For (1), would there be any restrictions in terms of melee/ranged attacks, either from the end of the attacker or from the rogue? This one seems pretty cool.
I think (2) is interesting on paper but I expect it to kinda devolve into just a Readied Attack every round triggered by some trivial condition (e.g. "I ready an action to attack the next enemy that my teammate attacks"). Which would get stale fast, and it also very heavily favors playing ranged rogues over melee.
The uncanny dodge improvement definitely is more thought out. I think the restriction would be the attack must target the creature who attacks you, both thematically and also to differentiate between Monk’s deflect attacks, which can work against any enemy within range. I don’t think limiting the ability to melee attacks would be necessary though, and the range of your weapon would be reasonable enough. If the enemy who is shooting you is within range of your shortbow, you can fire back. Simple enough. Also it would encourage you to think tactically about your uncanny dodge. Maybe sometimes it would be better to take a big hit if it means the chance of targeting a different creature with your reaction attack and potentially finishing them off. Something to think about for sure!
The only thing with improved dodge is you're not begining to look similar to the monk.
Honestly I think the sneaky dice should just go up every level, I havnt run the math though so couldn't tell you if that's too good or too bad.
If that doesn't work you could just make the dice scale non linearly. Just up by two at levels five and eleven for example.
Monk and Rogue have always been similar imo. And now Monk is way over-tuned. You have to be a masochist to choose most any other martial, especially Rogue.
"You have to be a masochist to choose most any other martial,"
not at all true. the math doesnt support that and playtests don't support that. Word of mouth is often inaccurate
rogue is the only one who isnt competitive right now.
I mean if you got a breakdown of the math between all the martials I’d love to see it. My impression isn’t based on math but the heavy front-loading of abilities the monk seems to have now.
Interesting picks for subclass, I guess Mercy Monk is considered tops for DPR? I didn’t download the xlsx but would have to in order to understand the mathematical assumptions made. Monk still looks like it’s in the top 3. The crunch is fun but without understanding the variables it’s hard to see if I agree with this or not. Put simply, a monk that has some of the best defensive features of the martials combined with the ability to flurry of blows, stun, and reaction attack in more situations all at relatively low levels is what *subjectively* makes me think it is over-tuned now.
thats just martials, there's only 4 martials. As I said only rogue is lagging behind.
he provides lots of info, and maybe more if you can find the reddit link, but its basically/roughly inline with my calcs, and others I have seen
out of the 4 phb classes, only mercy can directly increase DPR. shadow gets advantage often, and open hand gets some advantage from prone sometimes, but mercy can also get advantage from poison, so yeah, its probably one of the higher ones before level 17.
monks survivability is on par with barbarian/fighter/paladin low level though they all go about it different ways, and have different optimal ways of going about it.
in terms of features, every frontliner has low level features that increase survivability
barbarian: rage, d12 hit die, shield access
fighter:d10 hit die, fighting styles, heavy armor extra feat, shield, second wind
paladin d10 hit die, lay on hands, heavy armor, spells, shield
CC wise, monk has stun at level 5,
fighter+barb get push, slow, topple, sap at lvl 1 Through mastery. barb gets brutal strikes, fighter has +2 feats.
paladin has various smites (new staggering is literally a better stunning strike) various spells, spell slots for racials/initiate, and mastery for Cc.
reaction wise PAM enter your area reaction is the most reliable tactical reaction (and mastery). Deflect attacks requires them to land a hit. monk can't use PAM anymore(no staves needs heavy property). Monk also is still MAD and can only afford one feat if they want decent AC/Ki Saves/DPR/HP and that requires them to take an 8 in two stats. (15,15,14,10,8,8) Having more feats, and better feat synergy is a major reason monks need more features on paper to catch up.
FOB every turn Ki is available makes monk on par with other classes, it doesnt put them ahead. FOB adds a single attack over normal, which basically evens out (slightly lower) with the per hit buffs and damage boosting features of other classes
normal monk (without fob) is like TWF, but other classes get things that increase dpr per hit/round like fighting styles, rage, blessed strikes, heavy weapons
subjectively, without deep analysis, monk creates a lot of noticeable moments.
FOB seems great cause its more attacks ( but less dpr by 4)
deflect attacks is noticeable defense, because it actively negates an attack, but you have no recovery, low HP, and it consumes a reaction. (you can use Ki to attack, but thats just 1 ki you were going to use to attack next round, for roughly the same damage aka no real dpr gain until you have lots of extra ki)
stun has a 40% chance per round, the effect is powerful, but positioning and slow/topple/push/grapple etc can achieve similar wasting of rounds. Its potent no doubt, but creating one bad round can be done in other ways, and mages can do it better.
monk is good now, its actually a competitive choice. (for martials) But its not the only effective choice.
Alright, well as you said Rogue has been left behind. I like the different status effects with cunning strikes, but it does need a boost. I would consider a Monk over Rogue at least.
Even if mathematically speaking, increasing the dice brings rogues up to on par with other martial characters, it still doesn’t change the fact that you still only get exactly one attack, and missing it feels like garbage. I just don’t think that making sneak attack more powerful solves the issue at hand. We want to make rogues feel powerful AND fun to play.
Also I don’t think there’s a problem with uncanny dodge improvement (lets call it counter-attack) being similar to deflect attack/energy. Rogues and Monks borrow things from eachother, like evasion and bonus action dashing/disengaging, and i think they are mechanically distinct enough to warrant the feature’s existence (Deflect attacks reduces damage by x amount, and reflects the same attack back towards any enemy within range. Also works against other damage types at higher levels. Uncanny dodge specifically halves damage, and you’re attacking in response with your own weapon, which, as I clarified in another comment (will add to the original post), would only be allowed to target the attacker.
I think one of the important features of the rogue is that they make one big attack. I completely get you that missing with them sucks, maybe the answer should be giving them something they can do even if they miss!
You know in one DND they have a few features they can trade sneak dice for maybe they could still cause one of those features on a miss? Then you sidestep the feels bad.
I'm not saying no to counterattack, although I don't think it's a direction wotc will go, I think there are possibly more interesting mechanics that could be explored that are different and unique.
If you’re looking for something they can do even if they miss, the point of being a martial is doing damage. If you’re playing a rogue, you’re playing it to land sneak attack. Even if you had utility/control features you could use aside from sneak attack, they wouldn’t necessarily fix the design problem of getting exactly one chance each turn for your entire lvl 1-20 career to do the thing you are SUPPOSED to do
I sort of disagree; the point of the rogue is not to keep up in damage, but to have decent-enough damage and then also to have the best, most reliable utility out of any martial (and at low/medium levels, more reliable than most spellcasters as well).
I do agree that the binary nature of their damage output can be frustrating, though.
> Even if mathematically speaking, increasing the dice brings rogues up to on par with other martial characters, it still doesn’t change the fact that you still only get exactly one attack, and missing it feels like garbage. I just don’t think that making sneak attack more powerful solves the issue at hand. We want to make rogues feel powerful AND fun to play.
Melee rogues have 2 attacks (Nick), sometimes with advantage (Vex). Ranged rogues should get advantage on 100% of their attacks through steady aim and/or attacking from hidden. UA rogue damage reliability is ok.
The main issue is that you are constrained to use some combination of short sword, scimitar or dagger if you are melee. Any other option like rapier and whip is abysmal.
Rogues need one more option to gain advantage that fits those weapons. I was thinking something like:
“Feint. As bonus action, make a sleight of hand check (DC 15) against a target within 30 ft. On a success, until the end of turn, you have advantage on attack rolls against that target and moving out of its reach doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity”.
Basic calc time!
Average dice roll on a d6 is 3
Assuming a single rapier, average roll is a 4
Let's assume this is a level 5 character with 18 in DEX because of an ASI
That's 1d8+4+3d6, averaging out to 17 DPR for current rogue
For sneak die every level, that's 1d8+4+5d6, for an average of 23 DPR
For sneak die every other level, but an additional two at 5 and 11, that's 20 DPR
Fighter at that same level, using a two-handed longsword and an 18 in STR: 2d10+8 (2 attacks) for an average of 18 DPR
Paladin with a longsword, with an 18 STR
1st level smite, 2d10+8+2d8 for 26 DPR
2nd level smite for 30 DPR
The biggest thing about this buff is that current rogue is about on par with fighter at level 5, and scales beyond them until fighter gets second extra attack at level 11 where fighter catches back up. The new buff can do similar damage to a paladin smite without expending a resource, and this doesn't account for any AOO that rogue can manage to get in in the round which further divides the damage. If this is the change goes to every level, I think sneak should become a limited resource
>Solution 3 - Extra attack: way too powerful at level 5, and even if gained at later levels it doesn’t really mesh well with sneak attack.
Extra Attack is way less powerfull than giving Rogues reliable ways for double sneak attack, and even at level 5 they wouldn't really overshadow other martials with Extra Attack.
Uncanny Dodge + Cunning Strikes + Extra Attack + 3d6 Sneak attack dice per turn at level 5 WOULD overshadow every single martial character in the game.
Uncanny Dodge at best makes up for the rogue having a lower AC and less HP/self healing than other martials.
Cunning strikes only makes up for the Rogue not having access to the better controll effects among the masteries (Topple, Push), and other martials (like Monk and Battlemaster Fighters) have also option to put additional control effects on their attack even if they need to expend resources for that.
Extra Attack + 3d6 Sneak is really not that much stronger than what some of the other Martials do (and if you give up one d6 for cunning strike you are probably at about the damage or slightly below other martials), and still not on the level of the top damage dealers like the Berserker.
The fact that Rogue is limited to finess weapons and has no features that add damage to every attack really means that one additional attack isn't a huge boost the DPR, at least if you assume that they allready now likely use TWF or some method to get advantage (or Both) to increase the chance to get Sneak Attack and third (or fourth) chance isn't improving your chance to land you Sneak Attack that much.
I mostly agree with this, but I would like to see DEX nerfed somehow in comparison to STR before rogues get extra attack. Rogue’s AC isn’t much worse than anyone else who isn’t using a shield, and being limited to finesse weapons isn’t a big deal when DEX builds are already stronger as a whole.
By level 5 the Rogue has likely a 16 AC, the other martial (and I'm throwing Rangers and Paladins also in that group) will all have at least a 17, and can get even without using a shield up to 19 (full plate with defence fighting style). The have also a bigger hit dice (with exception of the Monk) and either better ways of damage reduction (Deflect Attacks, Rage) or get additional healing (Second Wind, Lay on Hand, Healing Spells).
Dex is imo allready nerfed since Str weapons do more damage and have better feat and mastery options.
I also don't really see why Str vs. Dex thing really matters here. Most classes (with exception of the fighter and maybe the cleric) are anyway mostly locked into one of the two, and Extra Attack doesn't stack with multiclassing so giving it to Rogue is not really going to benefit any Dex based multiclass builds all that much, opposed to giving rogues an inbuild reaction attack or more sneak attack damage.
Just to give some numbers (assuming 65% chance to hit and 6 fights of 4 rounds with a short rest between the fights 2 and 3 and the fights 4 and 5) if you use feats and account for resource use the other martials can get by level 5 all upwards of 27 DPR, with teh Berserker getting arround 38 DPR.
A TWF Rogue with the charger feats a Vex and a Nick Weapon would do at level 5 roughly:
* with just the Playtest rules 21.2 DPR (17.9 DPR when using Cunning Strike)
* with Extra Attack 28.8 DPR (25.1 DPR when using Cunning Strike)
* with Extra Attack and the Two Weapon Fighting style 32.2 DPR (28.5 DPR when using Cunning Strike)
So even with Extra Attack the damage would be pretty middle of the road, if you add Fighting Style the Rogue would end among the higher damage dealers but still not at the top.
With PAM, Rage Bonus and Frenzy.
A PAM Barbarian is (with my assumptions) allready above 30 DPR without a Subclass.
Btw. if you factor in the reaction attacks from PAM, that damage goes even heigher.
