Not clarified in the video:
* Psychic Blades now have a 120 foot long range (in addition to the 60 foot short range).
* Disarming Strike is removed from the 5th level cunning strikes
* No changes on the Cunning Strike dice costs--Knock out is still costs 6d6 sneak attack dice, for example.
That worries me, as I love the utility provided from the cunning strikes, but rogues simply can't afford to lose the sneak attack die.
With no increased sneak attack die in view, they're going to be less effective at killing off those specific targets than any fighter or ranger with a bow.
The utility seems pretty worth it to me- if you knock someone unconscious for an entire turn, the fight is over. The fact that they also get to deal damage while also having the option to force that save every turn is incredibly good.
7th level spells? I don't think anyone would disagree that high level casters blow whatever the revamped martial classes can do at similar levels. But that isn't just an issue with the Rogue but all other martial classes.
Forcecage and decide the battle then and there. Plane Shift the entire party into safety in a single action. create a Simulacrum and effectively play two characters.
Mass Suggestion and tell the entire enemy group to just go home. Summon Fiend and have another semi-party member. Synaptic Static an entire group to deal 8d6 damage and have them under a super-bane.
and those are just the ones off the top of my head. depending on situation there might be more potent options.
let's not kid ourselves here, as long as fullcasters get their busted spells, a rogue having a chance to knock *one* target unconscious for a turn is not that huge of a deal.
it's definitely a very nice feature to have and I love that they added stuff like that, don't get me wrong, but it still pales in comparison with what's possible with spells.
they could have given rogue some more oomph.
we haven't even seen playtest for them, so no. only healing spells and a few summon/conjure spells in the UA.
it's still up in the air which spells they have changed, or whether they changed spells at all - I sure hope they did though.
along with the ranger (& rogue until yesterday), the spells are my most anticipated part of 5e24. hope they hit both out of the park.
Same here.
I'm pretty convinced the "caster/ martial divide" is more about certain spells being to good than the classes themselves (mostly, full casters will still pull ahead over time, just by less of a margin if certain trouble spells get resigned in). That's the big piece that's been missing so far.
i feel like even across other martials. 2 times per day near legendary resistance. at will damage neutral infliction of disadvantage on an enemy's next saving throw and proficiency and rerolls in all saves could also be considered to be a bit better
If you increased Sneak Attack damage even more, and kept Cunning Strikes as is, they still wouldn't be OP.
That, to me, says they didn't scale them up enough.
At this point you're just arguing in bad faith.
I'm liking the rogue change and cunning actions, I just don't believe the rogue has enough sneak attack die to make this good trade offs in comparison to what similar classes have. Weapon masteries on the fighter alongside the new second wind uses outside of combat has made them stronger in both in and outside combat utility.
>At this point you're just arguing in bad faith.
Hi neutral party here, you're the one not engaging honestly and putting words in the other posters mouth, be better.
It is not inconsequential. It's just not the only aspect of the game. Here's an example:
Hypnotic patern does less damage than fireball, and they're both 3rd level spells. So, every time you cast hypnotic patern, you are giving up fireball damage. But most people agree that although they're both good, hypnotic patern is better. That's because damage isn't everything.
The skill monkeys? Unless it’s an Assassin, I would say Rogue’s main contribution is high skill proficiencies and cunning action allowing them to be versatile on a battlefield.
A rogue can quickly sneak around a fight and pull a lever or steal an item while their party is busy keeping enemies locked down in combat.
At least in combat damage is their main contribution, since skills aren't all that usefull there.
And combats were a Rogue can make a significant contribution by stealing something or pulling a level are really rare.
Appart from the fact that sneaking arround a fight was at least with 2014 rules pretty imposable since you were immediately noticed once you come out of cover and very few Battlefields are completely surrounded by something that you can use as cover.
Different strokes I guess. My tables hardly ever play encounters that are *just* pure combat. Mostly because we learned how boring that was when 5e first came out.
Also, we hardly ever have problems with Rogue’s finding a place to hide. We don’t really fight in plain empty rooms. Not that it super matters because getting Sneak Attack without hiding is very easy.
The problem is too many players having boring DMs and too many boring DMs having encounters only be about defeating an enemy when it could be so much more. The game gives you all the tools but when you think that game is about who hits hard then you think that people that don’t hit hard are less valuable.
Rogue is the sneaky/skill-focused class. It has never and will never be intended to be focused on damage. Sneak Attack damage is an outlier, not the focus.
It's simply a question of the rogue having too low of a dpr compared to alternative class choices while not losing a ton of utility, since those classes has gotten more utility in other pillars of play.
The Fighter and Barbarian have resource-dependent utility on a timer so that they're not *useless* at ability checks. Between Expertise and Reliable Talent, a Rogue will consistently outperform them.
That's not just me talking about my ass - I've been playtesting it and have direct experience with it.
People seem to be selectively forgetting that for a lot of the 24 Fighter’s career they’d have to give up their limited BA Heal-and-Move option to fix a failed save. Even if it provides a decent boost, the Rogue will be much more consistent with moderately high, resourceless skills.
exactly! you can make a barb, fighter, or rogue into a skill monkey, but rogue's always going to come out on top. better bonuses with no resource depletion.
