D&D 5E Would Rogues be broken if Sneak Attack were always on?

fil512 · Oct 17, 2018

In my experience, it’s pretty much always on if the rogue is a halfling.

CapnZapp · Oct 17, 2018

Gavin O. said:
So I'll be DMing my first campaign soon, and it's going to be with a group of people who have never played 5e before. One of the things I've found that most often gets misunderstood by new players is the condition for Rogues' Sneak Attack. Players don't seem to understand when exactly they're allowed to use it. I was considering simplifying it to just always apply, no advantage and no adjacent ally needed, but I'm wondering if that would make the Rogue too strong. I'm also aware that some of the rogue archetype class features give you a new way to apply your Sneak Attack, and I'm wondering what I could replace that ability with. Maybe 1d6 extra damage?

Probably not.

The secret is: Rogues are *incredibly hard* to optimize.

You can get two Sneak Attacks each combat round, but achieving this is *stupendously* difficult for a new gamer.

Saying "you have two free sneaks each round" (assuming you have that many attacks) is entirely balanced.

Going to all free is not a huge step, which explains my reply "probably not".

Since your players aren't min-maxers you should have nothing to worry about.

CapnZapp · Oct 17, 2018

Elfcrusher said:
What the heck is hard to understand about "an ally is within 5' of your target or you have Advantage on the attack roll"?

The pertinent question is "What the heck is hard to understand about getting a second sneak on someone else's turn?"

And the answer is:

Everything.

CapnZapp · Oct 17, 2018

Vexacia said:
In my experience, people who think Sneak Attack is overpowered are either very bad at math or very ignorant of the damage capability of bog standard Fighters that don't use any of their class features.

Rogues without Sneak Attack are worse at combat than Valor Bards by a significant margin. If you don't want to bother making checks, you're not going to break anything, because the non-SCAG cantrip/non-multiclass Rogue will still track behind a damage-focused Fighter (and the SCAG cantrip Rogue will track with the damage Fighter) in pretty much every case except for three:

1. The Rogue consistently has Haste and does Ready Action to Sneak Attack on another creature's turn as well as his own (but a GWM/SS Fighter with Haste would still be doing similar damage without having to Ready Action)

2. The Rogue multiclass dipped 5-6 into another class for Extra Attack (especially if he is XBM/SS, which is by far the most abusable build with an EA multiclass, but an XBM/SS Fighter still eclipses an Extra Attack5/RogueX build unless combined with scenario 1 above, where the multiclass EA5/Rogue does finally eventually win out [until 20, where it's dead even again])

3. You've banned the Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master feats (which I wouldn't advise because otherwise you're just indirectly buffing spellcasters/nerfing martials) in which case Rogues will be slightly better than Fighters at high levels (until level 20, where again Fighter becomes king regardless).

(sidenote: extra Fighter damage bonuses such as Action Surge, Battlemaster, or crit on 19-20/18-20 weren't considered and will tilt this a lil further in the Fighter's favor, and the Fighter already had the edge to begin with if the Rogue didn't go completely out of his way to be competitive)

So, would Rogues be broken if Sneak Attack were always on?
TL;DR: lol no

Thank you. It feels refreshing to see someone who gets it.

CapnZapp · Oct 17, 2018

Li Shenron said:
A Rogue player that wants to gain Sneak Attack damage as often as possible can already get close to "always". All she needs to do is attack an enemy which is already in melee with an ally. This is in general easier than having advantage on attacks, even tho the latter is presented as the main way to get Sneak Attack, however there are situations when this is not possible: e.g. when everyone is attacking at range or with reach weapons, or when all the melee allies are incapacitated.

So would it break the game to just default to "always"? Probably not. But it will fundamentally change how the Rogue is played tactically. Because as it stands, the Rogue has to look for ways either to have advantage on the attack rolls (hiding, gaining higher ground, etc.) or to target specific foes which are in melee with allies.

It's maybe a matter of preferences, but I definitely like being forced to think how can I get that bonus each round rather than not.

A Rogue needs to do more than just Sneak once every round to compete.

The theoretical maximum is twice every round, after all.

I agree Rogues are horrifically difficult for newcomers to play, if they have this expectation to compete.

cmad1977 · Oct 17, 2018

Gavin O. said:
So from what I gathered from your answers, it wouldn't break the game, but it also wouldn't be a good idea to introduce house rules when new players are learning.

Thank you so much for your answers. I've decided I'll probably just use Rules as Written.

Among all the extra ‘bad advice’ you’ve gotten you have latched onto the bit that’s actually useful. Your forum fu is impressive.

Blue · Oct 17, 2018

Gavin O. said:
So I'll be DMing my first campaign soon, and it's going to be with a group of people who have never played 5e before. One of the things I've found that most often gets misunderstood by new players is the condition for Rogues' Sneak Attack. Players don't seem to understand when exactly they're allowed to use it. I was considering simplifying it to just always apply, no advantage and no adjacent ally needed, but I'm wondering if that would make the Rogue too strong. I'm also aware that some of the rogue archetype class features give you a new way to apply your Sneak Attack, and I'm wondering what I could replace that ability with. Maybe 1d6 extra damage?

A bit of clarification - you mention only the triggers to get it, but "always on" also seems to imply it would apply to more than one attack per round. What is your intention there?

Assuming it's still only a single attack a round, it's a decent buff to the rogue. Perhaps the simplest would just be to say "once per turn you do this extra damage". That gives a bonus of no conditions, but removes a bonus of triggering during other people's turns - mechanically balanced and simplified as much as it can be.

All of that said, I wouldn't do it. First, it changes the feel of the feature. It's not that you can take advantage of distraction/someone not looking at you to get the right shot, now it's just a numerical bonus. Second, it takes away interesting tactical choices. You can always use it. No shooting your second choice target because that's the one engaged. No sneaking in (for advantage) so that you can get a sneak attack even if your allies aren't close. Third, It takes away the teamwork part - where your allies are engaging certain foes so you can sneak attack them, or casting debuffs that grant advantage knowing you'll really shine.

In other words, there's a reasonable give-&-take simplification you can do to keep it reasonable mechanically balanced, but taking away the needed triggers makes the feature less interesting both for the player and the other players and more just a "math add".

Eltab · Oct 17, 2018

Always-on Sneak Attack will not make the Rogue overpowered, but it will make him the DPR King.

In my experience, teaming up with the Defender in the party (attack the same target) equals always-on Sneak Attack.

Satyrn · Oct 17, 2018

I just wanna say that the aspect of Sneak Attack that I find fiddly and confusing is the "once per turn" bit.

Well, not confusing exactly. I just don't see how interpreting it as anything but once/round made sense in the context of 5e.

BookBarbarian · Oct 17, 2018

guachi said:
No, it wouldn't.

But it wouldn't feel like sneak attack at all.

I feel this way as well. It's obviously desinged to be available relatively on demand, but setting up the trigger is a big part of the fun, for me anyway.

Gavin O. said:
So from what I gathered from your answers, it wouldn't break the game, but it also wouldn't be a good idea to introduce house rules when new players are learning.

Thank you so much for your answers. I've decided I'll probably just use Rules as Written.

Good thinking.

D&D 5E Would Rogues be broken if Sneak Attack were always on?

fil512

Explorer

CapnZapp

Legend

CapnZapp

Legend

CapnZapp

Legend

CapnZapp

Legend

cmad1977

Hero

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer

Satyrn

First Post

BookBarbarian

Expert Long Rester

Similar Threads