D&D 5E Moving out of concealment to attack - when is stealth broken?

[Flamestrike]

And that means we should make it even easier? No.

Mate, Rouges dont become 'broken' when they get sneak attack damage. They're just useless in combat without it, and their combat effectiveness is based around the assumption that they get it on nearly every single attack.

Baseline Fighter 11, greatsword - 3 attacks, 6d6+15 damage (re-roll 1's amd 2's) so around 45 damage - and likely considerably more via GWM, Sup dice, Expanded critical or whatever from archetype and Action surge or magica weapon effects triggering 3 times.

Baseline Rogue 11, shortsword - 1 attack, 7d6+5 damage, so around 40 damage. Unable to increase much higher with feats and archetypes.

Without SA, the 11th level Rogue deals around 9 damage with his single attack, which is clearly trash.

 

[auburn2]

If your Rogue is not getting SA damage in 95 percent of the times they're rolling damage, you're not Rogueing correctly.

I disagree with that. They have disadvantage more than 5 percent of the time they are rolling damage and that stops SA regardless of the other conditions. After disadvantage, you do not get SA damage unless you are using a ranged or finesse weapon, meaning if you are throwing oil, casting a spell, pushing someone off a cliff or anything other than attacking with a ranged or finesse weapon you are not getting it either.

Those combined are going to account for well over 5% of the times you are rolling damage even if you could get it every other time (which you cant). I think in general it is more like you will get a sneak attack opportunity 60-70% of your turns as a Rogue. If you only consider the turns you make a weapon attack and forget turns where you do another action it is probably about 80% in my campaigns, both as a player and as a DM more for a swashbuckler.

If you were actually expected to get it 100% of the time there would be no conditions at all. It would be like the gloom stalker's extra damage. The rules would say the Rogue "gets sneak attack damage on 1 attack a turn" and leave it at that.

The last battle I had with my 2nd level Rogue we started 300 ft from the enemy. With my heavy crossbow I made 9 attacks and got exactly 1 SA. The first and only time I got SA in the entire battle was when I shot a bolt from 95ft away against an enemy that was finally in melee with the Paladin on the 2nd to last round of battle and you would be hard pressed to explain how your Rogue would have got SA. Of note I did manage a crit with disadvantage on a long range shot. That is the first I can remember doing that myself .... no SA dice on it though.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

That is different than getting advantage from hiding every round.

No one claimed the design intent is to hide every round.

 

[Maxperson]

If you focus on one guy while many are trying to kill you, then are going to be dead a lot quicker. Sorry I don't buy this and I think you contradict yourself here.

You can only be so aware of what goes on around you until you get to the point where you are fatally distracted. This is why 2 on 1 and 3 on 1 usually end up with the 1 dead. The 1 can't focus on 2 or 3 enemies at the same time and those are the ones he knows about. If he's going to split his attention further and look for enemies that might be lurking, waiting to jump out at him, he's got a death wish and will soon have it granted.

The whole premise of your argument is the guy is not paying attention to the main threat - i.e. the Rogue that is trying to sneak attack him.

Um. No. The premise of my argument is literally the opposite. The main threat is the one in front of him trying to bash his head in with a mace. Splitting your attention in all directions to spot a rogue that might or might not even exist is stupid.

 

[Flamestrike]

The last battle I had with my 2nd level Rogue we started 300 ft from the enemy. With my heavy crossbow I made 9 attacks and got exactly 1 SA.

1. 300' battles are outliers.
2. How were you proficient in the Heavy Crossbow?
3. Presuming a 30' movement speed, and your enemy remaining where he was, instead of plinking away with disadvantage on the attack rolls and no sneak attack to the damage, you could have instead closed to inside of 100' within 3 rounds (Dash and bonus action Dash each of rounds 1 and 2 covering 90' each round, then moved 30' on round 3, bonus action Hide, and then Attack with advantage for your action), making your attacks with advantage AND getting your sneak attack in each of rounds 3-9 instead of just on round 9.

If you choose to play a rogue your way, of course you wont get sneak attack. If you had have instead played your rogue to his strengths (kiting and sniping) you would have been 3 times more effective gaining advantage on 7/9 attack rolls and added sneak attack damage on all the attacks that hit.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I do try and throw in the occasional long range fight for the sake of variety.

 

[Reynard]

If Rogues were supposed to Sneak Attack every round, then Sneak Attack would have been written without any advantage requirement.

They don't require advantage to get Sneak Attack. They require teamwork.

