I have noticed there is a lot of discussion right now on speculation, and I wanted to bring it back to what have already seen.
Of the classes we have seen so far rogues are the weakest. Both Bards and Rangers get just as many ranks of expertise, but they also get spells. Rangers get better weapons.
If we look at rogue damage vs ranger damage at level 5 the rogue is doing 3d6 sneak attack and with 2 short swords 2d6+ dex if he hits with both attacks. On average this is 14 damage from sneak attack and 1 sword if he hits with one attack. If it is the first attack it will do 4 more damage at level 5, if it isn't it will do no more damage. If he hits with both it will be a total average of 21.5 damage.
Meanwhile the ranger with the same weapons has two-weapon fighting and is using hunters mark. Each hit will do 2d6+dex in damage with 3 attacks for a total of 33 damage if all 3 hit. Meaning the ranger just outright out damages the rogue unless the rogue can somehow get advantage on his attacks in melee (hide is unlikely to work for this). The rogues damage doesn't change to much at a range, attacking with advantage but only making one attack instead of 2. The rangers dips a bit because of 1 less attack at range. At level 7 the rogue adds another d6 for another 3.5 extra damage, still lagging behind the ranger, at this point the rogue does have the advantage of having 2 more expertise. At level 9 the rogue loses the skill expertise, the ranger unlocks 3rd level spells, which is where some of the best spells in the game reside, but rogue now has another 3.5 extra damage... which still makes him behind.
In terms of survivability the Ranger has a d10 of health, compared to the rogues d8. This means the ranger starts with 2 more health and gains 1 more every level up, in addition it has shield proficiency making it harder to hit. The uncanny dodge just helps make up for this discrepancy. Later Evasion at level 9 will help make up for it more and may make the rogue slightly more survivable in combat. But not by a huge margin thanks to spells the ranger has.
I would like to see rogues really get to push their skills higher. I want to see rogues finally get extra attack at 5 along with uncanny dodge. Pushing evasion back from 7 to 9 doesn't feel good I want to see rogues get evasion at level 7 at the same time they get their second expertise . Level 9 I would love to see be reliable talent or the new pact tactics. Subtle strikes doesn't give you sneak attack when you wouldn't already have it, it just lets you hide after you attack rather than having to do so before you attack. With reliable talent at 9 the rogue would always have a skills advantage over every other class. Elusive has always been a weird ability, especially for a high level ability, and it is yet another ability to add to survivability. Which I don't know that rogues need after uncanny dodge, evasion and slippery mind all kick in.
To bring it back to the topics people have been discussing. This is the caster/martial divide. Rangers and Bards are good, half caster and full caster, but the one that doesn't have spells, The rogue, has less damage, less survival, and less utility through most of its career. Rogues feel fun to play, but they just aren't good enough.
The change I suggest would mean the short sword wielding rogue would now do 3d6+2xdex +3d6 from sneak attack. The 3 attacks means it is almost guaranteed to land sneak attack which means damage is now closer to 21.6 even with to hit being taken into account vs the rangers 19.8. I think this is fair because the ranger has spells to add to utility. At level 7 the rogue would have both evasion and its second expertise and its damage would increase by 3.5 to 25.1 meanwhile the ranger would be gaining . At level 9 The ranger would catch up in expertise, it would get access to 3rd level spells, but the rogue would keep the best skills with reliable talent. The spells more than make up for the difference in skills and in damage and survivability vs the rogue even with these changes. I believe this is where the power of non-casters need to be to really compete.
I fully agree that rogues feel the weakest. Sneak attack once per turn on your turn only sucks even more. Best way to get satisfying power used to be exploiting Sneak Attack on enemy turn with Sentinel/Mage slayer/AoO. Not it's no longer an option. I suggest that Sneak Attack could only occur on your turn, but unlimited number of times. Twice for dual wielder (high risk, high reward), once for an archer.
Rogues do need to be buffed especially since they got hit with the nerf bat hard in this UA. I just don't understand how some people think it is a change for the better as they say it leaves them open for other upgrades to sneak attack that are not hinted to ever happen. They only buffs they got are QoL changes that made it easier to do what they already do but with more restrictions than before that leaves them worse off than before.
Now we he have most of the other class. Yes rogue is ultra weak. So is druid.
Mostly for one reason, they gave polyvalence to a ton of class which already had other solid stuff. But for class like rogue druid or mage which really were all about polyvalence, they bring nothing.
Thus huge power and utility discrepancy.
And with the number of players of that game, its not like they dev this in their hole. So yes nothing to think more than some two speed justice in their rework.
Give rogues hide in plain sight at level 9. Some description like as masters of distraction a rogue can hide without any cover and concealment as part as their bonus action hide, if they do not have cover or concealment by the end of their next turn they are no longer hidden unless they use another bonus action to hide again.
Edit to add.
11th level death blow if a rogue hits a enemy while hidden with less than 50 hit points they instantly are brought to 0 hit points.
13th level when a rogue hits a enemy while hidden they can try to paralyze the enemy, target makes a con save against dex based DC or is paralyzed, at the end of their turn they may make another save, duration 1 minute.
Sneak Attack can easily break the new damage mechanics. Notice that most of extra damages are limited to once per turn, even the Berserk one, that is supposed to be a damage dealer, the Divine Smite, and the same with the revised spells.
