Assassin rogue isn't a bad subclass simply because you can't auto-crit every time you surprise a creature. The way I see it, the Rules As Written keep min-maxing players from completely dominating combat with their first round burst damage. A multiclass that comes to mind is Gloom Stalker 4/Champion 5/Assassin11 which gives you 6 attacks within the first round of combat if you Action Surge and I believe I have seen builds that can give you as much as 8 attacks but I can't be certain. If you activate Assassinate, that is the chance for 6+ autocrits with Sneak Attack, Dread Ambusher, and Hunter's Mark tacked on. Or 12d8+6d6+6d6+2d8+5, using a longbow, and that's excluding magic items which you would most certainly have at level 20. That is extremely powerful and beats out most 9th level spells in terms of damage output. If you take away the auto crit, taking into account Improved Critical, you still have a roughly 20% chance to crit per attack while the enemy is unable to do anything in return. The point I'm trying to make is, and correct me if anything I said was wrong, but locking an ability that is capable of dealing more damage than a 9th level spell behind a couple of extra rolls that are best suited to the Rogue seems completely expected to me and perfectly balanced.
Edit: Realized I didn't even double the Sneak Attack and Hunter's Mark damage, nor did I do the plus including each attack so the actual calculation would be 12d8+12d6+12d6+2d8+30 damage.
Assassin rogue isn't a bad subclass simply because you can't auto-crit every time you surprise a creature. The way I see it, the Rules As Written keep min-maxing players from completely dominating combat with their first round burst damage. A multiclass that comes to mind is Gloom Stalker 4/Champion 5/Assassin11 which gives you 6 attacks within the first round of combat if you Action Surge and I believe I have seen builds that can give you as much as 8 attacks but I can't be certain. If you activate Assassinate, that is the chance for 6+ autocrits with Sneak Attack, Dread Ambusher, and Hunter's Mark tacked on. Or 12d8+6d6+6d6+2d8+5, using a longbow, and that's excluding magic items which you would most certainly have at level 20. That is extremely powerful and beats out most 9th level spells in terms of damage output. If you take away the auto crit, taking into account Improved Critical, you still have a roughly 20% chance to crit per attack while the enemy is unable to do anything in return. The point I'm trying to make is, and correct me if anything I said was wrong, but locking an ability that is capable of dealing more damage than a 9th level spell behind a couple of extra rolls that are best suited to the Rogue seems completely expected to me and perfectly balanced.
Edit: Realized I didn't even double the Sneak Attack and Hunter's Mark damage so the actual calculation would be 12d8+12d6+12d6+2d8+5 damage.
Champion is a bad subclass, but the most damaging build I know of in the game is Gloom Stalker 4/Assassin 4/Battle Master 12, with some slight rearranging possible depending on how clever you get with your ASIs. That doesn't change the fact that Assassin is a bad rogue subclass - it works so well with this build precisely because it's well-designed as a subclass for non-rogues but is pretty terrible for actual rogues.
Well played good sir. I'm going to be honest, I just used the first thing that came to mind but I agree, you have a far superior multiclass for maximum damage. I also completely agree that Assassin is far from the best rogue subclass as only the 3rd level and 17th level abilities seem to be useful within game unless your party runs a very slow, rp heavy campaign. However my main point was more so pertaining to the thread as a whole in which people were arguing whether the ability was too underpowered RAW. I was trying, perhaps unsuccessfully, to make the point that it is a balanced ability in my books even using the Surprised condition as written.
It might also be worth noting that it was perhaps made to be front-loaded for multiclassing on purpose by the designers.
You need to (1) have a DM that uses surprise, (2) be in a situation that allows for you to surprise an enemy, (3) pass whatever skill checks are needed to surprise the enemy, (4) not have another teammmate do something or fail a skill check that ruins surprise, (5) roll higher initiative than the enemy, (6) start combat in a way that allows you to reach one or more desirable targets on your first turn to land one or more attacks, and (7) actually land those attacks, before you see any benefit from Assassinate.
