Frankly, I think that paladin and ranger could use a choice between cantrips and weapon masteries, as well as features that use their Cha/Wis more effectively. So that when you pick a holy warrior class, you could choose whether you're more holy or more warrior, and as a ranger, whether you're more primal or more commando.
Just bring back the cantrip options for Fighting Style that the Paladin and Ranger got in Tasha's Cauldron. Add an Arcane version, and make all 3 available to anyone who can get a Fighting Style.
Blessed Strikes really does seem like a weird holdover from 2014, when subclasses differentiated themselves by either giving Potent Spellcasting or Divine Strike. Even if it wasn't a very well-designed feature, it made more sense than the current version. I'd prefer something new, instead of yet another vestige of 2014 which lacks real purpose.
I prefer the previous version (from "The Cleric and Revised Species" late last year; which was also pretty much like the option from Tasha's Cauldron). The only change I would make is allowing it to be used with Unarmed Strikes.
I am kind of surprised they are keeping the one level dip in cleric for heavy armor.
I still think they should make some of these class defining features be non-transferrable when you multi-class. This allows getting them early and maintaining class identity.
Weapon Masteries. Fighters get 3, barbarians 2, Monks 2, paladins 2, rangers 2, rogues 2, War Cleric 1. (I think I got that correct)
Either paladins and rangers should get one like the war cleric, or monks and barbarians should get 3 and fighters 4. I wasn’t surprised paladins and rangers got them, even rogues wasn’t a shock. But to give them (paladin, Ranger, rogue) the same amount as two of the three warriors was a surprise. If they want to use groups (experts, mages, priests, warriors) there should be some distinction between them.
Personally I would prefer WM be warrior group exclusive and let the rest use an ASI to take a feat.
Im sure this has been talked about already. I just haven’t had time to read all the UA or all the posts so I’m posting as stuff comes up. Sorry if it’s too much of a rehash.
Beyond two, does it really matter though? As far as I remember, they can all just change up their masteries on a long rest, so really, unless you are gonna be carrying around a bunch of weapons to juggle between, I think most characters will just want 2 weapons at any given time. I mean is "You get a fourth weapon mastery" really at all exciting?
I do find it kinda funny that they promised new and powerful features built into the warrior classes, only for that feature to be given to almost every single weapon using character. Im honestly fine with everyone using all masteries for any weapon can pick up, as long as fighters and barbarians get something as cool as the rogues cunning strike.
I had honestly given up hope on WoTC giving martials cool combat options, but cunning strike really reawakened option.
I think the most universally agreed upon thing throughout this entire playtesting process is that Cunning Strike is kick-ass.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I think the most universally agreed upon thing throughout this entire playtesting process is that Cunning Strike is kick-ass.
Absolutely. I was so excited when I read it for the first time, only to scroll down and see that you unlock more options at higher levels, and that subclasses give even more and/or synergy with existing options.. it is exactly what I wanted from one DND, I just dunno why only rogues get to have this kinda beautiful update.
Beyond two, does it really matter though? As far as I remember, they can all just change up their masteries on a long rest, so really, unless you are gonna be carrying around a bunch of weapons to juggle between, I think most characters will just want 2 weapons at any given time. I mean is "You get a fourth weapon mastery" really at all exciting?
That’s what I’ve been thinking. 2 is good. 3 gives you a bit more: melee, ranged, thrown. But at 4, who cares?
I think the most universally agreed upon thing throughout this entire playtesting process is that Cunning Strike is kick-ass.
Absolutely. I was so excited when I read it for the first time, only to scroll down and see that you unlock more options at higher levels, and that subclasses give even more and/or synergy with existing options.. it is exactly what I wanted from one DND, I just dunno why only rogues get to have this kinda beautiful update.
It is sort of a throwback to the D&D next playtests. All martials had a sneak attack style damage die, and they could spend the dice on additional effects, giving up damage to trip etc. They eventually dropped it and it sort of appeared in the battlemaster fighter. I always wish they had refined it and made it work instead of giving up on it.
Weapon Masteries. Fighters get 3, barbarians 2, Monks 2, paladins 2, rangers 2, rogues 2, War Cleric 1. (I think I got that correct)
Either paladins and rangers should get one like the war cleric, or monks and barbarians should get 3 and fighters 4. I wasn’t surprised paladins and rangers got them, even rogues wasn’t a shock. But to give them (paladin, Ranger, rogue) the same amount as two of the three warriors was a surprise. If they want to use groups (experts, mages, priests, warriors) there should be some distinction between them.
