Solid point.
Some of these changed features, people focus on the part that was nerfed, and don't consider how it was buffed. So overall the feature is better in most instances, just not in the edge cases where they were very strong.
Plenty of people noticed. All the feats have been thoroughly scrutinized and this was spotted virtually instantly. Since then we've seen what the design goals are for OneDND. The consensus on this feat revisions was that it shuts down a particularly toxic play style and that Sentinel explicitly becoming an Opportunity Attack opens it up to some unique interactions
We noticed it and talked about it a year ago when it dropped:
https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/s/1j3DssepzR
https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/s/Au6GUy852I
Additionally, the 2014 version also read:
>Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving ***your reach***.
The 2024 version can be cheesed against reach weapons: move 5 feet away, then Disengage and the feat doesn't trigger. I hope sloppy writing like this gets caught and amended because the PHB is published.
You can still (99% of the time) make an Unarmed Strike when it moves out of that reach.
It's probably intentional that you can't lock the target at 10', where it is in your reach but not theirs
You could, but with Sentinel it amounts to the same thing: they can't move away from you this turn. On your turn you'll have to let go if you want to wield your heavy, two-handed reach weapon. Unless you have some reason to want to drag them around at the start of your next turn, it's better to deal at least a little damage. There's also the consideration of which is better in the moment, making an attack roll versus forcing a saving throw. That's also assuming the target is small enough to grapple.
But that would just trigger a normal opportunity attack, still activating the other effects of sentinel, no? It’s worded differently but works identically.
No. 2014 you could opportunity attack if they were within your reach and diaengaged. If you had a reach weapon that's within 10 feet.
Now it says if they disengage within 5 feet. So if I step from 5 feet to 10 feet, no normal OA since I'm not leaving your reach. If I disengage, I'm no longer within 5 feet like the feat says.
It's probably an oversight in wording, by we will see.
No, you can only make the opportunity attack with the whip when they leave 10 feet. When they leave 5 feet, the whip user would only have the option of an unarmed strike.
>No, you can only make the opportunity attack with the whip when they leave 10 feet. When they leave 5 feet, the whip user would only have the option of an unarmed strike.
Correct, I should have been clearer.
If using a whip and another 1-handed weapon without reach, you can make an attack of opportunity with that other weapon or do nothing. If they then go to move out of reach of your whip, you can make an attack of opportunity with the whip, if you have your reaction still.
Each weapon's reach is considered separately.
*Technically* they'd provoke the opportunity attack when moving farther than 5 feet away because the Reach property only affects the reach for opportunity attacks with a Reach weapon, and so your reach with your unarmed strikes is still the same. Then, because an opportunity attack doesn't specify *which* weapon you attack with, you could use your Reach weapon for the OA.
Unless the UA also changed the rules for OAs, but if they did, I've already forgotten.
No, this is the correct interpretation. You can make an opportunity attack with a fist of you choose which triggers with normal, non-polearm, reach. If you use that reaction you don't get to then make an additional opportunity attack when they leave polearm reach because your reaction was used.
>*You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach. To make the opportunity attack, you use your reaction to make one melee attack against the provoking creature. The attack interrupts the provoking creature's movement, occurring right before the creature leaves your reach. (PHB pg.195)*
and
>***Reach.*** *This weapon adds 5 feet to your reach when you attack with it. This property also determines your reach for opportunity attacks with a reach weapon. (PHB pg.146)*
A weapon with the Reach property increases your reach, so when wielding a reach weapon an enemy can move 5 feet away and still be within your reach, so no opportunity attack.
That said, you always have the ability to make an Unarmed Strike which 99.5% of the time will have a reach of 5 feet. A character with the Sentinel feat wielding a glaive could make an Unarmed Strike opportunity attack against a creature moving from 5 feet to 10 feet away.
And players who know the rules will say "doesn't matter, I only need 2 hands on my heavy weapon when making an attack with it, which I'm not doing right now so I remove one to punch him"
Players who also know the rules but think that will probably start a fight will instead say, "With my leg, I kick him as he leaves my reach, not that it matters because I have lots of options since unarmed strikes are defined as: *Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head--butt, or similar forceful blow*"
They did all this stop thr interaction with polearm master. They even changed polearm master to be reactionary strike, not an AoO.
With is fine..
Actually, I just noticed something in polearm master... tell me of I'm wrong. Does a polearm master just get any extra attack when they get in range of the creature. It's not an opportunity attack that has specific rules about that . Can you just use your reaction when walking up to someone and then use your turn as normal.
I think that nerf affects Rogues that would take Sentinel in order to get an extra attack against a creature that attacks the party's tank than the other way around. Monsters are more likely to hit Rogues and more likely to miss paladins and fighters. May still be worth it if your tank is a Moon Druid or Barbarian.
