I love that they're expanding on official codified actions you can take besides the ones we already have. Things like Study, Search, and Influence were stuff you could already do, but now there are more concrete, up-front rules to them.
I also like that they changed healing spells to abjuration. Makes it more in line with stuff like protection from poison and greater restoration that remove status effects, since healing spells "remove" damage, so to speak.
I like it’s there but a lot of those things don’t really happen during the action economy phase of the game, influence maybe does a bit more (I want to shout out to get the bad guys to surrender), but the way it is worded needs a lot of work, study, I can’t see when that would be a relevant “action” it tends to happen during the exploration aspects of the game. This then makes keen mind less impactful.
Search again, usually happens after the fight has occurred.
Optimizer land is very often filled with hidden assumptions that make their build look better than they really are. E.g. one if the most common is assuming an unrealistically low AC opponent. For instance One D&D's GWM is on par with current GWM if one doesn't have Adv and comparing to level scaled monster ACs.
But as for the posted numbers : they are all subclass-less for simplicity, they do not use Variant Human nor Racial Feats, nor account for critical hits, but they do include Action Surge and Fighting Styles. Almost no one plays with hyper optimized builds thus they are a poor measure of power in play, these represent the most obvious optimization that an experienced player is likely to take. I'd also point out that this argument is misleading as to the discussion of One D&D because the changes to GWM that are in parallel with the changes to rogue. The changes to GWM obliterate those supposedly 100 DPR PAM-GWM builds, hence even greater reason to block the 2 sneak atracks per round.
Optimizer land is very often filled with hidden assumptions that make their build look better than they really are.
100% they do, many obscene builds you can find in forums on youtube often have hidden issues or ignore problems with viability past a single given thing. Often focusing on the highest possible DPR that could maybe be achieved if you can line up literally every little thing correctly. Saw one the other day of the new ranger using Hunter's Mark AND Hex, which is horrible given that you need a bonus action to move both of those to new targets, so it's only really viable in group vs 1 target fights lasting 3+ rounds.
The “charisma problem” is both a player problem and a DM problem ( that I am guilty of as well). Players hold back allowing the highest charisma character to make rolls and the DM allows it. Think about a real version of the same types of encounter. In the real world in a short “meet and greet” that exact thing is what would occur with little real discussion and some platitudes from both sides. Later at a larger event the high charisma might well have a chance to talk to the king more in private but all team members would be interacting with courtiers and able to make their varied attempts to promote the party’s agenda making their own charisma checks. The problem is we ( as DMs) typically do only the first and not the second. Often we do the same type of thing with nature/camping checks and other checks to speed up the game and “keep the story flowing” the problem is compounded by the fact that we don’t always have the most charismatic/ nature experienced/etc player doing the one and done so it’s more difficult. It is further compounded by the fact that we as a DM may not be that good with the skills or background knowledge to make decisions about how to run things.
The other angle on this is that the tendency towards punitive/boring failure pushes players towards letting the person with the best odds make the roll. If the DM makes failure interesting, a way to introduce twists or insert excitement rather than shutting the players down, then it becomes much easier for players to have their characters do things they aren't the best at. I've played games (in other systems) where a failed roll drew grins and chuckles from around the table, including from the person who rolled it, because we all knew it was going to be fun (for us, if not for the character). D&D doesn't really support that, though. It doesn't prevent it, necessarily, but it doesn't do anything to help it.
Optimizer land is very often filled with hidden assumptions that make their build look better than they really are. E.g. one if the most common is assuming an unrealistically low AC opponent. For instance One D&D's GWM is on par with current GWM if one doesn't have Adv and comparing to level scaled monster ACs.
But as for the posted numbers : they are all subclass-less for simplicity, they do not use Variant Human nor Racial Feats, nor account for critical hits, but they do include Action Surge and Fighting Styles. Almost no one plays with hyper optimized builds thus they are a poor measure of power in play, these represent the most obvious optimization that an experienced player is likely to take. I'd also point out that this argument is misleading as to the discussion of One D&D because the changes to GWM that are in parallel with the changes to rogue. The changes to GWM obliterate those supposedly 100 DPR PAM-GWM builds, hence even greater reason to block the 2 sneak atracks per round.
Sure but you aren't even using advantage which builds like GWM are built upon. The reason people are willing to take the -5 is because they can consistently create advantage on those builds with something as simple as a 2 level dip in barbarian to more obnoxious darkness builds. Heck the fighting style blind fighting with a fog cloud spell works as well.
I have literally never seen numbers that bad in any GWM build with or without PAM, either at the table or in optimizer builds. Some of their more obscene builds may rely on crazy assumptions but a lot of their more normal builds match in play experience.
And funnily enough pulling off two sneak attacks every round is probably harder to pull off in play than many if nor most of the more weird builds relying on hidden assumptions.
It is further compounded by the fact that we as a DM may not be that good with the skills or background knowledge to make decisions about how to run things.