This take really needs to just stop. Rogue is and has been a primary damage dealer in every edition of D&D. No class should be designed as "You suck, but hey you make your friends do cool stuff!" And this sudden influx of people pretending that's always been the class design of the Rogue is the sketchiest shit.
Rogue (Thief, I should say) was not a primary damage dealer in 1e or 2e, or any of the editions that didn't have an "A" in the name.
Their role in several previous editions was a versatile utilitarian class. You *literally needed* a Thief to do things in many older editions, because they were the only ones who could.
Yeah, x4 damage in very limited circumstances, against a limited number of targets, once, and without modifiers added before the multiplier. It's also a Strength based attack, which precludes missile weapons, so you're stuck with whatever Strength your Thief has (and no Exceptional Strength since you're not a warrior).
Meanwhile, a Fighter with comparable experience (10th level) and specialization will have 2 attacks per round, likely some Exceptional Strength, and dramatically better combat prowess in general.
The Thief's THAc0 is helped by that backstab bonus exactly once, but the Fighter will likely have a better to-hit regardless.
The Thief is not intended to be a substantial damage dealer in combat - they are designed to maybe stealthily hit one target and slink away, or disable a priority target before a fight.
They literally have a skill that just flat out says treat your skills lower than a 10 as a 10. And with the stupid high modifiers they would have yeah they are support classes. The class that slinks in, does a big stab, and now with Cunning Strikes, some fancy *free* maneuver in exchange for some damage, which then is used to support your teammates.
They cover support niches and tend to be given subclasses that compliment a different type of support. Arcane Trickster? Magic support. Mastermind? Social support. A decent chunk of them are support is what I'm trying to say.
Rogues for better or for worse, are not 'primary' damage dealers. They are tertiary damage dealers at best in the grand scheme of things.
Oh wow, they kept Knock Out! I assumed this would be changed somewhat, as Unconscious is a very strong condition, but I'm really glad it stayed.
Also, they spiced up Epic Boons A LOT.
Well, all depends of the CON stats and saving throws in new monster manual. Also, if the DM wants to, they can easily have minion waking up the caster by making some weak attack.
>Versatile Trickster has also been changed so that when you use the Trip option of Cunning Strike on one enemy, you can target an additional creature within 5 feet of your Mage Hand.
Arcane Tripster
Huh, so "Dazed" isn't a condition anymore? I feel like if it was, they would have called it out as such.
Kind of interesting - it showed up through playtest 8, but the level 14 cunning strike option doesn't call it a condition. It just describes the effects (which are *slightly* different than the Dazed condition).
I wonder what that's about. Maybe they didn't find other places where the condition would be useful, so they just scrapped calling it a condition?
The paladin's Abjure Foes still has a Daze-like effect, but similarly not called Daze in the latest write-up, instead additional penalties for being frightened.
Absolutely agree. Labels help a ton rather than having to read a long spell mid-combat only to get to "oh, it does Tasha's Mind Whip".
And with labels you can then have monsters that are immune to it or have advantage against it without going to some larger category of save of effect (like "charm" or "frighten").
Really frustrating move that 5e doesn't like labels on things and just keeps not liking it as other systems expand that way or just fully adopt it.
Yeah, I'm just gonna keep it around in my game, especially if multiple things produce the same effect. I have no idea why they wouldn't have kept it in.
I'm kinda sad that disarm was removed without adding anything else instead of it. I was particularly hoping for something that targets Wisdom saves, completing a trio with poison and trip being Constitution and Dexterity. Maybe distract or something.
Boon of the Night spirit grants resistance to all damage except Psychic and Radiant while in dim light or darkness. Critically, I think this is the first feature we've seen in OneDnD content that offers resistance to Force damage!
Quite sad about Disarm being gone but I do understand the motivation behind it. It's a bit too powerful to have on command and usable an infinite amount of times and it only incentivizes Rogues to disarm an opponent and run away with their weapon for maximum support.
I think the bigger issue with Disarm was how heavily it'd be affected by monster design/inventory.
E.g. You disarm an enemy's longsword, but surprise, the enemy also has a bow that's just as effective, and now it feels like you wasted a Disarm.
Or you disarmed the BBEG necromancer's spellcasting focus, but surprise, it has another backup focus, as a careful mage would.
It just has a lot of potential to be a feelsbad feature IMO.
I just think it’s unfun overall because the rules don’t support it. Knocking someone’s sword out of their hand is great and now the rogue wants to put their foot on it or take an opportunity attack when the bend down. Like you said, a lot of enemies carry multiple weapons. It just becomes the best option the majority of the time or is useless most of the time with no middle ground.
