PDA

View Full Version : What about the rogue?



killerjag
2014-07-06, 12:28 PM
Now that basic is out, what do you guys think of the rogue? Is it going to be the worst class like in 3E or do you see potential?

Twelvetrees
2014-07-06, 12:35 PM
I think that rogue sneak attacks are a thing to be feared when one rolls a crit...

da_chicken
2014-07-06, 01:17 PM
I like that they get d8 hit dice now. Cunning action is very powerful, making rogues very quick and with Fast Hands and Use Magic Device they're capable of surprising actions. The fact that they never get bonus attacks like Fighters means that TWF is always a good option for them.

Sartharina
2014-07-06, 01:33 PM
That their Sneak Attack scales with level and doesn't go more than 1/round means they only need that one attack to matter, though! (Although I miss the expending advantage for SA, and unique ways of getting Advantage mechanic from an early playtest :(]

But yeah - cunning action's awesome at making them versatile, slippery, and resourceful.

obryn
2014-07-06, 01:35 PM
Yeah, the extra action is the "secret sauce" here that will make them formidable.

I've revised my opinion on them. I think they're probably fine.

da_chicken
2014-07-06, 01:56 PM
That their Sneak Attack scales with level and doesn't go more than 1/round means they only need that one attack to matter, though! (Although I miss the expending advantage for SA, and unique ways of getting Advantage mechanic from an early playtest :(]

But yeah - cunning action's awesome at making them versatile, slippery, and resourceful.

Yeah, but the second attack doubles the chance for SA to land. And, if you haven't got a use for your bonus action, an extra attack is always good.

Sartharina
2014-07-06, 02:08 PM
True, though the rogue is having Cunning Action compete with the bonus action... making two-weapon fighting increase the rogue's "What the hell is he going to do next?" versatility.

PinkysBrain
2014-07-06, 02:14 PM
Now that basic is out, what do you guys think of the rogue? Is it going to be the worst class like in 3E or do you see potential?
Nah, rogue is okay'ish (as usual it's not so much that the martials are too weak, but the casters too strong ... yet another edition where we get down to "but they run out of spells" as a balancing argument). Although I do think there will be a lot of fighter dipping with multiclassing.

Inevitability
2014-07-06, 02:38 PM
A random rogue note; when using a finesse weapon, you don't need to be using dexterity for the attack. So rapier-wielding hill dwarf rogues with 20 strength and constitution wouldn't even be a lot behind the 'normal' rogue.

PinkysBrain
2014-07-06, 02:54 PM
A random rogue note; when using a finesse weapon, you don't need to be using dexterity for the attack. So rapier-wielding hill dwarf rogues with 20 strength and constitution wouldn't even be a lot behind the 'normal' rogue.
In damage ... in rogue'ish ability checks, the ability to use ranged weapons, AC, initiative and saves (no str save I could see yet) he's all far worse off.

Strength wasn't that good in 3e and they took away anything which made it good.

Inevitability
2014-07-06, 03:01 PM
In damage

How does a rogue's damage fall from lower dex?


in rogue'ish ability checks

True, but my whole point is to make an un-roguish rogue.


the ability to use ranged weapons

Thrown will work for when you can't close to melee, but you should be able to do so most of the time.


AC

Nope. Hill dwarf = free medium armor. 14 DEX is all we need.


initiative and saves (no str save I could see yet)

I give you this. Please note I stated that this would be behind a normal rogue, I just enjoy using material in a way it isn't meant to be used. The result of this build would be some sort of sneak-attacking tank, which is most likely weaker than a normal rogue or fighter, but still...

Sartharina
2014-07-06, 03:06 PM
Nope. Hill dwarf = free medium armor. 14 DEX is all we need.

Mountain dwarf, not hill.

Yorrin
2014-07-06, 03:15 PM
On Str based rogues- I've been putting a lot of thought into how Dwarves work with each class (favorite race, what can I say?), and the just do Str so much better than Dex that you're going to want to go that route for them with rogues.

Str-Rapier and Javelins, with expertise in Athletics and Perception/Intimidation to start. If the Heavy Armor feat is as good as it was in the last playtest then that'll be a good goal as well when you've capped Str (and maybe Con). Dual Str-Shortswords could be fun too, and feels more Dwarvish than a rapier. Kinda has a Thug feel to it either way, imo.

Sartharina
2014-07-06, 03:18 PM
Why are you using a rapier as a Dwarven Rogue instead of a Battleaxe or Warhammer?

Or handaxes?

