Why would you shoot on first seeing part of their body rather than on when you actually have a good shot? But normal sneak attacks are not limited in effect by anything less than full cover, merely in accuracy.
Because you wouldn't know if you would get to see their full body, nor for how long you might see it - a brief glimpse of their whole body as they dodge from one source of cover to another would not give you time to perfectly line up a shot for sneak attack.
Thank you. I’ve always seen it played and DMed it as I described, now I see what the RAW problem is. I expect I will continue to DM it that way as it makes more sense to me but at least I know it’s a homebrew change.
Why would you shoot on first seeing part of their body rather than on when you actually have a good shot? But normal sneak attacks are not limited in effect by anything less than full cover, merely in accuracy.
Because you wouldn't know if you would get to see their full body, nor for how long you might see it - a brief glimpse of their whole body as they dodge from one source of cover to another would not give you time to perfectly line up a shot for sneak attack.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
Why would you shoot on first seeing part of their body rather than on when you actually have a good shot? But normal sneak attacks are not limited in effect by anything less than full cover, merely in accuracy.
Because you wouldn't know if you would get to see their full body, nor for how long you might see it - a brief glimpse of their whole body as they dodge from one source of cover to another would not give you time to perfectly line up a shot for sneak attack.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
But not in the new rules, which is exactly the main problem everyone’s been having
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Why would you shoot on first seeing part of their body rather than on when you actually have a good shot? But normal sneak attacks are not limited in effect by anything less than full cover, merely in accuracy.
Because you wouldn't know if you would get to see their full body, nor for how long you might see it - a brief glimpse of their whole body as they dodge from one source of cover to another would not give you time to perfectly line up a shot for sneak attack.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
But not in the new rules, which is exactly the main problem everyone’s been having
Yeah I know and I have the same problem. I was just pointing out the elusive target potential exploit is already solved by the rules without needing any changes.
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round but I've never seen a character think that was a good use of both a 3rd level slot and their concentration. But hey for the sake of argument I'll go with it. That is broken. This fix doesn't just stop that, it also stops a huge range of non abusive uses of it. Standard AoO, geez let the exploit weakness class exploit the weakness they just opened. Readied actions, sure you can make some argument about not having enough time when a guy just comes through the door, I don't buy it but fine not enough time to line up a sneak attack in that instance. How about the rogue is watching a meeting on sniper over watch. He's drawn a bead on the wizard with a readied action of once he starts casting a spell, well damn I guess you just have to wait for normal initiative order and shoot him after he casts the spell, that is lame.
As an aside that last one happens a lot in our more intrigue oriented campaigns, it happens against the players as well which brings my cold black DM heart so much joy.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
I may have missed something, you would not get sneak attack with a readied action when they moved from behind cover unless you had an ally within 5 feet or had advantage somehow.
If you shoot on your turn you can use steady aim which would enable sneak attack against an enemy with partial cover.
Thank you. I’ve always seen it played and DMed it as I described, now I see what the RAW problem is. I expect I will continue to DM it that way as it makes more sense to me but at least I know it’s a homebrew change.
Personally I think held actions should come back, it probably does work better that way.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
I may have missed something, you would not get sneak attack with a readied action when they moved from behind cover unless you had an ally within 5 feet or had advantage somehow.
If you shoot on your turn you can use steady aim which would enable sneak attack against an enemy with partial cover.
So assumption on my part is you are hiding if doing this tactic. Hiding would normally grant advantage which gives the sneak attack, but if they are dodging there is no advantage so no sneak attack.
Why is it that people seem to be only talking about bards and rangers and seem to be shoving rogues under the rug as if the nerfs they took seems to be ok. It is almost as the people that are trying to say that the nerfs are OK never played rogues at all. I see dedicated posts to bards and rangers but not one about rogues.
Please explain your Rouge nerf. Evasion got moved to a higher level. Everything else seems better to me.
The problem is Rogue is a relatively weak class to start with. They moved evasion higher which is a big deal and then nerfed sneak attack to boot.
