Sigh...if you want your Rogue to keep up in damage with a martial class, then just play a martial class. Rogues have tons and tons of advantages that a martial class does not. Each class is designed to be different. A high end martial class SHOULD do way more damage than a Rogue.
Isn't Rogue also a martial class? I mean the division is martial and magic, right?
Rogue is a martial class, yes, and its combat purpose is to deal stupid amounts of damage. The idea that a fighter should do more damage than a rogue is absolutely absurd.
If we can't even agree on something as basic as a Rogue is NEVER supposed to do as much damage as a Fighter at higher levels, there can be no conversation. But I have to ask. What in the world gave you that idea in the first place?
The way the respective classes have been designed since at least 2nd edition? I dunno where you've been for the last thirty years. As I said, the entire combat purpose of the rogue is to do damage. That's all they do. They've got mediocre HP, mediocre AC, and very few support features (outside of specific subclasses like the mastermind). If they're not doing more damage than the much sturdier fighter, they're just dead weight in a fight, and the class design has always reflected that.
So they should be just as good on a fight as a fighter out barbarian, even thought the fighter and barbarian are significantly worse out of combat? Doesn't that just let the rogue shine at all times, where the fighter and barbarian are "just dead weight" out of combat? Sounds fair...
First of all, I didn't say they should be "just as good." I said they should do more damage (which they do and always have). They're a lot easier to kill, so whether or not they're "as good" as a fighter is debatable. Second, D&D is and always has been a game whose design focuses on combat first and everything else second, if at all. That sucks, and I certainly don't play the game that way, but that's how the game is designed, and that's the context in which I'm speaking. If a class's combat performance sucks because of their light armor and low HP, that needs to be made up for in combat, because combat is at least 75% of what the game is designed to be. Some classes make up for that by providing support to other characters, like bards. Rogues make up for it by doing dumb amounts of damage. That's why sneak attack exists.
Sigh...if you want your Rogue to keep up in damage with a martial class, then just play a martial class. Rogues have tons and tons of advantages that a martial class does not. Each class is designed to be different. A high end martial class SHOULD do way more damage than a Rogue.
Isn't Rogue also a martial class? I mean the division is martial and magic, right?
Rogue is a martial class, yes, and its combat purpose is to deal stupid amounts of damage. The idea that a fighter should do more damage than a rogue is absolutely absurd.
If we can't even agree on something as basic as a Rogue is NEVER supposed to do as much damage as a Fighter at higher levels, there can be no conversation. But I have to ask. What in the world gave you that idea in the first place?
The way the respective classes have been designed since at least 2nd edition? I dunno where you've been for the last thirty years. As I said, the entire combat purpose of the rogue is to do damage. That's all they do. They've got mediocre HP, mediocre AC, and very few support features (outside of specific subclasses like the mastermind). If they're not doing more damage than the much sturdier fighter, they're just dead weight in a fight, and the class design has always reflected that.
So they should be just as good on a fight as a fighter out barbarian, even thought the fighter and barbarian are significantly worse out of combat? Doesn't that just let the rogue shine at all times, where the fighter and barbarian are "just dead weight" out of combat? Sounds fair...
First of all, I didn't say they should be "just as good." I said they should do more damage (which they do and always have). They're a lot easier to kill, so whether or not they're "as good" as a fighter is debatable. Second, D&D is and always has been a game whose design focuses on combat first and everything else second, if at all. That sucks, and I certainly don't play the game that way, but that's how the game is designed, and that's the context in which I'm speaking. If a class's combat performance sucks because of their light armor and low HP, that needs to be made up for in combat, because combat is at least 75% of what the game is designed to be. Some classes make up for that by providing support to other characters, like bards. Rogues make up for it by doing dumb amounts of damage. That's why sneak attack exists.
And I get that. Rogues do loads of sneak attack damage. They can get that any time they get advantage, which is generally difficult to do, or by using team work to put an ally next to their target, which is pretty easy.
Giving them advantage so easily is really powerful. Doing so and allowing it to be exploited in ridiculously inconsistent ways, like allowing it on a galloping horse or a cart moving over rough ground at high speed where 2 steps to the left would stop it, goes from really powerful to unbelievable.
