D&D 5E (2014) Assassinate

[Ristamar]

No bonus action when surprised.

Page 189: "...anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action."

 

[Celtavian]

Actually curious, as I don't have my PHB with me. Is the Disadvantage on the save for Hold Person something particular to the Arcane Trickster? As I understand the rules, a situation that would yield Advantage on an attack roll does not necessarily yield Disadvantage on a saving throw. From my understanding, there's no benefit to casting a Save spell from hiding other than, as long as you stay hidden, enemies will have a harder time attacking you.

If the target isn't saving at Disadvantage, chances of success on that Hold Person are not quite as good as your attack with Advantage. (Especially if your Assassin is dual wielding thrown weapons or melee weapons, giving two chances at a hit, both with Advantage, one of which could yield full critical sneak attack.) Also remember that your target gets two chances to save before the Trickster's next turn. One when the spell is cast, and another at the end of its turn. Still a useful opening move! Even taking one turn away from an opponent is a useful thing in a 3-round combat, and anybody who attacks said target before its turn will get Advantage.

On the other hand, casting Hold Person against a target that is already surprised might be a bit of a waste. The target wasn't going to act that round anyway, and if it saves at the end of its turn, you've got nothing to show for your spell slot. Correct me if I'm wrong on this.

On a side tangent, with the Assassinate feature and a dual wielding rogue, you would get automatic criticals both attacks if successful, correct? Not that the critical on the non-sneak-attack is worth much compared to the 6d6 or more from the first attack, so probably better off using that bonus action to do something Cunning.

--EDITED TO ADD--

Obviously, if you're liking the Arcane Trickster, it's a great subclass, and opens up all sorts of creative options. We have an Arcane Trickster in our group now and he's having a great time. Just not sure that the Assassin is as useless as you're making it out to be. Assassinate comes up a lot, and when it does, it's always useful.

It seems all about what you like to do. If your thing is about sneaking around and getting the drop on people, Assassinate is great. And the Advantage from acting first in combat will often come up even when you're not surprising your enemies. That's a good chance at a free sneak attack just for having a high initiative bonus. (There's usually somebody who rolls lower initiative than the guy with +4 or +5 dex. Even if you don't pick up the Alert feat.) Not to mention that, as an Assassin, you don't have to worry about your Intelligence so much, so you can focus on stats like Wisdom and Strength, which make you better at getting climbing into useful places or spotting your enemies before they spot you. Not every Rogue wants to focus resources on Intelligence in order to have a high save DC.

Useless and suboptimal are two different things. No class is useless, even the Ranger Beast Master can be fun for someone to run and would not be useless.

It's very suboptimal. Assassinate is the Assassin's main trick in standard play. It has a few features that could come up in specific encounters, but these features can be duplicated with spells on the Arcane Trickster's list. The Assassin's ability scales because Sneak Attack scales. Whereas an Arcane Trickser's abilities scale with spells and he actually gets powerful abilities useful in combat as part of the class like eventually applying disadvantage on saving throws against his spells when hidden.

When someone creates an ability that looks powerful on paper that they look to limit as they have Assassinate while creating a vastly superior archetype like the Arcane Trickster as an option for the same class, I think of that as inferior design. I hate to see a cool name like Assassin used on a suboptimal archetype. I'm sure some will still take the Assassin until they are able to analyze class abilities with an eye toward optimal choices. Once they can do that, the Assassin will rarely be taken. I think the class would be more attractive with the more liberal interpretation of surprise, though maybe not for true optimizers. I know I can't take the archetype any longer. Spells and the Arcane Trickster abilities are too attractive and versatile compared to a very high damage hit every now and again.

As far as your other question, I believe the disadvantage on spell saves when hidden is obtained about level 9.

 

[Celtavian]

BUt you need to realize that is not how the rules describe combat.

The rules do not allow for those 'not quite in combat yet' attacks.

Not according to Mearls.

 

[Paraxis]

A surprised character only gets:

• Maybe a single bonus action
• a few seconds of talking
• An interaction with object.
• You recover the ability to react

That's still a large and impressive ability of function...
Note that I can see using a Ki point strike or Action Surge on the surprise turn... they are a bonus action, not an action. That's the grey area RAW.

The talking, the readying of a weapon, the ability to react - those are RAW and apparently RAI.

You can't take a bonus action if you can't take an action.

You can't interact with an object unless you move or take an action.

"You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action’s timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action."

"You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action. "

So when your surprised on your turn you can maybe say something, and after your turn is over you can take a reaction.

 

[MG.0]

So when your surprised on your turn you can maybe say something...

Usually "Ow!", or sometimes "S***!"

 

[Hriston]

Not according to Mearls.

Where does Mearls endorse out-of-initiative attacks?

 

[Hriston]

yea, the bard uses invisibility (2nd level) not improved...I have to ask him what spells he knows, the only ones I ever remember him casting in the last 7 levels are Hideous laughter (1st) Cure Wounds (1st, but has used all the slots) and Invisability (2nd)... infact I can also only name 2 cantrips... minor illusion, and message.... he really doesn't use his spells that much

In that case, the Bard would only get advantage/Sneak Attack on his 2nd round attack unless conditions are conducive for hiding again using Cunning Action to get advantage in later rounds. If that's the case, I could see both Assassins being more effective using ranged attacks from hiding, except then the Drow might be risking letting the Wizard get away, and the Bard letting the Drow get away. With only the 2nd level Invisibility the trade-off seems quite a bit better for the Drow.

 

[Coredump]

If invisibility does not give advantage on attack rolls, I see no reason to grant it for stealthing. If I start handing out advantage on attack rolls for "exceptional" stealth, what does that do for enhance ability dexterity spell. It devalues what the spell does.
It's not something I want to start doing. Sets a precedent I don't want to deal with.

First of all.... being invisible *DOES* give advantage on attack rolls.
Second...what are you talking about?? You quoted me, but I said *nothing* about gaining advantage on attack rolls from 'exceptional stealth'....??

My entire passage is about getting advantage on the *initiative* roll (and/or disadvantage for the target)

 

[Hriston]

I imagine they didn't specify an end because it's not a condition. Being accustomed to 3e, that threw me off at first.

Right, I remember a lot of people calling Surprise a quasi-condition soon after the edition came out. This may be because the rules refer to a "surprised creature". Never having played 3rd or 4th edition, conditions were all new to me anyway.

To me, Surprise, like a spell, is something you can do to a creature that has two effects. The rules are clear about when those effects end. At that point the creature is no longer surprised.

 

[Hriston]

You are correct. Reactions are usually regained at the start of turns. Isn't it logical to assume that if you don't get a reaction, you haven't taken a turn?

Not really. Surprise is an exception to the general rule that you can take your reaction whenever circumstance or an ability triggers it. For the period in which you are surprised, which is from the beginning of combat until the end of your first turn, you cannot take you reaction. It really has nothing to do with when your reaction refreshes, especially considering you haven't had an opportunity to take a reaction yet. It wouldn't make sense, for example for you to be able to take your reaction in the first round before your turn, and then not be able to during your turn.