Polearm Master allows you to make an attack with the opposite end of the weapon as a bonus action. Great Weapon Master allows you to take a -5 penalty to hit for a +10 bonus to damage when you make an attack with a heavy melee weapon.
So a raging barbarian can make an attack with the opposite end of a polearm for 1d4 + 14 damage?
That seems pretty nifty.
Lawolf wrote:
yep, heavy weapon, though you would have to weild a glaive or halberd only for this to work.
Sturmunddrang wrote:
Eerongal wrote:
silentdante wrote:
Eerongal wrote:
darius wrote:
Sturmunddrang wrote:
darius wrote:
Overpromises wrote:
you can only have 1 bonus action a turn.
page 69 basic rules same wording in players hand book
Bonus Actions
Various class features, spells, and other abilities let you
take an additional action on your turn called a bonus
action. The Cunning Action feature, for example, allows
a rogue to take a bonus action. You can take a bonus
action only when a special ability, spell, or other feature
of the game states that you can do something as a bonus
action. You otherwise don’t have a bonus action to take.
You can take only one bonus action on your turn, so
you must choose which bonus action to use when you
have more than one available
Keen_Man wrote:
Pyromantic wrote:
Kalani wrote:
silentdante wrote:
You can interpret the sentence both ways. I'll add bold and parenthesis for clarity.
1: On your turn, you can take one additional action (on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action).
If you mentally parse the sentence this way, it would mean you get on additional action but not an additional possible bonus action.
2: On your turn, you can take one additional (action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action).
Parsed this way, it clearly states that you get an additional normal action and an additional possible bonus action.
Since Action Surge is a class feature and is thus more specific than the general rule on bonus actions, it could indeed be superceding the general rule, allowing you to take an additional bonus action as well.
However, If I were the writer wanting to mean #2, I would have written:
On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and one additional possible bonus action.
Wuzzard wrote:
TheLyons wrote:
Wuzzard wrote:
Pyromantic wrote:
TheLyons wrote:
Glad to see encounter/daily damaging 'powers' sneaking into 5e martial types 
I'd allow anything that can be interpreted as getting fighters closer to caster damage, even if it's just through loop holes, feats, and multiple attacks.
silentdante wrote:
Pyromantic wrote:
Why would you take a bonus action in place of your regular action, it's worse.
In the example given, attack with pole arm for d10 +. As a bonus action, you can attack again for d10+, action surge, or d4+, pole arm mastery. With great weapon feat, you can take the penalty and bonus dmg any time.
Action Surge is a complete action, so if you use if for an attack action from a fighter you get multiple attacks if appropriate. This means 8 attacks for a fighter of he right level.
Action surge on a 20th level fighter means 8 attack, (9 if you can make an attack as a bonus action or 10 if you believe that action surge also gives you another bonus action). Action surge (like many other things in 5e) is very poorly worded.
But GWM+PM is still better for the barbarian due to reckless attacker. Although, a Fighter 11 Barbarian 9 is probably even better than either one. Especially if said warrior was a half-orc.
theres nothing stopping the fighter from taking the additional action provided by action surge to attack, and then at the end of that action, use the bonus additional attack provided by action surge to use the polearm master feat ability.
what are you talking about? this doesnt bring any detriment to the game unless the person that is being obnoxious is in your group, this doesnt do anything ot the hobby because if you went to 100 stores all over the US alone maybe 10 people visit the forums.
while i agree, it's easy to just read the rules and play how you read them, if a discussion comes up, why does it matter to you?
this is the same argument to say that Howard Stern should be taken off the air, instead of just saying to yourself, "maybe i should just not listen"
no one her is trying to be jack-holes, they just want to know if a cool combo is possible in the game rules, and because it's multiple peoples idea, it turned into a discussion. you act like everyone should thik the same way, and act the same way, and thats not how society works, people who discuss how rules are written and how it might interact with the game are not the jack-holes, people who come into a conversation add nothing to it but to talk down to others is the real jack-hole.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Point: silentdante
ROUND 2.
We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.
Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
DemoMonkey wrote:
silentdante wrote:
"you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible action".
I'm not seeing the terrible wording at all. You get [this] on top of [what you normally get]. You normally get an action and a possible bonus action if you have an ability to use it on. So action surge gives you one additional action, exactly like it says.
Lawolf wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
Sometimes language is like that painting of the young women, you'd swear it was just a painting of a young woman, until you look at it another way and now all you can see is an old woman.
TheLyons wrote:
Back on track here: The combo works even better than I originally thought. You get your ability modifier to damage with the off hand attack even if you don't have the two-weapon fighting style. This means a level 5 Barbarian could put out about 40 DPR!
I don't think the intent of the Action Surge rule is to give you an extra bonus action. I think, if that was the intent, it would have been written as follows: "On your turn, you can take an additional action and a possible bonus action, on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action."
Instead, the designers decided to specify exactly one additional action (not an additional action and bonus action).
Although, as I've said before, the best thing about these rules is their multi-interpretational context. It is the only way to play one rules set, RAW, in so many different playstyles. It is left to the group/table to interpret them, according to their own preferences.
Please, don't demand stricter context as "official" errata; it will only further divide the playerbase, possibly driving away much needed customers/players. Do we need a repeat of the last few years? Now that we've got an edition that can be what we all want it to be, in our own way.
EDIT: As to the OP, sounds like a nice combo! Like someone else said, earlier in this thread, at the cost of two feats it doesn't seem overpowered at all.
Rastapopoulos wrote:
This isn't all that broken. If you can hit with the -5 to hit occasionally it will not outweigh the many misses it took to get there. You will have accasional impressive hits as opposed to consistent hits for moderate damage.
Lawolf wrote:
Lokiron wrote:
Veleria wrote: