D&D 5E Sword and Board?

[Mistwell]

I have a third level dwarven fighter (Battle Master). I've been fighting with a glaive, intending to take Polearm Master at 4th level (and possibly sentinel and great weapon mastery at higher levels). I am the tank of the group, and also the one who most often is trying to focus foes on himself to protect the Warlock and Bard in the back ranks.

However, I just received a magic sword. I assume it is +1, and it also likely does something else (not sure what - it's from Sunken Citadel, but I don't want to spoil whatever it is, and my PC hasn't discovered what it is yet).

I am the only PC in the entire party that could use a long sword. The other front line melee combatant is a half orc druid who uses shillelagh. We have a warlock and a bard as well, but the warlock cannot use a longsword and the bard does not want to use one (I think he is a dex fighter when not casting spells). So it's my fighter, or we sell it.

I am not really opposed to the idea of using a londsword and shield. I took Defense as my Fighting Style, and wear heavy armor (currently splint mail). I believe my average damage will remain the same (going from 1d10 for the glaive to 1d8+1 for the longsword, which means both have an average of 5.5). And I'd have one of the only magic items in the whole party, so I could do full damage to foes who resist non-magic weapons that we are likely to encounter in the future.

However I lose the flexibility of the reach of the glaive, and the extra attack from Polearm Master, and the ability to make opportunity attacks when foes enter my reach from Polearm Master.

I could of course take a different feat, like Shield Master. That allows a bonus action to shove a foe, which is nice as I have an 20 strength and athletics training. Once they are on the ground, I'd get advantage attacking them, as would my melee ally. And the benefits to Dex saves will be helpful, as my Dex bonus is +0.

And of course I'd have a shield, which would bump my AC up to 20 - a very respectable AC, and also the opportunity to get a magical shield some day maybe.

But I am not sure it's worth the trade-off from Polearm Mastery and the flexibility of reach. I only have a 25 foot move, and so if I drop a foe with my first attack, once I have a second attack (with Extra Attack or Action Surge or Bonus Action Attack) it's often difficult to actually make it to another foe with my remaining movement. Using a polearm often allowed me to reach two targets in a single turn when otherwise I wouldn't have been able to. Particularly if there is difficult terrain involved.

So my question is to those of you who have used a sword & board approach in 5e. How did it work out? What do you think the trade offs are between polearm use and a sword and board? What other feats did you choose for your sword and board? Any interesting combinations with Battle Master maneuvers? Other things I should be aware of?

 

[FrogReaver]

I have a third level dwarven fighter (Battle Master). I've been fighting with a glaive, intending to take Polearm Master at 4th level (and possibly great weapon mastery at higher levels). I am the tank of the group, and also the one who most often is trying to focus foes on himself to protect the Warlock and Bard in the back ranks.

However, I just received a magic sword. I assume it is +1, and it also likely does something else (not sure what - it's from Sunken Citadel, but I don't want to spoil whatever it is, and my PC hasn't discovered what it is yet).

I am the only PC in the entire party that could use a long sword. The other front line melee combatant is a half orc druid who uses shillelagh. We have a warlock and a bard as well, but the warlock cannot use a longsword and the bard does not want to use one (I think he is a dex fighter when not casting spells). So it's my fighter, or we sell it.

I am not really opposed to the idea of using a londsword and shield. I took Defense as my Fighting Style, and wear heavy armor (currently splint mail). I believe my average damage will remain the same (going from 1d10 for the glaive to 1d8+1 for the longsword, which means both have an average of 5.5). And I'd have one of the only magic items in the whole party, so I could do full damage to foes who resist non-magic weapons that we are likely to encounter in the future.

However I lose the flexibility of the reach of the glaive, and the extra attack from Polearm Master, and the ability to make opportunity attacks when foes enter my reach from Polearm Master.

I could of course take a different feat, like Shield Master. That allows a bonus action to shove a foe, which is nice as I have an 20 strength and athletics training. Once they are on the ground, I'd get advantage attacking them, as would my melee ally. And the benefits to Dex saves will be helpful, as my Dex bonus is +0.

And of course I'd have a shield, which would bump my AC up to 20 - a very respectable AC, and also the opportunity to get a magical shield some day maybe.

But I am not sure it's worth the trade-off from Polearm Mastery and the flexibility of reach. I only have a 25 foot move, and so if I drop a foe with my first attack, once I have a second attack (with Extra Attack or Action Surge or Bonus Action Attack) it's often difficult to actually make it to another foe with my remaining movement. Using a polearm often allowed me to reach two targets in a single turn when otherwise I wouldn't have been able to. Particularly if there is difficult terrain involved.

So my question is to those of you who have used a sword & board approach in 5e. How did it work out? What do you think the trade offs are between polearm use and a sword and board? What other feats did you choose for your sword and board? Any interesting combinations with Battle Master maneuvers? Other things I should be aware of?