This IMO is the main issue, the DMG doesn't provide enough guidance to help DMs encourage PCs to use their different skills and expertise to complement each other. Whereas IMO the mechanics absolutely do support it. That the example of the party attending a party to pitch their idea to the king, there are many different skills that different characters could use to help with this: History/Intelligence - recalling the names, ranks, appropriate etiquette and forms of address. Insight/Wisdom - identifying those members of the court that have the king's ear or who are able to influence others around them, recognizing who seems the most sympathetic to the party's arguments. Persuasion/Charisma - making the party's case. Martial characters can always engage in games or sports to impress others - e.g. arm wrestling the king's bodyguard, or performing an archery stunt.
The "Influence" mechanics in One D&D are are step in the right direction, but I'd love to see more advice for non-combat encounters in the new DMG.
A lot of optimizer builds get around 100DPR end game.
Here's an 'optimizer' build for rogue that gets WAY more than 100 DPR end game.
Level 20 build: Arcane Trickster, assuming our DM allows Shadowblade + Booming Blade as Crawford says he would, and that thanks to our Disengage BB bonus damage triggers every round. We also have Adv either from a familiar or from dimlight/darkness with our Shadowblade, and we're facing an AC 10 enemy. We have one level of Genie warlock or hexblade, and we're an elf. We have the following feats/ASIs: +2 Dex, Elven Accuracy, Fighting Initiate (Dueling), Sentinel, Mage Slayer, Lucky Sneak Attack Dice: 20d6 Shadowblade: 3d8+5 + 2 BB Damage: 3d8+4d8 Genie Damage: +6 Chance to hit: 0.9998 without considering Lucky, so effectively 1, and 14 % chance to crit Critical hit DMG (Main Attack) = 20d6+3d8+3d8 = 97 Critical hit DMG (reaction attack) = 20d6+3d8 = 83.5
We have 3 ways to get an attack as a reaction by ourselves - mage casts a spell, enemy attacks someone other than us, AoO - (so let's assume 50% chance of getting a reaction): Main Action Attack = 3d8+5+2+6+20d6+3d8+4d8 (BB secondary) = 123.58+18 (BB secondary)= 141.58 Reaction attack = 102.19 Total DPR = 192.675
Now show me your optimizers PAM+GWM build that easily outshines this.
Sneak attack is 10d6, crawford allows it but the rule was clearly put in place just to stop that. And if you are going to cheese the arcane trickster at least use mirror image with sentinel as the other images would trigger the reaction attack.
And while you are being passive aggressive you can use that energy to google optimizers on youtube.
A lot of optimizer builds get around 100DPR end game.
Here's an 'optimizer' build for rogue that gets WAY more than 100 DPR end game.
Level 20 build: Arcane Trickster, assuming our DM allows Shadowblade + Booming Blade as Crawford says he would
Illegal.
, and that thanks to our Disengage BB bonus damage triggers every round.
Fundamentally not how BB works, but you're allowed to assume a target that always moves, provided you're explicit about this assumption. The "standard" assumption that the person you're replying to would have assumed is that your target remains stationary unless forced to move.
We also have Adv either from a familiar or from dimlight/darkness with our Shadowblade, and we're facing an AC 10 enemy.
AC 10 is not standard. You can assume anything you like, but the CR guidelines suggest AC 19, so that's the standard assumption for a level 20's target.
We have one level of Genie warlock or hexblade, and we're an elf. We have the following feats/ASIs: +2 Dex, Elven Accuracy, Fighting Initiate (Dueling), Sentinel, Mage Slayer, Lucky Sneak Attack Dice: 20d6
Illegal. Your Arcane Trickster 19/Warlock 1 has 10d6 Sneak Attack dice. Also worrying, because a Genielock and a Hexlock won't deal the same amount of damage.
Shadowblade: 3d8+5 + 2
I'm going to assume you assigned Elven Accuracy to Dex.
BB Damage: 3d8+4d8
You can't add these directly, as only one of these can crit, but we'll deal with that later.
Genie Damage: +6
Ok, so we're assuming Genie. That's fine.
Chance to hit: 0.9998 without considering Lucky, so effectively 1, and 14 % chance to crit
0.999875, actually, which would round to 0.9999 (the odds are so high because you assumed a bizarrely low AC). The chance to crit is 14.2625%, while I'm at it.
Critical hit DMG (Main Attack) = 20d6+3d8+3d8 = 97
This doesn't make any sense, so I'll just do correct math later all in one go.
Critical hit DMG (reaction attack) = 20d6+3d8 = 83.5
You said you were allowing reaction BB, but I'm glad to see you aren't, as it's illegal.
We have 3 ways to get an attack as a reaction by ourselves - mage casts a spell, enemy attacks someone other than us, AoO - (so let's assume 50% chance of getting a reaction):
This is fine but non-standard. It does mean that we have no basis for giving you superior builds as you have not fully explained your math on how many OAs we should be able to assume we get.
Main Action Attack = 3d8+5+2+6+20d6+3d8+4d8 (BB secondary) = 123.58+18 (BB secondary)= 141.58 Reaction attack = 102.19 Total DPR = 192.675
Now show me your optimizers PAM+GWM build that easily outshines this.