Personally I would prefer WM be warrior group exclusive and let the rest use an ASI to take a feat.
Im sure this has been talked about already. I just haven’t had time to read all the UA or all the posts so I’m posting as stuff comes up. Sorry if it’s too much of a rehash.
Fighters starts with 3, but get soon 4, and later 5. Also gets the ability to exchange them, using another one to the weapon. What I miss more is another Fighting Style, as only gets 1 like Paladin or Ranger.
I think the most universally agreed upon thing throughout this entire playtesting process is that Cunning Strike is kick-ass.
Indeed. Requires a deep revision about dice cost, obviously they put 1d6 to all for the testers to set the values. Also requiring something to use it, i.e. is has no sense to use the poison only for wearing the kit, but with no idea of using it, then require to have proficiency, adding it a non-free cost. The Withdraw should be only usable for unseen attacks.
Anyway the Rogue is bad from the base for me. Why should you bother at all using the Withdraw Cunning Strike, or hiding, when you can simply spam ranged attacks to the guy adjacent to your comrade with no penalty at all? The Rogue would need a full revision, that is not going to happen in 1D&D. I'd put:
- Sneak Attack to use d4 for target adjacent to friendly guy and no surprise, d8 for unseen (advantage) attacks.
- Cunning action giving Dash + Hide, both at the same time.
Then the Rogue would be more the character taking advantage of being unseen, really nice on dark and spaces with places to hide, emerging from unexpected and landing that Sneak Attack using d8, that could be using double dagger with Nick mastery, 2 chances with 2 attacks and leaving free the Bonus Action, and using Withdraw Cunning Attack to avoid foe opportunity attack, then with Cunning Action Dash and try to hide again. Also applicable to ranged attacks, like a sniper, you attack from hidden to use d8, then change position to another hiding again with Cunning Action. The feat that makes when you fail the attack not losing hide condition could even have some use.
At open places where can simply use the comrades help (this is, spamming ranged attacks to targets adjacent to comrade), it should be less efficient, then use d4.
At this moment cannot think how landing an (sneak) attack is the same efficient when the target is aware of you, even when fighting with another guy, than when is a surprise unseen attack.
Also notice that by this way, the martial would usually be better against the big guys, as usually against the boss, Dragon, etc. is hard to find places to hide. But the Rogue would be the best for stabbing those back line enemy casters. So more differentiated roles.
Beyond two, does it really matter though? As far as I remember, they can all just change up their masteries on a long rest, so really, unless you are gonna be carrying around a bunch of weapons to juggle between, I think most characters will just want 2 weapons at any given time. I mean is "You get a fourth weapon mastery" really at all exciting?
I do find it kinda funny that they promised new and powerful features built into the warrior classes, only for that feature to be given to almost every single weapon using character. Im honestly fine with everyone using all masteries for any weapon can pick up, as long as fighters and barbarians get something as cool as the rogues cunning strike.
I had honestly given up hope on WoTC giving martials cool combat options, but cunning strike really reawakened option.
I agree. Which is why I prefer WM to be Warrior exclusive. What fighter, barbarian, and monk get now is fine. Let the others use a feat if they want it.
Monk definitely needs a cunning strike-like ability on the base class. Especially if they don’t allow monks to use a different DC calculation for Unarmed Strikes Shove/Grapple options. Should be Ki Discipline DC or DEX instead of STR.
Honestly, I think I would take Cunning Strike, via Unarmed Strikes and Discipline Points instead of Sneak Attack, over Weapon Mastery for the base Monk class. Let the Kensei do Weapon Mastery.
Either paladins and rangers should get one like the war cleric, or monks and barbarians should get 3 and fighters 4.
I thought of monks as unarmed kung fu masters. Why the reliance on weapons?
Considering they have always had weapon proficiencies they have always had weapons at their disposal. They are not just unarmed fighting. And that is quite a narrow point of view on the class when so many different character concepts could be built using the monk class. Even way of shadow monk, in its description say “These monks might be called ninjas or shadowdancers, and they serve as spies and assassins.” Every see a ninja with a weapon? I bet you have.