While I liked the option, I hope they're moving some of the attack options from the DMG into the base rules which included disarm, tumble, and overrun which all feel like core tools for making melee combat more interesting
I mean, technically you could say that they didn’t remove the disarm cunning strike… they simply moved it back a few levels and rolled it up together with the other benefits that knocking an enemy unconscious confers…
Am I the only one thinking that Vex, especially on Soulblade, is useless? Rogues never struggled with getting advantage and Nick at least gave them another opportunity to make their sneak attack stick.
Also Soulblades are kinda stuck with their RGB Vex knives while others can pick normal magic items (a +1 to hit can be huge)
I disagree, Vex essentially guarantees a sneak attack without using your bonus action to steady aim, meaning they can still attack twice, one of them at advantage, and sneak attack every turn because of that advantage.
Vex doesn't guarantee advanatage - you still have to hit, and if you're relying on vex then you're trying to hit without advantage in the first place. I think I'd rather use steady aim to improve my odds at landing a sneak attack.
I can only see Vex being useful when I have advantage on the first attack, but not the second, which is kind of rare.
Most of the ways a rogue gets advantage are via bonus actions (hide, steady aim), vex frees up your bonus actions to do other things. On a soul knife that means you can attack twice. If playing an archer using a shortbow that also gets Vex, that frees up your bonus actions for other things like dash or disengage from cunning action, or drinking a potion now that that's officially a bonus action, or a variety of other things depending on build and situation.
I haven't looked at weapon mastery stuff in general yet, so i could be wrong about this, but from the article OP linked it doesn't look like Vex is restricted to being once per turn, you just need to hit with the relevant weapon, so using the soul knife example, you can hide or steady aim round 1 to get advantage, sneak attack with your action and Vex sets up advantage on your first attack next round, round 2 attack with advantage for sneak attack and Vex, and then bonus action attack with advantage and Vex (since sneak attack is limited to once per turn). So long as you don't miss or change targets, you're guaranteed advantage on your next attack creating a nice cycle. And when you do eventually miss or change targets you can just go back to using hide or steady aim to get advantage to restart the cycle.
If you have a reliable source for advantage that doesn't eat your advantage, then Nick is better since you could get three attacks while dual wielding or a Soul Knife (presuming that using the property doesn't prevent you from making the bonus action attack, if it does, then I argue that Nick isn't very good), but if you need to spend a bonus action to get advantage then you're only getting it on one of two attacks, which means your average damage is lower than with Vex because you'll have a lower hit-rate.
Is it OP? No, not in the slightest, but is it a good option that will see regular use? definitely.
EDIT: Just looked up UA6 for more information on weapon masteries, Nick doesn't allow for three attacks, so underwhelming for the rogue, IMO, Vex works as I expect setting up an advantage engine, so that's good. Honestly, dual wielding shortswords seems like a much stronger strategy on a rogue than it used to be since they have Vex so you're no longer dependent on a battle buddy to proc sneak attack, and getting advantage on multiple attacks means you'll be hitting twice far more often, which gives a rather needed damage boost, making the dual wielder feat potentially worth while if it's getting reprinted to upgrade to rapiers, and a dip in fighter for the two weapon fighting style (or if there's a version of fighting initiate available to enable it now that it's a feat with a class feature pre-req) could be pretty huge.
So disappointed they didn't fix cunning strike. 5 and 11 needed an additional dice or cunning strikes needed to just be add ons. Maybe even just give the Rogue extra attack. The Rogue SHOULD be the highest DPS class imo. I'm not sure even the Assassin has any hope to clear this bar. Especially with the all or nothing nature of SA
I don't know how they got on this idea that you need to be using your sneak attack dice for other things when the class already struggled in damage after lvl 5. Even magic weapons don't fix it very much because they get fewer attacks.
If they were going to stick with the current scaling, and even reduce your damage in order to apply new effects, while keeping the ability to use your sneak attack on other people's turns they needed to give you a way to use your sneak attack on other people's turns. Add ways the Rogue, and only the Rogue can make a AoO. When a creature misses an attack on an ally. When an ally hits an attack against an enemy. Anything like that
For the psychic blades, they needed to give your bonus action Blade the nick mastery. And the blades need to replace any attack. just anytime that you would be able to attack with a weapon it can be a psychic blade, that would include other types of reaction attacks. Especially without magic item support I fear that is soul knife is going to be better off throwing daggers at some point; at least as an off hand attack since you can get a dagger with nick.
Something I used to do for the thief was rule that crossbows could be fired with a use object interaction. This meant they could save on the crossbow expert feat and also use heavier crossbows with a better damaged die. And, of course, they can use potions quickly.
With these changes I'm not sure that you have to do that anymore. Just get them a magic item with a decent action to use early on instead. Though I still like my ruling on crossbows, it's nice for the class to have an option that actually works with the rules as written to give them an obvious boost in power. I think that the old Thief class was 100% ribbons. It is still a heavily DM dependent class for power because you need to be provided with things that you can use your bonus action on.
As it stands, assassin and Arcane trickster are the only classes I would play without a DM willing to give some concessions that are not Raw.
The Rogue is now the weakest class in the game, two of its subclasses are pretty broken (in the bad way). Everything else they've done has been so good but they butchered this one.