That’s a lot of gate keeping, much of which is outside the players control. I have played campaigns with Assassins who only succeeded triggering assassination once or twice over the entire length of the campaign, it is bad and feels bad. Champions crit far more often then Assassins, and they too are bad and underwhelming. Play a subclass that’s actually fun with interesting features you can use every session, not one that’s only good on paper.
You need to (1) have a DM that uses surprise, (2) be in a situation that allows for you to surprise an enemy, (3) pass whatever skill checks are needed to surprise the enemy, (4) not have another teammmate do something or fail a skill check that ruins surprise, (5) roll higher initiative than the enemy, (6) start combat in a way that allows you to reach one or more desirable targets on your first turn to land one or more attacks, and (7) actually land those attacks, before you see any benefit from Assassinate.
That’s a lot of gate keeping, much of which is outside the players control.
Assuming that you play with a DM and fellow players who want everyone to enjoy the game as much as possible, the only factors hindering the Assassin from a successful critical hit are the 3 rolls. And unless you play a character that is new in or "bad" at the assassination business, you have most likely increased your chances of succeeding these particular rolls (stat increases/feats/weapons etc.). Of course, sometimes the enemy is super perceptive or has a very high AC, but hopefully not always (a good assassin would research his targets either way, no?). And of course, sometimes the DM wants to catch his players off guard with traps and the like. However, most often the DM will allow the players to shine as much as possible. That is my experience at least.
Still, you have to pass 3 rolls, and it seems like a lot. But if you do succeed these rolls, you get a hefty reward. The potential of taking down an enemy before the fight really starts is a HUGE advantage (action economy is often underrated). And an advantage that is much more likely to be achieved with an Assassin than with any other subclass.
In the end, choosing the Assassin subclass is exactly what it sounds like. A choice. If you choose this skillset with no intention of setting up your attacks or character to play to its strengths, or if you have a DM who doesn't care to accommodate this specific subclass, then this most likely isn't the ideal subclass. If the above doesn't apply, then it is a very good choice for someone who wants to quickly and stealthily take out his enemies.
You need to (1) have a DM that uses surprise, (2) be in a situation that allows for you to surprise an enemy, (3) pass whatever skill checks are needed to surprise the enemy, (4) not have another teammmate do something or fail a skill check that ruins surprise, (5) roll higher initiative than the enemy, (6) start combat in a way that allows you to reach one or more desirable targets on your first turn to land one or more attacks, and (7) actually land those attacks, before you see any benefit from Assassinate.
That’s a lot of gate keeping, much of which is outside the players control.
Assuming that you play with a DM and fellow players who want everyone to enjoy the game as much as possible, the only factors hindering the Assassin from a successful critical hit are the 3 rolls. And unless you play a character that is new in or "bad" at the assassination business, you have most likely increased your chances of succeeding these particular rolls (stat increases/feats/weapons etc.). Of course, sometimes the enemy is super perceptive or has a very high AC, but hopefully not always (a good assassin would research his targets either way, no?). And of course, sometimes the DM wants to catch his players off guard with traps and the like. However, most often the DM will allow the players to shine as much as possible. That is my experience at least.
Still, you have to pass 3 rolls, and it seems like a lot. But if you do succeed these rolls, you get a hefty reward. The potential of taking down an enemy before the fight really starts is a HUGE advantage (action economy is often underrated). And an advantage that is much more likely to be achieved with an Assassin than with any other subclass.
In the end, choosing the Assassin subclass is exactly what it sounds like. A choice. If you choose this skillset with no intention of setting up your attacks or character to play to its strengths, or if you have a DM who doesn't care to accommodate this specific subclass, then this most likely isn't the ideal subclass. If the above doesn't apply, then it is a very good choice for someone who wants to quickly and stealthily take out his enemies.
Really the point here is the RAW way of running it is not very good for the Assassin as written....which is a fair critique and I think something DMs should know about and potentially plan for.
I am a big fan of giving people honest information about a class/subclass and letting them make a decision on how it will affect their fun playing it.