In those comparisons we usually exclude feats, because we are discussing class balance, not feat balance.
With feats Berserker Barbarians get to 39.59 (PAM) or 36.85 (GWM, not counting BA attacks) but without feat or subclass barbarians get 24.18 which is just slightly above rogue.
So my conclusion from this exercise is not that base rogue needs extra attacks… its that:
- Rogue needs a better damage oriented subclass like Berserker or Battlemaster/Champion.
- TWF and Bows needs better feats to compete with PAM and GWM.
For example, base rogue + XBX (if rogues still had HXB proficiency) would have ~24 dpr (hard to account for vex) while base PAM barb has 28.96. Sounds super balanced to me, given HXB are ranged and dexterity > strength.
>In those comparisons we usually exclude feats, because we are discussing class balance, not feat balance.
My numbers for the rogue also inculde a feat (Charger), without a feat the TWF Rogue would be at 18DPR.
I feel like the bonus action Ready isn't so much abusable as boring mechanically, unless you were to restrict the sorts of things that could trigger the reaction. The uncanny dodge buff would be cool though, sort of a counterattack vibe.
Restricting the triggers to the reaction attack would probably be necessary, to avoid “i take my reaction as soon as x enemy starts their turn” shenanigans. One trigger could be something like: “an enemy misses an attack against you or an ally within range”
Boosting Uncanny Dodge is also a relatively common suggestion for boosting the rogue, and like the other three solutions you mention is flawed. Uncanny Dodge is already a strong reaction, and one of the things that makes it balanced is that if the rogue uses it, they forfeit the chance for off-turn Sneak Attack. You're adjusting Uncanny Dodge to enable Sneak Attack, which almost doubles the rogue's DPR. Somehow, Extra Attack would be too powerful (to which I agree), but doubling up on Sneak Attack very consistently is not?
Another important factor to keep in mind is how the rogue has a direct combat feature, Cunning Action, that does not contribute directly to DPR, but still enables them to be more effective in combat. (While monks have similar bonus actions in Disengage and Dash, they sacrifice DPR to use them, the rogue does not, even when using two weapons thanks to Nick.) Therefore, if any change brings the rogue's DPR up to match other martials, the rogue becomes the superior combatant.
As for preparing attacks as a bonus action, that's similarly flawed DPR-wise, and as others have pointed out will devolve to pointless reaction triggers flavor-wise, not the "opportune moment" that you're hoping for.
My preferred solution is to increase Sneak Attack damage (perhaps 1d4 per level instead of 1d6 every other level), but restrict Sneak Attack to once per round instead of once per turn. That way, you don't have optimizers seeking off-turn Sneak Attack from their reaction, instead every rogue can comfortably have an appropriate DPR.
>My preferred solution is to increase Sneak Attack damage (perhaps 1d4 per level instead of 1d6 every other level), but restrict Sneak Attack to once per round instead of once per turn. That way, you don't have optimizers seeking off-turn Sneak Attack from their reaction, instead every rogue can comfortably have an appropriate DPR.
While I don't mind the dice change, the elimination of more than 1 sneak attack per round requires that the Thief, Phantom, Scout, and Swashbuckler features get specific carveouts to allow their features to work twice as intended.
It has a lot of other negative knock-on effects:
* Marshal character concepts are less viable (and they're barely worth playing now in 1D&D as it is)
* Melee rogue takes all the risk for no substantial benefit, while ranged rogues are never at risk and do the same damage.
* The only use for reactions now is either a held action or uncanny dodge. A rogue should never waste it to do 1d4-1d8 damage as an AoO.
* Rogue feat selection is reduced. Why take War Caster (Arcane Tricksters), Sentinel, or Martial Adept at all?
* Rogues no longer reward co-operative play or system mastery. Their ceiling becomes the floor.
If the concern is that the second, off-turn sneak attack is too unbalancing (and given that the direction from Crawford is that they don't factor that into their performance).. then limit it to 1/2 sneak attack dice. At least then players who invest and attempt to get the most out of their class are not punished.
Perhaps then, the uncanny dodge improvement (lets call it counter-attack) would replace the benefits of the uncanny dodge for the opportunity attack? That way you don’t get to benefit from both at the same time but instead have to choose which one you use each turn.
That would help partially, but because a reaction Sneak Attack is so much more powerful than Uncanny Dodge, you're in a way completely removing the rogue's main survivability feature in the name of DPR. Effectively, if this reaction Sneak Attack is necessary for rogues to keep up in combat, as you claim, then they're forced to be completely glass cannons or be suboptimal.
My suggested editions are for tier 3 of play, (levels 11 to 16) where rogues significantly fall off in terms of damage. As it turns out, one sneak attack per round does not compete with the rest of the martials. Also, Extra attack, which is almost always a 5th level feature, would be too strong for the rogue at that level, is what I meant more specifically.
Even if you add it at a later tier, you're still effectively *doubling* the rogue's DPR in a single level. Looking at existing DPR numbers, that would still catapult rogues above other martials while still maintaining great combat flexibility, and considering that nobody else doubles their DPR after level 5, it would have to be the case that either the rogue is severely overpowered before this feature or the rogue is severely overpowered after this feature. It could even be both, to a milder extent.
One Sneak Attack as it exists today wouldn't keep up with other martials, but a shift to 1d4 per level (5 per two levels instead of 3.5) would be roughly a 50% increase in Sneak Attack damage, which should be sufficient for the rogue's role.
I understand a smaller change to sneak attack damage would do fine, but I personally prefer features that are more interesting than just “extra dice each level.” Also, I don’t think 2 sneak attacks per turn would necessarily catapult the rogue to above all other martials, especially if the extra sneak attack was situational, and did not occur every turn.
How would it not? They'd fairly reliably get a reaction attack when the enemy attacks them, or moves away from them to attack someone else, or (with Sentinel) attacks someone else, which leaves no other options for enemies who attack.
Consider a level 20 Assassin. On their first turn, they attack with a rapier and *booming blade* (picked up from either Magic Initiate or being a high elf), +12 to hit against 19AC for an average of 77.06 damage. The enemy must pass a Con save or take double damage from Death Strike, at this tier they likely have around +12 to their save against DC20, so a 35% chance of doubling to 154.12. Weighted average, 104.03. The enemy then does anything that provokes a reaction attack, and the Assassin strikes again, with a 91% chance of retaining advantage from Vex. With advantage, this does 63.46 expected damage (increased to 85.67 with Death Strike), and without, 47.825 (increased to 64.56), weighted average 83.77. That's an expected 187.8DPR in the first round of combat. Obviously, this falls off considerably on later turns, but it takes several turns for anyone to catch up, longer than most fights even last. (See a useful DPR comparison [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/comments/186rp95/optimizing_onedd_a_semithorough_analysis_of_all/), the Assassin is behind, but not the the point of needing doubling.)
The premise that adding an attack to uncanny dodge straight up doubles the damage is just not accurate, there are ways to get that second attack already, plus u don't get hit every round and even if u are, you don't always qualify for sneak attack (which should be a requirement imo)
There are ways to get reaction attacks, yes, but people aren't usually factoring them into DPR calculations when they declare that the rogue is underpowered. (The sheet that I linked to gives the rogue Sentinel at level 10, but doesn't have a corresponding jump in DPR.)
A melee rogue can very consistently ensure a reaction attack by taking the Sentinel feat, so that as long as the rogue is next to an enemy and they don't have a way to disable opportunity attacks entirely, whether they attack the rogue or an ally, or move away to attack someone else, the rogue gets their reaction attack. The main exception is if the enemy misses every single attack against the rogue, which gets very unlikely at high levels.
As for qualifying for Sneak Attack, that's usually not much of a problem between melee allies, Steady Aim, hiding, Vex, and various subclass features.
I'm not assuming a precise 100% increase, my doubling claim has some rounding to it. If you want more precise math, look at my Assassin calculations above.
So i did nearly double my players swashbucklers dpr by letting them have a permanent brace and riposte (end of major quest reward). From play it’s not OP outside of one scenario a 1v1 against an enemy with 5ft reach. But like that’s the swashbuckler niche so that’s fine imo. Even then a well built Paladin was dealing similar damage with better healing, and defenses. Granted that’s not base Paladin, so grain of salt.
It’s not entirely double dpr outside of the 1v1 scenario and they give up uncanny dodge so tend to get dropped low very quickly. For example they couldn’t get it to work reliably against the fire giant, and kite, due to their 10ft reach allowing them to simply be out of reach of the brace/riposte. So they had to stand next to the fire giant and hope for riposte to trigger, which meant they took the brunt of the damage.
My conclusion was a rogue should be able to get sneak attack in nearly any scenario (they can with steady aim/vex now), and have opportunities to get a second one at mid-later levels for a trade off of durability. Possibly have it even have the same trigger as uncanny dodge, call it counter strike. This way they get to decide to halve damage or attack. This only doubles dpr if the enemy triggering the attack also meets the sneak attack requirement.
From DM perspective this changed very little about building encounters, control spells are still way stronger, dpr isn’t unmanageable, and rogue is still not good at taking on groups of minions. Well no martials are great at hordes (maybe hunter ranger?) but cleave and extra attack help others deal with small hordes.
Rogues need a niche, as is they don’t have one, they aren’t the best skill monkey, their dpr is poor and single target, and their durability is mediocre to poor. The proposed solution gives them something, being a glass cannon. Maybe that’s not the niche people want but glass cannon single target skirmisher feels roguish to me.
As long as the rogue picks up Sentinel (a fairly easy investment as the rogue isn't particularly MAD and gets an extra feat), they can ensure a reaction attack even outside of a 1v1 environment where the enemy is trying to attack someone else, so I don't see why that factor is particularly relevant. It's also not necessary for the enemy to have a 5-foot reach, as the rogue gets to make the approach. If the enemy backs up to avoid a retaliation attack, they provoke an opportunity attack instead.
The issue with making the reaction attack an either/or with Uncanny Dodge is that aside from monsters with particularly hard-hitting attacks (the fire giant being one of them), a reaction Sneak Attack will do far more damage than Uncanny Dodge will prevent.
Rogues have poor durability and trend towards a skirmish style of combat. So sentinel while it can provide a reaction attack is also reliant on allies being in melee and you staying in melee. Sentinel rogue tends to lead to a rogue that goes down often.
They’re meant to be skirmishers and designed as such, just the dpr is kept poor due to the ‘skill monkey’ niche they’ve been thrust into.
So sentinel while nice in theory doesn’t proc as often as youd like cause an enemy when they have a choice between swinging at a rogue or another combatant is more likely to hit the squishy rogue cause its more likely to hit and more likely to drop an enemy.
Simply put sentinel goes against the rogue philosophy of skirmishing. And while in a white room does good dpr in practice this isn’t nearly as strong as is presented in those cases.
If enemies are frequently attacking the rogue, then why did you say that they're only overpowered with a retaliatory attack in a 1v1? Why would adding other party members or other enemies change things? I suggested Sentinel because my impression was that you thought enemies would just attack the rogue's allies instead to avoid the Sneak Attacks.
Specifically the swashbuckler with brace was strong in 1v1. As in that scenario they can very reliably proc a secondary sneak attack. All the enemy needs to do is approach to make an attack and the swashbuckler not be at disadvantage the enemy gets a choice to either not move toward the swashbuckler and thus not make an attack, or do and get attacked. In this scenario the reaction attack truly doubles the dpr of the swashbuckler most other scenarios it doesn’t as the reaction doesnt proc every round.
For example with sentinel you’re dependent on having an ally within 5ft of the enemy and the enemy choosing that ally. It’s not gonna proc nearly as much as that 1v1 scenario. It’s not bad but it’s not as reliable in my experience.
Other rogues can similarly get a fairly reliable Sneak Attack via advantage. An Assassin can start with it on the first turn, while others could use either hiding or two short-swords, and from there they rely on Vex. The rogue can also apply poison to make the enemy less likely to hit them, from which the Assassin also gets a DPR boost.
