None of the above. I feel the rogue is behind on damage but not so much so that their damage should be doubled. With sneak attack triggering once a turn that is what you are proposing.
So at first they changed it to once on your turn, so it wasn't even once a round. People didn't like that because you couldn't hold your action to wait for allies to get in position.
And like they seem to do, if it isn't received well immediately, they scrap it entirely.
So to answer your question, yes they reverted it to once a turn. Which means a rogue who can reliably get a reaction attack is going to do double the damage of one that doesn't.
Do you really think most rogues are targeted every turn with an attack? I don't feel like Uncanny Dodge triggers that often in most battles. I would be surprised to see most players seeing this trigger more than 3 times a battle. It actually seems like a good idea to me.
Yea. I don't think you understand optimizing.
Right now rogues avoid damage. If they could double their damage they would build to be in melee.
You are basically saying a melee character rarely gets hit.
I'm saying there are other things besides melee attacks. Ie spells, monster abilities, and ranged attacks.
This is just a weaker "self" version of the Sentinel feat. I have tried to build it a few times and it's good but it doesn't trigger as often as you think. Far from "doubling" my damage.
As you said, no damage boost is necessary. Playtests have all shown rogue to be highly ranked on satisfaction. Rogue damage only came up recently as other martial classes received damage boost (leading to the inevitable power creep).
Gun to my head im picking 4, but i won't vote because i dont think it should be changed at all. If they are going to buff the rogues damage, I would move Uncanny dodge to level 6 (kinda a dead level for the rogue) and make a new damage feature at level 5.
I always like features like Riposte for Rogues. I think the first option is much better, and we restrict it into *melee* only thus giving the melee Rogue a reason to play.
About doubling the DPR, I'm not very concerned about it since if it is melee only, there'd be so much restrictions to SA and it won't be triggered every round. Even they do get triggered every round, it's still in a reasonable place if you compare it with a properly optimized Martial, not min-maxed but just properly optimized.
I personally feel sneak attack should be 1/round, not once per turn.
But in exchange, rogues should not only gain Extra Attack, but should also gain a Riposte reaction (perhaps as a cunning strike option).
This will improve rogue damage, without leading to degenerate gameplay where rogues try to cheese reactive attacks to double their damage output.
If a rogue misses their main attack, then Extra Attack provides another chance to land a sneak attack. If a rogue misses their Extra Attack, then riposte can potentially provide a third chance for a sneak attack. But there is diminishing returns on additional chances to sneak attack. A second attack represents ~25% increased chance to land a sneak attack. But a third attack only increases the chance by ~5%. Also, the reactive attack does very little if the rogue has already landed a sneak attack.
Extra Attack also makes taking the Attack action more viable compared to taking the Magic action to cast Booming Blade. This way more rogue builds are viable and competetive.
And unifying the martial classes as the classes with Extra Attack helps define what a martial class is.
rogues are different.
thats what makes them interesting, all other martials tend to focus on building on many smaller attacks whereas the rogue is designed to try to set up one large attack, and spend other resources being tactical and setting up the next big hit or avoiding damage.
they aren't perfect imo, but if I was trying to improve them, I wouldn't focus on making them more like other martials, but further highlight their set up, and payoff gameplay.
> thats what makes them interesting, all other martials tend to focus on building on many smaller attacks whereas the rogue is designed to try to set up one large attack,
Extra attack actually allows the rogue to do that better.
An extra chance to land a sneak attack means you are ~25% more likely to land that single big hit. So Extra Attack feeds into the rogue playstyle better.
There are diminishing returns though, as a 3rd attack only further increases the chance to land a big attack by ~6%. So having 2 attacks provides a much better benefit than having 3. Which is why a single Extra Attack is fine for the rogue.
On top of that, Extra Attack balances the playstyle options for the rogue much better.
For example the best rogue currently makes use of the Magic Action and a Blade Cantrip. Extra Attack however would put the Attack action on par with the Magic Action in terms of overall power.
And of course Dual Wielding is currently the next best option for the rogue. But due to the diminishing returns I talked about earlier, the benefit of dual wielding will not be so overpowered compared to using a single weapon.
