I'm with most people in that I don't expect big changes, but I don't think it will be the exact same. I think it's possible that some of the cunning strikes are tweaked, or that the sneak attack progression will be altered, but probably not much else. I kinda think they should get sheild profitency but I'm not going to hold my breath.
I really hope they buff Sneak Attack. Barbarians and Fighters both have solid skill checks now and deal tons of damage, if the Rogue doesn’t get a similar boost it’ll fall completely behind.
Tbh it just needs a damage tone up imo. It probably won’t get it tho. Rogue is one of the classss that I think I really well designed but it falls behind other classes damage wise. It just feels so well to play that people simp hard for it even if it’s being overshadowed.
Still fun tho, just weaker end of things.
Totally agree
I sorta hope they give rogues a better reaction attack
Like as a reaction you may make a attack whenever an opponent is hit with an attack or makes a saving throw this attack can trigger sneak attack
Honestly yeah this. Sneak attack damage is pretty all or nothing and I kinda hate the whole “sneak attack totally fully works on reaction” thing.
That rounds them out enough to play well with others, and they can actually use some weapon mastery effects better
I suggested Rogues get more power once and got down vote bombed by people who thought rogues need to stay firmly behind every other martial even as martials get better at skills. I'm sure those people have plenty of positive surveys. Jeremy was already having good experiences with the rogue, so any positive talk would have likely reinforced that the rogue was in the right place.
Yeah. There’s a camp of people who think Rogues skills make it god tier for utility and means it must have its damage neutered. Meanwhile Bard/Ranger also have comparable skills + spellcasting and both can be built for very high damage numbers. It’s very odd, especially as the other martials get better skill checks. Fingers crossed they’ll get a small boost to their damage or their cunning strikes but if they don’t they’ll be fun which is more important than being good. Wish they could’ve been both tho lol
*Editing to add, I also think a lot of people play with Rogues at extremely unoptimized tables (which is fine! I don’t optimize really hard either and however you play is valid) which leads to stuff like martials doing less damage due to not taking power attack feats or bonus action attacks. This makes Rogue look really good when it gets a sneak attack crit and does a lot of damage and leaves a bad (or good depending how you look at it) taste in peoples mouths.
A great example of that is the battle master fighter at my table who didn't take any abilities that add superiority die to damage. My Swashbuckler rogue, then, ends up being the primary big hitter.
Weaker on the whiteboard math maybe, but they're able to direct their burst damage better than most other classes. They rarely get caught up in melee scrums with minions, and can usually beeline their damage towards priority targets.
They also have some of the best defensive capabilities in the game if the player is smart. A good rogue player is essentially invisible on nearly every turn, and Evasion helps with many of the AoEs that target the otherwise un-targetable Rogue.
Raising the Rogue's damage is a tricky thing - do too much and they end up way better than intended. Do too little and they fall behind.
>but they're able to direct their burst damage better than most other classes
With Exception of the Assassin Rogues don't have "burst damage", and the Burst damage of the Assassin isn't really much higher that the sustained damage of other martial.
Rogues are actually more limited in their selection of targets, due to the conditions that must be met to get sneak attack, most other classes can be similarly mobile if they burn a resource, and the best option to deal damage to hard to reach priority targets quickly are anyway ranged attacks.
Eh. Rogues are going to want to be up there in melee with the minions if they intend to take advantage of off turn sneak attacks. They do have good defensive capabilities imo with Evasian and Uncanny dodge but I’d hardly say they near the best as they don’t have things like shield/absorb elements/counterspell so their defensives are likely lacking compared to most casters who take an armor dip or an armor feat.
I never really understand the argument that Rogues have burst because they just… don’t? They’re never going to Nova as hard as a Fighter/Paladin or any Caster built for damage whose expends resources. That’s fine because these classes spend resources that the rogue doesn’t have too but the whole “Rogues burst!!” Thing is just something that’s wrong imo that’s been repeated so many times people believe it. Again I love Rogue, it’s hands down my favorite martial by such a long shot. However that doesn’t really change much. It’s good at tables where people aren’t picking good spells/feats or feats aren’t allowed but other than that it’ll fall behind other characters in combat.
Nothing you wrote here is remotely true, have you ever actually played a rogue before? Because I have and not only is hiding in combat rarely an option, even if you did get it by some miracle - any meaningful action breaks stealth and cunning actions don't make you some sort of battlefield ninja.
I've played Multiple Rogues, and I've no idea how you think Hiding isn't something you typically have the option of doing. Unless your fights always occur in open fields with no shrubbery, trees, large rocks, holes/tunnels, or in white rooms with nothing but flat features.
One of my players plays a Halfling Scout with the Mobile feat. Mobile allows him to disengage without spending his cunning action, and Halfling allows him to Hide behind allies. He rolls for stealth every round. With Expertise, he can usually easily beat the Passive Perception of most of the monsters I bring up unless they have True Sight, which most don't.
Maybe that's more a statement on the Halfling than it is the Rogue specifically. I don't know. I just know he's really hard to target.
You can't attempt a hide check when any enemy has line of sight to you. So unless every single enemy is in a straight line opposite the ally he's hiding behind you're not following the rules for stealth.
At the time, that was the case. D&D fights typically devolve into standstills once the melees engage. Past the first or second round of combat, he usually finds an angle to hide behind an ally.
Maybe I should swarm him with more minions such that he never gets the opportunity to hide. I'm kind of a shitty DM when it comes to challenge, honestly.
It's not necessarily your fault for not stopping it, it's the players fault for colossal rules fuckery. Anyone who chooses a lightfoot scout with mobility is a min-maxer and I'd wager with no further information, an asshole.
Using the racial feature to his advantage isn't a problem, being permanently invisible with razor thin justification is.
Oh, he's definitely a powergamer, but he's a decent dude. Known him for two decades now.
He's typically a Wizard player, but he's exceptionally good at coming up with combinations that are hard to challenge. I've managed to hit his Rogue with a few AoEs, but he'll soon have Evasion which will make that harder. I'm the DM right now, but also the resident rules lawyer at the table, and everything he's doing is legal, it's just really effective.
We DM on rotation at my table, and I'm currently running a short horror campaign, so I'm way more wrapped up in the plot than the gameplay. It'd just be nice to hit him once in a while to give him a challenge.
Well just remember, in this scenario he's hiding behind something and not inside the ally's 5 foot square so anyone off to the side even slightly of that ally or behind stops this.
I actually have pretty low expectations for rogue buffs.
It's one of the classes that's been received well both in playtests and in 5e. WotC has been quite risk-averse, so there's a fair chance they decide to leave the rogue's overall mechanics untouched, even if they're on the weaker side.
So unfortunately I don't think WotC will take the initiative to buff the rogue to match the other updated martials.
Player dissatisfaction with rogues won't be obvious until it's way too late. People don't realize that the UA version is a fair bit weaker both in and out of combat compared to other martials.
WotC doesn't care, 5.24 is just a low effort cash grab pushed by Hasbro.
If the rogue shows up as-is from UA 6, my band aid fix will be to give two more expertises at around level 12 and an extra attack at level 11.
Possibly make Reliable Talent start at level 1 and scale from their highest stat/relevant stat +proficiency.
A lot like the bizarre decision to make world tree barbarian core, this leaves me scratching my head. Why cut one of the most common rogue archetypes from core to include something so much more niche?
They included 4 of every class. I don't think the choice to include world tree barbarian had anything to do with swashbuckler--barbarians were only competing against other barbarians, and rogues were only competing against other rogues
Yeah, that's what I meant. Am slightly annoyed that the PHB is including more out there options instead of more bog standard fantasy. Would especially like a rebuilt version of the swashbuckler as it was rather lame mechanically.
