D&D 5E Rogues without Darkvision

[Ahglock]

Some exotic senses (like echolocation 'blindsense') could be hidden from pretty much the same way sight can, but tremorsense I'd expect to be pretty un-foolable. If you have a sense of vibrations in the ground so refined that it can substitute for sight, I think a moving PC-sized creature will be noticeable no matter how lightly they step.

.

Again in my mind that's what the skill contest is about. I don't see the difference in saying dudes got eyes so refined he can see and someone snuck up on him and tremorsense so refined he can use it as sight and someone snuck up on him. It doesn't have to be that he can't hear/sense him it's that they mistake the vibrations for something not worth paying attention to.

And yeah hiding as a bonus action can be powerful but there are some hard limits on stealth, especially once combat is rolling. And spellcasters might have access to improved invisibility which is pretty much the same thing in most cases. Why is that okay along with the stupid huge laundry list of abilities they get but a rogue sneaking is now broken?

 

[Saeviomagy]

Some exotic senses (like echolocation 'blindsense') could be hidden from pretty much the same way sight can, but tremorsense I'd expect to be pretty un-foolable. If you have a sense of vibrations in the ground so refined that it can substitute for sight, I think a moving PC-sized creature will be noticeable no matter how lightly they step.

But can they be distinguished from a thrown pebble? Or a smaller creature? Tremorsense should change the approach the characters take to a fight. Treating it as "a monster that can just always see you" wrecks that.

OTOH I've seen in 5E the Rogue hide-as-a-bonus-action thing can be really crazy powerful in games where Stealth is interpreted generously/favorably.

More powerful than fly, or misty stepping to an out of reach ledge? Bear in mind that the advantage is basically a wash with dual wielding, and any foe with a ranged weapon can get their full complement of attacks by readying, so the only real gain is that the rogue will be getting his sneak attack on a solo foe (unless he fumbles his stealth check).

I mean sure, a melee only foe will get dominated by a ranged opponent in an open (yet hideable) area. If you really think that's a problem, allow readying a move+action instead of one or the other.

That's because D&D movement speeds assume 'combat' movement, avoiding obstacles and moving through a dangerous environment, rather than a running track.

You need to have a base movement of 158ft/round to hit the current marathon record, assuming the multiples used for overland travel in the phb. It's not a little bit out, it's way out. The only way to hit that while still being humanoid is with an elven monk 14/barbarian 6 with mobility and the elk totem.

But teleporting or flying take relatively low level spells. Well before you can run a competitive marathon, you can instantly transport the entire party to your destination.

Also, it's a matter of the game's granularity - Speed is the same for all humans unless a class feature or something modifies it.

Sure, but again: magic is required if you want to do anything cool, like running at real-world human speeds.

The given speeds seem about right (5 ft./second when you're doing something else, 10 ft./second when dashing) under those conditions.

I disagree. The pace is about right for me walking carrying a backpack. I think it would probably impact the accuracy of shooting with a longbow, and it's much too low for charging an opponent.

 

[Ahglock]

I'm not upset about the movement speed as I see it as a abstraction not based on real world running but based on expected set piece sizes. If people are too fast movement becomes irrelevant unless you start using massive fields constantly.

Stealth though I especially in the edition of rulings not ruled I'd of dropped the whole you need cover/concealment thing and just said in some rare instances stealth may be impossible or guaranteed so no roll would be needed. The idea that everyone is constantly looking everywhere needs to die in a fire. Hell no facing should have made it easier on the rogue not harder. Now you shouldn't have to sneak around to their back a pure skill test would be all that is needed. Did you sneak up on their blindside or not. Rules should have been no cover/conceal disadvantage, light cover/conceal normal roll, Better cover/conceal advantage.

Overall I'm not to worried about the mundane vs magical divide. Fighters are doing fine in my games. The hp, AC, damaged per round has made them invaluable. I do wish their were more monk style options though for over the top fighter types. Also I don't think it would wreck the balance if they had pulled a list of martial abilities like many of the current feats like athletic or whatever, the not direct combat ones and given all martial characters access to an additional 3-4 of them over the levels. I'm thinking like adding a climb speed to characters, have a pool of cool athletic stunts martial characters get access to for being so physically focussed.

I think a big problem is GM style. someone wants to do something crazy, tell them to roll for it. Don't say no, that's impossible.

phone typing fun.

 

[Khisanth the Ancient]

Again in my mind that's what the skill contest is about. I don't see the difference in saying dudes got eyes so refined he can see and someone snuck up on him and tremorsense so refined he can use it as sight and someone snuck up on him.

The difference, as I see it, is that tremorsense isn't blocked by intervening objects so there is really no way to hide from it. It just spots anything moving on the ground.

On the other hand, it has the weakness that it's really hard to spot characters standing still, and automatically fails against a levitating or flying character.