What is the nerf to sneak attack? Crits work the same in this playtest as 2014 so unless I’m missing something there is no nerf to sneak attack. Rogues are far from weak. Spells just interact with the game in the best possible ways. So comparing any class with spells to one without spells most people will favor one with spells. Until you play with meat grinder dm and can’t get a long rest. Then Rogues look phenomenal. Nothing in there base class runs out. Melee rogues are actually buffed by the new light weapon property. They get basically pack tactics at 13th and have an improved slippery mind that makes them proficient in two saves, Wis and Cha. I don’t see the nerf.
Sneak attack doesn’t work on other player’s turns anymore. That is the main nerf. Other than that, most changes are neutral or even buffs
Evasion is later, but that puts a subclass feature earlier, one which on the single subclass shown was probably buffed for non-multiclass, though it is still likely worse than evasion.
Oh yeah, you’re right it is a minor nerf. Unless someone was a master of getting opportunity attacks or had a battle master with them that would use that horrible commander strike maneuver I’m going to say it’s niche. Still a slight nerf. I’m going to say 6th level sub class features will be better or at least on par with evasion. Thief’s is equal in my opinion now that it’s all stealth checks, the arcane tricksters is better if it stays the same, and I hope the assassin’s gets reworked.
Another factor is ranger is now getting 2 ranks of expertise the same as the rogue.
When you put Rogue side by side with the other Experts you can see where it seems to lack in comparison.
First Level Rogue: Expertise, Sneak attack and Theives can't. So 2 languages (often referred to as a ribbon feature) sneak attack for a little more damage and expertise
Bard: Spell casting, Bardic Inspiration Ranger: Expertise, Favored Enemy and Spell casting. So far the Rogue is already starting a little behind. Spell casting, even cantrip and first level is better than 2 languages, though expertise over the bard does give them something Second Level: Cunning Action Bard: Expertise (catching up), and songs of restoration Ranger Fighting Style Ok bard has caught up here, cunning action is big. 3rd increase sneak attack, and Rogue Subclass Bard: 2nd level spells and Bard subclass Ranger: Ranger Subclass. Here we see the bard starting to pull ahead of the other 2 just be sheer features gained. The subclass features at this point need to be stronger for ranger and rogue to keep up with a full caster. 4th everyone gets a feat. So all good so far. 5th level Rogue: Uncanny dodge, sneak attack damage increase Bard: Jack of all trades, 3rd level spells Ranger: 2nd level spells and extra attack. Rogue has now fallen behind both classes. He has gained something to help with survival, but everyone's versatility is going to start outstripping him here. 6th level all of them gain Subclass feature, again, rogue's would need to be MUCH better to keep up at this point. 7th level Rogue gains another sneak attack die and their second expertise, Bard is gaining a 4th level spell and font of inspiration making bardic inspiration much better and Ranger is getting more movement and a climb and swim speed. Rogue is still behind, the second round of expertise helps a lot right here though for catching up. 8th everyone gets a feat. 9th Rogue gets more sneak attack, and evasion Bard gets a 5th level spell AND catches up in expertise, and Ranger gets 3rd level spells AND catches up in expertise. At this point the Rogue is VERY far behind the other two in terms of combat, utility and versatility. 10th level everyone gets a subclass feature, Rogue gets an addition feat... maybe this helps catch up a little. 11th level Rogue gains another sneak attack die AND gains Reliable talent Bard Gains Magical secrets and 6th level spells, and Ranger gains tireless. Bard is still better, but rogue has probably caught up to ranger at this point because Reliable talent really makes the rogue, but this is at level 11. 12th level Everyone gets a feat 13th level rogues get advantage at a time when they would have had sneak attack regardless, Rangers get nature's veil and Bards get 7th level spells.