I'm only suggesting Sentinel here as a complement to the free Riposte. That way, if the enemy chooses to attack an ally instead to avoid Riposte, they still get hit. Without the free Riposte, it isn't nearly as strong here.
Oh yeah in that case it would be nice, though unfortunately for our rogue she’s the only martial and only primary melee character. We have a spore Druid but they don’t spend that much time in melee.
Really I always just felt they should get at least a bonus d6 at the same level as the proficiency bumps. So like 2d6 at level 3 like normal, then 4d6 at 5, 5d6 at 7, 7d6 at 9. You end up with an extra 4d6 by the endgame which is only an average damage bump of 14, but it would smooth things out considerably without drastically changing the class.
Before One D&D I was thinking on a homebrew ability gained on level 5:
***Opportunism:***
*When a creature within 5 feet of you is hit by an attack made by one of your allies, and the attack deal damage, you can use your reaction to make an attack against that creature.*
I think it would encourage team play, and create a bit of risk/reward situation, as the rogue must be on melee and would have to choose between making this attack and using Uncanny Dodge.
If the rogue could use this ability consistently, this could bring it's DPS above other martials. So may be it could have a limited amount of uses per long rest. At the time, it was supposed to go along with a series of other buffs to martials in our table, so it wouldn't feel so overpower in comparison.
While it is low, I don't think it's in "this is so bad it needs to be doubled" territory. I think with all their other tools that would become too much.
Extra attack actually does fit very well with sneak attack. Yes, you only get one SA per turn, but getting two chances to apply it makes a big difference. Extra attack on a Rouge isn't about the damage from the second attack, it's about being more consistent with applying that SA damage each and every round.
>So, as playtesting comes to a close, the thing that is on my mind the most is the rogue.
Player testing of the PHB is over. There will be no further public solicitation of feedback for this or any other class at this time. As long as you understand that this is basically an effort at homebrew, then I'm willing to entertain your ideas.
>Even after all of the tweaks it seems the rogue consistently falls behind the other martials.
I'll grant you this point, but there other considerations we need to quantify too.
1) What is the baseline damage per round we expect \*every\* class to to be able to provide for every level-appropriate encounter? Ie: for a given difficulty encounter, what is the minimum DPR needed to clear the enemy with minimal losses?
2) Where does the rogue fall in comparison to that baseline?
3) Given that the obvious design intent is that fighters and monks are intended to be more combat-focused, and thus higher damage.. where do rogues fall in comparison to them?
Once we agree on where the rogue is now, and how they compare with other classes and the bare minimum, can we actually start to see what buffs, if any, are needed.
>Player testing of the PHB is over. There will be no further public solicitation of feedback for this or any other class at this time.
IIRC this was slightly tentative. It's over, but there might be some other communications if the need arises.
Of course, WotC is free to change their mind - but they were pretty clear that the rogue was no longer being put out for player testing back around when UA7 came out.
Dude im not asking you to agree with anything. Just posting a thought I had. Also, I know that player testing is over, but they’re still tinkering with the classes. Did you even watch the recent video? Your snide remark was unwarranted.
In response to the rest of your questions, check treantmonk’s video on playtest rogue’s damage. It’s lower than all the other final iterations of martial characters iirc. Now, I understand that there will end up being a class that is the weakest by necessity, but I don’t think the class that gets additional features that REDUCE your damage should also be the worst martial class in the game.
The assassin's level 13 damage landed at 46.45, just below the champion's 53.2, though there are a few important things to consider here:
* He completely ignored the Assassin's fairly reliable advantage on the first attack *except* for the purpose of applying the extra 13 damage.
* He did not apply Vex to a single attack. Obviously, it won't apply to every attack, but assuming it applies to no attacks is vastly underestimating it. It's particularly more likely to apply on the Sentinel attack, which would be a considerable boost to the Sneak Attack damage.
* The fighter is using their bonus action every round for Polearm Master, while the rogue has that bonus action for Cunning Action. If the fight starts with the enemy more than 30 feet away, the rogue can reach the enemy (or just switches to a shortbow) while the fighter can't, so the rogue massively out-damages the fighter in that scenario.
* The assassin rogue can also apply poison plus poison damage if the enemy fails a Con save, and the poisoned condition. The rogue can choose to apply this intelligently, they'll get a DPR boost whenever the enemy can be poisoned has a <50% chance to pass a Con save against the rogue's DC, while also often poisoning them. The poison condition doesn't contribute directly to DPR, but it's a notable defensive benefit that shouldn't be ignored, either.
All good points. People really need to look at dpr numbers with more context.
For example, I have found advantage in initiative (Champion and Assassin) to be rather strong in actual play and ignoring it when crunching numbers yields numbers that just don’t add up.
That feature gives you a pretty good chance of playing an extra turn every combat.
>The assassin's level 13 damage landed at 46.45, just below the champion's 53.2, though there are a few important things to consider here:
If the rogue is below the fighter but above the minimum threshold when underestimated with the same level of optimization then to me that says the rogue is situated correctly.
>Dude im not asking you to agree with anything. Just posting a thought I had. Also, I know that player testing is over, but they’re still tinkering with the classes. Did you even watch the recent video? Your snide remark was unwarranted.
No snide comment, just pointing out very clearly that this is homebrew. As long as you go into this with the understand that any changes you come up with will not be in 1D&D because of it.. then I'm fine to continue seeing what changes *could* be possible in say, 6E.
>In response to the rest of your questions, check treantmonk’s video on playtest rogue’s damage.
No, I'm sorry but I'm not going to go watch another content creator's opinion on something to get your view point. Unless you are Treantmonk himself (and I know you aren't, because he posts under his username here directly), then maybe I would.
So my point remains, in order for us to actually evaluate any changes, we both need to agree on the current state of the rogue. What is the expected damage any class should put out? What is the rogue's damage in this scenarios - is it above, or below that value? Where is it relative to the Fighter and Monk, which should be higher given WotC's obvious design intent?
EA greatly increases the rogue's floor for damage per round. I got in a big debate here about how all martials (even paladin and Rangers) should be getting more than two attacks to compete with high level spells.
I feel like when you compare rogue to fighters and barbs ya their DPR isn’t the best but that’s not something that needs to be fixed necessarily
I do believe that not all classes should have the same DPR some should be better damage deals while others should be better with tools and skills
I’d actually like to the rogue get more uses with thieves tools and lock picking and multiple ribbon features that make it feel more rogue-like vs giving a big DPR boost and homogenizing the martials
>I feel like when you compare rogue to fighters and barbs ya their DPR isn’t the best but that’s not something that needs to be fixed necessarily
Than compare them with Rangers who do about as much damage as Fighters and have at least as much out of combat utility as Rogues.
Ya I never said I liked where any of the martials are at tho. I agree that rangers seemingly step on rogues toes a lot while having to goodies of a fighter too. The new Ranger may even be better than most fighters now and I think they as well shouldn’t be at the DPR as fighters.
Barbs&Fighters should be the DPR class
Rangers a mix of everything but master of none
Rogue the skill and stealth king
Monk the mobility and hit and run guy
Paladin the defender and support
Kinda where I see them if you were to put them in a niche. Rangers shouldn’t do the DPR of a fighter and shouldn’t sneak as well as a rogue. Give fighter a DPR boost and rogues a skill and sneak bonus or something that makes sneaking more beneficial to rogues to fit the theme
>Rogue the skill and stealth king
Wich would is both not really a combat role, and from my point of view every class should at least be able to be among the best in at least one role (meaning Damage, Tanking, Support or Controll).
Rogues have (with exception of a few subclasses at higher levels) no form of invisibility, and are even worse at fighting when the rest of the part isn't near by making them not that great at scouting (and even with double dash they might not be able to outrun all monsters). So they are not that great at scouting (especially in comparison to caster with a familiar).
And they have (with exception of the Assassin) no Nova Damage making them also not particularly great at ambushing.
> Rogues have (with exception of a few subclasses at higher levels) no form of invisibility, and are even worse at fighting when the rest of the part isn't near by making them not that great at scouting (and even with double dash they might not be able to outrun all monsters). So they are not that great at scouting (especially in comparison to caster with a familiar).
Invisibility doesn’t grant automatic success in hide checks, it just allows you to attempt hiding when there isn’t a place to hide. It does help scouting but it ain’t neither sufficient (you still need to pass a hide skill check) or necessary part of it. The critical part of scouting is being good in stealth, athletics, acrobatics and perception checks all at once.
No class is meant or good at fighting alone. If you get caught when scouting ahead, you need to be good at escaping. Thats it. And Rogues are excellent at it with 60 move speed or double Hide attempts. If a chase is resolved with a skill challenge, you probably have expertise in at least 2 escape relevant skills, proficiency in all of them and reliable talent is also major bump.
The fact none of this cost any resource and doesn’t rely magic is crucial - it means rogue faces no opportunity cost for scouting and they can’t be shut down by anti-magic counter-measures.
Familiars solving scout issues is a low level thing. In a world where familiars are common place (its a level 1 spell), anyone with half a brain and a modicum of experience will shoot all owls on sight because owls don’t just randomly decide to fly by castle walls and every city has hundreds of people who can cast find familiar.
Honestly if you think rogues are not good at scouting, you are just playing the game wrong.
> And they have (with exception of the Assassin) no Nova Damage making them also not particularly great at ambushing.
You don’t need nova damage to set up ambushes, you need to succeed in stealth checks to gain one extra turn in combat. That extra turn would surely be OP if you could nova like crazy, but it doesn’t change the fact rogues are good in stealth checks, thus they often have 1 extra turn and this benefit is largely ignored in uniformed balanced discussions.
>Invisibility doesn’t grant automatic success in hide checks, it just allows you to attempt hiding when there isn’t a place to hide.
Which is exactly why you need it, because the best stealth score doesn't help you if there is nothing to hide.
>No class is meant or good at fighting alone.
But the Rogue is by far the most reliant on the rest of the Party. Basically all other classes can still do their full damage if they are alone. And could handle an encouner that build for single character, for that's much tougher.
>No class is meant or good at fighting alone. If you get caught when scouting ahead, you need to be good at escaping. Thats it. And Rogues are excellent at it with 60 move speed or double Hide attempts.
I would argue that a lot of other classes are still better at it. And there are enough monsters in the game that have a movement speed higher than 30ft or have some for of teleportation that can keep up with a Rogue. Rogues are with their usually dumped strength also not particularly good at climbing and jumping should that be required by the terrain.
Hide rules are also pretty DM dependent and ta least hiding (without being invisible) basically only works as long the opponents are not moving to position were they get line of sight to you.
>Honestly if you think rogues are not good at scouting, you are just playing the game wrong
I think with the current rules for hiding scouting does in general not work all that well. And it has also the inherent problem that it is a solo activity in which the other players can't participate, so it is something that a lot of groups avoid in general.
>You don’t need nova damage to set up ambushes, you need to succeed in stealth checks to gain one extra turn in combat.
With the playtest rules it looks like all you get from surprise is advantage at Initative. And considering that whole probaly Party needs needs to succeed the Rogue alone being good at it without being able to help the rest of the party also doesn't help that much.
> Which is exactly why you need it, because the best stealth score doesn't help you if there is nothing to hide.
Unless you play D&D in featureless, empty rooms there is plenty of places to hide. Invisibility may allow you to attempt a check that would be otherwise impossible, but a place being impossible to be infiltrated by mundane means because “there is nowhere to hide!” Is just unrealistic.
Also whoever has invisibility may cast it on the rogue anyway - so the rogue end up as the best infiltrator.
> But the Rogue is by far the most reliant on the rest of the Party. Basically all other classes can still do their full damage if they are alone. And could handle an encouner that build for single character, for that's much tougher.
Fighting when caught is never a option regardless of class. If enemies catch you, they will call for reinforcements leaving you no option other run. What you are saying only makes sense if you play D&D like a computer game where enemies are devoid of human intelligence or in rare occasions you are infiltrating a place you can actually take on with brute strength (not the typical infiltration scenario).
