Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ancalagon" data-source="post: 6852879" data-attributes="member: 23">HelloI thought I would bundle these questions in a single thread for efficiency.&nbsp; So I used to play 3.X a fair bit and I'm still learning the 5e rules.&nbsp; I've been finding some rather startling differences, so much so I'm wondering if I didn't misunderstand.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm not saying the new rules are bad (reserving judgement really) but I want to be sure I got it right.1:&nbsp; Sneak attacks.So a rogue can do a sneak attack vs an opponent on which he has advantage.&nbsp; Sounds good to me.&nbsp; But based on my reading of the rule, this isn't necessary.&nbsp; All I need is for my opponent to be in a melee fight with someone else - say my buddy Tordek the dwarf is fighting with an orc, all I need to do is walk up to the orc and hit it - no need for a flank etc?&nbsp;&nbsp; I can see this would results in sneak attacks being *extremely* frequent, am I wrong?&nbsp; I can see why they limited it to once a turn!2:&nbsp; Firing into melee.&nbsp; This isn't about trying to fire a bow when the angry orc is next to you.&nbsp; Rather, my buddy Tordek is fighting the orc but I'm not feeling very brave today, and I just want to fire an arrow at the orc instead of engaging into melee myself.&nbsp; In the old days, there would be a substantial penalty to this attack, basically making sure you shot just at the right moment make certain you wouldn't hit you ally.&nbsp; I assumed this would be a disadvantage... but I'm not seeing it in the book.&nbsp; Did I miss it?&nbsp;&nbsp; This matters a lot because it influences how well ranged characters can support a meleeist but also to see if sneak attacks can be applied at range.3:&nbsp; Opportunity attacksTwo sub questions here.&nbsp; A:&nbsp; can an opportunity attack be a sneak attack?&nbsp; What about a shove (that would make fighters a lot stickier...)?&nbsp; A smite?&nbsp; B:&nbsp; In 3.X leaving a threatened square triggered an attack of opportunity.&nbsp; But now it's leaving's someone's *reach*&nbsp; Say Tordek is standing directly in front of an orc warrior, but he doesn't want to attack this orc.&nbsp; Rather he want so attack the orc shaman standing directly behind the orc.&nbsp; In 3.x if he started walking around the orc bodyguard he would take an attack of opportunity.&nbsp; But if it's the warrior orc's *reach*... then all he has to do is move but stay *close* to the warrior orc, staying in its reach the entire time, until the orc shaman (who remember was just behind the orc warrior) is in Tordek's reach...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ancalagon, post: 6852879, member: 23"] Hello I thought I would bundle these questions in a single thread for efficiency. So I used to play 3.X a fair bit and I'm still learning the 5e rules. I've been finding some rather startling differences, so much so I'm wondering if I didn't misunderstand. I'm not saying the new rules are bad (reserving judgement really) but I want to be sure I got it right. 1: Sneak attacks. So a rogue can do a sneak attack vs an opponent on which he has advantage. Sounds good to me. But based on my reading of the rule, this isn't necessary. All I need is for my opponent to be in a melee fight with someone else - say my buddy Tordek the dwarf is fighting with an orc, all I need to do is walk up to the orc and hit it - no need for a flank etc? I can see this would results in sneak attacks being *extremely* frequent, am I wrong? I can see why they limited it to once a turn! 2: Firing into melee. This isn't about trying to fire a bow when the angry orc is next to you. Rather, my buddy Tordek is fighting the orc but I'm not feeling very brave today, and I just want to fire an arrow at the orc instead of engaging into melee myself. In the old days, there would be a substantial penalty to this attack, basically making sure you shot just at the right moment make certain you wouldn't hit you ally. I assumed this would be a disadvantage... but I'm not seeing it in the book. Did I miss it? This matters a lot because it influences how well ranged characters can support a meleeist but also to see if sneak attacks can be applied at range. 3: Opportunity attacks Two sub questions here. A: can an opportunity attack be a sneak attack? What about a shove (that would make fighters a lot stickier...)? A smite? B: In 3.X leaving a threatened square triggered an attack of opportunity. But now it's leaving's someone's *reach* Say Tordek is standing directly in front of an orc warrior, but he doesn't want to attack this orc. Rather he want so attack the orc shaman standing directly behind the orc. In 3.x if he started walking around the orc bodyguard he would take an attack of opportunity. But if it's the warrior orc's *reach*... then all he has to do is move but stay *close* to the warrior orc, staying in its reach the entire time, until the orc shaman (who remember was just behind the orc warrior) is in Tordek's reach... [/QUOTE]

Verification