It continues basically the whole way. 14th everyone gets subclass feature, 15, bards get more spells, Rangers get Feral sense and pull into greatness and Rogue gets another defensive ability with slippery mind. 16 everyone gets a feat, and 17 Bards get 9th level spells, rangers get 5th level spells and rogues get ANOTHER defensive ability that cancels advantage against them. This is where rogues fall behind again till level 18 because that defensive ability is just outright worse than the spell versatility gained by bards and rangers.
At most levels Rogues are behind the other 2 experts here, not far behind because every time they have a boost on skills like expertise, or something like cunning action to combat the increased spell versatility I think they do ok, but when they get nothing but defensive buff after defensive buff towards the end their versatility drops off. I would love to see rogues just get more skills, or more bonus action options for cunning action or more ways to gain advantage or something as they get into higher levels. As it is, I don't know if there is enough to gain after level 11 unless the 14th level feature for your rogue subclass is really good.
As far as thief goes, Search is solid, but lack of interact with object just hurts. Second story work is basically the same, Supreme sneak almost discourages me from making stealth one of my expertise, use magical device is stream lined, and thief's reflexes took a huge nerf both in number of times you could use it in a day and how much use you could get out of it. Thief was already a niche subclass rarely taken they didn't need to nerf it further.
Thief is easily fixable, in my opinion, by giving back the interact with object bonus action and removing the PB per long rest from thief's reflexes just allowing more bonus actions every round. I would also like to see steady aim return to rogue as well as giving them something better than elusive as a 17th level feature. Steady aim at level 5 in addition to uncanny dodge would go a long way to keeping rogue relevant.
I would also personally love to add attacks of opportunity to sneak attack. They are called attacks of opportunity afterall. It would still make it to where you couldn't hold your action and attack outside of turn and gain sneak attack or the weird interactions with command, but if the opponent made a poor tactical decision and didn't disengage from the rogue I think the rogue should get to punish them and have their moment to shine.
As a whole, most of the classes were nerfed in this document. Rangers lost their free spells per day and free nature's veil. Bards lost a LOT of their spell options and lore bards lost early magical secrets and rogues lost out of turn damage and the uniqueness of their expertise.
Wow you really underestimate or downplay the power of rogue at certain lvls. While I’ll agree that non spellcasters will never have the versatility of spellcasters you downplay the rogues damage potential and utility a lot. Level 1 Rogues have sneak attack every combat no resource use. Rangers have hunters mark from favored enemy, bonus action to use and cost a spell slot. Honestly think favored enemy is going to move to second level. I’m not going to waste my time comparing them to the Bard that’s the same as comparing them to a Wizard. Magic is really special in the game until you run out of spell slots. Most DMs don’t push their players to run out of spell slots so no point doing this comparison.
Rogue 2 you admit Cunning action is big.
Rogue 3 Thief is easily the weakest rogue subclass. And I agree interact with object needs to be a part of fast hands. Arcane trickster would be better than Ranger at this level. Thief could be better depending on play styles in combat. Especially if you have a day of repeated small combats.
Rogue 4 all the same
Rogue 5 keeps you in the fight. You downplay defensive abilities, but the rogue is really hard to put down because of these.
6th supreme sneak makes those hide checks easier and give you a higher DC to be found. Arcane trickster 6th is great if they don’t change when the bring it down.
7th Rouge sneak attack damage is stating to outpace a lot of people with extra attack. Hunters mark is keeping Ranger in the mix but he is spending spell slots on that. Also rangers extra movement on land is still slower than you with a cunning action and if you are the thief you have had a climb speed for 4 levels already. 8 feats
9th rogue gets evasion. So many dex saves in this game and rogues laugh at them. Rogues are behind Bards because they are full casters. They are on par with Rangers still in combat and only behind in utility because of spells. The Ranger will have to be selective of whether to use his spells for utility or save them for hunters mark.
10 additional feat rogue is better than Ranger if you make the right choice here.
11 reliable talent the rogue is outpacing everyone’s expertise.
12 feats
13 you really downplayed this but it’s big. Crits on sneak attack are usually huge. Rogues will almost always have advantage when they get sneak attack now.