Total: 0.999875*(62+13+(48.5+7)/2)+0.14625*(62+48.5/2) = 115.0 (rounding to the nearest tenth of a damage point) = 115.04 (rounding to the nearest hundredth)
Beating 115 is absolutely trivial, but I'll need to know how to assume an OA coefficient in general in order to math out a competing build for you. The golden standard (which assumes no OAs) is Battle Master 11/Assassin 3/Ranger 3 with remaining levels depending on exact preferences and/or the nature of the white room in question, and the optimal race choices for it are generally considered to be half-elf or bugbear (in this case I would expect bugbear to win out, as you've chosen such a low target AC). If you're willing to assume darkness in melee as you seem to, this can be upgraded - the "standard" assumption is SS+CBE+Hand Crossbow, but if you're willing to shove the targets into melee in darkness, the same build can do PAM+GWM+Glaive for excellent effect.
I can do radically better with a level 17 Genie Warlock and prep time, but that's pretty unfair to practical analysis.
To demonstrate how trivial beating 115 is, a Human Battle Master (no multiclassing, just level 20) deals 199.78 damage to AC 10 with a hand crossbow on turn 1. Feats/ASIs are simply Dexterity 20, Sharpshooter, Crossbow Expert, and no fighting style upgrade, so damage would go up pretty substantially with PAM/GWM/Glaive (and GWF, but I'd need to math out both the PHB GWF and the SAC GWF in order to cover both possible DM decisions).
A lot of optimizer builds get around 100DPR end game.
Here's an 'optimizer' build for rogue that gets WAY more than 100 DPR end game.
Level 20 build: Arcane Trickster, assuming our DM allows Shadowblade + Booming Blade as Crawford says he would, and that thanks to our Disengage BB bonus damage triggers every round. We also have Adv either from a familiar or from dimlight/darkness with our Shadowblade, and we're facing an AC 10 enemy. We have one level of Genie warlock or hexblade, and we're an elf. We have the following feats/ASIs: +2 Dex, Elven Accuracy, Fighting Initiate (Dueling), Sentinel, Mage Slayer, Lucky Sneak Attack Dice: 20d6 Shadowblade: 3d8+5 + 2 BB Damage: 3d8+4d8 Genie Damage: +6 Chance to hit: 0.9998 without considering Lucky, so effectively 1, and 14 % chance to crit Critical hit DMG (Main Attack) = 20d6+3d8+3d8 = 97 Critical hit DMG (reaction attack) = 20d6+3d8 = 83.5
We have 3 ways to get an attack as a reaction by ourselves - mage casts a spell, enemy attacks someone other than us, AoO - (so let's assume 50% chance of getting a reaction): Main Action Attack = 3d8+5+2+6+20d6+3d8+4d8 (BB secondary) = 123.58+18 (BB secondary)= 141.58 Reaction attack = 102.19 Total DPR = 192.675
Now show me your optimizers PAM+GWM build that easily outshines this.
1. How do you get 20d6 sneak attack dice? A19th level Rogue does 10d6.
2. There are no relevant AC10 enemies you are going to be facing at 20th level. You need to calculate this with AC22 or so.
3. If you disengage and move away from the enemy you will not be standing next to him to make a reaction attack, so the booming blade damage won't hardly ever trigger. Even if you did disengage it is not a sure thing.
4. You mention sentinel but to use this you need to be a Rogue standing in melee range with a CR25 or so enemy. The only other ally the BBEG is going to attack is potentially your familiar (and there is a non-zero chance your familiar is going to die just from being that close to the kind of enemies you will be facing). Other than that he will never attack anyone else.
5. You are going to run out of 2nd level spells quickly since there is almost no chance you are going to hang on to concentration for shadowblade more than one round.
6. You can not use shadowblade with booming blade since the rules change with Tasha's came out. With your Warlock level you can go with Hex though which is going to do just about as much damage.
Level 20 build: Arcane Trickster, assuming our DM allows Shadowblade + Booming Blade as Crawford says he would, and that thanks to our Disengage BB bonus damage triggers every round.
... We have 3 ways to get an attack as a reaction by ourselves - mage casts a spell, enemy attacks someone other than us, AoO - (so let's assume 50% chance of getting a reaction):
Erm, are you disengaging for Booming Blade or going for the Opportunity attacks? you'd need to be in 5 foot for that, you can't have both every round (can't have your cake AND eat it). I think that is also where you drew 20d6 from, because you're assuming 2 separate sneak attacks. Let us consider the following fighter,
High Elf (taking any cantrip), using Tasha's and standard array, STR 15+2, DEX 13, CON 14+1, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8
you pick up the following ASIs, +1 STR +1CON, +2 STR, PAM, Sentinel, Magic Initiate (Hex + 2 cantrips), GWM, Elven Accuracy (+1 DEX).
Fighting styles are Great Weapon Fighting and Protection
You take the Champion Fighter archetype
you equip a halbard, 1st attack you shove the creature prone, it is now advantage, so you get elven accuracy for a 38.59% chance to critical on your next 4 attacks.
Assuming an AC of 19 (this is more normal for a CR of 20), +11 to hit.
Chance to hit without GWM: 95.71%, Chance to hit with GWM: 78.4%
~89.39 + ~11.39 + ~112.62 (has all attacks since target still prone) = ~213.4 And this is properly adjusted for AC, unlike the 10 you chose, which even at CR 1 would be LOW, let alone CR20.
