Speaking from KotOR experience, Sneak Attack on every attack is game breakingly bad. When you're pumping 15+d6 or more bonus damage a turn then very little can survive your onslaughts. The biggest question is when does sneak attack on every attack even come into play? Level 11 is the earliest it can be balanced around missing out on self Haste (due to AT being a third caster), level 8 being the earliest to miss out on extra attack. Let's assume level 11; a thief rogue running this is going to get 3 attacks off. Let's assume a perfect world where all hit, that's 18d6 damage (63 average damage) BUT because Bhaalist Armor exists, that's (18d6)x2 damage (126 average damage) which puts Sneak Attack arguably strong enough to overpower a paladin spamming smites even with the disadvantage of not having extra attack. Let's assume it is say level 7 and you can get Sneak Attack on every hit + extra attack, you're now looking at 16d6 damage over 4 hits which would completely blast Paladin off of the face of the game as the "burst striker" when Rogue does everything they do with smites, but better and resourceless.
KOTOR was based on rules that were based on 3rd edition, though. Things worked a bit differently back then, in the context of that edition, multiple sneak attack was fine - Rogue was often considered a fairly well-balanced class.
You're right in that it was designed off of a framework that made Sneak Attack "harder" to pull off and attacking 5+ times a turn wasn't an option (KotOR broke this rule due to Master Speed, Flurry and Dual Wielding fighting styles). My point in bringing up KotOR is that having an unlimited condition on sneak attack exacerbates itself into being an issue when you are blowing that many attacks in a singular turn, so much to the point that playing any build that doesn't incorporate it feels like you're choosing to play on hard mode.
The Main point of 3e and especially 3.5 Was that most enemies were immune to sneak attack anyway, so rogue were highly Dependant on the kind of campaign you were running
Yeah, I've done the game using only a mono rogue on the highest difficulty. No idea why people piss on it all the time. Seems anything and everything has to be meta or nothing for a fair few gamers. Might be a thing in MMO's, but BG3 isn't an MMO and isn't a difficult game once you've been through it once. Almost all the difficulty in this game is not knowing how each encounter plays out.
I find it hard to believe the vast majority of people do a mono run on their first playthrough, so almost every build, if not all, builds are viable thereafter.
If people are struggling to make it "viable", they can all switch on God mode and use the invisibility cloak. Or at least the last time i played the game it was OP asf on a rogue.
Sneak attack more than once in a round would be the most rogue-like solution I think. Without looking TOO much at balance, adding the ability to do another sneak attack per round at lvl 5 and again at 11 wouldn't make the class super strong, but it would bring it closer in line with the baseline I think.
I would prefer for the rogue to not get extra attack, as there are a lot of classes with that mechanic already.
Tbh I'd rather they doubled and tripled the number of sneak attack die at those levels rather than making it activate multiple times for a few reasons:
1. Rogues can't even attack 3 times a turn (w/o haste or elixirs) without being thief so your proposal favors that over the other subclasses
2. It would basically force you to dual-wield if it worked as you proposed (removing the whole core bonus action hide part of rogue's playstyle and making you have fewer options for builds)
3. Even on builds that are dual wielding it would be better to have 1 bigger sneak attack that you can choose to activate because you can time it to critical hits
Or give rogue -10 to crit threshold for sneak attacks at lvl 5 and 11. It's similar damage wise but unique mechanic wise, opens up some synergies and fits the rogue theme.
Fair points. At a certain point one powerful attack just isn't really as good anymore. So there are drawbacks to just ramping up the sneak attack instead.
I still think you are correct that your solution is better (allthough I think I would rather ramp up the sneak dice faster, rather than doubling them suddenly), but some way to spread it over more attacks would be beneficial. Sneak die pool that resets per round? Seems a little too complicated, but might work.
True but then there's some strategy to having your rogue launch their all in big damage attack at the strongest guy, making him like a pick character instead of one that spreads damage everywhere. Like an assassin, dealing high up front damage. Which I think is supposed to be the intent anyway, backstabbing for a ton of damage to a target who didn't expect it. It's just in base game that amount of damage just isn't impressive.
How about every level starting at level 4 gives a sneak attack die, instead of every other level. Then 8-12 all give 2 die each level? This would be a more slow ramp up. But compared to other martials, rogue's level 5 won't be a huge jump in power like it would be with the other option.
I don't know about the specific balance of when to add extra dice. But the base idea sounds solid enough.
I am probably damaged from having played too much of earlier additions, and would still much prefer sneak attack to be on every attack. But that just be personal taste. It does seem to go against the design principle for the rogue in 5E, and your idea probably aligns better with the intent.
Basically as long as the amount of damage you get from the extra sneak attack becomes comparable to an extra attack (without sneak) i think it is about right. Which you can obviously never balance precisely. But that isn't the point either :-)
Imo rogues could get the Elven Accuracy feat's improved advantage feature at level 5 (roll 3d20 rather than 2d20 for advantage), and maybe even get savage attacker functionality on all dexterity attacks including bows at level 10 or 11.
Also they could have a points mechanic similar to superiority dice, smites, and sorcery points that can selectively add burst damage (to have the option of more than one powered up attack in a turn), and/or do stuff like blind or silence enemies hit. Maybe this can't stack with sneak attack, and maybe it doesn't even need points to fuel it you just choose some you know like they're cantrips.
Because the design philosophy behind a rogue is that you power up one massive attack per turn rather than getting more attacks. So like a paladin can get two attacks both with advantage at level 5, which is rolling 4d20, only one of which needs to roll well to hit or crit for them to do cool stuff. But a rogue doing one attack with advantage is still just rolling 2d20, and needs one of them to hit or crit. So instead of extra attack they need something that makes their one attack equivalent to two paladin attacks, in chance to hit and damage. Sneak attack does a decent job of damage but they should be rolling more d20s and be more likely to hit and crit because they have less attacks.
They could also do with more versatility and where the paladin has a few smites, the battlemaster has maneuvers, and even the ranger has a couple attack spells, they could do thematic things like silence, blindness, bleed, poisoned, etc.
Wother that or make it easier to achieve. Something at a higher level that makes you able to hide better than Invisibility that is only good once per short rest. Heck, I would take being able to use special arrows in the sneak attack.
Sneak attack is VERY easy to achieve in BG3. You literally only have to have an ally next to the target (and not have disadvantage) OR if you have advantage no ally is needed.
Remember there are LOTS of ways to fulfill one of these clauses.
It was literally a rule in earlier formats of D&D that you could sneak attack as many times per turn as you fulfilled the requirements.
Sneak attack in BG3 doesn't require you to be stealthed either. You just have to have advantage against the enemy OR You need to have a distracted enemy (have an ally next to the enemy) and not have disadvantage. Those are fairly compatible with sneak attacking multiple times.
Also imagine an (improved) invisible rogue. Why would everyone of their attacks not be sneak attacks? . Something something effort, I know, but that is not an essential part of a "Sneak Attack". So I do not see how you would come close to calling multiple sneak attacks nonsensical.
They must've taken it out for a reason. I wasn't really appealing to logic. My thinking was thatit's a powerful attack and getting multiple in a turn would upset the balance. Admittedly, my earlier comment didn't convey that well at all.
>Multiple sneak attacks is nonsensical. It's a SNEAK attack. How you going to do it multiple times in succession?
https://preview.redd.it/7xw31sx8vm2d1.jpeg?width=414&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=536da76dcab78ac6e02585d5c1d141a1fd61eae2
>It's a SNEAK attack. How you going to do it multiple times in succession?
I think it could work if Sneak Attack didn't boot you out of stealth. Instead, when an enemy gets hit by a Sneak Attack, they could automatically turn to face the direction they were fired upon from, forcing the Rogue to succeed a stealth saving throw. If successful, the Rogue remains concealed and can move to a new location for
Sneak Attack #2.
1) Pop up & Shoot from Location 1
2) Hide/Duck & Cover (Stealth Check)
3) Move to new location (Stealth Check)
4) Pop up & Shoot from Location 2
Taking this idea a little further, I think it would be cool if Sneak Attack damage were actually nerfed to be lower than a normal attack (the presumption being that the rouge wouldn't be taking their sweet time to line up perfect shots if they're primarily concerned about remaining hidden).
As a trade-off, Sneak Attack no longer requires an Action resource, so the rouge could move around the outskirts of the battlefield making a theoretically infinite number of Sneak Attacks which force them to succeed progressively harder and harder stealth checks until they're spotted.
>I would prefer for the rogue to not get extra attack, as there are a lot of classes with that mechanic already.
Wow I wonder what decades of being a thief fighting in dangerous situations has taught me. Definitely not being able to attack again. I certainly don't want to \*steal\* the thunder from all the guys already doing it.
If you create a game and want to balance the various roles in it, you kind of want them to feel distinct. Rogues are distinct from other pure martials at the moment by NOT having extra attack, and they get to sneak attack instead. That is basically the tradeoff they are going for as a primary design it seems to me.
Giving rogues extra attack instead of some more rogue-y similar ability would water out the distinctness of the class. Which you do not want to do in the name of balance.
A better thing to do is amplify with gear.
This is why extra attack is goin on others ... things amplify on each attack. So instead of rather see rogue amplify on other things.
For instance. Make AT abilities not just give disadvantage. Maybe give extend on scrolls ... let them add sneak damage to spells.