I think the most universally agreed upon thing throughout this entire playtesting process is that Cunning Strike is kick-ass.
Absolutely. I was so excited when I read it for the first time, only to scroll down and see that you unlock more options at higher levels, and that subclasses give even more and/or synergy with existing options.. it is exactly what I wanted from one DND, I just dunno why only rogues get to have this kinda beautiful update.
It is sort of a throwback to the D&D next playtests. All martials had a sneak attack style damage die, and they could spend the dice on additional effects, giving up damage to trip etc. They eventually dropped it and it sort of appeared in the battlemaster fighter. I always wish they had refined it and made it work instead of giving up on it.
Sorry, but I despise it.
The trip action is best. The poison is useless, as you can purchase poisons or make your own, thus negating the need to even use the poison cunning strike, unless you plan to remove all other methods of using poison as well.
The knock unconscious comes way too high a level, and for requiring 6 sneak attack dice for essentially a level 1 sleep spell.
Disarm is incredibly situational.
Basically cunning strike is offering very little, especially when my damage dealing is more important.
Panache for the swashbuckler, my preferred rogue, was trash before, but at least they were skills that didn't require dice, Which, the cunning strike that negates reactions is utterly useless, because that IS what swashbucklers get, and to remove that feature is to nerf them into oblivion.
Charm is most useful outside of battle, and in both old and new, it's a throw away.
The Dance bard is getting all the cool things that really would be best for a 'buckler.
There's been some talk about wording of turn and whether or not sneak attack damage applies to reactions on other players turns. It needs to be explicit if this is what they mean or not. DM gets final say in rules and that seems like something the DM would be against (hell, I would as a DM).
Steady aim is what it is, but the reason it's even something given is because of how incredibly DM dependent advantage is for the rogue (which is why I prefer Swashbuckler over other subclasses. I KNOW when I have sneak attack damage added and its spelled out).
A lot of people are hyped about these cunning actions but I feel lie they never play rogues because rogues are a lot of flavor outside of combat but their combat style is INCREDIBLY specific:
1. Get advantage.
2. use sneak attack damage.
3. run away from damage without getting hit.
That's it.
You want the swashbuckler to be a damage soaking tank? give them the dance bard's AC feat of dex plus charisma. if I don't get that, I am NEVER using any of the cunning actions associated with the class because I'm not going to goad, and I'd rather 2d6 of damage and run away than get 1d6 at random added to my AC each turn.
You want the assassin to do huge damage? Let them crit more and find a way to double that sneak attack damage. I'm NEVER going to give up 1d6 for poison to get 2d6 when I can just use a poison.
Thieves are a jumble.
They're definitely the subclass that shows just how much the rogue is dependent upon hiding and a kind DM. Instead of giving them a 1d6 penalty for EVERY round as they are going to made damned sure they stay keeping advantage/hidden, why not lean into the sleight of hand/theft skill that they typify? The key to any great heist or any quick pickpocket is to be able to stay blend in. They're the exact OPPOSITE of a swashbuckler, the attention grabbing charismatic ne'er-do-well.
Give them advantage on hiding, including hiding in plain sight.
Arcane Trickster really isn't a trickster, but i have no beef with it. It's just a martial class with spellasting. Pretty much the rogue version of the eldritch knight.
But basically, those cunning strikes are penalties for playing the class.
But basically, those cunning strikes are penalties for playing the class.
Poison is quite useful. The poisoned condition is very powerful, and the feature is generally an upgrade from actual poisons, since they tend to have low DCs whereas the feature scales off the Dex of a Rogue (high). In most situation, well worth the average of 3.5 damage you're giving up to use it.
Knock Out is not a level 1 sleep spell. Sleep pretty much only works on enemies with around 20 hp, and upcasting barely makes it better. But Knock Out? No matter what it is, no matter how much hp it has, if it fails that Con save, it's going unconscious. Sure, it's an average of 21 less damage, but once a monster is unconscious they might as well be dead. Also worth noting that there isn't a single creature with immunity to unconsciousness. Add all that together, you've got a solid high-risk high-reward option for when you think an enemy's got a low Con save, or just when you don't mind the hit to damage too much.
Disarm is situational!? What, you don't face enemies that have weapons? Or spellcasting foci? Or magic items? Or anything that you'd like to have?