There are many weaknesses in that thief build and some bad assumptions, shadow blade is concentration so if the creature straight charges you, you've probably lost that shadow blade if it attacks you directly and you only have 4 casts of shadow blade for the whole day, compared to fighter's twice per short rest action surge at level 20. And if somebody else in the party did something to give you advantage you could be pushing ~248.47 damage. The shove example, if you fail the shove (you have +11 to athletics tho with proficiency), you wait til next round and try to shove again. Admittedly the hex is also only once per day in this build, and also concentration tho with this build you're more likely to be holding off some creatures from ever being able to attack you due to PAM+Sentinel BS.
I'd say this Champion Fighter build beats it, and this isn't even the most optimized way to go about it, and let's not even get into magic weapons, cas a +3 Halberd would add significant amounts of damage to this. Shadow Blade meanwhile will always be a +0 to attack rolls.
COunterpoint to all of the above: not one single soul cares about the Optimancer White Room Math for level 20 builds against AC10 enemies. That will never happen in a real game. It's not even worth discussing. Stahppit.
Entangle causes Restrained which does cause flying creatures to fall in the UA. This is distinct from Grappled. Flying creatures aren't required to move to stay aloft in either 5e or One.
"Flying creatures enjoy many benefits of mobility, but they must also deal with the danger of falling. If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell".
In fact, a grappled creature in 5e has its speed reduced to 0, and thus grappling a flying creature causes it to fall. This line about prone and 0 speed has been removed in 1DnD playtest. On one hand, you can no longer cause a large gryphon to fall from the sky by latching onto it, but at the same time, a tiny sprite that you grab by the foot is still technically flying.
Entangle causes Restrained which does cause flying creatures to fall in the UA. This is distinct from Grappled. Flying creatures aren't required to move to stay aloft in either 5e or One.
"Flying creatures enjoy many benefits of mobility, but they must also deal with the danger of falling. If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell".
In fact, a grappled creature in 5e has its speed reduced to 0, and thus grappling a flying creature causes it to fall. This line about prone and 0 speed has been removed in 1DnD playtest. On one hand, you can no longer cause a large gryphon to fall from the sky by latching onto it, but at the same time, a tiny sprite that you grab by the foot is still technically flying.
The entangle spell " ...... sprout from the groundin a 20-foot square starting from a point within range."
They can not be affected by entangle unless they are flying very low (less than 20-foot).
I'd be interested to see some numbers on that. In my experience, even a Rogue guaranteed to get two shots at Sneak Attack per round with BB/GFB on both due to warcaster might be very hard pressed to keep up with the best GWM/PAM builds. And even then the comparison is not particularly fair, because the GWM/PAM builds can pretty much generate all of their damage on their own with little risk of a dip due to circumstances, while a Rogue counting on a reaction Sneak Attack is certainly counting on some combination of either luck or assistance from their teammates.
Level 20 build: Arcane Trickster, assuming our DM allows Shadowblade + Booming Blade as Crawford says he would, and that thanks to our Disengage BB bonus damage triggers every round.
... We have 3 ways to get an attack as a reaction by ourselves - mage casts a spell, enemy attacks someone other than us, AoO - (so let's assume 50% chance of getting a reaction):
Erm, are you disengaging for Booming Blade or going for the Opportunity attacks? you'd need to be in 5 foot for that, you can't have both every round (can't have your cake AND eat it). I think that is also where you drew 20d6 from, because you're assuming 2 separate sneak attacks. Let us consider the following fighter,
High Elf (taking any cantrip), using Tasha's and standard array, STR 15+2, DEX 13, CON 14+1, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8
you pick up the following ASIs, +1 STR +1CON, +2 STR, PAM, Sentinel, Magic Initiate (Hex + 2 cantrips), GWM, Elven Accuracy (+1 DEX).
Fighting styles are Great Weapon Fighting and Protection
You take the Champion Fighter archetype
you equip a halbard, 1st attack you shove the creature prone, it is now advantage, so you get elven accuracy for a 38.59% chance to critical on your next 4 attacks.
Assuming an AC of 19 (this is more normal for a CR of 20), +11 to hit.
Chance to hit without GWM: 95.71%, Chance to hit with GWM: 78.4%
~89.39 + ~11.39 + ~112.62 (has all attacks since target still prone) = ~213.4 And this is properly adjusted for AC, unlike the 10 you chose, which even at CR 1 would be LOW, let alone CR20.
There are many weaknesses in that thief build and some bad assumptions, shadow blade is concentration so if the creature straight charges you, you've probably lost that shadow blade if it attacks you directly and you only have 4 casts of shadow blade for the whole day, compared to fighter's twice per short rest action surge at level 20. And if somebody else in the party did something to give you advantage you could be pushing ~248.47 damage. The shove example, if you fail the shove (you have +11 to athletics tho with proficiency), you wait til next round and try to shove again. Admittedly the hex is also only once per day in this build, and also concentration tho with this build you're more likely to be holding off some creatures from ever being able to attack you due to PAM+Sentinel BS.
I'd say this Champion Fighter build beats it, and this isn't even the most optimized way to go about it, and let's not even get into magic weapons, cas a +3 Halberd would add significant amounts of damage to this. Shadow Blade meanwhile will always be a +0 to attack rolls.