In fact, handaxes are probably you're best bet - decent damage, dual-wielding, and they can be thrown.

Yorrin
2014-07-06, 03:36 PM
Why are you using a rapier as a Dwarven Rogue instead of a Battleaxe or Warhammer?

Or handaxes?

In fact, handaxes are probably you're best bet - decent damage, dual-wielding, and they can be thrown.

Because none of them activate Sneak Attack as it's currently written. It has to be a finesse or ranged weapon, which don't apply to any of those.

One amusing thing I did just notice is that you can sneak attack with nets. This is an amusing form of field control for the canny rogue.

Particle_Man
2014-07-06, 06:18 PM
I think it says under sneak attack that the rogue can only add the sneak attack damage once per turn, so TWF doesn't get double the sneak attack damage.

Also, nets are technically listed as damage "-" (not even 0), so since sneak attack talks about "an extra 1d6 damage" but nets are not listed as having any damage category, sneak attack would not apply (there is not existing damage category to be "extra" to). Which fits realism (unless you think the net is made of razor sharp piano wire garottes). :smallsmile:

The bonus action being usable to disengage is nice. Rogues go where they wish! :smallsmile:

obryn
2014-07-06, 06:26 PM
I think it says under sneak attack that the rogue can only add the sneak attack damage once per turn, so TWF doesn't get double the sneak attack damage.
You do, however, get twice the chance to apply it. :smallsmile:

Morty
2014-07-06, 06:36 PM
Because none of them activate Sneak Attack as it's currently written. It has to be a finesse or ranged weapon, which don't apply to any of those.


Talk about a restriction for no good reason... if I were to actually run a D&D Next game (unlikely), I'd definitely make it apply to all weapons the rogue is proficient with.

T.G. Oskar
2014-07-06, 07:02 PM
Expertise + Athletics + Shove for a Str-based Rogue (or even one with not-sucky Strength) should make you better than the Fighter in terms of pushing away or knocking people prone.

Blindsense means you're always aware of invisible creatures within range. It's a 10 ft. range, but it's pretty large.

Uncanny Dodge is now like Defensive Roll, which is pretty nice, even if it consumes your reaction. Then again, there are so little things that use Reaction...

Sneak Attack apparently affects everyone now. Undead and constructs are no longer immune. That depends on the actual monster rules, though, but if they are no longer immune, that's a HUGE boost to Rogue.

Cunning Action and Action Surge are nice ways to provide action economy to the classes that missed it the most.

All in all, the Rogue looks like playable. It has its niche currently protected, and if going by the last playtest rules, it can stand on its own easily.

pwykersotz
2014-07-06, 07:07 PM
Talk about a restriction for no good reason... if I were to actually run a D&D Next game (unlikely), I'd definitely make it apply to all weapons the rogue is proficient with.

Remember to allow them to back-stab with a ballista too. :smallwink:

rlc
2014-07-06, 08:35 PM
Well, it is ranged.

da_chicken
2014-07-06, 08:41 PM
Goblin: what's that hissing noise?
Rogue: CANNON SNEAK ATTACK!

HunterOfJello
2014-07-06, 10:14 PM
I dislike the single sneak attack per round (though it is still work using two weapon fighting for a rogue).

However, I do like the removal of the distance limit on ranged sneak attacks. I also like that as long as an enemy of the target is next to the enemy then you can ranged sneak attack it. Sneak attacking at range became much better overall and you may see far more ranged rogues than you ever saw before.


I also like Evasion and the Thief's Use Magic Device ability. I look forward to seeing more of the rogue archetypes in the future.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-07-07, 09:04 AM
Oh how I love sneak attacking with a ballista, beef stroganoff is usually the outcome :smalltongue:

But over on the WotC forums aparently as is, the rogue can use Cunning Action to use any object... Like a potion or wand.

Totally borked but fun!

Morty
2014-07-07, 09:35 AM
Remember to allow them to back-stab with a ballista too. :smallwink:

I don't see a ballista proficiency anywhere in there. :smalltongue:

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-07-07, 09:39 AM
I don't see a ballista proficiency anywhere in there. :smalltongue:

Obviously the ballista is implied to be in the weapon list. Why else would Rogue be a class?

Ballista: Heavy, Two Handed
3d10+Dex Mod damage

Special: If a rogue uses a ballista by propping it up on an over turned chair, the ballista counts as a finesse weapon.

