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

[Mistwell]

The rogue can always walk around the corner, that doesn't mean the enemy forgets they exist or doesn't keep an eye out for them to pop back out. It's more an issue with the rogue getting advantage every round than getting sneak attack (with is usually not an issue).

In my games if you want to hide and get advantage you're going to have to work a little harder at it and move around. Hiding behind the barbarian doesn't really cut it.

Well then what purpose does the halfling ability serve in your game?

Again, I am not saying anyone forgets they exist or doesn't keep an eye out for them, so let's leave that for someone else.

Why is it so wrong in your opinion that someone popping out from behind someone, even though you know they are there, has an advantage in hitting versus someone who is shooting from out in the open? The target knows they are behind someone, but doesn't don't know which point their attack will come from (left or right or even between the legs of the cover, up or middle or down) in the same way you would if they were out in the open. Why is it so weird to you that it provides some mechanical benefit in the odds of hitting their target, while not being about "forgetting they exist" or "keeping an eye out for them"?

 

[Oofta]

Well then what purpose does the halfling ability serve in your game?

Again, I am not saying anyone forgets they exist or doesn't keep an eye out for them, so let's leave that for someone else.

Why is it so wrong in your opinion that someone popping out from behind someone, even though you know they are there, has an advantage in hitting versus someone who is shooting from out in the open? The target knows they are behind someone, but doesn't don't know which point their attack will come from (left or right or even between the legs of the cover, up or middle or down) in the same way you would if they were out in the open. Why is it so weird to you that it provides some mechanical benefit in the odds of hitting their target, while not being about "forgetting they exist" or "keeping an eye out for them"?

What can I say? I think a rogue hiding behind the lone tree on an open plain "popping out" and getting advantage every round is dumb. The first time? Sure. Second time? Nope. Same with the halfling ability. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

So just like a rogue could potentially move from tree to tree (if the forest/underbrush) is dense enough to give them cover when moving around, a halfling might be able to move around in a crowd escaping notice.

Feel free to run it differently.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Well then what purpose does the halfling ability serve in your game?

Again, I am not saying anyone forgets they exist or doesn't keep an eye out for them, so let's leave that for someone else.

Why is it so wrong in your opinion that someone popping out from behind someone, even though you know they are there, has an advantage in hitting versus someone who is shooting from out in the open? The target knows they are behind someone, but doesn't don't know which point their attack will come from (left or right or even between the legs of the cover, up or middle or down) in the same way you would if they were out in the open. Why is it so weird to you that it provides some mechanical benefit in the odds of hitting their target, while not being about "forgetting they exist" or "keeping an eye out for them"?

Escaping pursuit, mostly. Not every racial ability is particularly useful in combat. In combat it would be useful once or twice, but if you use it in the stupidest way you can imagine, it's probably not going to work very well.

Look, here's the thing about hiding. When you attack from hiding, you have to reveal yourself. You're allowed to fire a ranged weapon and still gain the "unseen attacker" benefit if you're hiding, but it's assumed that if you're going to make a melee attack that you lose that benefit because it takes too much time to walk out from your hiding spot and make an attack. The game doesn't seem to care if you only have to step 5 feet out of hiding to make a melee attack, either. Moving out of hiding to make a melee attack means you don't get the "unseen attacker" benefit, but popping out and shooting a ranged weapon really quickly does.

So, the game is already drawing pretty strict limits on how hiding can work while benefiting as an "unseen attacker".

Further, unlike actual invisibility, you're not completely unpredictable. You are visible when you shoot from hiding. It spoils your hide. The idea is that they see you, but there just isn't time for them to react because missile weapons are so fast.

So, think about this logically. The hiding character who shoots a ranged weapon, the reasoning goes, has just enough time to benefit from being "unseen". If you were to even do more than quickly draw and fire -- even simply taking a few steps -- and you'd spoil that benefit because you're spoiling your hiding. So, what happens when the NPCs can reasonably assume that you will be popping out in the next few seconds and firing from exactly where you were only moments before after already having done so more than once immediately before? It kind of stops being reasonable that your attack from hiding can still benefit from being "unseen". You're "hiding" in as much as you're trying to be quiet and unseen, but you're certainly not "hiding" in the sense that your location is unknown. You're not even hiding in the sense that where you'll be attacking from for the next round are unknown!