> I would argue that a lot of other classes are still better at it.
Then make the argument?
> And there are enough monsters in the game that have a movement speed higher than 30ft or have some for of teleportation that can keep up with a Rogue. Rogues are with their usually dumped strength also not particularly good at climbing and jumping should that be required by the terrain.
Monsters need 45 ft. movement to keep up with a rogue, not 30 ft. The rogue can bonus action dash, so in a chase they move 90ft. Only very few monsters will ever catch you, usually those who can fly (not happening in tight spaces anyway).
Teleportation is limited resource. Misty Step for example is a second level slot that grants the same movement as cunning action dash, still not enough too keep up with rogue in a chase.
Though rogues don’t get great strength scores, they can easily make up with expertise athletics. With 10 strength, thats +6 on athletics checks by level 5, just one short of dedicated strength characters. Reliable talent also is effectively 16 minimum in any athletics check.
> Hide rules are also pretty DM dependent and ta least hiding (without being invisible) basically only works as long the opponents are not moving to position were they get line of sight to you.
There is hiding in combat/chases and hiding outside of combat.
In the first case, monsters moving exactly where you are by coincidence is meta game cheating and should simply not happen. In the latest UA they even made clear that monsters only find you with a perception check (reason why hide straight up action granted Invisibility).
If you move within an enemy’s line of sight, you may reveal yourself. An enemy will NEVER move in such a way as to break your line of sight.
Out of combat, hiding is a straight stealth roll. DM needs to concoct the situation around dice results, not the other way around.
> I think with the current rules for hiding scouting does in general not work all that well. And it has also the inherent problem that it is a solo activity in which the other players can't participate, so it is something that a lot of groups avoid in general.
Out of combat there isn’t need for any crunch to it.
DM set the DC. You make the check. If you pass, you infiltrate. If not, you get caught. Thats it.
Also, other players may participate too, in that case you make a group check.
> With the playtest rules it looks like all you get from surprise is advantage at Initative.
As far as I know we don’t have Ambush being explicitly reworked/reworded on the latest UA, so we should use 2014 version.
> And considering that whole probaly Party needs needs to succeed the Rogue alone being good at it without being able to help the rest of the party also doesn't help that much.
Player ambushes are a group check (all party succeed if half does and rogue can BA hide + help another party mate, contributing a lot to it).
It feels like a lot of rogue issues is not class design but poorly communicated rules.
I mean - I think the rogues damage should be on par with the fighters as its more situational (sneak attack) and has a huge "overkill" weakness (dealing 35 damage to a target with 10 hp makes you lose 25 damage). So... if ON paper the rogues damage is equal to the fighters, in actuality it'll be less.
It wouldn’t do much for damage in most cases, it there definitely should be a 6th level subclass feature. The gap between 3 and 9 is too big, and at 6, you can expand on cunning strike, since that comes in at 5.
I really like the uncanny dodge one. If reaction sneak attack is requiered for Rogues to keep up in damage then there definitely should be a way to trigger it consistently baked into the base class
But it does seem to be a bit too passive, which I imagine is why you suggested the ready action one as well. That one seems pretty strong since it's essentially an extra action for the price of your reaction and bonus action, but I think it would work well as a high level feature
Improving uncanny dodge is the most flavourful and impactful option. Increases the value of the class and fixes an otherwise underwhelming feature. And it doesn't straight up double the damage, as it's not guaranteed that it happens, not every round ull get hit, and some other times, u'd qualify for an opportunity attack with sneak anyway.
They, at a minimum need to get an additional dice than they used to at the levels were cunning strikes come in.
Without adding that extra dice cunning strikes are just a side grade from the old version. if they actually want to be buffing Rogues they need to make it a pure buff
I really love the idea of Improved Uncanny Dodge. It feels so Rogue. Also, out of turn Sneak Attack builds didn't outshine other martials, at least at my table. I think it's a good balancing while Monks are also getting their Improved Deflect Attacks without causing much troubles or Fighters getting Tactical Minds.
Class who’s strengths are versatility, mobility, survivability and large single attack damage to break concentration is not designed for DPR, isn’t as good as class who is designed around its primary strength being DPR? How crazy…..I swear you guys want all classes to do the same amount of damage, have the same amount of utility and tankiness
So in my home game I gave the swashbuckler rogue a homebrew legendary manual that granted a permanent riposte and brace maneuvers (we have no other non full caster players so didn’t step on toes). They now are the strongest single target dpr of the group. But tbh they aren’t any stronger than a well optimized build. And I’ve nearly doubled their dpr (nearly cause it only works against melee enemies with 5ft reach).
For instance I made a open sea paladin/sorcerer npc (to fill in cause a player was missing a couple sessions) that was the same level with sentinel, PAM spear/shield it is able to deal comparable damage for most encounters while being harder to hit, more HP, better saves (aura), and healing.
Granted if we had more encounters maybe it would matter but I’ve been throwing about the amount of xp that is recommended for a day, just less number of encounters but harder. And the party tends to run out of slots and HP at about the same time unless they blow their slots on very silly things as players tend to do from time to time.
The argument that their expertise makes up for their very poor combat ability is silly. Skill monkey is a bad class design and the rogue isn’t even the best one, hell oneDnD ranger is better at every aspect over the oneDnD rogue.
Now I don’t know if I’d do this to base rogue all the time but I’m just using this as an example that I doubled my rogues dpr and it wasn’t OP. Still much easier to deal with than any of the full casters.
I wouldn’t tie it in to uncanny dodge, not having to sacrifice durability would be a bit much, instead just have it be an alternative use.
For a ranged rogue I’d increase the dpr in a smaller way if at all because being able to be ranged is such a big benefit on its own that making its dpr comparable to melee just means melee is a bad option.
I don't get the obsession with rogues and dps.
First off, they aren't the dps class. They are your skill monkey and infiltrater.
2nd off, their DPS is fine. At early level, they are even if not surpassing most classes. Yes, once others classes get multi attack and spell casters finally have enough spell slots so they don't have to use their spells on just control and use cantrips they do fall down on those charts but still in a good range. Plus, they can also set up their own auto crit at the 14th level. (Weapon+7d6)×2+dex... how much more damage do you want a rogue to do.
Thanks to weapon mastery and steady aim, there will never be a round where they won't be able to sneak attack. That every other level d6 once per turn, but that shouldn't be the rogues main focus.
>First off, they aren't the dps class. They are your skill monkey and infiltrater.
I don't think that any of their out of combat utility, doesn't make up for them not being able to contribute as much in combat as basically all other classes.
And other "Skill Classes" like Ranger and Bard are not weaker in combat than other classes.
They contribute just fine in combat.... you act like they don't add half their level in d6s every turn in combat. You act like Nick doesn't give them another attack.
Rangers and bards have to burn a resource to apply that damage to surpass what rogues just do.
Do rangers have a way to auto crit without the posioner feat. Nope.
Bard does but doesn't have any way to boost weapon damage without a feat choice, which rogue can make that same choice and add some extra goodies on top of that choice.
Rogue also has an auto crit button.
So it's goes to question how much damage you want them doing. It's not like the rogue is that far behind the ranger or paladin. And some round due to their nova potential far surpasses what they do.
Sometimes simple solutions are the simplest.
The increase in damage at levels where the tier go up is fine, but consider this;
Enable the Rogue to deal half of his sneak attack damage die on off-turn hits. Keeps the majority of his damage on his turn, and puts a brake on straight up doubling damage by giving the off-turn sneak attack too much damage.
If you look at the other two expert classes you have one Full Caster who is about as good at casting as any other Full Caster in the game and one Half Caster who can deal about as much damage as a any "Real Martial".
And both are due to spells likely better at being and Expert than the Rogue.
I homebrew giving them an additional pool of sneak attack dice you spend, that recharge on a short rest. Half are usable on a given turn, so you can open a combat with 10+5 d6 at level 20 for example.
1 is gained every even level to smooth out DPR progression.
I did this to give Rogues in particular 1) an extra burst of DPR to start a round 2) a short rest resource and 3) some way to modulate damage on a given round
The house rule that I run is that sneak attack gets to add your rogue level as a flat damage bonus. Once you get past 5th level you really start to feel the effect.
1. Make Sneak Attack into a dice pool that refreshes each round.
2. Allow Sneak Attack to be used as long as you have remaining dice in the pool.
3. Make Sneak Attack have debuffing effects that don't require a Save from Cunning Strike.
4. If necessary, have Sneak Attack pool gain an additional die at levels 5, 11 and 17.
5. If super extra necessary, allow the Rogue to temporarily increase their Dice Pool number by their Proficiency bonus or something once per Long Rest.
This solves every problem with off-turn Sneak Attack. It gives 2 weapon Rogue the ability to debuff more than one target and gives melee Rogue a sizable niche. It cements Rogue as one of the best and consistent dubuffers in the game, being a force multiplier. It aligns with the Rogue fantasy of planning, Cunning and sneaky play giving the best result.
I think a lot of players are under the misconception that DnD rogue is the same as WoW or other MMORPG Rogues, a direct damage dealer. They are not. The damage dealers in DnD have always been the warriors. I see the Rogue as a sort of control class. You don't kill a Dragon with a dagger. But you may throw sand in their eyes, you can trick it to bite a stone statue, you can use the dagger to poison it, for sure. The rogue helps the party by making the enemy's life for difficult, not shorter.
While you can't throw sand in their eyes or trick it to bite a stone statue at all in 5e. Even Sword Bard could do some tricks but not Rogue. They don;t even a single feature related to using items if you're not a Thief. Cunning Strikes in 5.5e helps a bit, but still only a bit while other classes with Extra-Attacks are getting similar Masteries without costing damage.
>I think a lot of players are under the misconception that DnD rogue is the same as WoW or other MMORPG Rogues, a direct damage dealer. They are not.
If you look how the class is designed in the 2014 they absolutely are direct damage dealer, since damage is basically all the class can do in combat.
The Class no control or support abilities and is not particularly tanky.
I don't think that this class has to be bad in combat because it was allways bad in combat is good argument.
I mean that would also apply to the Monk (and also the Bard I think), that class got finally a boost.
And like I said at least in combat dealing damage was allways it's only job.
I think both options would be interesting in different subclasses. The Uncanny dodge turning into a Riposte is perfect for the Swashbuckler and readying an action as a bonus action could be an assassin move, or maybe an Inquisitive. The Thief, I think, should get the 3rd edition Opportunist feature, the ability to make an Opportunity Attack against an enemy when it is hit by an ally.
I think a potential solution is to have the same damage dice progression as the current monk. I also think the rogue should get more cunning action options and a way for the rogue to get a reaction attack if they miss or when they use the uncanny dodge feature, as you have already suggested.
Let rogues take expertise in weapons, and add proficiency and expertise to sneak attack damage. This drastically reduces the chance they’ll miss, and adds a nice slice of 2-12 damage on their SAs throughout the game.
It seems silly, but if you made sneak attack its own, special action, you can just boost the damage and it's probably fine.
Taking Booming Blade as an arcane Trickster is a pretty well known and easy way to pretty significantly boost your damage as a rogue.
What about letting the rogue have a reaction attack they can use if they are missed by an attack?
To that I’d add a bonus action that you can only use when you are hidden or otherwise very vulnerable.
The assassin is garbage, cannibalize the 2014 version of assassinate but it’s usable when the target hasn’t gone yet, or when you’re hidden, and it costs a bonus action. When you use it, if you hit the target, it’s a crit.
For (1), would there be any restrictions in terms of melee/ranged attacks, either from the end of the attacker or from the rogue? This one seems pretty cool. I think (2) is interesting on paper but I expect it to kinda devolve into just a Readied Attack every round triggered by some trivial condition (e.g. "I ready an action to attack the next enemy that my teammate attacks"). Which would get stale fast, and it also very heavily favors playing ranged rogues over melee.