 

[DND_Reborn]

FWIW, most people can't react fast enough to strike in that fraction of a second it takes you to half turn your head and use your eyes to check behind you. By the time they think to strike you can already be looking at your attacker again.

As to the advantage of numbers, this is very much a big deal IME doing martial arts and self-defense.

Even without flanking rules, granting attackers advantage when ganging up on a common defender is a good idea IMO. Of course, it can be a BIG advantage, so I've suggested instead granting the attackers a cumulative +1 bonus instead: so three attackers on one defender would gain a +3 bonus. To deny this bonus, you can have the defender accept disadvantage on his own attacks. It works as a nice house-rule for our tables.

 

[Asisreo]

Mate, Rouges dont become 'broken' when they get sneak attack damage. They're just useless in combat without it, and their combat effectiveness is based around the assumption that they get it on nearly every single attack.

Baseline Fighter 11, greatsword - 3 attacks, 6d6+15 damage (re-roll 1's amd 2's) so around 45 damage - and likely considerably more via GWM, Sup dice, Expanded critical or whatever from archetype and Action surge or magica weapon effects triggering 3 times.

Baseline Rogue 11, shortsword - 1 attack, 7d6+5 damage, so around 40 damage. Unable to increase much higher with feats and archetypes.

Without SA, the 11th level Rogue deals around 9 damage with his single attack, which is clearly trash.

DnD has a range to the damage they expect someone or something to do.

There's no reason why rogues can be assumed to have such equal damage to other classes at all times since they clearly have other powerful features in their belt like expertise, uncanny dodge, and high dex usage.

I think the designers meant that nothing breaks if they have sneak attack every round and the DM shouldn't try to prevent it. Not that if they don't get it, they'll fall behind the way saying they're "supposed to" does.

 

[nogray]

Further even if an enemy successfully hides, the enemy can flat prevent advantage simply by taking the dodge action. If the enemy takes a dodge action or does anythign else to cause disadvantage then it is impossible for a Rogue to get advantage. He can be melee attacking while invisible and hidden using a Barbarian Reckless attack ability against an enemy illuminated by faerie fire who is prone, poisoned, and restrained and he will still not have advantage if the enemy takes dodge action or there is any other condition that applies disadvantage. A single thing that causes disadvantage will cancel all advantages.

I don't know if this was addressed in the pages or time between then and now, but this isn't entirely true. The "a single thing that causes disadvantage ..." part at the end is correct, but the "preventing advantage from hidden enemies attacking by taking the dodge action" part is not correct. Against a hidden (or otherwise unseen) attacher, the dodge action does nothing. The dodge action only imposes disadvantage if you can see the attacker. If you successfully hide (or are outside the target's darkvision range, etc.) then the Dodge action doesn't help them at all.

 

[Flamestrike]

I don't know if this was addressed in the pages or time between then and now, but this isn't entirely true. The "a single thing that causes disadvantage ..." part at the end is correct, but the "preventing advantage from hidden enemies attacking by taking the dodge action" part is not correct. Against a hidden (or otherwise unseen) attacher, the dodge action does nothing. The dodge action only imposes disadvantage if you can see the attacker. If you successfully hide (or are outside the target's darkvision range, etc.) then the Dodge action doesn't help them at all.

The words 'you can zee' are so often missed in spells and abilities by many.

 

[Oofta]

BTW: the DM granting advantage or disadvantage based on the current circumstances is in the section on using ability scores, not under modifications to the game. The example they give is:

For example, imagine a wizard is running down a dungeon corridor to escape from a beholder. Around the corner ahead, two ogres lie in wait. Does the wizard hear the ogres readying their ambush? You look at the wizard’s passive Wisdom (Perception) score and consider all the factors weighing on it.​

​

The wizard is running, not paying attention to what’s ahead of him. This imposes disadvantage on the wizard’s ability check. However, the ogres are readying a portcullis trap and making a lot of noise with a winch, which could grant the wizard advantage on the check. As a result, the character has neither advantage nor disadvantage on the Wisdom check, and you don’t need to consider any additional factors. Past encounters with an ogre ambush, the fact that the wizard’s ears are still ringing from the thunderwave spell he cast at the beholder, the overall noise level of the dungeon — none of that matters any more. They all cancel out.​

​

So if you think someone in combat should have disadvantage on their check because much like the wizard they are not paying attention, then give them advantage.

It's not a house rule, it's part of being a DM and deciding when you think advantage and disadvantage should be applied for things not called out in the rules.

