D&D 5E Double Dash

Ovinomancer said:

Not if you run the race in combat rounds. There the fighter loses badly.

This is my gripe, really, that the issue is a mechanical artifact others defend by pointing out cases where it doesn't exist. As for rogues are nimble, this is very well covered by being able to dash as a bonus action after doing something else. Take away double dash and they're still super nimble and mobile characters.

And, again, I'm arguing from a position of displeasurr soooo strong I've done nothing about it over four campaigns but post here.

Click to expand...

Let's step through a hypothetical race and see what happens. The rogue has 14 CON, the fighter 16. Both have a 30' base speed.

Rounds 1-2: The rogue sprints away, getting 180'. The fighter only makes it 120'.

Round 3: Rogue uses their last free dash, and attempts a second. DC 10 CON check, which they have about a 2/3 chance of succeeding at, and a 1/3 chance of failing. The fighter still has plenty of free dashes left. So the rogue is either 90' ahead or 60' and exhausted.

Rounds 4-5: Rogue has to make a check again, whereas the fighter doesn't. On average the rogue has succeeded twice and failed once between rounds 3-5, making it to a total distance of 360' to the fighter's 300', but has taken a level of exhaustion.

Round 6: The fighter gets their last free dash, whereas the rogue has to make a CON check with disadvantage. Roughly 50% chance of maintaining their lead and a 50% chance of losing 30' and taking a second level of exhaustion, halving their speed.

Round 7: If the rogue made their check, they still have a 60' lead, but they have to make another check at disadvantage. Though now the fighter has to make a check too, with a 70% chance of success. So there's about a 2 in 12 chance the fighter will have caught up to the rogue by this point, another 3 in 12 that the lead is down to 30' with the rogue at half speed, about 2 in 12 that the rogue holds steady but is reduced to half speed, about 2 in 12 that the rogue holds steady without a speed reduction, and about 1 in 12 that the rogue actually gains.

The situation declines from here for the rogue. In the end it's very likely the fighter will catch up within the first minute of the chase.

Esker said:

The situation declines from here for the rogue. In the end it's very likely the fighter will catch up within the first minute of the chase.

Click to expand...

You have to flip this around and make the fighter the quarry for this to work most of the time.

Quarry gets a chance to hide at the end of every round as long as there is something to hide behind. Rogues are typically not too shabby at hiding which means the rogue will generally get away. This has to be taken into account in my view if an argument is to be based on the DMG chase rules. (There is also the matter of chase complications but because that affects both, we can probably discount.)

iserith said:

You have to flip this around and make the fighter the quarry for this to work most of the time.

Quarry gets a chance to hide at the end of every round as long as there is something to hide behind. Rogues are typically not too shabby at hiding which means the rogue will generally get away. This has to be taken into account in my view if an argument is to be based on the DMG chase rules. (There is also the matter of chase complications but because that affects both, we can probably discount.)

Click to expand...

Yeah. If there are places to hide, the rogue is probably going to get away. As they should; they're a rogue. Being slippery is like their whole thing (though if the fighter has survival proficiency, it gives disadvantage to hide checks). But if there's a chase out in the open and the rogue can't hide, the fighter's endurance is likely going to win out. This all seems right to me.

Ovinomancer said:

Not if you run the race in combat rounds.

Click to expand...

So dont run the race in combat rounds.

Flamestrike said:

So dont run the race in combat rounds.

Click to expand...

Right.

Issue: a mechanical artifact leads to an odd result.

Response: use a different resolution mechanism and just try to ignore it otherwise.

Good talk?

Ovinomancer said:

And all of your points are still true if you can't double dash.

Click to expand...

Not being able to double dash would come up so infrequently, while the ability to dash and still take another action is a big enough deal to be half of a feat (charger).

Ovinomancer said:

Right.

Issue: a mechanical artifact leads to an odd result.

Response: use a different resolution mechanism and just try to ignore it otherwise.

Good talk?

Click to expand...

It's only an issue if you (the DM) let it be an issue. It's no different to a hidden creature initiating combat (which triggers initiative, possibly allowing an Alert combatant to go before the surprising hidden creature.)

Your 'solution' to a problem that doesnt exist unless you (the DM) want it to, is to nerf the Rogue.

I swear this is anti-rogue week. Threads on arbitrarily nerfing finesse weapons AND cunning action this week.

Ovinomancer said:

Right.

Issue: a mechanical artifact leads to an odd result.

Response: use a different resolution mechanism and just try to ignore it otherwise.

Good talk?

Click to expand...

You keep saying that there's a mechanical artifact resulting from cunning action when conducting a chase, but it's not clear at all to me that there's anything wrong at all with the way chases work when using the DMG rules in conjunction with cunning action. Rogues tend to get away more easily than other classes, if and only if they can get to a hiding place within the first few rounds and beat the perception/survival checks of their pursuer. That's what half of the rogue's class features (cunning action, uncanny dodge, evasion, elusive, even slippery mind in a different sort of way) are about: getting away from trouble. Where's the artifact?

Flamestrike said:

It's only an issue if you (the DM) let it be an issue. It's no different to a hidden creature initiating combat (which triggers initiative, possibly allowing an Alert combatant to go before the surprising hidden creature.)

Your 'solution' to a problem that doesnt exist unless you (the DM) want it to, is to nerf the Rogue.

I swear this is anti-rogue week. Threads on arbitrarily nerfing finesse weapons AND cunning action this week.

Click to expand...

You know what bugs me? How is it that the rogue, who is supposed to be speedy, can only swing a dagger once per six seconds, whereas a brutish fighter can swing a greatsword two, three or even four times in the same amount of time. Rogues really ought to get at least as many attacks as fighters. And while we're on the subject, how is it that rogues, who are supposed to be skill monkeys, don't get any features that allow them to become especially skilled with their weapon of choice? They should really have access to fighting styles. AND MOREOVER, if any class should be able to use bursts of adrenaline to act extra quickly for a period of time, it should be rogues. Let's give them action surge too...

Or, you know, I guess we could treat the game as a game, and classes as bundles of mechanics put in place to provide interesting tradeoffs and rough big picture balance across different choices, rather than prescriptions about what kinds of character concepts are allowed if you take levels in that class.

Esker said:

You know what bugs me? How is it that the rogue, who is supposed to be speedy, can only swing a dagger once per six seconds

Click to expand...

[1 attack roll] is not =to [1 swing of a weapon].

A creature that makes 3 attack rolls against one target might only make one mighty swing. The inverse is also true; a creature that makes a single attack roll, might be stabbing his target multiple times.

Same deal how a 'hit' with an attack roll, doesnt necessarily mean you actually strike your target with your weapon. They could dodge or parry the blow at the last second (losing 'hit points' and tiring) or the blow could be luckily deflected (losing 'hit points' and running out of luck).

'Attack rolls' and 'hit points' are all mechanical abstractions. How they're narrated is entirely up to the group.