I haven't played a 5E paladin yet, but I'm considering one for a future campaign. I've been reading various class guides and most of them seem to think that the mobile feat is a bad choice. The reason they give is that Paladin's run toward combat, not away. They seem to be hung up on the ability to avoid opportunity attacks.
Given how weak paladins are at distance attacks, I would think closing the distance as fast as possible would be a good idea. I'm not saying other feats wouldn't have higher priority. I just think that the guides rate the mobile feat way too low.
It is good and works well. It works better on a Paladin than it does on other builds where the masses claim it is great (bladesinger Wizard specifically).
Even if you optimize your Paladin as a sword and board tank, she will still not have an AC high enough to disregard opportunity attacks.
Whether it is better than another feat or an ASI comes down to the specific character, the playstyle and the DM.
I think mobile is generally "better" than the most popular feats mentioned on the board - PAM and GWM. In a white room focused on damage those are going to do more damage, but mobile feat gives you a ton of flexibility in combat. Someone gets by you and is pounding on the wizard, attack the guy in front of you and then go use your second attack to lay a smite on the guy attacking the wizard.
Another Feat to consider for the same purpose is Fey touched. Misty Step will move you around in combat very well, better than mobile, albeit at the cost of a spell slot after the first use of the day. You also can get a +1 Charisma bonus with Fey Touched and get Hex or Hunters Mark as the first level spell for a mild damage boost on a free cast.
I think mobile is generally "better" than the most popular feats mentioned on the board - PAM and GWM. In a white room focused on damage those are going to do more damage, but mobile feat gives you a ton of flexibility in combat. Someone gets by you and is pounding on the wizard, attack the guy in front of you and then go use your second attack to lay a smite on the guy attacking the wizard.
If we assumed you had GWM, and someone gets by you, he'd take quite the oppie with a +10 to damage. Even if you didn't, you could potentially knock out the other guy right in front of you with GWM, then you could resume to attack the guy on your wizard just the same without taking any attacks of opportunity. Even if you choose to forgo using the +10 to hit, you could potentially use both attacks on the guy in front of you, then use your bonus action to knock the other guy out assuming you landed a K.O. (and why wouldn't you?).
Mobile isn't terrible, but it's got a really tough, uphill job of persuading you over the popular choices. You want to boost charisma, you want to boost your front line capabilities (either through damage feats or STR or tankiness), and mobile just isn't cutting it. With so few opportunities to take an ASI, you're really putting a damper on your progression if you took mobile instead of the other tried-and-true options. Fey touched, as you mentioned, does most of what you need AND it ticks off the checkboxes for what a paladin wants.
Fact of the matter is that damage feats like GWM and PAM are popular for a reason. It's somewhat disingenuous to write them off as only being better in a white room situation where damage is the only measured metric. Even then, damage is what usually clears an encounter.
I think the issue isn’t that mobile is a bad choice, it’s that there are usually better ones. A straight pally is realistically going to get 2-3 feat choices in the whole campaign. They are pretty MAD, so will probably spend at least 1, if not 2 of those on asi, or at least half feats. It’s tough for mobile to find its way above boosting str, cha or even con. And you have find steed to effectively increase your movement speed, at least some of the time, for only a spell slot, instead of a feat.
I think mobile is generally "better" than the most popular feats mentioned on the board - PAM and GWM. In a white room focused on damage those are going to do more damage, but mobile feat gives you a ton of flexibility in combat. Someone gets by you and is pounding on the wizard, attack the guy in front of you and then go use your second attack to lay a smite on the guy attacking the wizard.
If we assumed you had GWM, and someone gets by you, he'd take quite the oppie with a +10 to damage. Even if you didn't, you could potentially knock out the other guy right in front of you with GWM, then you could resume to attack the guy on your wizard just the same without taking any attacks of opportunity. Even if you choose to forgo using the +10 to hit, you could potentially use both attacks on the guy in front of you, then use your bonus action to knock the other guy out assuming you landed a K.O. (and why wouldn't you?).
Sure in a white room where no one has flyby, you are never fighting in the water, you have not already used your reaction and when you always hit even with a -5. Moreover in terms of mean damage GWM is only about +3 per attack, however the variance is much larger because you have more attacks that do 0. Because the variance is larger the reusults are less predictable. I think it will be rare in tier 2 will that enemies die from 2 attacks with GWM, it is more likely that they die from 2 hits, but that is a different thing.
Fact of the matter is that damage feats like GWM and PAM are popular for a reason. It's somewhat disingenuous to write them off as only being better in a white room situation where damage is the only measured metric. Even then, damage is what usually clears an encounter.