"The cunning strike that negates reactions" also gives you a half-dash for the price of 3.5 damage. So, one of the benefits of it is lost on the Swashbuckler, but the option as a whole can still be situationally useful. It isn't "utterly useless" like you say it is. And anyways, nobody's going to force Swashbucklers to use it, so I don't know where you get the idea that a single additional option is going to "nerf them into oblivion".
You think Awe is a throwaway? You can make yourself immune to all attacks from everybody in a 30 foot radius, at the cost of 10.5 damage. With the same DC as a full caster, quite possibly higher. Hell, you can even charm the person you just stabbed, so they just gaze in awe at your charisma instead of attacking you! How much more Swashbuckler-y can you get?
Swashbuckler isn't supposed to be a damage-soaking tank. Goad is good for situations where you can attack somebody and then run out of melee range, either into the range of a weaker ranged attack or out of sight completely. That way, they can't attack you, but they also have disadvantage on everybody else. It's also useful against enemies with a single, larger attack, since they can always be Uncanny Dodged.
Yes, some of them are situational. That's perfect. They give you a ton of different options which you can choose one of every time you Sneak Attack, and you're complaining that some are situational? If it isn't the right situation to use a specific Cunning Strike, then use a different one. Or, hell, just deal your Sneak Attack damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I think the most universally agreed upon thing throughout this entire playtesting process is that Cunning Strike is kick-ass.
Absolutely. I was so excited when I read it for the first time, only to scroll down and see that you unlock more options at higher levels, and that subclasses give even more and/or synergy with existing options.. it is exactly what I wanted from one DND, I just dunno why only rogues get to have this kinda beautiful update.
It is sort of a throwback to the D&D next playtests. All martials had a sneak attack style damage die, and they could spend the dice on additional effects, giving up damage to trip etc. They eventually dropped it and it sort of appeared in the battlemaster fighter. I always wish they had refined it and made it work instead of giving up on it.
Sorry, but I despise it.
The trip action is best. The poison is useless, as you can purchase poisons or make your own, thus negating the need to even use the poison cunning strike, unless you plan to remove all other methods of using poison as well.
The knock unconscious comes way too high a level, and for requiring 6 sneak attack dice for essentially a level 1 sleep spell.
Disarm is incredibly situational.
Basically cunning strike is offering very little, especially when my damage dealing is more important.
Panache for the swashbuckler, my preferred rogue, was trash before, but at least they were skills that didn't require dice, Which, the cunning strike that negates reactions is utterly useless, because that IS what swashbucklers get, and to remove that feature is to nerf them into oblivion.
Charm is most useful outside of battle, and in both old and new, it's a throw away.
The Dance bard is getting all the cool things that really would be best for a 'buckler.
There's been some talk about wording of turn and whether or not sneak attack damage applies to reactions on other players turns. It needs to be explicit if this is what they mean or not. DM gets final say in rules and that seems like something the DM would be against (hell, I would as a DM).
Steady aim is what it is, but the reason it's even something given is because of how incredibly DM dependent advantage is for the rogue (which is why I prefer Swashbuckler over other subclasses. I KNOW when I have sneak attack damage added and its spelled out).
A lot of people are hyped about these cunning actions but I feel lie they never play rogues because rogues are a lot of flavor outside of combat but their combat style is INCREDIBLY specific:
1. Get advantage.
2. use sneak attack damage.
3. run away from damage without getting hit.
That's it.
You want the swashbuckler to be a damage soaking tank? give them the dance bard's AC feat of dex plus charisma. if I don't get that, I am NEVER using any of the cunning actions associated with the class because I'm not going to goad, and I'd rather 2d6 of damage and run away than get 1d6 at random added to my AC each turn.
You want the assassin to do huge damage? Let them crit more and find a way to double that sneak attack damage. I'm NEVER going to give up 1d6 for poison to get 2d6 when I can just use a poison.
Thieves are a jumble.
They're definitely the subclass that shows just how much the rogue is dependent upon hiding and a kind DM. Instead of giving them a 1d6 penalty for EVERY round as they are going to made damned sure they stay keeping advantage/hidden, why not lean into the sleight of hand/theft skill that they typify? The key to any great heist or any quick pickpocket is to be able to stay blend in. They're the exact OPPOSITE of a swashbuckler, the attention grabbing charismatic ne'er-do-well.