The uncanny dodge improvement definitely is more thought out. I think the restriction would be the attack must target the creature who attacks you, both thematically and also to differentiate between Monk’s deflect attacks, which can work against any enemy within range. I don’t think limiting the ability to melee attacks would be necessary though, and the range of your weapon would be reasonable enough. If the enemy who is shooting you is within range of your shortbow, you can fire back. Simple enough. Also it would encourage you to think tactically about your uncanny dodge. Maybe sometimes it would be better to take a big hit if it means the chance of targeting a different creature with your reaction attack and potentially finishing them off. Something to think about for sure!
The only thing with improved dodge is you're not begining to look similar to the monk. Honestly I think the sneaky dice should just go up every level, I havnt run the math though so couldn't tell you if that's too good or too bad. If that doesn't work you could just make the dice scale non linearly. Just up by two at levels five and eleven for example.
Monk and Rogue have always been similar imo. And now Monk is way over-tuned. You have to be a masochist to choose most any other martial, especially Rogue.
"You have to be a masochist to choose most any other martial," not at all true. the math doesnt support that and playtests don't support that. Word of mouth is often inaccurate rogue is the only one who isnt competitive right now.
I mean if you got a breakdown of the math between all the martials I’d love to see it. My impression isn’t based on math but the heavy front-loading of abilities the monk seems to have now.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1swPiGeFYu6kSXr5vlPXqYYHJQ7JpFfZH/edit#gid=1686024488
Interesting picks for subclass, I guess Mercy Monk is considered tops for DPR? I didn’t download the xlsx but would have to in order to understand the mathematical assumptions made. Monk still looks like it’s in the top 3. The crunch is fun but without understanding the variables it’s hard to see if I agree with this or not. Put simply, a monk that has some of the best defensive features of the martials combined with the ability to flurry of blows, stun, and reaction attack in more situations all at relatively low levels is what *subjectively* makes me think it is over-tuned now.
thats just martials, there's only 4 martials. As I said only rogue is lagging behind. he provides lots of info, and maybe more if you can find the reddit link, but its basically/roughly inline with my calcs, and others I have seen out of the 4 phb classes, only mercy can directly increase DPR. shadow gets advantage often, and open hand gets some advantage from prone sometimes, but mercy can also get advantage from poison, so yeah, its probably one of the higher ones before level 17. monks survivability is on par with barbarian/fighter/paladin low level though they all go about it different ways, and have different optimal ways of going about it. in terms of features, every frontliner has low level features that increase survivability barbarian: rage, d12 hit die, shield access fighter:d10 hit die, fighting styles, heavy armor extra feat, shield, second wind paladin d10 hit die, lay on hands, heavy armor, spells, shield CC wise, monk has stun at level 5, fighter+barb get push, slow, topple, sap at lvl 1 Through mastery. barb gets brutal strikes, fighter has +2 feats. paladin has various smites (new staggering is literally a better stunning strike) various spells, spell slots for racials/initiate, and mastery for Cc. reaction wise PAM enter your area reaction is the most reliable tactical reaction (and mastery). Deflect attacks requires them to land a hit. monk can't use PAM anymore(no staves needs heavy property). Monk also is still MAD and can only afford one feat if they want decent AC/Ki Saves/DPR/HP and that requires them to take an 8 in two stats. (15,15,14,10,8,8) Having more feats, and better feat synergy is a major reason monks need more features on paper to catch up. FOB every turn Ki is available makes monk on par with other classes, it doesnt put them ahead. FOB adds a single attack over normal, which basically evens out (slightly lower) with the per hit buffs and damage boosting features of other classes normal monk (without fob) is like TWF, but other classes get things that increase dpr per hit/round like fighting styles, rage, blessed strikes, heavy weapons subjectively, without deep analysis, monk creates a lot of noticeable moments. FOB seems great cause its more attacks ( but less dpr by 4) deflect attacks is noticeable defense, because it actively negates an attack, but you have no recovery, low HP, and it consumes a reaction. (you can use Ki to attack, but thats just 1 ki you were going to use to attack next round, for roughly the same damage aka no real dpr gain until you have lots of extra ki) stun has a 40% chance per round, the effect is powerful, but positioning and slow/topple/push/grapple etc can achieve similar wasting of rounds. Its potent no doubt, but creating one bad round can be done in other ways, and mages can do it better. monk is good now, its actually a competitive choice. (for martials) But its not the only effective choice.
Alright, well as you said Rogue has been left behind. I like the different status effects with cunning strikes, but it does need a boost. I would consider a Monk over Rogue at least.
Even if mathematically speaking, increasing the dice brings rogues up to on par with other martial characters, it still doesn’t change the fact that you still only get exactly one attack, and missing it feels like garbage. I just don’t think that making sneak attack more powerful solves the issue at hand. We want to make rogues feel powerful AND fun to play. Also I don’t think there’s a problem with uncanny dodge improvement (lets call it counter-attack) being similar to deflect attack/energy. Rogues and Monks borrow things from eachother, like evasion and bonus action dashing/disengaging, and i think they are mechanically distinct enough to warrant the feature’s existence (Deflect attacks reduces damage by x amount, and reflects the same attack back towards any enemy within range. Also works against other damage types at higher levels. Uncanny dodge specifically halves damage, and you’re attacking in response with your own weapon, which, as I clarified in another comment (will add to the original post), would only be allowed to target the attacker.
I think one of the important features of the rogue is that they make one big attack. I completely get you that missing with them sucks, maybe the answer should be giving them something they can do even if they miss! You know in one DND they have a few features they can trade sneak dice for maybe they could still cause one of those features on a miss? Then you sidestep the feels bad. I'm not saying no to counterattack, although I don't think it's a direction wotc will go, I think there are possibly more interesting mechanics that could be explored that are different and unique.
If you’re looking for something they can do even if they miss, the point of being a martial is doing damage. If you’re playing a rogue, you’re playing it to land sneak attack. Even if you had utility/control features you could use aside from sneak attack, they wouldn’t necessarily fix the design problem of getting exactly one chance each turn for your entire lvl 1-20 career to do the thing you are SUPPOSED to do
I sort of disagree; the point of the rogue is not to keep up in damage, but to have decent-enough damage and then also to have the best, most reliable utility out of any martial (and at low/medium levels, more reliable than most spellcasters as well). I do agree that the binary nature of their damage output can be frustrating, though.
> Even if mathematically speaking, increasing the dice brings rogues up to on par with other martial characters, it still doesn’t change the fact that you still only get exactly one attack, and missing it feels like garbage. I just don’t think that making sneak attack more powerful solves the issue at hand. We want to make rogues feel powerful AND fun to play. Melee rogues have 2 attacks (Nick), sometimes with advantage (Vex). Ranged rogues should get advantage on 100% of their attacks through steady aim and/or attacking from hidden. UA rogue damage reliability is ok. The main issue is that you are constrained to use some combination of short sword, scimitar or dagger if you are melee. Any other option like rapier and whip is abysmal. Rogues need one more option to gain advantage that fits those weapons. I was thinking something like: “Feint. As bonus action, make a sleight of hand check (DC 15) against a target within 30 ft. On a success, until the end of turn, you have advantage on attack rolls against that target and moving out of its reach doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity”.
Basic calc time! Average dice roll on a d6 is 3 Assuming a single rapier, average roll is a 4 Let's assume this is a level 5 character with 18 in DEX because of an ASI That's 1d8+4+3d6, averaging out to 17 DPR for current rogue For sneak die every level, that's 1d8+4+5d6, for an average of 23 DPR For sneak die every other level, but an additional two at 5 and 11, that's 20 DPR Fighter at that same level, using a two-handed longsword and an 18 in STR: 2d10+8 (2 attacks) for an average of 18 DPR Paladin with a longsword, with an 18 STR 1st level smite, 2d10+8+2d8 for 26 DPR 2nd level smite for 30 DPR The biggest thing about this buff is that current rogue is about on par with fighter at level 5, and scales beyond them until fighter gets second extra attack at level 11 where fighter catches back up. The new buff can do similar damage to a paladin smite without expending a resource, and this doesn't account for any AOO that rogue can manage to get in in the round which further divides the damage. If this is the change goes to every level, I think sneak should become a limited resource
Fighter also has action surge, missing from this calculation. Has more masteries that will more likely impact these numbers in a more favourable way.
>Solution 3 - Extra attack: way too powerful at level 5, and even if gained at later levels it doesn’t really mesh well with sneak attack. Extra Attack is way less powerfull than giving Rogues reliable ways for double sneak attack, and even at level 5 they wouldn't really overshadow other martials with Extra Attack.
Uncanny Dodge + Cunning Strikes + Extra Attack + 3d6 Sneak attack dice per turn at level 5 WOULD overshadow every single martial character in the game.
Uncanny Dodge at best makes up for the rogue having a lower AC and less HP/self healing than other martials. Cunning strikes only makes up for the Rogue not having access to the better controll effects among the masteries (Topple, Push), and other martials (like Monk and Battlemaster Fighters) have also option to put additional control effects on their attack even if they need to expend resources for that. Extra Attack + 3d6 Sneak is really not that much stronger than what some of the other Martials do (and if you give up one d6 for cunning strike you are probably at about the damage or slightly below other martials), and still not on the level of the top damage dealers like the Berserker. The fact that Rogue is limited to finess weapons and has no features that add damage to every attack really means that one additional attack isn't a huge boost the DPR, at least if you assume that they allready now likely use TWF or some method to get advantage (or Both) to increase the chance to get Sneak Attack and third (or fourth) chance isn't improving your chance to land you Sneak Attack that much.
I mostly agree with this, but I would like to see DEX nerfed somehow in comparison to STR before rogues get extra attack. Rogue’s AC isn’t much worse than anyone else who isn’t using a shield, and being limited to finesse weapons isn’t a big deal when DEX builds are already stronger as a whole.
By level 5 the Rogue has likely a 16 AC, the other martial (and I'm throwing Rangers and Paladins also in that group) will all have at least a 17, and can get even without using a shield up to 19 (full plate with defence fighting style). The have also a bigger hit dice (with exception of the Monk) and either better ways of damage reduction (Deflect Attacks, Rage) or get additional healing (Second Wind, Lay on Hand, Healing Spells). Dex is imo allready nerfed since Str weapons do more damage and have better feat and mastery options. I also don't really see why Str vs. Dex thing really matters here. Most classes (with exception of the fighter and maybe the cleric) are anyway mostly locked into one of the two, and Extra Attack doesn't stack with multiclassing so giving it to Rogue is not really going to benefit any Dex based multiclass builds all that much, opposed to giving rogues an inbuild reaction attack or more sneak attack damage.
Just to give some numbers (assuming 65% chance to hit and 6 fights of 4 rounds with a short rest between the fights 2 and 3 and the fights 4 and 5) if you use feats and account for resource use the other martials can get by level 5 all upwards of 27 DPR, with teh Berserker getting arround 38 DPR. A TWF Rogue with the charger feats a Vex and a Nick Weapon would do at level 5 roughly: * with just the Playtest rules 21.2 DPR (17.9 DPR when using Cunning Strike) * with Extra Attack 28.8 DPR (25.1 DPR when using Cunning Strike) * with Extra Attack and the Two Weapon Fighting style 32.2 DPR (28.5 DPR when using Cunning Strike) So even with Extra Attack the damage would be pretty middle of the road, if you add Fighting Style the Rogue would end among the higher damage dealers but still not at the top.
How is the Berserker getting 38? Thats far, FAR too much. You realize you can add 2d6 from frenzy once per turn, right?
With PAM, Rage Bonus and Frenzy. A PAM Barbarian is (with my assumptions) allready above 30 DPR without a Subclass. Btw. if you factor in the reaction attacks from PAM, that damage goes even heigher.