Getting multi-attack in any way + double weapon + sneak attack = broken system. They are giving away all those high and multiple times extra damages in the new mechanics, to avoid trivializing important fights.
Also, the Rogue is the only one that gets second Expertise at level 7 instead 9. Combined with the Thief 6th level permanent and unlimited advantage to all DEX ability check rolls, that is superb.
Why everything must be reduced to combat and damages? If you make a Rogue, is because you like its versatility, and it gets more/earlier than the other expertises.
I disagree that rogues are the weakest, Rogues are the best scaling expert class, so yea, at level 5 they are weaker than ranger but at level 9 they are basically stronger and by level 15 doing significantly more damage than ranger does. Most of the issues are that too many classes are loaded up early with features and damage but have little in the late game. A lot of classes need their damage spread out more evenly like Rogue has.
Unless you have something like a fighter using commander's strike, in OneD&D Rogue's damage is actually more than it was in 5E, due to the light weapon property and also meant that sneak attack on melee weapons is more reliable. Yes Rogue can get more damage if they can use a Reaction in 5E but again, unless you have something like a fighter using Commander's Strike, that is highly unreliable. One D&D gives Rogues the ability to make two attacks and also gives advantage on attacks later on, which just makes them significantly stronger in tiers 3 & 4. Right now, too many classes are too strong in tiers 1 & 2 but then get barely anything in Tiers 3 & 4, which is likely why those tiers aren't generally that popular.
I actually put together a multiclass build back in the expert classes UA that the strongest you could get from it was a Ranger 5/Rogue 15, because most of Ranger's best abilities are gained by level 5, including extra attack and 2nd level spell casting for some extra utility (like pass without trace).
While I think the limiting of Rogue to one Sneak Attack per round is long overdue, I don't like the way they did it; it needs to be properly once per round, not limited to their turn, so you can at least still Ready an attack (e.g- hide behind a door and wait for the enemy to come through, for an actual sneak attack).
My main problem with it is that exploiting double Sneak Attack was the only way for damage focused Rogues to compete, and while I've always hated that (it feels cheap), they never gave us anything to replace it with.
I think the Sneak Attack as it is now would be fine once opened up to the round, but Rogues should gain an additional boost to it when they actually do things like back-stab and strike from hiding, to encourage you to actually do that sort of thing more rather than just using the myriad ways to gain advantage so you never have to do anything extra. For example they might treat a hit as a critical hit in these cases, so you still need to hit as normal, but get the double dice when you do. This would help to emphasise Rogues trying to get those opening round round strikes so you can bring down an enemy sooner, or to use the environment to finish off an already weakened foe.
But I think Rogue also just generally needs more to do in combat; for example, if they added [Tooltip Not Found] to Cunning Action, and then made equipment options like ball bearings actually scale then a "control" rogue could mix sneak attacks with setting traps items to aid allies, a "support" rogue could combo with fire-throwing allies using oil for the added damage, a direct-damage rogue could throw out an alchemist's fire (flask) and so-on.
Bombs and quick traps etc. should be the natural ally of a skirmishing rogue, but in 5e they always felt like afterthoughts; I had to create my own homebrew upgraded versions for a campaign with a Thief Rogue who wanted to use them, because they're just not worth it beyond tier 1 (and most aren't all that good in tier 1 either). So while the Ranger might excel at setting up ambushes, the Rogue should excel at springing them, or adapting on the fly when your thin veneer of a plan goes horribly wrong. You can do that on the RP/non-combat side, but the combat side needs to back it up.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Some items need an updated list, with different tier versions, as while the resistance ones are already good at any level, others not. We have that for the healing potion, with new and greater versions at Xanathar? (don't remember).
A homebrew could be taking those healing potions and apply the corresponding scaling and price to other items, but having something official is always better IMO.
They've already said rogues are getting buffed in the next round, so I'll wait and see what they have in mind.
Removing off-turn sneak attacks was an attempt to streamline the class and speed them up in play, but without the class getting a damage boost in the first two tiers (Subtle Strikes comes way too late) they end up suffering compared to 2014 with that change. On top of that, they lose out on the ability to TWF properly unless you take Crossbow Expert and use a hand crossbow as your offhand - though that does allow you to use it in melee as well.
Speculation: Perhaps the UA Rogue lost off-turn sneak attacks because the developers were initially planning on giving Monks a counter-attack (like Deflect Missile). If Monks have counter attacks and Rogues can get a 2nd sneak attack as a reaction, then Rogue+Monk becomes an obvious multiclass.
With the announcement that Rogue's off-turn sneak attack would be restored, I deduce that Monks will not get a counter attack that can trigger sneak attack.
I disagree that rogues are the weakest, Rogues are the best scaling expert class, so yea, at level 5 they are weaker than ranger but at level 9 they are basically stronger and by level 15 doing significantly more damage than ranger does. Most of the issues are that too many classes are loaded up early with features and damage but have little in the late game. A lot of classes need their damage spread out more evenly like Rogue has.
