with a -5. You need something like vengace paladin to make this work.
I think PAM + GWM is a good option at higher levels, when you've raised your strength enough to mitigate the -5 on the attack. Or if you can attack with two dices.
Anyway, you can always use a halberd at higher levels. You will lose your fighting style, yes, but since Tasha's that is no longer a problem.
Vengeance is only advantage against one creature per short rest. Which is better in boss fights, than just against lower trash mobs who die before you get to use it more than one turn! Trust me...on that one! Very frustrating! lol
I always use a shield at lower levels, just because your chance of dying is probably highest there. Heck, at 1st level, any crit stands a good chance of putting you down! At 4th level, PAM is worthwhile with a spear and shield, if you have a magic weapon. Otherwise, it's glaive or halberd for me. The 1d10 of the halberd is more to my liking. Throw in GWM at level 6 and now you start rocking!
For a paladin, the 1d6 isn't great for PAM. I would go glaive or halberd. But I can see the allure, it gives the paladin one more attack which can potentially crit. If you crit, you smite. Unless the foe is unworthy of a smite! :)
Chances of death (or, more immediately, of risk of magic depleting injury) among all party members can also be increased by the str based variant human fighter leading the way, torch in hand, while clanking along in all that heavy armour.
Another option for PAM the paladin would be for her to stay within about 25-30 ft of a potential frontline ready to hit hard with her hard-hitting smites at times when, hopefully, there may have been fewer opponents alerted. In this PAM the Pal build, she would have been able to take advantage of the Great Weapon Fighting rerolls of 1s or 2s on a damage die from the get-go. Potentially fewer opponents at a time and they potentially go down more quickly. What's not to love? Other party members may potentially have less need to use healing magics and potions leaving them on hand if PAM does go down.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yes, i know this is a very common build. However, i ask your help for a future subclass. Currently i'm playing a level1 fighter, variant human, with the Polearm Master feat. My gear is a heavy Armor, Shield and Spear. And my stats (standar array) are:
Str: 16, Dex: 8, Con: 15, Int: 13, Wis: 12, Cha: 10
My fighting style is Dueling.
Is this a correct Build for a Polearm Fighter? My DM allow us to exchange two stats at lvl 2, so if there are something wrong I still have time to change it.
But, my main cuestion is: Which subclass suits me more at level 3? My idea was to go for the Rune Knight, but a party mate tell me that this is a bad idea. Their argument is that the rune knight use a lot reactions, and that collides with the PAM feat. Is it so bad to use the rune knight with the PAM feat? What subclass do you recommend? I've been thinking of an eldritch knight, but I think I would have a hard time having both hands full. I think the most obvious option is the Battle Master, but in another game that I play with the same group there is already one. So, if I can, I prefer another option. But if it is the only viable option for a figther with PAM feat, I would go for that. How about an Echo Knight? I think is bad idea because the Echo Knight use a lot of bonus actions. Psy Warrior maybe? I don't know.
And one last question. What do I do in lvl4? Raise the constitution, or should I buy another feat? (i'm thinking in Heavy Armor Master, because i have a relatively low cons).
The campaign is up to level 6, by the way.
Thank you very much for your help. I never play fighters, and I'm a bit lost.
The thing about rune knight is that their reaction is only valuable if you take the cloud rune, which is honestly pretty mandatory to take when you get it. You redirect an attack. I tend to save it for crits. Psi warrior does something similar, but for lowering damage for 1d6+INT mod.
It's not that big a deal, honestly. However, it does require that you think twice before hitting something that enters your range. You'll have to consider the layout of the battlefield, and determine if your squishier companions are at risk. If so, you may want to hold off on using your PAM reaction. Otherwise, go on ahead. I'd be fine with that, but if youre not used to playing fighters, i'd recommend to stray away from the more complex decision making involved in weighing opportunity costs for your reaction.
Other fighters might use your bonus action and reaction in other ways. For that reason, I'd recommend either champion or cavalier. Go for champion if you wanna increase DPR, or cavalier if you want to be more of the tank of the party.