14 and above is almost all defensive because Rogues just need to live and they will do big damage. Gain proficiency in two saves is big, no advantage against the rogue is also strong. Sneak attack alone is strong offensive ability, and reliable talent gives you the best skill checks in the game. The only thing rogue is missing is magic. No matter how many skills or features you give a non spellcaster they will never have the versatility of a spell caster.
I specifically avoided talking about subclasses because your subclass will change. you may have noticed when reading there that I glossed over the subclasses every time they came up and just treated them as the same. So all of your points on thief are irrelevant to THAT post. Not to your overall point. If rogues consistently have some of the best subclasses than it could solve a lot of my issues.
Next, damage is NOT as high as you think it is, and up until level 9, I am actually ok with the defensive abilities I just wish they would get SOMETHING else in addition to it. Damage is ok, but people have already done the math to show, of all the classes rogue just doesn't keep up.
Lets take two weapon fighting rogue vs two weapon fighting ranger for an example at, lets say level 9. Rogue has 5d6 sneak attack dice at this point, 2d6 from each of the short swords and probably a +5 from their dex. This means 7d6+5 or an average of 29.5 damage and adjust for to hit chance, Which thankfully the rogue only needs to hit once to get at least 21 point of that damage so rogue is looking at an average of around 25 damagish per round. Vs ranger also two weapon fighting with hunters mark.... 6d6+15 or 46 points of damage x chance to hit, but they get 3 chances to hit instead of 2 with a 60% to hit, the ranger is looking at an average of around 27 per round. So no, I am not really underestimating their damage at all.
Versatility wise. at level 7 Rogues have more expertise, Rangers have spells, at 9 rangers have both the spells AND the expertise.... at 11 Rogues catch up again with reliable talent. I can not express how much I LOVE reliable talent. It is THE rogue feature. My only thing is I wish they something besides survival to add to their utility after level 2 and before level 11, besides simple expertise.
Because sure they have a lot of things to add to their survival, but rangers are wearing medium armor, shields if they want and have d10 for health + spells. The rogue's survival stuff is just kind of catching up. I think rogue is SUPER CLOSE to being good.
Also if we have to immediately throw out full casters as a comparison, that is a problem. We shouldn't have to do that. Casters get spells, non-casters and half casters get features. Those features should compete with spells, and in early levels they do.
Why would you shoot on first seeing part of their body rather than on when you actually have a good shot? But normal sneak attacks are not limited in effect by anything less than full cover, merely in accuracy.
Because you wouldn't know if you would get to see their full body, nor for how long you might see it - a brief glimpse of their whole body as they dodge from one source of cover to another would not give you time to perfectly line up a shot for sneak attack.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
Nowhere in the cover rules does it assign disadvantage to shooting targets who are under partial cover. People are always dodging about. Dodging in and of itself is reflected in dexterity mods and the dodging action gives an AC boost.
If they are completely hidden and not spotted, then they there would be disadvantage targeting them, but if they are completely hidden they wouldn't trigger a readied action, either.
Dodging action doesn't provide an AC boost, it gives disadvantage on attack, but yes cover only provides a bonus to AC and Dex saves not disadvantage.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
I may have missed something, you would not get sneak attack with a readied action when they moved from behind cover unless you had an ally within 5 feet or had advantage somehow.
If you shoot on your turn you can use steady aim which would enable sneak attack against an enemy with partial cover.
Move behind cover, bonus action hide then main action you use to ready an attack action outside your turn. Hide is another source of advantage for rogues.
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round
You seem to have lost me here. How does a hasted action give you an extra sneak attack? Sneak attack works once be turn and a haste doesn't grant you an extra turn. All haste does is grant you an extra action on each of your turns while the spell is active with a few other bonuses so you still only get one sneak attack on your turn.
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round
You seem to have lost me here. How does a hasted action give you an extra sneak attack? Sneak attack works once be turn and a haste doesn't grant you an extra turn. All haste does is grant you an extra action on each of your turns while the spell is active with a few other bonuses so you still only get one sneak attack on your turn.