I do need to note that attacking at 10 feet with a halberd against a prone enemy will be at disadvantage. Also your chance to shove an enemy prone at level 20 is not great unless you have expertise or advantage on the shove and many enemies will be immune.
I think this build/strategy would be better with Tavern Brawler, unarmed fighting style a maul and Rune Knight (allowing a bonus action shove with advantage after a 1d8 attack at advantage and being able to do it against huge creatures).
Level 20 build: Arcane Trickster, assuming our DM allows Shadowblade + Booming Blade as Crawford says he would, and that thanks to our Disengage BB bonus damage triggers every round.
... We have 3 ways to get an attack as a reaction by ourselves - mage casts a spell, enemy attacks someone other than us, AoO - (so let's assume 50% chance of getting a reaction):
Erm, are you disengaging for Booming Blade or going for the Opportunity attacks? you'd need to be in 5 foot for that, you can't have both every round (can't have your cake AND eat it). I think that is also where you drew 20d6 from, because you're assuming 2 separate sneak attacks. Let us consider the following fighter,
High Elf (taking any cantrip), using Tasha's and standard array, STR 15+2, DEX 13, CON 14+1, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8
you pick up the following ASIs, +1 STR +1CON, +2 STR, PAM, Sentinel, Magic Initiate (Hex + 2 cantrips), GWM, Elven Accuracy (+1 DEX).
Fighting styles are Great Weapon Fighting and Protection
You take the Champion Fighter archetype
you equip a halbard, 1st attack you shove the creature prone, it is now advantage, so you get elven accuracy for a 38.59% chance to critical on your next 4 attacks.
Assuming an AC of 19 (this is more normal for a CR of 20), +11 to hit.
Chance to hit without GWM: 95.71%, Chance to hit with GWM: 78.4%
~89.39 + ~11.39 + ~112.62 (has all attacks since target still prone) = ~213.4 And this is properly adjusted for AC, unlike the 10 you chose, which even at CR 1 would be LOW, let alone CR20.
There are many weaknesses in that thief build and some bad assumptions, shadow blade is concentration so if the creature straight charges you, you've probably lost that shadow blade if it attacks you directly and you only have 4 casts of shadow blade for the whole day, compared to fighter's twice per short rest action surge at level 20. And if somebody else in the party did something to give you advantage you could be pushing ~248.47 damage. The shove example, if you fail the shove (you have +11 to athletics tho with proficiency), you wait til next round and try to shove again. Admittedly the hex is also only once per day in this build, and also concentration tho with this build you're more likely to be holding off some creatures from ever being able to attack you due to PAM+Sentinel BS.
I'd say this Champion Fighter build beats it, and this isn't even the most optimized way to go about it, and let's not even get into magic weapons, cas a +3 Halberd would add significant amounts of damage to this. Shadow Blade meanwhile will always be a +0 to attack rolls.
I do need to note that attacking at 10 feet with a halberd against a prone enemy will be at disadvantage. Also your chance to shove an enemy prone at level 20 is not great unless you have expertise or advantage on the shove and many enemies will be immune.
I think this build/strategy would be better with Tavern Brawler, unarmed fighting style a maul and Rune Knight (allowing a bonus action shove with advantage after a 1d8 attack at advantage and being able to do it against huge creatures).
Why are you attacking an enemy at 10 foot when they are prone? you don't NEED to be at 10 foot to attack, you can still attack at 5 foot, the only time you need to be at 10 foot is for the Reactionary Opportunity Attack, since that is when they enter range, else wise all reach weapons can target any creature within reach.
I knew shove was a weakness in this, I only used it as an example of how to get advantage but there are actually better ways and more worth working with party around how to achieve it, since shoving might mess up your ranged allies, for example. So a caster with Faerie Fire or Greater Invisibility would be a better choice, however optimized builds usually ignore the whole "party" aspect despite builds working with party almost always being superior.
You do realize they changed the wording on sneak attack which requires the "attack action." Booming blade is a spell action amd wouldn't apply sneak as worded 😬
You do realize they changed the wording on sneak attack which requires the "attack action." Booming blade is a spell action amd wouldn't apply sneak as worded 😬
Yes, we know, but most Rogues didn’t use them off-turn Sneak Attacks anyways, so it’s not that big of a nerf. Also, some people exploited Sneak Attack to get more uses out of it, and they with that exploit unavailable, WotC can buff Rogues without buffing those already powerful min-maxed multi-round Sneak Attackers too. Overall, I think this change is a good one.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
No one enjoys being useless. The only thing that rogues excel at in this UA is expertise with thieves tools, which artificers may still get. Other than being worse off than before, where is the draw to being a rogue? You can't even be smart and hold an action because those normally activate off turn. I have never seen a legit rogue outside of homebrew break an encounter.
Overall martials lost most of that which allowed them to compete with casters in the expert UA. We still need to see the other classes to see how they compare overall but SS and GWM are just bad now and just swinging a weapon for little damage is a far cry to what a caster can do in all pillars of play.
On a side note, did they adjust player crits from just weapon damage or is that still a thing? If it was changed where should I be looking for that?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I like it’s there but a lot of those things don’t really happen during the action economy phase of the game, influence maybe does a bit more (I want to shout out to get the bad guys to surrender), but the way it is worded needs a lot of work, study, I can’t see when that would be a relevant “action” it tends to happen during the exploration aspects of the game. This then makes keen mind less impactful.