Based on observing it in play GWM is overrated, substantially worse than a half feat and not better than an ASI. PAM, especially on an echo knight combined with sentinel is pretty awesome. However both of these tie you to a small number of weapons and unless you are playing a one-shot they are not very good choices for a campaign. That Paladin who took mobile is going to fare a lot better when your party picks up a sentient long sword of sharpness as opposed to swinging a non-magic Glaive becasue he invested 2 feats in GWM and PAM (this example is from actual play in a published campaign, only the character was a Barbarian, not a Paladin).
If you do it the other way around it works a lot better - wait until you find a great magic Halberd then take GWM at your next ASI, but I can't actually remember finding a great heavy polearm in any campaign I've played. As a matter of fact, I can't remember finding a magic heavy polearm at all. We bought a few +1 weapons with a DM that allows this, but nothing better than that. To be honest the only awesome magic polearms I remember finding in any 5E campaign I played were all staffs. Another example from play - we had a GWM-PAM Human Paladin in a published campaign we played and we found a staff of striking. He ended up using it and it was pretty awesome .... but it would have been better if he had taken an ASI instead of GWM at level 0 and his GWM feat was nearly useless in the game after level 6 when we found the staff.
Mobile on the other hand is going to be useful all the time regardless of the direction the campaign goes. Perhaps not as useful as an ASI, or Fey touched, but in general better than GWM IME and probably better than PAM on a Paladin specifically.
There's a big difference basing an opinion on your own personal observations, which is ultimately anecdotal, and basing your opinion on something more quantitative like averages and stats. Increasing STR and taking GWM are in fact very similar numerically, but in situations where advantage occur (and these situations will occur whether or not you planned for it), GWM exceeds boosting STR. That given, GWM works even better when team mates use spells like bless or faerie fire, or features like bardic inspiration. The best part is that you don't have to power-attack every time. You can choose to toggle it on or off.
Paladins in particular have methods to take advantage of GWM, namely devotion and vengeance, and conquest to a certain extent. Devotion can just turn any weapon of theirs magical, so even if they never find a magical polearm, they can build PAM+GWM even if the DM never tosses a bone their way, and STILL hit like a truck.
I think mobile is generally "better" than the most popular feats mentioned on the board - PAM and GWM. In a white room focused on damage those are going to do more damage, but mobile feat gives you a ton of flexibility in combat. Someone gets by you and is pounding on the wizard, attack the guy in front of you and then go use your second attack to lay a smite on the guy attacking the wizard.
If we assumed you had GWM, and someone gets by you, he'd take quite the oppie with a +10 to damage. Even if you didn't, you could potentially knock out the other guy right in front of you with GWM, then you could resume to attack the guy on your wizard just the same without taking any attacks of opportunity. Even if you choose to forgo using the +10 to hit, you could potentially use both attacks on the guy in front of you, then use your bonus action to knock the other guy out assuming you landed a K.O. (and why wouldn't you?).
Sure in a white room where no one has flyby, you are never fighting in the water, you have not already used your reaction and when you always hit even with a -5. Moreover in terms of mean damage GWM is only about +3 per attack, however the variance is much larger because you have more attacks that do 0. Because the variance is larger the reusults are less predictable. I think it will be rare in tier 2 will that enemies die from 2 attacks with GWM, it is more likely that they die from 2 hits, but that is a different thing.
Fact of the matter is that damage feats like GWM and PAM are popular for a reason. It's somewhat disingenuous to write them off as only being better in a white room situation where damage is the only measured metric. Even then, damage is what usually clears an encounter.
Based on observing it in play GWM is overrated, substantially worse than a half feat and not better than an ASI. PAM, especially on an echo knight combined with sentinel is pretty awesome. However both of these tie you to a small number of weapons and unless you are playing a one-shot they are not very good choices for a campaign. That Paladin who took mobile is going to fare a lot better when your party picks up a sentient long sword of sharpness as opposed to swinging a non-magic Glaive becasue he invested 2 feats in GWM and PAM (this example is from actual play in a published campaign, only the character was a Barbarian, not a Paladin).
If you do it the other way around it works a lot better - wait until you find a great magic Halberd then take GWM at your next ASI, but I can't actually remember finding a great heavy polearm in any campaign I've played. As a matter of fact, I can't remember finding a magic heavy polearm at all. We bought a few +1 weapons with a DM that allows this, but nothing better than that. To be honest the only awesome magic polearms I remember finding in any 5E campaign I played were all staffs. Another example from play - we had a GWM-PAM Human Paladin in a published campaign we played and we found a staff of striking. He ended up using it and it was pretty awesome .... but it would have been better if he had taken an ASI instead of GWM at level 0 and his GWM feat was nearly useless in the game after level 6 when we found the staff.
Mobile on the other hand is going to be useful all the time regardless of the direction the campaign goes. Perhaps not as useful as an ASI, or Fey touched, but in general better than GWM IME and probably better than PAM on a Paladin specifically.