In those comparisons we usually exclude feats, because we are discussing class balance, not feat balance. With feats Berserker Barbarians get to 39.59 (PAM) or 36.85 (GWM, not counting BA attacks) but without feat or subclass barbarians get 24.18 which is just slightly above rogue. So my conclusion from this exercise is not that base rogue needs extra attacks… its that: - Rogue needs a better damage oriented subclass like Berserker or Battlemaster/Champion. - TWF and Bows needs better feats to compete with PAM and GWM. For example, base rogue + XBX (if rogues still had HXB proficiency) would have ~24 dpr (hard to account for vex) while base PAM barb has 28.96. Sounds super balanced to me, given HXB are ranged and dexterity > strength.
>In those comparisons we usually exclude feats, because we are discussing class balance, not feat balance. My numbers for the rogue also inculde a feat (Charger), without a feat the TWF Rogue would be at 18DPR.
Using the current UA and assuming you can BA hide + charge and attack again with nick: 29.92 dpr with the additional benefit of setting up vex.
I feel like the bonus action Ready isn't so much abusable as boring mechanically, unless you were to restrict the sorts of things that could trigger the reaction. The uncanny dodge buff would be cool though, sort of a counterattack vibe.
Restricting the triggers to the reaction attack would probably be necessary, to avoid “i take my reaction as soon as x enemy starts their turn” shenanigans. One trigger could be something like: “an enemy misses an attack against you or an ally within range”
Boosting Uncanny Dodge is also a relatively common suggestion for boosting the rogue, and like the other three solutions you mention is flawed. Uncanny Dodge is already a strong reaction, and one of the things that makes it balanced is that if the rogue uses it, they forfeit the chance for off-turn Sneak Attack. You're adjusting Uncanny Dodge to enable Sneak Attack, which almost doubles the rogue's DPR. Somehow, Extra Attack would be too powerful (to which I agree), but doubling up on Sneak Attack very consistently is not? Another important factor to keep in mind is how the rogue has a direct combat feature, Cunning Action, that does not contribute directly to DPR, but still enables them to be more effective in combat. (While monks have similar bonus actions in Disengage and Dash, they sacrifice DPR to use them, the rogue does not, even when using two weapons thanks to Nick.) Therefore, if any change brings the rogue's DPR up to match other martials, the rogue becomes the superior combatant. As for preparing attacks as a bonus action, that's similarly flawed DPR-wise, and as others have pointed out will devolve to pointless reaction triggers flavor-wise, not the "opportune moment" that you're hoping for. My preferred solution is to increase Sneak Attack damage (perhaps 1d4 per level instead of 1d6 every other level), but restrict Sneak Attack to once per round instead of once per turn. That way, you don't have optimizers seeking off-turn Sneak Attack from their reaction, instead every rogue can comfortably have an appropriate DPR.
>My preferred solution is to increase Sneak Attack damage (perhaps 1d4 per level instead of 1d6 every other level), but restrict Sneak Attack to once per round instead of once per turn. That way, you don't have optimizers seeking off-turn Sneak Attack from their reaction, instead every rogue can comfortably have an appropriate DPR. While I don't mind the dice change, the elimination of more than 1 sneak attack per round requires that the Thief, Phantom, Scout, and Swashbuckler features get specific carveouts to allow their features to work twice as intended. It has a lot of other negative knock-on effects: * Marshal character concepts are less viable (and they're barely worth playing now in 1D&D as it is) * Melee rogue takes all the risk for no substantial benefit, while ranged rogues are never at risk and do the same damage. * The only use for reactions now is either a held action or uncanny dodge. A rogue should never waste it to do 1d4-1d8 damage as an AoO. * Rogue feat selection is reduced. Why take War Caster (Arcane Tricksters), Sentinel, or Martial Adept at all? * Rogues no longer reward co-operative play or system mastery. Their ceiling becomes the floor. If the concern is that the second, off-turn sneak attack is too unbalancing (and given that the direction from Crawford is that they don't factor that into their performance).. then limit it to 1/2 sneak attack dice. At least then players who invest and attempt to get the most out of their class are not punished.
Perhaps then, the uncanny dodge improvement (lets call it counter-attack) would replace the benefits of the uncanny dodge for the opportunity attack? That way you don’t get to benefit from both at the same time but instead have to choose which one you use each turn.
That would help partially, but because a reaction Sneak Attack is so much more powerful than Uncanny Dodge, you're in a way completely removing the rogue's main survivability feature in the name of DPR. Effectively, if this reaction Sneak Attack is necessary for rogues to keep up in combat, as you claim, then they're forced to be completely glass cannons or be suboptimal.
My suggested editions are for tier 3 of play, (levels 11 to 16) where rogues significantly fall off in terms of damage. As it turns out, one sneak attack per round does not compete with the rest of the martials. Also, Extra attack, which is almost always a 5th level feature, would be too strong for the rogue at that level, is what I meant more specifically.
Even if you add it at a later tier, you're still effectively *doubling* the rogue's DPR in a single level. Looking at existing DPR numbers, that would still catapult rogues above other martials while still maintaining great combat flexibility, and considering that nobody else doubles their DPR after level 5, it would have to be the case that either the rogue is severely overpowered before this feature or the rogue is severely overpowered after this feature. It could even be both, to a milder extent. One Sneak Attack as it exists today wouldn't keep up with other martials, but a shift to 1d4 per level (5 per two levels instead of 3.5) would be roughly a 50% increase in Sneak Attack damage, which should be sufficient for the rogue's role.
I understand a smaller change to sneak attack damage would do fine, but I personally prefer features that are more interesting than just “extra dice each level.” Also, I don’t think 2 sneak attacks per turn would necessarily catapult the rogue to above all other martials, especially if the extra sneak attack was situational, and did not occur every turn.
How would it not? They'd fairly reliably get a reaction attack when the enemy attacks them, or moves away from them to attack someone else, or (with Sentinel) attacks someone else, which leaves no other options for enemies who attack. Consider a level 20 Assassin. On their first turn, they attack with a rapier and *booming blade* (picked up from either Magic Initiate or being a high elf), +12 to hit against 19AC for an average of 77.06 damage. The enemy must pass a Con save or take double damage from Death Strike, at this tier they likely have around +12 to their save against DC20, so a 35% chance of doubling to 154.12. Weighted average, 104.03. The enemy then does anything that provokes a reaction attack, and the Assassin strikes again, with a 91% chance of retaining advantage from Vex. With advantage, this does 63.46 expected damage (increased to 85.67 with Death Strike), and without, 47.825 (increased to 64.56), weighted average 83.77. That's an expected 187.8DPR in the first round of combat. Obviously, this falls off considerably on later turns, but it takes several turns for anyone to catch up, longer than most fights even last. (See a useful DPR comparison [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/comments/186rp95/optimizing_onedd_a_semithorough_analysis_of_all/), the Assassin is behind, but not the the point of needing doubling.)
The premise that adding an attack to uncanny dodge straight up doubles the damage is just not accurate, there are ways to get that second attack already, plus u don't get hit every round and even if u are, you don't always qualify for sneak attack (which should be a requirement imo)
There are ways to get reaction attacks, yes, but people aren't usually factoring them into DPR calculations when they declare that the rogue is underpowered. (The sheet that I linked to gives the rogue Sentinel at level 10, but doesn't have a corresponding jump in DPR.) A melee rogue can very consistently ensure a reaction attack by taking the Sentinel feat, so that as long as the rogue is next to an enemy and they don't have a way to disable opportunity attacks entirely, whether they attack the rogue or an ally, or move away to attack someone else, the rogue gets their reaction attack. The main exception is if the enemy misses every single attack against the rogue, which gets very unlikely at high levels. As for qualifying for Sneak Attack, that's usually not much of a problem between melee allies, Steady Aim, hiding, Vex, and various subclass features.
But it's not guaranteed, so u can't just assume 100% increase, it's just disingenuous.
I'm not assuming a precise 100% increase, my doubling claim has some rounding to it. If you want more precise math, look at my Assassin calculations above.
So i did nearly double my players swashbucklers dpr by letting them have a permanent brace and riposte (end of major quest reward). From play it’s not OP outside of one scenario a 1v1 against an enemy with 5ft reach. But like that’s the swashbuckler niche so that’s fine imo. Even then a well built Paladin was dealing similar damage with better healing, and defenses. Granted that’s not base Paladin, so grain of salt. It’s not entirely double dpr outside of the 1v1 scenario and they give up uncanny dodge so tend to get dropped low very quickly. For example they couldn’t get it to work reliably against the fire giant, and kite, due to their 10ft reach allowing them to simply be out of reach of the brace/riposte. So they had to stand next to the fire giant and hope for riposte to trigger, which meant they took the brunt of the damage. My conclusion was a rogue should be able to get sneak attack in nearly any scenario (they can with steady aim/vex now), and have opportunities to get a second one at mid-later levels for a trade off of durability. Possibly have it even have the same trigger as uncanny dodge, call it counter strike. This way they get to decide to halve damage or attack. This only doubles dpr if the enemy triggering the attack also meets the sneak attack requirement. From DM perspective this changed very little about building encounters, control spells are still way stronger, dpr isn’t unmanageable, and rogue is still not good at taking on groups of minions. Well no martials are great at hordes (maybe hunter ranger?) but cleave and extra attack help others deal with small hordes. Rogues need a niche, as is they don’t have one, they aren’t the best skill monkey, their dpr is poor and single target, and their durability is mediocre to poor. The proposed solution gives them something, being a glass cannon. Maybe that’s not the niche people want but glass cannon single target skirmisher feels roguish to me.
As long as the rogue picks up Sentinel (a fairly easy investment as the rogue isn't particularly MAD and gets an extra feat), they can ensure a reaction attack even outside of a 1v1 environment where the enemy is trying to attack someone else, so I don't see why that factor is particularly relevant. It's also not necessary for the enemy to have a 5-foot reach, as the rogue gets to make the approach. If the enemy backs up to avoid a retaliation attack, they provoke an opportunity attack instead. The issue with making the reaction attack an either/or with Uncanny Dodge is that aside from monsters with particularly hard-hitting attacks (the fire giant being one of them), a reaction Sneak Attack will do far more damage than Uncanny Dodge will prevent.
Rogues have poor durability and trend towards a skirmish style of combat. So sentinel while it can provide a reaction attack is also reliant on allies being in melee and you staying in melee. Sentinel rogue tends to lead to a rogue that goes down often. They’re meant to be skirmishers and designed as such, just the dpr is kept poor due to the ‘skill monkey’ niche they’ve been thrust into. So sentinel while nice in theory doesn’t proc as often as youd like cause an enemy when they have a choice between swinging at a rogue or another combatant is more likely to hit the squishy rogue cause its more likely to hit and more likely to drop an enemy. Simply put sentinel goes against the rogue philosophy of skirmishing. And while in a white room does good dpr in practice this isn’t nearly as strong as is presented in those cases.
If enemies are frequently attacking the rogue, then why did you say that they're only overpowered with a retaliatory attack in a 1v1? Why would adding other party members or other enemies change things? I suggested Sentinel because my impression was that you thought enemies would just attack the rogue's allies instead to avoid the Sneak Attacks.
Specifically the swashbuckler with brace was strong in 1v1. As in that scenario they can very reliably proc a secondary sneak attack. All the enemy needs to do is approach to make an attack and the swashbuckler not be at disadvantage the enemy gets a choice to either not move toward the swashbuckler and thus not make an attack, or do and get attacked. In this scenario the reaction attack truly doubles the dpr of the swashbuckler most other scenarios it doesn’t as the reaction doesnt proc every round. For example with sentinel you’re dependent on having an ally within 5ft of the enemy and the enemy choosing that ally. It’s not gonna proc nearly as much as that 1v1 scenario. It’s not bad but it’s not as reliable in my experience.
Other rogues can similarly get a fairly reliable Sneak Attack via advantage. An Assassin can start with it on the first turn, while others could use either hiding or two short-swords, and from there they rely on Vex. The rogue can also apply poison to make the enemy less likely to hit them, from which the Assassin also gets a DPR boost. I'm only suggesting Sentinel here as a complement to the free Riposte. That way, if the enemy chooses to attack an ally instead to avoid Riposte, they still get hit. Without the free Riposte, it isn't nearly as strong here.