Assassin relies a LOT on DM input for basically all of their abilities as they are final arbiter of "Surprise" and intrigue bits built into the subclass. You should be working with your DM from the get go if you want to play the subclass and see if you can come to an agreement on how that looks. If you do and it still doesn't live up to your expectations then maybe a subclass/class change might be the way to go.
Generally if I have a player that wants to play an assassin rouge I generally steer them towards Gloomstalker Ranger instead because they actually play a better assassin than assassin.
When is the last time you saw a boss, or even a mini boss, in a published adventure that could realistically be surprised?
Its an ability that MAYBE will come up SOMETIMES for wandering scouts, but almost never for tough important fights. Even with a helpful DM, you’re not going to be catching the necromancer by surprise in their tower.
When is the last time you saw a boss, or even a mini boss, in a published adventure that could realistically be surprised?
Its an ability that MAYBE will come up SOMETIMES for wandering scouts, but almost never for tough important fights. Even with a helpful DM, you’re not going to be catching the necromancer by surprise in their tower.
It is only a "MAYBE" and a "SOMETIMES" if you as a player don't actively try to put yourself in an advantageous position. Granted, it might not happen every single encounter, but it could easily happen half the time if you set your mind to it, and your DM appreciates your creativity.
As for "bosses" in published adventures, I don't know as I rarely play published adventures. However, looking at named monsters in the "monsters" catalogue on this website, I'd say it is very realistic to surprise/win initiative/hit these "bosses" based on their stats alone. Either way, "boss" fights are uncommon occurrences in my experience and therefore not the best reference for base mechanics. But even if you know of a powerful evil necromancer sitting in his tower, lure him out of it. Set up your ambush and play to your subclass' strengths instead of doing the opposite.
Looking at this thread, the main complaint regarding the subclass seems to be that it requires a certain measure of creativity to make it work as intended, and not simply adding another constant (die) to the math equation as is inherent in other subclasses. Both ways work for me. To each their own.
If you look at the other features of Assassin, it's very heavily skewed towards sneaking around and getting into places. It's not supposed to be murdering someone at the beginning of every combat. It's supposed to be the guy sneaking through the sleeping castle silently picking off the guards one by one.
It's not really a team player, although it performs fine in combat due to its base class features. But really it's meant for solo work. If there's not a lot of room in the campaign for that stuff, you're better off with another subclass.
Yeah, the basic problem is that stealthy assassination isn't really a team project, it's a solo project. Assassins are fine at what they do, but what they do isn't something that is a significant part of ordinary campaigns.
Yeah, the basic problem is that stealthy assassination isn't really a team project, it's a solo project. Assassins are fine at what they do, but what they do isn't something that is a significant part of ordinary campaigns.
This is why I generally steer them towards Gloomstalker. It plays much more team friendly.
Stealth is a weird bag in 5e....if you are very good at it but the party is not then its encouraging you to go ahead an scout but party splitting is not generally recommended too much.
If you are all good at Stealth or have a way to mitigate checks (Pass without Trace) then the whole party strategy changes and surprise becomes something that you always want to try to employ but one bad roll and the whole thing goes sour.
Since surprise is completely defined by the DM you get a varied experience that may not conform to your idea of stealth and it could be disappointing. The only way to prevent this is to communicate your expectations and see if they align as a group and with the DM. If not pick something that will more fit with the group dynamic or if you can't then move on from the group.
If they win initiative, you are not even in motion yet and they know you are there?
The way I see it is that you *are* already in motion. If you weren't, then initiative would not have been rolled.
Initiaive determines the order that actions are resolved; not the order that actions are started.
You still effectively break stealth before you even actually attack. And movement alone does not normally break stealth, not in the same way that attacking does.
Furthermore, if the person at range is stationary, they do not attack at all until their initiative.
Hmmm.... what happens if the person instead of saying 'I am attacking' says 'I ready an action to attack as soon as the enemy's turn starts?' Then their attack would happen during the target's turn while the target is still surprised.
That would appear to be a Ready action which RAW cannot happen outside of initiative
If they win initiative, you are not even in motion yet and they know you are there?
The way I see it is that you *are* already in motion. If you weren't, then initiative would not have been rolled.
