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

[Flamestrike]

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.

No it doesnt.

When you take the Dodge action, you focus entirely on avoiding attacks. Until the start of your next turn, any Attack roll made against you has disadvantage if you can see the attacker.

Roll20

If you're hidden (unseen and unheard) when you make your attack, you don't reveal yourself until after the attack is resolved (hit or miss).

You cant dodge an attack from a hidden creature.

 

[auburn2]

1) You're a Rogue capable of moving 60' a round using your bonus action alone. Anyone foolish enough to try and get close to you gets shot in the face and fails.

2) You do have a way to get advantage. Bonus action Hide. Unless this 300' engagement was a flat desert somewhere, there should have been ample places to hide.

Your example kind of seems to be 'Well my Rogue once had an encounter on an open field with nowhere to hide/ where I choose not to Hide, at a range of over 300 feet, and was using a weapon with which he was not proficient, and I didnt try to get sneak attack or kite my targets, so that's why rogues dont get sneak attack all the time'

I think the reason you didnt get much sneak attack in that encounter is due to other reasons.

They had bows and were shooting back in the begining of the fight. 60' a round is still over half the battle before I am no longer at long range (and by the way I did use BA dash quite a bit, while the Paladin was using dash as an action). I said I did not want to give up a shot to use double dash and get in front of him and doing so would have been useless.

It was a flat plain in broad daylight (which is why it was a fight at that range) and we were tracking the enemy. Now the DM is pretty RAW on hide, he is not going to let me hide if I am not obscured or can't explain why I should be able to hide. Further at long range BA hide does not enable SA anyway,

There was no way to get sneak attack on over 90% of that battle and no way to get advantage on half of it even if I could have hidden. At least I got to attack almost every round. The Paladin made 3 attacks the whole battle, two of them with thrown javelins.

You act like every single fight is a setup with characters starging from inside 30'. There are some of those, but then a lot of other too.

 

[Flamestrike]

They had bows and were shooting back in the begining of the fight. 60' a round is still over half the battle before I am no longer at long range (and by the way I did use BA dash quite a bit, while the Paladin was using dash as an action). I said I did not want to give up a shot to use double dash and get in front of him and doing so would have been useless.

It was a flat plain in broad daylight (which is why it was a fight at that range) and we were tracking the enemy. Now the DM is pretty RAW on hide, he is not going to let me hide if I am not obscured or can't explain why I should be able to hide. Further at long range BA hide does not enable SA anyway,

There was no way to get sneak attack on over 90% of that battle and no way to get advantage on half of it even if I could have hidden. At least I got to attack almost every round. The Paladin made 3 attacks the whole battle, two of them with thrown javelins.

You act like every single fight is a setup with characters starging from inside 30'. There are some of those, but then a lot of other too.

So you fought on a featureless and flat plain at the extreme range of 300' with a weapon you were not proficient with and a DM that is harsh with his Hiding rulings?

And this rather ridiculous outlier is your example of why Rogues don't often get to apply sneak attack to their damage rolls?

 

[Oofta]

They had bows and were shooting back in the begining of the fight. 60' a round is still over half the battle before I am no longer at long range (and by the way I did use BA dash quite a bit, while the Paladin was using dash as an action). I said I did not want to give up a shot to use double dash and get in front of him and doing so would have been useless.

It was a flat plain in broad daylight (which is why it was a fight at that range) and we were tracking the enemy. Now the DM is pretty RAW on hide, he is not going to let me hide if I am not obscured or can't explain why I should be able to hide. Further at long range BA hide does not enable SA anyway,

There was no way to get sneak attack on over 90% of that battle and no way to get advantage on half of it even if I could have hidden. At least I got to attack almost every round. The Paladin made 3 attacks the whole battle, two of them with thrown javelins.

You act like every single fight is a setup with characters starging from inside 30'. There are some of those, but then a lot of other too.

But at that distance, many builds are relatively ineffective. Any strength based build is screwed until they close the gap. Guess I don't see the point. If this describes every combat then yes, it's an issue with the DM. Otherwise? Some combats some builds will be more effective than others.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Druids at level 4 are pretty useless when they get separated from the party and attacked by about 5 ghouls.

 

[auburn2]

So you fought on a featureless and flat plain at the extreme range of 300' with a weapon you were not proficient with and a DM that is harsh with his Hiding rulings?

And this rather ridiculous outlier is your example of why Rogues don't often get to apply sneak attack to their damage rolls?

I am proficient in heavy crossbow.

Rogues regularly get to apply SA damage, just not 95% of the time like you opined earlier, especially when you amortize that number across all the battles they will fight, with all the weapons they will be using and all the conditions and situations they will be in.

 

[Flamestrike]

Rogues regularly get to apply SA damage, just not 95% of the time like you opined earlier, especially when you amortize that number across all the battles they will fight, with all the weapons they will be using and all the conditions and situations they will be in.

I disagree. Your mileage may vary. My encounters tend to be dungeons and similar areas (the scale of a standard battle map with minis) in groups of 5 PCs, and with ample terrain to allow Hiding.

 

[Maxperson]

I think 95% is still pretty close to accurate. Running, shooting fights are pretty rare. Far more often are fights in dungeons or other places where you can get on the enemy round 1 and the rogue gets sneak attack for 100% of his attacks. The rare running fights where the rogue gets sneak attack on 0% of his attacks are just part of the 5% of attacks where he doesn't get it.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

But at that distance, many builds are relatively ineffective. Any strength based build is screwed until they close the gap. Guess I don't see the point. If this describes every combat then yes, it's an issue with the DM. Otherwise? Some combats some builds will be more effective than others.

That’s one of the primary things that made me realize I wanted to do atributes differently in my game.
For 5e, I just make bows finesse.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You continue to bring up the disadvantage thing. I wasn't replying to you in my last couple of posts, so why do you give a flying fig? It's a topic being discussed. It has nothing to do with you.

I think you may have replied to the wrong post?