Unless you have something like a fighter using commander's strike, in OneD&D Rogue's damage is actually more than it was in 5E, due to the light weapon property and also meant that sneak attack on melee weapons is more reliable. Yes Rogue can get more damage if they can use a Reaction in 5E but again, unless you have something like a fighter using Commander's Strike, that is highly unreliable. One D&D gives Rogues the ability to make two attacks and also gives advantage on attacks later on, which just makes them significantly stronger in tiers 3 & 4. Right now, too many classes are too strong in tiers 1 & 2 but then get barely anything in Tiers 3 & 4, which is likely why those tiers aren't generally that popular.
Who cares what happens at level 15? Most campaigns don't go that high. I think there's maybe one official module from WotC that does.
The ability of light weapons to get an extra attack without using your bonus action is locked behind the Nick Weapon Mastery now, which Rogues don't get by default. They have to expend their level 4 feat to take Weapon Master.
I disagree that rogues are the weakest, Rogues are the best scaling expert class, so yea, at level 5 they are weaker than ranger but at level 9 they are basically stronger and by level 15 doing significantly more damage than ranger does. Most of the issues are that too many classes are loaded up early with features and damage but have little in the late game. A lot of classes need their damage spread out more evenly like Rogue has.
The rogue is not doing significantly more damage than the ranger at 15.
8d6 sneak attack, assume dual wield for 2d6, +5 for dex 20 is 40ish damage on a hit. Maybe +5 is they pick up the fighting style via feats. So maybe 45. Which sure, thery have one extra feat so give them that edge. 9 damage before the ranger does anything else is not significant.
Ranger is doing 6d6+15 for 36ish damage. And that is assuming they don't have any other spell going to boost damage. Rangers will likely outpace the rogues damage in most cases at level 15. Magical weapons will tilt it even more for the ranger as they have 3 attacks vs 2.
Potentially with a ranged build a rogue might outpace their damage by sacrificing an attack for staying hidden and keeping advantage rolling. But it wont be significant and it is still assuming no additional spells on the rangers part.
I disagree that rogues are the weakest, Rogues are the best scaling expert class, so yea, at level 5 they are weaker than ranger but at level 9 they are basically stronger and by level 15 doing significantly more damage than ranger does. Most of the issues are that too many classes are loaded up early with features and damage but have little in the late game. A lot of classes need their damage spread out more evenly like Rogue has.
The rogue is not doing significantly more damage than the ranger at 15.
8d6 sneak attack, assume dual wield for 2d6, +5 for dex 20 is 40ish damage on a hit. Maybe +5 is they pick up the fighting style via feats. So maybe 45. Which sure, thery have one extra feat so give them that edge. 9 damage before the ranger does anything else is not significant.
Ranger is doing 6d6+15 for 36ish damage. And that is assuming they don't have any other spell going to boost damage. Rangers will likely outpace the rogues damage in most cases at level 15. Magical weapons will tilt it even more for the ranger as they have 3 attacks vs 2.
Potentially with a ranged build a rogue might outpace their damage by sacrificing an attack for staying hidden and keeping advantage rolling. But it wont be significant and it is still assuming no additional spells on the rangers part.
Let's not assume dual wield and light weapon attack for now but a longbow and go with a normal 65% chance to hit
Rogue will get (1d8 + 5 + 8d6) * 0.8775 + (1d8 + 8d6) * 0.0975 = 32.175
Ranger will get ((1d8 + 5 + 1d6) * 0.75 + (1d8 +1d6) * 0.05) * 2 = 20.3
Rogue's level 13 ability that'll give them advantage on most attacks is HUGE (assuming archery fighting style for ranger). Ranger can also get something similar by expanding spell slots for a nerfed greater invisibility but else wise, yes would be highly dependent on concentration spells to keep up, maybe your direct damage of ice storm of moonbeam, maybe summons with Conjure Woodland Beings, enchant your attack with Elemental Weapon, or maybe inflict Faerie Fire to get advantage and so it's definitely possible for Ranger to still out-do Rogue by expanding resources.
Over the course of a whole dungeon, at level 13, you could only cast 1 4th level spell, and 3 3rd level spells... Rogue's DPR remains relatively consistent in this area. It basically requires more work for the Ranger to still be ahead at this point and I don't think it's ahead enough to say that Rogue is really weaker. Additionally Ranger will need to use action or bonus action to cast, which either means not attacking for a round or waiting for a round that you aren't applying/reapplying Hunter's Mark to another target too... else you could be losing out on that damage. On paper makes it easy to look like Ranger is going to perform better than actually does when you consider how it's going to be limited by action economy.
I disagree that rogues are the weakest, Rogues are the best scaling expert class, so yea, at level 5 they are weaker than ranger but at level 9 they are basically stronger and by level 15 doing significantly more damage than ranger does. Most of the issues are that too many classes are loaded up early with features and damage but have little in the late game. A lot of classes need their damage spread out more evenly like Rogue has.
The rogue is not doing significantly more damage than the ranger at 15.
8d6 sneak attack, assume dual wield for 2d6, +5 for dex 20 is 40ish damage on a hit. Maybe +5 is they pick up the fighting style via feats. So maybe 45. Which sure, thery have one extra feat so give them that edge. 9 damage before the ranger does anything else is not significant.
Ranger is doing 6d6+15 for 36ish damage. And that is assuming they don't have any other spell going to boost damage. Rangers will likely outpace the rogues damage in most cases at level 15. Magical weapons will tilt it even more for the ranger as they have 3 attacks vs 2.