Initiaive determines the order that actions are resolved; not the order that actions are started.
You still effectively break stealth before you even actually attack. And movement alone does not normally break stealth, not in the same way that attacking does.
Furthermore, if the person at range is stationary, they do not attack at all until their initiative.
Hmmm.... what happens if the person instead of saying 'I am attacking' says 'I ready an action to attack as soon as the enemy's turn starts?' Then their attack would happen during the target's turn while the target is still surprised.
All the points mentioned in the above quotes have already been addressed previously and extensively in this thread.
As for what would happen if you say "I ready an action to attack as soon as the enemy's turn starts", your DM would tell you that it is an illegal command for the Ready action as the trigger has to be perceivable. If you instead ready an action to attack when your enemy touches his nose and he happens to do that on his turn, then yes, your readied attack would trigger on the enemy's turn while he is still surprised (surprise lasts until the end of your turn).
I think that in practice many DM‘s allow a single character to make a single attack from an ambush before rolling initiative. I don’t know that that’s actually supported in the players handbook, but it does address the problem of why an enemy would be allowed to roll initiative and go first when they have not yet perceived any sort of attack against them or danger. Whether that single attack counts as surprise even though it is not during a surprise round in combat, and whether the first round of the combat that follows is a true surprise round or if you launch right into normal rounds... I dunno, again, an “opening volley” isn’t RAW.
I think that in practice many DM‘s allow a single character to make a single attack from an ambush before rolling initiative. I don’t know that that’s actually supported in the players handbook, but it does address the problem of why an enemy would be allowed to roll initiative and go first when they have not yet perceived any sort of attack against them or danger. Whether that single attack counts as surprise even though it is not during a surprise round in combat, and whether the first round of the combat that follows is a true surprise round or if you launch right into normal rounds... I dunno, again, an “opening volley” isn’t RAW.
Surprise doesn’t feel great in 5E.
Yeah generally I see the same thing and while its not RAW its generally fine but just be aware that Action Economy is already in the players favor most of the time and it could impact challenge of certain encounters. If you are ok with adjusting encounters to compensate then its not a huge issue.
I think that in practice many DM‘s allow a single character to make a single attack from an ambush before rolling initiative. I don’t know that that’s actually supported in the players handbook, but it does address the problem of why an enemy would be allowed to roll initiative and go first when they have not yet perceived any sort of attack against them or danger. Whether that single attack counts as surprise even though it is not during a surprise round in combat, and whether the first round of the combat that follows is a true surprise round or if you launch right into normal rounds... I dunno, again, an “opening volley” isn’t RAW.
Surprise doesn’t feel great in 5E.
I generally treat a surprising start of combat as surprise, even if it doesn't qualify for RAW surprise since the character wasn't stealthy, they just weren't recognized as a threat. It usually requires a deceit check (vs insight) instead of a stealth check.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yeah almost needed to make the Assassin work. I basically give it to them if they were surprised at the start of combat.
Assassin rogue isn't a bad subclass simply because you can't auto-crit every time you surprise a creature. The way I see it, the Rules As Written keep min-maxing players from completely dominating combat with their first round burst damage. A multiclass that comes to mind is Gloom Stalker 4/Champion 5/Assassin11 which gives you 6 attacks within the first round of combat if you Action Surge and I believe I have seen builds that can give you as much as 8 attacks but I can't be certain. If you activate Assassinate, that is the chance for 6+ autocrits with Sneak Attack, Dread Ambusher, and Hunter's Mark tacked on. Or 12d8+6d6+6d6+2d8+5, using a longbow, and that's excluding magic items which you would most certainly have at level 20. That is extremely powerful and beats out most 9th level spells in terms of damage output. If you take away the auto crit, taking into account Improved Critical, you still have a roughly 20% chance to crit per attack while the enemy is unable to do anything in return. The point I'm trying to make is, and correct me if anything I said was wrong, but locking an ability that is capable of dealing more damage than a 9th level spell behind a couple of extra rolls that are best suited to the Rogue seems completely expected to me and perfectly balanced.