Give them advantage on hiding, including hiding in plain sight.
Arcane Trickster really isn't a trickster, but i have no beef with it. It's just a martial class with spellasting. Pretty much the rogue version of the eldritch knight.
But basically, those cunning strikes are penalties for playing the class.
I dont understand, you think the poison option is useless because there are other ways of applying the condition? Poisons cost money and dig into your action economy. The poisoned condition itself is a huge benefit if you can make it stick.
A lot of the options are situational, which is good, since you get a bunch of options and you get to use them every sneak attack if you want to. This is exactly what we should want for martials, the ability to meaningful things i combat that arent just damage. For the longest time casters have had a monopoly on tactical choices, not the rogue gets to participate and make choices on their own, I dont understand why youd despise that?
The only two things in the UA that I kinda take issue with. One is their fix for the assassins crit/extra damage. I think the old version was kinda awkard to use in a party dynamic, but Im not super excited with the new version either.
The second is that "knock out" in particular doesnt quite seem like to live up to the fantasy of knocking someone out, too many saves imo. It makes it sound super unreliable, with a very high investment.
Indeed Cunning Attack can slow down much the pace requiring extra rolls for each attack. Change it to "if attack surpasses AC by X", so it would be harder to apply to tough enemies also.
I dont understand, you think the poison option is useless because there are other ways of applying the condition? Poisons cost money and dig into your action economy. The poisoned condition itself is a huge benefit if you can make it stick.
A lot of the options are situational, which is good, since you get a bunch of options and you get to use them every sneak attack if you want to. This is exactly what we should want for martials, the ability to meaningful things i combat that arent just damage. For the longest time casters have had a monopoly on tactical choices, not the rogue gets to participate and make choices on their own, I dont understand why youd despise that?
The only two things in the UA that I kinda take issue with. One is their fix for the assassins crit/extra damage. I think the old version was kinda awkard to use in a party dynamic, but Im not super excited with the new version either.
The second is that "knock out" in particular doesnt quite seem like to live up to the fantasy of knocking someone out, too many saves imo. It makes it sound super unreliable, with a very high investment.
I waffle on the poison condition to be honest. At lower levels, poison damage can take someone out if you can hit, but more often than not you're playing against monsters that go down in a single hit. At later levels, you're just better equipped to handle the situation and resistances and immunities make it less worthwhile. (plus there's just ways to add damages)
It may cost a lot or be harder to craft at lower levels, but at higher levels, your characters don't have a good outlet for money expenditures. Especially if you play the modules/books, some of which just heap piles of gold on your characters from the onset. (I could rant about the monetary system and how denominations outside of gold and the occasional silver are an issue, but that's for another day...)
I guess what bothers me is that this isn't so much a "fix" for a rogue. It's dangling something unlikely to be used in front of them with a significant cost, while not getting the class/subclass features right, and a lot of the subclass feature "feels" are what make or break a class.
The rogue's subclass features tend to be pretty lackluster and a miss. Especially when as you say, tactical, and honestly, a lot of the "cool" features go to casters.
I don't like that these strikes cost me damage dice. Flat out, those are too precious, and damage dice are not the same as spell slots or discipline points. That's straight up DAMAGE I'm sacrificing, not points or slots. Would you tell the fighter to give up an extra attack round to do some of these things?
Second, there's the fact that it's a wasted opportunity for my class to have a cooler talent/skill.
I don't like that these strikes cost me damage dice. Flat out, those are too precious, and damage dice are not the same as spell slots or discipline points. That's straight up DAMAGE I'm sacrificing, not points or slots. Would you tell the fighter to give up an extra attack round to do some of these things
That is how things are designed in 5e, to apply a cool condition you give up damage, or have to expend a precious limited resource (or both). Sorcerous Burst deals less damage than Fireball and costs a higher level slot because it can also apply a condition to the enemies, cantrips that have more powerful riders like Vicious Mockery, Sapping Sting, or Frostbite have smaller damage dice than those that have less powerful riders like Firebolt, Toll the Dead, or Ray of Frost.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just bring back the cantrip options for Fighting Style that the Paladin and Ranger got in Tasha's Cauldron. Add an Arcane version, and make all 3 available to anyone who can get a Fighting Style.
I prefer the previous version (from "The Cleric and Revised Species" late last year; which was also pretty much like the option from Tasha's Cauldron). The only change I would make is allowing it to be used with Unarmed Strikes.