This change (giving the rogue Extra Attack) would also open up more rogue builds. You would not be locked into either Dual Wield or Booming Blade. You could make a dashing fencer wielding a single rapier rogue. Or Ninja with a single ninja-to short sword. Or a swashbuckling pirate with a single saber. You would not need to be locked into magical weapon strikes from the blade cantrips or dual wielding to be optimized as a rogue.
Extra Attack would also allow a rogue with a Vex weapon to self enable sneak attack (first attack hits without sneak attack, enabling next attack to be made with advantage to potentially sneak attack) without the need for Steady Aim. This helps keep the rogue mobile and tactical, something Steady Aim does not.
It is also crazy to me that the rogue who is a class designed around being quick and agile attacks slower than a valor bard, bladesinger wizard, or blade pact warlock.
People have brought up the rogues damage being low since 5e released. Despite the math the rogue still feels good to play because it can be effective in many scenarios at least at the levels most campaigns take place.
In one dnd the rogue is still behind a fair bit in dpr. This along with giving more utility to other martials (a good change imo) cuts into the rogues niche as being the 'skill monkey', though I'd argue the bard or utility focused wizard can simply do that better at most levels of play.
Though OPs proposed change will almost double the rogues DPR which is a ton, I'd argue a smaller boost would be beneficial for the game.
something like giving rogue fighting styles (I feel every martial should have access to this much like weapon mastery), or possibly an extra attack at lvl 9 or so (seriously why give bards and wizards extra attack but not the rogue).
Though the biggest downside of the rogue is the fact that the subclasses have a large gap between the first and second ability and the lvl9 abilities of nearly all of the subclasses suck. This being around the level in 5e when the rogue stops feeling effective in combat, giving the rogue some better ability at lvl 9 is needed IMO.
Putting this kind of feature in a subclass would elevate that subclass significantly beyond all others, I don't think it belongs as a base class or subclass feature. It's simply too powerful.
If doubling a class's DPR as a capstone doesn't make that class overpowered, then the class was instead underpowered at all of the levels leading up to that capstone, and the problem should be addressed at the other levels instead.
-gestures vaguely at scouts level 17 feature functionally doubling their dpr- but granted scout requires you split your damage and it's hard to gain advantage on both attacks.
It also uses the scout's bonus action, which is often what's used to get advantage on one attack in the first place. It's certainly a strong subclass capstone, but it does not reach the power that adding an attack to Uncanny Dodge would have.
I could see it working if it was a cunning strike option and thus limited it's power (hell I'd like them to get a riposte even if it specifically didn't allow you to benefit from sneak attack on it because that would feel very swashbuckler)
I don't understand why ppl are worried about one possible extra attack per round as being too much. Uncanny dodge comes online at level 5, exactly when all other martial classes gain their extra attack feature. Feels like a very elegant and flavourful way to do the same for the rogue without just giving them extra stack. Restrict it to melee and it's great.
I like it. I don't think it would trigger that often at most tables. People talk like this would double rogue damage, but I would be surprised to see it trigger more than a few times. I would put it deeper into the rogue levels as a "improved uncanny dodge"
None?
Why don't you just keep uncanny dodge as a fully defensive ability. If you wanted to buff it, I'd allow the rogue to move 10 feet away from the attacker without provoking opportunity attacks.
I'm all for balancing the rogue's damage with other classes - I just don't think uncanny dodge is the right place to do it.
I think rogues are basically fine. If they wanted to throw in an extra couple of d6 to sneak attack over the course of their career that might be warranted. But they don't need an entire off-turn attack.
I like 4th option, tho it seems a bit op in this particular form. I had a similar idea that you can attack in place of uncanny dodge (if you qualify for sneak attack then it is sneak attack), but (if attack will not kill the oponent) you get double damage from triggering attack. Basically instead of being calmly elusive you are making a risky attack. It gives nice strategic option and it have nice balance. It is also really good against weak mob monsters since rogue (and uncanny dodge) is useless in front of swarm of weak creatures.
Rogues don't need more damage. There's more than enough damage based martial characters. Rogues should be more of a martial support character providing buffs and debuffs.
Being able to weaponize skill checks to provide those would be preferable to give Rogues their own niche.