The barbarian your halfling is hiding behind is standing by himself in the middle of an open room. Every orc fighting here saw this halfling "disappear" behind the barbarian 12 seconds ago, then pop out and fire their bow. Then the halfling did it again 6 seconds later. Now the halfling is "hiding" again. Is it really going to still be unexpected? These orcs are now very aware that the halfling is planning to poke out and fire. Can you still really be considered "unseen"? They know where you are. They know what you're planning to do. You've already got a fraction of a fraction of a second according to the game rules as it is because of the restriction that hiding attacks only work with ranged weapons. Sure, sure, the barbarian is distracting. But he isn't so distracting that, say, the gnome wizard's firebolt from 60 feet away should get advantage. The orcs are able to pay enough attention to that to not grant the wizard advantage.

That's what I mean by straining credulity beyond the breaking point. It's no longer reasonable that you're actually hiding in any realistic sense of the term.

Sure, it makes sense if there's several PCs or a lot of objects to hide behind that if you're moving quietly or moving around that your attacks will remain unpredictable enough to benefit. But if the barbarian is the only thing to hide behind and you keep ducking behind them, it doesn't really matter if sometimes you go left and sometimes you go right. It's just not unpredictable enough anymore.

 

[iserith]

Disincentizing hiding in the exact same spot either through ruling outright failure or disadvantage on the Dexterity (Stealth) check also encourages more tactical movement during combat. I don't even need to care about "realism" in my fantasy game to want to see more of that.

 

[Zardnaar]

I allow the halfling thing to work once per combat.

You're not hiding once you launch the first strike imho.

If you had hide in plain sight though yeah the combo works.

 

[Charlaquin]

Quick question: I'm very strongly considering a rogue as a replacement character in an existing campaign (currently 11th), but the DM usually does 1-3 encounters per day and often "for tension" does not allow short rests between them. That context has been really favoring casters. Do you think a rogue can keep up with a Paladin and a bunch of casters in a case like that?

I think rogues can generally keep up with most casters in terms of single-target damage in a low encounter-per-day scenario, as long as they can consistently get either two attacks or advantage (which steady aim certainly helps with). You won’t outdo powerful AoEs like Fireball, but you won’t feel like you aren’t making a meaningful contribution. Paladins’ single-target DPR gets really crazy when they can reliably nova strike, but the rogue’s damage output is more sustainable longer term. You might also be able to carve out a niche outside of combat, what with expertise and eventually reliable talent.

(Just for more info, it's an Ancient-Greek themed game with most of the group aligned with Athena except for one with Persephone. I was thinking about a Phantom Rogue aligned with Hades, which would be a great RP fit and fill gaps in the party. We're generally a low coin, moderately low item group, but I would probably start with a rare and an uncommon item.)

That sounds awesome!

 

[Blue]

Want to stop halfling hiding from working repeatedly - go for it. Please tell me ahead of time though, because if I choose halfling for my rogue because that hide is a pretty cool ability, and then you nerf it mid-session at the table, it's feel pretty bait-and-switch.

Better yet, let me know at character creation that you're nerfing part of the halfling features but replacing it with something new to keep the race balanced.

 

[Mistwell]

Escaping pursuit, mostly. Not every racial ability is particularly useful in combat. In combat it would be useful once or twice, but if you use it in the stupidest way you can imagine, it's probably not going to work very well.

Look, here's the thing about hiding. When you attack from hiding, you have to reveal yourself. You're allowed to fire a ranged weapon and still gain the "unseen attacker" benefit if you're hiding, but it's assumed that if you're going to make a melee attack that you lose that benefit because it takes too much time to walk out from your hiding spot and make an attack. The game doesn't seem to care if you only have to step 5 feet out of hiding to make a melee attack, either. Moving out of hiding to make a melee attack means you don't get the "unseen attacker" benefit, but popping out and shooting a ranged weapon really quickly does.

So, the game is already drawing pretty strict limits on how hiding can work while benefiting as an "unseen attacker".

Further, unlike actual invisibility, you're not completely unpredictable. You are visible when you shoot from hiding. It spoils your hide. The idea is that they see you, but there just isn't time for them to react because missile weapons are so fast.

