D&D 5E What Is Sneak Attack "Equal" To, Balance-wise?

[tetrasodium]

Sure, if we assume maxed out attribute scores for both. A Ranger can dump Dex and maintain parity, however.

I saw someone make a damage comparison the other day proclaiming the greatness of cantrips using a fighter... with ten strength... and a shortsword or some other d6 weapon. This seems similar, why on earth would you compare a rogue to a ranger that dumps dex. Are you still talking about 5e?

 

[Parmandur]

I saw someone make a damage comparison the other day proclaiming the greatness of cantrips using a fighter... with ten strength... and a shortsword or some other d6 weapon. This seems similar, why on earth would you compare a rogue to a ranger that dumps dex. Are you still talking about 5e?

A Ranger can dump Dex: A rogue ought not do so. The Ranger has no repercussions to their AC potential for doing so, and focusing on Wisdom, Strength and Constitution exclusively.

 

[cbwjm]

The Ranger is actually slightly better at avoiding being attacked, because of their AC advantage, and can stand longer if it comes to it. Their original design us not to be the high damage king: that is the Rogue's domain.

I'm not sure rangers really have an AC advantage vs rogues. Though they can start out with medium armour, most (possibly every) rangers I've seen seem to wear the same light armour as rogues with the same bonus to dexterity. None of them seem to bother with shields for that extra AC bonus, instead dual wielding or staying on the sidelines shooting arrows.

 

[cbwjm]

A Ranger can dump Dex: A rogue ought not do so. The Ranger has no repercussions to their AC potential for doing so, and focusing on Wisdom, Strength and Constitution exclusively.

Rangers still need a 14 dex at least to make best use of medium armour, they don't start with heavy armour so can't make up the difference that way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The Ranger is actually slightly better at avoiding being attacked, because of their AC advantage, and can stand longer if it comes to it. Their original design us not to be the high damage king: that is the Rogue's domain.

I don’t know that the Rogue can be called the high damage king, whereas the Ranger does seem to have been built to kill things quickly.

Anyway, the original intent is academic, we’re home brewing.

 

[Campbell]

You should weigh the overall toolkit after the change. My experience from playing a sorcerer / swashbuckler is that Sneak Attack becomes much better as a feature when you have multiple chances to pull it off.

 

[Zardnaar]

Ranger AC better low levels in medium armor assuming point buy.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Ranger AC better low levels in medium armor assuming point buy.

Only if the rogue doesn't get studded leather, and again, the rogue is less MAD. Assuming they both start with a 16, as most will.

Anyway, I don't think the ranger is quite as strong a class in general as the rogue, so I'm okay if this idea gives them an overall mild boost.

 

[Zardnaar]

Only if the rogue doesn't get studded leather, and again, the rogue is less MAD. Assuming they both start with a 16, as most will.

Anyway, I don't think the ranger is quite as strong a class in general as the rogue, so I'm okay if this idea gives them an overall mild boost.

With a shield AC 17 vs 15.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

With a shield AC 17 vs 15.

Either build can use a shield, and it is optimal for neither.