Essentially I want all Rogues to have access to the same damage without having to build the Rogue and party around guaranteeing a reaction attack most rounds, as it's such a weird way for Rogues to play in practice. I want Rogues to be high risk, high reward combatants who can mess up a target but get into trouble fast if they can't escape afterwards.
One thing I'd consider is adding yet-another Cunning Action option, where the rogue can Ready an off-turn attack (technically a delayed "extra" attack). That way they could proc a second sneak attack per round without needing an AoO or party member's feature, but have to burn their bonus action to do it (giving up Steady Aim or the other Cunning Actions, etc).
Such a thing might want some other restriction, probably on exactly what the trigger can be. But I'd be fine with letting it be melee or ranged.
something like...? "Patience (cost: 2d6). rogue picks a target, delaying their attack action for just the right window of opportunity. after all other combatants have had their turn this round, if the target is out of range, dead, or otherwise inaccessible, then the attack is lost. else, rogue may move up to 10ft before sneak attacking their target (regardless of whether sneak attack requirements are met). if rogue is hidden or invisible before this action, this attack does not end that condition."
the wording of the attack is deliberate to allow a sneak attack even if one was used up by opportunity attack before the delayed main attack (thus the 2d6 cost). and the last bit is there so that a high-initiative rogue might be able to get off another sneak attack and still have a bonus action available for whatever that turn. kinda ended up being ranged only until i added a 10ft movement before, but that part could probably go away if it doesn't make enough sense.
They don't need allies though, they have Steady Aim and Cunning Action Hide. You can get sneak attacks on your own just fine with either of those, much less both.
Also weapon mastery, Vex weapons, use two shortswords or take crossbow expert and two hand crossbows. Rogue is definitely not as ally dependent for their damage as they are in 5E.
Congratz for finding out the ranged options that exists to do your rogue stuff. In melee you still need allies, unless like I said that archetype condition which is really opening options. I'm personnaly not talking about damage, I'm talking about abilities usage. And I'm not against conditions wheter thematics or mechanics for abilities. The mechanicaly melee/allies dependancy is boring and unflavoured. I envision more the rogue like a skirmisher than a bloodhungry packdog. With Hide you can skirmish once which is basically the whole concept of cunning action, but then
No more gracе, it's over
What? Literally have the melee version in what I said, it's right there.
Should a rogue be rushing in alone to melee on the frontline? heck no. If you're going a melee build, you can still use a ranged weapon and stand behind tank until enemies come into range. But if we are talking 1-on-1 situations, Rogue has the option to use two shortswords, you can't use your BA to disengage or dash afterwards, sure, two scimitars and standing behind the tank is the better option but D&D is a party based game, you want rogue to be a lone wolf but this is a party game for the party. Sure some might argue that Barbarian, Fighter or Paladin can lone wolf to some degree but all three of these fold in a one vs. group situation, which a rogue utilizing ranged weapons and hiding places might be able to win, because rogues are not noble fighters in one-on-one fights, they are usually dirtier fighters that will do anything to win or escape safely.
But for rogue to do what you want it to do, it has to be able to do everything and if it does everything, what is the point in other classes? literally pointless. Rogues are scouts, they sneak around, gather information, find safe paths, lay traps, there is a lot a rogue can do before a combat even starts in many cases. Rogue is one of the best classes for attacking from surprise since that can often be two sneak attacks before the enemy has had a chance to even take an action. Every class needs to have reliance on the party, it is just that in rogue's case, it's more obvious what that reliance is but in terms of DPR, Rogue is not lacking.
I didn't realize this was a competition for most DPR; I thought it was a cooperative game for having fun.
people tend to have less fun once they realize they are really bad at helping the team.
rogue doesnt need to be the best, it can even be the worst, but it can't be the same as now.
and this isn't another type of medium, decisions made now might last another 5 years of the life of the game. Is there a good reason the rogue with normal play should do like 50 to 60% the damage of other classes.
What is the design benefit of that? How would the game be worst if rogue did OK damage?
Bad at helping the team? So is bard unplayable? because their DPR tends to be the lowest in the game until they pick up some form of powerful AoE from magical secrets but I don't see people saying Bard does not help the team. There is clearly more than just DPR at play and rogue often serves quiet important tasks for the team, from scouting/stealth to picking locks, disarming traps, etc, and while it is possible for some other classes to do those same things, they usually need to give something else up to do them while Rogue is just naturally good at them.
There is literally nothing wrong with rogue right now, the game is pretty well split on what classes do and making rogue a requirement for any adventuring party would make the game less enjoyable, if somebody wants to play a Ranger or a Bard instead to fulfil that stealth/scout type of stuff then the game should allow that. As it stands, Rogue has been one of the most popular classes (behind fighter) for a long time, it's more popular than all of the full casters for most of 5E, Rogue is almost seen (incorrectly) as a necessity by many groups in 5E. All OneD&D has done is open up more groups to not having to think they can't function without a rogue.
As far as damage goes, Rogue does have the same issue that literally every non-full caster has, lacking any decent AoE but in terms of DPR, Rogue is pretty good, beats most classes and beats fighter despite what the original post said. Fighter can out nova Rogue but for sustained DPR, Rogue is winning since sneak attack is that powerful and is the best scaling feature in the game for DPR. Rogue is not a front-liner, it usually pops in to do an attack and pops back behind to safety. This is what Rogue is designed too do, you can also do it with hand crossbows, you'd still be near the tank in most combats but you still have more survivability than most Gish builds which operate in a similar fashion, and arguably even being better than monk in 5E.
bard has way more utility than rogue, its a full caster, with magic secrets. It can also do better than rogue damage if it actually cares to.
Are you seriously trying to argue Bard, probably the lowest DPR class in the game... does more damage than Rogue, one of the higher DPR classes in the game.... that's just crazy. Maybe if you go into some crazy build using particular subclasses, there could be a few potential builds once you get to level 10 where it catches up but bard DPR is terrible.
As for utility, yes Bard gets more, they are support based so supplying utility is literally what that class does but it's still weaker than Rogue at stealth/scouting most of the time since by the time bard gets any decent spells for that, rogue has reliable talent which basically means, never failing any check you're proficient in be that checking for traps/perception, lock picking, stealth, etc. So rogue has less but still serves the scout role better than Bard does.