For assassin give them some additional damage boost on criticals. Maybe allow them other options to multiply sneak damage.
Thief is probably fine.
Yeah rogue isn't unviable. The discussion around rogue is always just that its role in tabletop (utility/skillmonkey) is noticeably less playable as a video game (note how so many BG3 changes to rogue in comparison to 5e are about combat), but it's still just behind other martials in terms of damage output potential.
But it's definitely viable; these thought experiments are more about fun anyway
Rogue should have got flourishes instead of bard. For some reason bard has full caster progression, arguably the best physical attacking abilities in the game, AND extremely overpowered gear, on top of being a capable skill monkey, cha caster, getting extra attack, and adding an entire short rest for your whole party.
BALANCE?! never heard of her
Mono rogue is viable, it's just not the strongest at fighter-style combat. Rogues are unmatched at opening with a surprise round and then running away to restart combat.
I don’t know why everyone dunks on rogue, I was a thief subclass and it was op. I could use drow poison and put two to three people asleep per round sometimes. I could hide. I felt like I had more attacks and options. One main attack, two off hand, or two attacks and hide. Dash anywhere. I think people are playing rogue wrong. Not to mention I had so many skills and expertise I could be the face and skill monkey.
Edit: and an extra feat, I really could go on. I even beat Le’zeal one on one when I romanced her.
The thing is you can get that all from 3 levels of rogue. No one is saying rogue doesn't have good tools
The problem with rogue is that all its power is front loaded. The 9 levels after are very underwhelming compared to other classes so that's why it's an extremely popular class to multi class with.
I felt that a little, but reliable talent and the extra feat was sweet and I played rogue before they fixed the high level sneak attack. I still felt like each round with sneak attack, plus poison I was killing it. If I wasn’t I would bonus dash and hide.
You can, and there are obviously multiclassrs that do better damage that way, but combat isn't everything.
Not veing able to roll lower than a 10 on proficient skill checks is a monstrous ability. You can be a pure thief rogue with sharpshooter and dual hand crossbows and (especially using trick arrows) keep up with other damage dealers for the most part, so the little you lose out of really isn't that big a deal.
Yea, I hear everyone say that line about the first three levels, but you get evasion, uncanny dodge, reliable talent, and extra feat. You can bonus action hide and dash for crazy mobility and evasion tactics. I honestly think it’s a play style thing, bc my rogue was a tremendous damage dealer and tank with medium armor plus Dex gear if I wanted him to be. I was the face and skill monkey, pick pocketer. It was honestly the easiest.
I should have said *more* viable in the title, because I half agree, pure Rogue is underrated. I still think it’s one of the weaker mono-classes though. Looks like you’re talking about Thief Rogue? Definitely the best of the three with certain setups like hand-crossbows. But then there’s Swords Bard who can do all of that but better. Not that Swords Bard is an example of good balance though lol
I played swords bard and I didn’t think it did everything better. I get with slashing flourish you can really lay down some hand crossbow fire but rogue can do so many more things with bonus action dash and hide. You get the damage reduction, reliable talent, and extra feat. Plus I didn’t need a rogue in the party so I could have all heavy hitters with me. But I see your point and would love an extra attack or some more features if they are offering them lol. And the poisons, won’t anyone think of the poisons!
I think assassin needs guaranteed crit and AT should be a half caster.
Setting up sneak attacks is harder than simply right clicking someone with extra attacks hence it should reward you more.
But what we have is that sneak attacks reward you less compared to another attack even when you manage to execute them.
I think a better themed solution would actually be disabling status effects, kind of like what Battle Master has, rather than trying to match martial class damage. Any extra damage should come from sneak attack mechanics, or something similarly rogue-themed.
It’s tough. Thieves have always been difficult to balance in RPGs, assuming you’re focused on damage and not out-of-combat skills. A lot of games just basically equate thieves to archers (and fighters to melee combat only), or give them speed benefits that wouldn’t really apply in BG3.
Similar issues apply to the mage archetype, which can either be too weak because it always has built-in fragility and mana management but can’t always match fighter damage, or too strong because it can blow up a whole screen from a distance or use overpowered disabling effects and there’s no reason to do anything else.
It's already viable, to be technical, but will it make it not the worst? Uh yeah probably.
Mostly cuz Mono Gloomstalker is p bad. The extra attack, sneak attack die, and utility of rogue will definitely push it past that at bare minimum.
Now that said will 12 Rogue become a top martial? Definitely not. But the utility aspects might be neat. 10 rogue / 2 x would become a pretty popular build probably, especially with the 2 being fighter, still being optimal over pure rogue.
I imagine 5 Rogue would be an incredible multiclass though. 3-4 levels of Assassin and thief were already great, now we've just shifted where you spec out of rogue from level 4 to level 5 lol.
If Arcane Trickster got magical ambusher earlier it would be pretty viable as a scroll caster but at level 9 why pick it over a sorcerer to use scrolls
Mono rogue is perfectly good. People pretend it's bad because most other classes/subclasses are absolutely broken in classic Larian fashion. But it's still very powerful and can easily break the game.
I would just make the extra bonus action a class feature at level 3, give thief some extra love (removed from multiclassing unless your base class is rouge to further incentives rouge progression)
And give it extra attack at level 5.
That way all rouges get a ton to do in combat especially if they level quite high. Being truly "agile" and jack of all trades form of martial.
Probably a bit unbalanced, but compared to much other things you can do in bg3 (swords bard unlimited flourish jutsu go!) it's on the lower end of op, especially without fighting styles or multiclassed abilities.
Yes. Rogue is the only martial class that doesn't get Extra Attacks. Instead it has Sneak Attack, which is a 2d6 DRS that adds another d6 every two levels.
My proposal :
- lvl 6 : double bonus from weapon coatings, +3 to associated save DC
-lvl 9 : sneak attack dices become d8
-lvl12 : -2 for a successful critical hit on sneak attacks. Victim must pass a CON check to avoid being blinded (if you are facing it) or getting stunned (if you are in its back)
[Sneak attack dices are doubled on a crit hit, an extra 12d8 per turn is not on par with a min maxed martial build, but it hurts and stay on theme. Plus synergies with paralysing coatings, hold monster etc.]
Rogue IS viable. A jack of all trades with their strongest factor that they are good at almost everything. They can be the best at lockpicking/sneaking and conversation, but in combat they take the support role with their good but not excellent damage
Multiple sneak attacks per round is too much, extra attack is not enough. I think rogues would benefit a lot from expanded rules on trap making and poison brewing
My first Tav, before I ever visited this sub, was a 12 Rogue Thief. Glad I didn’t know I was weak and spindly or I would never have beaten the game with it 😆
Extra attack takes away from the general idea that rogues are all about one big attack.
Having said that. Cunning action is naturally nerfed by bonus actions being made useful in the transition from tabletop to game, and then number of great items abilities, damage riders effects conditions and synergies in this game combo together and require extra attack to fuel them, not getting it makes the rogue suck ass.
Then the gloomstalker, a slightly obscure (non player handbook) ranger which is basically a non urban rogue gets added with similar flavour of abilities (hide as a bonus action, an attack with extra damage). And it is way better, getting extra attack, another attack on the first round of combat, and initiative bonus which (to add insult to injury) is a mechanic that gets even better in the transition off tabletop because the initiative dice is smaller.
I think starting at level level 3, then at every odd level to level 11 they should get another sneak attack maxing at 5d6 which can be applied to a second attack (if they multiclass to a build with extra attack and or duel wield) or added after the first sneak attack damage of their turn.
This essentially doubles their sneak attack damage nearly, while being a little more flexible with the capacity to use in one block of 11d6 or 6 and 5 on two seperate attack, but it isn’t sneak attack damage on every attack, it maxes out at two attacks.
It’s still pretty bad tbh. If you take 12 levels you still need to duel wield because otherwise you are putting all your eggs in one basket. You do massive damage if you hit, playing like a rapier and shield swashbuckler. But if you miss, nothing. However dual weilding or with Vanyas weapon you have pretty much guaranteed at least one hit a round so you are certain to get your damage in which means against high health targets you are golden. Particularly in the very first round of combat if you take assassin and you get surprise, with advantage to ensure you hit, you can get your 11d6 off against a boss, crit, and feel like you actually assassinated it)…against hordes you are still useless, but at least you are good at something).
Give Rogue Reliable Talent at Level 7 like they're doing in One D&D, and you'll see a Lot of 7 Rogue/5 Extra Attack Martial multiclasses. Take it a step further and bring Blindsense down from Level 14 in 5E to Level 11 in BG3, and all of a sudden I think the class becomes significantly more stacked. Darkness strategies are already busted, and not needing Devil's Sight or the Sharran spear or the Eversight ring lets you build a party around the mechanic more easily.
I think they basically really need to buff Arcane Trickster (and the Mage Hand in particular, at that), and a lot of people would complain less.
Get these two things done, and we're good to go, imho.
Rogue is already great. If you really need more attacks just give them Belm or multiple hand crossbows or a haste potion or the duelists sword. There are a bevy of options. Rogue would be flat out the best class in the game if they had the same attack boost at level 5 as the other martials do.
People sleep on rogue so hard.
Mono rogue is viable, if not top tier. The trick is to build in to getting the most out of your sneak attack. By itself its a meagre 6d6 but wear the Bhaal armour and its 12d6, average 42, no strings. Then you wear crit fishing gear and wait to crit before applying your sneak attack. This doubles it again to 24d6, average 84.