I still think they should make some of these class defining features be non-transferrable when you multi-class. This allows getting them early and maintaining class identity.
Weapon Masteries.
Fighters get 3, barbarians 2, Monks 2, paladins 2, rangers 2, rogues 2, War Cleric 1. (I think I got that correct)
Either paladins and rangers should get one like the war cleric, or monks and barbarians should get 3 and fighters 4.
I wasn’t surprised paladins and rangers got them, even rogues wasn’t a shock. But to give them (paladin, Ranger, rogue) the same amount as two of the three warriors was a surprise. If they want to use groups (experts, mages, priests, warriors) there should be some distinction between them.
Personally I would prefer WM be warrior group exclusive and let the rest use an ASI to take a feat.
Im sure this has been talked about already. I just haven’t had time to read all the UA or all the posts so I’m posting as stuff comes up. Sorry if it’s too much of a rehash.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Beyond two, does it really matter though? As far as I remember, they can all just change up their masteries on a long rest, so really, unless you are gonna be carrying around a bunch of weapons to juggle between, I think most characters will just want 2 weapons at any given time. I mean is "You get a fourth weapon mastery" really at all exciting?
I do find it kinda funny that they promised new and powerful features built into the warrior classes, only for that feature to be given to almost every single weapon using character. Im honestly fine with everyone using all masteries for any weapon can pick up, as long as fighters and barbarians get something as cool as the rogues cunning strike.
I had honestly given up hope on WoTC giving martials cool combat options, but cunning strike really reawakened option.
I think the most universally agreed upon thing throughout this entire playtesting process is that Cunning Strike is kick-ass.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Absolutely. I was so excited when I read it for the first time, only to scroll down and see that you unlock more options at higher levels, and that subclasses give even more and/or synergy with existing options.. it is exactly what I wanted from one DND, I just dunno why only rogues get to have this kinda beautiful update.
That’s what I’ve been thinking. 2 is good. 3 gives you a bit more: melee, ranged, thrown. But at 4, who cares?
It is sort of a throwback to the D&D next playtests. All martials had a sneak attack style damage die, and they could spend the dice on additional effects, giving up damage to trip etc. They eventually dropped it and it sort of appeared in the battlemaster fighter. I always wish they had refined it and made it work instead of giving up on it.
Fighters starts with 3, but get soon 4, and later 5. Also gets the ability to exchange them, using another one to the weapon. What I miss more is another Fighting Style, as only gets 1 like Paladin or Ranger.
Indeed. Requires a deep revision about dice cost, obviously they put 1d6 to all for the testers to set the values. Also requiring something to use it, i.e. is has no sense to use the poison only for wearing the kit, but with no idea of using it, then require to have proficiency, adding it a non-free cost. The Withdraw should be only usable for unseen attacks.
Anyway the Rogue is bad from the base for me. Why should you bother at all using the Withdraw Cunning Strike, or hiding, when you can simply spam ranged attacks to the guy adjacent to your comrade with no penalty at all? The Rogue would need a full revision, that is not going to happen in 1D&D. I'd put:
- Sneak Attack to use d4 for target adjacent to friendly guy and no surprise, d8 for unseen (advantage) attacks.
- Cunning action giving Dash + Hide, both at the same time.
Then the Rogue would be more the character taking advantage of being unseen, really nice on dark and spaces with places to hide, emerging from unexpected and landing that Sneak Attack using d8, that could be using double dagger with Nick mastery, 2 chances with 2 attacks and leaving free the Bonus Action, and using Withdraw Cunning Attack to avoid foe opportunity attack, then with Cunning Action Dash and try to hide again. Also applicable to ranged attacks, like a sniper, you attack from hidden to use d8, then change position to another hiding again with Cunning Action. The feat that makes when you fail the attack not losing hide condition could even have some use.
At open places where can simply use the comrades help (this is, spamming ranged attacks to targets adjacent to comrade), it should be less efficient, then use d4.
At this moment cannot think how landing an (sneak) attack is the same efficient when the target is aware of you, even when fighting with another guy, than when is a surprise unseen attack.
Also notice that by this way, the martial would usually be better against the big guys, as usually against the boss, Dragon, etc. is hard to find places to hide. But the Rogue would be the best for stabbing those back line enemy casters. So more differentiated roles.