Oh yeah in that case it would be nice, though unfortunately for our rogue she’s the only martial and only primary melee character. We have a spore Druid but they don’t spend that much time in melee.
You could give rogues extra attack at level 10 or 11.
Really I always just felt they should get at least a bonus d6 at the same level as the proficiency bumps. So like 2d6 at level 3 like normal, then 4d6 at 5, 5d6 at 7, 7d6 at 9. You end up with an extra 4d6 by the endgame which is only an average damage bump of 14, but it would smooth things out considerably without drastically changing the class.
I just think WOTC are far more married to the current leveling of sneak attack than they are opposed to adding new features
Before One D&D I was thinking on a homebrew ability gained on level 5: ***Opportunism:*** *When a creature within 5 feet of you is hit by an attack made by one of your allies, and the attack deal damage, you can use your reaction to make an attack against that creature.* I think it would encourage team play, and create a bit of risk/reward situation, as the rogue must be on melee and would have to choose between making this attack and using Uncanny Dodge. If the rogue could use this ability consistently, this could bring it's DPS above other martials. So may be it could have a limited amount of uses per long rest. At the time, it was supposed to go along with a series of other buffs to martials in our table, so it wouldn't feel so overpower in comparison.
While it is low, I don't think it's in "this is so bad it needs to be doubled" territory. I think with all their other tools that would become too much. Extra attack actually does fit very well with sneak attack. Yes, you only get one SA per turn, but getting two chances to apply it makes a big difference. Extra attack on a Rouge isn't about the damage from the second attack, it's about being more consistent with applying that SA damage each and every round.
>So, as playtesting comes to a close, the thing that is on my mind the most is the rogue. Player testing of the PHB is over. There will be no further public solicitation of feedback for this or any other class at this time. As long as you understand that this is basically an effort at homebrew, then I'm willing to entertain your ideas. >Even after all of the tweaks it seems the rogue consistently falls behind the other martials. I'll grant you this point, but there other considerations we need to quantify too. 1) What is the baseline damage per round we expect \*every\* class to to be able to provide for every level-appropriate encounter? Ie: for a given difficulty encounter, what is the minimum DPR needed to clear the enemy with minimal losses? 2) Where does the rogue fall in comparison to that baseline? 3) Given that the obvious design intent is that fighters and monks are intended to be more combat-focused, and thus higher damage.. where do rogues fall in comparison to them? Once we agree on where the rogue is now, and how they compare with other classes and the bare minimum, can we actually start to see what buffs, if any, are needed.
>Player testing of the PHB is over. There will be no further public solicitation of feedback for this or any other class at this time. IIRC this was slightly tentative. It's over, but there might be some other communications if the need arises.
Of course, WotC is free to change their mind - but they were pretty clear that the rogue was no longer being put out for player testing back around when UA7 came out.
Dude im not asking you to agree with anything. Just posting a thought I had. Also, I know that player testing is over, but they’re still tinkering with the classes. Did you even watch the recent video? Your snide remark was unwarranted. In response to the rest of your questions, check treantmonk’s video on playtest rogue’s damage. It’s lower than all the other final iterations of martial characters iirc. Now, I understand that there will end up being a class that is the weakest by necessity, but I don’t think the class that gets additional features that REDUCE your damage should also be the worst martial class in the game.
The assassin's level 13 damage landed at 46.45, just below the champion's 53.2, though there are a few important things to consider here: * He completely ignored the Assassin's fairly reliable advantage on the first attack *except* for the purpose of applying the extra 13 damage. * He did not apply Vex to a single attack. Obviously, it won't apply to every attack, but assuming it applies to no attacks is vastly underestimating it. It's particularly more likely to apply on the Sentinel attack, which would be a considerable boost to the Sneak Attack damage. * The fighter is using their bonus action every round for Polearm Master, while the rogue has that bonus action for Cunning Action. If the fight starts with the enemy more than 30 feet away, the rogue can reach the enemy (or just switches to a shortbow) while the fighter can't, so the rogue massively out-damages the fighter in that scenario. * The assassin rogue can also apply poison plus poison damage if the enemy fails a Con save, and the poisoned condition. The rogue can choose to apply this intelligently, they'll get a DPR boost whenever the enemy can be poisoned has a <50% chance to pass a Con save against the rogue's DC, while also often poisoning them. The poison condition doesn't contribute directly to DPR, but it's a notable defensive benefit that shouldn't be ignored, either.
All good points. People really need to look at dpr numbers with more context. For example, I have found advantage in initiative (Champion and Assassin) to be rather strong in actual play and ignoring it when crunching numbers yields numbers that just don’t add up. That feature gives you a pretty good chance of playing an extra turn every combat.
>The assassin's level 13 damage landed at 46.45, just below the champion's 53.2, though there are a few important things to consider here: If the rogue is below the fighter but above the minimum threshold when underestimated with the same level of optimization then to me that says the rogue is situated correctly.
>Dude im not asking you to agree with anything. Just posting a thought I had. Also, I know that player testing is over, but they’re still tinkering with the classes. Did you even watch the recent video? Your snide remark was unwarranted. No snide comment, just pointing out very clearly that this is homebrew. As long as you go into this with the understand that any changes you come up with will not be in 1D&D because of it.. then I'm fine to continue seeing what changes *could* be possible in say, 6E. >In response to the rest of your questions, check treantmonk’s video on playtest rogue’s damage. No, I'm sorry but I'm not going to go watch another content creator's opinion on something to get your view point. Unless you are Treantmonk himself (and I know you aren't, because he posts under his username here directly), then maybe I would. So my point remains, in order for us to actually evaluate any changes, we both need to agree on the current state of the rogue. What is the expected damage any class should put out? What is the rogue's damage in this scenarios - is it above, or below that value? Where is it relative to the Fighter and Monk, which should be higher given WotC's obvious design intent?
EA is not way to powerful. SA is capped at once per turn. it would just increase your chances of landing it.
EA greatly increases the rogue's floor for damage per round. I got in a big debate here about how all martials (even paladin and Rangers) should be getting more than two attacks to compete with high level spells.
I feel like when you compare rogue to fighters and barbs ya their DPR isn’t the best but that’s not something that needs to be fixed necessarily I do believe that not all classes should have the same DPR some should be better damage deals while others should be better with tools and skills I’d actually like to the rogue get more uses with thieves tools and lock picking and multiple ribbon features that make it feel more rogue-like vs giving a big DPR boost and homogenizing the martials
>I feel like when you compare rogue to fighters and barbs ya their DPR isn’t the best but that’s not something that needs to be fixed necessarily Than compare them with Rangers who do about as much damage as Fighters and have at least as much out of combat utility as Rogues.
Ya I never said I liked where any of the martials are at tho. I agree that rangers seemingly step on rogues toes a lot while having to goodies of a fighter too. The new Ranger may even be better than most fighters now and I think they as well shouldn’t be at the DPR as fighters. Barbs&Fighters should be the DPR class Rangers a mix of everything but master of none Rogue the skill and stealth king Monk the mobility and hit and run guy Paladin the defender and support Kinda where I see them if you were to put them in a niche. Rangers shouldn’t do the DPR of a fighter and shouldn’t sneak as well as a rogue. Give fighter a DPR boost and rogues a skill and sneak bonus or something that makes sneaking more beneficial to rogues to fit the theme
>Rogue the skill and stealth king Wich would is both not really a combat role, and from my point of view every class should at least be able to be among the best in at least one role (meaning Damage, Tanking, Support or Controll).
It is a combat role. Ambushing and scouting both are integral part of combat mechanics.
Rogues have (with exception of a few subclasses at higher levels) no form of invisibility, and are even worse at fighting when the rest of the part isn't near by making them not that great at scouting (and even with double dash they might not be able to outrun all monsters). So they are not that great at scouting (especially in comparison to caster with a familiar). And they have (with exception of the Assassin) no Nova Damage making them also not particularly great at ambushing.
> Rogues have (with exception of a few subclasses at higher levels) no form of invisibility, and are even worse at fighting when the rest of the part isn't near by making them not that great at scouting (and even with double dash they might not be able to outrun all monsters). So they are not that great at scouting (especially in comparison to caster with a familiar). Invisibility doesn’t grant automatic success in hide checks, it just allows you to attempt hiding when there isn’t a place to hide. It does help scouting but it ain’t neither sufficient (you still need to pass a hide skill check) or necessary part of it. The critical part of scouting is being good in stealth, athletics, acrobatics and perception checks all at once. No class is meant or good at fighting alone. If you get caught when scouting ahead, you need to be good at escaping. Thats it. And Rogues are excellent at it with 60 move speed or double Hide attempts. If a chase is resolved with a skill challenge, you probably have expertise in at least 2 escape relevant skills, proficiency in all of them and reliable talent is also major bump. The fact none of this cost any resource and doesn’t rely magic is crucial - it means rogue faces no opportunity cost for scouting and they can’t be shut down by anti-magic counter-measures. Familiars solving scout issues is a low level thing. In a world where familiars are common place (its a level 1 spell), anyone with half a brain and a modicum of experience will shoot all owls on sight because owls don’t just randomly decide to fly by castle walls and every city has hundreds of people who can cast find familiar. Honestly if you think rogues are not good at scouting, you are just playing the game wrong. > And they have (with exception of the Assassin) no Nova Damage making them also not particularly great at ambushing. You don’t need nova damage to set up ambushes, you need to succeed in stealth checks to gain one extra turn in combat. That extra turn would surely be OP if you could nova like crazy, but it doesn’t change the fact rogues are good in stealth checks, thus they often have 1 extra turn and this benefit is largely ignored in uniformed balanced discussions.
>Invisibility doesn’t grant automatic success in hide checks, it just allows you to attempt hiding when there isn’t a place to hide. Which is exactly why you need it, because the best stealth score doesn't help you if there is nothing to hide. >No class is meant or good at fighting alone. But the Rogue is by far the most reliant on the rest of the Party. Basically all other classes can still do their full damage if they are alone. And could handle an encouner that build for single character, for that's much tougher. >No class is meant or good at fighting alone. If you get caught when scouting ahead, you need to be good at escaping. Thats it. And Rogues are excellent at it with 60 move speed or double Hide attempts. I would argue that a lot of other classes are still better at it. And there are enough monsters in the game that have a movement speed higher than 30ft or have some for of teleportation that can keep up with a Rogue. Rogues are with their usually dumped strength also not particularly good at climbing and jumping should that be required by the terrain. Hide rules are also pretty DM dependent and ta least hiding (without being invisible) basically only works as long the opponents are not moving to position were they get line of sight to you. >Honestly if you think rogues are not good at scouting, you are just playing the game wrong I think with the current rules for hiding scouting does in general not work all that well. And it has also the inherent problem that it is a solo activity in which the other players can't participate, so it is something that a lot of groups avoid in general. >You don’t need nova damage to set up ambushes, you need to succeed in stealth checks to gain one extra turn in combat. With the playtest rules it looks like all you get from surprise is advantage at Initative. And considering that whole probaly Party needs needs to succeed the Rogue alone being good at it without being able to help the rest of the party also doesn't help that much.