Sneak attack on your turn when you attack. Take the ready action to use your reaction to sneak attack again outside of your turn. This is all about using the reaction on someone elses turn to get sneak attack. Old sneak attack said once per turn, by doing it on your turn and once on another turn you could do it twice. Any trick that allowed you to do so would work. AoO, Order clerics, Battle Master fighters. Getting an extra action on your turn that you could spend on the ready action.... so on and so forth.
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round
You seem to have lost me here. How does a hasted action give you an extra sneak attack? Sneak attack works once be turn and a haste doesn't grant you an extra turn. All haste does is grant you an extra action on each of your turns while the spell is active with a few other bonuses so you still only get one sneak attack on your turn.
Sneak attack on your turn when you attack. Take the ready action to use your reaction to sneak attack again outside of your turn. This is all about using the reaction on someone elses turn to get sneak attack. Old sneak attack said once per turn, by doing it on your turn and once on another turn you could do it twice. Any trick that allowed you to do so would work. AoO, Order clerics, Battle Master fighters. Getting an extra action on your turn that you could spend on the ready action.... so on and so forth.
So make it once per round and we’re good
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
To take a step back from specifics for a moment, does anyone else worry a little about overall "character inflation" with the new class rules?
Many more Feats that give stat bonuses, what feels like pretty big advances in Ranger abilities, and a lot of levels of things moved earlier to make way for even *bigger* things like Epic Boons at Level 20, especially if any of the *previous* rules will still be applicable in the new system?
Yes, some Feats have been restricted to "Warrior Group" only, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me as far as flexibility in character creation (why couldn't I be a Expert and take Two Weapon Fighting?), but again, since we haven't seen all the Feats, I see more than inflate characters than *balance* them.
I've already seen some pretty devastating Ranger combo suggestions taking the new rules and adding Magic Initiative as a starting Feat and I makes me wonder if it's already too much power creep. If Rogue really is a class with super high satisfaction levels, seems like *not changing them* might be wise, but balancing some of the classes people aren't satisfied with to be on par would be good.
Personally I was hoping for more 1) balance , 2) flexibility to customize characters, and 3) some suggestions for rules for holes in the system (like crafting or gambling).
There's *no way* you'll be able to use 5e characters with the new ones; they'll be sunk. "Compatibility" is going to be "Yeah you can use old modules, but players are going to have a lot easier time with opponents if you don't fix them.
I guess I'm still concerned with the more foundational aspects underneath all of this.
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round
You seem to have lost me here. How does a hasted action give you an extra sneak attack? Sneak attack works once be turn and a haste doesn't grant you an extra turn. All haste does is grant you an extra action on each of your turns while the spell is active with a few other bonuses so you still only get one sneak attack on your turn.
Sneak attack on your turn when you attack. Take the ready action to use your reaction to sneak attack again outside of your turn. This is all about using the reaction on someone elses turn to get sneak attack. Old sneak attack said once per turn, by doing it on your turn and once on another turn you could do it twice. Any trick that allowed you to do so would work. AoO, Order clerics, Battle Master fighters. Getting an extra action on your turn that you could spend on the ready action.... so on and so forth.
Ok so you use your main action to ready an action, and use your hasted action to attack. You still run the chance to miss so a chance to sneak attack twice a turn. I don't think that the hasted action would give you bonus action off hand attack due to the wording but yeah I can see that. Still run the risk of the caster losing concentration and leaving your paralyzed for a round. It is not like it is a solvable issue and not really abusive.
To take a step back from specifics for a moment, does anyone else worry a little about overall "character inflation" with the new class rules?
Many more Feats that give stat bonuses, what feels like pretty big advances in Ranger abilities, and a lot of levels of things moved earlier to make way for even *bigger* things like Epic Boons at Level 20, especially if any of the *previous* rules will still be applicable in the new system?