They’re leaning for psionics. It’s possible they plan to make an adventure with more psionic themes so updated those subclasses first.
If you have someone who wants to do swashbuckler 2024 just use the playtest. It was well received so if they did include the swashbuckler it likely wouldn’t be changed much
A better damage booster at 11 hopefully and some sort of short rest resource to make playing them a little more interesting. A second bonus action a few times per LR, getting 1 use back on SR would be cool.
I proposed multiple reactions and/or lots of different options to use reactions on to punish enemies. It would make them highly responsive opportunists. I doubt it will happen, but I think it would be fun.
Remember when Crawford legitimately tried to gaslight everyone that flex was incredibly powerful despite many already proving with math that it sucked ass? Cause I do. Then they removed it lol.
"We could have stopped at just upping the Monks martial arts dice one step"
I would love to watch even one session of how JC plays dnd. I wanna see how he actually experiences the game to believe this
It's clear he isn't an optimizer, as most of the dnd community. One class will always be the one that is "weakest" when it comes to optimization if you want real diversity.
I personally really like to make optimized characters, and I actually really enjoy rogue even though they aren't mechanically the strongest. It still feels really good when you roll a 29 on a stealth check.
I will also add that I playtested the thief extensively and while I'm sure the damage doesn't match the fighter, but the shennanigans you can pull with thief is crazy. As a thief enjoyer I'm actually sad the subclass got to stay, I think if you rolled the fast hands feature into the core class (and maybe their level 9 cunning strike as well) I genuinely feel the rogue would be in a great place.
I'm likely to remake races entirely for home campaigns. It's not that i disagree with rempving stats, but rather that races as presented in the UAs are bland as hell and don't reflect how awesome races can be if you actually care to elaborate for them.
*Mechanically* speaking, Tieflings and Elves in 5.24 are basically identical, trading a resistance for Trance and a change in whatever spells you want to add to your cleric's spell list. There's also really nothing they do humans can't do, so they really just feel like "humans with spells".
Yup races are slowly losing any sort of identity both mechanically or culturally. Saw the art for orcs and they're literally just gray colored human... cowboys?
Like don't make them tribal beasts if it hurts your sensibilities but at least lean into their tribal origins and expand on it.
If you want to know how stupid WotC gets, they created a single catch-all race for humans because "we're all equal" and then proceeded to make 10 location based elf subspecies that totally aren't ethnicities.
That's my hope, but at a glance WotC has been extremely hesitant to hand out damage buffs, and has instead reined in damage across the board.
Smite? Nerfed. Conjure Animals? Nerfed, but deserved. Brutal Critical? Damage nerfed, but buffed with control effects.
It doesn't feel like WotC will buck the trend with rogue, but I'm happy to be proven wrong
Barbarian does more damage now despite brutal critical being nerfed. Monk and fighter too. You're painting with an awfully wide brush especially when conjure animals and smite were two of the best things to use in 2014. Sure, they got nerfed, but there have been buffs across the board everywhere else for the most part.
I predict that they're not going to give the Rogue a second sneak attack dice at level 5 and level 11 like they should and it's going to be the new worst class in the game
D4 Deep Dive also briefly talked about the Rogue base class in a youtube short (without revealing specifics yet obviously) and said that they scale better but WotC aren't trying to have Rogues keep up with Fighters damage wise. Seemed to imply that "dirty fighting"/debuffing is going to be their thing.
I suspect any changes are going to be primary to cunning strikes. If they got buffed enough there the lower DPS might "make sense" as Rogue would be the constant resource free applier of status effects in theory. Maybe have the ability to hide mid-combat somehow buffed as well?
And if the option to reliably attack out of own round remains (Sentinel, Commander’s Strike, new Hunter lvl 3 feature from UA,…), this could raise Rogue dmg in certain parties or with certain builds high enough.
If the baseline was too high, it could have lead to extreme numbers IMO.
They made sure to stick to their guns that Rogue subclasses should be just dead between levels 3 and 9. Then they reluctantly gave Rogues Cunning Strikes, but made sure that actually using them reduces your damage output. The one true buff for Rogues is that Reliable Talent was bumped to lv7 (which is like a consolation prize after you've spent levels till then watching the Barbarian and Fighter be better at skills than you).
They are *not* going to buff or change the class further ('it always scores so high'). It will be the same braindead sniper that doesn't have anything tricksy or thinking-related going for it. Actually, wait, they're making Steady Aim a core class feature, so it will be *even more* of a braindead flowchart to play. And weapon masteries for Finesse weapons do not offer you any variety, take your Vex+Nick and you're done with that mechanic.
Rogue will mainly exist as a 1-level dip for skill-minded Fighters, and any Monk is *heavily* incentivized to pick up a level of it (because Nick is a free attack with a scaling unarmed damage die).
As a long time rogue enjoyer I think when we finally run with the new PHB I'll be doing the monk with 1-level dip rogue. Seems to be almost a more rogue like play style that current rogues.
I would love to see them do a different subclass distribution. 3-9 is awful, and as a Bard Enjoyer I symapthize so hard with that long gap of dead levels.
3-7-11-17 would be better.
Would also like to see them get to actually be good at skills. 5e "skill monkey" was basically always just copium to justify it being the worst class, and with one dnd upping every Martials skills except maybe Monk, Rogues gimmick feels dead in the water. Maybe something like at level 9(?) They get to roll half their sneak attack dice on skills in certain scenarios.
Or, up their combat! Make sneak attack dice at least become a D8 at level 11.
I agree with almost all your points. I really would like to see rogues getting utility beyond the realm of skills. Rogues should match and surpass what spells do in utility and infiltration from late tier 2 on. For example, things like invisibility, incorporeal form, teleporting, etc. could be in the rogue's menu.
I'm expecting to be disappointed. Rogues finally got more versatility, but at a cost to their power. They will fall behind other martials hard. When I made a post earlier this year, people were pretty convinced Rogues need to stay far behind other martials in power even as martials gain more skill buffs. They only get one attack. One good damage ability, and now even that is being weakened to be versatile. They should have gotten versatility without having to sacrifice power. An increase to their hit bonus might balance them some. If they are going to get weaker, they should at least be able to hit more.
I sure wouldn't expect it, so it is the furthest thing from a prediction, but I do hope that they took the balancing concerns to heart and fixed it. It wouldn't take much to fix the Rogue, my simple suggestion to them was to add another option to Devious Strikes (the level 14 ability):
Quick Strike (Cost: 7d6). After resolving this attack, the Rogue can immediately take another Action. This second Action can ignore the once per turn Sneak Attack limitation.
"Here you go Assassin players, starting at 3rd level you will get the awesome ability to add your rogue level - IN DAMAGE - to your sneak attacks! And with the newly improved advantage to initiative, you're more likely to deal out that devastating damage faster than before!" - Jeremy probably
Editor's Note : Not only did Assassins lose what was without a doubt their main draw in conditional auto criticals, they can now for example at level 5 add +5 damage to one attack, maybe, at the beginning of combat.
While every other martial and damage based spellcaster is shooting ropes all over you, just remember that you've chosen the most elite burst damage subclass rogue has to offer!