But can they be distinguished from a thrown pebble?

I don't see how it could possibly not be - the vibrations would be totally different. Even with just human hearing, could you mistake the sound of a pebble hitting rock for the sound of a footstep?

You need to have a base movement of 158ft/round to hit the current marathon record,

Yeah, the overland travel speeds should maybe be increased a bit.

Even so, though, current marathon record is a lot more friendly terrain and less weight of gear than I think the overland travel rules assume.

Plus, marathoners at that level are trained for something highly specific, so in a D&D world would probably have some class that gives fast movement plus the Mobile feat.

I disagree. The pace is about right for me walking carrying a backpack. I think it would probably impact the accuracy of shooting with a longbow, and it's much too low for charging an opponent.

Well, I think that's a matter of level of abstraction. People only have two speeds - normal and dash (without something like the rogue's Cunning Action). Within those limits, I think it's about right.

And yeah hiding as a bonus action can be powerful but there are some hard limits on stealth, especially once combat is rolling. And spellcasters might have access to improved invisibility which is pretty much the same thing in most cases. Why is that okay along with the stupid huge laundry list of abilities they get but a rogue sneaking is now broken?

Yeah, looking at that again, the limits there are stronger than we were playing it. (And I wasn't saying that it's broken -- I don't think it is, especially in the rules as written -- just that interpreting Stealth super-favorably can make it really powerful.)

But rogues get hide-as-a-bonus-action at 2nd level instead of 7th, and greater invisibility is a concentration spell.

 

[Ahglock]

I'm not sure I buy that. If someone plays a rogue in my games there will almost always be enough scattered cover so they can hide every round. It barely effects play. Withdraw and moving 15 feet back has almost the same effect in most cases. So the rogue can dash into and out of fights relatively unscathed if they don't ready actions, woo that 3d6 they get hit with is changing the tide of battle.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

But teleporting or flying take relatively low level spells. Well before you can run a competitive marathon, you can instantly transport the entire party to your destination.

Teleport is 7th level and can get you killed, and Fly IV for a whole party is 6th level and lasts only ten minutes. Neither is feasible for low-level overland transport.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm not sure I buy that. If someone plays a rogue in my games there will almost always be enough scattered cover so they can hide every round. It barely effects play. Withdraw and moving 15 feet back has almost the same effect in most cases. So the rogue can dash into and out of fights relatively unscathed if they don't ready actions, woo that 3d6 they get hit with is changing the tide of battle.

Hit-and-run rogue tactics are less about the extra 3d6 damage and more about the rogue's ability to solo threats without involvement from the other PCs. If the Rogue can sneak ahead and take out all the guards that were intended to be a Hard encounter, not only does he feel like Batman but the cleric saves on healing spells and the wizard saves his Fireball for something harder.

Of course, this works best in a game where adventures are challenging enough that the players are more worried about not losing than competing with each other for "most kills." Ideally you, as DM, want the wizard to high-five the wizard instead of glaring at him for "kill-stealing." [Also, casual murder is repulsive--if you're worried about "kill stealing" you are probably Evil. IMO.]

 

[Ahglock]

How does a rogue solo a threat with hit and run? Ready action will solve that quick when all attacks are focussed on the rogue.

 

[CapnZapp]

What I really miss from the Rogue class is:

* Clear incentive for the character to join in melee.
* A clear and concise mechanism for involving stealth in getting Sneak Attack.

That is:

This simply means the game should keep the icing of the rogue cake for melee rogues. If you stay at range, you expose yourself to less risk, and less risk should mean less reward. Or, to be honest, the 5E Rogue is probably balanced as it appears RAW: as a ranged combatant with little reason to actively seek melee. So a melee rogue could probably get a little extra.

My ideal Rogue class is still clearly designed around the realization it needs a good shot at Sneak damage every round of every fight, so my ideal sneak-and-sneak rules would probably mean a Rogue that gets to attack and hide each round, with a meaningful benefit of doing so.

Meaning: a benefit that revolves around getting Sneak Attack. (Not hiding to get out of the crosshairs of the monsters. Since the monsters can - presumably - simply switch their attacks to another party member, this is actually not that great a net benefit for the party as a whole).

Perhaps something that for ranged rogues require terrain, but for melee rogues only require feinting. If you risk being a melee rogue, you get in your sneak attacks by simply making a Feint skill check vs the monster's perception (or insight etc). Once you've made your check, your sneak attacks are assured for the rest of that fight against that monster.

Ranged rogues with no place to hide are SOL.

Something like that.

 

[CapnZapp]

Shadow Monk

Sorry but I can't take the suggestion to include a Shadow Monk in any Halfling Rogue party seriously.

Unless...

...you mean the Halfling should be that Shadow Monk!!

Because then your suggestion is awesome.