I agree. Which is why I prefer WM to be Warrior exclusive. What fighter, barbarian, and monk get now is fine. Let the others use a feat if they want it.
Monk definitely needs a cunning strike-like ability on the base class. Especially if they don’t allow monks to use a different DC calculation for Unarmed Strikes Shove/Grapple options. Should be
KiDiscipline DC or DEX instead of STR.EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Honestly, I think I would take Cunning Strike, via Unarmed Strikes and Discipline Points instead of Sneak Attack, over Weapon Mastery for the base Monk class.
Let the Kensei do Weapon Mastery.
I thought of monks as unarmed kung fu masters. Why the reliance on weapons?
Considering they have always had weapon proficiencies they have always had weapons at their disposal. They are not just unarmed fighting. And that is quite a narrow point of view on the class when so many different character concepts could be built using the monk class. Even way of shadow monk, in its description say “These monks might be called ninjas or shadowdancers, and they serve as spies and assassins.” Every see a ninja with a weapon? I bet you have.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Sorry, but I despise it.
The trip action is best. The poison is useless, as you can purchase poisons or make your own, thus negating the need to even use the poison cunning strike, unless you plan to remove all other methods of using poison as well.
The knock unconscious comes way too high a level, and for requiring 6 sneak attack dice for essentially a level 1 sleep spell.
Disarm is incredibly situational.
Basically cunning strike is offering very little, especially when my damage dealing is more important.
Panache for the swashbuckler, my preferred rogue, was trash before, but at least they were skills that didn't require dice, Which, the cunning strike that negates reactions is utterly useless, because that IS what swashbucklers get, and to remove that feature is to nerf them into oblivion.
Charm is most useful outside of battle, and in both old and new, it's a throw away.
The Dance bard is getting all the cool things that really would be best for a 'buckler.
There's been some talk about wording of turn and whether or not sneak attack damage applies to reactions on other players turns. It needs to be explicit if this is what they mean or not. DM gets final say in rules and that seems like something the DM would be against (hell, I would as a DM).
Steady aim is what it is, but the reason it's even something given is because of how incredibly DM dependent advantage is for the rogue (which is why I prefer Swashbuckler over other subclasses. I KNOW when I have sneak attack damage added and its spelled out).
A lot of people are hyped about these cunning actions but I feel lie they never play rogues because rogues are a lot of flavor outside of combat but their combat style is INCREDIBLY specific:
1. Get advantage.
2. use sneak attack damage.
3. run away from damage without getting hit.
That's it.
You want the swashbuckler to be a damage soaking tank? give them the dance bard's AC feat of dex plus charisma. if I don't get that, I am NEVER using any of the cunning actions associated with the class because I'm not going to goad, and I'd rather 2d6 of damage and run away than get 1d6 at random added to my AC each turn.
You want the assassin to do huge damage? Let them crit more and find a way to double that sneak attack damage. I'm NEVER going to give up 1d6 for poison to get 2d6 when I can just use a poison.
Thieves are a jumble.
They're definitely the subclass that shows just how much the rogue is dependent upon hiding and a kind DM. Instead of giving them a 1d6 penalty for EVERY round as they are going to made damned sure they stay keeping advantage/hidden, why not lean into the sleight of hand/theft skill that they typify? The key to any great heist or any quick pickpocket is to be able to stay blend in. They're the exact OPPOSITE of a swashbuckler, the attention grabbing charismatic ne'er-do-well.
Give them advantage on hiding, including hiding in plain sight.
Arcane Trickster really isn't a trickster, but i have no beef with it. It's just a martial class with spellasting. Pretty much the rogue version of the eldritch knight.
But basically, those cunning strikes are penalties for playing the class.
Poison is quite useful. The poisoned condition is very powerful, and the feature is generally an upgrade from actual poisons, since they tend to have low DCs whereas the feature scales off the Dex of a Rogue (high). In most situation, well worth the average of 3.5 damage you're giving up to use it.
Knock Out is not a level 1 sleep spell. Sleep pretty much only works on enemies with around 20 hp, and upcasting barely makes it better. But Knock Out? No matter what it is, no matter how much hp it has, if it fails that Con save, it's going unconscious. Sure, it's an average of 21 less damage, but once a monster is unconscious they might as well be dead. Also worth noting that there isn't a single creature with immunity to unconsciousness. Add all that together, you've got a solid high-risk high-reward option for when you think an enemy's got a low Con save, or just when you don't mind the hit to damage too much.
