D&D 5E Rogues are Awesome. Is it the Tasha's Effect?

[Zardnaar]

I am pretty sure it is not optimal for the overwhelming majority of levels. I've seen numerous charts of the damage comparison, and GFB/BB beat TWF for almost all the levels, due to scaling of the cantrips damage. I guess I need to dig one of those charts up, since you're the second person to make this claim.

White room yes but.....

1. GFB misses, dual wielding gets another attack.

2. Has the rogue splashed the fighter level?
3. Most games likely are lower level.

GFB doesn't win single target until level 9 or so.

Online only 10% of games go over level 10.

Throw in misses and dual wielding looks pretty good.

Pre Tasha's anyway.

Level 1-4 it's roughly break even but you double chance to sneak attack.

GFB lvl 5 wins on paper but yeah still double chance to sneak attack.

If you splash that fighter level roughly even.
Level 9+ gfb starts looking better.

Post Tasha using new rule it's a blow out imho to GFB.

 

[auburn2]

White room yes but.....

Where TWF wins is on flexibility. TWF does give you two opportunities to land SA and as such it lets you delay your decision on what to use your BA for. If you hit with your first you can forgo the offhand attack and disengage or do something else with your BA. Also if you already have advantage on the first attack from a familiar or poisioned enemy or something else, then yes getting the second attack does marginally increase your chance to land SA, but with advantage you are probably going to hit on your first attack anyway.

In terms of build any rogue can do TWF and just about all of them are carrying around at least a couple daggers and sometimes even a short sword as a backup weapon. So you can build a rapier-GFB rogue and still do TWF if faced with a very high AC wizard or something else that you are going to need to ensure the hit on.

 

[Mistwell]

White room yes but.....

1. GFB misses, dual wielding gets another attack.

2. Has the rogue splashed the fighter level?
3. Most games likely are lower level.

GFB doesn't win single target until level 9 or so.

Online only 10% of games go over level 10.

Throw in misses and dual wielding looks pretty good.

Pre Tasha's anyway.

Level 1-4 it's roughly break even but you double chance to sneak attack.

GFB lvl 5 wins on paper but yeah still double chance to sneak attack.

If you splash that fighter level roughly even.
Level 9+ gfb starts looking better.

Post Tasha using new rule it's a blow out imho to GFB.

I am not white rooming it, I play an arcane trickster with green flame blade, booming blade, a familiar, and the steady aim ability. I started with two weapon fighting but shifted to rapier because it meaningfully increased my damage output after only a few levels. No fighter levels, and we're not at high level and nowhere close to being 10th level. I don't miss very often because it's relatively easy to get advantage with a familiar or steady aim or something else like faerie fire.

I know there are charts which show that holds for most games on average, factoring in chances to hit and damage and even crit chances. I am pretty sure you guys have underestimated the scaling damage of the cantrips and overestimated the chances of missing. It's a rogue after all, which means not very multi-attribute-dependent and fully able to focus on dex.

 

[Zardnaar]

I am not white rooming it, I play an arcane trickster with green flame blade, booming blade, a familiar, and the steady aim ability. I started with two weapon fighting but shifted to rapier because it meaningfully increased my damage output after only a few levels. No fighter levels, and we're not at high level and nowhere close to being 10th level. I don't miss very often because it's relatively easy to get advantage with a familiar or steady aim or something else like faerie fire.

I know there are charts which show that holds for most games on average, factoring in chances to hit and damage and even crit chances. I am pretty sure you guys have underestimated the scaling damage of the cantrips and overestimated the chances of missing. It's a rogue after all, which means not very multi-attribute-dependent and fully able to focus on dex.

I'm talking about pre steady aim.

Post steady aim it's a blowout in favor of what you're doing.

 

[Zardnaar]

Are you talking about steady aim? That does not buff the dual wielding rogue, it uses a bonus action meaning you can't dual wield. It makes TWF impossible.

I said non dual wielding rogue. That means rogues who don't dual wield.

If steady aim is allowed I wouldn't be running a dual woelding rogue put it that way.

It's a buff for Archer rogues, a big buff for arcane trickster/high elf rogues and a minor nerf for masterminds.

 

[Flamestrike]

I am pretty sure it is not optimal for the overwhelming majority of levels.

For levels 1-4 BB and GFB dont deal any extra damage to the target (unless it moves for BB).

I was making the comparison between TWF and Aim (TWF has higher DPR than Aim, and you can still move) to show why Aim wasnt broken.

Pretty sure I said that the cantrips make the Aim action better than TWF from a straight DPR comparison with TWF (starting at 5th level).

It's a minimal gain though, for something you generally need to spend a Feat on.

 

[Flamestrike]

I've found that is good if I don't have another way of getting sneak attack but with steady aim I get advantage on attack which automatically grants sneak attack plus I have better chance to hit so unless the enemy is close I find I always use SA then fall back on IF if I have to move. Thing with SA there's no ability check roll like with IF or hiding. It just works.

The problem with Aim is, you cant move when you use it. With insightful fighting, you can move, and it lasts a minute (freeing up your bonus action for other uses going forward).

 

[auburn2]

It's a minimal gain though, for something you generally need to spend a Feat on.

Agree with the rest of what you posted, but not this. Why do you need a feat? 3rd level AT can take GFB and BB both and has steady aim.

 

[auburn2]

I said non dual woelding rogue. That means rogues who don't dual wield.

If steady aim is allowed I wouldn't be running a dual woelding rogue put it that way.

It's a buff for Archer rogues, a big buff for arcane trickster/high elf rogues and a minor nerf for masterminds.

My bad, I completely misread that.

It is a buff in potential DPR, but it comes at a high cost for any Rogue. It uses the BA which makes cunning action useless and I would argue cunning action is nearly as big a deal for a Rogue as sneak attack, maybe a bigger deal because there are other ways to do a lot of damage. On top of taking away cunning action it drops move to 0.

I would say steady aim is a nice add to the bag of tricks but not a huge buff IIMO because of the very high cost to use it. Most Rogues are not going to be using it every turn.

 

[Mistwell]

My bad, I completely misread that.

It is a buff in potential DPR, but it comes at a high cost for any Rogue. It uses the BA which makes cunning action useless and I would argue cunning action is nearly as big a deal for a Rogue as sneak attack, maybe a bigger deal because there are other ways to do a lot of damage. On top of taking away cunning action it drops move to 0.

I would say steady aim is a nice add to the bag of tricks but not a huge buff IIMO because of the very high cost to use it. Most Rogues are not going to be using it every turn.

Uh you do realize that two weapon fighting ALSO costs your bonus action, right?

As for steady aim, I use a combination of hiding and sniping (ranged attack so no cantrip), familiar for advantage on melee attack and cantrip (can then use cunning action), steady aim and cantrip (cannot use cunning action), something else like faerie fire for advantage (can use cantrip and cunning action) or just not attacking with advantage (can use cantrip and cunning action but higher miss chance). It all depends on the situation but most of the time I do not find it's a very high cost to use steady aim.