 

[auburn2]

1. 300' battles are outliers.
2. How were you proficient in the Heavy Crossbow?
3. Presuming a 30' movement speed, and your enemy remaining where he was, instead of plinking away with disadvantage on the attack rolls and no sneak attack to the damage, you could have instead closed to inside of 100' within 3 rounds (Dash and bonus action Dash each of rounds 1 and 2 covering 90' each round, then moved 30' on round 3, bonus action Hide, and then Attack with advantage for your action), making your attacks with advantage AND getting your sneak attack in each of rounds 3-9 instead of just on round 9.

If you choose to play a rogue your way, of course you wont get sneak attack. If you had have instead played your rogue to his strengths (kiting and sniping) you would have been 3 times more effective gaining advantage on 7/9 attack rolls and added sneak attack damage on all the attacks that hit.

1. 300 feet are rare, but 150 feet are not and that 1st attack on a 150ft engagement is usually going to be either with disadvantage or without any other way to get SA. Assuming you do not get SA that first attack you would need 19 more rounds all with SA to bring that up to 95% and very few battles last 20 rounds.

2. You do not need to be proficient to get SA. There are several ways to get proficiency though, Racial proficiency and variant human or custom lineage with the weapon master feat being the two most obvious. Weapon master is an awesome feat for a 1st level Rogue because it boosts dex, giving you up to a +3 when combined with custom lineage and lets you pick up whip, heavy crossbow, scimitar and net. Crossbow gets you a 1d10 weapon, whip gets you a reach weapon, RAW you can us a net and get SA damage while throwing a net if an ally is within 5 feet and you have advantage (canceling the long range disadvantage) and scimitar is not that beneficial, but hey if you find a magic scimitar you are proficient. Getting sharpshooter down the road lets you shoot without disadvantage out to 400' with your crossbow and lets you use your net without disadvantage.

3. I was within 100 feet to some of them on the 5th round or so, but shortly after that the enemy was fleeing in different directions. Following rounds were spent gaining little ground. Regardless being within 100' did not and will not garner SA without any allies close by and without advantage.

Taking double dash like you suggest would have put me well in front of anyone else in the party, made me the target of most of the enemies, and STILL would not have gotten me sneak attack, because I would not have had advantage on the attack, or any ally close enough to trigger it. There was no way for me to get advantage until the Paladin got close. Even if I was 3rd level and had steady aim I would not have been able to get it more than once more because steady aim cuts move to 0. Finally even if I could have somehow got SA by doing double dash for two rounds that would have eliminated two entire attacks, so it would not have been 7 out of 9, instead it would be 5 out of 7 and 7d10+5d6+21<9d10+1d6+27 meaning even if i could have used that to get more SA later in the battle, it would have been less damage.

 

[auburn2]

I don't know if this was addressed in the pages or time between then and now, but this isn't entirely true. The "a single thing that causes disadvantage ..." part at the end is correct, but the "preventing advantage from hidden enemies attacking by taking the dodge action" part is not correct. Against a hidden (or otherwise unseen) attacher, the dodge action does nothing. The dodge action only imposes disadvantage if you can see the attacker. If you successfully hide (or are outside the target's darkvision range, etc.) then the Dodge action doesn't help them at all.

Dodge certainly does stop SA from a hidden archer unless there is an ally within 5 feet of them. If you do not have advantage or an ally within 5 feet you don't get SA and dodge will cancel all advantages regardless of how many there are.

Now if they do have another ally within 5 feet sure it doesn't disable it by itself, but the enemy gets a vote. Depending on the inititive order there are other things he can do, for example if the Rogue goes between the bad guy and the ally, the bad guy can take dodge and back up away from the ally. Every situation is different, but usually an adversary can stop SA if they make a determined effort to do that (which may or may not be a good idea).

 

[Maxperson]

1. 300 feet are, but 150 feet are not and that 1st attack on a 150ft engagement is usually going to be either with disadvantage or without any other way to get SA. Assuming you do not get SA that first attack you would need 19 more rounds all with SA to bring that up to 95% and very, very few battles last 20 rounds.

At that distance, few if any of the PCs are attacking in round 1, so the rogue isn't really behind

BTW: the DM granting advantage or disadvantage based on the current circumstances is in the section on using ability scores, not under modifications to the game. The example they give is:

For example, imagine a wizard is running down a dungeon corridor to escape from a beholder. Around the corner ahead, two ogres lie in wait. Does the wizard hear the ogres readying their ambush? You look at the wizard’s passive Wisdom (Perception) score and consider all the factors weighing on it.​

​

The wizard is running, not paying attention to what’s ahead of him. This imposes disadvantage on the wizard’s ability check. However, the ogres are readying a portcullis trap and making a lot of noise with a winch, which could grant the wizard advantage on the check. As a result, the character has neither advantage nor disadvantage on the Wisdom check, and you don’t need to consider any additional factors. Past encounters with an ogre ambush, the fact that the wizard’s ears are still ringing from the thunderwave spell he cast at the beholder, the overall noise level of the dungeon — none of that matters any more. They all cancel out.​

​

So if you think someone in combat should have disadvantage on their check because much like the wizard they are not paying attention, then give them advantage.