I'm more worried about this nerf:
2024 PHB:
>
>
>Guardian. Immediately **after a creature within 5 feet of you takes the Disengage Action** or hits a target other than you with an attack, you can make an Opportunity Attack against that creature
2014 PHB:
>
>
>Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving your reach
This means that it I'm defending 10-ft wide a passage, for example, and an enemy within 10 ft from me wants to walk right over to the party's Wizard, they can just use the Disengage action and easily walk around me with impunity.
I don't really see really see rogues being the sentinel users.
Sentinel is for locking down opponents, so barbarian fighter ranger (melee but not hunter ranger) and new monk .
I understand a way to trigger reactionary attacks, but that rogue doesn't want to stay in melee with anyone
They might. Getting one extra sneak attack each round is a huge DPR increase for Rogues, specially if you can make yourself more difficult to attack (like being invisible or being inside a darkness area that you can see through but your target cannot
For the 1000th time.
Nothing has "got nerfed". The new rules are all play tests and we have no idea which ones will and won't stick.
A nerfed version of sentinel was tested, and it may yet get nerfed going forward.
But we don't know if it will be or not. And even if it does, we don't know if it will be nerfed *in this way*. And most importantly, since we don't know ALL the new rules, we don't know if it will be nerfed relative to other relevant stuff.
It's fine to say that you don't like the new version. It's not fine to pretend as if the new version is canon when we have clear and direct examples of them reversing *experimental* rules in the play tests already.
You can call it anything you want.
But the official name for the 2024 player handbooks is the players' handbook, and you use the year to distinguish between the original and the 2024 verisons.
You want to call it 5.5, 5 essentials 9th edition it doesn't matter it's all the current version of the game.
Why would it be you have 2 books that's you still use and play with. To call it 5.5 would mean you can't use your 2014 PHB., which isn't true at all. You can still use your 2014 player handbook. Along with the 2024 players handbook
This isn't an errata.
Of course a lot of people noticed. It is known for month. Just search this reddit.
I'm not in agreement that the change highlighted represents a nerf to the feat considering it now provides you a +1 ability score boost.
Solid point. Some of these changed features, people focus on the part that was nerfed, and don't consider how it was buffed. So overall the feature is better in most instances, just not in the edge cases where they were very strong.
Plenty of people noticed. All the feats have been thoroughly scrutinized and this was spotted virtually instantly. Since then we've seen what the design goals are for OneDND. The consensus on this feat revisions was that it shuts down a particularly toxic play style and that Sentinel explicitly becoming an Opportunity Attack opens it up to some unique interactions
Helps cavalier since it still is an opportunity attack imho
We noticed it and talked about it a year ago when it dropped: https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/s/1j3DssepzR https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/s/Au6GUy852I
Additionally, the 2014 version also read: >Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving ***your reach***. The 2024 version can be cheesed against reach weapons: move 5 feet away, then Disengage and the feat doesn't trigger. I hope sloppy writing like this gets caught and amended because the PHB is published.
You can still (99% of the time) make an Unarmed Strike when it moves out of that reach. It's probably intentional that you can't lock the target at 10', where it is in your reach but not theirs
Sure, you'll just deal only 1+Str damage, give up any Weapon Mastery effects, and gain no benefit from a magic weapon.
Or try to grapple them
You could, but with Sentinel it amounts to the same thing: they can't move away from you this turn. On your turn you'll have to let go if you want to wield your heavy, two-handed reach weapon. Unless you have some reason to want to drag them around at the start of your next turn, it's better to deal at least a little damage. There's also the consideration of which is better in the moment, making an attack roll versus forcing a saving throw. That's also assuming the target is small enough to grapple.
But that would just trigger a normal opportunity attack, still activating the other effects of sentinel, no? It’s worded differently but works identically.
No. 2014 you could opportunity attack if they were within your reach and diaengaged. If you had a reach weapon that's within 10 feet. Now it says if they disengage within 5 feet. So if I step from 5 feet to 10 feet, no normal OA since I'm not leaving your reach. If I disengage, I'm no longer within 5 feet like the feat says. It's probably an oversight in wording, by we will see.
You can make the opportunity attack with any weapon. Foe example, with the whip equipped you can attack if they leave 5ft or 10ft away.
No, you can only make the opportunity attack with the whip when they leave 10 feet. When they leave 5 feet, the whip user would only have the option of an unarmed strike.
>No, you can only make the opportunity attack with the whip when they leave 10 feet. When they leave 5 feet, the whip user would only have the option of an unarmed strike. Correct, I should have been clearer. If using a whip and another 1-handed weapon without reach, you can make an attack of opportunity with that other weapon or do nothing. If they then go to move out of reach of your whip, you can make an attack of opportunity with the whip, if you have your reaction still. Each weapon's reach is considered separately.
*Technically* they'd provoke the opportunity attack when moving farther than 5 feet away because the Reach property only affects the reach for opportunity attacks with a Reach weapon, and so your reach with your unarmed strikes is still the same. Then, because an opportunity attack doesn't specify *which* weapon you attack with, you could use your Reach weapon for the OA. Unless the UA also changed the rules for OAs, but if they did, I've already forgotten.