Yes, some Feats have been restricted to "Warrior Group" only, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me as far as flexibility in character creation (why couldn't I be a Expert and take Two Weapon Fighting?), but again, since we haven't seen all the Feats, I see more than inflate characters than *balance* them.
I've already seen some pretty devastating Ranger combo suggestions taking the new rules and adding Magic Initiative as a starting Feat and I makes me wonder if it's already too much power creep. If Rogue really is a class with super high satisfaction levels, seems like *not changing them* might be wise, but balancing some of the classes people aren't satisfied with to be on par would be good.
Personally I was hoping for more 1) balance , 2) flexibility to customize characters, and 3) some suggestions for rules for holes in the system (like crafting or gambling).
There's *no way* you'll be able to use 5e characters with the new ones; they'll be sunk. "Compatibility" is going to be "Yeah you can use old modules, but players are going to have a lot easier time with opponents if you don't fix them.
I guess I'm still concerned with the more foundational aspects underneath all of this.
What does everyone else think?
Rangers needed the buff compared to phb ranger. The feats restricted to warrior group were mostly fighting styles, which were already restricted to 3 classes anyway. But the power level is a legitimate concern, though maybe less extreme than you say.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round but I've never seen a character think that was a good use of both a 3rd level slot and their concentration. But hey for the sake of argument I'll go with it. That is broken. This fix doesn't just stop that, it also stops a huge range of non abusive uses of it. Standard AoO, geez let the exploit weakness class exploit the weakness they just opened. Readied actions, sure you can make some argument about not having enough time when a guy just comes through the door, I don't buy it but fine not enough time to line up a sneak attack in that instance. How about the rogue is watching a meeting on sniper over watch. He's drawn a bead on the wizard with a readied action of once he starts casting a spell, well damn I guess you just have to wait for normal initiative order and shoot him after he casts the spell, that is lame.
Sniper overwatch would be a situation of surprise, which 5e does not use readied actions for - it would give the rogue a whole turn before the wizard gets to act. We have yet to see how One D&D handles surprise, but the current One D&D sneak attack rules + current 5e Surprise mechanics would give you Sneak Attack to sniper someone.
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round but I've never seen a character think that was a good use of both a 3rd level slot and their concentration. But hey for the sake of argument I'll go with it. That is broken. This fix doesn't just stop that, it also stops a huge range of non abusive uses of it. Standard AoO, geez let the exploit weakness class exploit the weakness they just opened. Readied actions, sure you can make some argument about not having enough time when a guy just comes through the door, I don't buy it but fine not enough time to line up a sneak attack in that instance. How about the rogue is watching a meeting on sniper over watch. He's drawn a bead on the wizard with a readied action of once he starts casting a spell, well damn I guess you just have to wait for normal initiative order and shoot him after he casts the spell, that is lame.
Sniper overwatch would be a situation of surprise, which 5e does not use readied actions for - it would give the rogue a whole turn before the wizard gets to act. We have yet to see how One D&D handles surprise, but the current One D&D sneak attack rules + current 5e Surprise mechanics would give you Sneak Attack to sniper someone.
It would only give you sneak attack if you are hidden. Surprise itself won't give you sneak attack.
Lets take two weapon fighting rogue vs two weapon fighting ranger for an example at, lets say level 9. Rogue has 5d6 sneak attack dice at this point, 2d6 from each of the short swords and probably a +5 from their dex. This means 7d6+5 or an average of 29.5 damage and adjust for to hit chance, Which thankfully the rogue only needs to hit once to get at least 21 point of that damage so rogue is looking at an average of around 25 damagish per round. Vs ranger also two weapon fighting with hunters mark.... 6d6+15 or 46 points of damage x chance to hit, but they get 3 chances to hit instead of 2 with a 60% to hit, the ranger is looking at an average of around 27 per round. So no, I am not really underestimating their damage at all.