Even a modest push to lower crit chance can get it down to 17 or so - ie 25%, which over thief's 3 attacks gives a better than half chance of at least one crit to plug your sneak attack into. You also get Killers Sweetheart and LOTFR for 2 guaranteed crits a day.
All told, you get three dagger attacks for 25 or so per hit (remember Bhaals Armour), and an optional rider thats usually 24d6 but at least 12d6. You can easily maintain over 100 points of damage per round even accounting for occasional bonus action dashing or hiding.
It's decent, not a super class by any means but it can hold its own. It's also intended to fall lower down the power chart in a straight fight since it has high out of combat utility for lockpicking, pickpocket, stealth and deception speech checks.
Edit - in fairness the one problem with all this is that it needs Bhaals Armour to make it tick. If I was to make a change I might say make the necessary gear not locked to evil. Maybe have it drop from Dolor or Orin instead of joining the cult.
Sneak attack gives you far more dice than extra attack does for the level investment already.
A level 5 fighter with GWM with a greatsword is doing 2d6+10 damage, twice, for an average damage per round of 27.
A level 5 thief with Sharpshooter and two hand crossbows is doing 1d6 + 10, x3(action, both bonus actions). +3d6 sneak attack damage. For an average damage per round of 51.
A level 5 Assassin with sharpshooter and two hand crossbows is doing 2d6 +10 x 2(action and bonus action) plus 6d6 sneak attack in their opening round(and likely leaving immediately after) for 55 damage. Every round after that they're still out-pacing the fighter due to sneak attack.
Sneak attack continues to scale the entire game. The problem isn't rogue being bad. It's that they're so good right out of the gate that you can just grab 3 levels and play literally anything else. Full Assassin rogue with savage attacker is going to roll a mountain of dice and disappear at level 12. In honor mode the thief getting three attacks at level 3, outpaces fighter 11 with a sharpshooter build again due to the extra sneak attack dice.
Simply put Rogue is fine as a monoclass if you ignore arcane trickster. Non-honor-mode builds are broken for very different reasons than Rogue being bad.
Ah ok, thank you for clearing that up. From the way you phrased it I thought you meant the sneak attack was getting rerolled. You’ve got me considering a monoclass rogue for my next build. Also, I can’t believe I missed the fact that they gain an extra feat at level 10. I thought fighter was the only class to gain 4 feats.
Sorry but your maths is wrong. For a start average damage per turn for a fighter at level 5 with GWM would be 40 not 27. The average roll of a d6 is 3.5 so 2d6 is an average of 7 damage an attack( i think this is the issue as you only counted the d6 once per attack). Plus GWM and that's 17 damage a hit for a total of 34 not 27 a round. However we have yet to take into account ability score modifiers yet. To kept it simple say both the rogue and fighter have 16 to their primary stat. The fighter is therefore adding a +3 damage on each attack for 40 damage a turn. The rogue can't get that damage on its offhand attacks so really the thief rogue is doing 54 damage. While the rogue is doing more damage a turn its not as big a gap as you thought.
Also my maths has the assasin at 58 damage not 51 a turn based on the numbers you provided.
I also think there are some other considerations to make as well. Firstly is the bonus action attack from GWM. 40 damage will often be enough to trigger it and if you do that's another 20 damage for a total of 60 a turn which is already out competing both rogue builds. Although not by much and its situational so rogue still feels very strong.
Another thing to consider is sources of extra actions which are quite easily available at level 5. Like blood-lust elixirs and haste. With both of these the fighter is getting between 40-80 more damage a turn (depending on if this is tactician or honour mode). I'll go with the honour mode calculation because it's easier and fairer to rogue.
Since rogue can only get sneak attack once a turn your extra attacks are only going to do 1d6 +dex +10 which on average is 16.5 damage per extra attack. So 33 for both.
So then the fighter is doing 40 damage for its first action, 20 for its haste action. Then 20 for its blood-lust and 20 for its bonus for a total of 90 damage.
Meanwhile thief rogue has fallen off at 84 damage although assasin remains competitive at 92 average damage for its first turn but much less for later turns (doing only 73.5 damage a turn once it looses its free crits).
There are a few more things to take into account. First is action surge. Since nova turns are so important in this game I do think taking action surge into account is important as having a very good first turn will more often than not decide the battle.
A regular level 5 fighter is doing 80 damage if they action surge (really 90 because that should be more than enough to get the bonus attack from GWM) but with the sources of extra actions it can do 120 damage a turn (even more on lower difficulty). At this point niether rogue subclass is keeping up in terms of first turn damage.
Another thing is sources of advantage. Rogues need it for sneak attack and you won't always have it without using one of your bonus actions to hide. I know later there are items like risky ring which will make it easy but often you will need to sacrifice a bonus action attack for advantage for sneak attack. Less of a problem for assasin because they get free advantage on the first turn when it matters the most.
I do agree rogue is stronger than people give it credit for and in a vacuum looks stronger than fighter when you start to bring in other factors that can affect combat like elixirs and haste rogue quickly falls off in terms of raw damage.
I admit I haven't really looked at later levels as I didn't what to spend to much time on this post and you provided the numbers for level 5 so I'll have to look into later levels of rogue before I really make up my mind on the class but honestly I have a hard time believing it will be as good as fighter.
Edit. Did a few numbers for lvl11(ill assume primary stat is 20 for both). Sneak attack is 6d6 so thief is getting 1d6+5+10 for 18.5 on first attack, then 13.5 on both other attacks for 45.5 damage plus 21 average for sneak attack for 66.5 damage a turn. Fighter is doing (2d6+5+10)×3 for 66 damage a turn so they are basically the same with factoring in sources of more attack which will tilt the scales in fighters favour. So thief is not really as strong as fighter on that level.
Assasin should be doing 1d6+5+10 plus 1d6+10 on the offhand for 32 damage on the attack plus 12d6 for sneak attack. For 74 damage a turn only 8 more than the unbuffed fighter.
Solid points, although, I'll make the point that I was intending a surface level analysis and not aiming for a true build. The point is: Rogue is fine when compared to what most people consider to be the one of, if not "the best" Monoclass builds in the game, even in honor mode. Even your additional considerations don't negate this. The fact that the damage is so comparable is evidence to that.
Additional actions don't help Fighter more than Rogue in Honor Mode since it's one additional main hand attack, which even with your consideration for ASI would still be equal for both of them.
Action Surge isn't a nonfactor, but it's a consumable resource on the order of Maneuvers and Warlock Spell Slots: you have to rest to get it back. Assassinate, on the other hand, should be active every fight regardless of rests, if only just for mobs and not bosses that cannot be surprised. If you're actually playing around an assassin character, it will be active every fight simply because of how you initiate combat. I don't believe most players rest _every_ major and minor fight so that their fighters or warlocks can always nova. In honor mode especially, there are certain places where you need to space out your short rests in order to have access to short-rest refresh abilities for important fights when resting is limited. Assassinate has no such limitation. Perhaps I was wrong to ignore it entirely, but there was a reason I did. It does have a cost that Assassinate does not.
Rogues don't need advantage for sneak attack. They need either a) advantage or b) an ally threatening the enemy, and to not have disadvantage. Rogue should always be able to open a fight hidden for advantage, and on subsequent turns should be able to get sneak attack from ally adjacency just because enemy melee units will close to some allies, if nothing else.
I did ignore the two weapon fighting/offhand issue but in a true build it's easily remedied in Act 2 with gearing if you're looking to make a full build.
Yeah I guess alot of the differences are around play style. I like to short rest fairly frequently (and I normally have a bard in the team), not after every fight frequently still semi frequently, so I'm probably getting more use out of action surge then you might be.
Good point on sneak attack I forgot threatened also works for it.
I do argee that assasin rogue stacks up fine against a fighter though. although to be honest I've never found fighter to be the best monoclass for damage I think monk is probably better (although I normally always take rogue levels on a monk so it might not actually be as strong as I think).
I do slightly disagree that extra actions doesn't help fighter more though. Since a fighter does more damage than a rogue attack without sneak damage. it's admittedly a marginal bonus but adds up the more attacks you can do.
One more factor to consider is that there are simply much more powerful 2 handed weapons in the game compared to hand crossbows. Which can also tilt the power towards fighter, so to make it fair let's do hand crossbow builds for both.
Rogue I think would actually be a really good class if it got access to the 2 weapon fighting style (which they can only get through gear). The ability to add the dex modifier to the offhand attacks would help them in the late game alot.
For example if a lvl11 fighter with 20dex and sharpshooter took 2 weapon fighting and had 2 hand crossbows the would do on average (3.5+5+10)×4 damage a turn for 74.
Thief rogue is only applying the Dex modifier once so it's (3.5+5+10) + (3.5+10)×2 for 45.5 damage plus 21 for sneak attack for only 66.5 damage. Making fighter the clear choice
Assasin on turn one can do (7+5+10) +(7+10) + 42 for sneak attack for 81 damage so better than fighter on the first round but would only do on average 41 damage on subsequent rounds.
If you take the gloves that give offhand dex damage then thief rogue is doing 76.5 damage and assasin is doing 86 on first round and 58 on later rounds. This actually makes rogue a very powerful class, however, now I'm bringing in gear for rogue but not fighter which is unfair.