Potentially with a ranged build a rogue might outpace their damage by sacrificing an attack for staying hidden and keeping advantage rolling. But it wont be significant and it is still assuming no additional spells on the rangers part.
Let's not assume dual wield and light weapon attack for now but a longbow and go with a normal 65% chance to hit
Rogue will get (1d8 + 5 + 8d6) * 0.8775 + (1d8 + 8d6) * 0.0975 = 32.175
Ranger will get ((1d8 + 5 + 1d6) * 0.75 + (1d8 +1d6) * 0.05) * 2 = 20.3
Rogue's level 13 ability that'll give them advantage on most attacks is HUGE (assuming archery fighting style for ranger). Ranger can also get something similar by expanding spell slots for a nerfed greater invisibility but else wise, yes would be highly dependent on concentration spells to keep up, maybe your direct damage of ice storm of moonbeam, maybe summons with Conjure Woodland Beings, enchant your attack with Elemental Weapon, or maybe inflict Faerie Fire to get advantage and so it's definitely possible for Ranger to still out-do Rogue by expanding resources.
Over the course of a whole dungeon, at level 13, you could only cast 1 4th level spell, and 3 3rd level spells... Rogue's DPR remains relatively consistent in this area. It basically requires more work for the Ranger to still be ahead at this point and I don't think it's ahead enough to say that Rogue is really weaker. Additionally Ranger will need to use action or bonus action to cast, which either means not attacking for a round or waiting for a round that you aren't applying/reapplying Hunter's Mark to another target too... else you could be losing out on that damage. On paper makes it easy to look like Ranger is going to perform better than actually does when you consider how it's going to be limited by action economy.
While I forgot about the rogues level 13 ability the numbers still are far too close given that the ranger has spells, 1 4th and 3 3rd probably 2 to cast as one was cast for hunters mark. But that is more than enough for most tables to dominate the rogues damage.
Summon spells last an hour, the ranger is going to stomp all over those numbers all day every day at the vast majority of tables. And that is assuming they switch to the more sane but still over powered tashas spells, if they stick with the PH ones its even more dominating. And they still have more utility.
And assuming the enemy's are built with 65% in mind at most tables I don't think the rogues ability to get advantage will be that huge in practice. By level 13 most people will likely have a +2 weapon, so archery style assumption its 85% to hit now and 98%ish with advantage is that better sure, but both will pretty much never miss in most fights, a single bless will make it virtually guaranteed. Now maybe they will redo the math on their monsters and assume magic weapons, or magic weapons lose their plusses or something, but there is a point of diminishing returns on advantage, going from very rarely miss to almost never miss is just not that big of a deal. Over enough attacks that you constantly track yeah its noticed, or if you just look at math sure, but at a table in play not so much. If the rogue never misses post level 13 but the ranger only misses once every 2-3 fights does the math look like it was a lot, sure, but at the table in play was it, not at all.
I disagree that rogues are the weakest, Rogues are the best scaling expert class, so yea, at level 5 they are weaker than ranger but at level 9 they are basically stronger and by level 15 doing significantly more damage than ranger does. Most of the issues are that too many classes are loaded up early with features and damage but have little in the late game. A lot of classes need their damage spread out more evenly like Rogue has.
The rogue is not doing significantly more damage than the ranger at 15.
8d6 sneak attack, assume dual wield for 2d6, +5 for dex 20 is 40ish damage on a hit. Maybe +5 is they pick up the fighting style via feats. So maybe 45. Which sure, thery have one extra feat so give them that edge. 9 damage before the ranger does anything else is not significant.
Ranger is doing 6d6+15 for 36ish damage. And that is assuming they don't have any other spell going to boost damage. Rangers will likely outpace the rogues damage in most cases at level 15. Magical weapons will tilt it even more for the ranger as they have 3 attacks vs 2.
Potentially with a ranged build a rogue might outpace their damage by sacrificing an attack for staying hidden and keeping advantage rolling. But it wont be significant and it is still assuming no additional spells on the rangers part.
Let's not assume dual wield and light weapon attack for now but a longbow and go with a normal 65% chance to hit
Rogue will get (1d8 + 5 + 8d6) * 0.8775 + (1d8 + 8d6) * 0.0975 = 32.175
Ranger will get ((1d8 + 5 + 1d6) * 0.75 + (1d8 +1d6) * 0.05) * 2 = 20.3
Rogue's level 13 ability that'll give them advantage on most attacks is HUGE (assuming archery fighting style for ranger). Ranger can also get something similar by expanding spell slots for a nerfed greater invisibility but else wise, yes would be highly dependent on concentration spells to keep up, maybe your direct damage of ice storm of moonbeam, maybe summons with Conjure Woodland Beings, enchant your attack with Elemental Weapon, or maybe inflict Faerie Fire to get advantage and so it's definitely possible for Ranger to still out-do Rogue by expanding resources.