Rogue is not supposed to be the highest DPS class in the game! It is supposed to have lower DPS than damage-focused classes like Fighter or Barbarian, because it gets so much extra utility outside of combat - otherwise there would be 0 reason to play a Fighter since Rogue would be just as good or better at every aspect of the game. The problem is actually that Ranger is overtuned and in it's current iteration making Fighters largely obsolete except as a MC dip.
Because you wouldn't know if you would get to see their full body, nor for how long you might see it - a brief glimpse of their whole body as they dodge from one source of cover to another would not give you time to perfectly line up a shot for sneak attack.
Thank you. I’ve always seen it played and DMed it as I described, now I see what the RAW problem is. I expect I will continue to DM it that way as it makes more sense to me but at least I know it’s a homebrew change.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
If they are dodging from one source of cover to another you'd have disadvantage on attacking them as they are dodging which would negate sneak attacks. If they are just walking out from behind cover, in 5e you would and should get a sneak attack with a readied action.
But not in the new rules, which is exactly the main problem everyone’s been having
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Quest offer! Enter the deep dungeon here
Ctg’s blood is on the spam filter’s hands
Yeah I know and I have the same problem. I was just pointing out the elusive target potential exploit is already solved by the rules without needing any changes.
I'll even give the off turn sneak attack could be exploited and abused but honestly we never saw it. Sure haste could give them double sneak attacks a round but I've never seen a character think that was a good use of both a 3rd level slot and their concentration. But hey for the sake of argument I'll go with it. That is broken. This fix doesn't just stop that, it also stops a huge range of non abusive uses of it. Standard AoO, geez let the exploit weakness class exploit the weakness they just opened. Readied actions, sure you can make some argument about not having enough time when a guy just comes through the door, I don't buy it but fine not enough time to line up a sneak attack in that instance. How about the rogue is watching a meeting on sniper over watch. He's drawn a bead on the wizard with a readied action of once he starts casting a spell, well damn I guess you just have to wait for normal initiative order and shoot him after he casts the spell, that is lame.
As an aside that last one happens a lot in our more intrigue oriented campaigns, it happens against the players as well which brings my cold black DM heart so much joy.
I may have missed something, you would not get sneak attack with a readied action when they moved from behind cover unless you had an ally within 5 feet or had advantage somehow.
If you shoot on your turn you can use steady aim which would enable sneak attack against an enemy with partial cover.
Personally I think held actions should come back, it probably does work better that way.
So assumption on my part is you are hiding if doing this tactic. Hiding would normally grant advantage which gives the sneak attack, but if they are dodging there is no advantage so no sneak attack.
I specifically avoided talking about subclasses because your subclass will change. you may have noticed when reading there that I glossed over the subclasses every time they came up and just treated them as the same. So all of your points on thief are irrelevant to THAT post. Not to your overall point. If rogues consistently have some of the best subclasses than it could solve a lot of my issues.
Next, damage is NOT as high as you think it is, and up until level 9, I am actually ok with the defensive abilities I just wish they would get SOMETHING else in addition to it. Damage is ok, but people have already done the math to show, of all the classes rogue just doesn't keep up.
Lets take two weapon fighting rogue vs two weapon fighting ranger for an example at, lets say level 9. Rogue has 5d6 sneak attack dice at this point, 2d6 from each of the short swords and probably a +5 from their dex. This means 7d6+5 or an average of 29.5 damage and adjust for to hit chance, Which thankfully the rogue only needs to hit once to get at least 21 point of that damage so rogue is looking at an average of around 25 damagish per round.
Vs ranger also two weapon fighting with hunters mark.... 6d6+15 or 46 points of damage x chance to hit, but they get 3 chances to hit instead of 2 with a 60% to hit, the ranger is looking at an average of around 27 per round. So no, I am not really underestimating their damage at all.
Versatility wise. at level 7 Rogues have more expertise, Rangers have spells, at 9 rangers have both the spells AND the expertise.... at 11 Rogues catch up again with reliable talent. I can not express how much I LOVE reliable talent. It is THE rogue feature. My only thing is I wish they something besides survival to add to their utility after level 2 and before level 11, besides simple expertise.