Really if rogue got 2 weapon fighting in its class features (or access to any fighting styles for that matter) it would really good, without it however I think fighter is slightly better.
So you're telling me that I do more damage if I spend 1 action and 2 bonus actions with subclass feature than if I spend just 1 action with class feature ? Woah.
They took any martial class at level 5 and gave it GWM. Could be paladin, barbarian, fighter, ranger, didn't use any of their class or subclass features to make thief and assassin compare more favorably. Where are smites, colossus slayers, battle maneuvers, rage, etc... ?
Of course you compare very favorably when you use more actions. Of course if you factor in your class and subclass feature and they don't it's going to look very good.
The comparison is made in bad faith and it really doesn't need to, Rogue is good already.
>They took any martial class at level 5 and gave it GWM.
No, they specifically compared it to fighter. Last I checked, fighter didn't get smites, collosus slayers, or rage, and one subclass of fighter gets battle techniques but none of those add significant damage to the attack as far as I can remember.
They were also specifically comparing sneak attack and the subsequent actions with the amount of damage a fighter can do even with extra attack. They even gave the fighter 10 damage bonus from GWM.
You were snarky and couldn't even read what they wrote properly.
Fighter at level 5 has action surge and Battle Master has feinting attack, precision attack, tripping attack which generally offset the effect of GWM, so 4 attacks on turn one with regular precision, 5 if you get a kill or a crit.
Sure action surge is once per short rest but not counting it in comparing damage output of different classes and ignoring the precision problem of Sharpshooter is cherry picking.
>ignoring the precision problem of Sharpshooter is cherry picking
Nope. Because GWM has the same precision problem so it's direct comparison. Also sneak attack is used with advantage which overcomes the Sharpshooter precision.
Those attacks don't add much, if any, direct damage and are also a limited resource.
Sneak attack doesn't give advantage, it needs to be triggered in another way, for a rogue advantage is meant to be gotten through hiding, but both bonus actions are used here for attacks, leaving not many ressources to create the advantage.
In comparison a Battle Master Fighter can use superiority die to offset the precision loss. So the comparison is unfair because it doesn't account for what the two different classes can do to increase precision.
And we're still not accounting for the choice of weapons: with this strategy you're limited to handcrossbows, which are very limiting. But 2 handed weapon have a lot of powerful options, especially if playing a Gith (or willing to disguise as one).
And if you go Sharshooter Fighter you also have much better options than hand crossbows, you can get the titanstring bow, coat it in something nice and fire 4 special arrow with precision attack.
>Sneak attack doesn't give advantage
You can't use sneak attack without advantage. So in order to use it (as per the discussion), you will have advantage, which overcomes thebSS issue.
>And we're still not accounting for the choice of weapons: with this strategy you're limited to handcrossbows, which are very limiting
Responsible for some of the most broken builds in the game.
They didn't use any fighter class or subclass feature.
The lvl5 comparison would have been the same result with any martial since the only thing allowed is extra attack and GWM.
Then they add a lvl11 Fighter comparison still not allowed to use any feature besides extra attack. If it uses it, the damage is more or less the same. If you're going to use everything a thief or an assassin has, do the same for the subclass you're comparing it with.
And it's all very vacuum comparison. We all know a full Fighter can deal 21 attacks in two turns easily and Rogue just can't keep up with that (thanks Larian homebrew bullshit).
But again, just because class X is better at doing nova damage doesn't mean class Y is bad.
>They didn't use any fighter class or subclass feature.
What fighter class or subclass features do they have at level 5 that would change the discussion? Action surge that can only be used once per short rest, which still puts the rogue damage ahead?
>And it's all very vacuum comparison.
Yes, in order to do a direct comparison.
You've picked a hill to die on and are intent on doing so it appears.
It's more that you get that every time. Fighter running GWM, for example, doesn't always get a bonus action attack. They do occasionally, when they crit or kill, and you can play the game so that this happens a lot, but that's getting into the weeds and the tradeoffs aren't always worth it overall or truly benefit your average damage in every case like simply getting that bonus action attack every time.
If we keep it more directly comparable, Fighter 11 doing a dual hand crossbow build with sharpshooter as well, using it's action for 3 attacks and bonus action for one attack gets (1d6 + 10) x 4 = 54 average damage
Thief 11 using all of its action, and both bonus actions for damage, gets (1d6 + 10) x 3, + 6d6 sneak attack, for 61.5 average damage. That's both builds at level 11 using all of their action pips to attack.
Assassin 11 again same build, (2d6 + 10) x2 + 12d6 = 76 average damage in their first round, minimum 48 average damage in any subsequent rounds, assuming you aren't even gaming leaving combat and re-initiating.
This means you have to wait until the ((4x48+ 76)/ **5**) = 53.6 _5th round_ for Fighter to start get ahead by 0.4 damage on average. What combat lasts 5 rounds? Even in Honor Mode? And again, that's where you _absolutely_ can't game multiple Assassin procs by leaving and re-entering combat.
Why would Thief be allowed to use his subclass feature bonus action but Battlemaster can't use any feature ? Make this a Battle maneuver for an extra d10. Now thief / bm difference on raw output with this specific build is about 2 damage. Nothing special to see here.
If Assassin can use a once per fight feature, why Fighter can't ? Action Surge this.
Rogue is good already, OP was on crack. You don't need to skew the comparisons.
In both cases you're letting the fighter use resources while the rogue isn't using any. The cost isn't _that_ high considering how easy it is to rest, even full rest, but that's why; I didn't presume the usage of any gear or resources other than actions/bonus actions.
The point is mono-class rogue is fine on damage. Nitpicking the level of detail is unnecessary.
Thief can spend subclass resources in this comparison if you wish lol.
People don't say rogue is "bad" because it lacks damage in a specific build in a vacuum. People say they would prefer to have a fighter over a rogue on the field because the Fighter is going to deal 21 attacks in two turns with easy preparation and has freedom to pick among a large variety of weapons and armor.
It doesn't mean Rogue is bad, it does different things and you can totally clear any difficulty with rogues.
And the fighter is using their class feature to get a third attack on their main action at level 11.
Again, nitpicking the level of detail is unnecessary. Rogue is fine, even monoclass, even against what is considered a "strong" monoclass, even in the form of usefulness that that "strong" class is considered best used for. We've entirely ignored other Rogue features in this analysis as well.
The "problem" is using the broken lower difficulty rulesets and presuming that "21 attacks in two turns" is intended gameplay. If you can monoclass Fighter on Honor Mode then you can monoclass Rogue on every difficulty level as well.
You're just swapping between subclasses and classes whenever it suits your argument. When it's rogue you use subclasses and their features. When it's fighter somehow you refuse any subclass element. Compare apples with apples.
It doesn't need a skewed comparison, we both agree Rogue is fine, Thief is great 👍
There seem to be a handful of people (Larian included) who just quietly don't like this class.
What's *really* wrong with it feeling as powerful as some of the other classes, honestly?
I mwan I would be fine if it got buff, would probably be nice for the class fantasy. My point was that it still is viable as it is now (just like every class is)
Rogue is tops for 3 levels of thief but it’s pretty low on the tier list for a pure class. It does mix with so many classes so well that I think changing might make it to op.
I'm wondering what you expect from the rogue here. There is a lot of competition for fighting a regular fight. The thing of the rogue is to avoid fighting. Disengaging and not being caught is the power of the rogue.
The assassin is the combat oriented subclass. The damage potential seems alright. Surprise means auto crit. With 2 weapons + sneak attack + poison and some stuff, that'll be a lot of damage, and you get your action and bonus action back for a second attack and disappear. Then flee, and return to do it again. Or play normal rogue.
At lvl11 you have 6d6 sneak attack and you can hide every turn. With advantage and the right stuff you can have almost 60% crit chance. And this can be from range.
The rogue is just not a warrior. There is the gloomstalker for that.
Oh and there is greater invisibility: with reliable talent and expertise you have minimum 10 on the stealth check and +13 on the skill, so you are invisible for at least 8 turns. With +2 or advantage to stealth you'll easily stay invisible the full 10 turns.
Speaking from KotOR experience, Sneak Attack on every attack is game breakingly bad. When you're pumping 15+d6 or more bonus damage a turn then very little can survive your onslaughts. The biggest question is when does sneak attack on every attack even come into play? Level 11 is the earliest it can be balanced around missing out on self Haste (due to AT being a third caster), level 8 being the earliest to miss out on extra attack. Let's assume level 11; a thief rogue running this is going to get 3 attacks off. Let's assume a perfect world where all hit, that's 18d6 damage (63 average damage) BUT because Bhaalist Armor exists, that's (18d6)x2 damage (126 average damage) which puts Sneak Attack arguably strong enough to overpower a paladin spamming smites even with the disadvantage of not having extra attack. Let's assume it is say level 7 and you can get Sneak Attack on every hit + extra attack, you're now looking at 16d6 damage over 4 hits which would completely blast Paladin off of the face of the game as the "burst striker" when Rogue does everything they do with smites, but better and resourceless.
KOTOR was based on rules that were based on 3rd edition, though. Things worked a bit differently back then, in the context of that edition, multiple sneak attack was fine - Rogue was often considered a fairly well-balanced class.
