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

[Zardnaar]

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

How's the rogue getting a shield?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

How's the rogue getting a shield?

Proficiency swapping, race, training, whatever.

More importantly, when have you ever seen a ranger use one?

 

[Zardnaar]

Proficiency swapping, race, training, whatever.

More importantly, when have you ever seen a ranger use one?

The good rangers I have seen use bow.

Until tashas good rogues dual wielded.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It seems bizarre to me to suggest Rogues are significantly better at avoiding/surviving damage than Rangers. They seem pretty comparable at the table, Rangers having slightly more HP more than compensating for occasional-use Rogue stuff. If they're both Ranged which is arguably optimal for both post-Tasha's then it's even less of an issue.

Out of combat utility is also typically similar. Rogues can optimize a few skills, but Rangers have useful stuff they can do, and spells.

I think if you removed all access to damaging spells or any spell that could increase your chance to hit or the like, from Rangers, and removed the extra attack, and removed any archetype-specific abilities which added damage, you could probably give them Sneak Attack and not do anything horrible to the game. Plus removing all damage/hit related stuff from their spells would increase their overall utility as they'd have to use useful spells, CC or the like instead.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't think you're ever going to get a good assessment of what a Ranger needs to give up to gain Sneak Attack without actually just having one of your players play it and see what happens. And what happens will probably depend greatly also on what the other PCs are at the table.

After all... if you end up having a party wherein you have your SA Ranger but no Rogue next to them... it's really not going to matter if the SA Ranger is "balanced" against the Rogue because you'll have no Rogue to balance against. It'll be the SA Ranger versus the other damage-dealers in the group you'll need to look at (and none of us can white-room ALL of those potential balance issues from here). So make your best guesstimation (Sneak Attack in -- Extra Attack & Fighting Style out) and see what happens when it plays.

 

[Xeviat]

Rogues have evasion and uncanny dodge to help mitigate damage loss.

Again, compare a variant Arcane Trickster to a Ranger with your favorite subclass. That will get you in the right ballpark I think.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So make your best guesstimation (Sneak Attack in -- Extra Attack & Fighting Style out) and see what happens when it plays.

If you don't also remove "bonus damage mechanism" which a lot of Ranger subclasses have, it's going to be between somewhat and drastically ahead of a Rogue. Dread Ambusher for example would be particularly nice, as you'd get two shots at landing SA from a single Attack action (as well as potentially the +1d8 damage, but that's a smaller factor).

 

[Stalker0]

Going back to one of the first posts in this thread, seems that that Sneak Attack is fairly comparable to hunter's mark + extra attack until about 9th level.

So to the OP, do you foresee your games going past that mark? If not, seems a straight swap is dirt simple and won't give you any problems. If you do expect higher levels, probably the easiest way is do that is just cap sneak attack to max 4d6. That will keep you in line into higher levels with no muss and no fuss.

 

[DEFCON 1]

If you don't also remove "bonus damage mechanism" which a lot of Ranger subclasses have, it's going to be between somewhat and drastically ahead of a Rogue. Dread Ambusher for example would be particularly nice, as you'd get two shots at landing SA from a single Attack action (as well as potentially the +1d8 damage, but that's a smaller factor).

Yeah, but like I said, if there's no Rogue in the party, then it doesn't matter how the Ranger balances against one. It'll be more like how does the SA Ranger who might also cast Hunter's Mark (but not necessarily) measure up against the GWM barbarian and the smiting Vengeance Paladin in the party (for example).

 

[auburn2]

I was thinking about the Ranger, and about how I see it more as an expert class than a warrior class, and it occurred to me that I might be on the wrong track with giving Sneak Attack to an Assassin class, and instead might give it to the Ranger.

But that then begs the question, is it enough to give the Ranger Sneak Attack in exchange for Extra Attack? Must they also lose Fighting Style? Even more?

Has anyone tried anything like this in 5e?

I wonder if you could make a half caster into a full caster by dropping Extra Attack?

I mean, I know all these things interact with other features, so it would require playtesting to really know, but I'm curious what folks thoughts are.

I would get rid of extra attack and make their hit dice d8. If you want to keep d10 hit dice I would make it every 3 levels instead of every two.

Compared to a Rogue SA, the Ranger gets more weapon options, including heavy crossbow which is the best in the game as well as better armor and access to shields. So I think nerfing hps is a good equalizer.