Welcome to D&D. We roll dice to randomly determine outcomes here.
I think the point is that the subclass itself confers no benefit to getting the leg up on your target....which combined with the abysmal design of the Assassinate feature makes it even worse.
You attack at advantage (ie sneak attack) plus automatically crit if you win initiative attacking from stealth. That's pretty significant.
Class features don't often allow for guaranteed critical hits. That's not really how D&D works, we roll dice to determine outcomes.
Increase odds? Yea, rerolls? sure. A bonus here or there? yeah ok.
Guaranteed critical hits every combat on round one just because? Naw.
You're asking for something crazy OP. Sorry, you need to reevaluate your expectations.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
The Assassin is waiting in an alley for her target, and he comes walking in right on schedule, she waits, and he passes on by. She pops out of the shadows and he stops, and starts looking around. She knows he has been alerted somehow. He doesn't know where she is yet, but something has gone wrong, so she fades back into the shadows and waits. He looks around, can't find her, and he moves on, she pops back out of the shadows again, and this time he doesn't stop, so she goes though with the attack and he screams as the dagger sinks into his back.
There you go. She gets to roll twice to see if she hits and take the best roll, and if she hits, she's got a crit.
The trick here is that a target who is surprised and doesn't have the initiative keeps moving. The only reason they would stop is because they have the initiative. The Assassin doesn't even need to re-roll their stealth check. The target doesn't know where they are, but they do have an excuse to roll an active check and that's a benefit to all sides really, it keeps people from invariably being Assassinated, so it is possible they could find that Assassin, but the Assassin can have Expertise in Stealth, while the other than a Rogue or Bard you have to have the Skill expert feat to have Expertise in Perception.
As for the Alert feat, the main thing it does is make you immune to Surprise. The bonus to Initiative is just a nice perk. It's kind of wasted on a Rogue unless they are really paranoid, which, I suppose an Assassin might well be. If they both have it, the higher dex of the Rogue cancels out the initiative bonus of the feat, so the Rogue is still more likely to win the initiative. You don't need to have surprise to get the drop on someone, you just need to have the initiative, so the Assassin at least gets Advantage when they attack, so long as they get the initiative, and the odds are stacked in their favor.
Welcome to D&D. We roll dice to randomly determine outcomes here.
I think the point is that the subclass itself confers no benefit to getting the leg up on your target....which combined with the abysmal design of the Assassinate feature makes it even worse.
You attack at advantage (ie sneak attack) plus automatically crit if you win initiative attacking from stealth. That's pretty significant.
Class features don't often allow for guaranteed critical hits. That's not really how D&D works, we roll dice to determine outcomes.
Increase odds? Yea, rerolls? sure. A bonus here or there? yeah ok.
Guaranteed critical hits every combat on round one just because? Naw.
You're asking for something crazy OP. Sorry, you need to reevaluate your expectations.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
It's not based on the infrequently of it and finicky nature of the ability.
I already posted what I think is a better ability that doesn't use crits or the silly surprise rules.
My own take on the Assassin Rogue's rules for critical hits/advantage is that the RAW/RAI both are meant to help create opportunities for those characters to plan out or at least strategize a "hit" on an NPC or monster. They're not meant to be particularly handy in normal/group combat, where getting surprise is often difficult.
If the assassin rogue is scouting well ahead of the party, whether in wilderness or in a dungeon, then stealth, hiding, and darkness all provide ample chances for the assassin to apply those class features...but they're likely not going to be within easy reach of the party for help for at least a round or two.
Except that as soon as an attack is brought up, initiative is rolled. Even if the NPC/monster has no idea that there is an Assassin Rogue hiding in the bushes, they have an initiative order. This means that they can still roll higher initiative than the AR and completely nullify the surprise aspect of the AR, making them no better than any other Rogue.
Murdering a lone guard from the shadows does not have to require initiative. The combat rules are a tool to be used when it makes sense to do so. You use your car to get around, but you don't need it to cross the street.
If an assassin wants to sneak around murdering guards, their chance of failure already rests in their ability to stay undetected. Assuming the guards are just basic mooks that would die in one crit, just let the assassin be an assassin.
Welcome to D&D. We roll dice to randomly determine outcomes here.
I think the point is that the subclass itself confers no benefit to getting the leg up on your target....which combined with the abysmal design of the Assassinate feature makes it even worse.
You attack at advantage (ie sneak attack) plus automatically crit if you win initiative attacking from stealth. That's pretty significant.
Class features don't often allow for guaranteed critical hits. That's not really how D&D works, we roll dice to determine outcomes.
Increase odds? Yea, rerolls? sure. A bonus here or there? yeah ok.
Guaranteed critical hits every combat on round one just because? Naw.
You're asking for something crazy OP. Sorry, you need to reevaluate your expectations.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
Unless you multiclass, it's win initiative and one attack (two if two-weapon fighting, which is antithetical to the subclass getting proficiency in the poisoner's kit, and remember, the Rogue doesn't get access to the twf style) has advantage, two if you have highly specific buffs already on you (which is unlikely, since you won initiative). The auto-crit relies on surprise. Assassinate is well-designed for a Fighter and hot garbage for a Rogue, which is one reason why most Assassin builds are a class with Extra Attack (usually Fighter, but you can do serious business with e.g. a Watchers Paladin) and a Rogue dip. Another reason is that the L3 and L17 abilities are using a fundamentally distinct definition of what makes a good Assassin from the L9 and L13 benefits. Taken as a whole, Assassin is just Swashbuckler but worse.
Here's a much better version of Assassinate (based on going very quickly, not on any traditional definitions of what it means to Assassinate well):
ASSASSINATE
At 3rd level, you master the art of the ambush. You can add your proficiency bonus to your initiative rolls.