Interesting. Your anecdotal observations are that Great Weapon Master isn't that great? Yet, there are whole threads online about "is Great Weapon Master OP?" Honestly, both GWM and Sharpshooter are both insanely good, exchanging a -5 to hit for +10 damage. I think you are kind of out on a limb, that GWM and PAM aren't that good. Anybody with GWM is going to pick and choose when to use it, of course. But some of the benefits, such as getting the bonus action attack when you crit or kill something, can come into play more than you would think (hit the wounded guy, when you can and smart teammates in initiative right before you will leave you the wounded one, so you get that BA attack).
Paladins have multiple options for boosting their attack rolls, making GWM one of the better options if you plan on using a 2h heavy weapon.
Yes, if you are playing Adventurer's League, then PAM isn't as good as non-AL, since you are unlikely to find a magical polearm, but GWM is still quite good since your chances are better with finding of the heavy 2h weapons: greatsword, maul, greataxe, etc (Cgarciao has made that point a number of times over the last year). If I was going to play in just a regular non-AL DnD game, I would want to talk with my DM about whether if I go PAM were they willing to consider having a magic weapon I can use for it? Outside of an AL game, I think many DMs will be willing to tailor their game to what their players want or would benefit from. I mean, you planned on some loot being a flametongue longsword, isn't all that much to make it a flametongue greatsword? I don't think it is. I've been around DnD since the 1970s and many of the old school modules used to even say "frostbrand sword of whatever type best suits your party."
Mobile feat is ok for any class, but it's going to be better for some. It's not a great fit for a paladin imo. When you factor in feats and ASIs you will need, Mobile is pretty far down my wish list. But as with all things, that's just for me and how I see my paladins. That's the great part about DnD, we can all build our characters they way we want.
Mobile on Paladins is okay-ish but for the most part just a wasted ASI, really. You don't care much about avoiding opportunity attacks and while the additional movement is nice to get into melee faster, it rarely makes a real difference and doesn't help at all with situations where the Paladin really struggles (like against flying enemies for example). Not to mention that eventually most Paladins will have their summoned mount so they'll have much more movement speed in open area encounters than with Mobile anyway and indoors enemies are usually close enough to not need the additional 10 movement speed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
Fights spread out unless you are in a hamster tube. Outdoor fights spread out a lot when your party is running around avoiding monsters. I like mobility stacked on top of Tabaxi double move so I can close with the critters while my party is in retrograde mode.
There's a big difference basing an opinion on your own personal observations, which is ultimately anecdotal, and basing your opinion on something more quantitative like averages and stats. Increasing STR and taking GWM are in fact very similar numerically, but in situations where advantage occur (and these situations will occur whether or not you planned for it), GWM exceeds boosting STR. That given, GWM works even better when team mates use spells like bless or faerie fire, or features like bardic inspiration. The best part is that you don't have to power-attack every time. You can choose to toggle it on or off.
If you are going to use rigorous statistics an averages you need to consider the statistics on how many magic weapons are available and how your chosen feats will fare against enemies that resist or worse are immune to non-magic damage. Even if they can make their weapon magical to overcome that they need to consider the quality of weapons available and the affect that has on attacks and damage, especially in tier 2 and tier 3.
In all the WOTC 5E published adventures I don't remember finding a single magic heavy melee weapon that was not cursed and I have played most of the publisjed campaings. I gave two examples above of awesome weapons found in WOTC published adventures where we had a GWM player and the fact he did not take a different feat actually nerfed his character.
That may be anectdotal, but it is also true and if I am wrong and it is in fact common to find highly-potent heavy weapons the equivalent of weapons like the Sword of Zariel or Tearurli or a staff of striking then let me know I am wrong and which campaigns these are in .... because these three weapons are actually in published campaigns, and you can get them in tier 2 or lower tier 3. In addition to these three legendary weapons, in 3 other campaigns there is a sunblade and two different maces that do an extra d6 damage that you can get in tier 1 and a dragontooth dagger you can get in early tier 2! That is all off the top of my head from official WOTC published adventures, but I am sure there are more examples. If I am wrong and it is as common to find such powerful heavy weapons or even if the gap is closer than I believe let me know.
The rigorous numerical analysis is not practical, usable or meaningful unless you consider the availability of powerful magic weapons. If you are not talking about using it in an actual campaign, then you are doing the analysis in a whiteroom where it is situational, based on a certain style of play and DM.
Interesting. Your anecdotal observations are that Great Weapon Master isn't that great? Yet, there are whole threads online about "is Great Weapon Master OP?" Honestly, both GWM and Sharpshooter are both insanely good, exchanging a -5 to hit for +10 damage. I think you are kind of out on a limb, that GWM and PAM aren't that good. Anybody with GWM is going to pick and choose when to use it, of course. But some of the benefits, such as getting the bonus action attack when you crit or kill something, can come into play more than you would think (hit the wounded guy, when you can and smart teammates in initiative right before you will leave you the wounded one, so you get that BA attack).