Essentially I want all Rogues to have access to the same damage without having to build the Rogue and party around guaranteeing a reaction attack most rounds, as it's such a weird way for Rogues to play in practice. I want Rogues to be high risk, high reward combatants who can mess up a target but get into trouble fast if they can't escape afterwards.
One thing I'd consider is adding yet-another Cunning Action option, where the rogue can Ready an off-turn attack (technically a delayed "extra" attack). That way they could proc a second sneak attack per round without needing an AoO or party member's feature, but have to burn their bonus action to do it (giving up Steady Aim or the other Cunning Actions, etc).
Such a thing might want some other restriction, probably on exactly what the trigger can be. But I'd be fine with letting it be melee or ranged.
something like...? "Patience (cost: 2d6). rogue picks a target, delaying their attack action for just the right window of opportunity. after all other combatants have had their turn this round, if the target is out of range, dead, or otherwise inaccessible, then the attack is lost. else, rogue may move up to 10ft before sneak attacking their target (regardless of whether sneak attack requirements are met). if rogue is hidden or invisible before this action, this attack does not end that condition."
the wording of the attack is deliberate to allow a sneak attack even if one was used up by opportunity attack before the delayed main attack (thus the 2d6 cost). and the last bit is there so that a high-initiative rogue might be able to get off another sneak attack and still have a bonus action available for whatever that turn. kinda ended up being ranged only until i added a 10ft movement before, but that part could probably go away if it doesn't make enough sense.
To be completely clear, I meant an option for "Cunning Action" (so it costs your Bonus Action), not "Cunning Strike" (costs dice of SA damage). And that it would use/require the Reaction.
Basically, use your action for whatever (presumably an attack), then use your bonus action to, instead of Steady Aim or Hide or Disengage or whatever, ready a second attack to be used as your Reaction. This would absolutely prevent you from making a real AoO or otherwise use your reaction.
Essentially I want all Rogues to have access to the same damage without having to build the Rogue and party around guaranteeing a reaction attack most rounds, as it's such a weird way for Rogues to play in practice. I want Rogues to be high risk, high reward combatants who can mess up a target but get into trouble fast if they can't escape afterwards.
One thing I'd consider is adding yet-another Cunning Action option, where the rogue can Ready an off-turn attack (technically a delayed "extra" attack). That way they could proc a second sneak attack per round without needing an AoO or party member's feature, but have to burn their bonus action to do it (giving up Steady Aim or the other Cunning Actions, etc).
Such a thing might want some other restriction, probably on exactly what the trigger can be. But I'd be fine with letting it be melee or ranged.
something like...? "Patience (cost: 2d6). rogue picks a target, delaying their attack action for just the right window of opportunity. after all other combatants have had their turn this round, if the target is out of range, dead, or otherwise inaccessible, then the attack is lost. else, rogue may move up to 10ft before sneak attacking their target (regardless of whether sneak attack requirements are met). if rogue is hidden or invisible before this action, this attack does not end that condition."
the wording of the attack is deliberate to allow a sneak attack even if one was used up by opportunity attack before the delayed main attack (thus the 2d6 cost). and the last bit is there so that a high-initiative rogue might be able to get off another sneak attack and still have a bonus action available for whatever that turn. kinda ended up being ranged only until i added a 10ft movement before, but that part could probably go away if it doesn't make enough sense.
To be completely clear, I meant an option for "Cunning Action" (so it costs your Bonus Action), not "Cunning Strike" (costs dice of SA damage). And that it would use/require the Reaction.
Basically, use your action for whatever (presumably an attack), then use your bonus action to, instead of Steady Aim or Hide or Disengage or whatever, ready a second attack to be used as your Reaction. This would absolutely prevent you from making a real AoO or otherwise use your reaction.
ah, i saw "option for Cunning--" and my mind ran away with the only 'Cunning' which i expect is still taking applications for new ideas. a new action for Cunning Action seems a little unlikely since that action would be 'Attack' (or maybe 'Off-Hand Attack,' except that it would clutter the rules with additional explanation for how that applies to two-weapon wielding rogues whose dm allows them to walk around with a pair of loaded hand crossbows without getting snippy about loading properties). which means multiclass dips for an extra attack each round. also, i just don't expect devs are keen to encourage gamey conditional delays like "as soon as it's not my character's turn anymore," because of how they take some people out of the game.
my Cunning Strike thought still stands, though. i figure it's a boon but reduces sneak attack damage by two dice and anyway the attack might be much less worth taking by the time everyone else has had their go (which is a consequence i support). as many have said, the best crowd control is to inflict the 'dead' condition but here this rogue is intentionally leaving targets up to do more damage to the party for some reason. better be a good reason.
But of course Fighter at level 6 is better than Fighter at level 5, and Rogue doesn't happen to scale at that level in any combat-relevant way so the math changes. But that's not a fair comparison, since you specifically choose a level in which one gets a big boost while the other doesn't. At 5th level, on the other hand, both get meaningful features, and it could be said that Fighter's Extra Attack is more useful than the Rogue's +1d6 SA. Uncanny Dodge doesn't add damage so it's not even taken into account.
10 AC is rare but it exists. I just wanted a larger sample pool to show change. More importantly, 65% is just a random number that has no meaning. For a Fighter at level 5 that didn't take any ASI (since you chose a feat) that would be +6 to hit so 65% is AC 13 which is pretty low. 14 for +7 to hit, still pretty low. And as we saw, no-advantage Rogue climbs in comparison to Fighters when hit% is lower. So just choosing 65% is yet another random choice in favour of Fighter, rather than calculating for any AC using variable X (or any AC in a reasonable range). You also don't take crits into account, but those do happen and on average help Rogues more than they do Fighters. So ignoring those is once again tipping things in the Fighter's favour. Especially since Rogue can get advantage which means 9.75% crit.
I don't remember PAM/GWM and Graze as of the latest playtest, so I can't comment much on that. I didn't count in Rogue's access to Weapon Masteries either, so I'm sure the effect doesn't shift much in either's favour. I'll have to look on this later when I can read the documents again (currently on mobile).
Also why shortbow and not rapier for Rogue?
For your 11th level comparison, Fighter got 3 feats so how do they have 20STR? Maybe those feats give +1 to it, I'll need to look again, but otherwise those numbers are just random. Even if they do give +1 each, that still means starting with 17 STR. Possible, but most don't.