During your first turn of each combat, you roll Dexterity ability checks with advantage, and once during that turn, if you make an attack with advantage, you instead make it with triple advantage. If that attack hits, the target takes double damage from the attack. If the target hasn't taken a turn yet in this combat, it takes triple damage instead.
Now that is good enough to compete with Arcane Trickster or Swashbuckler.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
Unless you multiclass, it's win initiative and one attack (two if two-weapon fighting, which is antithetical to the subclass getting proficiency in the poisoner's kit, and remember, the Rogue doesn't get access to the twf style) has advantage, two if you have highly specific buffs already on you (which is unlikely, since you won initiative).
Two Weapon Fighting would be fantastic for the opening round to increase your odds of landing a hit/crit. And HOW is using poisons "antithetical" to two weapon fighting?? If you main hand misses (somehow, since you're attacking at advantage) then you would at least still have an offhand swing to land the base die rolls, which adds up since your freeby crit doubles them.
The auto-crit relies on surprise. Assassinate is well-designed for a Fighter and hot garbage for a Rogue, which is one reason why most Assassin builds are a class with Extra Attack (usually Fighter, but you can do serious business with e.g. a Watchers Paladin) and a Rogue dip. Another reason is that the L3 and L17 abilities are using a fundamentally distinct definition of what makes a good Assassin from the L9 and L13 benefits. Taken as a whole, Assassin is just Swashbuckler but worse.
Basing class design on intentionally multiclassing into other classes isn't how they do thing. Multiclassing is an optional rule.
Here's a much better version of Assassinate (based on going very quickly, not on any traditional definitions of what it means to Assassinate well):
ASSASSINATE
At 3rd level, you master the art of the ambush. You can add your proficiency bonus to your initiative rolls.
During your first turn of each combat, you roll Dexterity ability checks with advantage, and once during that turn, if you make an attack with advantage, you instead make it with triple advantage. If that attack hits, the target takes double damage from the attack. If the target hasn't taken a turn yet in this combat, it takes triple damage instead.
Now that is good enough to compete with Arcane Trickster or Swashbuckler.
Note that you un-made-it-a-crit. So with 3d20 to hit you're likelihood of critting is high, and that'd be x6 damage... Nothing does this. Nothing comes close to doing this. Anywhere in any subclass. This is absurd.
This isn't even on topic anymore either. Surprise rules are fine. TBH assassin rogue's assassinate ability is fine too. You're not supposed to IWIN button all encounters on round 1. It already does what is advertised, assassin rogues are far more lethal when they surprise their target. That not what you want your rogue doing? Pick a different subclass. Leave the surprise rules alone they work fine. Hijack another thread.
As for this topic, surprise is essentially like a condition. On round one some people have this 'condition'. It allows some combatants who don't have this 'condition' and who roll high initiative to effectively, but not actually, have two turns before the surprised enemy has a turn. Using an actual 'surprise round' isn't something 5e does.
The rules for initiating combat in 5e work best if you start combat the moment a character begins to attack. You essentially freeze frame, record scratch at the moment when someone involved in the resulting battle starts their attack. The situation where an assassin says they strike but rolls shit initiative and slinks back into the shadows? That's silly and a result of timing the start of combat wrong. Why'd their target stop moving? Really, you have to be able to answer this. What in-game reason did they suddenly stop and freeze mid stride while walking down the hallway the assassin was about to strike from?
They obviously are 'surprised' by the incoming attack. But, how? And, exactly what are they seeing? Did the assassin unsheathe their blade and the sound set them off? A reflection? They're responding to something... what? If your answer is: Nothing at all. The assassin forgoes their attack, combat over and tries again in another 6 seconds to re-do-over initiative... then you're timing it wrong and you DM is very literally letting you get away with murder.
Welcome to D&D. We roll dice to randomly determine outcomes here.
I think the point is that the subclass itself confers no benefit to getting the leg up on your target....which combined with the abysmal design of the Assassinate feature makes it even worse.
You attack at advantage (ie sneak attack) plus automatically crit if you win initiative attacking from stealth. That's pretty significant.
Class features don't often allow for guaranteed critical hits. That's not really how D&D works, we roll dice to determine outcomes.
Increase odds? Yea, rerolls? sure. A bonus here or there? yeah ok.
Guaranteed critical hits every combat on round one just because? Naw.
You're asking for something crazy OP. Sorry, you need to reevaluate your expectations.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
Unless you multiclass, it's win initiative and one attack (two if two-weapon fighting, which is antithetical to the subclass getting proficiency in the poisoner's kit, and remember, the Rogue doesn't get access to the twf style) has advantage, two if you have highly specific buffs already on you (which is unlikely, since you won initiative). The auto-crit relies on surprise. Assassinate is well-designed for a Fighter and hot garbage for a Rogue, which is one reason why most Assassin builds are a class with Extra Attack (usually Fighter, but you can do serious business with e.g. a Watchers Paladin) and a Rogue dip. Another reason is that the L3 and L17 abilities are using a fundamentally distinct definition of what makes a good Assassin from the L9 and L13 benefits. Taken as a whole, Assassin is just Swashbuckler but worse.
Here's a much better version of Assassinate (based on going very quickly, not on any traditional definitions of what it means to Assassinate well):
ASSASSINATE
At 3rd level, you master the art of the ambush. You can add your proficiency bonus to your initiative rolls.
During your first turn of each combat, you roll Dexterity ability checks with advantage, and once during that turn, if you make an attack with advantage, you instead make it with triple advantage. If that attack hits, the target takes double damage from the attack. If the target hasn't taken a turn yet in this combat, it takes triple damage instead.
Now that is good enough to compete with Arcane Trickster or Swashbuckler.