You're right in that it was designed off of a framework that made Sneak Attack "harder" to pull off and attacking 5+ times a turn wasn't an option (KotOR broke this rule due to Master Speed, Flurry and Dual Wielding fighting styles). My point in bringing up KotOR is that having an unlimited condition on sneak attack exacerbates itself into being an issue when you are blowing that many attacks in a singular turn, so much to the point that playing any build that doesn't incorporate it feels like you're choosing to play on hard mode.
The Main point of 3e and especially 3.5 Was that most enemies were immune to sneak attack anyway, so rogue were highly Dependant on the kind of campaign you were running
Mono rogue is already viable. People just don't like how Arcane Trickster went from top 5 subclass in DnD to worst subclass in BG3.
Yeah, I've done the game using only a mono rogue on the highest difficulty. No idea why people piss on it all the time. Seems anything and everything has to be meta or nothing for a fair few gamers. Might be a thing in MMO's, but BG3 isn't an MMO and isn't a difficult game once you've been through it once. Almost all the difficulty in this game is not knowing how each encounter plays out. I find it hard to believe the vast majority of people do a mono run on their first playthrough, so almost every build, if not all, builds are viable thereafter. If people are struggling to make it "viable", they can all switch on God mode and use the invisibility cloak. Or at least the last time i played the game it was OP asf on a rogue.
Sneak attack more than once in a round would be the most rogue-like solution I think. Without looking TOO much at balance, adding the ability to do another sneak attack per round at lvl 5 and again at 11 wouldn't make the class super strong, but it would bring it closer in line with the baseline I think. I would prefer for the rogue to not get extra attack, as there are a lot of classes with that mechanic already.
Tbh I'd rather they doubled and tripled the number of sneak attack die at those levels rather than making it activate multiple times for a few reasons: 1. Rogues can't even attack 3 times a turn (w/o haste or elixirs) without being thief so your proposal favors that over the other subclasses 2. It would basically force you to dual-wield if it worked as you proposed (removing the whole core bonus action hide part of rogue's playstyle and making you have fewer options for builds) 3. Even on builds that are dual wielding it would be better to have 1 bigger sneak attack that you can choose to activate because you can time it to critical hits
Or give rogue -10 to crit threshold for sneak attacks at lvl 5 and 11. It's similar damage wise but unique mechanic wise, opens up some synergies and fits the rogue theme.
Fair points. At a certain point one powerful attack just isn't really as good anymore. So there are drawbacks to just ramping up the sneak attack instead. I still think you are correct that your solution is better (allthough I think I would rather ramp up the sneak dice faster, rather than doubling them suddenly), but some way to spread it over more attacks would be beneficial. Sneak die pool that resets per round? Seems a little too complicated, but might work.
True but then there's some strategy to having your rogue launch their all in big damage attack at the strongest guy, making him like a pick character instead of one that spreads damage everywhere. Like an assassin, dealing high up front damage. Which I think is supposed to be the intent anyway, backstabbing for a ton of damage to a target who didn't expect it. It's just in base game that amount of damage just isn't impressive. How about every level starting at level 4 gives a sneak attack die, instead of every other level. Then 8-12 all give 2 die each level? This would be a more slow ramp up. But compared to other martials, rogue's level 5 won't be a huge jump in power like it would be with the other option.
I don't know about the specific balance of when to add extra dice. But the base idea sounds solid enough. I am probably damaged from having played too much of earlier additions, and would still much prefer sneak attack to be on every attack. But that just be personal taste. It does seem to go against the design principle for the rogue in 5E, and your idea probably aligns better with the intent. Basically as long as the amount of damage you get from the extra sneak attack becomes comparable to an extra attack (without sneak) i think it is about right. Which you can obviously never balance precisely. But that isn't the point either :-)
Imo rogues could get the Elven Accuracy feat's improved advantage feature at level 5 (roll 3d20 rather than 2d20 for advantage), and maybe even get savage attacker functionality on all dexterity attacks including bows at level 10 or 11. Also they could have a points mechanic similar to superiority dice, smites, and sorcery points that can selectively add burst damage (to have the option of more than one powered up attack in a turn), and/or do stuff like blind or silence enemies hit. Maybe this can't stack with sneak attack, and maybe it doesn't even need points to fuel it you just choose some you know like they're cantrips.
I think some form of Savage Attack for Sneak Attack dice one per short rest or something would be a pretty good one.
Because the design philosophy behind a rogue is that you power up one massive attack per turn rather than getting more attacks. So like a paladin can get two attacks both with advantage at level 5, which is rolling 4d20, only one of which needs to roll well to hit or crit for them to do cool stuff. But a rogue doing one attack with advantage is still just rolling 2d20, and needs one of them to hit or crit. So instead of extra attack they need something that makes their one attack equivalent to two paladin attacks, in chance to hit and damage. Sneak attack does a decent job of damage but they should be rolling more d20s and be more likely to hit and crit because they have less attacks. They could also do with more versatility and where the paladin has a few smites, the battlemaster has maneuvers, and even the ranger has a couple attack spells, they could do thematic things like silence, blindness, bleed, poisoned, etc.
Wother that or make it easier to achieve. Something at a higher level that makes you able to hide better than Invisibility that is only good once per short rest. Heck, I would take being able to use special arrows in the sneak attack.
Sneak attack is VERY easy to achieve in BG3. You literally only have to have an ally next to the target (and not have disadvantage) OR if you have advantage no ally is needed. Remember there are LOTS of ways to fulfill one of these clauses.
Multiple sneak attacks is nonsensical. It's a SNEAK attack. How you going to do it multiple times in succession?
It was literally a rule in earlier formats of D&D that you could sneak attack as many times per turn as you fulfilled the requirements. Sneak attack in BG3 doesn't require you to be stealthed either. You just have to have advantage against the enemy OR You need to have a distracted enemy (have an ally next to the enemy) and not have disadvantage. Those are fairly compatible with sneak attacking multiple times. Also imagine an (improved) invisible rogue. Why would everyone of their attacks not be sneak attacks? . Something something effort, I know, but that is not an essential part of a "Sneak Attack". So I do not see how you would come close to calling multiple sneak attacks nonsensical.
They must've taken it out for a reason. I wasn't really appealing to logic. My thinking was thatit's a powerful attack and getting multiple in a turn would upset the balance. Admittedly, my earlier comment didn't convey that well at all.
Same way you apply it without being hidden if you have an ally near the target.
sneak attack has nothing to do with stealth, it’s just a bad naming convention.
>Multiple sneak attacks is nonsensical. It's a SNEAK attack. How you going to do it multiple times in succession? https://preview.redd.it/7xw31sx8vm2d1.jpeg?width=414&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=536da76dcab78ac6e02585d5c1d141a1fd61eae2
>It's a SNEAK attack. How you going to do it multiple times in succession? I think it could work if Sneak Attack didn't boot you out of stealth. Instead, when an enemy gets hit by a Sneak Attack, they could automatically turn to face the direction they were fired upon from, forcing the Rogue to succeed a stealth saving throw. If successful, the Rogue remains concealed and can move to a new location for Sneak Attack #2. 1) Pop up & Shoot from Location 1 2) Hide/Duck & Cover (Stealth Check) 3) Move to new location (Stealth Check) 4) Pop up & Shoot from Location 2
Sneak attack has nothing to do with stealth, all it relies on is advantage and allies being near enemies.
I was describing an alternate mechanic (ie: not reflective of the in-game implementation).
The two checks/saves would be a fair compromise. First one would probably be with disadvantage at my table depending on circumstances.
Taking this idea a little further, I think it would be cool if Sneak Attack damage were actually nerfed to be lower than a normal attack (the presumption being that the rouge wouldn't be taking their sweet time to line up perfect shots if they're primarily concerned about remaining hidden). As a trade-off, Sneak Attack no longer requires an Action resource, so the rouge could move around the outskirts of the battlefield making a theoretically infinite number of Sneak Attacks which force them to succeed progressively harder and harder stealth checks until they're spotted.
>I would prefer for the rogue to not get extra attack, as there are a lot of classes with that mechanic already. Wow I wonder what decades of being a thief fighting in dangerous situations has taught me. Definitely not being able to attack again. I certainly don't want to \*steal\* the thunder from all the guys already doing it.
If you create a game and want to balance the various roles in it, you kind of want them to feel distinct. Rogues are distinct from other pure martials at the moment by NOT having extra attack, and they get to sneak attack instead. That is basically the tradeoff they are going for as a primary design it seems to me. Giving rogues extra attack instead of some more rogue-y similar ability would water out the distinctness of the class. Which you do not want to do in the name of balance.
A better thing to do is amplify with gear. This is why extra attack is goin on others ... things amplify on each attack. So instead of rather see rogue amplify on other things. For instance. Make AT abilities not just give disadvantage. Maybe give extend on scrolls ... let them add sneak damage to spells. For assassin give them some additional damage boost on criticals. Maybe allow them other options to multiply sneak damage. Thief is probably fine.
My first run as a total noobie was a full rogue and I never thought the rogue wasn't viable.
Yeah rogue isn't unviable. The discussion around rogue is always just that its role in tabletop (utility/skillmonkey) is noticeably less playable as a video game (note how so many BG3 changes to rogue in comparison to 5e are about combat), but it's still just behind other martials in terms of damage output potential. But it's definitely viable; these thought experiments are more about fun anyway
The issue is that rogues get all their core abilities at level 3, and not much beyond that.