I know how often they come into play in games I play because I have played characters with GWM.
I did not say sharpshooter was not great. That is great, in part because magic bows are common and it can in fact be used with all missile weapons also sharpshooter eliminates partial cover,which averages probably averages another +1 on attacks. If we are talking missile weapons sharpshooter is great, but the ranged feat that I would say falls short is crossbow expert, for largely the same reason as GWM.
My anecdotal observations are based on published official WOTC content. If there are great awesome heavy weapons to be found then you can pretty easily prove me wrong by pointing out where and specific weapons.
I have played a LOT of D&D in the last 5 years and foudn a LOT of awesome weapons. GWM characters, including those played by me, never were as good as they would have been with a different feat or ASI.
Yes, if you are playing Adventurer's League, then PAM isn't as good as non-AL, since you are unlikely to find a magical polearm, but GWM is still quite good since your chances are better with finding of the heavy 2h weapons: greatsword, maul, greataxe, etc (Cgarciao has made that point a number of times over the last year).
I think you have this backwards. I have never found a great magic heavy melee weapon. I have found many staffs and some spears, both of which work with PAM.
If I was going to play in just a regular non-AL DnD game, I would want to talk with my DM about whether if I go PAM were they willing to consider having a magic weapon I can use for it?
Sure. But that is situational. It is DM specifc and anecotal and as I said I actually think this is a bigger issue for GWM than it is for PAM. If you want to really evaluate this objectively you need to look at what magic items are actually in published content. If you do that, whether looking at the DMG or individual campaigns, heavy melee weapons do not appear often. Sure there are a lot of swords, and they could be Greatswors, but they are short or long swords a lot more often than greatswords and some of them are specifically longswords (like a Sunblade).
Outside of an AL game, I think many DMs will be willing to tailor their game to what their players want or would benefit from.
This is anecdotal. Of the 10+ DMs I played with only 1 put in character-specific magic items and most of those were based on their background, not mechanics and only 1 was a weapon at all.
I mean, you planned on some loot being a flametongue longsword, isn't all that much to make it a flametongue greatsword? I don't think it is. I've been around DnD since the 1970s and many of the old school modules used to even say "frostbrand sword of whatever type best suits your party."
It is not that much to keep it a flametoungue longsword either. Above I gave two specific examples where we had a GWM character and the DM did not change the awesome weapon to something the melee guy in the party could use.
I have a two more examples in campaigns I am currently playing: I am playing an Arcane Archer/Arcane Trickster multiclass. She found an awesome magic bow. Literally the best bow I have ever seen. It is +2 and every time you hit you can roll your attack again and if you hit again it crits. The only problem is I am a human and the bow can only be attuned by an Elf (and we have no elves in the party). It would be nothing to modify that slightly .... but then it is nothing not to either.
I am also playing an undead warlock in a short homebrew with a 3 person party (me, human echo knight PAM, Half-Orc Moon Druid). We found this +2 shortsword that does an extra 2d6 psychic damage, it also can cast a cone of psychic energy that does 3d8 once a day. We have a PAM echo knight as only Martial, my Warlock, who is not even proficient ended up taking it. She mostly stays out of melee but she can use the cone of spychic and with the +2 bonus and extra damage I am actually better in melee with it than I am with something I would be proficient in. Again could have made it a Halberd or Spear but he did not change it for our party.
Wow. Didn't expect this thread to take off like it did. Thanks for all the input. It will be a while before we start a new campaign, so I will have plenty of time to mull things over. I kind of like the fey touched option, as it almost demands some kind of interesting backstory explanation.
If I am wrong and it is as common to find such powerful heavy weapons or even if the gap is closer than I believe let me know.
The rigorous numerical analysis is not practical, usable or meaningful unless you consider the availability of powerful magic weapons. If you are not talking about using it in an actual campaign, then you are doing the analysis in a whiteroom where it is situational, based on a certain style of play and DM.
One thing I notice is you tend to use "published WotC content" as one of your main arguments. How many hardcovers have you played? in hoard of the dragon queen, there's a magical greatsword. Prince of the abyss, two greataxes. tales from the yawning portal, you can get a greatsword and a greataxe, . out of the abyss, a halberd. curse of stradh, a greatsword. storm king's thunder, a greatsword and two greataxes. In RoTFM, there's guidance for DM's to let you swap out the cauldron of plenty for a moontouched greatsword. Hey, wild beyond the witchlight, snicker snack. There's just a ton of these weapons lying around. This isn't even counting the gazillion AL legal modules which include great weapons. Did WoTC publish those modules? No, but they gave 'em the green light as far as letting players use them in a public setting, so, that's pretty much as good.