Edit: Realized I didn't even double the Sneak Attack and Hunter's Mark damage, nor did I do the plus including each attack so the actual calculation would be 12d8+12d6+12d6+2d8+30 damage.
Champion is a bad subclass, but the most damaging build I know of in the game is Gloom Stalker 4/Assassin 4/Battle Master 12, with some slight rearranging possible depending on how clever you get with your ASIs. That doesn't change the fact that Assassin is a bad rogue subclass - it works so well with this build precisely because it's well-designed as a subclass for non-rogues but is pretty terrible for actual rogues.
Well played good sir. I'm going to be honest, I just used the first thing that came to mind but I agree, you have a far superior multiclass for maximum damage. I also completely agree that Assassin is far from the best rogue subclass as only the 3rd level and 17th level abilities seem to be useful within game unless your party runs a very slow, rp heavy campaign. However my main point was more so pertaining to the thread as a whole in which people were arguing whether the ability was too underpowered RAW. I was trying, perhaps unsuccessfully, to make the point that it is a balanced ability in my books even using the Surprised condition as written.
It might also be worth noting that it was perhaps made to be front-loaded for multiclassing on purpose by the designers.
You need to (1) have a DM that uses surprise, (2) be in a situation that allows for you to surprise an enemy, (3) pass whatever skill checks are needed to surprise the enemy, (4) not have another teammmate do something or fail a skill check that ruins surprise, (5) roll higher initiative than the enemy, (6) start combat in a way that allows you to reach one or more desirable targets on your first turn to land one or more attacks, and (7) actually land those attacks, before you see any benefit from Assassinate.
That’s a lot of gate keeping, much of which is outside the players control. I have played campaigns with Assassins who only succeeded triggering assassination once or twice over the entire length of the campaign, it is bad and feels bad. Champions crit far more often then Assassins, and they too are bad and underwhelming. Play a subclass that’s actually fun with interesting features you can use every session, not one that’s only good on paper.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Assuming that you play with a DM and fellow players who want everyone to enjoy the game as much as possible, the only factors hindering the Assassin from a successful critical hit are the 3 rolls. And unless you play a character that is new in or "bad" at the assassination business, you have most likely increased your chances of succeeding these particular rolls (stat increases/feats/weapons etc.).
Of course, sometimes the enemy is super perceptive or has a very high AC, but hopefully not always (a good assassin would research his targets either way, no?).
And of course, sometimes the DM wants to catch his players off guard with traps and the like.
However, most often the DM will allow the players to shine as much as possible. That is my experience at least.
Still, you have to pass 3 rolls, and it seems like a lot. But if you do succeed these rolls, you get a hefty reward. The potential of taking down an enemy before the fight really starts is a HUGE advantage (action economy is often underrated). And an advantage that is much more likely to be achieved with an Assassin than with any other subclass.
In the end, choosing the Assassin subclass is exactly what it sounds like. A choice. If you choose this skillset with no intention of setting up your attacks or character to play to its strengths, or if you have a DM who doesn't care to accommodate this specific subclass, then this most likely isn't the ideal subclass. If the above doesn't apply, then it is a very good choice for someone who wants to quickly and stealthily take out his enemies.
Really the point here is the RAW way of running it is not very good for the Assassin as written....which is a fair critique and I think something DMs should know about and potentially plan for.
I am a big fan of giving people honest information about a class/subclass and letting them make a decision on how it will affect their fun playing it.
Assassin relies a LOT on DM input for basically all of their abilities as they are final arbiter of "Surprise" and intrigue bits built into the subclass. You should be working with your DM from the get go if you want to play the subclass and see if you can come to an agreement on how that looks. If you do and it still doesn't live up to your expectations then maybe a subclass/class change might be the way to go.
Generally if I have a player that wants to play an assassin rouge I generally steer them towards Gloomstalker Ranger instead because they actually play a better assassin than assassin.
When is the last time you saw a boss, or even a mini boss, in a published adventure that could realistically be surprised?