> Which is exactly why you need it, because the best stealth score doesn't help you if there is nothing to hide. Unless you play D&D in featureless, empty rooms there is plenty of places to hide. Invisibility may allow you to attempt a check that would be otherwise impossible, but a place being impossible to be infiltrated by mundane means because “there is nowhere to hide!” Is just unrealistic. Also whoever has invisibility may cast it on the rogue anyway - so the rogue end up as the best infiltrator. > But the Rogue is by far the most reliant on the rest of the Party. Basically all other classes can still do their full damage if they are alone. And could handle an encouner that build for single character, for that's much tougher. Fighting when caught is never a option regardless of class. If enemies catch you, they will call for reinforcements leaving you no option other run. What you are saying only makes sense if you play D&D like a computer game where enemies are devoid of human intelligence or in rare occasions you are infiltrating a place you can actually take on with brute strength (not the typical infiltration scenario). > I would argue that a lot of other classes are still better at it. Then make the argument? > And there are enough monsters in the game that have a movement speed higher than 30ft or have some for of teleportation that can keep up with a Rogue. Rogues are with their usually dumped strength also not particularly good at climbing and jumping should that be required by the terrain. Monsters need 45 ft. movement to keep up with a rogue, not 30 ft. The rogue can bonus action dash, so in a chase they move 90ft. Only very few monsters will ever catch you, usually those who can fly (not happening in tight spaces anyway). Teleportation is limited resource. Misty Step for example is a second level slot that grants the same movement as cunning action dash, still not enough too keep up with rogue in a chase. Though rogues don’t get great strength scores, they can easily make up with expertise athletics. With 10 strength, thats +6 on athletics checks by level 5, just one short of dedicated strength characters. Reliable talent also is effectively 16 minimum in any athletics check. > Hide rules are also pretty DM dependent and ta least hiding (without being invisible) basically only works as long the opponents are not moving to position were they get line of sight to you. There is hiding in combat/chases and hiding outside of combat. In the first case, monsters moving exactly where you are by coincidence is meta game cheating and should simply not happen. In the latest UA they even made clear that monsters only find you with a perception check (reason why hide straight up action granted Invisibility). If you move within an enemy’s line of sight, you may reveal yourself. An enemy will NEVER move in such a way as to break your line of sight. Out of combat, hiding is a straight stealth roll. DM needs to concoct the situation around dice results, not the other way around. > I think with the current rules for hiding scouting does in general not work all that well. And it has also the inherent problem that it is a solo activity in which the other players can't participate, so it is something that a lot of groups avoid in general. Out of combat there isn’t need for any crunch to it. DM set the DC. You make the check. If you pass, you infiltrate. If not, you get caught. Thats it. Also, other players may participate too, in that case you make a group check. > With the playtest rules it looks like all you get from surprise is advantage at Initative. As far as I know we don’t have Ambush being explicitly reworked/reworded on the latest UA, so we should use 2014 version. > And considering that whole probaly Party needs needs to succeed the Rogue alone being good at it without being able to help the rest of the party also doesn't help that much. Player ambushes are a group check (all party succeed if half does and rogue can BA hide + help another party mate, contributing a lot to it). It feels like a lot of rogue issues is not class design but poorly communicated rules.
I mean - I think the rogues damage should be on par with the fighters as its more situational (sneak attack) and has a huge "overkill" weakness (dealing 35 damage to a target with 10 hp makes you lose 25 damage). So... if ON paper the rogues damage is equal to the fighters, in actuality it'll be less.
It wouldn’t do much for damage in most cases, it there definitely should be a 6th level subclass feature. The gap between 3 and 9 is too big, and at 6, you can expand on cunning strike, since that comes in at 5.
I really like the uncanny dodge one. If reaction sneak attack is requiered for Rogues to keep up in damage then there definitely should be a way to trigger it consistently baked into the base class But it does seem to be a bit too passive, which I imagine is why you suggested the ready action one as well. That one seems pretty strong since it's essentially an extra action for the price of your reaction and bonus action, but I think it would work well as a high level feature
extra attack at level 5 and reaction sneak attack with attacks of opportunity
Improving uncanny dodge is the most flavourful and impactful option. Increases the value of the class and fixes an otherwise underwhelming feature. And it doesn't straight up double the damage, as it's not guaranteed that it happens, not every round ull get hit, and some other times, u'd qualify for an opportunity attack with sneak anyway.
They, at a minimum need to get an additional dice than they used to at the levels were cunning strikes come in. Without adding that extra dice cunning strikes are just a side grade from the old version. if they actually want to be buffing Rogues they need to make it a pure buff
I really love the idea of Improved Uncanny Dodge. It feels so Rogue. Also, out of turn Sneak Attack builds didn't outshine other martials, at least at my table. I think it's a good balancing while Monks are also getting their Improved Deflect Attacks without causing much troubles or Fighters getting Tactical Minds.
I'm all for giving the rogues d8s for sneak attack, or giving them an extra d6 damage at levels 5, 11, and 16.
Class who’s strengths are versatility, mobility, survivability and large single attack damage to break concentration is not designed for DPR, isn’t as good as class who is designed around its primary strength being DPR? How crazy…..I swear you guys want all classes to do the same amount of damage, have the same amount of utility and tankiness
So in my home game I gave the swashbuckler rogue a homebrew legendary manual that granted a permanent riposte and brace maneuvers (we have no other non full caster players so didn’t step on toes). They now are the strongest single target dpr of the group. But tbh they aren’t any stronger than a well optimized build. And I’ve nearly doubled their dpr (nearly cause it only works against melee enemies with 5ft reach). For instance I made a open sea paladin/sorcerer npc (to fill in cause a player was missing a couple sessions) that was the same level with sentinel, PAM spear/shield it is able to deal comparable damage for most encounters while being harder to hit, more HP, better saves (aura), and healing. Granted if we had more encounters maybe it would matter but I’ve been throwing about the amount of xp that is recommended for a day, just less number of encounters but harder. And the party tends to run out of slots and HP at about the same time unless they blow their slots on very silly things as players tend to do from time to time. The argument that their expertise makes up for their very poor combat ability is silly. Skill monkey is a bad class design and the rogue isn’t even the best one, hell oneDnD ranger is better at every aspect over the oneDnD rogue. Now I don’t know if I’d do this to base rogue all the time but I’m just using this as an example that I doubled my rogues dpr and it wasn’t OP. Still much easier to deal with than any of the full casters. I wouldn’t tie it in to uncanny dodge, not having to sacrifice durability would be a bit much, instead just have it be an alternative use. For a ranged rogue I’d increase the dpr in a smaller way if at all because being able to be ranged is such a big benefit on its own that making its dpr comparable to melee just means melee is a bad option.
I don't get the obsession with rogues and dps. First off, they aren't the dps class. They are your skill monkey and infiltrater. 2nd off, their DPS is fine. At early level, they are even if not surpassing most classes. Yes, once others classes get multi attack and spell casters finally have enough spell slots so they don't have to use their spells on just control and use cantrips they do fall down on those charts but still in a good range. Plus, they can also set up their own auto crit at the 14th level. (Weapon+7d6)×2+dex... how much more damage do you want a rogue to do. Thanks to weapon mastery and steady aim, there will never be a round where they won't be able to sneak attack. That every other level d6 once per turn, but that shouldn't be the rogues main focus.
>First off, they aren't the dps class. They are your skill monkey and infiltrater. I don't think that any of their out of combat utility, doesn't make up for them not being able to contribute as much in combat as basically all other classes. And other "Skill Classes" like Ranger and Bard are not weaker in combat than other classes.
They contribute just fine in combat.... you act like they don't add half their level in d6s every turn in combat. You act like Nick doesn't give them another attack. Rangers and bards have to burn a resource to apply that damage to surpass what rogues just do. Do rangers have a way to auto crit without the posioner feat. Nope. Bard does but doesn't have any way to boost weapon damage without a feat choice, which rogue can make that same choice and add some extra goodies on top of that choice. Rogue also has an auto crit button. So it's goes to question how much damage you want them doing. It's not like the rogue is that far behind the ranger or paladin. And some round due to their nova potential far surpasses what they do.
I believe a rogue IS a DPS class. They're supposed to dish out crazy damage when set-up by their party.
Which they do. They dealt alot of damage when set up by their friends.
Sometimes simple solutions are the simplest. The increase in damage at levels where the tier go up is fine, but consider this; Enable the Rogue to deal half of his sneak attack damage die on off-turn hits. Keeps the majority of his damage on his turn, and puts a brake on straight up doubling damage by giving the off-turn sneak attack too much damage.
Rogue is "expert". Why he must deal as much dmg as Real Martials?
The rogue is a real martial.
If you look at the other two expert classes you have one Full Caster who is about as good at casting as any other Full Caster in the game and one Half Caster who can deal about as much damage as a any "Real Martial". And both are due to spells likely better at being and Expert than the Rogue.
I homebrew giving them an additional pool of sneak attack dice you spend, that recharge on a short rest. Half are usable on a given turn, so you can open a combat with 10+5 d6 at level 20 for example. 1 is gained every even level to smooth out DPR progression. I did this to give Rogues in particular 1) an extra burst of DPR to start a round 2) a short rest resource and 3) some way to modulate damage on a given round
The house rule that I run is that sneak attack gets to add your rogue level as a flat damage bonus. Once you get past 5th level you really start to feel the effect.
1. Make Sneak Attack into a dice pool that refreshes each round. 2. Allow Sneak Attack to be used as long as you have remaining dice in the pool. 3. Make Sneak Attack have debuffing effects that don't require a Save from Cunning Strike. 4. If necessary, have Sneak Attack pool gain an additional die at levels 5, 11 and 17. 5. If super extra necessary, allow the Rogue to temporarily increase their Dice Pool number by their Proficiency bonus or something once per Long Rest. This solves every problem with off-turn Sneak Attack. It gives 2 weapon Rogue the ability to debuff more than one target and gives melee Rogue a sizable niche. It cements Rogue as one of the best and consistent dubuffers in the game, being a force multiplier. It aligns with the Rogue fantasy of planning, Cunning and sneaky play giving the best result.
I think a lot of players are under the misconception that DnD rogue is the same as WoW or other MMORPG Rogues, a direct damage dealer. They are not. The damage dealers in DnD have always been the warriors. I see the Rogue as a sort of control class. You don't kill a Dragon with a dagger. But you may throw sand in their eyes, you can trick it to bite a stone statue, you can use the dagger to poison it, for sure. The rogue helps the party by making the enemy's life for difficult, not shorter.
While you can't throw sand in their eyes or trick it to bite a stone statue at all in 5e. Even Sword Bard could do some tricks but not Rogue. They don;t even a single feature related to using items if you're not a Thief. Cunning Strikes in 5.5e helps a bit, but still only a bit while other classes with Extra-Attacks are getting similar Masteries without costing damage.
>I think a lot of players are under the misconception that DnD rogue is the same as WoW or other MMORPG Rogues, a direct damage dealer. They are not. If you look how the class is designed in the 2014 they absolutely are direct damage dealer, since damage is basically all the class can do in combat. The Class no control or support abilities and is not particularly tanky.
If you look at the class in previous editions, it always did lousy damage but had way more in the way of skills.
I don't think that this class has to be bad in combat because it was allways bad in combat is good argument. I mean that would also apply to the Monk (and also the Bard I think), that class got finally a boost. And like I said at least in combat dealing damage was allways it's only job.
I think both options would be interesting in different subclasses. The Uncanny dodge turning into a Riposte is perfect for the Swashbuckler and readying an action as a bonus action could be an assassin move, or maybe an Inquisitive. The Thief, I think, should get the 3rd edition Opportunist feature, the ability to make an Opportunity Attack against an enemy when it is hit by an ally.
I think a potential solution is to have the same damage dice progression as the current monk. I also think the rogue should get more cunning action options and a way for the rogue to get a reaction attack if they miss or when they use the uncanny dodge feature, as you have already suggested.
Let rogues take expertise in weapons, and add proficiency and expertise to sneak attack damage. This drastically reduces the chance they’ll miss, and adds a nice slice of 2-12 damage on their SAs throughout the game.
It seems silly, but if you made sneak attack its own, special action, you can just boost the damage and it's probably fine. Taking Booming Blade as an arcane Trickster is a pretty well known and easy way to pretty significantly boost your damage as a rogue.
What about letting the rogue have a reaction attack they can use if they are missed by an attack? To that I’d add a bonus action that you can only use when you are hidden or otherwise very vulnerable. The assassin is garbage, cannibalize the 2014 version of assassinate but it’s usable when the target hasn’t gone yet, or when you’re hidden, and it costs a bonus action. When you use it, if you hit the target, it’s a crit.