And especially, since you don't count crits and assume a rather low AC for the enemy, you make higher levelled Fighter much stronger than they should be, and Rogues weaker than they should be. Any crit with 20d6 SA is a lot of extra damage for that level 20 that is just ignored.
And one last note before I come back to this tomorrow to check on what I don't remember and also compute a better comparison, I don't personally think Rogues with all their skills and damage-mitigating abilities should deal as much damage as a Fighter who has pretty much only that can. I still think your calculations are wrong, but if it turns out at higher levels Rogue falls on average 10%, even 20%, I wouldn't really care. But since at level 5 it is much higher, I dount it will be even that.
Well first thanks for your proper reading and reply.
I just feel the need for that comment : how long do you think "your typical thief" can risk someone else life to land a fatal blow, and have that same someone accepting them in a group, decently speaking, without being mad at it. This is not too extreme to consider that by working with a group u at least try to not risk someone else life. But if you're survival/fighting style requires surprise/opportunity, how do you compose. Thus for me the so called independance of the rogue concept.
Well, fair point, but I didn't mean putting them in danger, but rather let them take hits instead. This isn't different from any spellcaster/archer. Also, if that person knows that by distracting the enemy you can find an opportunity for such a fatal blow, they might (if confident in their ability enough) try to survive as long as they can in hope that you kill it for them. That's your average tank.
And it's not like you need them to work especially hard to distract the enemy (even though it would definitely help). Just being there, trying to kill the thing themselves is quite a big distraction. Compare that to a Wizard that needs a lot more protection and ends up hitting you too with that Fireball.
Without relying on off-turn attacks and ignoring subclasses and consumable resources, the question for rogue vs fighter is whether sneak attack dice outweight extra attacks. I'll look at levels 8, 15, and 20, as 8 and 15 are midway between extra attack breakpoints and 20 is end; there's no point to talking about tier 1 because fighters don't get extra attacks at that level. I'll look at ranged because (a) it's simpler, and (b) the whole business of reaction attacks goes away. I'm not going to dual wield in either case, and I'm going to assume that rogue's easier access to advantage and fighter's archery fighting style come out even in the end. This gives us
At level 8, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+4d6+M, or 23+M. The fighter's dpr is 2d8+10+2M, or 19+2M. If M is less than 4 (likely at this level) the rogue wins.
At level 14, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+7d6+M, or 34+M. The fighter's dpr is 3d8+15+3M, or 28+3M. If M is less than 3 (uncertain at this level) the rogue wins.
At level 20, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+6+10d6+M, or 45+M. The fighter's dpr is 4d8+24+3M, or 42+4M. If M is less than 1 (very unlikely at this level) the rogue wins.
So, for core dpr, they're very comparable. Now, fighters do get more damage-boosting options such as action surge, but rogues get a ton more non-combat utility.
But of course Fighter at level 6 is better than Fighter at level 5, and Rogue doesn't happen to scale at that level in any combat-relevant way so the math changes. But that's not a fair comparison, since you specifically choose a level in which one gets a big boost while the other doesn't. At 5th level, on the other hand, both get meaningful features, and it could be said that Fighter's Extra Attack is more useful than the Rogue's +1d6 SA. Uncanny Dodge doesn't add damage so it's not even taken into account.
10 AC is rare but it exists. I just wanted a larger sample pool to show change. More importantly, 65% is just a random number that has no meaning. For a Fighter at level 5 that didn't take any ASI (since you chose a feat) that would be +6 to hit so 65% is AC 13 which is pretty low. 14 for +7 to hit, still pretty low. And as we saw, no-advantage Rogue climbs in comparison to Fighters when hit% is lower. So just choosing 65% is yet another random choice in favour of Fighter, rather than calculating for any AC using variable X (or any AC in a reasonable range). You also don't take crits into account, but those do happen and on average help Rogues more than they do Fighters. So ignoring those is once again tipping things in the Fighter's favour. Especially since Rogue can get advantage which means 9.75% crit.
I don't remember PAM/GWM and Graze as of the latest playtest, so I can't comment much on that. I didn't count in Rogue's access to Weapon Masteries either, so I'm sure the effect doesn't shift much in either's favour. I'll have to look on this later when I can read the documents again (currently on mobile).
Also why shortbow and not rapier for Rogue?
For your 11th level comparison, Fighter got 3 feats so how do they have 20STR? Maybe those feats give +1 to it, I'll need to look again, but otherwise those numbers are just random. Even if they do give +1 each, that still means starting with 17 STR. Possible, but most don't.
And especially, since you don't count crits and assume a rather low AC for the enemy, you make higher levelled Fighter much stronger than they should be, and Rogues weaker than they should be. Any crit with 20d6 SA is a lot of extra damage for that level 20 that is just ignored.
And one last note before I come back to this tomorrow to check on what I don't remember and also compute a better comparison, I don't personally think Rogues with all their skills and damage-mitigating abilities should deal as much damage as a Fighter who has pretty much only that can. I still think your calculations are wrong, but if it turns out at higher levels Rogue falls on average 10%, even 20%, I wouldn't really care. But since at level 5 it is much higher, I dount it will be even that.
every class gets different things at different levels, but thats mostly because 5es progression is poor (in comparing classes at the same level). but in the fixed progression of previous UAs fighter got feat at 5. Things for the fighter, and the rogue won't drastically change from 6-11, so going by level 5 in this case isn't very illustrative of t2 play.
Level 5 players will often face multiple CR 3 enemies, and sometimes CR5. it actually doesnt greatly effect things as long as you use the same numbers for both, and don't use really high or really low numbers.
I can calculate for crit, but I would do that in anydice, so I just opted out, crit doesnt matter much. fighter is rolling a lot of dice with GS. thief is only slightly more. I also chose graze over topple to make the math simpler, with less assumptions, but in reality, topple is better, and gives advantage so both would have that. Rogue mastery is simple, vex. the rest available don't add damage, and nick, which I considered.
Because I was already assuming advantage on sneak attack, this doesnt effect things much.