If you by "good enough to compete" mean roughly being able to shave off half the HP on average of most creatures with CR equal to the rogue's level, then yes, your level 3 homebrew feature would make the Assassin good enough to compete. With 2 Assassins in the party, the average combat would likely be over before the rest of the party got to take their turn assuming you have 2 opponents with CR balanced against the PCs level, and most probably be over during the very 1st round. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it would change the flow of combat a lot in general.
If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends.
I'm pretty sure this tells you how long surprise lasts...
Pretty sure it doesn't. It doesn't actually say it ends there. It just says that if you are surprised, there are some things you can't do in the first round of combat. Never actually says it ends on round one. Or even when on round one it would end.
Ok, you are right. Step 2, use common sense following your line of thinking. Either Surprised ends as I quoted above, until you've finished suffering the consequences that the condition applies OR the Surprised condition lasts all through the combat, into your long rest and for the rest of your life. Because it never is stated clearly enough for you the Surprised condition ended. Take your pick.
If this is a difficult inference to make, you are going to have a tough time understanding rules. I have a feeling this is not the case however, you seem too smart for that. Arguing for the sake of it is indeed, a sign of a pedant. This argument of yours is completely unnecessary as it has already been pointed out that the SaC clears up this argument, in my favor.
If anyone is surprised, no actions are taken yet. First, initiative is rolled as normal. Then, the first round of combat starts, and the unsurprised combatants act in initiative order. A surprised creature can’t move or take an action or a reaction until its first turn ends (remember that being unable to take an action also means you can’t take a bonus action). In effect, a surprised creature skips its first turn in a fight. Once that turn ends, the creature is no longer surprised.
In short, activity in a combat is always ordered by initiative, whether or not someone is surprised, and after the first round of combat has passed, surprise is no longer a factor. You can still try to hide from your foes and gain the benefits conferred by being hidden, but you don’t deprive your foes of their turns when you do so.
If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends.
I'm pretty sure this tells you how long surprise lasts...
Pretty sure it doesn't. It doesn't actually say it ends there. It just says that if you are surprised, there are some things you can't do in the first round of combat. Never actually says it ends on round one. Or even when on round one it would end.
Ok, you are right. Step 2, use common sense following your line of thinking. Either Surprised ends as I quoted above, until you've finished suffering the consequences that the condition applies OR the Surprised condition lasts all through the combat, into your long rest and for the rest of your life. Because it never is stated clearly enough for you the Surprised condition ended. Take your pick.
False dichotomy. No. I won't pick between your false premise duality. Rules do whatever it is they say they do.
If this is a difficult inference to make, you are going to have a tough time understanding rules.
When discussing the rules as written, "inferences" are not welcome. Inferences are a perfect example of how people make up wildly inaccurate information and go around claiming its the rules. Rules are explicit statement. Inferences are conclusions made without relying on explicit statements. That's the opposite of how you read rules.
I have a feeling this is not the case however, you seem too smart for that. Arguing for the sake of it is indeed, a sign of a pedant. This argument of yours is completely unnecessary as it has already been pointed out that the SaC clears up this argument, in my favor.
Sage advice is excellent to conclude how rules are intended to function, but not how rules are actually written. RAI vs RAW.
If anyone is surprised, no actions are taken yet. First, initiative is rolled as normal. Then, the first round of combat starts, and the unsurprised combatants act in initiative order. A surprised creature can’t move or take an action or a reaction until its first turn ends (remember that being unable to take an action also means you can’t take a bonus action). In effect, a surprised creature skips its first turn in a fight. Once that turn ends, the creature is no longer surprised.
In short, activity in a combat is always ordered by initiative, whether or not someone is surprised, and after the first round of combat has passed, surprise is no longer a factor. You can still try to hide from your foes and gain the benefits conferred by being hidden, but you don’t deprive your foes of their turns when you do so.
Relevant references in bold.
I'd never actually play the game with surprise just lasting for the whole encounter.
But, what actually is printed is still a valid topic to discuss. Maybe you don't like discussing RAW? That's fine. Don't.
If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends.
I'm pretty sure this tells you how long surprise lasts...
Pretty sure it doesn't. It doesn't actually say it ends there. It just says that if you are surprised, there are some things you can't do in the first round of combat. Never actually says it ends on round one. Or even when on round one it would end.
Ok, you are right. Step 2, use common sense following your line of thinking. Either Surprised ends as I quoted above, until you've finished suffering the consequences that the condition applies OR the Surprised condition lasts all through the combat, into your long rest and for the rest of your life. Because it never is stated clearly enough for you the Surprised condition ended. Take your pick.
False dichotomy. No. I won't pick between your false premise duality. Rules do whatever it is they say they do.
If this is a difficult inference to make, you are going to have a tough time understanding rules.
When discussing the rules as written, "inferences" are not welcome. Inferences are a perfect example of how people make up wildly inaccurate information and go around claiming its the rules. Rules are explicit statement. Inferences are conclusions made without relying on explicit statements. That's the opposite of how you read rules.
I have a feeling this is not the case however, you seem too smart for that. Arguing for the sake of it is indeed, a sign of a pedant. This argument of yours is completely unnecessary as it has already been pointed out that the SaC clears up this argument, in my favor.
Sage advice is excellent to conclude how rules are intended to function, but not how rules are actually written. RAI vs RAW.
If anyone is surprised, no actions are taken yet. First, initiative is rolled as normal. Then, the first round of combat starts, and the unsurprised combatants act in initiative order. A surprised creature can’t move or take an action or a reaction until its first turn ends (remember that being unable to take an action also means you can’t take a bonus action). In effect, a surprised creature skips its first turn in a fight. Once that turn ends, the creature is no longer surprised.