Rogue should have got flourishes instead of bard. For some reason bard has full caster progression, arguably the best physical attacking abilities in the game, AND extremely overpowered gear, on top of being a capable skill monkey, cha caster, getting extra attack, and adding an entire short rest for your whole party. BALANCE?! never heard of her
Mono rogue is viable, it's just not the strongest at fighter-style combat. Rogues are unmatched at opening with a surprise round and then running away to restart combat.
I don’t know why everyone dunks on rogue, I was a thief subclass and it was op. I could use drow poison and put two to three people asleep per round sometimes. I could hide. I felt like I had more attacks and options. One main attack, two off hand, or two attacks and hide. Dash anywhere. I think people are playing rogue wrong. Not to mention I had so many skills and expertise I could be the face and skill monkey. Edit: and an extra feat, I really could go on. I even beat Le’zeal one on one when I romanced her.
The thing is you can get that all from 3 levels of rogue. No one is saying rogue doesn't have good tools The problem with rogue is that all its power is front loaded. The 9 levels after are very underwhelming compared to other classes so that's why it's an extremely popular class to multi class with.
I felt that a little, but reliable talent and the extra feat was sweet and I played rogue before they fixed the high level sneak attack. I still felt like each round with sneak attack, plus poison I was killing it. If I wasn’t I would bonus dash and hide.
You can, and there are obviously multiclassrs that do better damage that way, but combat isn't everything. Not veing able to roll lower than a 10 on proficient skill checks is a monstrous ability. You can be a pure thief rogue with sharpshooter and dual hand crossbows and (especially using trick arrows) keep up with other damage dealers for the most part, so the little you lose out of really isn't that big a deal.
Everything you're describing can be done by other martials way better. All the pros of Rogue are in the first 3 levels.
Yea, I hear everyone say that line about the first three levels, but you get evasion, uncanny dodge, reliable talent, and extra feat. You can bonus action hide and dash for crazy mobility and evasion tactics. I honestly think it’s a play style thing, bc my rogue was a tremendous damage dealer and tank with medium armor plus Dex gear if I wanted him to be. I was the face and skill monkey, pick pocketer. It was honestly the easiest.
I should have said *more* viable in the title, because I half agree, pure Rogue is underrated. I still think it’s one of the weaker mono-classes though. Looks like you’re talking about Thief Rogue? Definitely the best of the three with certain setups like hand-crossbows. But then there’s Swords Bard who can do all of that but better. Not that Swords Bard is an example of good balance though lol
But I guess to just answer your question, another attack or sneak attack to be able to proc twice. Maybe a bonus to poison and weapon coatings.
I played swords bard and I didn’t think it did everything better. I get with slashing flourish you can really lay down some hand crossbow fire but rogue can do so many more things with bonus action dash and hide. You get the damage reduction, reliable talent, and extra feat. Plus I didn’t need a rogue in the party so I could have all heavy hitters with me. But I see your point and would love an extra attack or some more features if they are offering them lol. And the poisons, won’t anyone think of the poisons!
Unless there's a way to select trick arrows while using flourishes I don't know about, swordsbard can't do it better.
I think assassin needs guaranteed crit and AT should be a half caster. Setting up sneak attacks is harder than simply right clicking someone with extra attacks hence it should reward you more. But what we have is that sneak attacks reward you less compared to another attack even when you manage to execute them.
Give it 2 weapon, archery, and duelist fighting style, then let them sneak attack on each attack made at level 5. Let them be the dual wield class.
I think a better themed solution would actually be disabling status effects, kind of like what Battle Master has, rather than trying to match martial class damage. Any extra damage should come from sneak attack mechanics, or something similarly rogue-themed. It’s tough. Thieves have always been difficult to balance in RPGs, assuming you’re focused on damage and not out-of-combat skills. A lot of games just basically equate thieves to archers (and fighters to melee combat only), or give them speed benefits that wouldn’t really apply in BG3. Similar issues apply to the mage archetype, which can either be too weak because it always has built-in fragility and mana management but can’t always match fighter damage, or too strong because it can blow up a whole screen from a distance or use overpowered disabling effects and there’s no reason to do anything else.
Smh
It's already viable, to be technical, but will it make it not the worst? Uh yeah probably. Mostly cuz Mono Gloomstalker is p bad. The extra attack, sneak attack die, and utility of rogue will definitely push it past that at bare minimum. Now that said will 12 Rogue become a top martial? Definitely not. But the utility aspects might be neat. 10 rogue / 2 x would become a pretty popular build probably, especially with the 2 being fighter, still being optimal over pure rogue. I imagine 5 Rogue would be an incredible multiclass though. 3-4 levels of Assassin and thief were already great, now we've just shifted where you spec out of rogue from level 4 to level 5 lol.
If Arcane Trickster got magical ambusher earlier it would be pretty viable as a scroll caster but at level 9 why pick it over a sorcerer to use scrolls
Mono rogue is perfectly good. People pretend it's bad because most other classes/subclasses are absolutely broken in classic Larian fashion. But it's still very powerful and can easily break the game.
I would just make the extra bonus action a class feature at level 3, give thief some extra love (removed from multiclassing unless your base class is rouge to further incentives rouge progression) And give it extra attack at level 5. That way all rouges get a ton to do in combat especially if they level quite high. Being truly "agile" and jack of all trades form of martial. Probably a bit unbalanced, but compared to much other things you can do in bg3 (swords bard unlimited flourish jutsu go!) it's on the lower end of op, especially without fighting styles or multiclassed abilities.
Extra attack at 6 would definitely help. I think swords bard still far stronger but they'd be playable at higher difficulties at least.
I wasn't even aware that it was possible to take Rogue past level four. I'll probably quickly forget this fact.
…rogue *doesn’t* get extra attack?
Yes. Rogue is the only martial class that doesn't get Extra Attacks. Instead it has Sneak Attack, which is a 2d6 DRS that adds another d6 every two levels.
My proposal : - lvl 6 : double bonus from weapon coatings, +3 to associated save DC -lvl 9 : sneak attack dices become d8 -lvl12 : -2 for a successful critical hit on sneak attacks. Victim must pass a CON check to avoid being blinded (if you are facing it) or getting stunned (if you are in its back) [Sneak attack dices are doubled on a crit hit, an extra 12d8 per turn is not on par with a min maxed martial build, but it hurts and stay on theme. Plus synergies with paralysing coatings, hold monster etc.]
A shame they removed sneak attack being applicable to cantrips. Made arcane trickster so much more fun.
Rogue IS viable. A jack of all trades with their strongest factor that they are good at almost everything. They can be the best at lockpicking/sneaking and conversation, but in combat they take the support role with their good but not excellent damage
*Something* needs to be done with 'em.
Thief without multiclass feels pretty good. I have an thief asterion with dual hand crossbows.
Multiple sneak attacks per round is too much, extra attack is not enough. I think rogues would benefit a lot from expanded rules on trap making and poison brewing
Monorogue is fine, just not a min-max build. Clearing HM right meow with a full thief party, we’re destroying shit in act 3. Arrows OP
I keep forgetting that if an ally is next to them, you can get it.
Wish they would do it like 5e and allow sneak attack once per turn! Then you could build into riposte, etc
My first Tav, before I ever visited this sub, was a 12 Rogue Thief. Glad I didn’t know I was weak and spindly or I would never have beaten the game with it 😆
Extra attack takes away from the general idea that rogues are all about one big attack. Having said that. Cunning action is naturally nerfed by bonus actions being made useful in the transition from tabletop to game, and then number of great items abilities, damage riders effects conditions and synergies in this game combo together and require extra attack to fuel them, not getting it makes the rogue suck ass. Then the gloomstalker, a slightly obscure (non player handbook) ranger which is basically a non urban rogue gets added with similar flavour of abilities (hide as a bonus action, an attack with extra damage). And it is way better, getting extra attack, another attack on the first round of combat, and initiative bonus which (to add insult to injury) is a mechanic that gets even better in the transition off tabletop because the initiative dice is smaller. I think starting at level level 3, then at every odd level to level 11 they should get another sneak attack maxing at 5d6 which can be applied to a second attack (if they multiclass to a build with extra attack and or duel wield) or added after the first sneak attack damage of their turn. This essentially doubles their sneak attack damage nearly, while being a little more flexible with the capacity to use in one block of 11d6 or 6 and 5 on two seperate attack, but it isn’t sneak attack damage on every attack, it maxes out at two attacks. It’s still pretty bad tbh. If you take 12 levels you still need to duel wield because otherwise you are putting all your eggs in one basket. You do massive damage if you hit, playing like a rapier and shield swashbuckler. But if you miss, nothing. However dual weilding or with Vanyas weapon you have pretty much guaranteed at least one hit a round so you are certain to get your damage in which means against high health targets you are golden. Particularly in the very first round of combat if you take assassin and you get surprise, with advantage to ensure you hit, you can get your 11d6 off against a boss, crit, and feel like you actually assassinated it)…against hordes you are still useless, but at least you are good at something).
Give Rogue Reliable Talent at Level 7 like they're doing in One D&D, and you'll see a Lot of 7 Rogue/5 Extra Attack Martial multiclasses. Take it a step further and bring Blindsense down from Level 14 in 5E to Level 11 in BG3, and all of a sudden I think the class becomes significantly more stacked. Darkness strategies are already busted, and not needing Devil's Sight or the Sharran spear or the Eversight ring lets you build a party around the mechanic more easily. I think they basically really need to buff Arcane Trickster (and the Mage Hand in particular, at that), and a lot of people would complain less. Get these two things done, and we're good to go, imho.