If I am wrong and it is as common to find such powerful heavy weapons or even if the gap is closer than I believe let me know.
The rigorous numerical analysis is not practical, usable or meaningful unless you consider the availability of powerful magic weapons. If you are not talking about using it in an actual campaign, then you are doing the analysis in a whiteroom where it is situational, based on a certain style of play and DM.
One thing I notice is you tend to use "published WotC content" as one of your main arguments. How many hardcovers have you played? in hoard of the dragon queen, there's a magical greatsword. Prince of the abyss, two greataxes. tales from the yawning portal, you can get a greatsword and a greataxe, . out of the abyss, a halberd. curse of stradh, a greatsword. storm king's thunder, a greatsword and two greataxes. In RoTFM, there's guidance for DM's to let you swap out the cauldron of plenty for a moontouched greatsword. Hey, wild beyond the witchlight, snicker snack. There's just a ton of these weapons lying around. This isn't even counting the gazillion AL legal modules which include great weapons. Did WoTC publish those modules? No, but they gave 'em the green light as far as letting players use them in a public setting, so, that's pretty much as good.
So, is that enough for you?
I have played all of those except WBW and TFYP. I believe you even thouhg we did not find all those items. More to the point though, compare those items to the other weapons available in those adventures
Minor spoilers below:
In POA we did find a magic greataxe, but it was only usable by a Dwarf. We also found a cursed greataxe in either this or ROTFM (I can't remember which). By comparison, in POA there are 4 legendary magic weapons though that outshine anything else in the adventure.
I forgot about Rezmir's Sword in HODQ. That is an awesome magic weapon and a legit example, but it is one and it is still not the equivalent of some of the other weapons available.
OOTA is loaded with magic items. I don't knwo what the Halberd you can get is, but that adventure has a sunblade you can get in tier 1.
We never found a heavy weapon in ROTFM except maybe a cursed greataxe.
SKT I never found a greataxe or a greatsword. We did find a giant-sized magic sword which caused disadvantage if you used it because of its size.
Depending on your level I think a better choice for a feat would be mounted combat as you will eliminate the mobility aspect with a mount. You can use a weapon with reach like a lance and ride by and hit. If the enemies are medium or smaller you have advantage too.
At higher levels you can even get a flying mount. If the DM lets you get a Dragonnel you will even have flyby tactics.
Pair with a saddle of the cavalier and you can basically go anywhere you want on the battlefield...if hasted even better.
The only time this does not work out is in tight spaced dungeons with no room.....but that is very rare.
At higher levels you can even get a flying mount. If the DM lets you get a Dragonnel you will even have flyby tactics.
This is really difficult as intelligent mounts must be uncontrolled and thus have their own initiative. That means they could flyby, but not really on your turn, so you could only get one attack as a ready action.
There are workarounds, but they are all kind of clunky.
At higher levels you can even get a flying mount. If the DM lets you get a Dragonnel you will even have flyby tactics.
This is really difficult as intelligent mounts must be uncontrolled and thus have their own initiative. That means they could flyby, but not really on your turn, so you could only get one attack as a ready action.
There are workarounds, but they are all kind of clunky.
You have the option of controlling them or leaving them independent. Most control them so the mount does not get to act other than your means of travel which quite honestly is fantastic as it is. At the higher levels anything a mount could do independently is minuscule in comparison to being your best travel.
At higher levels you can even get a flying mount. If the DM lets you get a Dragonnel you will even have flyby tactics.
This is really difficult as intelligent mounts must be uncontrolled and thus have their own initiative. That means they could flyby, but not really on your turn, so you could only get one attack as a ready action.
There are workarounds, but they are all kind of clunky.
Aye and honestly while find steed is good they are...soft so getting dismounted is a constant issue.
With the mounted combat feat and a saddle of the cavalier your mount will rarely if ever take damage and you cannot be removed from the mount under any type of normal means. What's more is you always leave a 4th level slot open to re-summon if something does happen.
I haven't played a 5E paladin yet, but I'm considering one for a future campaign. I've been reading various class guides and most of them seem to think that the mobile feat is a bad choice. The reason they give is that Paladin's run toward combat, not away. They seem to be hung up on the ability to avoid opportunity attacks.
Given how weak paladins are at distance attacks, I would think closing the distance as fast as possible would be a good idea. I'm not saying other feats wouldn't have higher priority. I just think that the guides rate the mobile feat way too low.
I would appreciate any thoughts on this.
It is good and works well. It works better on a Paladin than it does on other builds where the masses claim it is great (bladesinger Wizard specifically).
Even if you optimize your Paladin as a sword and board tank, she will still not have an AC high enough to disregard opportunity attacks.
Whether it is better than another feat or an ASI comes down to the specific character, the playstyle and the DM.
