D&D 5E Uncanny Dodge (Rogue)

[Celtavian]

You can't dodge what cannot miss.

Rogues dodge what cannot miss all the time.

 

[Celtavian]

Some spells and effects are attacks. They use attack rolls. The only thing that qualifies as an attack is something that uses an attack roll. Casting a spell on someone and imposing a saving throw isn't an attack as it doesn't use an attack roll.

PHB p193 under the Making an Attack heading: Whether you're striking with a melee weapon, firing a weapon at range, or making an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has a simple structure. Skip ahead a few sentences and move on to page 194. If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple. If you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack.

Ergo, no attack roll means no attack. If you aren't attacking you can't trigger Uncanny Dodge as it clearly states "when an attacker that you can see hits you with an attack"



There is nothing vague about the wording. There is no ambiguity. No attack roll = no attack = no Uncanny Dodge.

If that is the case, that makes Uncanny Dodge rather weak. I guess it is only a low level ability. Half-damage from an attack roll attack is very, very weak. Most single attacks don't do much damage. Higher level creatures with strong attacks that do a lot of damage have multi-attack. I guess it would be nice against a crit from a creature with a strong attack. Otherwise, not a very good ability at all. Too much in this game does its damage with no attack roll and a save other than Dex. Most of the time those are the worst attacks in the game. I was hoping Uncanny Dodge would be something special in 5e.

 

[Uller]

You can't dodge what cannot miss.

That's what makes it uncanny.

 

[Uller]

PHB p193 under the Making an Attack heading: Whether you're striking with a melee weapon, firing a weapon at range, or making an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has a simple structure. Skip ahead a few sentences and move on to page 194. If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple. If you're making an attack roll, you're making an attack.

Ergo, no attack roll means no attack. If you aren't attacking you can't trigger Uncanny Dodge as it clearly states "when an attacker that you can see hits you with an attack"

So by this logic a dragon's wing attack (which as I pointed out has the word "attack" right there in the name) is not an attack, can't be dodged and doesn't break invisibility.

Nope. If one of my players tried to argue that his action which was clearly intended to harm an enemy was not an attack because it didnt require an attack roll in order to remain invisible I'd just laugh.

If I said any time you come across an animal covered with fur you are looking at a mammal that would be a true statement, right? But there are mammals that are not covered with fur. So...that statement about attacks and attack rolls is a useful guideline but is not definitive.

 

[Chocolategravy]

So by this logic a dragon's wing attack (which as I pointed out has the word "attack" right there in the name) is not an attack, can't be dodged and doesn't break invisibility

Correct, it's an action. Beating it's wings to fly also doesn't break invisibility. In fact, not only is it an action, it's a legendary action, which already breaks all the rules of the game anyway, so it should hardly bother you that it doesn't break invis. They've chosen poorly for a LOT of names of abilities in 5E and "wing attack" is just another example, in previous editions it is "wing buffet" but maybe WotC is doing it's part to combat rampant obesity by not bringing to mind tables laden with chicken wings.

 

[Uller]

Correct, it's an action. Beating it's wings to fly also doesn't break invisibility. In fact, not only is it an action, it's a legendary action, which already breaks all the rules of the game anyway, so it should hardly bother you that it doesn't break invis. They've chosen poorly for a LOT of names of abilities in 5E and "wing attack" is just another example, in previous editions it is "wing buffet" but maybe WotC is doing it's part to combat rampant obesity by not bringing to mind tables laden with chicken wings.

A dragon beating its wings to fly around is obviously not an attack. A dragon beating its wings to hit opponents with them and do damage to them obviously is an attack.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I think its' odd that folks want to take a relatively low, but pretty powerful ability (which essentially doubles a Rogue's HP in melee) and expand it to fit any situation that could possibly be construed to be an attack.

In my game, if there's a roll to attack, they'll get the Uncanny Dodge.

 

[Dausuul]

The Uncanny Dodge can be used against magical attacks?


Uncanny Dodge (Rogue Class)

Starting at 5th level, when an attacker that you can see
hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to
halve the attack’s damage against you.

Anything that includes an attack roll is fair game. That includes spell attacks (e.g., fire bolt), but not spells that call for saving throws (e.g., disintegrate).

 

[Uller]

I think its' odd that folks want to take a relatively low, but pretty powerful ability (which essentially doubles a Rogue's HP in melee) and expand it to fit any situation that could possibly be construed to be an attack.

In my game, if there's a roll to attack, they'll get the Uncanny Dodge.

I think therein lies the fundamental misunderstanding of the effectiveness of uncanny dodge. It doesnt double your hp. It's a reaction. Lvl 5+ parties are routinely fighting foes that get more than one attack or fighting larger numbers of weak foes. The first time it was used at our table the rogue's player thought she could just use it over and over and put herself in a bad spot thinking she could just dodge to stay alive. She dodged he first hit and then I had to explain to her that she couldn't use it again until her next turn. The next hit was a crit. The third hit put her down. If someone uses it to save a few hp on an attack that allows a dex save so what? Against any intelligent foe they just wasted it because the next attack will hurt worse. That is why I am so for the rogue being able to use this on any damaging attack...I want the rogue to have meaningful tactical choices. (Plus I just dont buy gamist arguments when they get way down in the weeds to the point where folks are arguing over the meaning of he words attack and hit).

Take Magic Missile. It specifically says the target is "hit" by the missiles so I would allow dodge against one missile. But in all likelihood the caster is not alone and if his allies are smart they will realize the rogue is now at a tactical (but temporary) disadvantage and will press the attack...all to save what? 1 or 2 hp? But if the rogue is low on hp that choice might make a big difference. Why would I want to deny my player that choice over a ridiculous definition of the word "attack"?

Some mentioned it is a "low level" ability. That's pretty subjective isn't it? In our last game our Paladin used abjure enemy to great effect and basically took a powerful enemy out of the fight...he got outsized use of his low level ability because he made good choices. That's what is supposed to happen.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I get the Reaction tag, but thus far rogues in my game have used it well.