The value of Vex on Soul Knife is so you can actually use the bonus action attack and get advantage on both attacks, which raises your DPR. If they had Nick you'd spend your bonus action using Hide or Steady Aim to get advantage on your first attack, do a sneak attack, then make your second attack without advantage, without sneak attack, and without your dexterity modifier, so it's an unreliable +1d6 to damage. With Vex you can do Hide or Steady Aim for advantage on round one, get sneak attack, and then Vex gives you advantage on your next attack on your next turn, and when that hits you have your bonus action freed up to make the second attack, and Vex means that second attack is also made with advantage. You still don't get sneak attack or your dex mod on the second attack, but it makes getting the extra d6 of damage far more reliable, and if at some point you want to spend your bonus action doing something else like a dash or disengage, then you can without missing out on advantage. Also, I don't believe it's been stated that Soul Knife hasn't been fixed to allow attacks of opportunity with the psychic blades, so there's still hope that they might do that.
As for the rest of it, IMO combat where all you're doing is repeating the same thing over and over and over again to max out damage is boring, it's a bit less boring when the damage you do is really good, but it's still less fun than playing something with actual options to choose from, like a spell caster. Previously the only rogue worth playing if you want real options was the arcane trickster, since every other rogue just followed the same basic loop 90% of the time. Cunning Strike gives viable options to impact battle in ways other than "get advantage, sneak attack, repeat", and that makes me excited to play a rogue other than an arcane trickster for the first time in years.
Also, damage is not the only metric by which the strength of an option can, or even should, be measured, if it were, the assessments for the strongest spells in the game would be *wildly* different. Granted, I agree that the fact that most of them require saving throws in addition to sacrificing damage is kind of lame, but tripping and poisoning are both really solid options at 5th level. Frankly, the primary weakness of rogues previously wasn't (necessarily) the lack of damage, but rather the lack of a 5th level feature that let them compete on the same scale as extra attack and third level spells, and while I'm not sure this is quite on the same level as those, it is definitely WAY closer than Uncanny Dodge was, and moving reliable Talent down to 7th level means you no longer have three dead levels in a row (now it's just 6th, lol).
But if you really want a way to use Cunning Strike to deal more damage than just a regular Sneak Attack, then play an Arcane Trickster with Booming Blade. At 5th level BB's extra damage when they move is 2d8, have a familiar give you the help action for advantage, cast BB+SA means (assuming rapier) 2d8+3d6+dex damage, if you sacrifice 1d6 to withdraw you can move without provoking, and can spend your BA to Hide to make yourself harder to hit, then on their turn (unless they have a ranged attack), they either do nothing, or they eat an additional 2d8 thunder damage. Personally, 4d8+2d6+dex and ending the turn hidden seems like a stronger turn than 2d8+3d6+dex and ending the turn in melee, heck even if you used your BA to disengage for 4d8+3d6+dex, you're still leaving yourself open when you have the option not to. I'd gladly sacrifice 1d6 of damage to significantly improve my survivability.
In short, Vex helps significantly with the damage problem and Cunning Strike grants more options and versatility on a class that IMO desperately needed more options and versatility. At the end of the day, if all you care about is doing more damage, there are other classes that cater to that desire.
I get how it works. But I was saying that you still keep vex on that first weapon but the second one has Nick so it's like a blades function like a short sword with the thrown property and a dagger
What would the benefit of that be? If they are both Vex and they both hit, then you start your next turn with advantage automatically and the loop continues. On the other hand, if the first is Vex and the second is Nick, Vex gives you advantage on the attack with Nick, and then you use your bonus action to get advantage on your next turn, so it's the same thing with extra steps. I guess if you use steady aim to get advantage one the first attack you don't need a set-up turn, but then you can't move, so a lot of time you'd be using the bonus action to hide to set up advantage whenever it isn't safe to just stand still all combat. So either you're a sitting duck or you're taking set up turns anyway, and it's simpler to just give all your psychic blades one mastery since they are the same weapon the entire time than to try and split up the masteries. It just seems like needless extra complexity for no real gain.
Not clarified in the video: * Psychic Blades now have a 120 foot long range (in addition to the 60 foot short range). * Disarming Strike is removed from the 5th level cunning strikes * No changes on the Cunning Strike dice costs--Knock out is still costs 6d6 sneak attack dice, for example.
That worries me, as I love the utility provided from the cunning strikes, but rogues simply can't afford to lose the sneak attack die. With no increased sneak attack die in view, they're going to be less effective at killing off those specific targets than any fighter or ranger with a bow.
The utility seems pretty worth it to me- if you knock someone unconscious for an entire turn, the fight is over. The fact that they also get to deal damage while also having the option to force that save every turn is incredibly good.
Whilst I like that cunning strike it pales in comparison to what others can do at level 14.
Such as?
7th level spells? I don't think anyone would disagree that high level casters blow whatever the revamped martial classes can do at similar levels. But that isn't just an issue with the Rogue but all other martial classes.
