So looking at how weapon juggling is being encouraged by the new equipping and unequipping rules (as part of an attack on an action, before or after)…

It appear to me that if a lv5 martial character with Polearm Master attacked

1. 1st Attack: With a light weapon

2. 2nd Attack: With a ‘free’ attack with a Dagger/Light Hammer/Sickle/Scimitar (Nick).

3. 3rd Attack: With a Halberd (Cleave)

4. 4th Attack: Get a second Halberd attack against another target with no ability modifier added to damage

5. 5th Attack: Bonus Action, attack with the Halberd,

Which leaves the Halberd in hand to potentially attack twice as a reaction on someone else's turn! …This seems pretty strong to me, especially as you start to add other weapon masteries like Vex

Would be super strong with the old Cavalier Fighter’s Unwavering Mark ability

‘When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can mark the creature until the end of your next turn.’

Gaining a taunt for all enemies hit that are within 5 feet of you: disadvantage on any attack roll that doesn’t target you.

This could be against seven creatures if you were swarmed and got the make a reaction when an enemy entered your reach… which means turn two

You could also make your strength modifier number of attacks as part of the bonus action (lets say four) which is then eight attacks turn two!

Edit: If you would like to try this and are concerned about a DM ruling against weapon swapping (despite it being a design aim), then you could play a Thri-kreen and do have all these weapons equipped at the same time anyway

Where is #4 coming from? I get the other three but not sure where the third non-Nick attack is from 

Quote from ThriKreenWarrior >>

Where is #4 coming from? I get the other three but not sure where the third non-Nick attack is from 

 That's the Cleave bonus attack.

I've seen this concept tossed out before. I haven't taken a good look at the exact weapon-juggling rules in the new edition, which is the big sticking point, but honestly if I was a DM I'd nix the combo. It's too much of a gamey exploit imo and breaks my suspension of disbelief.

I’d imagine it would feel a lot more believable to people of the light weapons were thrown - this seems to fit our narrative of fast and achievable actions better

As a DM, I would have no problem with this. This is all by design, and honestly, it doesn't seem that strong. The Nick and Cleave attacks don't add your ability modifier to the damage, which is a big deal. Combined, they'd deal 9 points of damage on average a opposed to 17. It's basically half, and it gets worse once your ability modifier becomes +5. The Polearm Master attack uses a d4.

The combo you're describing would deal 32.5 points of damage on average (assuming you have a second target to hit). If instead of doing that, you use a greataxe (also Cleave weapon mastery) and instead of taking the feat Polearm Master you take Great Weapon Master, on average (also assuming a second target) you would deal 33.5 damage. Not to mention that requiring 3 weapons to do your combo makes any potential magic weapon worse, since it doesn't affect all of your attacks, as opposed to using the same weapon as with the greataxe.

Also, this is assuming there's a second target available, which will definitely not happen every turn. So your average damage is actually lower than 32.5 per turn.

Not saying this is a bad combo, and it sounds like fun. Just saying that if a DM has a problem with this, they just need to do the math and realize this isn't doing anything special.

Quote from Sookie_99 >>

Not saying this is a bad combo, and it sounds like fun. Just saying that if a DM has a problem with this, they just need to do the math and realize this isn't doing anything special.

That's only true until you start adding spells / abilities that deal damage on every hit - like Hex/Hunter's Mark, Spirit Shroud, Conjure Minor Elementals, Lunar Form, Rage Damage, Divine Favor or GWM.

GWM adds your Proficiency bonus to attack 3&4
Rage adds +2/+3 to all attacks
Divine Favor adds +1d4 to all 3 Halberd attacks
Lunar Form/Spirit Shroud/CME add multiple dice to all attacks
Hex/Hunter's Mark add +1d6 to 4 of the attacks.

That's not what the original post said, though. And they also said "at level 5".

- Conjure Minor Elementals is completely broken, so the problem wouldn't be the combo, but the spell. Plus, you would need to multiclass to pull it off. You can't even learn it at level 5, but not even at 7 if you want both the weapon masteries and the spell.

- If you're using Hex or Hunter's Mark it's still not a big deal. They compete for your bonus action and the damage isn't that high. And in the case of Hex you need to multiclass to get it along with the weapon masteries required.