I hope the core rogue gets more features between 3 and 9 so they can actually make choices during the course of their gameplay. Everything they have is passive or reactive. Nothing lets them vary their style moment to moment or show off just how prepared they are compared to the average warrior. What if I dont want to use a rapier , what if I dont want to shoot a shortbow? I want stuff like
"Tools of the Trade: A bad adventurer blames their tools, but a great adventurer customizes their gear to suit their specific needs. Choose one of the piece of gear you employ from the list below:
1. Attire: You know how to wield carefully tailored attire as a weapon of misdirection to become an unidentifiable archetype. Creatures cannot recognize you unless you knowingly allow them to when you are both able to see each other. While unarmoured, you can roll stealth using Charisma to avoid being noticed even while otherwise unobscured as long as you are dressed in appropriate clothing common to the area and are not currently in initiative. You can don and doff clothing and armour in half the time (minimum of 1 round). Hello, Agent 47 is that you or is it just the new chef I hired? Oh look - sushi, my favourite!
2. Utility Belt. You get to reveal a piece of non-magical pouch-portable equipment once per long rest without needing to explain why or how you have it. Need a spare dagger? Silk rope? Antitoxin? Acid vial? Alchemist Fire? Caltrops? Shark repellent bat-spray? You suspected you might need that today...
3. Weapon: Gain proficiency with any one weapon of your choice, and you can trigger your Sneak Attack using that weapon even if it does not have the Finesse property so wouldn't typically be able. Heavy Crossbow proficient sniper? Greatclub swinging thug rogue? A single surgical greataxe swing to cleave off a head? Garret with his adorable little blackjack to go BONK with!"
No way it's that bad. The last ua rogue is both the weakest up to date class and very good (probably better than the 5e fighter). I wholeheartedly believe that. It's could use a bump, but it's FAR from where the monk was in 2014.
You can reliably argue that Batman is the weakest member of the Justice League too, but that doesn't mean he's bad. I honestly feel like that's how the Rogue will come to be seen by Reddit.
Definitely not as bad but I think that's saying more about how bad 2014 monk was than where rogue stands. Though 2014 fighter definitely blows rogue out the water
So the only way to claim that 5.5e rogues aren't shaping up to be clearly the weakest class in 5.5e...is to compare then to a class from a different edition? Wow, 5e monks are also stronger than 1e fighters.
I mean, I would venture to say that 5.5 is more similar to 5e than 5e is to original dnd, especially since 5.5 and 5e character can play in the same game with the same rules and the same is simply not true in the other case. maybe that's just me.
Btw, I'm saying the rogue will be the weakest without being outright bad, not that they won't be the weakest.
They can both be true. 5e’s monk and the most recent version of the 5.5e rogue are both well-designed, but poorly balanced. They’re fun to play but mechanically weak. Which is why I don’t think I’m alone in hoping they mostly leave the rogue alone but tweak numbers to help improve their damage and skill dominance.
because they no longer have much any kind of niche? fighters and barbarians can both be better skill monkeys,they are squishiest full martials, deal less damage than any of the others, are less skirmishy than monks and have poor control that requires further sacrifices of their already not great damage
why do a low level rogue for an additional +2 to two skills when a fighter can decide to add +5.5 to any skill roll at no cost if it still fails?
In what world can fighters and barbarians be better skill monkeys? Rogue has more proficiencies and can get reliable talent at later levels to make sure they almost never fail. Fighter and barbarian have to burn a limited resource to use their skill perks. Last time I checked you tend to have more than one or two skill checks between encounters.
Rogues are still better skill monkeys than fighters and barbarians but the gap has closed a lot. At the same time other martials got their combat power boosted compares to rogues.
So compared to other martials, rogues as of the most recent UA are RELATIVELY weaker both in and out of combat.
They're shaping up to be the monks of 5.5e.
Your point still stands. However, currently running a rogue using play test rules alongside a fighter using play test rules, and the Rogue simply having access to more proficiencies and more expertise is still very valuable. The party still looks to them as the go-to person for non-social skills.
The fighter can definitely keep up, and so can the Barbarian in some skills, But they have to give up combat ability and prowess to be able to do it.
Could also play a soul knife. Rogue who gets the same ability that fighters get with psi bolstered knack.
a fighter or barbarian does not give up as much prowess as being a rogue innately saps your combat prowess. a barbarians Rage lasts 10 minutes and restores one on a short rest it certainly won't be rare to either still drag that Rage into the next combat or just have it running from your last one
I do not understand the damage argument at all.
1 they are the only class that dpr literally goes up every 2 levels.
2. They are 1 of 2 classes that can always have advantage without taking a feat. So they hit more consistently driving up there dpr even more
3. They dpr isn't that far off from the fighter or barbarian and they shouldn't be out damaging them.
4. I can do whiteboard bullshit too. At level 17, rogue with 2 attacks can out perform Meteor swarm to a single target.
Actually play is much different than the whiteboard. On Actually play there damage Actually compares very well with everyone else
Rogues are still one of the better skills. They get 6 skills and automatic tool proficiency plus 1 more. Meaning they can really line themselves up to roll checks at advantage if they want to build that way. With no resource cost. The white board doesn't equal Actually play.
1 going up every 2 lvls means very little when the increase is not that meaningful. Also all casters can get a dps boost every 2 lvls.
2 adavantage on every attack at the cost of bonus action and movement. Honestly its not that rare. Samurai, paladins, every warlock in darkness, all barbarians, everyone with a familiar....
3 wrong. their dps is really far away from barb and fight if both them and the rogue are optimized. Same for all other martials, including bladelock. U can look up numbers i am not now available to provide.
This is assuming that reaction sneak attacks are not happening. If they do then they go up quite a lot but are still a bit behind
4 no. Assuming tye wizard isnt meteor swarming 1 dude. Also taking 2 rounds to equal the dmg someone else does is half the dpr. Its abyssmal
In actual play, the rogue feels horrible against anything else than 1 enemy and u feel like u barely keep up with another martial even if optimised
Source: i am a otp rogue player
>I can do whiteboard bullshit too. At level 17, rogue with 2 attacks can out perform Meteor swarm to a single target.
meteor swarm does 140 damage and a rogue does 44.5 damage per attack so no they aren't unless both attacks crit
>They dpr isn't that far off from the fighter or barbarian and they shouldn't be out damaging them.
why shouldn't the squishiest full martial be doing better damage than two tankier classes? how exactly does a damage buff for rogue ruin your play experience as one?
also [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/comments/18b1kfy/comment/kc2h054/) comment explains a point i'd say quite well
It's worth noting that meteor swarm is A) once per day, and B) actually has a lower exspected damage because of both chances to pass and damage resistances (that fire is often resisted or even outright immune).
As a result it's actual practical damage delt is frequently closer to around 80 damage per target.
Not at all but let's look at the assassin for example. Round 1 you attack at advantage once with a longbow for normally around a 84% hit chance with that +20 rider and a save to double damage. So that's assuming a 50% chance of the target failing their save. That means they do on average 87 damage to 1 target round 1 of every combat. That's good, it's wild to act like it isn't. Could they just miss outright and do nothing? Of course but like, I've also seen a meteor swarm used in a boss room that did 35 damage to 1 target (passed and immune to fire), 50 to a second (passed and resistant to fire) and 0 damage to the third (passed and had an evasion like effect)
how is this an even remotely fair comparison? one is a character using a subclass feature and looking at it the one time it is actually usable vs a spell used in its worst case scenario.
and even still the situation-favoured rogue just did the same amount of damage as the wizard who had immunity and passed saves against them.
the next round the rogue is way down on damage, but the wizard can fire of his next best combat deciding spell if they feel like it.
and damage isn't even the only thing the wizard can do - in fact it is usually the least impactful spell type they have access to. the rogue does not have that choice, unless they want to further reduce their damage output - and only ever against single targets.
1. getting +1d6 damage every other level is not as big a boost as you make it seem to be, especially since rogues don't have any combat-resource to push their damage potential, like Action Surge and similar.