I think mobile is generally "better" than the most popular feats mentioned on the board - PAM and GWM. In a white room focused on damage those are going to do more damage, but mobile feat gives you a ton of flexibility in combat. Someone gets by you and is pounding on the wizard, attack the guy in front of you and then go use your second attack to lay a smite on the guy attacking the wizard.
Another Feat to consider for the same purpose is Fey touched. Misty Step will move you around in combat very well, better than mobile, albeit at the cost of a spell slot after the first use of the day. You also can get a +1 Charisma bonus with Fey Touched and get Hex or Hunters Mark as the first level spell for a mild damage boost on a free cast.
If we assumed you had GWM, and someone gets by you, he'd take quite the oppie with a +10 to damage. Even if you didn't, you could potentially knock out the other guy right in front of you with GWM, then you could resume to attack the guy on your wizard just the same without taking any attacks of opportunity. Even if you choose to forgo using the +10 to hit, you could potentially use both attacks on the guy in front of you, then use your bonus action to knock the other guy out assuming you landed a K.O. (and why wouldn't you?).
Mobile isn't terrible, but it's got a really tough, uphill job of persuading you over the popular choices. You want to boost charisma, you want to boost your front line capabilities (either through damage feats or STR or tankiness), and mobile just isn't cutting it. With so few opportunities to take an ASI, you're really putting a damper on your progression if you took mobile instead of the other tried-and-true options. Fey touched, as you mentioned, does most of what you need AND it ticks off the checkboxes for what a paladin wants.
Fact of the matter is that damage feats like GWM and PAM are popular for a reason. It's somewhat disingenuous to write them off as only being better in a white room situation where damage is the only measured metric. Even then, damage is what usually clears an encounter.
I think the issue isn’t that mobile is a bad choice, it’s that there are usually better ones. A straight pally is realistically going to get 2-3 feat choices in the whole campaign. They are pretty MAD, so will probably spend at least 1, if not 2 of those on asi, or at least half feats. It’s tough for mobile to find its way above boosting str, cha or even con.
And you have find steed to effectively increase your movement speed, at least some of the time, for only a spell slot, instead of a feat.
Sure in a white room where no one has flyby, you are never fighting in the water, you have not already used your reaction and when you always hit even with a -5. Moreover in terms of mean damage GWM is only about +3 per attack, however the variance is much larger because you have more attacks that do 0. Because the variance is larger the reusults are less predictable. I think it will be rare in tier 2 will that enemies die from 2 attacks with GWM, it is more likely that they die from 2 hits, but that is a different thing.
Based on observing it in play GWM is overrated, substantially worse than a half feat and not better than an ASI. PAM, especially on an echo knight combined with sentinel is pretty awesome. However both of these tie you to a small number of weapons and unless you are playing a one-shot they are not very good choices for a campaign. That Paladin who took mobile is going to fare a lot better when your party picks up a sentient long sword of sharpness as opposed to swinging a non-magic Glaive becasue he invested 2 feats in GWM and PAM (this example is from actual play in a published campaign, only the character was a Barbarian, not a Paladin).
If you do it the other way around it works a lot better - wait until you find a great magic Halberd then take GWM at your next ASI, but I can't actually remember finding a great heavy polearm in any campaign I've played. As a matter of fact, I can't remember finding a magic heavy polearm at all. We bought a few +1 weapons with a DM that allows this, but nothing better than that. To be honest the only awesome magic polearms I remember finding in any 5E campaign I played were all staffs. Another example from play - we had a GWM-PAM Human Paladin in a published campaign we played and we found a staff of striking. He ended up using it and it was pretty awesome .... but it would have been better if he had taken an ASI instead of GWM at level 0 and his GWM feat was nearly useless in the game after level 6 when we found the staff.
Mobile on the other hand is going to be useful all the time regardless of the direction the campaign goes. Perhaps not as useful as an ASI, or Fey touched, but in general better than GWM IME and probably better than PAM on a Paladin specifically.
There's a big difference basing an opinion on your own personal observations, which is ultimately anecdotal, and basing your opinion on something more quantitative like averages and stats. Increasing STR and taking GWM are in fact very similar numerically, but in situations where advantage occur (and these situations will occur whether or not you planned for it), GWM exceeds boosting STR. That given, GWM works even better when team mates use spells like bless or faerie fire, or features like bardic inspiration. The best part is that you don't have to power-attack every time. You can choose to toggle it on or off.
Paladins in particular have methods to take advantage of GWM, namely devotion and vengeance, and conquest to a certain extent. Devotion can just turn any weapon of theirs magical, so even if they never find a magical polearm, they can build PAM+GWM even if the DM never tosses a bone their way, and STILL hit like a truck.