- If you're gonna use Lunar Form along with the weapon masteries, you're gonna be taking feats and multiclassing, so at that point it's not a problem, anyway.

- Spirit Shroud can only be learned by classes that don't get weapon masteries, except for paladins. But they learn Spirit Shroud much later than full caster, so it's also not a problem.

- Divine Favor deals even less damage than Hex/Hunter's Mark. It really isn't a big deal. And you can't upcast it.

- Rage Damage is even lower than Hex or Hunter's Mark, until level 16 when it deals slightly more. 

I never said GWM was the best way to deal damage, nor that it was good. It was an example, showing that the combo in the original post wasn't that big of a deal, since a simple GWM, Cleave greataxe could do the same.

Quote from Sookie_99 >>

The combo in the original post wasn't that big of a deal, since a simple GWM, Cleave greataxe could do the same.

I never said it is great for damage, it is great for attack quantity which Greataxe GWM doesn’t come close to.

It was something to note for things that stack with attack quantity like the example I gave: Cavalier fighter

I mean, if you're planning on using this against 7 creatures, then it becomes even more circumstantial. Sure, technically it can happen, but I have yet to see that in a campaign. Also, if you're using the cavalier fighter and you're being swarmed by enemies (even if it's not as many as 7), it seems very clear to me that those enemies have no intention of attacking your allies. If you have that many targets around you, you already did your job. Marking them is redundant most of the time.

Also, I'm pretty sure that these bonus action attacks don't stack. If you have 4 creatures marked, it doesn't mean you can make 4 attacks with one bonus action. And each attack would count as one. So you can't make 8 attacks per long rest unless your Strength modifier is +8. And even then, only one attack per bonus action.

Juggling weapons in one attack action just sounds stupid.  I enjoy the idea of not having to drop my battleaxe to quickly switch to a Warhammer but swapping mid action just sounds dumb to me.  Wouldn't try and do it, wouldn't allow it at a table I run, and would ruthlessly mock someone who tried to do it in a game I was participating in.

This is the kind of stuff that leaves me very leery about the whole Weapon Mastery system

I am curious about so many naysayers when it comes to even minor buffs in martial versatility or power.

Why do so many people want martial characters to be gritty realistic (slow, weak, basic) and so casters to completely overshadow them in a DnD system where you can have demi-god like attributes by lvs4-8

Literally any breakout build or in this case even just a new option for attack per round ceiling and it seems half of DMs are going to home-brew it to remove… what? The fun of the player? Enforce the martials to stay in their lane?

Quote from Cheeky_Hamster >>

I am curious about so many naysayers when it comes to even minor buffs in martial versatility or power.

1) A 40 percent increase in the number of attacks you can make in a turn is not a "minor buff"

2) Juggling multiple weapons every turn like chainsaws to enable said buff is pretty ridiculous

Quote from Sookie_99 >>

As a DM, I would have no problem with this. This is all by design, and honestly, it doesn't seem that strong. The Nick and Cleave attacks don't add your ability modifier to the damage, which is a big deal. Combined, they'd deal 9 points of damage on average a opposed to 17. It's basically half, and it gets worse once your ability modifier becomes +5. The Polearm Master attack uses a d4.

The combo you're describing would deal 32.5 points of damage on average (assuming you have a second target to hit). If instead of doing that, you use a greataxe (also Cleave weapon mastery) and instead of taking the feat Polearm Master you take Great Weapon Master, on average (also assuming a second target) you would deal 33.5 damage. Not to mention that requiring 3 weapons to do your combo makes any potential magic weapon worse, since it doesn't affect all of your attacks, as opposed to using the same weapon as with the greataxe.

Also, this is assuming there's a second target available, which will definitely not happen every turn. So your average damage is actually lower than 32.5 per turn.

Not saying this is a bad combo, and it sounds like fun. Just saying that if a DM has a problem with this, they just need to do the math and realize this isn't doing anything special.

@AntonSirius I refer you to the breakdown above that Sookie_99 kindly did for us.

Unless you are facing ‘Minions’ (1hp enemies) or have a way to capitalise on 5-7 attacks a round then this is at most a minor damage buff but what it is is cool and fun - another option for how to play!