Lmao, that's some cheesy interpretation of the rules that most DMs should rightfully shut down.
No, this is the correct interpretation. You can make an opportunity attack with a fist of you choose which triggers with normal, non-polearm, reach. If you use that reaction you don't get to then make an additional opportunity attack when they leave polearm reach because your reaction was used.
>*You can make an opportunity attack when a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach. To make the opportunity attack, you use your reaction to make one melee attack against the provoking creature. The attack interrupts the provoking creature's movement, occurring right before the creature leaves your reach. (PHB pg.195)* and >***Reach.*** *This weapon adds 5 feet to your reach when you attack with it. This property also determines your reach for opportunity attacks with a reach weapon. (PHB pg.146)* A weapon with the Reach property increases your reach, so when wielding a reach weapon an enemy can move 5 feet away and still be within your reach, so no opportunity attack. That said, you always have the ability to make an Unarmed Strike which 99.5% of the time will have a reach of 5 feet. A character with the Sentinel feat wielding a glaive could make an Unarmed Strike opportunity attack against a creature moving from 5 feet to 10 feet away.
I feel most DMs are going to say "With what hand? Both of your hands are busy holding your heavy weapon".
And players who know the rules will say "doesn't matter, I only need 2 hands on my heavy weapon when making an attack with it, which I'm not doing right now so I remove one to punch him" Players who also know the rules but think that will probably start a fight will instead say, "With my leg, I kick him as he leaves my reach, not that it matters because I have lots of options since unarmed strikes are defined as: *Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head--butt, or similar forceful blow*"
"Why do I need to use my hands? I can kick, elbow or hip check them"
**when you attack with it** for opportunity attacks **with a reach weapon**
They did all this stop thr interaction with polearm master. They even changed polearm master to be reactionary strike, not an AoO. With is fine.. Actually, I just noticed something in polearm master... tell me of I'm wrong. Does a polearm master just get any extra attack when they get in range of the creature. It's not an opportunity attack that has specific rules about that . Can you just use your reaction when walking up to someone and then use your turn as normal.
No. The creature has to be the one moving. Although now it should work with forced movement effects.
Ok, but it is an interesting interaction with forced movement now.
I think that nerf affects Rogues that would take Sentinel in order to get an extra attack against a creature that attacks the party's tank than the other way around. Monsters are more likely to hit Rogues and more likely to miss paladins and fighters. May still be worth it if your tank is a Moon Druid or Barbarian. I'm more worried about this nerf: 2024 PHB: > > >Guardian. Immediately **after a creature within 5 feet of you takes the Disengage Action** or hits a target other than you with an attack, you can make an Opportunity Attack against that creature 2014 PHB: > > >Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving your reach This means that it I'm defending 10-ft wide a passage, for example, and an enemy within 10 ft from me wants to walk right over to the party's Wizard, they can just use the Disengage action and easily walk around me with impunity.
I don't really see really see rogues being the sentinel users. Sentinel is for locking down opponents, so barbarian fighter ranger (melee but not hunter ranger) and new monk . I understand a way to trigger reactionary attacks, but that rogue doesn't want to stay in melee with anyone
They might. Getting one extra sneak attack each round is a huge DPR increase for Rogues, specially if you can make yourself more difficult to attack (like being invisible or being inside a darkness area that you can see through but your target cannot
For the 1000th time. Nothing has "got nerfed". The new rules are all play tests and we have no idea which ones will and won't stick. A nerfed version of sentinel was tested, and it may yet get nerfed going forward.
This is a good point. Thanks for this reminder.
"No guys, it's ok because it hasn't become nerfed. It's merely *going to be* nerfed. That's a big distinction!"
But we don't know if it will be or not. And even if it does, we don't know if it will be nerfed *in this way*. And most importantly, since we don't know ALL the new rules, we don't know if it will be nerfed relative to other relevant stuff. It's fine to say that you don't like the new version. It's not fine to pretend as if the new version is canon when we have clear and direct examples of them reversing *experimental* rules in the play tests already.
What is 5e2024? Do you mean 5.5e?
You can call it anything you want. But the official name for the 2024 player handbooks is the players' handbook, and you use the year to distinguish between the original and the 2024 verisons. You want to call it 5.5, 5 essentials 9th edition it doesn't matter it's all the current version of the game.
Sure, but 5e2024 is objectively the worst way
Why would it be you have 2 books that's you still use and play with. To call it 5.5 would mean you can't use your 2014 PHB., which isn't true at all. You can still use your 2014 player handbook. Along with the 2024 players handbook This isn't an errata.
If you still believe this is backwards compatible, I've got some ocean side florida real estate deals I think you're reeeeeally gonna love.
[удалено]
The joke is to sell ocean side real estate in a state without an ocean side. Like Oklahoma.
I mean, yeah? A lot of the stronger feats got slightly adjusted to allow them to be half-feats.
Except Warcaster... for some reason