In short, activity in a combat is always ordered by initiative, whether or not someone is surprised, and after the first round of combat has passed, surprise is no longer a factor. You can still try to hide from your foes and gain the benefits conferred by being hidden, but you don’t deprive your foes of their turns when you do so.
Relevant references in bold.
I'd never actually play the game with surprise just lasting for the whole encounter.
But, what actually is printed is still a valid topic to discuss. Maybe you don't like discussing RAW? That's fine. Don't.
I choose to.
All valid points. I will however point out that you still need to interpret RAW in order to understand it. Whether your interpretation is strictly literal and completely divorced from any logical reasoning is another matter. My point being that even if "the rules do what they say they do and nothing more" the rule itself still has to be interpreted.
The below quote taken from SAC will hopefully put an end to your discussion. In case you didn't know, rulings that appear in SAC are official rulings. Whether an official ruling equals RAW or RAI can be debated.
For triggering the rogue’s Assassinate ability, when does a creature stop being surprised? After their turn in the round, or at the end of the round? A surprised creature stops being surprised at the end of its first turn in combat.
If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends.
I'm pretty sure this tells you how long surprise lasts...
Pretty sure it doesn't. It doesn't actually say it ends there. It just says that if you are surprised, there are some things you can't do in the first round of combat. Never actually says it ends on round one. Or even when on round one it would end.
Ok, you are right. Step 2, use common sense following your line of thinking. Either Surprised ends as I quoted above, until you've finished suffering the consequences that the condition applies OR the Surprised condition lasts all through the combat, into your long rest and for the rest of your life. Because it never is stated clearly enough for you the Surprised condition ended. Take your pick.
False dichotomy. No. I won't pick between your false premise duality. Rules do whatever it is they say they do.
If this is a difficult inference to make, you are going to have a tough time understanding rules.
When discussing the rules as written, "inferences" are not welcome. Inferences are a perfect example of how people make up wildly inaccurate information and go around claiming its the rules. Rules are explicit statement. Inferences are conclusions made without relying on explicit statements. That's the opposite of how you read rules.
I have a feeling this is not the case however, you seem too smart for that. Arguing for the sake of it is indeed, a sign of a pedant. This argument of yours is completely unnecessary as it has already been pointed out that the SaC clears up this argument, in my favor.
Sage advice is excellent to conclude how rules are intended to function, but not how rules are actually written. RAI vs RAW.
If anyone is surprised, no actions are taken yet. First, initiative is rolled as normal. Then, the first round of combat starts, and the unsurprised combatants act in initiative order. A surprised creature can’t move or take an action or a reaction until its first turn ends (remember that being unable to take an action also means you can’t take a bonus action). In effect, a surprised creature skips its first turn in a fight. Once that turn ends, the creature is no longer surprised.
In short, activity in a combat is always ordered by initiative, whether or not someone is surprised, and after the first round of combat has passed, surprise is no longer a factor. You can still try to hide from your foes and gain the benefits conferred by being hidden, but you don’t deprive your foes of their turns when you do so.
Relevant references in bold.
I'd never actually play the game with surprise just lasting for the whole encounter.
But, what actually is printed is still a valid topic to discuss. Maybe you don't like discussing RAW? That's fine. Don't.
I choose to.
All valid points. I will however point out that you still need to interpret RAW in order to understand it. Whether your interpretation is strictly literal and completely divorced from any logical reasoning is another matter. My point being that even if "the rules do what they say they do and nothing more" the rule itself still has to be interpreted.
The below quote taken from SAC will hopefully put an end to your discussion. In case you didn't know, rulings that appear in SAC are official rulings (RAW), not RAI.
For triggering the rogue’s Assassinate ability, when does a creature stop being surprised? After their turn in the round, or at the end of the round? A surprised creature stops being surprised at the end of its first turn in combat.
lol the SAC definition of RAW is RAW then.
RAW. “Rules as written”—that’s what RAW stands for. When I dwell on the RAW interpretation of a rule, I’m studying what the text says in context, without regard to the designers’ intent. The text is forced to stand on its own.
And it defines it thusly. So do I. The text must stand on its own. After all, it is literally rules as written. Not RACISAC (Rules as clarified in sage advice compendium)
SAC is official rulings. Not rules. They're like a collection of clarification of how that game should probably be played and what the goals and intentions of the rules are. They're official too. But no amount of SAC entries changes RAW. Only errata does that.
Edit: Again, just for clarity... I agree entirely that anyone and everyone should continue playing the game with surprise ended after people's first turn. That's not really in dispute. Just the curiosity that technically RAW doesn't ever say that is when surprise ends.
"If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends."
That's in the Player's Handbook. I guess I see your point. As long as it's the player's turn, surprise goes on. It never says that their turn ever ends. I kind of suspect they meant that as soon as the next player takes their turn surprise ends, but it doesn't say so, and here in this forum, if there is a comma out of place it matters, so technically the player remains surprised until doomsday, or someone else takes an action, which would end their turn. If nobody else takes an action, a bonus action, or a reaction, surprise goes on until the DM decides to intervene.
There is still no legal way for someone to get attacked twice by the same attacker when surprised.
"If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends."
That's in the Player's Handbook. I guess I see your point. As long as it's the player's turn, surprise goes on. It never says that their turn ever ends. I kind of suspect they meant that as soon as the next player takes their turn surprise ends, but it doesn't say so, and here in this forum, if there is a comma out of place it matters, so technically the player remains surprised until doomsday, or someone else takes an action, which would end their turn. If nobody else takes an action, a bonus action, or a reaction, surprise goes on until the DM decides to intervene.
There is still no legal way for someone to get attacked twice by the same attacker when surprised.