Its an ability that MAYBE will come up SOMETIMES for wandering scouts, but almost never for tough important fights. Even with a helpful DM, you’re not going to be catching the necromancer by surprise in their tower.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
It is only a "MAYBE" and a "SOMETIMES" if you as a player don't actively try to put yourself in an advantageous position. Granted, it might not happen every single encounter, but it could easily happen half the time if you set your mind to it, and your DM appreciates your creativity.
As for "bosses" in published adventures, I don't know as I rarely play published adventures. However, looking at named monsters in the "monsters" catalogue on this website, I'd say it is very realistic to surprise/win initiative/hit these "bosses" based on their stats alone. Either way, "boss" fights are uncommon occurrences in my experience and therefore not the best reference for base mechanics. But even if you know of a powerful evil necromancer sitting in his tower, lure him out of it. Set up your ambush and play to your subclass' strengths instead of doing the opposite.
Looking at this thread, the main complaint regarding the subclass seems to be that it requires a certain measure of creativity to make it work as intended, and not simply adding another constant (die) to the math equation as is inherent in other subclasses. Both ways work for me. To each their own.
If you look at the other features of Assassin, it's very heavily skewed towards sneaking around and getting into places. It's not supposed to be murdering someone at the beginning of every combat. It's supposed to be the guy sneaking through the sleeping castle silently picking off the guards one by one.
It's not really a team player, although it performs fine in combat due to its base class features. But really it's meant for solo work. If there's not a lot of room in the campaign for that stuff, you're better off with another subclass.
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
Yeah, the basic problem is that stealthy assassination isn't really a team project, it's a solo project. Assassins are fine at what they do, but what they do isn't something that is a significant part of ordinary campaigns.
This is why I generally steer them towards Gloomstalker. It plays much more team friendly.
What prevents this from happening:
My response to this scenario ranges from "LOLno," to "This game no longer suits my play style," then take a break.
I am a Canadian Dungeon Master, which means I reflexively apologize when the monsters score a critical hit on the players' characters.
The way I see it is that you *are* already in motion. If you weren't, then initiative would not have been rolled.
Initiaive determines the order that actions are resolved; not the order that actions are started.
Stealth is a weird bag in 5e....if you are very good at it but the party is not then its encouraging you to go ahead an scout but party splitting is not generally recommended too much.
If you are all good at Stealth or have a way to mitigate checks (Pass without Trace) then the whole party strategy changes and surprise becomes something that you always want to try to employ but one bad roll and the whole thing goes sour.
Since surprise is completely defined by the DM you get a varied experience that may not conform to your idea of stealth and it could be disappointing. The only way to prevent this is to communicate your expectations and see if they align as a group and with the DM. If not pick something that will more fit with the group dynamic or if you can't then move on from the group.
That would appear to be a Ready action which RAW cannot happen outside of initiative
All the points mentioned in the above quotes have already been addressed previously and extensively in this thread.
As for what would happen if you say "I ready an action to attack as soon as the enemy's turn starts", your DM would tell you that it is an illegal command for the Ready action as the trigger has to be perceivable. If you instead ready an action to attack when your enemy touches his nose and he happens to do that on his turn, then yes, your readied attack would trigger on the enemy's turn while he is still surprised (surprise lasts until the end of your turn).
I think that in practice many DM‘s allow a single character to make a single attack from an ambush before rolling initiative. I don’t know that that’s actually supported in the players handbook, but it does address the problem of why an enemy would be allowed to roll initiative and go first when they have not yet perceived any sort of attack against them or danger. Whether that single attack counts as surprise even though it is not during a surprise round in combat, and whether the first round of the combat that follows is a true surprise round or if you launch right into normal rounds... I dunno, again, an “opening volley” isn’t RAW.
Surprise doesn’t feel great in 5E.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yeah generally I see the same thing and while its not RAW its generally fine but just be aware that Action Economy is already in the players favor most of the time and it could impact challenge of certain encounters. If you are ok with adjusting encounters to compensate then its not a huge issue.
I generally treat a surprising start of combat as surprise, even if it doesn't qualify for RAW surprise since the character wasn't stealthy, they just weren't recognized as a threat. It usually requires a deceit check (vs insight) instead of a stealth check.