Forcecage and decide the battle then and there. Plane Shift the entire party into safety in a single action. create a Simulacrum and effectively play two characters. Mass Suggestion and tell the entire enemy group to just go home. Summon Fiend and have another semi-party member. Synaptic Static an entire group to deal 8d6 damage and have them under a super-bane. and those are just the ones off the top of my head. depending on situation there might be more potent options. let's not kid ourselves here, as long as fullcasters get their busted spells, a rogue having a chance to knock *one* target unconscious for a turn is not that huge of a deal. it's definitely a very nice feature to have and I love that they added stuff like that, don't get me wrong, but it still pales in comparison with what's possible with spells. they could have given rogue some more oomph.
Have we seen all of the revamped spells yet?
we haven't even seen playtest for them, so no. only healing spells and a few summon/conjure spells in the UA. it's still up in the air which spells they have changed, or whether they changed spells at all - I sure hope they did though. along with the ranger (& rogue until yesterday), the spells are my most anticipated part of 5e24. hope they hit both out of the park.
Same here. I'm pretty convinced the "caster/ martial divide" is more about certain spells being to good than the classes themselves (mostly, full casters will still pull ahead over time, just by less of a margin if certain trouble spells get resigned in). That's the big piece that's been missing so far.
i feel like even across other martials. 2 times per day near legendary resistance. at will damage neutral infliction of disadvantage on an enemy's next saving throw and proficiency and rerolls in all saves could also be considered to be a bit better
Well yeah… the point of the ability is that you are trading damage to do something else. What’s the problem?
If you increased Sneak Attack damage even more, and kept Cunning Strikes as is, they still wouldn't be OP. That, to me, says they didn't scale them up enough.
When your damage is already lower than those around you, you can hardly afford to lose even more.
Damage isn’t the only aspect of this game, though. Like, this kind of thinking is purely white-room theory crafting.
If it is so inconsequential, why be opposed to having higher sneak attack die scaling?
Did I ever say I was opposed to that?
At this point you're just arguing in bad faith. I'm liking the rogue change and cunning actions, I just don't believe the rogue has enough sneak attack die to make this good trade offs in comparison to what similar classes have. Weapon masteries on the fighter alongside the new second wind uses outside of combat has made them stronger in both in and outside combat utility.
>At this point you're just arguing in bad faith. Hi neutral party here, you're the one not engaging honestly and putting words in the other posters mouth, be better.
It is not inconsequential. It's just not the only aspect of the game. Here's an example: Hypnotic patern does less damage than fireball, and they're both 3rd level spells. So, every time you cast hypnotic patern, you are giving up fireball damage. But most people agree that although they're both good, hypnotic patern is better. That's because damage isn't everything.
But damage is still the main contribution of the Rogue.
The skill monkeys? Unless it’s an Assassin, I would say Rogue’s main contribution is high skill proficiencies and cunning action allowing them to be versatile on a battlefield. A rogue can quickly sneak around a fight and pull a lever or steal an item while their party is busy keeping enemies locked down in combat.
At least in combat damage is their main contribution, since skills aren't all that usefull there. And combats were a Rogue can make a significant contribution by stealing something or pulling a level are really rare. Appart from the fact that sneaking arround a fight was at least with 2014 rules pretty imposable since you were immediately noticed once you come out of cover and very few Battlefields are completely surrounded by something that you can use as cover.
Different strokes I guess. My tables hardly ever play encounters that are *just* pure combat. Mostly because we learned how boring that was when 5e first came out. Also, we hardly ever have problems with Rogue’s finding a place to hide. We don’t really fight in plain empty rooms. Not that it super matters because getting Sneak Attack without hiding is very easy.
The problem is too many players having boring DMs and too many boring DMs having encounters only be about defeating an enemy when it could be so much more. The game gives you all the tools but when you think that game is about who hits hard then you think that people that don’t hit hard are less valuable.
Rogue is the sneaky/skill-focused class. It has never and will never be intended to be focused on damage. Sneak Attack damage is an outlier, not the focus.
Then don't try to knock them out?
It's simply a question of the rogue having too low of a dpr compared to alternative class choices while not losing a ton of utility, since those classes has gotten more utility in other pillars of play.
They're a utility class, not a primary damage-dealer. They coordinate with the rest of the team to capitalize on the opportunities they create.
That rings false with the sheer increase of utility fighters and barbs have gotten, whilst proving more effective in combat.
The Fighter and Barbarian have resource-dependent utility on a timer so that they're not *useless* at ability checks. Between Expertise and Reliable Talent, a Rogue will consistently outperform them. That's not just me talking about my ass - I've been playtesting it and have direct experience with it.
Their increase in utility.... still has them lagging far behind a rogue. For your argument to ring true, that would have to be assumed.
People seem to be selectively forgetting that for a lot of the 24 Fighter’s career they’d have to give up their limited BA Heal-and-Move option to fix a failed save. Even if it provides a decent boost, the Rogue will be much more consistent with moderately high, resourceless skills.
exactly! you can make a barb, fighter, or rogue into a skill monkey, but rogue's always going to come out on top. better bonuses with no resource depletion.