Well, no... not even that. That quote never says the end of the turn is when surprise ends. It says you cannot move, take actions, or take reactions until that turn ends. It is absolutely silent on when surprise ends. By RAW we're left with a vestigial surprise condition that has no real effect, since it only has an effect on round one.
Edit: let's swap some other words into that sentence structure to illuminate this further:
If you're poor, you can't go out partying, and you can't go shopping until after payday.
When payday comes, you can go out partying and shopping. But... that doesn't necessarily mean you're no longer poor lol.
Yes yes, there is an implication that the effects of the condition being over means the condition itself should be over... but, just, technically, it is curious that it never actually says that, absent is: when surprise ends.
I see your point. It never says that Surprise ends, and "Surprised" isn't a Condition, so there are no special rules in place for how it is removed. If you're technical, and this is the forum for that, you can be attacked as many times as the attacker wants until the DM decides to do something, because even if your turn ends, you remain surprised. That would actually be worse than the old Surprise Round, at least that one ends.
People who refuse to accept the SAC is "official" remind me of the days when Gary Gygax used to post articles in Dragon Magazine, and maintained that since it was his game, and he wrote the rules, anything he decided to write down was Official Rules and should be treated as such. He was the God Of D&D. Now we have Jeremy Crawford in the same role.
If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends.
I'm pretty sure this tells you how long surprise lasts...
Pretty sure it doesn't. It doesn't actually say it ends there. It just says that if you are surprised, there are some things you can't do in the first round of combat. Never actually says it ends on round one. Or even when on round one it would end.
Ok, you are right. Step 2, use common sense following your line of thinking. Either Surprised ends as I quoted above, until you've finished suffering the consequences that the condition applies OR the Surprised condition lasts all through the combat, into your long rest and for the rest of your life. Because it never is stated clearly enough for you the Surprised condition ended. Take your pick.
False dichotomy. No. I won't pick between your false premise duality. Rules do whatever it is they say they do.
If this is a difficult inference to make, you are going to have a tough time understanding rules.
When discussing the rules as written, "inferences" are not welcome. Inferences are a perfect example of how people make up wildly inaccurate information and go around claiming its the rules. Rules are explicit statement. Inferences are conclusions made without relying on explicit statements. That's the opposite of how you read rules.
I have a feeling this is not the case however, you seem too smart for that. Arguing for the sake of it is indeed, a sign of a pedant. This argument of yours is completely unnecessary as it has already been pointed out that the SaC clears up this argument, in my favor.
Sage advice is excellent to conclude how rules are intended to function, but not how rules are actually written. RAI vs RAW.
If anyone is surprised, no actions are taken yet. First, initiative is rolled as normal. Then, the first round of combat starts, and the unsurprised combatants act in initiative order. A surprised creature can’t move or take an action or a reaction until its first turn ends (remember that being unable to take an action also means you can’t take a bonus action). In effect, a surprised creature skips its first turn in a fight. Once that turn ends, the creature is no longer surprised.
In short, activity in a combat is always ordered by initiative, whether or not someone is surprised, and after the first round of combat has passed, surprise is no longer a factor. You can still try to hide from your foes and gain the benefits conferred by being hidden, but you don’t deprive your foes of their turns when you do so.
Relevant references in bold.
I'd never actually play the game with surprise just lasting for the whole encounter.
But, what actually is printed is still a valid topic to discuss. Maybe you don't like discussing RAW? That's fine. Don't.
I choose to.
All valid points. I will however point out that you still need to interpret RAW in order to understand it. Whether your interpretation is strictly literal and completely divorced from any logical reasoning is another matter. My point being that even if "the rules do what they say they do and nothing more" the rule itself still has to be interpreted.
The below quote taken from SAC will hopefully put an end to your discussion. In case you didn't know, rulings that appear in SAC are official rulings (RAW), not RAI.
For triggering the rogue’s Assassinate ability, when does a creature stop being surprised? After their turn in the round, or at the end of the round? A surprised creature stops being surprised at the end of its first turn in combat.
lol the SAC definition of RAW is RAW then.
RAW. “Rules as written”—that’s what RAW stands for. When I dwell on the RAW interpretation of a rule, I’m studying what the text says in context, without regard to the designers’ intent. The text is forced to stand on its own.
And it defines it thusly. So do I. The text must stand on its own. After all, it is literally rules as written. Not RACISAC (Rules as clarified in sage advice compendium)
SAC is official rulings. Not rules. They're like a collection of clarification of how that game should probably be played and what the goals and intentions of the rules are. They're official too. But no amount of SAC entries changes RAW. Only errata does that.
Edit: Again, just for clarity... I agree entirely that anyone and everyone should continue playing the game with surprise ended after people's first turn. That's not really in dispute. Just the curiosity that technically RAW doesn't ever say that is when surprise ends.
I see you managed to quote my comment before my edit. I agree that rulings in SAC are not inherently RAW. Rulings in SAC are official interpretations of RAW, sometimes including an explanation of RAI, and an encouragement of RAF. Whether or not an official interpretation is good enough for the individual reading the interpretation is another question. As I see it, unless the point of a discussion is to find out what RAI is, it is always viable to look past other's interpretation of RAW in favor of your own. Everyone is expected to interpret RAW, and as soon as RAW is discussed outside of a direct quote we're in the realm of interpretation. The line between a RAW interpretation and RAI often becomes blurry, because in order to interpret RAW we need to apply common sense and knowledge (words can have multiple meanings depending on the context). Yet there can only ever be one RAI (the official intent) where there can be multiple RAW interpretations (yours, mine, SAC's).
If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends.
I'm pretty sure this tells you how long surprise lasts...