Interesting. Your anecdotal observations are that Great Weapon Master isn't that great? Yet, there are whole threads online about "is Great Weapon Master OP?" Honestly, both GWM and Sharpshooter are both insanely good, exchanging a -5 to hit for +10 damage. I think you are kind of out on a limb, that GWM and PAM aren't that good. Anybody with GWM is going to pick and choose when to use it, of course. But some of the benefits, such as getting the bonus action attack when you crit or kill something, can come into play more than you would think (hit the wounded guy, when you can and smart teammates in initiative right before you will leave you the wounded one, so you get that BA attack).
Paladins have multiple options for boosting their attack rolls, making GWM one of the better options if you plan on using a 2h heavy weapon.
Yes, if you are playing Adventurer's League, then PAM isn't as good as non-AL, since you are unlikely to find a magical polearm, but GWM is still quite good since your chances are better with finding of the heavy 2h weapons: greatsword, maul, greataxe, etc (Cgarciao has made that point a number of times over the last year). If I was going to play in just a regular non-AL DnD game, I would want to talk with my DM about whether if I go PAM were they willing to consider having a magic weapon I can use for it? Outside of an AL game, I think many DMs will be willing to tailor their game to what their players want or would benefit from. I mean, you planned on some loot being a flametongue longsword, isn't all that much to make it a flametongue greatsword? I don't think it is. I've been around DnD since the 1970s and many of the old school modules used to even say "frostbrand sword of whatever type best suits your party."
Mobile feat is ok for any class, but it's going to be better for some. It's not a great fit for a paladin imo. When you factor in feats and ASIs you will need, Mobile is pretty far down my wish list. But as with all things, that's just for me and how I see my paladins. That's the great part about DnD, we can all build our characters they way we want.
Take care and good discussing this with you.
Mobile on Paladins is okay-ish but for the most part just a wasted ASI, really. You don't care much about avoiding opportunity attacks and while the additional movement is nice to get into melee faster, it rarely makes a real difference and doesn't help at all with situations where the Paladin really struggles (like against flying enemies for example). Not to mention that eventually most Paladins will have their summoned mount so they'll have much more movement speed in open area encounters than with Mobile anyway and indoors enemies are usually close enough to not need the additional 10 movement speed.
I've never encountered a forum where I got this many "talking to a wall" impressions as this one...
Fights spread out unless you are in a hamster tube. Outdoor fights spread out a lot when your party is running around avoiding monsters. I like mobility stacked on top of Tabaxi double move so I can close with the critters while my party is in retrograde mode.
If you are going to use rigorous statistics an averages you need to consider the statistics on how many magic weapons are available and how your chosen feats will fare against enemies that resist or worse are immune to non-magic damage. Even if they can make their weapon magical to overcome that they need to consider the quality of weapons available and the affect that has on attacks and damage, especially in tier 2 and tier 3.
In all the WOTC 5E published adventures I don't remember finding a single magic heavy melee weapon that was not cursed and I have played most of the publisjed campaings. I gave two examples above of awesome weapons found in WOTC published adventures where we had a GWM player and the fact he did not take a different feat actually nerfed his character.
That may be anectdotal, but it is also true and if I am wrong and it is in fact common to find highly-potent heavy weapons the equivalent of weapons like the Sword of Zariel or Tearurli or a staff of striking then let me know I am wrong and which campaigns these are in .... because these three weapons are actually in published campaigns, and you can get them in tier 2 or lower tier 3. In addition to these three legendary weapons, in 3 other campaigns there is a sunblade and two different maces that do an extra d6 damage that you can get in tier 1 and a dragontooth dagger you can get in early tier 2! That is all off the top of my head from official WOTC published adventures, but I am sure there are more examples. If I am wrong and it is as common to find such powerful heavy weapons or even if the gap is closer than I believe let me know.
The rigorous numerical analysis is not practical, usable or meaningful unless you consider the availability of powerful magic weapons. If you are not talking about using it in an actual campaign, then you are doing the analysis in a whiteroom where it is situational, based on a certain style of play and DM.
I know how often they come into play in games I play because I have played characters with GWM.
I did not say sharpshooter was not great. That is great, in part because magic bows are common and it can in fact be used with all missile weapons also sharpshooter eliminates partial cover,which averages probably averages another +1 on attacks. If we are talking missile weapons sharpshooter is great, but the ranged feat that I would say falls short is crossbow expert, for largely the same reason as GWM.
My anecdotal observations are based on published official WOTC content. If there are great awesome heavy weapons to be found then you can pretty easily prove me wrong by pointing out where and specific weapons.
I have played a LOT of D&D in the last 5 years and foudn a LOT of awesome weapons. GWM characters, including those played by me, never were as good as they would have been with a different feat or ASI.
I think you have this backwards. I have never found a great magic heavy melee weapon. I have found many staffs and some spears, both of which work with PAM.