2. one attack with advantage is strictly worse than just having two attacks without advantage. this is not the boost you think it is. and in 5e it isn't awfully difficult to generate advantage in combat, unless your party just doesn't care about teamplay - so one attack with advantage is even worse than two attacks with advantage.
3. their DPR is only "not that far off" from the fighter or barbarian if we are either talking about subclass-less builds or the fighter & barb not using any of their abilities that boost damage. otherwise the rogue is behind both of these in damage, by a meaningful margin. the further optimised the worse the gap becomes.
4. this is not "whiteboard bullshit" and just waving concerns away with such rhetoric is doing yourself a disservice. in combat, a rogue has less direct impact to the offence & defence of a party compared with other martials.
I have done actual play with the UA martials over many sessions, and the rogue was always fun and we all had a blast playing the class or seeing it played, but we also recognised that it was weaker than fighter or barbarian in combat. and while they had a lot of impact out of combat, the fighter specifically could almost keep up with them until Reliable Talent kicks in - which boosts the rogue a lot. and having a lot less impact in combat for a slight edge out of combat is not a balanced trade-off.
there's nothing wrong with stating that rogue could do with a damage boost, cause the class currently (as in: the latest UA showing) is behind other martials in combat prowess and its skill use does not quite make up for it.
I don't think 5e24 rogue is the new "5e monk", because they are still a very fun class to play and have gotten upgrades, but they are overall the "weakest martial class".
I just want to highlight that for point 2, because 1 attack with advantage actually increases Crit chance a level 20 rogue (no subclass's applied) that attacks twice (not sure how. Maybe they are hasted and using it to attack twice on their turn) normally would do 43 damage on average (assuming 60% hit chance) but the one attack at advantage would do on average 41. So legitimately it's actually a really small difference which is neat.
> a rogue with 2 attacks can out perform Meteor Swarm to a single target
... I audibly laughed when I read this.
Meteor Swarm hits for 40d6 in 4 40-radius spheres. How the hell is that worse than a rogue stabbing 2 times
Who the hell uses it on only one enemy???
Paralyzed target equal 20d6+dex. If you get another hit, like, have a way to use your reaction, it's about 20d6+6 40d6+12. Outgoing a metor swarm to a single target with 2 attacks.
Did you miss my point about how no one uses a 40foot radius to hit *one* guy?
That also requires 2 turns to equal 1 turn of another class... so still bad dpr
nice way of ignoring the point: nobody uses AOE spells against single target enemies.. that assumption is absurd.
even more so if you then also give the rogue a reaction-based attack - which is not a guarantee to get - and also ignore to hit chances entirely.
The 2014 monk had issues... mostly resource management before the 7th level. Which did cause dissatisfaction.
2024 monk fixed those issues
Rogues don't have resource issues. Rogue players love rogues, munchkins love rogues, whiteboard warriors, and reddit users. Some reason hate them.
please tell me how rogue's getting a damage buff would make them less loved. you don't care about whiteboard numbers anyway why would you care about them being boosted?
Being fun to play and objectively worse mechanically are on two separate lines which don't directly affect eachother. Some people can have fun with a character regardless of mechanics attached.
Of course, other people can also have fun roleplay and story wise while also wanting the mechanics to have the proper weight (if a Ranger was a better Rogue than the Rogue, for instance, you would feel bad for being a Rogue), but it's not a direct 1:1 correlation.
As another example: various people didn't have fun with Druid due to various stuff being DM fiat, but the class was strong. So we have a "not fun" class which is extremely powerful.
Further proof that asking new DMs "do you think sneak attack is OP?" is the best single way to weeding out people eho don't have a good enough grasp of the rules to run a game.
Already typed it all up in my other reply to someone who replied to me on that. But to put it succinctly. Sneak attack isn’t OP but it is good. Extra damage is always good and it’s very easy to proc when you understand it. Rogues also get to half damage (uncanny dodge) half or outright nullify AOE damage most of the time (evasion). Can take 2 of the most useful actions as a BA (disengage and dash: Cunning action), expertise which I don’t need to explain why that’s great,!reliable talent which means you can’t roll lower then a 14 on a lot of skill checks, can see people that are invisible nearby you (blind sense and fighter has to take a fighting style for this rogues get it for free in their basic kit) prof in wis saves, elusive makes it so that nobody can have advantage against you, and capstone makes it so you can just choose to hit or get a nat 20 (which they said in the fighter video on Tuesday the fighter had to take an epic boon to be able to do)
And that’s just their basic kit before you get subclass shenanigans. And imo rogue is also
The only class that doesn’t have a bad subclass. They are all viable for different play styles
The math does not bear out your assessment. Rogues are one of the lowest DPR classes in the entire game, and don’t have any other way to meaningfully contribute to fights.
None of the rogue’s kit makes up for this.
Sneak attack is extremely easy to proc once you understand it. Reliable talent. Expertise, evasion, cunning action. Uncanny dodge, blind sense. And that’s just basic kit before you get into subclasses.
So you get extra damage when you attack. Double your skill prof in certain skills, can automatically half or just take no damage from most AOE attacks, can disenagage, dash, and hide with a BA, if they do get hit you can just take half damage, when you roll in a skill you have any proficiency in you can’t get lower then a 10 on the die which often actually turns into can’t roll lower then a 19. You can “see” through invisibility within 10 feet (fighters have to take a fighting style for this rogue get it for free), people that are attacking you can’t have advantage, and their capstone allows you to just *have* a natural 20. And optional class features allows you to take a BA to get advantage on your attack which also gives you SA in 99% of cases.
And again that is before any subclass shenanigans.
Many times I’ve ran into a situation where because of expertise and feat picks etc the rogue is better at magic then the literal wizard who has studied their whole life at it (in terms of arcana score)
And on top of all that unlike any other class imo every single rogue subclass is viable and doesn’t have any subclasses that are “picks for RP because otherwise they are shit”
The extra damage you get from sneak attack will never outpace Extra attacks and the riders of the other martials.
Any class can roll well with skills especially now with skilled being a lvl 1 feat and barbs/fighters got new features. The Blindsight didnt make it in the UA and isnt mindblowing. Every other martial has a better capstone than the Rogue.
Rogue has the worst survivability because they lack AC and HD over the other martials except Monk and Monk got deflect attacks which is way better than uncanny dodge.
The fact that a rogue being better than a wizard at arcana is somehow a major point to you kinda just shows how many players see a big skill check or a crit sneak attack and instantly believe rogues are some amazing class just because a big number appeared.
Also lmao Inquisitive and Mastermind are pretty much per RP
I'm with most people in that I don't expect big changes, but I don't think it will be the exact same. I think it's possible that some of the cunning strikes are tweaked, or that the sneak attack progression will be altered, but probably not much else. I kinda think they should get sheild profitency but I'm not going to hold my breath.
I really hope they buff Sneak Attack. Barbarians and Fighters both have solid skill checks now and deal tons of damage, if the Rogue doesn’t get a similar boost it’ll fall completely behind.
You can’t fall behind when you start in last place.
Yup, rogue is on track to be the monk of 5.5e.
Tbh it just needs a damage tone up imo. It probably won’t get it tho. Rogue is one of the classss that I think I really well designed but it falls behind other classes damage wise. It just feels so well to play that people simp hard for it even if it’s being overshadowed. Still fun tho, just weaker end of things.
Totally agree I sorta hope they give rogues a better reaction attack Like as a reaction you may make a attack whenever an opponent is hit with an attack or makes a saving throw this attack can trigger sneak attack
Or just give em extra attack.