Pretty sure it doesn't. It doesn't actually say it ends there. It just says that if you are surprised, there are some things you can't do in the first round of combat. Never actually says it ends on round one. Or even when on round one it would end.
I’ve noticed that there are some classes that have a probability chance of being able to use their class features and this angers some people to no end.
I mean, you can cast a spell and the bad guy gets a Saving Throw and that’s totally fine, but not being able to use an ability every time so it applies constantly just rubs people the wrong way for some reason.
Assassinate works in every single combat against everyone that you beat on initiative order. When stealthed, it also adds an additional effect. It doesn’t matter if that additional effect is balanced because of the requirements of stealth and initiative, if an ability exists some people just can’t handle not automatically getting to use it.
It’s just the way the world is I guess.
Notwithstanding, a +5 (20 Dex) Init mod vs a +0 Init mod gives you a 73.75% chance of moving first.
Alert and 20 Dex means you’re going to go first 88.75% of the time.
If you get advantage on stealth? +5 Init mod vs +0 Init mod gives you a 87.31% chance to go first.
Initiative is not the boogey man people claim it to be. A DM not allowing you to surprise opponents or being stealthy are far bigger issues in my opinion.
It does indeed, but in spite of the fact that the SAC is considered "official" not everyone accept is as RAW, and says it's only RAI. Thanks to the fact that Jeremy Crawford is associated with it in some way, I can't say I blame them.
Welcome to D&D. We roll dice to randomly determine outcomes here.
I think the point is that the subclass itself confers no benefit to getting the leg up on your target....which combined with the abysmal design of the Assassinate feature makes it even worse.
You attack at advantage (ie sneak attack) plus automatically crit if you win initiative attacking from stealth. That's pretty significant.
Class features don't often allow for guaranteed critical hits. That's not really how D&D works, we roll dice to determine outcomes.
Increase odds? Yea, rerolls? sure. A bonus here or there? yeah ok.
Guaranteed critical hits every combat on round one just because? Naw.
You're asking for something crazy OP. Sorry, you need to reevaluate your expectations.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
It's not based on the infrequently of it and finicky nature of the ability.
I already posted what I think is a better ability that doesn't use crits or the silly surprise rules.
What’s wrong with Assassinate though then? In any combat where you attack from Stealth, there’s like a 75% chance of being able to use both features of this ability, and 75% chance of being able to use at least one feature in any combat without stealth.
I’d love to know what you find silly then, if the idea of infrequency isn’t the reason.
Welcome to D&D. We roll dice to randomly determine outcomes here.
I think the point is that the subclass itself confers no benefit to getting the leg up on your target....which combined with the abysmal design of the Assassinate feature makes it even worse.
You attack at advantage (ie sneak attack) plus automatically crit if you win initiative attacking from stealth. That's pretty significant.
Class features don't often allow for guaranteed critical hits. That's not really how D&D works, we roll dice to determine outcomes.
Increase odds? Yea, rerolls? sure. A bonus here or there? yeah ok.
Guaranteed critical hits every combat on round one just because? Naw.
You're asking for something crazy OP. Sorry, you need to reevaluate your expectations.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
It's not based on the infrequently of it and finicky nature of the ability.
I already posted what I think is a better ability that doesn't use crits or the silly surprise rules.
What’s wrong with Assassinate though then? In any combat where you attack from Stealth, there’s like a 75% chance of being able to use both features of this ability, and 75% chance of being able to use at least one feature in any combat without stealth.
I’d love to know what you find silly then, if the idea of infrequency isn’t the reason.
75% is exceedingly generous based on the fact you aren't getting a bonus to initiative in any fashion from the subclass.
You (and your party) need to successfully stealth and catch an enemy or enemies by surprise.
Then you need to roll a higher initiative.
Then you need to actually hit.
The odds of all three happening even 25% of the time is being generous. I would say about 10% or less of the time will you meet all of the conditions to actually use the full ability.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You attack at advantage (ie sneak attack) plus automatically crit if you win initiative attacking from stealth. That's pretty significant.
Class features don't often allow for guaranteed critical hits. That's not really how D&D works, we roll dice to determine outcomes.
Increase odds? Yea, rerolls? sure. A bonus here or there? yeah ok.
Guaranteed critical hits every combat on round one just because? Naw.
You're asking for something crazy OP. Sorry, you need to reevaluate your expectations.
Win initiative and your attacks crit. That's already really fantastic.
I got quotes!
The Assassin is waiting in an alley for her target, and he comes walking in right on schedule, she waits, and he passes on by. She pops out of the shadows and he stops, and starts looking around. She knows he has been alerted somehow. He doesn't know where she is yet, but something has gone wrong, so she fades back into the shadows and waits. He looks around, can't find her, and he moves on, she pops back out of the shadows again, and this time he doesn't stop, so she goes though with the attack and he screams as the dagger sinks into his back.
There you go. She gets to roll twice to see if she hits and take the best roll, and if she hits, she's got a crit.
The trick here is that a target who is surprised and doesn't have the initiative keeps moving. The only reason they would stop is because they have the initiative. The Assassin doesn't even need to re-roll their stealth check. The target doesn't know where they are, but they do have an excuse to roll an active check and that's a benefit to all sides really, it keeps people from invariably being Assassinated, so it is possible they could find that Assassin, but the Assassin can have Expertise in Stealth, while the other than a Rogue or Bard you have to have the Skill expert feat to have Expertise in Perception.
As for the Alert feat, the main thing it does is make you immune to Surprise. The bonus to Initiative is just a nice perk. It's kind of wasted on a Rogue unless they are really paranoid, which, I suppose an Assassin might well be. If they both have it, the higher dex of the Rogue cancels out the initiative bonus of the feat, so the Rogue is still more likely to win the initiative. You don't need to have surprise to get the drop on someone, you just need to have the initiative, so the Assassin at least gets Advantage when they attack, so long as they get the initiative, and the odds are stacked in their favor.