I also get that combat is a big part of the game. However, it's not the whole game. Many of the traditional non-combat situations are perfect for most rogues: sneaking, picking locks, making deals, stealing things... Rogues typically shine out of combat over most of the other classes. They should be at least slightly worse in combat when they are significantly better out of combat, but they aren't. They are on a par, at least with a little tactical play. Steady Aim makes them even better, and the exploits with mounts etc arguably make them outshine any other martial classes.
I had some comments about this, but I kept deleting them and rewriting them because in the end, it all comes down to the way the player plays the rogue.
The fact that taking the attack action gives the rogue a single attack does put it in an "all or nothing" situation that just about every other martial class doesn't experience since they have multiple attacks when they take the attack action.
I'm with Optimus re: the defensive capabilities of rogues. While a Fighter can certainly take more hits, when you factor in conditions applied with those hits then avoiding damage altogether becomes much more attractive than absorbing it. Cunning Action is amazing in the right hands, and Evasion is pretty great as well.
I don't find rogues damage to be that impressive - 10d6 looks and sounds like a lot more damage than it actually is - SA just lets them keep up with everyone else. But I do think they have more than that to offer in combat. They have great mobility and if your combats include interactive terrain features or skill checks or alternate goals or anything besides just hitting things until they die, rogues are generally good at doing all of those things.
I also fail to see how whatever's balanced for a rogue standing still in square A to make one attack, isn't equally balanced for a rogue if they happen to be attacking from square B, C, D, E, F, or G. "The rogue has advantage on their attack" is explicitly what this ability is all about enabling, so complaining "wow advantage on an attack is strong!" is just... taking issue with the core strength the ability is meant to promote. Riding a mount or a vehicle isn't exactly "one weird trick that DM's hate!", there's no shortage of scenarios where doing so is impractical or even dangerous, or if the Rogue has built to minimize those risks... good for them? I would find it far less intuitive and more disruptive to force a Rogue to dismount their ride a turn ahead of time in order to use Steady Aim, than to just let it happen. Mounts are good, yes, but there's also opportunity cost involved in building for them effectively.
I'd agree with that. Static damage modifiers and multiple attacks are where DPR really shines, not additional d6's that are conditional when the chips are down. Even rogues look for Sharpshooter and Crossbow Expert to be damage kings, Sneak Attack is only really a damage threat when you start critting consistently, or making at least one sneak attack Opportunity Attack per round.
Looking at that second link, the rogue does more DPR than a Berserker Barbarian in tier one, and about the same in the rest of the tiers, with only 2 sneak attacks in 3, and with advantage only in one round in 3.
Overall, in combat, the rogue already does pretty well just in damage, and has great mobility and other in-combat skills to make them more useful. Out of combat, rogues have massive advantages over the other martial classes in the most common situations. Saying "aaawww, but we want to do better than everyone else in combat as well as shine out of combat"... Well, I guess most of the rogue characters I've seen played want to be spotlight hogs.
Again, Steady Aim is not just about getting Sneak Attack. It also massively increases hit chances and the number of crits, which increases the DPR still further. If this increase comes at the cost of having to remain stationery, that's powerful but at high cost, so fairly balanced. As soon as you find a way to beat the system and avoid restrictions on movement, it just goes over the top.
Looking at that second link, the rogue does more DPR than a Berserker Barbarian in tier one, and about the same in the rest of the tiers, with only 2 sneak attacks in 3, and with advantage only in one round in 3.
Overall, in combat, the rogue already does pretty well just in damage, and has great mobility and other in-combat skills to make them more useful. Out of combat, rogues have massive advantages over the other martial classes in the most common situations. Saying "aaawww, but we want to do better than everyone else in combat as well as shine out of combat"... Well, I guess most of the rogue characters I've seen played want to be spotlight hogs.
Again, Steady Aim is not just about getting Sneak Attack. It also massively increases hit chances and the number of crits, which increases the DPR still further. If this increase comes at the cost of having to remain stationery, that's powerful but at high cost, so fairly balanced. As soon as you find a way to beat the system and avoid restrictions on movement, it just goes over the top.