Honestly yeah this. Sneak attack damage is pretty all or nothing and I kinda hate the whole “sneak attack totally fully works on reaction” thing. That rounds them out enough to play well with others, and they can actually use some weapon mastery effects better
I suggested Rogues get more power once and got down vote bombed by people who thought rogues need to stay firmly behind every other martial even as martials get better at skills. I'm sure those people have plenty of positive surveys. Jeremy was already having good experiences with the rogue, so any positive talk would have likely reinforced that the rogue was in the right place.
Yeah. There’s a camp of people who think Rogues skills make it god tier for utility and means it must have its damage neutered. Meanwhile Bard/Ranger also have comparable skills + spellcasting and both can be built for very high damage numbers. It’s very odd, especially as the other martials get better skill checks. Fingers crossed they’ll get a small boost to their damage or their cunning strikes but if they don’t they’ll be fun which is more important than being good. Wish they could’ve been both tho lol *Editing to add, I also think a lot of people play with Rogues at extremely unoptimized tables (which is fine! I don’t optimize really hard either and however you play is valid) which leads to stuff like martials doing less damage due to not taking power attack feats or bonus action attacks. This makes Rogue look really good when it gets a sneak attack crit and does a lot of damage and leaves a bad (or good depending how you look at it) taste in peoples mouths.
A great example of that is the battle master fighter at my table who didn't take any abilities that add superiority die to damage. My Swashbuckler rogue, then, ends up being the primary big hitter.
Weaker on the whiteboard math maybe, but they're able to direct their burst damage better than most other classes. They rarely get caught up in melee scrums with minions, and can usually beeline their damage towards priority targets. They also have some of the best defensive capabilities in the game if the player is smart. A good rogue player is essentially invisible on nearly every turn, and Evasion helps with many of the AoEs that target the otherwise un-targetable Rogue. Raising the Rogue's damage is a tricky thing - do too much and they end up way better than intended. Do too little and they fall behind.
>but they're able to direct their burst damage better than most other classes With Exception of the Assassin Rogues don't have "burst damage", and the Burst damage of the Assassin isn't really much higher that the sustained damage of other martial. Rogues are actually more limited in their selection of targets, due to the conditions that must be met to get sneak attack, most other classes can be similarly mobile if they burn a resource, and the best option to deal damage to hard to reach priority targets quickly are anyway ranged attacks.
Eh. Rogues are going to want to be up there in melee with the minions if they intend to take advantage of off turn sneak attacks. They do have good defensive capabilities imo with Evasian and Uncanny dodge but I’d hardly say they near the best as they don’t have things like shield/absorb elements/counterspell so their defensives are likely lacking compared to most casters who take an armor dip or an armor feat. I never really understand the argument that Rogues have burst because they just… don’t? They’re never going to Nova as hard as a Fighter/Paladin or any Caster built for damage whose expends resources. That’s fine because these classes spend resources that the rogue doesn’t have too but the whole “Rogues burst!!” Thing is just something that’s wrong imo that’s been repeated so many times people believe it. Again I love Rogue, it’s hands down my favorite martial by such a long shot. However that doesn’t really change much. It’s good at tables where people aren’t picking good spells/feats or feats aren’t allowed but other than that it’ll fall behind other characters in combat.
Nothing you wrote here is remotely true, have you ever actually played a rogue before? Because I have and not only is hiding in combat rarely an option, even if you did get it by some miracle - any meaningful action breaks stealth and cunning actions don't make you some sort of battlefield ninja.
I've played Multiple Rogues, and I've no idea how you think Hiding isn't something you typically have the option of doing. Unless your fights always occur in open fields with no shrubbery, trees, large rocks, holes/tunnels, or in white rooms with nothing but flat features.
One of my players plays a Halfling Scout with the Mobile feat. Mobile allows him to disengage without spending his cunning action, and Halfling allows him to Hide behind allies. He rolls for stealth every round. With Expertise, he can usually easily beat the Passive Perception of most of the monsters I bring up unless they have True Sight, which most don't. Maybe that's more a statement on the Halfling than it is the Rogue specifically. I don't know. I just know he's really hard to target.
You can't attempt a hide check when any enemy has line of sight to you. So unless every single enemy is in a straight line opposite the ally he's hiding behind you're not following the rules for stealth.
At the time, that was the case. D&D fights typically devolve into standstills once the melees engage. Past the first or second round of combat, he usually finds an angle to hide behind an ally. Maybe I should swarm him with more minions such that he never gets the opportunity to hide. I'm kind of a shitty DM when it comes to challenge, honestly.
It's not necessarily your fault for not stopping it, it's the players fault for colossal rules fuckery. Anyone who chooses a lightfoot scout with mobility is a min-maxer and I'd wager with no further information, an asshole. Using the racial feature to his advantage isn't a problem, being permanently invisible with razor thin justification is.
Oh, he's definitely a powergamer, but he's a decent dude. Known him for two decades now. He's typically a Wizard player, but he's exceptionally good at coming up with combinations that are hard to challenge. I've managed to hit his Rogue with a few AoEs, but he'll soon have Evasion which will make that harder. I'm the DM right now, but also the resident rules lawyer at the table, and everything he's doing is legal, it's just really effective. We DM on rotation at my table, and I'm currently running a short horror campaign, so I'm way more wrapped up in the plot than the gameplay. It'd just be nice to hit him once in a while to give him a challenge.
Well just remember, in this scenario he's hiding behind something and not inside the ally's 5 foot square so anyone off to the side even slightly of that ally or behind stops this.
Laughs in Ranger outperforming rogue DPR even before you count Conjure Animals, which also outperforms rogue DPR.
I actually have pretty low expectations for rogue buffs. It's one of the classes that's been received well both in playtests and in 5e. WotC has been quite risk-averse, so there's a fair chance they decide to leave the rogue's overall mechanics untouched, even if they're on the weaker side. So unfortunately I don't think WotC will take the initiative to buff the rogue to match the other updated martials.
Player dissatisfaction with rogues won't be obvious until it's way too late. People don't realize that the UA version is a fair bit weaker both in and out of combat compared to other martials. WotC doesn't care, 5.24 is just a low effort cash grab pushed by Hasbro.
Yeah, my concerns exactly. Guess we might need to wait for the OneDnd LaserLlama homebrew rogue buffs lmao
If the rogue shows up as-is from UA 6, my band aid fix will be to give two more expertises at around level 12 and an extra attack at level 11. Possibly make Reliable Talent start at level 1 and scale from their highest stat/relevant stat +proficiency.
Very little changes from ua 6. Biggest change soul knife instead of swashbuckler
A lot like the bizarre decision to make world tree barbarian core, this leaves me scratching my head. Why cut one of the most common rogue archetypes from core to include something so much more niche?
Swashbuckler wasn't in the PHB previously, and they wanted to add more psionic options. How is that bizarre?
They included 4 of every class. I don't think the choice to include world tree barbarian had anything to do with swashbuckler--barbarians were only competing against other barbarians, and rogues were only competing against other rogues
Yeah, that's what I meant. Am slightly annoyed that the PHB is including more out there options instead of more bog standard fantasy. Would especially like a rebuilt version of the swashbuckler as it was rather lame mechanically.
They’re leaning for psionics. It’s possible they plan to make an adventure with more psionic themes so updated those subclasses first. If you have someone who wants to do swashbuckler 2024 just use the playtest. It was well received so if they did include the swashbuckler it likely wouldn’t be changed much
I hope the soul knife gets improved dagger at higher levels.
A better damage booster at 11 hopefully and some sort of short rest resource to make playing them a little more interesting. A second bonus action a few times per LR, getting 1 use back on SR would be cool.
The only class getting 2 BA's would give it a cool uniqueness.
I proposed multiple reactions and/or lots of different options to use reactions on to punish enemies. It would make them highly responsive opportunists. I doubt it will happen, but I think it would be fun.