Also, I'd changing your stats around so that your CON is 14. Standard array means you can't have two stats starting at 16 as a v.human, so, you might as well start it at 14. Probably set it to 13, and add the +1 to it for 14. Then move stats around to make your mental saves a bit better. 16/8/14/10/14/12. a 2 CON modifier is not so bad. You're proficient in the saving throw, and you have a d10 hit die, and you'll be donning your heavy armor+shield. Your HP'll be fine.
Since you're a fighter and you're going to six, I'd recommend you increase your STR score every single time. By the time you reach lvl 6, your STR will be at 20, and that's a huge advantage. Assuming no advantage, you'd be doing approximately 20 DPR. Under the same conditions, a GWM+GWF+greatsword fighter with 20 STR is pulling 18.6 DPR, so that's really nice for your build. If you went cavalier, increasing STR allows you to mark more targets per long rest, so you can better fulfill that "tank" role.
I'm sure this is a dumb question, but do you not have to hold the polearm with two hands in order to attack with the opposite end? I realize there's nothing in RAW but I don't see how from a physics perspective, a character can hold a spear with one hand and a shield in the other and still attack with the blunt end of said spear. Or is that an exploit because it's not explicitly stated?
In the real world, you are right. But DnD isn't the real world, is the best answer imo. It doesn't make sense, but it does to Jeremy Crawford, apparently. It's the RAW, so just roll with it! :) lol
Thanks a lot. I'll rearrange the stats in the way you suggested. I think is a very good perspective. I'm used to playing classes with little health, and I have the chip to increase it as much as possible. But you are right, it is important to have some good saves on mental attributes. In this case, a +2 might be sufficient, and there is no reason to leave it at 15 for a future raise. The champion seems a bit boring to me. I will look the cavalier, that never caught my attention. But it could be okay.
And a sweet 20 str at lvl6 is very tempting. I will go for it.
Yes, in real world have no sense. But RAW works in that way. For me, shield and spear + PAM is a lot of better than halberd or glaive + PAM. Especially with dueling style combat. But maybe halberd or glaive + PAM + Sentinel is better, i don't know. However, with a lvl6 limit, i think is better to go for this sweet 20str, and i have no more room for another feat.
I don't think a rune knight is so bad with the PAM, to be honest. You will need to know when to use your reaction for one thing or another, yes. But I don't see a big problem with that. You will have good options both for action, as for your bonus action and for your reactions. You just have to decide when to use what.
Battlemaster maneuvers will greatly increase your combat prowess, versatility and control. Menacing Attack, Trip Attack and Riposte are awesome.
That paltry 1d6 of a spear 1h is a "no-go" for me. Even the 1d4 of the reverse end attack won't make up for something like that. With a halberd or glaive you can have PAM and GWM, which is a killer combo. Remember, the reverse end attack can also get the +10 damage of GWM.
I think a spear 1h with PAM might be ok for a paladin, who is looking for extra attacks that can crit and then put a smite on. But not as fond of it with a fighter. But to each his/her own. :)
I'm surprised you'd come to that conclusion in your comparison of fighter vs paladin. Paladins have a few more innate options to increase their to-hit either from blessing or channel divinities or both. Fighters don't.
But it should be noted that the duelist beats the GWM user in cases where there is no advantage. Now, how often the OP will be able to earn advantage on his attacks is beyond me. If he plays with a caster that likes using faerie fire, or his campaign includes the flanking rule, or plays with a wolf totem barbarian, then I'd totally suggest he throw away the shield and pick up GWM. Otherwise, it can be hard to come by, and I'd wager over the lifetime of this campaign a duelist would surpass a GWM user in terms of DPR.
We've not even touched upon lasting power, which the shield totally grants! Certainly, I'd also wager the duelist would be standing a lot longer. I don't even know how I'd quantify the damage gained by the duelist, and the damage lost by the GWM user, when considering turns of lost consciousness, but it'd certainly make the disparity more notable in the duelist's favor.
A vengeance paladin getting three attacks all with advantage can smite on all three potentially, especially if one of them crits. The more attacks you have, the better chance you have to crit. The math there is undeniable. ;) In this case, the weapon damage isn't doing the heavy lifting, but the smite is. And yes, paladins have better options to generate advantage and hit. This doesn't change my thought that PAM and shield strikes me as kind of wasting it on a fighter.