<Insert clever signature here>
It's not based on the infrequently of it and finicky nature of the ability.
I already posted what I think is a better ability that doesn't use crits or the silly surprise rules.
Murdering a lone guard from the shadows does not have to require initiative. The combat rules are a tool to be used when it makes sense to do so. You use your car to get around, but you don't need it to cross the street.
If an assassin wants to sneak around murdering guards, their chance of failure already rests in their ability to stay undetected. Assuming the guards are just basic mooks that would die in one crit, just let the assassin be an assassin.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Unless you multiclass, it's win initiative and one attack (two if two-weapon fighting, which is antithetical to the subclass getting proficiency in the poisoner's kit, and remember, the Rogue doesn't get access to the twf style) has advantage, two if you have highly specific buffs already on you (which is unlikely, since you won initiative). The auto-crit relies on surprise. Assassinate is well-designed for a Fighter and hot garbage for a Rogue, which is one reason why most Assassin builds are a class with Extra Attack (usually Fighter, but you can do serious business with e.g. a Watchers Paladin) and a Rogue dip. Another reason is that the L3 and L17 abilities are using a fundamentally distinct definition of what makes a good Assassin from the L9 and L13 benefits. Taken as a whole, Assassin is just Swashbuckler but worse.
Here's a much better version of Assassinate (based on going very quickly, not on any traditional definitions of what it means to Assassinate well):
ASSASSINATE
At 3rd level, you master the art of the ambush. You can add your proficiency bonus to your initiative rolls.
During your first turn of each combat, you roll Dexterity ability checks with advantage, and once during that turn, if you make an attack with advantage, you instead make it with triple advantage. If that attack hits, the target takes double damage from the attack. If the target hasn't taken a turn yet in this combat, it takes triple damage instead.
Now that is good enough to compete with Arcane Trickster or Swashbuckler.
Two Weapon Fighting would be fantastic for the opening round to increase your odds of landing a hit/crit. And HOW is using poisons "antithetical" to two weapon fighting?? If you main hand misses (somehow, since you're attacking at advantage) then you would at least still have an offhand swing to land the base die rolls, which adds up since your freeby crit doubles them.
Basing class design on intentionally multiclassing into other classes isn't how they do thing. Multiclassing is an optional rule.
Note that you un-made-it-a-crit. So with 3d20 to hit you're likelihood of critting is high, and that'd be x6 damage... Nothing does this. Nothing comes close to doing this. Anywhere in any subclass. This is absurd.
This isn't even on topic anymore either. Surprise rules are fine. TBH assassin rogue's assassinate ability is fine too. You're not supposed to IWIN button all encounters on round 1. It already does what is advertised, assassin rogues are far more lethal when they surprise their target. That not what you want your rogue doing? Pick a different subclass. Leave the surprise rules alone they work fine. Hijack another thread.
As for this topic, surprise is essentially like a condition. On round one some people have this 'condition'. It allows some combatants who don't have this 'condition' and who roll high initiative to effectively, but not actually, have two turns before the surprised enemy has a turn. Using an actual 'surprise round' isn't something 5e does.
The rules for initiating combat in 5e work best if you start combat the moment a character begins to attack. You essentially freeze frame, record scratch at the moment when someone involved in the resulting battle starts their attack. The situation where an assassin says they strike but rolls shit initiative and slinks back into the shadows? That's silly and a result of timing the start of combat wrong. Why'd their target stop moving? Really, you have to be able to answer this. What in-game reason did they suddenly stop and freeze mid stride while walking down the hallway the assassin was about to strike from?
They obviously are 'surprised' by the incoming attack. But, how? And, exactly what are they seeing? Did the assassin unsheathe their blade and the sound set them off? A reflection? They're responding to something... what? If your answer is: Nothing at all. The assassin forgoes their attack, combat over and tries again in another 6 seconds to re-do-over initiative... then you're timing it wrong and you DM is very literally letting you get away with murder.
I got quotes!
If you by "good enough to compete" mean roughly being able to shave off half the HP on average of most creatures with CR equal to the rogue's level, then yes, your level 3 homebrew feature would make the Assassin good enough to compete.
With 2 Assassins in the party, the average combat would likely be over before the rest of the party got to take their turn assuming you have 2 opponents with CR balanced against the PCs level, and most probably be over during the very 1st round. It's not necessarily a bad thing, but it would change the flow of combat a lot in general.
Ok, you are right. Step 2, use common sense following your line of thinking. Either Surprised ends as I quoted above, until you've finished suffering the consequences that the condition applies OR the Surprised condition lasts all through the combat, into your long rest and for the rest of your life. Because it never is stated clearly enough for you the Surprised condition ended. Take your pick.
If this is a difficult inference to make, you are going to have a tough time understanding rules. I have a feeling this is not the case however, you seem too smart for that. Arguing for the sake of it is indeed, a sign of a pedant. This argument of yours is completely unnecessary as it has already been pointed out that the SaC clears up this argument, in my favor.
Relevant references in bold.
False dichotomy. No. I won't pick between your false premise duality. Rules do whatever it is they say they do.
When discussing the rules as written, "inferences" are not welcome. Inferences are a perfect example of how people make up wildly inaccurate information and go around claiming its the rules. Rules are explicit statement. Inferences are conclusions made without relying on explicit statements. That's the opposite of how you read rules.
Sage advice is excellent to conclude how rules are intended to function, but not how rules are actually written. RAI vs RAW.
I'd never actually play the game with surprise just lasting for the whole encounter.
