Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Majoru Oakheart" data-source="post: 6311153" data-attributes="member: 5143">Honestly, it depends what they are guarding.&nbsp; If their goal isn't to start any fights, just to make sure no one gets past them then it doesn't matter how good a fighter they are.&nbsp; They can nudge the fighter next to them when they see people approaching and have him kill them or raise an alarm and have everyone kill them.&nbsp; Even if it comes to a fight, it's better to have a Rogue who spotted the people trying to sneak past him and have a fight at ALL than have the fighter miss them and have the treasure stolen with no fight.Besides, the original question was &quot;Can an elf rogue be a DECENT archer in 5e?&quot;&nbsp; I'd suggest that compared to all the other classes that don't get Extra attack, they are significantly better.&nbsp; Which I'd say makes them decent.&nbsp; And, as I've said before, who does the most damage in a round will swing randomly between Rogue and Fighter in a battle.&nbsp; Especially if we are considering an Archer Rogue with a Sword and Board Fighter which will likely happen in many games.Yes, Fighters who want to be archers will be the best at it.&nbsp; But if we judge how good archers are based on their damage per round alone, then (assuming 5th level characters where both the fighter and rogue have an 18 dex and assuming an AC 12 target) on a scale of &quot;Character with an 8 Dex picks up a bow without proficiency in it&quot;(1.225) to &quot;Fighter who chose the Archery class feature&quot;(13.6) then the Rogue(11.625) is about 85% in his effectiveness as an archer.&nbsp; Which I think definitely qualifies him as &quot;decent&quot;.And when you consider the Rogue's abilities with skills, stealth(ability to avoid battles entirely and create ambushes), maneuverability(cunning action to move in and out of combat so he won't even be there for the enemies to retaliate against or to hide entirely), and Evasion(to absorb damage) as a character they make up for their lack of damage fairly dramatically.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Majoru Oakheart, post: 6311153, member: 5143"] Honestly, it depends what they are guarding. If their goal isn't to start any fights, just to make sure no one gets past them then it doesn't matter how good a fighter they are. They can nudge the fighter next to them when they see people approaching and have him kill them or raise an alarm and have everyone kill them. Even if it comes to a fight, it's better to have a Rogue who spotted the people trying to sneak past him and have a fight at ALL than have the fighter miss them and have the treasure stolen with no fight. Besides, the original question was "Can an elf rogue be a DECENT archer in 5e?" I'd suggest that compared to all the other classes that don't get Extra attack, they are significantly better. Which I'd say makes them decent. And, as I've said before, who does the most damage in a round will swing randomly between Rogue and Fighter in a battle. Especially if we are considering an Archer Rogue with a Sword and Board Fighter which will likely happen in many games. Yes, Fighters who want to be archers will be the best at it. But if we judge how good archers are based on their damage per round alone, then (assuming 5th level characters where both the fighter and rogue have an 18 dex and assuming an AC 12 target) on a scale of "Character with an 8 Dex picks up a bow without proficiency in it"(1.225) to "Fighter who chose the Archery class feature"(13.6) then the Rogue(11.625) is about 85% in his effectiveness as an archer. Which I think definitely qualifies him as "decent". And when you consider the Rogue's abilities with skills, stealth(ability to avoid battles entirely and create ambushes), maneuverability(cunning action to move in and out of combat so he won't even be there for the enemies to retaliate against or to hide entirely), and Evasion(to absorb damage) as a character they make up for their lack of damage fairly dramatically. [/QUOTE]

Verification