I use SB, for the steady aim build, because steady aim requires less movement, I use scimitar for dual wield build because rapier would require the dual wield feat which is worse than charger.
almost every level 4 feat has stats now, and charger, gwm, and pole all can boost str. Starting at 17 will be common now with every race having +2 +1, and most feats giving +1 stats.
mathematically there is no difference between a critical on big attack or a critical on a bunch of smaller attacks (distributive property). and by 20, fighter has similar dice damage per attack action than rogue. (6d6 +d10+d4with reroll 1+2)= (6*4.15+6.3+3)=34.26 versus 11*3.5 for rogue=38.5. once you consider that this is a 5-10% chance, that difference in dpr becomes very slight. the one advantage is, thief may have easier advantage? maybe because lots of high end enemies have Blindsight and truesight. And high end fighters have tons of means of advantage including advantage when they miss. regardless, at 20 you are talking a difference of maybe 1.2dpr for rogue best case (10% crit chance versus 7% on fighter)
and like I said, this doesnt include action surge, magic items, or subclasses which likely favor fighter. no matter how you slice it rogue is far behind other martials.
Without relying on off-turn attacks and ignoring subclasses and consumable resources, the question for rogue vs fighter is whether sneak attack dice outweight extra attacks. I'll look at levels 8, 15, and 20, as 8 and 15 are midway between extra attack breakpoints and 20 is end; there's no point to talking about tier 1 because fighters don't get extra attacks at that level. I'll look at ranged because (a) it's simpler, and (b) the whole business of reaction attacks goes away. I'm not going to dual wield in either case, and I'm going to assume that rogue's easier access to advantage and fighter's archery fighting style come out even in the end. This gives us
At level 8, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+4d6+M, or 23+M. The fighter's dpr is 2d8+10+2M, or 19+2M. If M is less than 4 (likely at this level) the rogue wins.+
At level 14, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+7d6+M, or 34+M. The fighter's dpr is 3d8+15+3M, or 28+3M. If M is less than 3 (uncertain at this level) the rogue wins.
At level 20, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+6+10d6+M, or 45+M. The fighter's dpr is 4d8+24+3M, or 42+4M. If M is less than 1 (very unlikely at this level) the rogue wins.
So, for core dpr, they're very comparable. Now, fighters do get more damage-boosting options such as action surge, but rogues get a ton more non-combat utility.
What is your M? what is the number in the middle 1d8+5+4d6+M
your comparison is bad. ranged is not the high dps playstyle for fighter
rogue doesnt have easier access to advantage, they both basically always have it. ammunition only has a few masteries. vex is the DPS choice.
you choose ranged, which is less dps, you ignore feats, which favor fighter. Its like let's assume the fighter doesnt use half of its features, looks the same.
why isn't the fighter using heavy xbow?
your base assumptions don't accurately represent a fighter.
Ok, I'm guessing your M is for magic weapon.
regardless ignoring feats is literally ignoring fighter features, which links to ignoring dual wielding, which benefits fighter via xbow expert and full martial weapon proficiency. And you ignore mastery. You basically ignore all of fighter's signature stuff.
To everyone who'd like to see the numbers, here's a chart about numbers. Sure Rogue could to a basic DPR, but the promblem doesn't lie in unoptimized characters. The problem lies in characters with any sort of optimizations. Their floor is similar, but their ceiling has been far beyond than a Rogue could do. The gap has been way too big.
To everyone who'd like to see the numbers, here's a chart about numbers. Sure Rogue could to a basic DPR, but the promblem doesn't lie in unoptimized characters. The problem lies in characters with any sort of optimizations. Their floor is similar, but their ceiling has been far beyond than a Rogue could do. The gap has been way too big.
To everyone who'd like to see the numbers, here's a chart about numbers. Sure Rogue could to a basic DPR, but the promblem doesn't lie in unoptimized characters. The problem lies in characters with any sort of optimizations. Their floor is similar, but their ceiling has been far beyond than a Rogue could do. The gap has been way too big.
Your idea of way too large and mine seem to be very different. Their DPR on your charts look fine. Sure eldritch knight is much higher but one build with limited resources being better is not that big of a deal to me. If it was any higher the question would be why would you play any other martial as the rogue is better at skills.
I'm unclear on how you're modeling things, but there's a potentially important thing for the rogue: the level 20 feature Stroke of Luck can turn a miss into a critical hit. In situations where you have advantage you don't miss often enough for this to be a significant dpr boost, but it's non-zero.
In any case, a skills-based character doing lower raw damage than a pure damage build is not really a problem.
Without relying on off-turn attacks and ignoring subclasses and consumable resources, the question for rogue vs fighter is whether sneak attack dice outweight extra attacks. I'll look at levels 8, 15, and 20, as 8 and 15 are midway between extra attack breakpoints and 20 is end; there's no point to talking about tier 1 because fighters don't get extra attacks at that level. I'll look at ranged because (a) it's simpler, and (b) the whole business of reaction attacks goes away. I'm not going to dual wield in either case, and I'm going to assume that rogue's easier access to advantage and fighter's archery fighting style come out even in the end. This gives us
At level 8, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+4d6+M, or 23+M. The fighter's dpr is 2d8+10+2M, or 19+2M. If M is less than 4 (likely at this level) the rogue wins.+
At level 14, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+7d6+M, or 34+M. The fighter's dpr is 3d8+15+3M, or 28+3M. If M is less than 3 (uncertain at this level) the rogue wins.
At level 20, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+6+10d6+M, or 45+M. The fighter's dpr is 4d8+24+3M, or 42+4M. If M is less than 1 (very unlikely at this level) the rogue wins.
So, for core dpr, they're very comparable. Now, fighters do get more damage-boosting options such as action surge, but rogues get a ton more non-combat utility.
What is your M? what is the number in the middle 1d8+5+4d6+M
your comparison is bad. ranged is not the high dps playstyle for fighter
rogue doesnt have easier access to advantage, they both basically always have it. ammunition only has a few masteries. vex is the DPS choice.
you choose ranged, which is less dps, you ignore feats, which favor fighter. Its like let's assume the fighter doesnt use half of its features, looks the same.
why isn't the fighter using heavy xbow?
your base assumptions don't accurately represent a fighter.
Ok, I'm guessing your M is for magic weapon.
regardless ignoring feats is literally ignoring fighter features, which links to ignoring dual wielding, which benefits fighter via xbow expert and full martial weapon proficiency. And you ignore mastery. You basically ignore all of fighter's signature stuff.