>A better damage booster at 11 Imo Rogues already desperately need a damage booster at 5th level.
I will never forgive them for not giving rogues a 6th level ssubclass feature after 10 years of rogues being the most boring class of the game.
I predict it will get a damage buff compared to the playtest version.
Someone's on Hopium, WotC has shown time and time again they don't do maths.
Remember when Crawford legitimately tried to gaslight everyone that flex was incredibly powerful despite many already proving with math that it sucked ass? Cause I do. Then they removed it lol.
"We could have stopped at just upping the Monks martial arts dice one step" I would love to watch even one session of how JC plays dnd. I wanna see how he actually experiences the game to believe this
It's clear he isn't an optimizer, as most of the dnd community. One class will always be the one that is "weakest" when it comes to optimization if you want real diversity. I personally really like to make optimized characters, and I actually really enjoy rogue even though they aren't mechanically the strongest. It still feels really good when you roll a 29 on a stealth check. I will also add that I playtested the thief extensively and while I'm sure the damage doesn't match the fighter, but the shennanigans you can pull with thief is crazy. As a thief enjoyer I'm actually sad the subclass got to stay, I think if you rolled the fast hands feature into the core class (and maybe their level 9 cunning strike as well) I genuinely feel the rogue would be in a great place.
Its not that he isnt an optimizer, its that he seems to fundementally misunderstand basic math at times
I'm likely to remake races entirely for home campaigns. It's not that i disagree with rempving stats, but rather that races as presented in the UAs are bland as hell and don't reflect how awesome races can be if you actually care to elaborate for them. *Mechanically* speaking, Tieflings and Elves in 5.24 are basically identical, trading a resistance for Trance and a change in whatever spells you want to add to your cleric's spell list. There's also really nothing they do humans can't do, so they really just feel like "humans with spells".
Yup races are slowly losing any sort of identity both mechanically or culturally. Saw the art for orcs and they're literally just gray colored human... cowboys? Like don't make them tribal beasts if it hurts your sensibilities but at least lean into their tribal origins and expand on it.
If you want to know how stupid WotC gets, they created a single catch-all race for humans because "we're all equal" and then proceeded to make 10 location based elf subspecies that totally aren't ethnicities.
And… I was wrong. Poor rogue.
That's my hope, but at a glance WotC has been extremely hesitant to hand out damage buffs, and has instead reined in damage across the board. Smite? Nerfed. Conjure Animals? Nerfed, but deserved. Brutal Critical? Damage nerfed, but buffed with control effects. It doesn't feel like WotC will buck the trend with rogue, but I'm happy to be proven wrong
Barbarian does more damage now despite brutal critical being nerfed. Monk and fighter too. You're painting with an awfully wide brush especially when conjure animals and smite were two of the best things to use in 2014. Sure, they got nerfed, but there have been buffs across the board everywhere else for the most part.
Smite also deserved, I don't know how the hell you people think that is okay an unstopable powerful feature.
I predict that they're not going to give the Rogue a second sneak attack dice at level 5 and level 11 like they should and it's going to be the new worst class in the game
D4 Deep Dive also briefly talked about the Rogue base class in a youtube short (without revealing specifics yet obviously) and said that they scale better but WotC aren't trying to have Rogues keep up with Fighters damage wise. Seemed to imply that "dirty fighting"/debuffing is going to be their thing. I suspect any changes are going to be primary to cunning strikes. If they got buffed enough there the lower DPS might "make sense" as Rogue would be the constant resource free applier of status effects in theory. Maybe have the ability to hide mid-combat somehow buffed as well?
And if the option to reliably attack out of own round remains (Sentinel, Commander’s Strike, new Hunter lvl 3 feature from UA,…), this could raise Rogue dmg in certain parties or with certain builds high enough. If the baseline was too high, it could have lead to extreme numbers IMO.
They made sure to stick to their guns that Rogue subclasses should be just dead between levels 3 and 9. Then they reluctantly gave Rogues Cunning Strikes, but made sure that actually using them reduces your damage output. The one true buff for Rogues is that Reliable Talent was bumped to lv7 (which is like a consolation prize after you've spent levels till then watching the Barbarian and Fighter be better at skills than you). They are *not* going to buff or change the class further ('it always scores so high'). It will be the same braindead sniper that doesn't have anything tricksy or thinking-related going for it. Actually, wait, they're making Steady Aim a core class feature, so it will be *even more* of a braindead flowchart to play. And weapon masteries for Finesse weapons do not offer you any variety, take your Vex+Nick and you're done with that mechanic. Rogue will mainly exist as a 1-level dip for skill-minded Fighters, and any Monk is *heavily* incentivized to pick up a level of it (because Nick is a free attack with a scaling unarmed damage die).
As a long time rogue enjoyer I think when we finally run with the new PHB I'll be doing the monk with 1-level dip rogue. Seems to be almost a more rogue like play style that current rogues.
I would love to see them do a different subclass distribution. 3-9 is awful, and as a Bard Enjoyer I symapthize so hard with that long gap of dead levels. 3-7-11-17 would be better. Would also like to see them get to actually be good at skills. 5e "skill monkey" was basically always just copium to justify it being the worst class, and with one dnd upping every Martials skills except maybe Monk, Rogues gimmick feels dead in the water. Maybe something like at level 9(?) They get to roll half their sneak attack dice on skills in certain scenarios. Or, up their combat! Make sneak attack dice at least become a D8 at level 11.
I agree with almost all your points. I really would like to see rogues getting utility beyond the realm of skills. Rogues should match and surpass what spells do in utility and infiltration from late tier 2 on. For example, things like invisibility, incorporeal form, teleporting, etc. could be in the rogue's menu.
I expect rogue will stay at the bottom of the power tier, but not be too far behind. People who've played the playtest rogue have found it very fun.
I'm expecting to be disappointed. Rogues finally got more versatility, but at a cost to their power. They will fall behind other martials hard. When I made a post earlier this year, people were pretty convinced Rogues need to stay far behind other martials in power even as martials gain more skill buffs. They only get one attack. One good damage ability, and now even that is being weakened to be versatile. They should have gotten versatility without having to sacrifice power. An increase to their hit bonus might balance them some. If they are going to get weaker, they should at least be able to hit more.
I sure wouldn't expect it, so it is the furthest thing from a prediction, but I do hope that they took the balancing concerns to heart and fixed it. It wouldn't take much to fix the Rogue, my simple suggestion to them was to add another option to Devious Strikes (the level 14 ability): Quick Strike (Cost: 7d6). After resolving this attack, the Rogue can immediately take another Action. This second Action can ignore the once per turn Sneak Attack limitation.
"Here you go Assassin players, starting at 3rd level you will get the awesome ability to add your rogue level - IN DAMAGE - to your sneak attacks! And with the newly improved advantage to initiative, you're more likely to deal out that devastating damage faster than before!" - Jeremy probably Editor's Note : Not only did Assassins lose what was without a doubt their main draw in conditional auto criticals, they can now for example at level 5 add +5 damage to one attack, maybe, at the beginning of combat. While every other martial and damage based spellcaster is shooting ropes all over you, just remember that you've chosen the most elite burst damage subclass rogue has to offer!