Over the course of a whole dungeon, at level 13, you could only cast 1 4th level spell, and 3 3rd level spells... Rogue's DPR remains relatively consistent in this area. It basically requires more work for the Ranger to still be ahead at this point and I don't think it's ahead enough to say that Rogue is really weaker. Additionally Ranger will need to use action or bonus action to cast, which either means not attacking for a round or waiting for a round that you aren't applying/reapplying Hunter's Mark to another target too... else you could be losing out on that damage. On paper makes it easy to look like Ranger is going to perform better than actually does when you consider how it's going to be limited by action economy.
While I forgot about the rogues level 13 ability the numbers still are far too close given that the ranger has spells, 1 4th and 3 3rd probably 2 to cast as one was cast for hunters mark. But that is more than enough for most tables to dominate the rogues damage.
Summon spells last an hour, the ranger is going to stomp all over those numbers all day every day at the vast majority of tables. And that is assuming they switch to the more sane but still over powered tashas spells, if they stick with the PH ones its even more dominating. And they still have more utility.
And assuming the enemy's are built with 65% in mind at most tables I don't think the rogues ability to get advantage will be that huge in practice. By level 13 most people will likely have a +2 weapon, so archery style assumption its 85% to hit now and 98%ish with advantage is that better sure, but both will pretty much never miss in most fights, a single bless will make it virtually guaranteed. Now maybe they will redo the math on their monsters and assume magic weapons, or magic weapons lose their plusses or something, but there is a point of diminishing returns on advantage, going from very rarely miss to almost never miss is just not that big of a deal. Over enough attacks that you constantly track yeah its noticed, or if you just look at math sure, but at a table in play not so much. If the rogue never misses post level 13 but the ranger only misses once every 2-3 fights does the math look like it was a lot, sure, but at the table in play was it, not at all.
By level 15, conjure woodland beings isn't going to do so well, most of it will be dead in a single AoE and their attack rolls do not scale to level, it's creatures with like +2~+5 attack against ~18AC creatures. Hunter's Mark will still, and the numbers aren't close, nor do they get closer. Rogue pulls further away the higher the level and Ranger can only claw back with spells, eventually at 17 they get 1 cast of Swift Quiver, which is yet another spell which conflicts with reapplying Hunter's Mark but beats Hunter's Mark on damage, so unless you get 1 big boss, usually not gunna be worth it. The Rogue gets basically +3 DPR every other level from 13 onwards.
You might not think the Rogue's ability to get advantage for likely 90%+ of their attacks isn't huge but it is. It's a MASSIVE jump in DPR and will play out as such; as a Rogue, you want to prioritize targets you can use sneak attack on, that usually means targets within 5 foot of an ally, that same condition now additionally gives advantage. Rogue is still heavily party dependent for it but it's still huge.
In 1DnD they have proficiency with simple weapons, and finesse martial weapons. Not longbows.
That means they're limited to shortbows or light crossbows at range.
It's level 15, Rogue has had four feats by this point and easily can pick up Weapon Training, of course Weapon Training in the same UA gives +1 Strength or Dexterity, so it's a good one to consider picking up for rogue, Depending on your build, you could even go for the Heavy Crossbow for the 1d10 instead. You would also then pick up Sharpshooter with another feat since you have proficiency with a martial weapon, that gives you another +1 Dexterity. You just need a 3rd feat to get to 20 Dexterity Score (assuming you started at 17). So it's really quite a viable way to go.
The ability of light weapons to get an extra attack without using your bonus action is locked behind the Nick Weapon Mastery now, which Rogues don't get by default. They have to expend their level 4 feat to take Weapon Master.
Just checked the UA, and Nick doesn't replace the Light property. Nick allows you to make the TWF attack as a part of your Action rather than having to spend a Bonus Action for it. "When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack action, instead of as a Bonus Action. You can still make this extra attack only once per turn." TWF isn't being locked into Martial classes.
Edit- Just reread your post and you covered this, my bad. Really, I don't think Rogues need that much extra with their Bonus Action as a main class feature- a lot of subclasses give them something to occupy it.
Give rogues hide in plain sight at level 9. Some description like as masters of distraction a rogue can hide without any cover and concealment as part as their bonus action hide, if they do not have cover or concealment by the end of their next turn they are no longer hidden unless they use another bonus action to hide again.
Edit to add.
11th level death blow if a rogue hits a enemy while hidden with less than 50 hit points they instantly are brought to 0 hit points.
13th level when a rogue hits a enemy while hidden they can try to paralyze the enemy, target makes a con save against dex based DC or is paralyzed, at the end of their turn they may make another save, duration 1 minute.
While I love Hide in plain sight, It will probably not be back in the game. Wotc so far has actively tried to avoid the appearance of controversy features.
It needed a rewrite and is in a mixed archetype(ninja could be ranger or rogue or even fighters) and there's the bad impressions of the past. all that means WotC probably won't even try when nature's veil represents the new feature philosophy "better".(air quotes) even for the rogue.
I have noticed there is a lot of discussion right now on speculation, and I wanted to bring it back to what have already seen.
Of the classes we have seen so far rogues are the weakest. Both Bards and Rangers get just as many ranks of expertise, but they also get spells. Rangers get better weapons.
If we look at rogue damage vs ranger damage at level 5 the rogue is doing 3d6 sneak attack and with 2 short swords 2d6+ dex if he hits with both attacks. On average this is 14 damage from sneak attack and 1 sword if he hits with one attack. If it is the first attack it will do 4 more damage at level 5, if it isn't it will do no more damage. If he hits with both it will be a total average of 21.5 damage.