As I have said before, Steady Aim is yet another reason to ban the abomination that shall not be named from any table. I can visualize it now:
"I am playing a creature that looks like a Human Variant but identifies as an Elf with a +2 to Dex, who has Animal Handling, takes 2 levels of Hexblade, the rest in Rogue, so I have Hexblade's Curse (Crit on 19 or 20), Elven Advantage (roll 3 20's on Advantage), and ride a Warhorse, and because of Animal Handling my skills provide me with a non-moving platform so I can use Steady Aim every turn. Oh, did I mention I rolled an 18 and am putting that into Dex so I start with a 20 in Dex at level 0?"
Looking at that second link, the rogue does more DPR than a Berserker Barbarian in tier one, and about the same in the rest of the tiers, with only 2 sneak attacks in 3, and with advantage only in one round in 3.
Overall, in combat, the rogue already does pretty well just in damage, and has great mobility and other in-combat skills to make them more useful. Out of combat, rogues have massive advantages over the other martial classes in the most common situations. Saying "aaawww, but we want to do better than everyone else in combat as well as shine out of combat"... Well, I guess most of the rogue characters I've seen played want to be spotlight hogs.
Again, Steady Aim is not just about getting Sneak Attack. It also massively increases hit chances and the number of crits, which increases the DPR still further. If this increase comes at the cost of having to remain stationery, that's powerful but at high cost, so fairly balanced. As soon as you find a way to beat the system and avoid restrictions on movement, it just goes over the top.
ADV does help with DPR but losing movement pretty much negates the benefit of range most of the time. Its a fine balance option IMO as you are basically risking a lot for a sure fire way to get ADV on your strike (melee or range).
DPR wise its heavily dependant on the subclass for fighter/barb too. Zerk is the worst comparison as its completely outclassed by PAM. Zealot barb is the gold standard for barb damage.
Fighter gold standard is SS/CBE Dex battle master fighter with a hand crossbow and archery style. The precision die and action surge puts them firmly ahead of most DPR builds.
Rogue does good consistent DPR and can get to the target or use the above Steady Aim to ensure they are hitting who they want to hit. Their focus is more single target take down.
Fighter is better at mobs and mowing down a single target if needed.
Barb is more of a tanky build and relies on drawing fire by using reckless and being a threat damage wise.
If you don’t want to use a mount, the scout rogue seems to be able to take full advantage of it by using their reaction to move without attack of opportunity to set up another steady aim/attack on their turn.
How are you using your reaction to move? If you Steady Aim then you've used your bonus action, and presumably your action to attack, so you can't use the Ready action.
A swarm keeper multiclass would be able to do this every turn at level 6. And I keep saying it, but a level 3 rogue on a mount could do it too.
How can a swarm keeper move while using Steady Aim?
On the round that Steady Aim is used, your bonus action is used for Steady Aim.
If you have Writhing Tide already active from using your bonus action on a previous round, then using your bonus action to do Steady Aim will set your move to 0 - and this will include the flying speed granted by Writhing Tide.
How are you using your reaction to move? If you Steady Aim then you've used your bonus action, and presumably your action to attack, so you can't use the Ready action.
A Scout can move (half speed) as a reaction on opponents turns (if the opponent end their move within 5ft of the scout) so no need for a ready action. And thus it should work just fine with Steady-Aim.
How can a swarm keeper move while using Steady Aim?
On the round that Steady Aim is used, your bonus action is used for Steady Aim.
If you have Writhing Tide already active from using your bonus action on a previous round, then using your bonus action to do Steady Aim will set your move to 0 - and this will include the flying speed granted by Writhing Tide.
By using Gathered Swarm. It's effects triggers on a hit, no action needed so the "You are moved by the swarm 5 feet horizontally in a direction of your choice." effect should still apply (not that 5ft is much but still).
How are you using your reaction to move? If you Steady Aim then you've used your bonus action, and presumably your action to attack, so you can't use the Ready action.
A Scout can move (half speed) as a reaction on opponents turns (if the opponent end their move within 5ft of the scout) so no need for a ready action. And thus it should work just fine with Steady-Aim.
Since this would happen outside the scout's turn, I don't think it really falls into the same category.