In response the the chainsaw, this is only three weapon swaps… I encourage you to count out loud six seconds and mime unsheathing two weapons from your hips, attacking then sheathing them again and then taking a weapon of your back and attacking three times… you will see that it is easily possible, six seconds is a long time in a fight - if anything DnD is a bit slow as a combat simulator

Quote from Cheeky_Hamster >>

Quote from Sookie_99 >>

As a DM, I would have no problem with this. This is all by design, and honestly, it doesn't seem that strong. The Nick and Cleave attacks don't add your ability modifier to the damage, which is a big deal. Combined, they'd deal 9 points of damage on average a opposed to 17. It's basically half, and it gets worse once your ability modifier becomes +5. The Polearm Master attack uses a d4.

The combo you're describing would deal 32.5 points of damage on average (assuming you have a second target to hit). If instead of doing that, you use a greataxe (also Cleave weapon mastery) and instead of taking the feat Polearm Master you take Great Weapon Master, on average (also assuming a second target) you would deal 33.5 damage. Not to mention that requiring 3 weapons to do your combo makes any potential magic weapon worse, since it doesn't affect all of your attacks, as opposed to using the same weapon as with the greataxe.

Also, this is assuming there's a second target available, which will definitely not happen every turn. So your average damage is actually lower than 32.5 per turn.

Not saying this is a bad combo, and it sounds like fun. Just saying that if a DM has a problem with this, they just need to do the math and realize this isn't doing anything special.

@AntonSirius I refer you to the breakdown above that Sookie_99 kindly did for us.

Unless you are facing ‘Minions’ (1hp enemies) or have a way to capitalise on 5-7 attacks a round then this is at most a minor damage buff but what it is is cool and fun - another option for how to play!

In response the the chainsaw, this is only three weapon swaps… I encourage you to count out loud six seconds and mime unsheathing two weapons from your hips, attacking then sheathing them again and then taking a weapon of your back and attacking three times… you will see that it is easily possible, six seconds is a long time in a fight - if anything DnD is a bit slow as a combat simulator

 And then try doing it while trying to avoid being hit by the thing you're swinging at while they're trying to avoid letting you hit them.

Yeah precisely, DnD combat is quite slow compared to real life - but it provides big movements for the imagination

You and I seem to be operating on a very different sense of "six seconds"', particularly when you're trying to manipulate several pounds of metal with a single hand. Yes, you can wave an empty hand around all over the place in that timespan, but that's not particularly representative of the experience you're trying to emulate.

PS: Drawing from the back is something that happens in video games far more often than it ever did IRL. You'd either need to tip your weapon forward so you'd probably be drawing a sharp edge very close to your own next, or need to attempt to draw the weapon nearly straight up from the shoulderblade. Neither is particularly practical, and the former seems like an excellent way to cut your own throat by accident. They might have been carried that way when someone was going from point A to point B but didn't expect to need instant access to them between the two points, but have someone actually hold a yardstick in place across your back so it doesn't magically snap free and tell me how long it takes for you to get it in front of you and how comfortable the motion was.

Here is a video for you, it links to youtube: https://youtu.be/0EWi2DnDoaI?si=sWs6MdO_LeP1tIbA

BUT bear in mind that I am not arguing for gritty realism anyway but rather that combat is narratively pleasing in this supernatural fantasy game. Which means that martial characters also have to be able to compete with their caster contemporaries (else they wouldn’t exist)

Edit: besides, I was giving an extreme example to show just how long six seconds is in combat. In game I would just hold the Halberd in one hand, and draw and throw/drop/leave the weapons inside the monster as I was using the one handed weapons as I find that a more pleasing image in my head (which is also completely RAW)

Quote from Cheeky_Hamster >>

In response the the chainsaw, this is only three weapon swaps… I encourage you to count out loud six seconds and mime unsheathing two weapons from your hips, attacking then sheathing them again and then taking a weapon of your back and attacking three times… you will see that it is easily possible, six seconds is a long time in a fight - if anything DnD is a bit slow as a combat simulator

As has been the case since the game was first created, a single attack does not represent one swing of your weapon

An attack is a series of movements, feints etc that add up to one batch of damage, if successful. That's why Multiattack makes sense -- you aren't swinging your weapon faster, you're getting more efficient at all the various little things that add up to an "attack"

But even in your example, no, it wouldn't be possible for either you or I to land five significant strikes within six seconds against an opponent who's trying not to get hit while swapping between three different weapons, especially when one of those weapons is a freaking halberd