Meanwhile the ranger with the same weapons has two-weapon fighting and is using hunters mark. Each hit will do 2d6+dex in damage with 3 attacks for a total of 33 damage if all 3 hit. Meaning the ranger just outright out damages the rogue unless the rogue can somehow get advantage on his attacks in melee (hide is unlikely to work for this). The rogues damage doesn't change to much at a range, attacking with advantage but only making one attack instead of 2. The rangers dips a bit because of 1 less attack at range. At level 7 the rogue adds another d6 for another 3.5 extra damage, still lagging behind the ranger, at this point the rogue does have the advantage of having 2 more expertise. At level 9 the rogue loses the skill expertise, the ranger unlocks 3rd level spells, which is where some of the best spells in the game reside, but rogue now has another 3.5 extra damage... which still makes him behind.
In terms of survivability the Ranger has a d10 of health, compared to the rogues d8. This means the ranger starts with 2 more health and gains 1 more every level up, in addition it has shield proficiency making it harder to hit. The uncanny dodge just helps make up for this discrepancy. Later Evasion at level 9 will help make up for it more and may make the rogue slightly more survivable in combat. But not by a huge margin thanks to spells the ranger has.
I would like to see rogues really get to push their skills higher. I want to see rogues finally get extra attack at 5 along with uncanny dodge. Pushing evasion back from 7 to 9 doesn't feel good I want to see rogues get evasion at level 7 at the same time they get their second expertise . Level 9 I would love to see be reliable talent or the new pact tactics. Subtle strikes doesn't give you sneak attack when you wouldn't already have it, it just lets you hide after you attack rather than having to do so before you attack. With reliable talent at 9 the rogue would always have a skills advantage over every other class. Elusive has always been a weird ability, especially for a high level ability, and it is yet another ability to add to survivability. Which I don't know that rogues need after uncanny dodge, evasion and slippery mind all kick in.
To bring it back to the topics people have been discussing. This is the caster/martial divide. Rangers and Bards are good, half caster and full caster, but the one that doesn't have spells, The rogue, has less damage, less survival, and less utility through most of its career. Rogues feel fun to play, but they just aren't good enough.
The change I suggest would mean the short sword wielding rogue would now do 3d6+2xdex +3d6 from sneak attack. The 3 attacks means it is almost guaranteed to land sneak attack which means damage is now closer to 21.6 even with to hit being taken into account vs the rangers 19.8. I think this is fair because the ranger has spells to add to utility. At level 7 the rogue would have both evasion and its second expertise and its damage would increase by 3.5 to 25.1 meanwhile the ranger would be gaining . At level 9 The ranger would catch up in expertise, it would get access to 3rd level spells, but the rogue would keep the best skills with reliable talent. The spells more than make up for the difference in skills and in damage and survivability vs the rogue even with these changes. I believe this is where the power of non-casters need to be to really compete.
I fully agree that rogues feel the weakest. Sneak attack once per turn on your turn only sucks even more. Best way to get satisfying power used to be exploiting Sneak Attack on enemy turn with Sentinel/Mage slayer/AoO. Not it's no longer an option. I suggest that Sneak Attack could only occur on your turn, but unlimited number of times. Twice for dual wielder (high risk, high reward), once for an archer.
Rogues do need to be buffed especially since they got hit with the nerf bat hard in this UA. I just don't understand how some people think it is a change for the better as they say it leaves them open for other upgrades to sneak attack that are not hinted to ever happen. They only buffs they got are QoL changes that made it easier to do what they already do but with more restrictions than before that leaves them worse off than before.
Now we he have most of the other class.
Yes rogue is ultra weak. So is druid.
Mostly for one reason, they gave polyvalence to a ton of class which already had other solid stuff.
But for class like rogue druid or mage which really were all about polyvalence, they bring nothing.
Thus huge power and utility discrepancy.
And with the number of players of that game, its not like they dev this in their hole.
So yes nothing to think more than some two speed justice in their rework.
Give rogues hide in plain sight at level 9. Some description like as masters of distraction a rogue can hide without any cover and concealment as part as their bonus action hide, if they do not have cover or concealment by the end of their next turn they are no longer hidden unless they use another bonus action to hide again.
Edit to add.
11th level death blow if a rogue hits a enemy while hidden with less than 50 hit points they instantly are brought to 0 hit points.
13th level when a rogue hits a enemy while hidden they can try to paralyze the enemy, target makes a con save against dex based DC or is paralyzed, at the end of their turn they may make another save, duration 1 minute.
Sneak Attack can easily break the new damage mechanics. Notice that most of extra damages are limited to once per turn, even the Berserk one, that is supposed to be a damage dealer, the Divine Smite, and the same with the revised spells.
Getting multi-attack in any way + double weapon + sneak attack = broken system. They are giving away all those high and multiple times extra damages in the new mechanics, to avoid trivializing important fights.
Also, the Rogue is the only one that gets second Expertise at level 7 instead 9. Combined with the Thief 6th level permanent and unlimited advantage to all DEX ability check rolls, that is superb.
Why everything must be reduced to combat and damages? If you make a Rogue, is because you like its versatility, and it gets more/earlier than the other expertises.