Because sure they have a lot of things to add to their survival, but rangers are wearing medium armor, shields if they want and have d10 for health + spells. The rogue's survival stuff is just kind of catching up. I think rogue is SUPER CLOSE to being good.
Also if we have to immediately throw out full casters as a comparison, that is a problem. We shouldn't have to do that. Casters get spells, non-casters and half casters get features. Those features should compete with spells, and in early levels they do.
Dodging action doesn't provide an AC boost, it gives disadvantage on attack, but yes cover only provides a bonus to AC and Dex saves not disadvantage.
Move behind cover, bonus action hide then main action you use to ready an attack action outside your turn. Hide is another source of advantage for rogues.
You seem to have lost me here. How does a hasted action give you an extra sneak attack? Sneak attack works once be turn and a haste doesn't grant you an extra turn. All haste does is grant you an extra action on each of your turns while the spell is active with a few other bonuses so you still only get one sneak attack on your turn.
Sneak attack on your turn when you attack. Take the ready action to use your reaction to sneak attack again outside of your turn. This is all about using the reaction on someone elses turn to get sneak attack. Old sneak attack said once per turn, by doing it on your turn and once on another turn you could do it twice. Any trick that allowed you to do so would work. AoO, Order clerics, Battle Master fighters. Getting an extra action on your turn that you could spend on the ready action.... so on and so forth.
So make it once per round and we’re good
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Quest offer! Enter the deep dungeon here
Ctg’s blood is on the spam filter’s hands
To take a step back from specifics for a moment, does anyone else worry a little about overall "character inflation" with the new class rules?
Many more Feats that give stat bonuses, what feels like pretty big advances in Ranger abilities, and a lot of levels of things moved earlier to make way for even *bigger* things like Epic Boons at Level 20, especially if any of the *previous* rules will still be applicable in the new system?
Yes, some Feats have been restricted to "Warrior Group" only, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me as far as flexibility in character creation (why couldn't I be a Expert and take Two Weapon Fighting?), but again, since we haven't seen all the Feats, I see more than inflate characters than *balance* them.
I've already seen some pretty devastating Ranger combo suggestions taking the new rules and adding Magic Initiative as a starting Feat and I makes me wonder if it's already too much power creep. If Rogue really is a class with super high satisfaction levels, seems like *not changing them* might be wise, but balancing some of the classes people aren't satisfied with to be on par would be good.
Personally I was hoping for more 1) balance , 2) flexibility to customize characters, and 3) some suggestions for rules for holes in the system (like crafting or gambling).
There's *no way* you'll be able to use 5e characters with the new ones; they'll be sunk. "Compatibility" is going to be "Yeah you can use old modules, but players are going to have a lot easier time with opponents if you don't fix them.
I guess I'm still concerned with the more foundational aspects underneath all of this.
What does everyone else think?
Ok so you use your main action to ready an action, and use your hasted action to attack. You still run the chance to miss so a chance to sneak attack twice a turn. I don't think that the hasted action would give you bonus action off hand attack due to the wording but yeah I can see that. Still run the risk of the caster losing concentration and leaving your paralyzed for a round. It is not like it is a solvable issue and not really abusive.
Rangers needed the buff compared to phb ranger. The feats restricted to warrior group were mostly fighting styles, which were already restricted to 3 classes anyway. But the power level is a legitimate concern, though maybe less extreme than you say.
Royalty among the charge kingdom. All will fall before our glorious assault!
Quest offer! Enter the deep dungeon here
Ctg’s blood is on the spam filter’s hands
Sniper overwatch would be a situation of surprise, which 5e does not use readied actions for - it would give the rogue a whole turn before the wizard gets to act. We have yet to see how One D&D handles surprise, but the current One D&D sneak attack rules + current 5e Surprise mechanics would give you Sneak Attack to sniper someone.
It would only give you sneak attack if you are hidden. Surprise itself won't give you sneak attack.