But, what actually is printed is still a valid topic to discuss. Maybe you don't like discussing RAW? That's fine. Don't.
I choose to.
I got quotes!
All valid points. I will however point out that you still need to interpret RAW in order to understand it. Whether your interpretation is strictly literal and completely divorced from any logical reasoning is another matter. My point being that even if "the rules do what they say they do and nothing more" the rule itself still has to be interpreted.
The below quote taken from SAC will hopefully put an end to your discussion. In case you didn't know, rulings that appear in SAC are official rulings. Whether an official ruling equals RAW or RAI can be debated.
lol the SAC definition of RAW is RAW then.
And it defines it thusly. So do I. The text must stand on its own. After all, it is literally rules as written. Not RACISAC (Rules as clarified in sage advice compendium)
SAC is official rulings. Not rules. They're like a collection of clarification of how that game should probably be played and what the goals and intentions of the rules are. They're official too. But no amount of SAC entries changes RAW. Only errata does that.
Edit: Again, just for clarity... I agree entirely that anyone and everyone should continue playing the game with surprise ended after people's first turn. That's not really in dispute. Just the curiosity that technically RAW doesn't ever say that is when surprise ends.
I got quotes!
"If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends."
That's in the Player's Handbook. I guess I see your point. As long as it's the player's turn, surprise goes on. It never says that their turn ever ends. I kind of suspect they meant that as soon as the next player takes their turn surprise ends, but it doesn't say so, and here in this forum, if there is a comma out of place it matters, so technically the player remains surprised until doomsday, or someone else takes an action, which would end their turn. If nobody else takes an action, a bonus action, or a reaction, surprise goes on until the DM decides to intervene.
There is still no legal way for someone to get attacked twice by the same attacker when surprised.
<Insert clever signature here>
Well, no... not even that. That quote never says the end of the turn is when surprise ends. It says you cannot move, take actions, or take reactions until that turn ends. It is absolutely silent on when surprise ends. By RAW we're left with a vestigial surprise condition that has no real effect, since it only has an effect on round one.
Edit: let's swap some other words into that sentence structure to illuminate this further:
If you're poor, you can't go out partying, and you can't go shopping until after payday.
When payday comes, you can go out partying and shopping. But... that doesn't necessarily mean you're no longer poor lol.
Yes yes, there is an implication that the effects of the condition being over means the condition itself should be over... but, just, technically, it is curious that it never actually says that, absent is: when surprise ends.
I got quotes!
I see your point. It never says that Surprise ends, and "Surprised" isn't a Condition, so there are no special rules in place for how it is removed. If you're technical, and this is the forum for that, you can be attacked as many times as the attacker wants until the DM decides to do something, because even if your turn ends, you remain surprised. That would actually be worse than the old Surprise Round, at least that one ends.
People who refuse to accept the SAC is "official" remind me of the days when Gary Gygax used to post articles in Dragon Magazine, and maintained that since it was his game, and he wrote the rules, anything he decided to write down was Official Rules and should be treated as such. He was the God Of D&D. Now we have Jeremy Crawford in the same role.
<Insert clever signature here>
I see you managed to quote my comment before my edit.
I agree that rulings in SAC are not inherently RAW. Rulings in SAC are official interpretations of RAW, sometimes including an explanation of RAI, and an encouragement of RAF. Whether or not an official interpretation is good enough for the individual reading the interpretation is another question. As I see it, unless the point of a discussion is to find out what RAI is, it is always viable to look past other's interpretation of RAW in favor of your own. Everyone is expected to interpret RAW, and as soon as RAW is discussed outside of a direct quote we're in the realm of interpretation. The line between a RAW interpretation and RAI often becomes blurry, because in order to interpret RAW we need to apply common sense and knowledge (words can have multiple meanings depending on the context). Yet there can only ever be one RAI (the official intent) where there can be multiple RAW interpretations (yours, mine, SAC's).
In the SAC it does.
I’ve noticed that there are some classes that have a probability chance of being able to use their class features and this angers some people to no end.
I mean, you can cast a spell and the bad guy gets a Saving Throw and that’s totally fine, but not being able to use an ability every time so it applies constantly just rubs people the wrong way for some reason.
Assassinate works in every single combat against everyone that you beat on initiative order. When stealthed, it also adds an additional effect. It doesn’t matter if that additional effect is balanced because of the requirements of stealth and initiative, if an ability exists some people just can’t handle not automatically getting to use it.
It’s just the way the world is I guess.
Notwithstanding, a +5 (20 Dex) Init mod vs a +0 Init mod gives you a 73.75% chance of moving first.
Alert and 20 Dex means you’re going to go first 88.75% of the time.
If you get advantage on stealth? +5 Init mod vs +0 Init mod gives you a 87.31% chance to go first.
Initiative is not the boogey man people claim it to be. A DM not allowing you to surprise opponents or being stealthy are far bigger issues in my opinion.
It does indeed, but in spite of the fact that the SAC is considered "official" not everyone accept is as RAW, and says it's only RAI. Thanks to the fact that Jeremy Crawford is associated with it in some way, I can't say I blame them.
<Insert clever signature here>
What’s wrong with Assassinate though then? In any combat where you attack from Stealth, there’s like a 75% chance of being able to use both features of this ability, and 75% chance of being able to use at least one feature in any combat without stealth.
I’d love to know what you find silly then, if the idea of infrequency isn’t the reason.
75% is exceedingly generous based on the fact you aren't getting a bonus to initiative in any fashion from the subclass.
You (and your party) need to successfully stealth and catch an enemy or enemies by surprise.
Then you need to roll a higher initiative.
Then you need to actually hit.
The odds of all three happening even 25% of the time is being generous. I would say about 10% or less of the time will you meet all of the conditions to actually use the full ability.