I disagree that rogues are the weakest, Rogues are the best scaling expert class, so yea, at level 5 they are weaker than ranger but at level 9 they are basically stronger and by level 15 doing significantly more damage than ranger does. Most of the issues are that too many classes are loaded up early with features and damage but have little in the late game. A lot of classes need their damage spread out more evenly like Rogue has.
Unless you have something like a fighter using commander's strike, in OneD&D Rogue's damage is actually more than it was in 5E, due to the light weapon property and also meant that sneak attack on melee weapons is more reliable. Yes Rogue can get more damage if they can use a Reaction in 5E but again, unless you have something like a fighter using Commander's Strike, that is highly unreliable. One D&D gives Rogues the ability to make two attacks and also gives advantage on attacks later on, which just makes them significantly stronger in tiers 3 & 4. Right now, too many classes are too strong in tiers 1 & 2 but then get barely anything in Tiers 3 & 4, which is likely why those tiers aren't generally that popular.
I actually put together a multiclass build back in the expert classes UA that the strongest you could get from it was a Ranger 5/Rogue 15, because most of Ranger's best abilities are gained by level 5, including extra attack and 2nd level spell casting for some extra utility (like pass without trace).
While I think the limiting of Rogue to one Sneak Attack per round is long overdue, I don't like the way they did it; it needs to be properly once per round, not limited to their turn, so you can at least still Ready an attack (e.g- hide behind a door and wait for the enemy to come through, for an actual sneak attack).
My main problem with it is that exploiting double Sneak Attack was the only way for damage focused Rogues to compete, and while I've always hated that (it feels cheap), they never gave us anything to replace it with.
I think the Sneak Attack as it is now would be fine once opened up to the round, but Rogues should gain an additional boost to it when they actually do things like back-stab and strike from hiding, to encourage you to actually do that sort of thing more rather than just using the myriad ways to gain advantage so you never have to do anything extra. For example they might treat a hit as a critical hit in these cases, so you still need to hit as normal, but get the double dice when you do. This would help to emphasise Rogues trying to get those opening round round strikes so you can bring down an enemy sooner, or to use the environment to finish off an already weakened foe.
But I think Rogue also just generally needs more to do in combat; for example, if they added [Tooltip Not Found] to Cunning Action, and then made equipment options like ball bearings actually scale then a "control" rogue could mix sneak attacks with setting traps items to aid allies, a "support" rogue could combo with fire-throwing allies using oil for the added damage, a direct-damage rogue could throw out an alchemist's fire (flask) and so-on.
Bombs and quick traps etc. should be the natural ally of a skirmishing rogue, but in 5e they always felt like afterthoughts; I had to create my own homebrew upgraded versions for a campaign with a Thief Rogue who wanted to use them, because they're just not worth it beyond tier 1 (and most aren't all that good in tier 1 either). So while the Ranger might excel at setting up ambushes, the Rogue should excel at springing them, or adapting on the fly when your thin veneer of a plan goes horribly wrong. You can do that on the RP/non-combat side, but the combat side needs to back it up.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Some items need an updated list, with different tier versions, as while the resistance ones are already good at any level, others not. We have that for the healing potion, with new and greater versions at Xanathar? (don't remember).
A homebrew could be taking those healing potions and apply the corresponding scaling and price to other items, but having something official is always better IMO.
They've already said rogues are getting buffed in the next round, so I'll wait and see what they have in mind.
Removing off-turn sneak attacks was an attempt to streamline the class and speed them up in play, but without the class getting a damage boost in the first two tiers (Subtle Strikes comes way too late) they end up suffering compared to 2014 with that change. On top of that, they lose out on the ability to TWF properly unless you take Crossbow Expert and use a hand crossbow as your offhand - though that does allow you to use it in melee as well.
Speculation: Perhaps the UA Rogue lost off-turn sneak attacks because the developers were initially planning on giving Monks a counter-attack (like Deflect Missile). If Monks have counter attacks and Rogues can get a 2nd sneak attack as a reaction, then Rogue+Monk becomes an obvious multiclass.
With the announcement that Rogue's off-turn sneak attack would be restored, I deduce that Monks will not get a counter attack that can trigger sneak attack.
Who cares what happens at level 15? Most campaigns don't go that high. I think there's maybe one official module from WotC that does.
The ability of light weapons to get an extra attack without using your bonus action is locked behind the Nick Weapon Mastery now, which Rogues don't get by default. They have to expend their level 4 feat to take Weapon Master.
The rogue is not doing significantly more damage than the ranger at 15.
8d6 sneak attack, assume dual wield for 2d6, +5 for dex 20 is 40ish damage on a hit. Maybe +5 is they pick up the fighting style via feats. So maybe 45. Which sure, thery have one extra feat so give them that edge. 9 damage before the ranger does anything else is not significant.
Ranger is doing 6d6+15 for 36ish damage. And that is assuming they don't have any other spell going to boost damage. Rangers will likely outpace the rogues damage in most cases at level 15. Magical weapons will tilt it even more for the ranger as they have 3 attacks vs 2.
Potentially with a ranged build a rogue might outpace their damage by sacrificing an attack for staying hidden and keeping advantage rolling. But it wont be significant and it is still assuming no additional spells on the rangers part.