Search again, usually happens after the fight has occurred.
Optimizer land is very often filled with hidden assumptions that make their build look better than they really are. E.g. one if the most common is assuming an unrealistically low AC opponent. For instance One D&D's GWM is on par with current GWM if one doesn't have Adv and comparing to level scaled monster ACs.
But as for the posted numbers : they are all subclass-less for simplicity, they do not use Variant Human nor Racial Feats, nor account for critical hits, but they do include Action Surge and Fighting Styles. Almost no one plays with hyper optimized builds thus they are a poor measure of power in play, these represent the most obvious optimization that an experienced player is likely to take. I'd also point out that this argument is misleading as to the discussion of One D&D because the changes to GWM that are in parallel with the changes to rogue. The changes to GWM obliterate those supposedly 100 DPR PAM-GWM builds, hence even greater reason to block the 2 sneak atracks per round.
100% they do, many obscene builds you can find in forums on youtube often have hidden issues or ignore problems with viability past a single given thing. Often focusing on the highest possible DPR that could maybe be achieved if you can line up literally every little thing correctly. Saw one the other day of the new ranger using Hunter's Mark AND Hex, which is horrible given that you need a bonus action to move both of those to new targets, so it's only really viable in group vs 1 target fights lasting 3+ rounds.
The other angle on this is that the tendency towards punitive/boring failure pushes players towards letting the person with the best odds make the roll. If the DM makes failure interesting, a way to introduce twists or insert excitement rather than shutting the players down, then it becomes much easier for players to have their characters do things they aren't the best at. I've played games (in other systems) where a failed roll drew grins and chuckles from around the table, including from the person who rolled it, because we all knew it was going to be fun (for us, if not for the character). D&D doesn't really support that, though. It doesn't prevent it, necessarily, but it doesn't do anything to help it.
Sure but you aren't even using advantage which builds like GWM are built upon. The reason people are willing to take the -5 is because they can consistently create advantage on those builds with something as simple as a 2 level dip in barbarian to more obnoxious darkness builds. Heck the fighting style blind fighting with a fog cloud spell works as well.
I have literally never seen numbers that bad in any GWM build with or without PAM, either at the table or in optimizer builds. Some of their more obscene builds may rely on crazy assumptions but a lot of their more normal builds match in play experience.
And funnily enough pulling off two sneak attacks every round is probably harder to pull off in play than many if nor most of the more weird builds relying on hidden assumptions.
This IMO is the main issue, the DMG doesn't provide enough guidance to help DMs encourage PCs to use their different skills and expertise to complement each other. Whereas IMO the mechanics absolutely do support it. That the example of the party attending a party to pitch their idea to the king, there are many different skills that different characters could use to help with this:
History/Intelligence - recalling the names, ranks, appropriate etiquette and forms of address.
Insight/Wisdom - identifying those members of the court that have the king's ear or who are able to influence others around them, recognizing who seems the most sympathetic to the party's arguments.
Persuasion/Charisma - making the party's case.
Martial characters can always engage in games or sports to impress others - e.g. arm wrestling the king's bodyguard, or performing an archery stunt.
The "Influence" mechanics in One D&D are are step in the right direction, but I'd love to see more advice for non-combat encounters in the new DMG.
Here's an 'optimizer' build for rogue that gets WAY more than 100 DPR end game.
Level 20 build: Arcane Trickster, assuming our DM allows Shadowblade + Booming Blade as Crawford says he would, and that thanks to our Disengage BB bonus damage triggers every round. We also have Adv either from a familiar or from dimlight/darkness with our Shadowblade, and we're facing an AC 10 enemy. We have one level of Genie warlock or hexblade, and we're an elf. We have the following feats/ASIs: +2 Dex, Elven Accuracy, Fighting Initiate (Dueling), Sentinel, Mage Slayer, Lucky
Sneak Attack Dice: 20d6
Shadowblade: 3d8+5 + 2
BB Damage: 3d8+4d8
Genie Damage: +6
Chance to hit: 0.9998 without considering Lucky, so effectively 1, and 14 % chance to crit
Critical hit DMG (Main Attack) = 20d6+3d8+3d8 = 97
Critical hit DMG (reaction attack) = 20d6+3d8 = 83.5
We have 3 ways to get an attack as a reaction by ourselves - mage casts a spell, enemy attacks someone other than us, AoO - (so let's assume 50% chance of getting a reaction):
Main Action Attack = 3d8+5+2+6+20d6+3d8+4d8 (BB secondary) = 123.58+18 (BB secondary)= 141.58
Reaction attack = 102.19
Total DPR = 192.675
Now show me your optimizers PAM+GWM build that easily outshines this.
Sneak attack is 10d6, crawford allows it but the rule was clearly put in place just to stop that. And if you are going to cheese the arcane trickster at least use mirror image with sentinel as the other images would trigger the reaction attack.
And while you are being passive aggressive you can use that energy to google optimizers on youtube.
Illegal.
Fundamentally not how BB works, but you're allowed to assume a target that always moves, provided you're explicit about this assumption. The "standard" assumption that the person you're replying to would have assumed is that your target remains stationary unless forced to move.