How can a swarm keeper move while using Steady Aim?
On the round that Steady Aim is used, your bonus action is used for Steady Aim.
If you have Writhing Tide already active from using your bonus action on a previous round, then using your bonus action to do Steady Aim will set your move to 0 - and this will include the flying speed granted by Writhing Tide.
By using Gathered Swarm. It's effects triggers on a hit, no action needed so the "You are moved by the swarm 5 feet horizontally in a direction of your choice." effect should still apply (not that 5ft is much but still).
Ah, I see. As long it is on your turn and not an opportunity attack :)
A DM that is comfortable with a swarm of bugs carrying the rogue, but not comfortable with a horse carrying the rogue, is.... certainly a very particular sort of DM.
First of all, I didn't say they should be "just as good." I said they should do more damage (which they do and always have). They're a lot easier to kill, so whether or not they're "as good" as a fighter is debatable. Second, D&D is and always has been a game whose design focuses on combat first and everything else second, if at all. That sucks, and I certainly don't play the game that way, but that's how the game is designed, and that's the context in which I'm speaking. If a class's combat performance sucks because of their light armor and low HP, that needs to be made up for in combat, because combat is at least 75% of what the game is designed to be. Some classes make up for that by providing support to other characters, like bards. Rogues make up for it by doing dumb amounts of damage. That's why sneak attack exists.
They have dodge and AC that's generally 1 less then str builds. They have evasion.
They are a lot harder to kill actually.
Oh, also there's the hit die difference I forgot to mention, which is another tick in the column for Fighter defensive abilities.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
And I get that. Rogues do loads of sneak attack damage. They can get that any time they get advantage, which is generally difficult to do, or by using team work to put an ally next to their target, which is pretty easy.
Giving them advantage so easily is really powerful. Doing so and allowing it to be exploited in ridiculously inconsistent ways, like allowing it on a galloping horse or a cart moving over rough ground at high speed where 2 steps to the left would stop it, goes from really powerful to unbelievable.
I also get that combat is a big part of the game. However, it's not the whole game. Many of the traditional non-combat situations are perfect for most rogues: sneaking, picking locks, making deals, stealing things... Rogues typically shine out of combat over most of the other classes. They should be at least slightly worse in combat when they are significantly better out of combat, but they aren't. They are on a par, at least with a little tactical play. Steady Aim makes them even better, and the exploits with mounts etc arguably make them outshine any other martial classes.
I had some comments about this, but I kept deleting them and rewriting them because in the end, it all comes down to the way the player plays the rogue.
The fact that taking the attack action gives the rogue a single attack does put it in an "all or nothing" situation that just about every other martial class doesn't experience since they have multiple attacks when they take the attack action.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I'm with Optimus re: the defensive capabilities of rogues. While a Fighter can certainly take more hits, when you factor in conditions applied with those hits then avoiding damage altogether becomes much more attractive than absorbing it. Cunning Action is amazing in the right hands, and Evasion is pretty great as well.
I don't find rogues damage to be that impressive - 10d6 looks and sounds like a lot more damage than it actually is - SA just lets them keep up with everyone else. But I do think they have more than that to offer in combat. They have great mobility and if your combats include interactive terrain features or skill checks or alternate goals or anything besides just hitting things until they die, rogues are generally good at doing all of those things.
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
I also fail to see how whatever's balanced for a rogue standing still in square A to make one attack, isn't equally balanced for a rogue if they happen to be attacking from square B, C, D, E, F, or G. "The rogue has advantage on their attack" is explicitly what this ability is all about enabling, so complaining "wow advantage on an attack is strong!" is just... taking issue with the core strength the ability is meant to promote. Riding a mount or a vehicle isn't exactly "one weird trick that DM's hate!", there's no shortage of scenarios where doing so is impractical or even dangerous, or if the Rogue has built to minimize those risks... good for them? I would find it far less intuitive and more disruptive to force a Rogue to dismount their ride a turn ahead of time in order to use Steady Aim, than to just let it happen. Mounts are good, yes, but there's also opportunity cost involved in building for them effectively.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I'm not super good with the clicky clack math, but luckily it's not hard to find someone whose done the calculations online: https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/4cg25y/a_dpr_analysis_of_the_martial_classes_levels_111/
So it kinda looks like rogues fall to the back of the pack in Tier 2-3 which is where this comparison stops.