So, think about this logically. The hiding character who shoots a ranged weapon, the reasoning goes, has just enough time to benefit from being "unseen". If you were to even do more than quickly draw and fire -- even simply taking a few steps -- and you'd spoil that benefit because you're spoiling your hiding. So, what happens when the NPCs can reasonably assume that you will be popping out in the next few seconds and firing from exactly where you were only moments before after already having done so more than once immediately before? It kind of stops being reasonable that your attack from hiding can still benefit from being "unseen". You're "hiding" in as much as you're trying to be quiet and unseen, but you're certainly not "hiding" in the sense that your location is unknown. You're not even hiding in the sense that where you'll be attacking from for the next round are unknown!

The barbarian your halfling is hiding behind is standing by himself in the middle of an open room. Every orc fighting here saw this halfling "disappear" behind the barbarian 12 seconds ago, then pop out and fire their bow. Then the halfling did it again 6 seconds later. Now the halfling is "hiding" again. Is it really going to still be unexpected? These orcs are now very aware that the halfling is planning to poke out and fire. Can you still really be considered "unseen"? They know where you are. They know what you're planning to do. You've already got a fraction of a fraction of a second according to the game rules as it is because of the restriction that hiding attacks only work with ranged weapons. Sure, sure, the barbarian is distracting. But he isn't so distracting that, say, the gnome wizard's firebolt from 60 feet away should get advantage. The orcs are able to pay enough attention to that to not grant the wizard advantage.

That's what I mean by straining credulity beyond the breaking point. It's no longer reasonable that you're actually hiding in any realistic sense of the term.

Sure, it makes sense if there's several PCs or a lot of objects to hide behind that if you're moving quietly or moving around that your attacks will remain unpredictable enough to benefit. But if the barbarian is the only thing to hide behind and you keep ducking behind them, it doesn't really matter if sometimes you go left and sometimes you go right. It's just not unpredictable enough anymore.

I mean, the response to everything you just said is in the post you were quoting. It's not about not knowing where the shooter is at. It's about not knowing where the shot will come from with regard to that cover you're hiding behind.

Assume the Barbarian is like a 7 x 5 wall. Mark a 1, 2, 3 down the left side from top to bottom, and then a 4, 5, 6 own the right side. The 1 starts two feet down, 2 starts four feet down, and 3 starts six feet down, and same with the 4, 5, 6 on the other side. So six points, each with about a 2 x 2 space where a crossbow bolt could be shot from.

If the rogue were attacking from out in the open, you would know precisely which point from their space the shot is coming from, which means you'd know the angle and the part of you they are targeting, making it easier for you to dodge.

However, if the rogue is shooting by popping out from behind that 7x5 wall, you don't know which of the 6 points along the sides of the wall the shot will come from. Even though you know it will come from one of those six points, you don't know which point unlike if the rogue had been out in the open.

So it has nothing to do with "unexpected" - you expect the shot you just cannot expect the point the shot will come from.

Nor does it strain credulity to believe that "not knowing what point among six points" a shot will come from should provide some advantage to the shooter, since it's more difficult for the target to dodge a shot when they don't know which point (which means which angle and the point on the target it will be directed at) it will come from even though they expect a shot will come from one of those six points.

 

[iserith]

Want to stop halfling hiding from working repeatedly - go for it. Please tell me ahead of time though, because if I choose halfling for my rogue because that hide is a pretty cool ability, and then you nerf it mid-session at the table, it's feel pretty bait-and-switch.

Better yet, let me know at character creation that you're nerfing part of the halfling features but replacing it with something new to keep the race balanced.

I'm fine with it working repeatedly. Just don't do it from the exact same place in subsequent rounds or you'll be making the Dexterity (Stealth) check at disadvantage. Move somewhere else you can hide and you won't. Up to you.

 

[Mistwell]

Disincentizing hiding in the exact same spot either through ruling outright failure or disadvantage on the Dexterity (Stealth) check also encourages more tactical movement during combat. I don't even need to care about "realism" in my fantasy game to want to see more of that.

It just means the ranged rogue is at a disadvantage relative to the melee rogue. Which is why we have Steady Aim now. Balance-wise, WOTC acknowledges it tactically made sense they both be treated equally.