It's not a house rule, it's part of being a DM and deciding when you think advantage and disadvantage should be applied for things not called out in the rules.

You're misusing that rule. That rule is for special circumstances only, not blanket rules. A blanket rule to make combat disadvantage is a house rule.

 

[fearsomepirate]

In a campaign where most battles are foes lobbing arrows and spells at each other from ranges between 300' and 150', and the DM isn't letting the rogue hide much, it's a pretty crappy class to play. In a typical dungeon crawl, the rogue should be almost always having sneak attack, since he can pretty much always attack whomever the Fighter is attacking. Even if the rogue gets SA every round, his damage output will be somewhat behind a Fighter's, depending on level and build. Add advantage to that, and the rogue still isn't much ahead of a Champion (who isn't even the hardest-hitting Fighter).

Plot is the Y probability a character does at least X damage.

 

[auburn2]

In a campaign where most battles are foes lobbing arrows and spells at each other from ranges between 300' and 150', and the DM isn't letting the rogue hide much, it's a pretty crappy class to play. In a typical dungeon crawl, the rogue should be almost always having sneak attack, since he can pretty much always attack whomever the Fighter is attacking. Even if the rogue gets SA every round, his damage output will be somewhat behind a Fighter's, depending on level and build. Add advantage to that, and the rogue still isn't much ahead of a Champion (who isn't even the hardest-hitting Fighter).

Plot is the Y probability a character does at least X damage.

I think this is misleading for a couple reasons:

1. You are assuming the GWM fighter gets to attack with his heavy weapon every turn. That is not a good assumption because even in a dungeon environment he is going to have to take dash to get to another enemy or make ranged attacks every now and then. The Rogue is far more versatile in landing heavy damage as he is able to do it on both ranged and melee attacks.

2. It is not appropriate to compare damage percentage because they are not the same. If the champion takes +10 damage his hit percentage is going to be 25% lower. If you compare this to a Rogue getting advantage he is going to hit a lot less. Until he gets 3 attacks a round there is a crossover at high AC where the Rogue will be doing more damage (assuming SA). Once he gets 3 attacks a round the fighter will outrun the Rogue at all ACs, ability to get in melee attacks not withstanding.

3. The Rogue is an awesome class to play and while certain combats are not his forte it is unmatched in role play IMO and is my favorite class. Even when you are in a battle where enemies are lobbing arrows from range it is still more fun to be a Rogue than a melee fighter.

 

[fearsomepirate]

1. You are assuming the GWM fighter gets to attack with his heavy weapon every turn.

It's a comparison of a single turn. Yes, if the DM consistently gives the rogue endless hiding places while taking measures to ensure the melee characters can't engage, the rogue will greatly outdamage any melee class, especially once the melee players get fed up with not being allowed to contribute and stop coming to game night. The point here is to illustrate that a rogue's sneak attack is in the same ballpark as a fighter's normal attack.

2. It is not appropriate to compare damage percentage because they are not the same. If the champion takes +10 damage his hit percentage is going to be 25% lower.

I'm considering the Great Weapon Fighting Style, which lets you reroll 1s and 2s, not the Great Weapon Master feat.

3. The Rogue is an awesome class to play and while certain combats are not his forte it is unmatched in role play IMO and is my favorite class. Even when you are in a battle where enemies are lobbing arrows from range it is still more fun to be a Rogue than a melee fighter.

A Fighter still gets all 3 attacks if he uses a longbow. Unless he has 8 DEX, that puts him ahead of a rogue without sneak attack. So, one way or another, no, a rogue's sneak attack isn't particularly overpowered.

 

[Oofta]

In games I've run and played the rogue gets sneak attack probably 95% of the time. If that's not possible, then the odds are that other builds will also not be as effective.

No analysis can possibly cover every style of game for every campaign.

 

[fearsomepirate]

In the games I've run, the rogue gets sneak attack probably 95% of the time, up until I stopped reminding the rogue player every game how to strategically use Ready or otherwise choose a target to ensure he got it, at which point the frequency dropped to about 20%. The best-planned rule system will not survive contact with the players.