Sure. But that is situational. It is DM specifc and anecotal and as I said I actually think this is a bigger issue for GWM than it is for PAM. If you want to really evaluate this objectively you need to look at what magic items are actually in published content. If you do that, whether looking at the DMG or individual campaigns, heavy melee weapons do not appear often. Sure there are a lot of swords, and they could be Greatswors, but they are short or long swords a lot more often than greatswords and some of them are specifically longswords (like a Sunblade).
This is anecdotal. Of the 10+ DMs I played with only 1 put in character-specific magic items and most of those were based on their background, not mechanics and only 1 was a weapon at all.
It is not that much to keep it a flametoungue longsword either. Above I gave two specific examples where we had a GWM character and the DM did not change the awesome weapon to something the melee guy in the party could use.
I have a two more examples in campaigns I am currently playing: I am playing an Arcane Archer/Arcane Trickster multiclass. She found an awesome magic bow. Literally the best bow I have ever seen. It is +2 and every time you hit you can roll your attack again and if you hit again it crits. The only problem is I am a human and the bow can only be attuned by an Elf (and we have no elves in the party). It would be nothing to modify that slightly .... but then it is nothing not to either.
I am also playing an undead warlock in a short homebrew with a 3 person party (me, human echo knight PAM, Half-Orc Moon Druid). We found this +2 shortsword that does an extra 2d6 psychic damage, it also can cast a cone of psychic energy that does 3d8 once a day. We have a PAM echo knight as only Martial, my Warlock, who is not even proficient ended up taking it. She mostly stays out of melee but she can use the cone of spychic and with the +2 bonus and extra damage I am actually better in melee with it than I am with something I would be proficient in. Again could have made it a Halberd or Spear but he did not change it for our party.
Wow. Didn't expect this thread to take off like it did. Thanks for all the input. It will be a while before we start a new campaign, so I will have plenty of time to mull things over. I kind of like the fey touched option, as it almost demands some kind of interesting backstory explanation.
One thing I notice is you tend to use "published WotC content" as one of your main arguments. How many hardcovers have you played? in hoard of the dragon queen, there's a magical greatsword. Prince of the abyss, two greataxes. tales from the yawning portal, you can get a greatsword and a greataxe, . out of the abyss, a halberd. curse of stradh, a greatsword. storm king's thunder, a greatsword and two greataxes. In RoTFM, there's guidance for DM's to let you swap out the cauldron of plenty for a moontouched greatsword. Hey, wild beyond the witchlight, snicker snack. There's just a ton of these weapons lying around. This isn't even counting the gazillion AL legal modules which include great weapons. Did WoTC publish those modules? No, but they gave 'em the green light as far as letting players use them in a public setting, so, that's pretty much as good.
So, is that enough for you?
I have played all of those except WBW and TFYP. I believe you even thouhg we did not find all those items. More to the point though, compare those items to the other weapons available in those adventures
Minor spoilers below:
In POA we did find a magic greataxe, but it was only usable by a Dwarf. We also found a cursed greataxe in either this or ROTFM (I can't remember which). By comparison, in POA there are 4 legendary magic weapons though that outshine anything else in the adventure.
I forgot about Rezmir's Sword in HODQ. That is an awesome magic weapon and a legit example, but it is one and it is still not the equivalent of some of the other weapons available.
OOTA is loaded with magic items. I don't knwo what the Halberd you can get is, but that adventure has a sunblade you can get in tier 1.
We never found a heavy weapon in ROTFM except maybe a cursed greataxe.
SKT I never found a greataxe or a greatsword. We did find a giant-sized magic sword which caused disadvantage if you used it because of its size.
Depending on your level I think a better choice for a feat would be mounted combat as you will eliminate the mobility aspect with a mount. You can use a weapon with reach like a lance and ride by and hit. If the enemies are medium or smaller you have advantage too.
At higher levels you can even get a flying mount. If the DM lets you get a Dragonnel you will even have flyby tactics.
Pair with a saddle of the cavalier and you can basically go anywhere you want on the battlefield...if hasted even better.
The only time this does not work out is in tight spaced dungeons with no room.....but that is very rare.
This is really difficult as intelligent mounts must be uncontrolled and thus have their own initiative. That means they could flyby, but not really on your turn, so you could only get one attack as a ready action.
There are workarounds, but they are all kind of clunky.
You have the option of controlling them or leaving them independent. Most control them so the mount does not get to act other than your means of travel which quite honestly is fantastic as it is. At the higher levels anything a mount could do independently is minuscule in comparison to being your best travel.
With the mounted combat feat and a saddle of the cavalier your mount will rarely if ever take damage and you cannot be removed from the mount under any type of normal means. What's more is you always leave a 4th level slot open to re-summon if something does happen.