I guess feats favor fighters in that they get one more than the rogue, but odds are they both will have their damage side in feats covered roughly the same level depending on build. If your point is there is one specific build of fighter which does far better in DPR, um okay. That sounds like something they should look at so people are not motivated into just doing one fighter build, and less to do with fighter/rogue balance.
Essentially I want all Rogues to have access to the same damage without having to build the Rogue and party around guaranteeing a reaction attack most rounds, as it's such a weird way for Rogues to play in practice. I want Rogues to be high risk, high reward combatants who can mess up a target but get into trouble fast if they can't escape afterwards.
One thing I'd consider is adding yet-another Cunning Action option, where the rogue can Ready an off-turn attack (technically a delayed "extra" attack). That way they could proc a second sneak attack per round without needing an AoO or party member's feature, but have to burn their bonus action to do it (giving up Steady Aim or the other Cunning Actions, etc).
Such a thing might want some other restriction, probably on exactly what the trigger can be. But I'd be fine with letting it be melee or ranged.
something like...? "Patience (cost: 2d6). rogue picks a target, delaying their attack action for just the right window of opportunity. after all other combatants have had their turn this round, if the target is out of range, dead, or otherwise inaccessible, then the attack is lost. else, rogue may move up to 10ft before sneak attacking their target (regardless of whether sneak attack requirements are met). if rogue is hidden or invisible before this action, this attack does not end that condition."
the wording of the attack is deliberate to allow a sneak attack even if one was used up by opportunity attack before the delayed main attack (thus the 2d6 cost). and the last bit is there so that a high-initiative rogue might be able to get off another sneak attack and still have a bonus action available for whatever that turn. kinda ended up being ranged only until i added a 10ft movement before, but that part could probably go away if it doesn't make enough sense.
To be completely clear, I meant an option for "Cunning Action" (so it costs your Bonus Action), not "Cunning Strike" (costs dice of SA damage). And that it would use/require the Reaction.
Basically, use your action for whatever (presumably an attack), then use your bonus action to, instead of Steady Aim or Hide or Disengage or whatever, ready a second attack to be used as your Reaction. This would absolutely prevent you from making a real AoO or otherwise use your reaction.
So:
Cunning Action Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each of your turns in combat. This action can be used only to take the Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Ready action.
And then some verbiage that you get some or all of your Sneak Attack dice for that Ready action (possibly separately from the current turn's Sneak Attack dice and/or your next turn's Sneak Attack dice ... or maybe you have to save some of this turn's SA dice to possibly use for that Ready action).
Without relying on off-turn attacks and ignoring subclasses and consumable resources, the question for rogue vs fighter is whether sneak attack dice outweight extra attacks. I'll look at levels 8, 15, and 20, as 8 and 15 are midway between extra attack breakpoints and 20 is end; there's no point to talking about tier 1 because fighters don't get extra attacks at that level. I'll look at ranged because (a) it's simpler, and (b) the whole business of reaction attacks goes away. I'm not going to dual wield in either case, and I'm going to assume that rogue's easier access to advantage and fighter's archery fighting style come out even in the end. This gives us
At level 8, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+4d6+M, or 23+M. The fighter's dpr is 2d8+10+2M, or 19+2M. If M is less than 4 (likely at this level) the rogue wins.+
At level 14, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+5+7d6+M, or 34+M. The fighter's dpr is 3d8+15+3M, or 28+3M. If M is less than 3 (uncertain at this level) the rogue wins.
At level 20, the ranged rogue's dpr is 1d8+6+10d6+M, or 45+M. The fighter's dpr is 4d8+24+3M, or 42+4M. If M is less than 1 (very unlikely at this level) the rogue wins.
So, for core dpr, they're very comparable. Now, fighters do get more damage-boosting options such as action surge, but rogues get a ton more non-combat utility.
What is your M? what is the number in the middle 1d8+5+4d6+M
your comparison is bad. ranged is not the high dps playstyle for fighter
rogue doesnt have easier access to advantage, they both basically always have it. ammunition only has a few masteries. vex is the DPS choice.
you choose ranged, which is less dps, you ignore feats, which favor fighter. Its like let's assume the fighter doesnt use half of its features, looks the same.
why isn't the fighter using heavy xbow?
your base assumptions don't accurately represent a fighter.
Ok, I'm guessing your M is for magic weapon.
regardless ignoring feats is literally ignoring fighter features, which links to ignoring dual wielding, which benefits fighter via xbow expert and full martial weapon proficiency. And you ignore mastery. You basically ignore all of fighter's signature stuff.
I guess feats favor fighters in that they get one more than the rogue, but odds are they both will have their damage side in feats covered roughly the same level depending on build. If your point is there is one specific build of fighter which does far better in DPR, um okay. That sounds like something they should look at so people are not motivated into just doing one fighter build, and less to do with fighter/rogue balance.
rogue doesnt have great damage feats, because most damage feats and features for martials are built around multiple hits. They also purposefully limit rogues access to things like fighting styles, ranged martial weapons, non finesse weapons.
There are a number of useful feats. You also choose ranged, when ranged is designed to have less synergy, and one specific weapon, when the fighter is designed to be able to take advantage of multiple weapons.
the cornerstones of fighter is
fighting styles
mastery of multiple weapons and armor
extra feats
your analysis is like almost purposefully ignoring everything that the fighter would have, as a customizable class.
if they want to range, they will probably take advantage of dual wielding and xbow expert, because that is a martial weapon they get access to that thief doesnt. Thats on purpose. They will use heavy xbows, and might take GWM because heavy weapons get a damage bonus.
this isnt about hyper specific builds, the fighter's whole shtick is having more and better weapon access, and more ways to specialize those weapons/playstyles while also being baseline good at all weapons.
i can make a xbow build that does better than your description, a throwing weapon build that does better, a melee/ranged mix, a pure melee heavy style, probably even a 1handed style. its not just one build, its the fact that fighter is designed in opposition to your projected fighter. you basically filter out the things holding rogue back by making the fighter ignore most game mechanics.
and all that aside, your wrong about rogue having better access to advantage. which basically throws your calcs off by like 7% minimum. (which is another reason why its odd, you picked the least effective fighting style when considered with one dnds access to advantage)
Essentially I want all Rogues to have access to the same damage without having to build the Rogue and party around guaranteeing a reaction attack most rounds, as it's such a weird way for Rogues to play in practice. I want Rogues to be high risk, high reward combatants who can mess up a target but get into trouble fast if they can't escape afterwards.
