D&D 5E Elven Rogue with advantage and Elven Accuracy. Is diping into fighter to get the Archery Fighting Style overkill?

[TwoSix]

It's only one less skill, you get an additional one when you MC into Rogue. The shield proficiency, for example, is easily worth one less skill to a whole lot of builds.

For this specific case, it's pretty much choosing which flavor of nothing burger you want. Probably the single most impactful thing is the choice between Dex and Con saves, otherwise Fighter 1 is giving you heavy armor you're not going to use (because you're Dex based) and 2 extra hit points, and Rogue 1 is giving you your 7th most important skill proficiency.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Maybe I'm running it wrong, but I generally run it that when you attack from stealth, only your first attack would gain advantage; any subsequent shots would not. If that's the case (and I'm not sure what's the RAW rule), it also would devalue the 2nd attack, since it's less accurate and may not trigger sneak attack (depending on whether there's an adjacent ally).

Yes, that's correct. My #2 probably made it sound like you get advantage on the 2nd attack if the first one misses, which is only the case if you have Skulker feat. It probably should have read:

"Getting a second attack is most valuable when your first attack misses and you have an ally adjacent to the target (in order to still get Sneak Attack)...."

 

[TwoSix]

Yes, that's correct. My #2 probably made it sound like you get advantage on the 2nd attack if the first one misses, which is only the case if you have Skulker feat. It probably should have read:

Makes sense. It doesn't really change much, it's not like "enemy has one of your allies adjacent" is some kind of edge case. Unless you're running one of those optimal "everyone is ranged because ranged is so much better" parties that some people like to go on about.

 

[Fenris-77]

For this specific case, it's pretty much choosing which flavor of nothing burger you want. Probably the single most impactful thing is the choice between Dex and Con saves, otherwise Fighter 1 is giving you heavy armor you're not going to use (because you're Dex based) and 2 extra hit points, and Rogue 1 is giving you your 7th most important skill proficiency.

I think the shield proficiency and fighting style are the most important moving parts in that equation. The +2 AC and +2 damage from Duelist, or +2 TH from archery you get there is a pretty big nice buff IMO, unless you plan to focus on melee and dual wield.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Makes sense. It doesn't really change much, it's not like "enemy has one of your allies adjacent" is some kind of edge case. Unless you're running one of those optimal "everyone is ranged because ranged is so much better" parties that some people like to go on about.

Or if you're attacking the boss caster in the back, or whatever.

But, yeah, in many/most cases you still get sneak attack on the 2nd attack, just not with advantage.

 

[TwoSix]

I think the shield proficiency and fighting style are the most important moving parts in that equation. The +2 AC and +2 damage from Duelist, or +2 TH from archery you get there is a pretty big nice buff IMO, unless you plan to focus on melee and dual wield.

Sure, but I thought the discussion was around the relative merits of going Fighter at 1st level over Rogue at 1st level; you're going to get shield proficiency and Fighting Style no matter when you take Fighter 1.

 

[Fenris-77]

Sure, but I thought the discussion was around the relative merits of going Fighter at 1st level over Rogue at 1st level; you're going to get shield proficiency and Fighting Style no matter when you take Fighter 1.

Facts.

Some people really value the CON save. In the listed case it probably doesn't matter unless the save is the key. It is a 'better' save than dex, but whatevs really.

 

[TwoSix]

Facts.

Some people really value the CON save. In the listed case it probably doesn't matter unless the save is the key. It is a 'better' save than dex, but whatevs really.

Yea, it's a tough call. I'd probably favor the Con save, since the Dex save will be decent since you're boosting Dex, but I can see an argument for the Dex save if they go high enough in rogue to get evasion.

 

[Guest 6801328]

One thing we're learning is that you really can't be "wrong" in 5e. Even when there's supposedly mathematical proof that one build is superior to the other, it always leaves out hard-to-quantify variables.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It's only one less skill, you get an additional one when you MC into Rogue. The shield proficiency, for example, is easily worth one less skill to a whole lot of builds.

Can’t agree at all on that, tbh.

I think the shield proficiency and fighting style are the most important moving parts in that equation. The +2 AC and +2 damage from Duelist, or +2 TH from archery you get there is a pretty big nice buff IMO, unless you plan to focus on melee and dual wield.

The only part of that that depends on when you take fighter is shield proficiency, and I’d rather have the extra skill and rogue saves, and dual wield when in Melee. Also, the build in question was an archer