Joe the Rat
2014-07-07, 12:01 PM
Do thrown weapons count as ranged weapons? Beyond the "well, duh" part, We have Ranged weapons (the category), and the range property. So which do they mean? This would make a difference if you could throw your Handaxe (or Javelin) to get SA damage, or if it's specifically for shooty weapons and finesse throwers.

Inevitability
2014-07-07, 12:06 PM
Do thrown weapons count as ranged weapons? Beyond the "well, duh" part, We have Ranged weapons (the category), and the range property. So which do they mean? This would make a difference if you could throw your Handaxe (or Javelin) to get SA damage, or if it's specifically for shooty weapons and finesse throwers.

I believe they don't. D&D is pretty strict on exact terms, so 'ranged weapons' seems to refer to 'everything we explicitly call a ranged weapon'.

LtPowers
2014-07-07, 12:11 PM
I believe they don't. D&D is pretty strict on exact terms, so 'ranged weapons' seems to refer to 'everything we explicitly call a ranged weapon'.

That makes no sense. No sneak attack with thrown daggers? Or do they still count because they're finesse?


Powers &8^]

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-07-07, 12:13 PM
That makes no sense. No sneak attack with thrown daggers? Or do they still count because they're finesse?


Powers &8^]

Finesse should work fine.

1337 b4k4
2014-07-07, 12:16 PM
I believe they don't. D&D is pretty strict on exact terms, so 'ranged weapons' seems to refer to 'everything we explicitly call a ranged weapon'.

Mearls stated that thrown weapons are considered ranged weapons. https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/485922969311772672

Sartharina
2014-07-07, 12:22 PM
D&D is pretty strict on exact termsAre you serious? People thinking D&D is strict on exact terms (When it's anything but) is the only reason the Dysfunctional Rules thread chain for 3.5 takes more than a single thread.

D&D is NOT a strict-term game. Except maybe the last edition.

Inevitability
2014-07-07, 12:32 PM
About the 'exact terms' stuff, while there are exceptions, you should generally just read the rules in the simplest way possible. Assuming that thrown weapons automatically count as ranged strikes me as more odd than if they didn't.

I am sorry for any confusion that arose. I'm still learning this game. I'm sorry! :smallredface:

I didn't know about the tweet. Guess that clears things up.

SpawnOfMorbo
2014-07-07, 12:35 PM
Are you serious? People thinking D&D is strict on exact terms (When it's anything but) is the only reason the Dysfunctional Rules thread chain for 3.5 takes more than a single thread.

D&D is NOT a strict-term game. Except maybe the last edition.

Actually for the most part it is a strict terms game. 4e was the only edition that said "hey want to change something? Do it" when it came to the spells and powers and such. Like changing a fireball to a Ice ball... You just had to change the descriptor from fire to ice and everything else stayed the same.

But all D&D editions used strict terms, unless the DM says differently. If the DM doesn't say differently then the rules are the rules.

Joe the Rat
2014-07-07, 12:37 PM
Mearls stated that thrown weapons are considered ranged weapons. https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/485922969311772672

Good to know.

This does lead to the issue of a rogue being able to sneak attack with a thrown handaxe, but not SA with a handaxe in melee.

Prime32
2014-07-10, 09:23 AM
What could really help the rogue is the ability to sneak attack with spells. Elf or wizard dip for shocking grasp = auto sneak attack vs metal armor.

Yorrin
2014-07-10, 09:31 AM
What could really help the rogue is the ability to sneak attack with spells. Elf or wizard dip for shocking grasp = auto sneak attack vs metal armor.

Yeah, a Ray of Frost Sneak Attack would be delicious. I'm hoping the Spellthief subclass that we've heard rumors of will let them do this.

da_chicken
2014-07-10, 03:25 PM
Any High Elven Rogue can already do that.

Sartharina
2014-07-10, 03:35 PM
Rogues are living proof to enemies of the party there is nothing that they can possess that you cannot take away while stabbing them in the face!

Yorrin
2014-07-10, 03:37 PM
Any High Elven Rogue can already do that.

Nope. Sneak Attack specifically requires you to be using a weapon, rather than a spell. Though if rules don't exist for this I'm probably going to houserule that spells that call for ranged attack rolls count.

da_chicken
2014-07-10, 04:03 PM
Nope. Sneak Attack specifically requires you to be using a weapon, rather than a spell.

Oh, fair enough.


Though if rules don't exist for this I'm probably going to houserule that spells that call for ranged attack rolls count.