AC 10 is not standard. You can assume anything you like, but the CR guidelines suggest AC 19, so that's the standard assumption for a level 20's target.
Illegal. Your Arcane Trickster 19/Warlock 1 has 10d6 Sneak Attack dice. Also worrying, because a Genielock and a Hexlock won't deal the same amount of damage.
I'm going to assume you assigned Elven Accuracy to Dex.
You can't add these directly, as only one of these can crit, but we'll deal with that later.
Ok, so we're assuming Genie. That's fine.
0.999875, actually, which would round to 0.9999 (the odds are so high because you assumed a bizarrely low AC). The chance to crit is 14.2625%, while I'm at it.
This doesn't make any sense, so I'll just do correct math later all in one go.
You said you were allowing reaction BB, but I'm glad to see you aren't, as it's illegal.
This is fine but non-standard. It does mean that we have no basis for giving you superior builds as you have not fully explained your math on how many OAs we should be able to assume we get.
Correct math is:
Crittable damage, action attack: 10d6 (sneak) + 3d8 (shadow blade) + 3d8 (booming blade) = 62
Non-crittable damage, action attack: 5 (dexterity) + 2 (dueling) + 6 (genie) = 13
Crittable damage, reaction attack: 10d6 (sneak) + 3d8 (shadow blade) = 48.5
Non-crittable damage, reaction attack: 5 (dexterity) + 2 (dueling) = 7
Total: 0.999875*(62+13+(48.5+7)/2)+0.14625*(62+48.5/2) = 115.0 (rounding to the nearest tenth of a damage point) = 115.04 (rounding to the nearest hundredth)
Beating 115 is absolutely trivial, but I'll need to know how to assume an OA coefficient in general in order to math out a competing build for you. The golden standard (which assumes no OAs) is Battle Master 11/Assassin 3/Ranger 3 with remaining levels depending on exact preferences and/or the nature of the white room in question, and the optimal race choices for it are generally considered to be half-elf or bugbear (in this case I would expect bugbear to win out, as you've chosen such a low target AC). If you're willing to assume darkness in melee as you seem to, this can be upgraded - the "standard" assumption is SS+CBE+Hand Crossbow, but if you're willing to shove the targets into melee in darkness, the same build can do PAM+GWM+Glaive for excellent effect.
I can do radically better with a level 17 Genie Warlock and prep time, but that's pretty unfair to practical analysis.
To demonstrate how trivial beating 115 is, a Human Battle Master (no multiclassing, just level 20) deals 199.78 damage to AC 10 with a hand crossbow on turn 1. Feats/ASIs are simply Dexterity 20, Sharpshooter, Crossbow Expert, and no fighting style upgrade, so damage would go up pretty substantially with PAM/GWM/Glaive (and GWF, but I'd need to math out both the PHB GWF and the SAC GWF in order to cover both possible DM decisions).
1. How do you get 20d6 sneak attack dice? A19th level Rogue does 10d6.
2. There are no relevant AC10 enemies you are going to be facing at 20th level. You need to calculate this with AC22 or so.
3. If you disengage and move away from the enemy you will not be standing next to him to make a reaction attack, so the booming blade damage won't hardly ever trigger. Even if you did disengage it is not a sure thing.
4. You mention sentinel but to use this you need to be a Rogue standing in melee range with a CR25 or so enemy. The only other ally the BBEG is going to attack is potentially your familiar (and there is a non-zero chance your familiar is going to die just from being that close to the kind of enemies you will be facing). Other than that he will never attack anyone else.
5. You are going to run out of 2nd level spells quickly since there is almost no chance you are going to hang on to concentration for shadowblade more than one round.
6. You can not use shadowblade with booming blade since the rules change with Tasha's came out. With your Warlock level you can go with Hex though which is going to do just about as much damage.
Erm, are you disengaging for Booming Blade or going for the Opportunity attacks? you'd need to be in 5 foot for that, you can't have both every round (can't have your cake AND eat it). I think that is also where you drew 20d6 from, because you're assuming 2 separate sneak attacks. Let us consider the following fighter,
High Elf (taking any cantrip), using Tasha's and standard array, STR 15+2, DEX 13, CON 14+1, INT 10, WIS 12, CHA 8
you pick up the following ASIs, +1 STR +1CON, +2 STR, PAM, Sentinel, Magic Initiate (Hex + 2 cantrips), GWM, Elven Accuracy (+1 DEX).
Fighting styles are Great Weapon Fighting and Protection
You take the Champion Fighter archetype
you equip a halbard, 1st attack you shove the creature prone, it is now advantage, so you get elven accuracy for a 38.59% chance to critical on your next 4 attacks.
Assuming an AC of 19 (this is more normal for a CR of 20), +11 to hit.