Let's not assume dual wield and light weapon attack for now but a longbow and go with a normal 65% chance to hit
Rogue will get (1d8 + 5 + 8d6) * 0.8775 + (1d8 + 8d6) * 0.0975 = 32.175
Ranger will get ((1d8 + 5 + 1d6) * 0.75 + (1d8 +1d6) * 0.05) * 2 = 20.3
Rogue's level 13 ability that'll give them advantage on most attacks is HUGE (assuming archery fighting style for ranger). Ranger can also get something similar by expanding spell slots for a nerfed greater invisibility but else wise, yes would be highly dependent on concentration spells to keep up, maybe your direct damage of ice storm of moonbeam, maybe summons with Conjure Woodland Beings, enchant your attack with Elemental Weapon, or maybe inflict Faerie Fire to get advantage and so it's definitely possible for Ranger to still out-do Rogue by expanding resources.
Over the course of a whole dungeon, at level 13, you could only cast 1 4th level spell, and 3 3rd level spells... Rogue's DPR remains relatively consistent in this area. It basically requires more work for the Ranger to still be ahead at this point and I don't think it's ahead enough to say that Rogue is really weaker. Additionally Ranger will need to use action or bonus action to cast, which either means not attacking for a round or waiting for a round that you aren't applying/reapplying Hunter's Mark to another target too... else you could be losing out on that damage. On paper makes it easy to look like Ranger is going to perform better than actually does when you consider how it's going to be limited by action economy.
While I forgot about the rogues level 13 ability the numbers still are far too close given that the ranger has spells, 1 4th and 3 3rd probably 2 to cast as one was cast for hunters mark. But that is more than enough for most tables to dominate the rogues damage.
Summon spells last an hour, the ranger is going to stomp all over those numbers all day every day at the vast majority of tables. And that is assuming they switch to the more sane but still over powered tashas spells, if they stick with the PH ones its even more dominating. And they still have more utility.
And assuming the enemy's are built with 65% in mind at most tables I don't think the rogues ability to get advantage will be that huge in practice. By level 13 most people will likely have a +2 weapon, so archery style assumption its 85% to hit now and 98%ish with advantage is that better sure, but both will pretty much never miss in most fights, a single bless will make it virtually guaranteed. Now maybe they will redo the math on their monsters and assume magic weapons, or magic weapons lose their plusses or something, but there is a point of diminishing returns on advantage, going from very rarely miss to almost never miss is just not that big of a deal. Over enough attacks that you constantly track yeah its noticed, or if you just look at math sure, but at a table in play not so much. If the rogue never misses post level 13 but the ranger only misses once every 2-3 fights does the math look like it was a lot, sure, but at the table in play was it, not at all.
By level 15, conjure woodland beings isn't going to do so well, most of it will be dead in a single AoE and their attack rolls do not scale to level, it's creatures with like +2~+5 attack against ~18AC creatures. Hunter's Mark will still, and the numbers aren't close, nor do they get closer. Rogue pulls further away the higher the level and Ranger can only claw back with spells, eventually at 17 they get 1 cast of Swift Quiver, which is yet another spell which conflicts with reapplying Hunter's Mark but beats Hunter's Mark on damage, so unless you get 1 big boss, usually not gunna be worth it. The Rogue gets basically +3 DPR every other level from 13 onwards.
You might not think the Rogue's ability to get advantage for likely 90%+ of their attacks isn't huge but it is. It's a MASSIVE jump in DPR and will play out as such; as a Rogue, you want to prioritize targets you can use sneak attack on, that usually means targets within 5 foot of an ally, that same condition now additionally gives advantage. Rogue is still heavily party dependent for it but it's still huge.
Where is the Rogue getting Longbow proficiency?
In 1DnD they have proficiency with simple weapons, and finesse martial weapons. Not longbows.
That means they're limited to shortbows or light crossbows at range.
It's level 15, Rogue has had four feats by this point and easily can pick up Weapon Training, of course Weapon Training in the same UA gives +1 Strength or Dexterity, so it's a good one to consider picking up for rogue, Depending on your build, you could even go for the Heavy Crossbow for the 1d10 instead. You would also then pick up Sharpshooter with another feat since you have proficiency with a martial weapon, that gives you another +1 Dexterity. You just need a 3rd feat to get to 20 Dexterity Score (assuming you started at 17). So it's really quite a viable way to go.
Just checked the UA, and Nick doesn't replace the Light property. Nick allows you to make the TWF attack as a part of your Action rather than having to spend a Bonus Action for it. "When you make the extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack action, instead of as a Bonus Action. You can still make this extra attack only once per turn." TWF isn't being locked into Martial classes.Edit- Just reread your post and you covered this, my bad. Really, I don't think Rogues need that much extra with their Bonus Action as a main class feature- a lot of subclasses give them something to occupy it.
While I love Hide in plain sight, It will probably not be back in the game. Wotc so far has actively tried to avoid the appearance of controversy features.
It needed a rewrite and is in a mixed archetype(ninja could be ranger or rogue or even fighters) and there's the bad impressions of the past. all that means WotC probably won't even try when nature's veil represents the new feature philosophy "better".(air quotes) even for the rogue.