I probably wouldn't. The last thing I'd want to deal with is players complaining that martials have to be magical to keep up or some nonsense. If it's part of a subclass feature or part of a feat that would be fine, but otherwise let sneak attack be something restricted to weapons.

akaddk
2014-07-10, 06:26 PM
TWF is also good for poison use. Poisons now work for the entire minute of their duration, meaning during a combat you'll potentially get 10 attacks with a poisoned weapon. Poisoner's Kit proficiency halves the cost of poisons and we've only seen the Basic poison so far, which is pretty weak, but I'm sure there are more exciting variants to come.

cfalcon
2014-07-11, 10:10 PM
I just... I just never know. Rogue balance is important to me, but it's just so damned rare. Barring 4ed (where I assume everything was balanced, but don't play for many reasons), I haven't seen the rogue work right. They seem to give them a mechanic that is potentially disruptive, then give them a bunch of reasons why they can't use it. The rogue has also been very poorly tested in a lot of games- Pathfinder revisited the Hide rules quite a bit.

I dislike that none of these games seem to have what I would consider a reasonable stealth mechanic. 2ed you rolled your dice or you didn't, but at least if you rolled a successful hide you were actually hidden. 3.X and Pathfinder it was frustrating as hell to not know whether three Spot checks were going to oppose you or like three thousand, and it was also silly that the rogue in 3.X doesn't really even HAVE skills like he did in second- the skills aren't tied to him and similar classes, they are mostly available for anyone who wants to dork with them.


Anyway, I have hopes, but though I'll probably buy the books initially I won't bother investing in the game for real until I see oriental classes launched, psionic classes launched, and for those guys to be reasonably balanced. 3.X had a bunch of issues by launching these so much later IMO, and the quality really suffered. Pathfinder did a much better job with a ninja and samurai, but they just left psionics out of their ruleset pretty much entirely, etc. I'd rather absent than broken, but still. Basically, I have little faith in "we reset down to core classes" as a balance mechanic. I don't want a rogue that is obsoleted or mandatory or paper thin or unable to contribute if the enemy has like, a fart cloud preventing sneak attack or whatever. For such a moderate damage mechanic it sure was countered by everything in 3.X....

m4th
2014-07-11, 10:50 PM
I don't want a rogue that is obsoleted or mandatory or paper thin or unable to contribute if the enemy has like, a fart cloud preventing sneak attack or whatever. For such a moderate damage mechanic it sure was countered by everything in 3.X....

I think you'll find the rogue in 5E is durable, useful, and consistently powerful. Its certainly not mandatory; a wizard can open locks by expending lots of time or spell slots, and a cleric can heal the damage done by traps. Sneak is contested against the enemies passive perception unless they are actively searching a specific area of space for the rogue, so you avoid the "3000 observers and one of them rolls a 20" situation you ran into in 3.x. Sneak attack is easy to get: any advantage or any adjacent ally grants sneak attack, and neither the basic rules nor the playtest bestiary mention undead and constructs having immunity to them.

The other incredible thing about rogues is their wonderful customization options. Humans, elves, dwarves, and halflings all make excellent rogues, and they all play slightly differently both in combat and out of combat.

I am personally playing a wizard right now, but only because there were two rogues at the table this week when I showed up. If I get the chance, I'll probably change over.

akaddk
2014-07-11, 10:55 PM
Rogue balance is important to me, but it's just so damned rare.
Well, it might please you to know that they intend to make 5e a "living" game. What they mean by that is that they intend to do surveys and continue open & closed playtesting and consult forum discussions, etc. in order to get feedback to do major or minor revisions a couple of times a year. So not every month but probably once every six months they'll revisit things, using what they've learned and look to make it better. They're even possibly looking at doing reprints with errata included every so often.

I consider that acceptable. Every year or so I could consider looking at the revisions and whether or not it justifies a new purchase of core books, or just stick with the iOS/Android version and printed out errata sheets. I know a lot of people will complain about having to buy new books but I think that's a moot point, especially when the same people also tend to be the ones complaining about how everything is broken and that errata is needed :smallsigh:

obryn
2014-07-11, 11:04 PM
Barring 4ed (where I assume everything was balanced, but don't play for many reasons), I haven't seen the rogue work right.
The 4e Essentials Thief is probably my favorite incarnation of the class, ever.

The 4e Rogue is a very strong Striker with some neat control elements, but the E-Thief captures the skills and maneuverability aspects better.

TheOOB
2014-07-12, 12:40 AM
Yeah, a Ray of Frost Sneak Attack would be delicious. I'm hoping the Spellthief subclass that we've heard rumors of will let them do this.

Would be too powerful. Sneak attack is balanced under the assumption that your base damage doesn't scale.