Chance to hit without GWM: 95.71%, Chance to hit with GWM: 78.4%
Damage with GWM: (((2d8+4)*.8+2d10*.2)+15+2d6) * 38.59% * 3 + (((2d2+4)*.8+2d4*.2)+15+2d6) * 38.59% + (((1d8+2)*.8+1d10*.2)+15+1d6) * 39.81% * 3 + ((1d2+2)*.8+1d4*.2)+15+1d6) * 39.81% = ~89.39
Damage without GWM: (((2d8+4)*.8+2d10*.2)+5+2d6) * 38.59% * 3 + (((2d2+4)*.8+2d4*.2)+5+2d6) * 38.59% + (((1d8+2)*.8+1d10*.2)+5+1d6) * 57.12% * 3 + ((1d2+2)*.8+1d4*.2)+5+1d6) * 57.12% = ~67.76
On top of this you could potentially get that extra PAM reaction, which thanks to sentinel also reduces the creature to 0 speed.
Assuming no advantage with GWM: ((2d8+4)*.8+2d10*.2)+15+2d6)*.15 + ((1d8+2)*.8+1d10*.2)+15+1d6)* .25 = ~11.39
without: ((2d8+4)*.8+2d10*.2)+5+2d6)*.15 + ((1d8+2)*.8+1d10*.2)+5+1d6)* .5 = ~11.09
now let's drop in an action surge...
~89.39 + ~11.39 + ~112.62 (has all attacks since target still prone) = ~213.4 And this is properly adjusted for AC, unlike the 10 you chose, which even at CR 1 would be LOW, let alone CR20.
There are many weaknesses in that thief build and some bad assumptions, shadow blade is concentration so if the creature straight charges you, you've probably lost that shadow blade if it attacks you directly and you only have 4 casts of shadow blade for the whole day, compared to fighter's twice per short rest action surge at level 20. And if somebody else in the party did something to give you advantage you could be pushing ~248.47 damage. The shove example, if you fail the shove (you have +11 to athletics tho with proficiency), you wait til next round and try to shove again. Admittedly the hex is also only once per day in this build, and also concentration tho with this build you're more likely to be holding off some creatures from ever being able to attack you due to PAM+Sentinel BS.
I'd say this Champion Fighter build beats it, and this isn't even the most optimized way to go about it, and let's not even get into magic weapons, cas a +3 Halberd would add significant amounts of damage to this. Shadow Blade meanwhile will always be a +0 to attack rolls.
COunterpoint to all of the above: not one single soul cares about the Optimancer White Room Math for level 20 builds against AC10 enemies. That will never happen in a real game. It's not even worth discussing. Stahppit.
Please do not contact or message me.
"Flying creatures enjoy many benefits of mobility, but they must also deal with the danger of falling. If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell".
In fact, a grappled creature in 5e has its speed reduced to 0, and thus grappling a flying creature causes it to fall. This line about prone and 0 speed has been removed in 1DnD playtest. On one hand, you can no longer cause a large gryphon to fall from the sky by latching onto it, but at the same time, a tiny sprite that you grab by the foot is still technically flying.
The entangle spell " ...... sprout from the ground in a 20-foot square starting from a point within range."
They can not be affected by entangle unless they are flying very low (less than 20-foot).
A PAM Fighter build is going to get a reaction attack far more than a Rogue using TWF, especially if you take battlemaster.
Also keep in mind a Rogue needs to burn an ASI and take a feat for booming blade, unless he is an elf or Arcane Trickster.
I do need to note that attacking at 10 feet with a halberd against a prone enemy will be at disadvantage. Also your chance to shove an enemy prone at level 20 is not great unless you have expertise or advantage on the shove and many enemies will be immune.
I think this build/strategy would be better with Tavern Brawler, unarmed fighting style a maul and Rune Knight (allowing a bonus action shove with advantage after a 1d8 attack at advantage and being able to do it against huge creatures).
Why are you attacking an enemy at 10 foot when they are prone? you don't NEED to be at 10 foot to attack, you can still attack at 5 foot, the only time you need to be at 10 foot is for the Reactionary Opportunity Attack, since that is when they enter range, else wise all reach weapons can target any creature within reach.
I knew shove was a weakness in this, I only used it as an example of how to get advantage but there are actually better ways and more worth working with party around how to achieve it, since shoving might mess up your ranged allies, for example. So a caster with Faerie Fire or Greater Invisibility would be a better choice, however optimized builds usually ignore the whole "party" aspect despite builds working with party almost always being superior.
You do realize they changed the wording on sneak attack which requires the "attack action." Booming blade is a spell action amd wouldn't apply sneak as worded 😬
Yes, we know, but most Rogues didn’t use them off-turn Sneak Attacks anyways, so it’s not that big of a nerf. Also, some people exploited Sneak Attack to get more uses out of it, and they with that exploit unavailable, WotC can buff Rogues without buffing those already powerful min-maxed multi-round Sneak Attackers too. Overall, I think this change is a good one.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.No one enjoys being useless. The only thing that rogues excel at in this UA is expertise with thieves tools, which artificers may still get. Other than being worse off than before, where is the draw to being a rogue? You can't even be smart and hold an action because those normally activate off turn. I have never seen a legit rogue outside of homebrew break an encounter.
Overall martials lost most of that which allowed them to compete with casters in the expert UA. We still need to see the other classes to see how they compare overall but SS and GWM are just bad now and just swinging a weapon for little damage is a far cry to what a caster can do in all pillars of play.
On a side note, did they adjust player crits from just weapon damage or is that still a thing? If it was changed where should I be looking for that?