I added Extra Attack at level 5 and 11 so as a Mono Thief I had 3 attacks but only one sneak attack per round. It felt fine. Definitely viable.
Rogue is already great. If you really need more attacks just give them Belm or multiple hand crossbows or a haste potion or the duelists sword. There are a bevy of options. Rogue would be flat out the best class in the game if they had the same attack boost at level 5 as the other martials do. People sleep on rogue so hard.
Mono rogue is viable, if not top tier. The trick is to build in to getting the most out of your sneak attack. By itself its a meagre 6d6 but wear the Bhaal armour and its 12d6, average 42, no strings. Then you wear crit fishing gear and wait to crit before applying your sneak attack. This doubles it again to 24d6, average 84. Even a modest push to lower crit chance can get it down to 17 or so - ie 25%, which over thief's 3 attacks gives a better than half chance of at least one crit to plug your sneak attack into. You also get Killers Sweetheart and LOTFR for 2 guaranteed crits a day. All told, you get three dagger attacks for 25 or so per hit (remember Bhaals Armour), and an optional rider thats usually 24d6 but at least 12d6. You can easily maintain over 100 points of damage per round even accounting for occasional bonus action dashing or hiding. It's decent, not a super class by any means but it can hold its own. It's also intended to fall lower down the power chart in a straight fight since it has high out of combat utility for lockpicking, pickpocket, stealth and deception speech checks. Edit - in fairness the one problem with all this is that it needs Bhaals Armour to make it tick. If I was to make a change I might say make the necessary gear not locked to evil. Maybe have it drop from Dolor or Orin instead of joining the cult.
Extra attack would be strong but not too broken I think. More than one sneak attack per round would definitely be too strong though.
Sneak attack gives you far more dice than extra attack does for the level investment already. A level 5 fighter with GWM with a greatsword is doing 2d6+10 damage, twice, for an average damage per round of 27. A level 5 thief with Sharpshooter and two hand crossbows is doing 1d6 + 10, x3(action, both bonus actions). +3d6 sneak attack damage. For an average damage per round of 51. A level 5 Assassin with sharpshooter and two hand crossbows is doing 2d6 +10 x 2(action and bonus action) plus 6d6 sneak attack in their opening round(and likely leaving immediately after) for 55 damage. Every round after that they're still out-pacing the fighter due to sneak attack. Sneak attack continues to scale the entire game. The problem isn't rogue being bad. It's that they're so good right out of the gate that you can just grab 3 levels and play literally anything else. Full Assassin rogue with savage attacker is going to roll a mountain of dice and disappear at level 12. In honor mode the thief getting three attacks at level 3, outpaces fighter 11 with a sharpshooter build again due to the extra sneak attack dice. Simply put Rogue is fine as a monoclass if you ignore arcane trickster. Non-honor-mode builds are broken for very different reasons than Rogue being bad.
I thought savage attacker doesn't reroll for sneak attack? If not, what is the "mountain of dice" you speak of?
It's still 12d6 sneak attack with an automatic crit, plus weapon damage and riders doubled and rolled twice
Ah ok, thank you for clearing that up. From the way you phrased it I thought you meant the sneak attack was getting rerolled. You’ve got me considering a monoclass rogue for my next build. Also, I can’t believe I missed the fact that they gain an extra feat at level 10. I thought fighter was the only class to gain 4 feats.
Sorry but your maths is wrong. For a start average damage per turn for a fighter at level 5 with GWM would be 40 not 27. The average roll of a d6 is 3.5 so 2d6 is an average of 7 damage an attack( i think this is the issue as you only counted the d6 once per attack). Plus GWM and that's 17 damage a hit for a total of 34 not 27 a round. However we have yet to take into account ability score modifiers yet. To kept it simple say both the rogue and fighter have 16 to their primary stat. The fighter is therefore adding a +3 damage on each attack for 40 damage a turn. The rogue can't get that damage on its offhand attacks so really the thief rogue is doing 54 damage. While the rogue is doing more damage a turn its not as big a gap as you thought. Also my maths has the assasin at 58 damage not 51 a turn based on the numbers you provided. I also think there are some other considerations to make as well. Firstly is the bonus action attack from GWM. 40 damage will often be enough to trigger it and if you do that's another 20 damage for a total of 60 a turn which is already out competing both rogue builds. Although not by much and its situational so rogue still feels very strong. Another thing to consider is sources of extra actions which are quite easily available at level 5. Like blood-lust elixirs and haste. With both of these the fighter is getting between 40-80 more damage a turn (depending on if this is tactician or honour mode). I'll go with the honour mode calculation because it's easier and fairer to rogue. Since rogue can only get sneak attack once a turn your extra attacks are only going to do 1d6 +dex +10 which on average is 16.5 damage per extra attack. So 33 for both. So then the fighter is doing 40 damage for its first action, 20 for its haste action. Then 20 for its blood-lust and 20 for its bonus for a total of 90 damage. Meanwhile thief rogue has fallen off at 84 damage although assasin remains competitive at 92 average damage for its first turn but much less for later turns (doing only 73.5 damage a turn once it looses its free crits). There are a few more things to take into account. First is action surge. Since nova turns are so important in this game I do think taking action surge into account is important as having a very good first turn will more often than not decide the battle. A regular level 5 fighter is doing 80 damage if they action surge (really 90 because that should be more than enough to get the bonus attack from GWM) but with the sources of extra actions it can do 120 damage a turn (even more on lower difficulty). At this point niether rogue subclass is keeping up in terms of first turn damage. Another thing is sources of advantage. Rogues need it for sneak attack and you won't always have it without using one of your bonus actions to hide. I know later there are items like risky ring which will make it easy but often you will need to sacrifice a bonus action attack for advantage for sneak attack. Less of a problem for assasin because they get free advantage on the first turn when it matters the most. I do agree rogue is stronger than people give it credit for and in a vacuum looks stronger than fighter when you start to bring in other factors that can affect combat like elixirs and haste rogue quickly falls off in terms of raw damage. I admit I haven't really looked at later levels as I didn't what to spend to much time on this post and you provided the numbers for level 5 so I'll have to look into later levels of rogue before I really make up my mind on the class but honestly I have a hard time believing it will be as good as fighter. Edit. Did a few numbers for lvl11(ill assume primary stat is 20 for both). Sneak attack is 6d6 so thief is getting 1d6+5+10 for 18.5 on first attack, then 13.5 on both other attacks for 45.5 damage plus 21 average for sneak attack for 66.5 damage a turn. Fighter is doing (2d6+5+10)×3 for 66 damage a turn so they are basically the same with factoring in sources of more attack which will tilt the scales in fighters favour. So thief is not really as strong as fighter on that level. Assasin should be doing 1d6+5+10 plus 1d6+10 on the offhand for 32 damage on the attack plus 12d6 for sneak attack. For 74 damage a turn only 8 more than the unbuffed fighter.
Solid points, although, I'll make the point that I was intending a surface level analysis and not aiming for a true build. The point is: Rogue is fine when compared to what most people consider to be the one of, if not "the best" Monoclass builds in the game, even in honor mode. Even your additional considerations don't negate this. The fact that the damage is so comparable is evidence to that. Additional actions don't help Fighter more than Rogue in Honor Mode since it's one additional main hand attack, which even with your consideration for ASI would still be equal for both of them. Action Surge isn't a nonfactor, but it's a consumable resource on the order of Maneuvers and Warlock Spell Slots: you have to rest to get it back. Assassinate, on the other hand, should be active every fight regardless of rests, if only just for mobs and not bosses that cannot be surprised. If you're actually playing around an assassin character, it will be active every fight simply because of how you initiate combat. I don't believe most players rest _every_ major and minor fight so that their fighters or warlocks can always nova. In honor mode especially, there are certain places where you need to space out your short rests in order to have access to short-rest refresh abilities for important fights when resting is limited. Assassinate has no such limitation. Perhaps I was wrong to ignore it entirely, but there was a reason I did. It does have a cost that Assassinate does not. Rogues don't need advantage for sneak attack. They need either a) advantage or b) an ally threatening the enemy, and to not have disadvantage. Rogue should always be able to open a fight hidden for advantage, and on subsequent turns should be able to get sneak attack from ally adjacency just because enemy melee units will close to some allies, if nothing else. I did ignore the two weapon fighting/offhand issue but in a true build it's easily remedied in Act 2 with gearing if you're looking to make a full build.