One thing I'd consider is adding yet-another Cunning Action option, where the rogue can Ready an off-turn attack (technically a delayed "extra" attack). That way they could proc a second sneak attack per round without needing an AoO or party member's feature, but have to burn their bonus action to do it (giving up Steady Aim or the other Cunning Actions, etc).
Such a thing might want some other restriction, probably on exactly what the trigger can be. But I'd be fine with letting it be melee or ranged.
<snip>
<snip> Basically, use your action for whatever (presumably an attack), then use your bonus action to, instead of Steady Aim or Hide or Disengage or whatever, ready a second attack to be used as your Reaction. This would absolutely prevent you from making a real AoO or otherwise use your reaction.
So:
Cunning Action Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each of your turns in combat. This action can be used only to take the Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Ready action.
And then some verbiage that you get some or all of your Sneak Attack dice for that Ready action (possibly separately from the current turn's Sneak Attack dice and/or your next turn's Sneak Attack dice ... or maybe you have to save some of this turn's SA dice to possibly use for that Ready action).
That's what you're looking for?
Note: I'm not really "looking" for anything; I think Rogue is fine and has always been fine. I was just idly considering a way to let Rogues do the off-turn second-sneak-attack thing without needing a different party member to optimize for it. "Spend your Bonus Action and Reaction" seems like a fair cost, especially since Rogues have such valuable uses for both of those, and the person I was responding to wanted a risk-vs-reward thing.
I haven't really put much thought into how to word it, but a few notes:
Probably not as generic as a full Ready. I'd want some limits on what can be done with it (attack only) and what the trigger can be (the target must take an action? dunno.)
I'd want the resulting attack to be classified as an Attack of Opportunity, I think. So abilities (like Mobile) that protect someone from AoO would protect from this.
Given the above, it'd also need to be clarified that this kind of attack can be done ranged, which is unlike most other AoOs.
Some clarifying notes on how you can get another SA on someone else's turn could be nice, but I guess this also depends on just what they land on in the new version of Rogue.
Essentially I want all Rogues to have access to the same damage without having to build the Rogue and party around guaranteeing a reaction attack most rounds, as it's such a weird way for Rogues to play in practice. I want Rogues to be high risk, high reward combatants who can mess up a target but get into trouble fast if they can't escape afterwards.
One thing I'd consider is adding yet-another Cunning Action option, where the rogue can Ready an off-turn attack (technically a delayed "extra" attack). That way they could proc a second sneak attack per round without needing an AoO or party member's feature, but have to burn their bonus action to do it (giving up Steady Aim or the other Cunning Actions, etc).
Such a thing might want some other restriction, probably on exactly what the trigger can be. But I'd be fine with letting it be melee or ranged.
something like...? "Patience (cost: 2d6). rogue picks a target, delaying their attack action for just the right window of opportunity. after all other combatants have had their turn this round, if the target is out of range, dead, or otherwise inaccessible, then the attack is lost. else, rogue may move up to 10ft before sneak attacking their target (regardless of whether sneak attack requirements are met). if rogue is hidden or invisible before this action, this attack does not end that condition."
the wording of the attack is deliberate to allow a sneak attack even if one was used up by opportunity attack before the delayed main attack (thus the 2d6 cost). and the last bit is there so that a high-initiative rogue might be able to get off another sneak attack and still have a bonus action available for whatever that turn. kinda ended up being ranged only until i added a 10ft movement before, but that part could probably go away if it doesn't make enough sense.
To be completely clear, I meant an option for "Cunning Action" (so it costs your Bonus Action), not "Cunning Strike" (costs dice of SA damage). And that it would use/require the Reaction.
Basically, use your action for whatever (presumably an attack), then use your bonus action to, instead of Steady Aim or Hide or Disengage or whatever, ready a second attack to be used as your Reaction. This would absolutely prevent you from making a real AoO or otherwise use your reaction.
So:
Cunning Action Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each of your turns in combat. This action can be used only to take the Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Ready action.
And then some verbiage that you get some or all of your Sneak Attack dice for that Ready action (possibly separately from the current turn's Sneak Attack dice and/or your next turn's Sneak Attack dice ... or maybe you have to save some of this turn's SA dice to possibly use for that Ready action). No That's what you're looking for?
Everyone smart would literally just cunning action ready an action to attack at the start of the next person’s turn. Since it’s no longer the rogue’s turn they can qualify for sneak attack again. This would be better than just giving them extra attack but clunky. It takes very little thought to make this work. So it might be too strong
Everyone smart would literally just cunning action ready an action to attack at the start of the next person’s turn. Since it’s no longer the rogue’s turn they can qualify for sneak attack again. This would be better than just giving them extra attack but clunky. It takes very little thought to make this work. So it might be too strong
Maybe Cunning Action adds Ready actionOnly to use it as an attack, and with the penalty of doing it WITH DISADVANTAGE (This will be neutralized if an advantage is obtained.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
something like...? "Patience (cost: 2d6). rogue picks a target, delaying their attack action for just the right window of opportunity. after all other combatants have had their turn this round, if the target is out of range, dead, or otherwise inaccessible, then the attack is lost. else, rogue may move up to 10ft before sneak attacking their target (regardless of whether sneak attack requirements are met). if rogue is hidden or invisible before this action, this attack does not end that condition."
the wording of the attack is deliberate to allow a sneak attack even if one was used up by opportunity attack before the delayed main attack (thus the 2d6 cost). and the last bit is there so that a high-initiative rogue might be able to get off another sneak attack and still have a bonus action available for whatever that turn. kinda ended up being ranged only until i added a 10ft movement before, but that part could probably go away if it doesn't make enough sense.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
Are you seriously trying to argue Bard, probably the lowest DPR class in the game... does more damage than Rogue, one of the higher DPR classes in the game.... that's just crazy. Maybe if you go into some crazy build using particular subclasses, there could be a few potential builds once you get to level 10 where it catches up but bard DPR is terrible.
As for utility, yes Bard gets more, they are support based so supplying utility is literally what that class does but it's still weaker than Rogue at stealth/scouting most of the time since by the time bard gets any decent spells for that, rogue has reliable talent which basically means, never failing any check you're proficient in be that checking for traps/perception, lock picking, stealth, etc. So rogue has less but still serves the scout role better than Bard does.