Disarm is situational!? What, you don't face enemies that have weapons? Or spellcasting foci? Or magic items? Or anything that you'd like to have?
"The cunning strike that negates reactions" also gives you a half-dash for the price of 3.5 damage. So, one of the benefits of it is lost on the Swashbuckler, but the option as a whole can still be situationally useful. It isn't "utterly useless" like you say it is. And anyways, nobody's going to force Swashbucklers to use it, so I don't know where you get the idea that a single additional option is going to "nerf them into oblivion".
You think Awe is a throwaway? You can make yourself immune to all attacks from everybody in a 30 foot radius, at the cost of 10.5 damage. With the same DC as a full caster, quite possibly higher. Hell, you can even charm the person you just stabbed, so they just gaze in awe at your charisma instead of attacking you! How much more Swashbuckler-y can you get?
Swashbuckler isn't supposed to be a damage-soaking tank. Goad is good for situations where you can attack somebody and then run out of melee range, either into the range of a weaker ranged attack or out of sight completely. That way, they can't attack you, but they also have disadvantage on everybody else. It's also useful against enemies with a single, larger attack, since they can always be Uncanny Dodged.
Yes, some of them are situational. That's perfect. They give you a ton of different options which you can choose one of every time you Sneak Attack, and you're complaining that some are situational? If it isn't the right situation to use a specific Cunning Strike, then use a different one. Or, hell, just deal your Sneak Attack damage.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I dont understand, you think the poison option is useless because there are other ways of applying the condition? Poisons cost money and dig into your action economy. The poisoned condition itself is a huge benefit if you can make it stick.
A lot of the options are situational, which is good, since you get a bunch of options and you get to use them every sneak attack if you want to. This is exactly what we should want for martials, the ability to meaningful things i combat that arent just damage. For the longest time casters have had a monopoly on tactical choices, not the rogue gets to participate and make choices on their own, I dont understand why youd despise that?
The only two things in the UA that I kinda take issue with. One is their fix for the assassins crit/extra damage. I think the old version was kinda awkard to use in a party dynamic, but Im not super excited with the new version either.
The second is that "knock out" in particular doesnt quite seem like to live up to the fantasy of knocking someone out, too many saves imo. It makes it sound super unreliable, with a very high investment.
Indeed Cunning Attack can slow down much the pace requiring extra rolls for each attack. Change it to "if attack surpasses AC by X", so it would be harder to apply to tough enemies also.
I waffle on the poison condition to be honest. At lower levels, poison damage can take someone out if you can hit, but more often than not you're playing against monsters that go down in a single hit. At later levels, you're just better equipped to handle the situation and resistances and immunities make it less worthwhile. (plus there's just ways to add damages)
It may cost a lot or be harder to craft at lower levels, but at higher levels, your characters don't have a good outlet for money expenditures. Especially if you play the modules/books, some of which just heap piles of gold on your characters from the onset. (I could rant about the monetary system and how denominations outside of gold and the occasional silver are an issue, but that's for another day...)
I guess what bothers me is that this isn't so much a "fix" for a rogue. It's dangling something unlikely to be used in front of them with a significant cost, while not getting the class/subclass features right, and a lot of the subclass feature "feels" are what make or break a class.
The rogue's subclass features tend to be pretty lackluster and a miss. Especially when as you say, tactical, and honestly, a lot of the "cool" features go to casters.
I don't like that these strikes cost me damage dice. Flat out, those are too precious, and damage dice are not the same as spell slots or discipline points. That's straight up DAMAGE I'm sacrificing, not points or slots. Would you tell the fighter to give up an extra attack round to do some of these things?
Second, there's the fact that it's a wasted opportunity for my class to have a cooler talent/skill.
That is how things are designed in 5e, to apply a cool condition you give up damage, or have to expend a precious limited resource (or both). Sorcerous Burst deals less damage than Fireball and costs a higher level slot because it can also apply a condition to the enemies, cantrips that have more powerful riders like Vicious Mockery, Sapping Sting, or Frostbite have smaller damage dice than those that have less powerful riders like Firebolt, Toll the Dead, or Ray of Frost.