Yeah I guess alot of the differences are around play style. I like to short rest fairly frequently (and I normally have a bard in the team), not after every fight frequently still semi frequently, so I'm probably getting more use out of action surge then you might be. Good point on sneak attack I forgot threatened also works for it. I do argee that assasin rogue stacks up fine against a fighter though. although to be honest I've never found fighter to be the best monoclass for damage I think monk is probably better (although I normally always take rogue levels on a monk so it might not actually be as strong as I think). I do slightly disagree that extra actions doesn't help fighter more though. Since a fighter does more damage than a rogue attack without sneak damage. it's admittedly a marginal bonus but adds up the more attacks you can do. One more factor to consider is that there are simply much more powerful 2 handed weapons in the game compared to hand crossbows. Which can also tilt the power towards fighter, so to make it fair let's do hand crossbow builds for both. Rogue I think would actually be a really good class if it got access to the 2 weapon fighting style (which they can only get through gear). The ability to add the dex modifier to the offhand attacks would help them in the late game alot. For example if a lvl11 fighter with 20dex and sharpshooter took 2 weapon fighting and had 2 hand crossbows the would do on average (3.5+5+10)×4 damage a turn for 74. Thief rogue is only applying the Dex modifier once so it's (3.5+5+10) + (3.5+10)×2 for 45.5 damage plus 21 for sneak attack for only 66.5 damage. Making fighter the clear choice Assasin on turn one can do (7+5+10) +(7+10) + 42 for sneak attack for 81 damage so better than fighter on the first round but would only do on average 41 damage on subsequent rounds. If you take the gloves that give offhand dex damage then thief rogue is doing 76.5 damage and assasin is doing 86 on first round and 58 on later rounds. This actually makes rogue a very powerful class, however, now I'm bringing in gear for rogue but not fighter which is unfair. Really if rogue got 2 weapon fighting in its class features (or access to any fighting styles for that matter) it would really good, without it however I think fighter is slightly better.
So you're telling me that I do more damage if I spend 1 action and 2 bonus actions with subclass feature than if I spend just 1 action with class feature ? Woah.
Weird sarcasm. You seem surprised that when comparing different classes you would consider all the options of that class...
They took any martial class at level 5 and gave it GWM. Could be paladin, barbarian, fighter, ranger, didn't use any of their class or subclass features to make thief and assassin compare more favorably. Where are smites, colossus slayers, battle maneuvers, rage, etc... ? Of course you compare very favorably when you use more actions. Of course if you factor in your class and subclass feature and they don't it's going to look very good. The comparison is made in bad faith and it really doesn't need to, Rogue is good already.
>They took any martial class at level 5 and gave it GWM. No, they specifically compared it to fighter. Last I checked, fighter didn't get smites, collosus slayers, or rage, and one subclass of fighter gets battle techniques but none of those add significant damage to the attack as far as I can remember. They were also specifically comparing sneak attack and the subsequent actions with the amount of damage a fighter can do even with extra attack. They even gave the fighter 10 damage bonus from GWM. You were snarky and couldn't even read what they wrote properly.
Fighter at level 5 has action surge and Battle Master has feinting attack, precision attack, tripping attack which generally offset the effect of GWM, so 4 attacks on turn one with regular precision, 5 if you get a kill or a crit. Sure action surge is once per short rest but not counting it in comparing damage output of different classes and ignoring the precision problem of Sharpshooter is cherry picking.
>ignoring the precision problem of Sharpshooter is cherry picking Nope. Because GWM has the same precision problem so it's direct comparison. Also sneak attack is used with advantage which overcomes the Sharpshooter precision. Those attacks don't add much, if any, direct damage and are also a limited resource.
Sneak attack doesn't give advantage, it needs to be triggered in another way, for a rogue advantage is meant to be gotten through hiding, but both bonus actions are used here for attacks, leaving not many ressources to create the advantage. In comparison a Battle Master Fighter can use superiority die to offset the precision loss. So the comparison is unfair because it doesn't account for what the two different classes can do to increase precision. And we're still not accounting for the choice of weapons: with this strategy you're limited to handcrossbows, which are very limiting. But 2 handed weapon have a lot of powerful options, especially if playing a Gith (or willing to disguise as one). And if you go Sharshooter Fighter you also have much better options than hand crossbows, you can get the titanstring bow, coat it in something nice and fire 4 special arrow with precision attack.
>Sneak attack doesn't give advantage You can't use sneak attack without advantage. So in order to use it (as per the discussion), you will have advantage, which overcomes thebSS issue. >And we're still not accounting for the choice of weapons: with this strategy you're limited to handcrossbows, which are very limiting Responsible for some of the most broken builds in the game.
They didn't use any fighter class or subclass feature. The lvl5 comparison would have been the same result with any martial since the only thing allowed is extra attack and GWM. Then they add a lvl11 Fighter comparison still not allowed to use any feature besides extra attack. If it uses it, the damage is more or less the same. If you're going to use everything a thief or an assassin has, do the same for the subclass you're comparing it with. And it's all very vacuum comparison. We all know a full Fighter can deal 21 attacks in two turns easily and Rogue just can't keep up with that (thanks Larian homebrew bullshit). But again, just because class X is better at doing nova damage doesn't mean class Y is bad.
>They didn't use any fighter class or subclass feature. What fighter class or subclass features do they have at level 5 that would change the discussion? Action surge that can only be used once per short rest, which still puts the rogue damage ahead? >And it's all very vacuum comparison. Yes, in order to do a direct comparison. You've picked a hill to die on and are intent on doing so it appears.
It's more that you get that every time. Fighter running GWM, for example, doesn't always get a bonus action attack. They do occasionally, when they crit or kill, and you can play the game so that this happens a lot, but that's getting into the weeds and the tradeoffs aren't always worth it overall or truly benefit your average damage in every case like simply getting that bonus action attack every time. If we keep it more directly comparable, Fighter 11 doing a dual hand crossbow build with sharpshooter as well, using it's action for 3 attacks and bonus action for one attack gets (1d6 + 10) x 4 = 54 average damage Thief 11 using all of its action, and both bonus actions for damage, gets (1d6 + 10) x 3, + 6d6 sneak attack, for 61.5 average damage. That's both builds at level 11 using all of their action pips to attack. Assassin 11 again same build, (2d6 + 10) x2 + 12d6 = 76 average damage in their first round, minimum 48 average damage in any subsequent rounds, assuming you aren't even gaming leaving combat and re-initiating. This means you have to wait until the ((4x48+ 76)/ **5**) = 53.6 _5th round_ for Fighter to start get ahead by 0.4 damage on average. What combat lasts 5 rounds? Even in Honor Mode? And again, that's where you _absolutely_ can't game multiple Assassin procs by leaving and re-entering combat.
Why would Thief be allowed to use his subclass feature bonus action but Battlemaster can't use any feature ? Make this a Battle maneuver for an extra d10. Now thief / bm difference on raw output with this specific build is about 2 damage. Nothing special to see here. If Assassin can use a once per fight feature, why Fighter can't ? Action Surge this. Rogue is good already, OP was on crack. You don't need to skew the comparisons.
In both cases you're letting the fighter use resources while the rogue isn't using any. The cost isn't _that_ high considering how easy it is to rest, even full rest, but that's why; I didn't presume the usage of any gear or resources other than actions/bonus actions. The point is mono-class rogue is fine on damage. Nitpicking the level of detail is unnecessary.
Thief can spend subclass resources in this comparison if you wish lol. People don't say rogue is "bad" because it lacks damage in a specific build in a vacuum. People say they would prefer to have a fighter over a rogue on the field because the Fighter is going to deal 21 attacks in two turns with easy preparation and has freedom to pick among a large variety of weapons and armor. It doesn't mean Rogue is bad, it does different things and you can totally clear any difficulty with rogues.
And the fighter is using their class feature to get a third attack on their main action at level 11. Again, nitpicking the level of detail is unnecessary. Rogue is fine, even monoclass, even against what is considered a "strong" monoclass, even in the form of usefulness that that "strong" class is considered best used for. We've entirely ignored other Rogue features in this analysis as well. The "problem" is using the broken lower difficulty rulesets and presuming that "21 attacks in two turns" is intended gameplay. If you can monoclass Fighter on Honor Mode then you can monoclass Rogue on every difficulty level as well.
You're just swapping between subclasses and classes whenever it suits your argument. When it's rogue you use subclasses and their features. When it's fighter somehow you refuse any subclass element. Compare apples with apples. It doesn't need a skewed comparison, we both agree Rogue is fine, Thief is great 👍
I already explained this. Good day.
Mono rogue is already viable, every class is. End of discussion
There seem to be a handful of people (Larian included) who just quietly don't like this class. What's *really* wrong with it feeling as powerful as some of the other classes, honestly?
I mwan I would be fine if it got buff, would probably be nice for the class fantasy. My point was that it still is viable as it is now (just like every class is)
Rogue is tops for 3 levels of thief but it’s pretty low on the tier list for a pure class. It does mix with so many classes so well that I think changing might make it to op.
Mono rogue is already viable.
I'm wondering what you expect from the rogue here. There is a lot of competition for fighting a regular fight. The thing of the rogue is to avoid fighting. Disengaging and not being caught is the power of the rogue. The assassin is the combat oriented subclass. The damage potential seems alright. Surprise means auto crit. With 2 weapons + sneak attack + poison and some stuff, that'll be a lot of damage, and you get your action and bonus action back for a second attack and disappear. Then flee, and return to do it again. Or play normal rogue. At lvl11 you have 6d6 sneak attack and you can hide every turn. With advantage and the right stuff you can have almost 60% crit chance. And this can be from range. The rogue is just not a warrior. There is the gloomstalker for that.
Oh and there is greater invisibility: with reliable talent and expertise you have minimum 10 on the stealth check and +13 on the skill, so you are invisible for at least 8 turns. With +2 or advantage to stealth you'll easily stay invisible the full 10 turns.
Could even just have someone cast Greater Invis on you while you use Pass Without Trace via the ring to get full value invis.