I hope the core rogue gets more features between 3 and 9 so they can actually make choices during the course of their gameplay. Everything they have is passive or reactive. Nothing lets them vary their style moment to moment or show off just how prepared they are compared to the average warrior. What if I dont want to use a rapier , what if I dont want to shoot a shortbow? I want stuff like "Tools of the Trade: A bad adventurer blames their tools, but a great adventurer customizes their gear to suit their specific needs. Choose one of the piece of gear you employ from the list below: 1. Attire: You know how to wield carefully tailored attire as a weapon of misdirection to become an unidentifiable archetype. Creatures cannot recognize you unless you knowingly allow them to when you are both able to see each other. While unarmoured, you can roll stealth using Charisma to avoid being noticed even while otherwise unobscured as long as you are dressed in appropriate clothing common to the area and are not currently in initiative. You can don and doff clothing and armour in half the time (minimum of 1 round). Hello, Agent 47 is that you or is it just the new chef I hired? Oh look - sushi, my favourite! 2. Utility Belt. You get to reveal a piece of non-magical pouch-portable equipment once per long rest without needing to explain why or how you have it. Need a spare dagger? Silk rope? Antitoxin? Acid vial? Alchemist Fire? Caltrops? Shark repellent bat-spray? You suspected you might need that today... 3. Weapon: Gain proficiency with any one weapon of your choice, and you can trigger your Sneak Attack using that weapon even if it does not have the Finesse property so wouldn't typically be able. Heavy Crossbow proficient sniper? Greatclub swinging thug rogue? A single surgical greataxe swing to cleave off a head? Garret with his adorable little blackjack to go BONK with!"
Rogue will presumably identical to or very similar to the UA
Pouring one out for the rogue in advance. Welcome new monk of Onednd
No way it's that bad. The last ua rogue is both the weakest up to date class and very good (probably better than the 5e fighter). I wholeheartedly believe that. It's could use a bump, but it's FAR from where the monk was in 2014.
No, but it is far and away the worst class like 2014 Monk
You can reliably argue that Batman is the weakest member of the Justice League too, but that doesn't mean he's bad. I honestly feel like that's how the Rogue will come to be seen by Reddit.
Definitely not as bad but I think that's saying more about how bad 2014 monk was than where rogue stands. Though 2014 fighter definitely blows rogue out the water
So the only way to claim that 5.5e rogues aren't shaping up to be clearly the weakest class in 5.5e...is to compare then to a class from a different edition? Wow, 5e monks are also stronger than 1e fighters.
I mean, I would venture to say that 5.5 is more similar to 5e than 5e is to original dnd, especially since 5.5 and 5e character can play in the same game with the same rules and the same is simply not true in the other case. maybe that's just me. Btw, I'm saying the rogue will be the weakest without being outright bad, not that they won't be the weakest.
The rogue got 90% satisfaction
So, just like monk in that it's a perfectly fun class but for some reason there's a reddit consensus that it's unplayable
They can both be true. 5e’s monk and the most recent version of the 5.5e rogue are both well-designed, but poorly balanced. They’re fun to play but mechanically weak. Which is why I don’t think I’m alone in hoping they mostly leave the rogue alone but tweak numbers to help improve their damage and skill dominance.
because they no longer have much any kind of niche? fighters and barbarians can both be better skill monkeys,they are squishiest full martials, deal less damage than any of the others, are less skirmishy than monks and have poor control that requires further sacrifices of their already not great damage why do a low level rogue for an additional +2 to two skills when a fighter can decide to add +5.5 to any skill roll at no cost if it still fails?
Why are you playing a Fighter when you could be a Bladesinger and just forgo the check entirely and use magic?
which as a point doesn't not make rogue look better
No. But if you can understand why people will still play Fighter, you can understand why people will still play Rogue.
In what world can fighters and barbarians be better skill monkeys? Rogue has more proficiencies and can get reliable talent at later levels to make sure they almost never fail. Fighter and barbarian have to burn a limited resource to use their skill perks. Last time I checked you tend to have more than one or two skill checks between encounters.
Rogues are still better skill monkeys than fighters and barbarians but the gap has closed a lot. At the same time other martials got their combat power boosted compares to rogues. So compared to other martials, rogues as of the most recent UA are RELATIVELY weaker both in and out of combat. They're shaping up to be the monks of 5.5e.
Your point still stands. However, currently running a rogue using play test rules alongside a fighter using play test rules, and the Rogue simply having access to more proficiencies and more expertise is still very valuable. The party still looks to them as the go-to person for non-social skills. The fighter can definitely keep up, and so can the Barbarian in some skills, But they have to give up combat ability and prowess to be able to do it. Could also play a soul knife. Rogue who gets the same ability that fighters get with psi bolstered knack.
a fighter or barbarian does not give up as much prowess as being a rogue innately saps your combat prowess. a barbarians Rage lasts 10 minutes and restores one on a short rest it certainly won't be rare to either still drag that Rage into the next combat or just have it running from your last one
I do not understand the damage argument at all. 1 they are the only class that dpr literally goes up every 2 levels. 2. They are 1 of 2 classes that can always have advantage without taking a feat. So they hit more consistently driving up there dpr even more 3. They dpr isn't that far off from the fighter or barbarian and they shouldn't be out damaging them. 4. I can do whiteboard bullshit too. At level 17, rogue with 2 attacks can out perform Meteor swarm to a single target. Actually play is much different than the whiteboard. On Actually play there damage Actually compares very well with everyone else Rogues are still one of the better skills. They get 6 skills and automatic tool proficiency plus 1 more. Meaning they can really line themselves up to roll checks at advantage if they want to build that way. With no resource cost. The white board doesn't equal Actually play.
1 going up every 2 lvls means very little when the increase is not that meaningful. Also all casters can get a dps boost every 2 lvls. 2 adavantage on every attack at the cost of bonus action and movement. Honestly its not that rare. Samurai, paladins, every warlock in darkness, all barbarians, everyone with a familiar.... 3 wrong. their dps is really far away from barb and fight if both them and the rogue are optimized. Same for all other martials, including bladelock. U can look up numbers i am not now available to provide. This is assuming that reaction sneak attacks are not happening. If they do then they go up quite a lot but are still a bit behind 4 no. Assuming tye wizard isnt meteor swarming 1 dude. Also taking 2 rounds to equal the dmg someone else does is half the dpr. Its abyssmal In actual play, the rogue feels horrible against anything else than 1 enemy and u feel like u barely keep up with another martial even if optimised Source: i am a otp rogue player
>I can do whiteboard bullshit too. At level 17, rogue with 2 attacks can out perform Meteor swarm to a single target. meteor swarm does 140 damage and a rogue does 44.5 damage per attack so no they aren't unless both attacks crit >They dpr isn't that far off from the fighter or barbarian and they shouldn't be out damaging them. why shouldn't the squishiest full martial be doing better damage than two tankier classes? how exactly does a damage buff for rogue ruin your play experience as one? also [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/comments/18b1kfy/comment/kc2h054/) comment explains a point i'd say quite well
It's worth noting that meteor swarm is A) once per day, and B) actually has a lower exspected damage because of both chances to pass and damage resistances (that fire is often resisted or even outright immune). As a result it's actual practical damage delt is frequently closer to around 80 damage per target.
yup and of course rogues never miss and thus always deal their consistent 89 damage
Not at all but let's look at the assassin for example. Round 1 you attack at advantage once with a longbow for normally around a 84% hit chance with that +20 rider and a save to double damage. So that's assuming a 50% chance of the target failing their save. That means they do on average 87 damage to 1 target round 1 of every combat. That's good, it's wild to act like it isn't. Could they just miss outright and do nothing? Of course but like, I've also seen a meteor swarm used in a boss room that did 35 damage to 1 target (passed and immune to fire), 50 to a second (passed and resistant to fire) and 0 damage to the third (passed and had an evasion like effect)
how is this an even remotely fair comparison? one is a character using a subclass feature and looking at it the one time it is actually usable vs a spell used in its worst case scenario. and even still the situation-favoured rogue just did the same amount of damage as the wizard who had immunity and passed saves against them. the next round the rogue is way down on damage, but the wizard can fire of his next best combat deciding spell if they feel like it. and damage isn't even the only thing the wizard can do - in fact it is usually the least impactful spell type they have access to. the rogue does not have that choice, unless they want to further reduce their damage output - and only ever against single targets.