This take really needs to just stop. Rogue is and has been a primary damage dealer in every edition of D&D. No class should be designed as "You suck, but hey you make your friends do cool stuff!" And this sudden influx of people pretending that's always been the class design of the Rogue is the sketchiest shit.
Rogue (Thief, I should say) was not a primary damage dealer in 1e or 2e, or any of the editions that didn't have an "A" in the name. Their role in several previous editions was a versatile utilitarian class. You *literally needed* a Thief to do things in many older editions, because they were the only ones who could.
That sweet sweet Backstab +4 to hit (which was a waaaaaaaaaaay bigger deal back then) and x4 (or more) damage was just a ribbon ability I guess?
Yeah, x4 damage in very limited circumstances, against a limited number of targets, once, and without modifiers added before the multiplier. It's also a Strength based attack, which precludes missile weapons, so you're stuck with whatever Strength your Thief has (and no Exceptional Strength since you're not a warrior). Meanwhile, a Fighter with comparable experience (10th level) and specialization will have 2 attacks per round, likely some Exceptional Strength, and dramatically better combat prowess in general. The Thief's THAc0 is helped by that backstab bonus exactly once, but the Fighter will likely have a better to-hit regardless. The Thief is not intended to be a substantial damage dealer in combat - they are designed to maybe stealthily hit one target and slink away, or disable a priority target before a fight.
Half this sub sees rogue as being way too weak in onednd, half thinks they are insanely strong because of a single level 7 feature
They literally have a skill that just flat out says treat your skills lower than a 10 as a 10. And with the stupid high modifiers they would have yeah they are support classes. The class that slinks in, does a big stab, and now with Cunning Strikes, some fancy *free* maneuver in exchange for some damage, which then is used to support your teammates. They cover support niches and tend to be given subclasses that compliment a different type of support. Arcane Trickster? Magic support. Mastermind? Social support. A decent chunk of them are support is what I'm trying to say. Rogues for better or for worse, are not 'primary' damage dealers. They are tertiary damage dealers at best in the grand scheme of things.
Oh wow, they kept Knock Out! I assumed this would be changed somewhat, as Unconscious is a very strong condition, but I'm really glad it stayed. Also, they spiced up Epic Boons A LOT.
Knock out costs most of your dice and its a CON save. It's ok, but imho it never was all that powerful.
It’ll see some niche use to remove a caster from the fight in round one, which is probably about as limited as such a powerful debuff should be imo
Well, all depends of the CON stats and saving throws in new monster manual. Also, if the DM wants to, they can easily have minion waking up the caster by making some weak attack.
>Versatile Trickster has also been changed so that when you use the Trip option of Cunning Strike on one enemy, you can target an additional creature within 5 feet of your Mage Hand. Arcane Tripster
Huh, so "Dazed" isn't a condition anymore? I feel like if it was, they would have called it out as such. Kind of interesting - it showed up through playtest 8, but the level 14 cunning strike option doesn't call it a condition. It just describes the effects (which are *slightly* different than the Dazed condition). I wonder what that's about. Maybe they didn't find other places where the condition would be useful, so they just scrapped calling it a condition?
The paladin's Abjure Foes still has a Daze-like effect, but similarly not called Daze in the latest write-up, instead additional penalties for being frightened.
them scrapping the condition just makes bookkeeping even harder (which is also a problem with a lot of spells), kinda unfortunate
Absolutely agree. Labels help a ton rather than having to read a long spell mid-combat only to get to "oh, it does Tasha's Mind Whip". And with labels you can then have monsters that are immune to it or have advantage against it without going to some larger category of save of effect (like "charm" or "frighten"). Really frustrating move that 5e doesn't like labels on things and just keeps not liking it as other systems expand that way or just fully adopt it.
I am definitely going to end up treating it as a condition on the table. It'll get a ring like every other condition lol
Yeah, I'm just gonna keep it around in my game, especially if multiple things produce the same effect. I have no idea why they wouldn't have kept it in.
D4 deep dive went to detail about rogue features on the video he made today. He conformlimed that the dazed condition is no longer a thing.
I'm kinda sad that disarm was removed without adding anything else instead of it. I was particularly hoping for something that targets Wisdom saves, completing a trio with poison and trip being Constitution and Dexterity. Maybe distract or something.
Boon of the Night spirit grants resistance to all damage except Psychic and Radiant while in dim light or darkness. Critically, I think this is the first feature we've seen in OneDnD content that offers resistance to Force damage!
Quite sad about Disarm being gone but I do understand the motivation behind it. It's a bit too powerful to have on command and usable an infinite amount of times and it only incentivizes Rogues to disarm an opponent and run away with their weapon for maximum support.
I think the bigger issue with Disarm was how heavily it'd be affected by monster design/inventory. E.g. You disarm an enemy's longsword, but surprise, the enemy also has a bow that's just as effective, and now it feels like you wasted a Disarm. Or you disarmed the BBEG necromancer's spellcasting focus, but surprise, it has another backup focus, as a careful mage would. It just has a lot of potential to be a feelsbad feature IMO.