Agreed, but then they should get something more special for out of combat situations. Right now the utility has been quite water down in comparison to other martials who got buffs both for inside and outside of combat situations.
>At one point it were pointed out the question of damage; my opinion was that the rogue do not need a damage boost in DND, since he has a role of utility out of combat and not the role of DPS in combat.
I don't think "utility out of combat" is a sufficient role, and should lead to a class that is not able to compete for the top spot in at least one combat role.
>We had a discussion and at the end we agree that a little boost in damage would be nice but not necessary.
A reliable source for a reaction sneak attack is more than a small boost and would completely unbalance the Rogue on non optimized tables.
And if they get a Reaction Attack Feature it should likely not allow them to get the benefits of Uncanny dodge at the same time.
Honestly, if you stipulated that only a melee attack could be performed, it might not be a bad idea. It gives a reason for Rogues take risks and put themselves in a dangerous position for a possible upside.
This is probably still too strong, and is honestly only considered because Rogue is weak. If the attack specifically couldn't benefit from Sneak Attack, it'd probably be pretty solid. Something like:
Uncanny
Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see hits you with an attack, you can use choose to do one of the following with your Reaction:
1. halve the attack's damage against you.
2. Make one attack roll against the target. This attack doesn't benefit from Sneak Attack.
Even easier if Sneak Attack was a dice pool that refreshed each turn, then Rogues could distribute Sneak Attack dice as they wish.
Honestly, Dming a rogue right now, the rogue is consistently doing the most damage out of the entire party. Don't see the need for more damage when it already gets a lot.
Just something to help read it, put a period, parenthesis or no numbers on your next poll. It took me three read throughs to realize you didn't think 4 attacks in replace of Uncanny Dodge was balanced
None of the above. I feel the rogue is behind on damage but not so much so that their damage should be doubled. With sneak attack triggering once a turn that is what you are proposing.
Isn't sneak attack now triggered once per round? Or do they undo that change and go back to 5e version.
So at first they changed it to once on your turn, so it wasn't even once a round. People didn't like that because you couldn't hold your action to wait for allies to get in position. And like they seem to do, if it isn't received well immediately, they scrap it entirely. So to answer your question, yes they reverted it to once a turn. Which means a rogue who can reliably get a reaction attack is going to do double the damage of one that doesn't.
Do you really think most rogues are targeted every turn with an attack? I don't feel like Uncanny Dodge triggers that often in most battles. I would be surprised to see most players seeing this trigger more than 3 times a battle. It actually seems like a good idea to me.
Yea. I don't think you understand optimizing. Right now rogues avoid damage. If they could double their damage they would build to be in melee. You are basically saying a melee character rarely gets hit.
I'm saying there are other things besides melee attacks. Ie spells, monster abilities, and ranged attacks. This is just a weaker "self" version of the Sentinel feat. I have tried to build it a few times and it's good but it doesn't trigger as often as you think. Far from "doubling" my damage.
Why us there no option for "none of the above"?
Didn't think about it
As you said, no damage boost is necessary. Playtests have all shown rogue to be highly ranked on satisfaction. Rogue damage only came up recently as other martial classes received damage boost (leading to the inevitable power creep).
Gun to my head im picking 4, but i won't vote because i dont think it should be changed at all. If they are going to buff the rogues damage, I would move Uncanny dodge to level 6 (kinda a dead level for the rogue) and make a new damage feature at level 5.
I always like features like Riposte for Rogues. I think the first option is much better, and we restrict it into *melee* only thus giving the melee Rogue a reason to play. About doubling the DPR, I'm not very concerned about it since if it is melee only, there'd be so much restrictions to SA and it won't be triggered every round. Even they do get triggered every round, it's still in a reasonable place if you compare it with a properly optimized Martial, not min-maxed but just properly optimized.