Unless I am planning on being a pure tank, I'm not going with a shield anyway, as a fighter though. I'd rather be an archer or have a 2h melee weapon.
That's true as far as RAW is concerned as per:
Polearm Master
You can keep your enemies at bay with reach weapons. You gain the following benefits:
The fact that they seem to have had reach weapons in mind and that they then mentioned glaive, halberd and pikes first makes me think that RAI might originally have been for this feat to apply to polearms when used two-handed.
A DM can either go with RAW or a potential interpretation of RAI.
I'm not sure what was making sense to Jeremy Crawford at the time.
A quarterstaff isn't truly a 1h weapon, historically. It's a 2h weapon. Some of the staff fighting forms, have single strikes that are made with a single hand, but then go back to using both hands. Honestly, even the reverse attack with a shield and spear/quarterstaff is questionable. Polearm fighting forms came out of staff fighting forms, so the reverse attack while using both hands makes sense. It doesn't make as much sense with a shield. Quarterstaff and shield was not a thing.
But DnD is a fantasy game, not a reality simulator. It would do a terrible job as a reality simulator. So just go with the RAW imo.
p.s. what's even worse, to me, is the concept that a quarterstaff, a long bit of wood, does the exact same damage as a "long bit of wood" with a metal sharpened point on the end! In the real world, spears are some of THE most used and useful items ever invented! Quarterstaffs are not! That the quarterstaff does the same damage is silly! But again, DnD is a game, not a reality simulator. Just let it go! :)
RAW can certainly take leaps away from reality but with some of them potentially being averted by a little optional consideration of RAI.
I agree, "It would do a terrible job as a reality simulator." If it tried PAM might risk sending a pike wielding fighter's allies flying, but that's RAW. :D
All the same, in various cases where I think that an interpretation of RAI makes sense, I may choose to go with that.
I do not agree.
At level 1:
- Fighter with dueling + PAM and spear is doing 1d6 + 5 and 1d4 + 5. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 12.
- Fighter with PAM and halberd or glaive is doing 1d10 + 3 and 1d4+ 3. So, if both attacks hit, max damage is 20, min damage is 8.
And you also have a +2 AC. I think spear + shield is better.
At level 4, if you go to GWM, you can't get the ability score increse. And, if you use the GWM damage, you are hitting with a -5. You need something like vengace paladin to make this work.
I think PAM + GWM is a good option at higher levels, when you've raised your strength enough to mitigate the -5 on the attack. Or if you can attack with two dices.
Anyway, you can always use a halberd at higher levels. You will lose your fighting style, yes, but since Tasha's that is no longer a problem.
Vengeance is only advantage against one creature per short rest. Which is better in boss fights, than just against lower trash mobs who die before you get to use it more than one turn! Trust me...on that one! Very frustrating! lol
I always use a shield at lower levels, just because your chance of dying is probably highest there. Heck, at 1st level, any crit stands a good chance of putting you down! At 4th level, PAM is worthwhile with a spear and shield, if you have a magic weapon. Otherwise, it's glaive or halberd for me. The 1d10 of the halberd is more to my liking. Throw in GWM at level 6 and now you start rocking!
For a paladin, the 1d6 isn't great for PAM. I would go glaive or halberd. But I can see the allure, it gives the paladin one more attack which can potentially crit. If you crit, you smite. Unless the foe is unworthy of a smite! :)
Chances of death (or, more immediately, of risk of magic depleting injury) among all party members can also be increased by the str based variant human fighter leading the way, torch in hand, while clanking along in all that heavy armour.
Another option for PAM the paladin would be for her to stay within about 25-30 ft of a potential frontline ready to hit hard with her hard-hitting smites at times when, hopefully, there may have been fewer opponents alerted. In this PAM the Pal build, she would have been able to take advantage of the Great Weapon Fighting rerolls of 1s or 2s on a damage die from the get-go. Potentially fewer opponents at a time and they potentially go down more quickly. What's not to love? Other party members may potentially have less need to use healing magics and potions leaving them on hand if PAM does go down.