Sword and board largely will depend on DM monster tactics. If you are focused and have any heals behind you then a sword and board shield master fighter can last nearly forever in combat.

if you will not be focused often then the extra defense is meh. Keep it for a backup in dealing with magic resistance and do your polearm thing.

 

[Tony Vargas]

But I am not sure it's worth the trade-off from Polearm Mastery and the flexibility of reach.

Polearm Mastery is a sacrifice, sure. IIRC, there's also an S&B feat, though, and it too has gotten some good press around here. Shaping your PC's development around a magic item is classic a D&D thing to do, too, so I wouldn't feel bad about it.

The Cleric/Fighter who found the lets-not-give-anything-away-magic-longsword way back when my old group was exploring the brand-new Citadel in 3.0, ended up taking more fighter levels than originally intended and picking feats to suit the weapon.

I only have a 25 foot move, and so if I drop a foe with my first attack, once I have a second attack it's often difficult to actually make it to another foe with my remaining movement. Using a polearm often allowed me to reach two targets in a single turn when otherwise I wouldn't have been able to.

Shields do cramp your style a bit, thanks to object-interaction. One option is to carry around a javelin or other throwable weapon, early in a fight, you can toss it before closing, giving you a little more flexiblity in who you attack and where you move, if that flexibility is still at a premium, pull another, when you ready to settle into melee, draw the longsword.


The other obvious option is to keep the glaive, and use the longsword when you really need the bonus to hit, ability to damage certain creatures, or whatever other special it has. The longsword is a versatile weapon, so you could drop the glaive and wield it two-handed, rather than switch to S&B.

 

[Oofta]

The only concern with knocking enemies prone (and don't underestimate how useful that can be) would be the effect it's going to have on ranged attackers in the group. Your character will get advantage, but they may get disadvantage.

But other than that, having an higher AC, slightly better damage output (you'll hit more often with advantage) are good.

Just load up on some hand-axes or light hammers for short range ranged attacks.

 

[hawkeyefan]

[MENTION=2525]Mistwell[/MENTION] I have a sword and board fighter and he's actually really tough. His damage is respectable. His AC is the best I've seen without spells boosting. He has shield mastery, which gives a boost in boyh offe se and defense.

One thing to keep in mind is the Fighting Styles. You'll get a second if you stick with Fighter, so it's good if they work together. Mine has Dueling and Guardian.

He has been known to run up to enemies and get in their face, and then take the dodge action. He can really absorb attacks when he needs to.

I think it boils down to if you wamt to focus on dealing damage or taking hits. A shield really leams you toward one of those options while a pola leans you toward another.

 

[jaelis]

Boss move is to lash the sword onto the end of a pole and convince your DM to let you treat it as a +1 glaive.

 

[CTurbo]

I wouldn't let finding a magic weapon change your entire character scheme. If you are a Polearm Master and especially if you took the Polearm master feat, you should stick with that. Keep the Longsword so you could use it if needed against an enemy that may be immune to no magical attacks. It is 1d10 when used 2 handed afterall.

 

[FrogReaver]

I wouldn't let finding a magic weapon change your entire character scheme. If you are a Polearm Master and especially if you took the Polearm master feat, you should stick with that. Keep the Longsword so you could use it if needed against an enemy that may be immune to no magical attacks. It is 1d10 when used 2 handed afterall.

So far he's not taken any choice that would cause him issues with going sword and board. He picked defensive style and hasn't gotten a feat yet as he's level 3.

 

[Mistwell]

Polearm is not part of his background or role playing identity, it was just the overall combat strategy I'd been using until now. I do like the look of a dwarf with a big glaive smacking people 10 feet away, but it's not necessary to the character concept. No feats have been chosen yet.

I am concerned about battlefield control without the polearm. Foes can more easily run by me to get at the caster PCs without it. But if I can get them to engage me (and I do have the Goad maneuver, which will help a bit with that.

 

[Wulffolk]

Never let a "build" get in the way of playing the character.

Imagine that you are a Dwarven warrior with no special training yet in one style over another. You are currently lugging around your average steel glaive, but haven't yet learned any special talents with it. All of a sudden you find a mysterious gleaming magical sword. I would think that most people would seize that opportunity and adapt their style. I doubt that many would just sell that mystical blade in the belief that the benevolent DM in the sky would drop a magical glaive in their lap eventually.

Then again, I suppose that there are plenty of people in real life that pass up real opportunities in the belief that "God" will reward them with what they want later. So maybe this whole post was pointless.

Personally I think that shields are way under-valued in D&D. I can't even imagine engaging in a fight without a shield to protect me, in real life. Now add all the extra threats of a D&D setting and there is no way that I would ever fight without a shield.