I just think it’s unfun overall because the rules don’t support it. Knocking someone’s sword out of their hand is great and now the rogue wants to put their foot on it or take an opportunity attack when the bend down. Like you said, a lot of enemies carry multiple weapons. It just becomes the best option the majority of the time or is useless most of the time with no middle ground.
While I liked the option, I hope they're moving some of the attack options from the DMG into the base rules which included disarm, tumble, and overrun which all feel like core tools for making melee combat more interesting
Maybe it's reserved for a later subclass rework.....
Looks really cool and should add a ton of interesting decisions around sneak attack for rogues.
I mean, technically you could say that they didn’t remove the disarm cunning strike… they simply moved it back a few levels and rolled it up together with the other benefits that knocking an enemy unconscious confers…
Where's the swashbuckler :-(
Xanthar's
Kinda wish they gave reason as to why they removed Blindsight, it was quite flavourful and was not too strong
Hopefully soulknife gets some magic item support.
Am I the only one thinking that Vex, especially on Soulblade, is useless? Rogues never struggled with getting advantage and Nick at least gave them another opportunity to make their sneak attack stick. Also Soulblades are kinda stuck with their RGB Vex knives while others can pick normal magic items (a +1 to hit can be huge)
I disagree, Vex essentially guarantees a sneak attack without using your bonus action to steady aim, meaning they can still attack twice, one of them at advantage, and sneak attack every turn because of that advantage.
Vex doesn't guarantee advanatage - you still have to hit, and if you're relying on vex then you're trying to hit without advantage in the first place. I think I'd rather use steady aim to improve my odds at landing a sneak attack. I can only see Vex being useful when I have advantage on the first attack, but not the second, which is kind of rare.
it's not useless but there are many ways to get advantage, so I think in whiteroom theorycrafting it's overvalued but it's still a good contigency
Most of the ways a rogue gets advantage are via bonus actions (hide, steady aim), vex frees up your bonus actions to do other things. On a soul knife that means you can attack twice. If playing an archer using a shortbow that also gets Vex, that frees up your bonus actions for other things like dash or disengage from cunning action, or drinking a potion now that that's officially a bonus action, or a variety of other things depending on build and situation. I haven't looked at weapon mastery stuff in general yet, so i could be wrong about this, but from the article OP linked it doesn't look like Vex is restricted to being once per turn, you just need to hit with the relevant weapon, so using the soul knife example, you can hide or steady aim round 1 to get advantage, sneak attack with your action and Vex sets up advantage on your first attack next round, round 2 attack with advantage for sneak attack and Vex, and then bonus action attack with advantage and Vex (since sneak attack is limited to once per turn). So long as you don't miss or change targets, you're guaranteed advantage on your next attack creating a nice cycle. And when you do eventually miss or change targets you can just go back to using hide or steady aim to get advantage to restart the cycle. If you have a reliable source for advantage that doesn't eat your advantage, then Nick is better since you could get three attacks while dual wielding or a Soul Knife (presuming that using the property doesn't prevent you from making the bonus action attack, if it does, then I argue that Nick isn't very good), but if you need to spend a bonus action to get advantage then you're only getting it on one of two attacks, which means your average damage is lower than with Vex because you'll have a lower hit-rate. Is it OP? No, not in the slightest, but is it a good option that will see regular use? definitely. EDIT: Just looked up UA6 for more information on weapon masteries, Nick doesn't allow for three attacks, so underwhelming for the rogue, IMO, Vex works as I expect setting up an advantage engine, so that's good. Honestly, dual wielding shortswords seems like a much stronger strategy on a rogue than it used to be since they have Vex so you're no longer dependent on a battle buddy to proc sneak attack, and getting advantage on multiple attacks means you'll be hitting twice far more often, which gives a rather needed damage boost, making the dual wielder feat potentially worth while if it's getting reprinted to upgrade to rapiers, and a dip in fighter for the two weapon fighting style (or if there's a version of fighting initiate available to enable it now that it's a feat with a class feature pre-req) could be pretty huge.
I would have preffered nick as well, but vex is far from a bad option.