To be completely clear, I meant an option for "Cunning Action" (so it costs your Bonus Action), not "Cunning Strike" (costs dice of SA damage). And that it would use/require the Reaction.
Basically, use your action for whatever (presumably an attack), then use your bonus action to, instead of Steady Aim or Hide or Disengage or whatever, ready a second attack to be used as your Reaction. This would absolutely prevent you from making a real AoO or otherwise use your reaction.
ah, i saw "option for Cunning--" and my mind ran away with the only 'Cunning' which i expect is still taking applications for new ideas. a new action for Cunning Action seems a little unlikely since that action would be 'Attack' (or maybe 'Off-Hand Attack,' except that it would clutter the rules with additional explanation for how that applies to two-weapon wielding rogues whose dm allows them to walk around with a pair of loaded hand crossbows without getting snippy about loading properties). which means multiclass dips for an extra attack each round. also, i just don't expect devs are keen to encourage gamey conditional delays like "as soon as it's not my character's turn anymore," because of how they take some people out of the game.
my Cunning Strike thought still stands, though. i figure it's a boon but reduces sneak attack damage by two dice and anyway the attack might be much less worth taking by the time everyone else has had their go (which is a consequence i support). as many have said, the best crowd control is to inflict the 'dead' condition but here this rogue is intentionally leaving targets up to do more damage to the party for some reason. better be a good reason.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
But of course Fighter at level 6 is better than Fighter at level 5, and Rogue doesn't happen to scale at that level in any combat-relevant way so the math changes. But that's not a fair comparison, since you specifically choose a level in which one gets a big boost while the other doesn't. At 5th level, on the other hand, both get meaningful features, and it could be said that Fighter's Extra Attack is more useful than the Rogue's +1d6 SA. Uncanny Dodge doesn't add damage so it's not even taken into account.
10 AC is rare but it exists. I just wanted a larger sample pool to show change. More importantly, 65% is just a random number that has no meaning. For a Fighter at level 5 that didn't take any ASI (since you chose a feat) that would be +6 to hit so 65% is AC 13 which is pretty low. 14 for +7 to hit, still pretty low. And as we saw, no-advantage Rogue climbs in comparison to Fighters when hit% is lower. So just choosing 65% is yet another random choice in favour of Fighter, rather than calculating for any AC using variable X (or any AC in a reasonable range). You also don't take crits into account, but those do happen and on average help Rogues more than they do Fighters. So ignoring those is once again tipping things in the Fighter's favour. Especially since Rogue can get advantage which means 9.75% crit.
I don't remember PAM/GWM and Graze as of the latest playtest, so I can't comment much on that. I didn't count in Rogue's access to Weapon Masteries either, so I'm sure the effect doesn't shift much in either's favour. I'll have to look on this later when I can read the documents again (currently on mobile).
Also why shortbow and not rapier for Rogue?
For your 11th level comparison, Fighter got 3 feats so how do they have 20STR? Maybe those feats give +1 to it, I'll need to look again, but otherwise those numbers are just random. Even if they do give +1 each, that still means starting with 17 STR. Possible, but most don't.
And especially, since you don't count crits and assume a rather low AC for the enemy, you make higher levelled Fighter much stronger than they should be, and Rogues weaker than they should be. Any crit with 20d6 SA is a lot of extra damage for that level 20 that is just ignored.
And one last note before I come back to this tomorrow to check on what I don't remember and also compute a better comparison, I don't personally think Rogues with all their skills and damage-mitigating abilities should deal as much damage as a Fighter who has pretty much only that can. I still think your calculations are wrong, but if it turns out at higher levels Rogue falls on average 10%, even 20%, I wouldn't really care. But since at level 5 it is much higher, I dount it will be even that.
Varielky
Well, fair point, but I didn't mean putting them in danger, but rather let them take hits instead. This isn't different from any spellcaster/archer. Also, if that person knows that by distracting the enemy you can find an opportunity for such a fatal blow, they might (if confident in their ability enough) try to survive as long as they can in hope that you kill it for them. That's your average tank.
And it's not like you need them to work especially hard to distract the enemy (even though it would definitely help). Just being there, trying to kill the thing themselves is quite a big distraction. Compare that to a Wizard that needs a lot more protection and ends up hitting you too with that Fireball.
Varielky
If they print the last Rogue we saw in the UA it will be fine. Rogue doesn’t need to be the best at everything.
Without relying on off-turn attacks and ignoring subclasses and consumable resources, the question for rogue vs fighter is whether sneak attack dice outweight extra attacks. I'll look at levels 8, 15, and 20, as 8 and 15 are midway between extra attack breakpoints and 20 is end; there's no point to talking about tier 1 because fighters don't get extra attacks at that level. I'll look at ranged because (a) it's simpler, and (b) the whole business of reaction attacks goes away. I'm not going to dual wield in either case, and I'm going to assume that rogue's easier access to advantage and fighter's archery fighting style come out even in the end. This gives us
So, for core dpr, they're very comparable. Now, fighters do get more damage-boosting options such as action surge, but rogues get a ton more non-combat utility.
every class gets different things at different levels, but thats mostly because 5es progression is poor (in comparing classes at the same level). but in the fixed progression of previous UAs fighter got feat at 5. Things for the fighter, and the rogue won't drastically change from 6-11, so going by level 5 in this case isn't very illustrative of t2 play.
the 65% AC is based on the average value of monsters to players at every level, and what monster you usually face by encounter building. https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/2nn6ld/the_monster_quick_stats_by_cr_table/ and
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/2nn6ld/the_monster_quick_stats_by_cr_table/
Level 5 players will often face multiple CR 3 enemies, and sometimes CR5. it actually doesnt greatly effect things as long as you use the same numbers for both, and don't use really high or really low numbers.
I can calculate for crit, but I would do that in anydice, so I just opted out, crit doesnt matter much. fighter is rolling a lot of dice with GS. thief is only slightly more. I also chose graze over topple to make the math simpler, with less assumptions, but in reality, topple is better, and gives advantage so both would have that. Rogue mastery is simple, vex. the rest available don't add damage, and nick, which I considered.
Because I was already assuming advantage on sneak attack, this doesnt effect things much.