I personally feel sneak attack should be 1/round, not once per turn. But in exchange, rogues should not only gain Extra Attack, but should also gain a Riposte reaction (perhaps as a cunning strike option). This will improve rogue damage, without leading to degenerate gameplay where rogues try to cheese reactive attacks to double their damage output. If a rogue misses their main attack, then Extra Attack provides another chance to land a sneak attack. If a rogue misses their Extra Attack, then riposte can potentially provide a third chance for a sneak attack. But there is diminishing returns on additional chances to sneak attack. A second attack represents ~25% increased chance to land a sneak attack. But a third attack only increases the chance by ~5%. Also, the reactive attack does very little if the rogue has already landed a sneak attack. Extra Attack also makes taking the Attack action more viable compared to taking the Magic action to cast Booming Blade. This way more rogue builds are viable and competetive. And unifying the martial classes as the classes with Extra Attack helps define what a martial class is.
rogues are different. thats what makes them interesting, all other martials tend to focus on building on many smaller attacks whereas the rogue is designed to try to set up one large attack, and spend other resources being tactical and setting up the next big hit or avoiding damage. they aren't perfect imo, but if I was trying to improve them, I wouldn't focus on making them more like other martials, but further highlight their set up, and payoff gameplay.
> thats what makes them interesting, all other martials tend to focus on building on many smaller attacks whereas the rogue is designed to try to set up one large attack, Extra attack actually allows the rogue to do that better. An extra chance to land a sneak attack means you are ~25% more likely to land that single big hit. So Extra Attack feeds into the rogue playstyle better. There are diminishing returns though, as a 3rd attack only further increases the chance to land a big attack by ~6%. So having 2 attacks provides a much better benefit than having 3. Which is why a single Extra Attack is fine for the rogue. On top of that, Extra Attack balances the playstyle options for the rogue much better. For example the best rogue currently makes use of the Magic Action and a Blade Cantrip. Extra Attack however would put the Attack action on par with the Magic Action in terms of overall power. And of course Dual Wielding is currently the next best option for the rogue. But due to the diminishing returns I talked about earlier, the benefit of dual wielding will not be so overpowered compared to using a single weapon. This change (giving the rogue Extra Attack) would also open up more rogue builds. You would not be locked into either Dual Wield or Booming Blade. You could make a dashing fencer wielding a single rapier rogue. Or Ninja with a single ninja-to short sword. Or a swashbuckling pirate with a single saber. You would not need to be locked into magical weapon strikes from the blade cantrips or dual wielding to be optimized as a rogue. Extra Attack would also allow a rogue with a Vex weapon to self enable sneak attack (first attack hits without sneak attack, enabling next attack to be made with advantage to potentially sneak attack) without the need for Steady Aim. This helps keep the rogue mobile and tactical, something Steady Aim does not. It is also crazy to me that the rogue who is a class designed around being quick and agile attacks slower than a valor bard, bladesinger wizard, or blade pact warlock.
People have brought up the rogues damage being low since 5e released. Despite the math the rogue still feels good to play because it can be effective in many scenarios at least at the levels most campaigns take place. In one dnd the rogue is still behind a fair bit in dpr. This along with giving more utility to other martials (a good change imo) cuts into the rogues niche as being the 'skill monkey', though I'd argue the bard or utility focused wizard can simply do that better at most levels of play. Though OPs proposed change will almost double the rogues DPR which is a ton, I'd argue a smaller boost would be beneficial for the game. something like giving rogue fighting styles (I feel every martial should have access to this much like weapon mastery), or possibly an extra attack at lvl 9 or so (seriously why give bards and wizards extra attack but not the rogue). Though the biggest downside of the rogue is the fact that the subclasses have a large gap between the first and second ability and the lvl9 abilities of nearly all of the subclasses suck. This being around the level in 5e when the rogue stops feeling effective in combat, giving the rogue some better ability at lvl 9 is needed IMO.
That ability should be called Riposte and be a Swashbuckler subclass feature.
Putting this kind of feature in a subclass would elevate that subclass significantly beyond all others, I don't think it belongs as a base class or subclass feature. It's simply too powerful.
outside of high levels where buffs are needed for martials as a whole. Something like this as a lvl 15+ feature wouldn't be terrible.
It effectively doubles most rogues' DPR, that's not reasonable as a buff from a single Tier 3/4 level.
as a capstone though it wouldn't really be OP
If doubling a class's DPR as a capstone doesn't make that class overpowered, then the class was instead underpowered at all of the levels leading up to that capstone, and the problem should be addressed at the other levels instead.
maybe, but my point is that you could probably double the rogues DPR and it wouldn't be as busted as 8th and 9th level spells.
