D&D 5E Rogues are Awesome. Is it the Tasha's Effect?

[UngeheuerLich]

So long as you and your players are fine with you not DMing as RAW or RAI then it's fine. For me, I'd find it frustrating that you are breaking a core mechanic of my class. I'd much rather you have an enemy archer or spellcaster hold their action until I pop out. Or have a mounted enemy chase me down. That would be cool. There are other ways of challenging the rogue without breaking the RAW and RAI.

I don't see, why I am not using RAW.
If you use the same stone again and again, advantage is the RAW solution.

Staight from the SRD, last paragraph of the advantage/disadvantage section:

You usually gain advantage or disadvantage through the use of special abilities, actions, or spells. Inspiration can also give a character advantage. The GM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant advantage or impose disadvantage as a result.

Edit: and my personal guideline is: would a player complain if that tactic is used against them. And if you think about it: every CR 1/4 goblin can hide as a bonus action and has a 1d6+2 ranged attack with a lot of reach. Look at how the first encounter in Lost mines of phandelver goes if all goblins split up and start hidden. It will be the first TPK.

 

[Mistwell]

So long as you and your players are fine with you not DMing as RAW or RAI then it's fine. For me, I'd find it frustrating that you are breaking a core mechanic of my class. I'd much rather you have an enemy archer or spellcaster hold their action until I pop out. Or have a mounted enemy chase me down. That would be cool. There are other ways of challenging the rogue without breaking the RAW and RAI.

I get where you are coming from. But as for RAW, I don't think the rules as written determine that is or is not how it's "supposed" to be used. The DM applies advantage and disadvantage whenever they feel the circumstances justify it and find it appropriate, and that's all they did in making that determination. Nothing about the core mechanic is "broken" by this determination.

 

[ECMO3]

TWF is still optimal over Aim (presuming another way to attain SA) from a raw DPR perspective.

Advantage is two rolls to hit, and both could hit but you only get SA+Weapon

Two attacks is just as likely to hit as one attack with Advantage, but also has the possibility of both weapons hitting (for extra weapon damage).

This is not true except at 1st and 2nd level for three reasons: First, using a single weapon allows a d8 Rapier, second advantage lets you crit the SA on the 2nd d20 roll even if both rolls are good enough to hit and third advantage lets you land your ability bonus if only the 2nd dice is high enough to hit.

With TWF you lose crit SA dice if the second roll crits after the action already landed SA without a crit.

At 3rd level and above a Rogue wielding a Rapier with advantage will outdamage a Rogue wielding 2 shortswords using TWF.

Even a Rogue wielding a single shortsword with advantage will outdamage one using two shortswords and TWF after 11th level.

 

[Rabulias]

At 3rd level and above a Rogue wielding a Rapier with advantage will outdamage a Rogue wielding 2 shortswords using TWF.

Even a Rogue wielding a single shortsword with advantage will outdamage one using two shortswords and TWF after 11th level.

Why doesn't the rogue with two shortswords get advantage in your comparison? If the rogue can rely on getting advantage a lot, why not use two weapons? If you have advantage for one attack, you likely have it for the other. Two weapons are better. It's all about landing that Sneak Attack damage. Every. Round. You. Can. And two weapons gives you two chances to do so.

 

[Ovinomancer]

This is not true except at 1st and 2nd level for three reasons: First, using a single weapon allows a d8 Rapier, second advantage lets you crit the SA on the 2nd d20 roll even if both rolls are good enough to hit and third advantage lets you land your ability bonus if only the 2nd dice is high enough to hit.

With TWF you lose crit SA dice if the second roll crits after the action already landed SA without a crit.

At 3rd level and above a Rogue wielding a Rapier with advantage will outdamage a Rogue wielding 2 shortswords using TWF.

Even a Rogue wielding a single shortsword with advantage will outdamage one using two shortswords and TWF after 11th level.

If you crunch the numbers, this isn't at all clear. Two weapon fighting has a significant increase in weapon damage dice applied, while advantage has a slight increase in sneak attack dice applied. This varied by chance to hit, but at a 60% base chance to his, TWF does 1.3 times weapon damage and .84 times sneak attack damage, on average. Advantage does .92 weapon and .88 sneak.

Let's say that weapon is a d8, for 4.5 damage, and sneak is 5 dice, for 17.5 damage. This means that TWF is doing 1.3(4.5)+.84(17.5) or 20.55. Advantage is doing .92(4.5) + .88(17.5) or 19.54.

The advantage of advantaged ranged attacks vs TWF isn't raw damage, it's the other, less mathy benefits of target selection efficiency, mobility, and damage mitigation, with a second order effect of rogue build efficacy (you don't have to prioritize CON for front line soak).

 

[Sword of Spirit]

This varied by chance to hit, but at a 60% base chance to his, TWF does 1.3 times weapon damage and .84 times sneak attack damage, on average. Advantage does .92 weapon and .88 sneak.

How is Advantage getting more sneak attack damage? Is this based on being able to choose to apply sneak attack on the first attack before finding out that the second was a crit?

 

[Ovinomancer]

How is Advantage getting more sneak attack damage? Is this based on being able to choose to apply sneak attack on the first attack before finding out that the second was a crit?

Because it has a higher chance to land a crit that results in 2Y. This approach assumes you add sneak attack to the first hit if TWF. If you aren't doing this, then your overall damage output drops pretty severely. You have a new case where your damage for the round is just X and it's replacing X+Y.

 

[tommybahama]

I get where you are coming from. But as for RAW, I don't think the rules as written determine that is or is not how it's "supposed" to be used. The DM applies advantage and disadvantage whenever they feel the circumstances justify it and find it appropriate, and that's all they did in making that determination. Nothing about the core mechanic is "broken" by this determination.

Jeremy Crawford said that RAI the rogue is supposed to get advantage even if hiding and attacking from the same place over and over. It is a core mechanic of the class. I think that's why they added the steady aim. Some DMs just can't wrap their heads around core mechanics, although it would help if WotC was more transparent about their design intents. Crawford is the worst at this with his incomplete twitter responses.

 

[Maxperson]

How is Advantage getting more sneak attack damage? Is this based on being able to choose to apply sneak attack on the first attack before finding out that the second was a crit?

The more d20's you roll, the more chances to crit you get. That's going to increase the sneak attack damage over the long run.

 

[Zardnaar]

We'll see.

Jeremy Crawford said that RAI the rogue is supposed to get advantage even if hiding and attacking from the same place over and over. It is a core mechanic of the class. I think that's why they added the steady aim. Some DMs just can't wrap their heads around core mechanics, although it would help if WotC was more transparent about their design intents. Crawford is the worst at this with his incomplete twitter responses.

Core mechanics don't support Crawford's PoV. It's not core in the PHB.

He may have changed his mind or thinks they should but its not in the PHB.

Very few players irl are overly familiar with his Twitter stuff or even the errata.

The reason I don't use things outside the PHB is because of that. If you are you need to be specific not "I'm using the errata and JCs personal opinion".

If the Halfling ability works as JC intended they really screwed up as it's a quasi greater invisibility effect. Combined with the rest of the halfling package that's pretty damn good relative to the other PHB races espicially Dragonborn.

Either way they done screwed up good.