I use SB, for the steady aim build, because steady aim requires less movement, I use scimitar for dual wield build because rapier would require the dual wield feat which is worse than charger.
almost every level 4 feat has stats now, and charger, gwm, and pole all can boost str. Starting at 17 will be common now with every race having +2 +1, and most feats giving +1 stats.
mathematically there is no difference between a critical on big attack or a critical on a bunch of smaller attacks (distributive property). and by 20, fighter has similar dice damage per attack action than rogue. (6d6 +d10+d4with reroll 1+2)= (6*4.15+6.3+3)=34.26 versus 11*3.5 for rogue=38.5. once you consider that this is a 5-10% chance, that difference in dpr becomes very slight. the one advantage is, thief may have easier advantage? maybe because lots of high end enemies have Blindsight and truesight. And high end fighters have tons of means of advantage including advantage when they miss. regardless, at 20 you are talking a difference of maybe 1.2dpr for rogue best case (10% crit chance versus 7% on fighter)
and like I said, this doesnt include action surge, magic items, or subclasses which likely favor fighter. no matter how you slice it rogue is far behind other martials.
What is your M? what is the number in the middle 1d8+5+4d6+M
your comparison is bad. ranged is not the high dps playstyle for fighter
rogue doesnt have easier access to advantage, they both basically always have it. ammunition only has a few masteries. vex is the DPS choice.
you choose ranged, which is less dps, you ignore feats, which favor fighter. Its like let's assume the fighter doesnt use half of its features, looks the same.
why isn't the fighter using heavy xbow?
your base assumptions don't accurately represent a fighter.
Ok, I'm guessing your M is for magic weapon.
regardless ignoring feats is literally ignoring fighter features, which links to ignoring dual wielding, which benefits fighter via xbow expert and full martial weapon proficiency. And you ignore mastery. You basically ignore all of fighter's signature stuff.
To everyone who'd like to see the numbers, here's a chart about numbers. Sure Rogue could to a basic DPR, but the promblem doesn't lie in unoptimized characters. The problem lies in characters with any sort of optimizations. Their floor is similar, but their ceiling has been far beyond than a Rogue could do. The gap has been way too big.
Chart: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1swPiGeFYu6kSXr5vlPXqYYHJQ7JpFfZH/htmlview#gid=1686024488
To everyone who'd like to see the numbers, here's a chart about numbers. Sure Rogue could to a basic DPR, but the promblem doesn't lie in unoptimized characters. The problem lies in characters with any sort of optimizations. Their floor is similar, but their ceiling has been far beyond than a Rogue could do. The gap has been way too big.
Chart: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/0/d/1swPiGeFYu6kSXr5vlPXqYYHJQ7JpFfZH/htmlview#gid=1686024488
Your idea of way too large and mine seem to be very different. Their DPR on your charts look fine. Sure eldritch knight is much higher but one build with limited resources being better is not that big of a deal to me. If it was any higher the question would be why would you play any other martial as the rogue is better at skills.
I'm unclear on how you're modeling things, but there's a potentially important thing for the rogue: the level 20 feature Stroke of Luck can turn a miss into a critical hit. In situations where you have advantage you don't miss often enough for this to be a significant dpr boost, but it's non-zero.
In any case, a skills-based character doing lower raw damage than a pure damage build is not really a problem.
I guess feats favor fighters in that they get one more than the rogue, but odds are they both will have their damage side in feats covered roughly the same level depending on build. If your point is there is one specific build of fighter which does far better in DPR, um okay. That sounds like something they should look at so people are not motivated into just doing one fighter build, and less to do with fighter/rogue balance.
So:
Cunning Action
Starting at 2nd level, your quick thinking and agility allow you to move and act quickly. You can take a bonus action on each of your turns in combat. This action can be used only to take the Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Ready action.
And then some verbiage that you get some or all of your Sneak Attack dice for that Ready action (possibly separately from the current turn's Sneak Attack dice and/or your next turn's Sneak Attack dice ... or maybe you have to save some of this turn's SA dice to possibly use for that Ready action).
That's what you're looking for?
rogue doesnt have great damage feats, because most damage feats and features for martials are built around multiple hits. They also purposefully limit rogues access to things like fighting styles, ranged martial weapons, non finesse weapons.
There are a number of useful feats. You also choose ranged, when ranged is designed to have less synergy, and one specific weapon, when the fighter is designed to be able to take advantage of multiple weapons.
the cornerstones of fighter is
fighting styles
mastery of multiple weapons and armor
extra feats
your analysis is like almost purposefully ignoring everything that the fighter would have, as a customizable class.
if they want to range, they will probably take advantage of dual wielding and xbow expert, because that is a martial weapon they get access to that thief doesnt. Thats on purpose. They will use heavy xbows, and might take GWM because heavy weapons get a damage bonus.
this isnt about hyper specific builds, the fighter's whole shtick is having more and better weapon access, and more ways to specialize those weapons/playstyles while also being baseline good at all weapons.
i can make a xbow build that does better than your description, a throwing weapon build that does better, a melee/ranged mix, a pure melee heavy style, probably even a 1handed style. its not just one build, its the fact that fighter is designed in opposition to your projected fighter. you basically filter out the things holding rogue back by making the fighter ignore most game mechanics.
and all that aside, your wrong about rogue having better access to advantage. which basically throws your calcs off by like 7% minimum. (which is another reason why its odd, you picked the least effective fighting style when considered with one dnds access to advantage)
Note: I'm not really "looking" for anything; I think Rogue is fine and has always been fine. I was just idly considering a way to let Rogues do the off-turn second-sneak-attack thing without needing a different party member to optimize for it. "Spend your Bonus Action and Reaction" seems like a fair cost, especially since Rogues have such valuable uses for both of those, and the person I was responding to wanted a risk-vs-reward thing.
I haven't really put much thought into how to word it, but a few notes:
Everyone smart would literally just cunning action ready an action to attack at the start of the next person’s turn. Since it’s no longer the rogue’s turn they can qualify for sneak attack again. This would be better than just giving them extra attack but clunky. It takes very little thought to make this work. So it might be too strong
Maybe Cunning Action adds Ready action Only to use it as an attack, and with the penalty of doing it WITH DISADVANTAGE (This will be neutralized if an advantage is obtained.)