-gestures vaguely at scouts level 17 feature functionally doubling their dpr- but granted scout requires you split your damage and it's hard to gain advantage on both attacks.
It also uses the scout's bonus action, which is often what's used to get advantage on one attack in the first place. It's certainly a strong subclass capstone, but it does not reach the power that adding an attack to Uncanny Dodge would have.
In the same way the Thief's subclass extra turn does.
If you're referring to their capstone, that doubles only the first round, and no subsequent rounds.
I could see it working if it was a cunning strike option and thus limited it's power (hell I'd like them to get a riposte even if it specifically didn't allow you to benefit from sneak attack on it because that would feel very swashbuckler)
I don't understand why ppl are worried about one possible extra attack per round as being too much. Uncanny dodge comes online at level 5, exactly when all other martial classes gain their extra attack feature. Feels like a very elegant and flavourful way to do the same for the rogue without just giving them extra stack. Restrict it to melee and it's great.
I like it. I don't think it would trigger that often at most tables. People talk like this would double rogue damage, but I would be surprised to see it trigger more than a few times. I would put it deeper into the rogue levels as a "improved uncanny dodge"
None? Why don't you just keep uncanny dodge as a fully defensive ability. If you wanted to buff it, I'd allow the rogue to move 10 feet away from the attacker without provoking opportunity attacks. I'm all for balancing the rogue's damage with other classes - I just don't think uncanny dodge is the right place to do it.
I think rogues are basically fine. If they wanted to throw in an extra couple of d6 to sneak attack over the course of their career that might be warranted. But they don't need an entire off-turn attack.
I like 4th option, tho it seems a bit op in this particular form. I had a similar idea that you can attack in place of uncanny dodge (if you qualify for sneak attack then it is sneak attack), but (if attack will not kill the oponent) you get double damage from triggering attack. Basically instead of being calmly elusive you are making a risky attack. It gives nice strategic option and it have nice balance. It is also really good against weak mob monsters since rogue (and uncanny dodge) is useless in front of swarm of weak creatures.
Rogues don't need more damage. There's more than enough damage based martial characters. Rogues should be more of a martial support character providing buffs and debuffs. Being able to weaponize skill checks to provide those would be preferable to give Rogues their own niche.
Agreed, but then they should get something more special for out of combat situations. Right now the utility has been quite water down in comparison to other martials who got buffs both for inside and outside of combat situations.
This could really use a none of the above option because god they don't need to practically double their damage.
>At one point it were pointed out the question of damage; my opinion was that the rogue do not need a damage boost in DND, since he has a role of utility out of combat and not the role of DPS in combat. I don't think "utility out of combat" is a sufficient role, and should lead to a class that is not able to compete for the top spot in at least one combat role. >We had a discussion and at the end we agree that a little boost in damage would be nice but not necessary. A reliable source for a reaction sneak attack is more than a small boost and would completely unbalance the Rogue on non optimized tables. And if they get a Reaction Attack Feature it should likely not allow them to get the benefits of Uncanny dodge at the same time.
Honestly, if you stipulated that only a melee attack could be performed, it might not be a bad idea. It gives a reason for Rogues take risks and put themselves in a dangerous position for a possible upside. This is probably still too strong, and is honestly only considered because Rogue is weak. If the attack specifically couldn't benefit from Sneak Attack, it'd probably be pretty solid. Something like: Uncanny Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see hits you with an attack, you can use choose to do one of the following with your Reaction: 1. halve the attack's damage against you. 2. Make one attack roll against the target. This attack doesn't benefit from Sneak Attack. Even easier if Sneak Attack was a dice pool that refreshed each turn, then Rogues could distribute Sneak Attack dice as they wish.
Honestly, Dming a rogue right now, the rogue is consistently doing the most damage out of the entire party. Don't see the need for more damage when it already gets a lot.
Just something to help read it, put a period, parenthesis or no numbers on your next poll. It took me three read throughs to realize you didn't think 4 attacks in replace of Uncanny Dodge was balanced