This one's a bit more in depth and goes to level 15: https://www.enworld.org/threads/melee-combat-benchmarking-class-comparison-updated.435760/
Also seems like the rogue falls behind in damage.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I'd agree with that. Static damage modifiers and multiple attacks are where DPR really shines, not additional d6's that are conditional when the chips are down. Even rogues look for Sharpshooter and Crossbow Expert to be damage kings, Sneak Attack is only really a damage threat when you start critting consistently, or making at least one sneak attack Opportunity Attack per round.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Looking at that second link, the rogue does more DPR than a Berserker Barbarian in tier one, and about the same in the rest of the tiers, with only 2 sneak attacks in 3, and with advantage only in one round in 3.
Overall, in combat, the rogue already does pretty well just in damage, and has great mobility and other in-combat skills to make them more useful. Out of combat, rogues have massive advantages over the other martial classes in the most common situations. Saying "aaawww, but we want to do better than everyone else in combat as well as shine out of combat"... Well, I guess most of the rogue characters I've seen played want to be spotlight hogs.
Again, Steady Aim is not just about getting Sneak Attack. It also massively increases hit chances and the number of crits, which increases the DPR still further. If this increase comes at the cost of having to remain stationery, that's powerful but at high cost, so fairly balanced. As soon as you find a way to beat the system and avoid restrictions on movement, it just goes over the top.
As I have said before, Steady Aim is yet another reason to ban the abomination that shall not be named from any table. I can visualize it now:
"I am playing a creature that looks like a Human Variant but identifies as an Elf with a +2 to Dex, who has Animal Handling, takes 2 levels of Hexblade, the rest in Rogue, so I have Hexblade's Curse (Crit on 19 or 20), Elven Advantage (roll 3 20's on Advantage), and ride a Warhorse, and because of Animal Handling my skills provide me with a non-moving platform so I can use Steady Aim every turn. Oh, did I mention I rolled an 18 and am putting that into Dex so I start with a 20 in Dex at level 0?"
ADV does help with DPR but losing movement pretty much negates the benefit of range most of the time. Its a fine balance option IMO as you are basically risking a lot for a sure fire way to get ADV on your strike (melee or range).
DPR wise its heavily dependant on the subclass for fighter/barb too. Zerk is the worst comparison as its completely outclassed by PAM. Zealot barb is the gold standard for barb damage.
Fighter gold standard is SS/CBE Dex battle master fighter with a hand crossbow and archery style. The precision die and action surge puts them firmly ahead of most DPR builds.
Rogue does good consistent DPR and can get to the target or use the above Steady Aim to ensure they are hitting who they want to hit. Their focus is more single target take down.
Fighter is better at mobs and mowing down a single target if needed.
Barb is more of a tanky build and relies on drawing fire by using reckless and being a threat damage wise.
They all have their places and it works well IMO.
How are you using your reaction to move? If you Steady Aim then you've used your bonus action, and presumably your action to attack, so you can't use the Ready action.
How can a swarm keeper move while using Steady Aim?
On the round that Steady Aim is used, your bonus action is used for Steady Aim.
If you have Writhing Tide already active from using your bonus action on a previous round, then using your bonus action to do Steady Aim will set your move to 0 - and this will include the flying speed granted by Writhing Tide.
A Scout can move (half speed) as a reaction on opponents turns (if the opponent end their move within 5ft of the scout) so no need for a ready action. And thus it should work just fine with Steady-Aim.
By using Gathered Swarm. It's effects triggers on a hit, no action needed so the "You are moved by the swarm 5 feet horizontally in a direction of your choice." effect should still apply (not that 5ft is much but still).
Since this would happen outside the scout's turn, I don't think it really falls into the same category.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Yea Steady-Aim only restricts movement on ones own turn.
Ah, I see. As long it is on your turn and not an opportunity attack :)
A DM that is comfortable with a swarm of bugs carrying the rogue, but not comfortable with a horse carrying the rogue, is.... certainly a very particular sort of DM.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.