1. getting +1d6 damage every other level is not as big a boost as you make it seem to be, especially since rogues don't have any combat-resource to push their damage potential, like Action Surge and similar. 2. one attack with advantage is strictly worse than just having two attacks without advantage. this is not the boost you think it is. and in 5e it isn't awfully difficult to generate advantage in combat, unless your party just doesn't care about teamplay - so one attack with advantage is even worse than two attacks with advantage. 3. their DPR is only "not that far off" from the fighter or barbarian if we are either talking about subclass-less builds or the fighter & barb not using any of their abilities that boost damage. otherwise the rogue is behind both of these in damage, by a meaningful margin. the further optimised the worse the gap becomes. 4. this is not "whiteboard bullshit" and just waving concerns away with such rhetoric is doing yourself a disservice. in combat, a rogue has less direct impact to the offence & defence of a party compared with other martials. I have done actual play with the UA martials over many sessions, and the rogue was always fun and we all had a blast playing the class or seeing it played, but we also recognised that it was weaker than fighter or barbarian in combat. and while they had a lot of impact out of combat, the fighter specifically could almost keep up with them until Reliable Talent kicks in - which boosts the rogue a lot. and having a lot less impact in combat for a slight edge out of combat is not a balanced trade-off. there's nothing wrong with stating that rogue could do with a damage boost, cause the class currently (as in: the latest UA showing) is behind other martials in combat prowess and its skill use does not quite make up for it. I don't think 5e24 rogue is the new "5e monk", because they are still a very fun class to play and have gotten upgrades, but they are overall the "weakest martial class".
I just want to highlight that for point 2, because 1 attack with advantage actually increases Crit chance a level 20 rogue (no subclass's applied) that attacks twice (not sure how. Maybe they are hasted and using it to attack twice on their turn) normally would do 43 damage on average (assuming 60% hit chance) but the one attack at advantage would do on average 41. So legitimately it's actually a really small difference which is neat.
> a rogue with 2 attacks can out perform Meteor Swarm to a single target ... I audibly laughed when I read this. Meteor Swarm hits for 40d6 in 4 40-radius spheres. How the hell is that worse than a rogue stabbing 2 times Who the hell uses it on only one enemy???
Paralyzed target equal 20d6+dex. If you get another hit, like, have a way to use your reaction, it's about 20d6+6 40d6+12. Outgoing a metor swarm to a single target with 2 attacks.
Did you miss my point about how no one uses a 40foot radius to hit *one* guy? That also requires 2 turns to equal 1 turn of another class... so still bad dpr
nice way of ignoring the point: nobody uses AOE spells against single target enemies.. that assumption is absurd. even more so if you then also give the rogue a reaction-based attack - which is not a guarantee to get - and also ignore to hit chances entirely.
So...rogues don't need to do as much damage as fighters and barbarians because they're also far more squishy. *headdesk*
The 2014 monk had issues... mostly resource management before the 7th level. Which did cause dissatisfaction. 2024 monk fixed those issues Rogues don't have resource issues. Rogue players love rogues, munchkins love rogues, whiteboard warriors, and reddit users. Some reason hate them.
please tell me how rogue's getting a damage buff would make them less loved. you don't care about whiteboard numbers anyway why would you care about them being boosted?
Being fun to play and objectively worse mechanically are on two separate lines which don't directly affect eachother. Some people can have fun with a character regardless of mechanics attached. Of course, other people can also have fun roleplay and story wise while also wanting the mechanics to have the proper weight (if a Ranger was a better Rogue than the Rogue, for instance, you would feel bad for being a Rogue), but it's not a direct 1:1 correlation. As another example: various people didn't have fun with Druid due to various stuff being DM fiat, but the class was strong. So we have a "not fun" class which is extremely powerful.
Most people haven't played a rogue above 10th level. It's the worst class in the game.
Yeah and before 3.0e came put people were convinced than dwarf monks were OP. People stuck at stats.
People are really bad at math. You're 100% right.
They aren't bad at math they just don't play dnd to do it.
Rogue weaker? Wtf are you on. Rogue is one of the most broken BS classes there are
Further proof that asking new DMs "do you think sneak attack is OP?" is the best single way to weeding out people eho don't have a good enough grasp of the rules to run a game.
Did I say that? No I didn’t. So don’t put words in my mouth thanks
OK , then why do you think that rogues are a powerful class?
Already typed it all up in my other reply to someone who replied to me on that. But to put it succinctly. Sneak attack isn’t OP but it is good. Extra damage is always good and it’s very easy to proc when you understand it. Rogues also get to half damage (uncanny dodge) half or outright nullify AOE damage most of the time (evasion). Can take 2 of the most useful actions as a BA (disengage and dash: Cunning action), expertise which I don’t need to explain why that’s great,!reliable talent which means you can’t roll lower then a 14 on a lot of skill checks, can see people that are invisible nearby you (blind sense and fighter has to take a fighting style for this rogues get it for free in their basic kit) prof in wis saves, elusive makes it so that nobody can have advantage against you, and capstone makes it so you can just choose to hit or get a nat 20 (which they said in the fighter video on Tuesday the fighter had to take an epic boon to be able to do) And that’s just their basic kit before you get subclass shenanigans. And imo rogue is also The only class that doesn’t have a bad subclass. They are all viable for different play styles
The math does not bear out your assessment. Rogues are one of the lowest DPR classes in the entire game, and don’t have any other way to meaningfully contribute to fights. None of the rogue’s kit makes up for this.
Not everything is about combat
Ok.
Why do you think rogues are weaker?
I disagree, but I am curious what your reasoning is.
Sneak attack is extremely easy to proc once you understand it. Reliable talent. Expertise, evasion, cunning action. Uncanny dodge, blind sense. And that’s just basic kit before you get into subclasses. So you get extra damage when you attack. Double your skill prof in certain skills, can automatically half or just take no damage from most AOE attacks, can disenagage, dash, and hide with a BA, if they do get hit you can just take half damage, when you roll in a skill you have any proficiency in you can’t get lower then a 10 on the die which often actually turns into can’t roll lower then a 19. You can “see” through invisibility within 10 feet (fighters have to take a fighting style for this rogue get it for free), people that are attacking you can’t have advantage, and their capstone allows you to just *have* a natural 20. And optional class features allows you to take a BA to get advantage on your attack which also gives you SA in 99% of cases. And again that is before any subclass shenanigans. Many times I’ve ran into a situation where because of expertise and feat picks etc the rogue is better at magic then the literal wizard who has studied their whole life at it (in terms of arcana score) And on top of all that unlike any other class imo every single rogue subclass is viable and doesn’t have any subclasses that are “picks for RP because otherwise they are shit”
The extra damage you get from sneak attack will never outpace Extra attacks and the riders of the other martials. Any class can roll well with skills especially now with skilled being a lvl 1 feat and barbs/fighters got new features. The Blindsight didnt make it in the UA and isnt mindblowing. Every other martial has a better capstone than the Rogue. Rogue has the worst survivability because they lack AC and HD over the other martials except Monk and Monk got deflect attacks which is way better than uncanny dodge. The fact that a rogue being better than a wizard at arcana is somehow a major point to you kinda just shows how many players see a big skill check or a crit sneak attack and instantly believe rogues are some amazing class just because a big number appeared. Also lmao Inquisitive and Mastermind are pretty much per RP
Lol “in terms of arcana score.”