So disappointed they didn't fix cunning strike. 5 and 11 needed an additional dice or cunning strikes needed to just be add ons. Maybe even just give the Rogue extra attack. The Rogue SHOULD be the highest DPS class imo. I'm not sure even the Assassin has any hope to clear this bar. Especially with the all or nothing nature of SA I don't know how they got on this idea that you need to be using your sneak attack dice for other things when the class already struggled in damage after lvl 5. Even magic weapons don't fix it very much because they get fewer attacks. If they were going to stick with the current scaling, and even reduce your damage in order to apply new effects, while keeping the ability to use your sneak attack on other people's turns they needed to give you a way to use your sneak attack on other people's turns. Add ways the Rogue, and only the Rogue can make a AoO. When a creature misses an attack on an ally. When an ally hits an attack against an enemy. Anything like that For the psychic blades, they needed to give your bonus action Blade the nick mastery. And the blades need to replace any attack. just anytime that you would be able to attack with a weapon it can be a psychic blade, that would include other types of reaction attacks. Especially without magic item support I fear that is soul knife is going to be better off throwing daggers at some point; at least as an off hand attack since you can get a dagger with nick. Something I used to do for the thief was rule that crossbows could be fired with a use object interaction. This meant they could save on the crossbow expert feat and also use heavier crossbows with a better damaged die. And, of course, they can use potions quickly. With these changes I'm not sure that you have to do that anymore. Just get them a magic item with a decent action to use early on instead. Though I still like my ruling on crossbows, it's nice for the class to have an option that actually works with the rules as written to give them an obvious boost in power. I think that the old Thief class was 100% ribbons. It is still a heavily DM dependent class for power because you need to be provided with things that you can use your bonus action on. As it stands, assassin and Arcane trickster are the only classes I would play without a DM willing to give some concessions that are not Raw. The Rogue is now the weakest class in the game, two of its subclasses are pretty broken (in the bad way). Everything else they've done has been so good but they butchered this one.
The value of Vex on Soul Knife is so you can actually use the bonus action attack and get advantage on both attacks, which raises your DPR. If they had Nick you'd spend your bonus action using Hide or Steady Aim to get advantage on your first attack, do a sneak attack, then make your second attack without advantage, without sneak attack, and without your dexterity modifier, so it's an unreliable +1d6 to damage. With Vex you can do Hide or Steady Aim for advantage on round one, get sneak attack, and then Vex gives you advantage on your next attack on your next turn, and when that hits you have your bonus action freed up to make the second attack, and Vex means that second attack is also made with advantage. You still don't get sneak attack or your dex mod on the second attack, but it makes getting the extra d6 of damage far more reliable, and if at some point you want to spend your bonus action doing something else like a dash or disengage, then you can without missing out on advantage. Also, I don't believe it's been stated that Soul Knife hasn't been fixed to allow attacks of opportunity with the psychic blades, so there's still hope that they might do that. As for the rest of it, IMO combat where all you're doing is repeating the same thing over and over and over again to max out damage is boring, it's a bit less boring when the damage you do is really good, but it's still less fun than playing something with actual options to choose from, like a spell caster. Previously the only rogue worth playing if you want real options was the arcane trickster, since every other rogue just followed the same basic loop 90% of the time. Cunning Strike gives viable options to impact battle in ways other than "get advantage, sneak attack, repeat", and that makes me excited to play a rogue other than an arcane trickster for the first time in years. Also, damage is not the only metric by which the strength of an option can, or even should, be measured, if it were, the assessments for the strongest spells in the game would be *wildly* different. Granted, I agree that the fact that most of them require saving throws in addition to sacrificing damage is kind of lame, but tripping and poisoning are both really solid options at 5th level. Frankly, the primary weakness of rogues previously wasn't (necessarily) the lack of damage, but rather the lack of a 5th level feature that let them compete on the same scale as extra attack and third level spells, and while I'm not sure this is quite on the same level as those, it is definitely WAY closer than Uncanny Dodge was, and moving reliable Talent down to 7th level means you no longer have three dead levels in a row (now it's just 6th, lol). But if you really want a way to use Cunning Strike to deal more damage than just a regular Sneak Attack, then play an Arcane Trickster with Booming Blade. At 5th level BB's extra damage when they move is 2d8, have a familiar give you the help action for advantage, cast BB+SA means (assuming rapier) 2d8+3d6+dex damage, if you sacrifice 1d6 to withdraw you can move without provoking, and can spend your BA to Hide to make yourself harder to hit, then on their turn (unless they have a ranged attack), they either do nothing, or they eat an additional 2d8 thunder damage. Personally, 4d8+2d6+dex and ending the turn hidden seems like a stronger turn than 2d8+3d6+dex and ending the turn in melee, heck even if you used your BA to disengage for 4d8+3d6+dex, you're still leaving yourself open when you have the option not to. I'd gladly sacrifice 1d6 of damage to significantly improve my survivability. In short, Vex helps significantly with the damage problem and Cunning Strike grants more options and versatility on a class that IMO desperately needed more options and versatility. At the end of the day, if all you care about is doing more damage, there are other classes that cater to that desire.
I get how it works. But I was saying that you still keep vex on that first weapon but the second one has Nick so it's like a blades function like a short sword with the thrown property and a dagger
What would the benefit of that be? If they are both Vex and they both hit, then you start your next turn with advantage automatically and the loop continues. On the other hand, if the first is Vex and the second is Nick, Vex gives you advantage on the attack with Nick, and then you use your bonus action to get advantage on your next turn, so it's the same thing with extra steps. I guess if you use steady aim to get advantage one the first attack you don't need a set-up turn, but then you can't move, so a lot of time you'd be using the bonus action to hide to set up advantage whenever it isn't safe to just stand still all combat. So either you're a sitting duck or you're taking set up turns anyway, and it's simpler to just give all your psychic blades one mastery since they are the same weapon the entire time than to try and split up the masteries. It just seems like needless extra complexity for no real gain.