D&D 5E Rogues & damage...

[MasterTrancer]

All I can say is maybe some of you are far older than I am I guess. I was a kid playing D&D. My memory of the rogue is them being feared for the backstab. Why? Because as an opening attack it did a ton of damage.

Yeah. We let the rogue do the backstab if he made his Move Silently and Hide in Shadows. Sorry if some of you were full on adults or kids that decided to make sure the rogue had to have shadows we use it. We did not. It was his best combat ability and the other young players I was with didn't spend our time worrying about whether the rogue was in shadows or what not. We wanted that rogue player to have fun playing his character. So we made it easy.

That rogue loved doing big backstab hits. I'm not going to worry about whether you think of how my friends and I played when young. I know the rogue hit hard when he opened up an attack. I know the kids I gamed with liked the rogue because he hit like a truck with that opening attack as well as the other nifty stealthing abilities. We loved finding magic items in modules made by Gygax and his cohorts. It was good times.

Glad to hear some of you are adult (or maybe you were adults) enough to make sure not too many magic items were handed out and that the rogue could only use his capabilities when there were shadows present. My group was not. We were kids having fun playing modules that handed out maybe too much treasure. Oh well.

Whether you want to recall or not, the rogue did a truckload of damage on that opening hit. It was a feature of the class. It made him one of the most feared damage dealers in the game. It was definitely worthwhile to allow the rogue to make an opening attack because he could actually kill something doing it. Monsters didn't have as many hit point as they do now.

That's the last I'll say on this given it was so long as to not matter for the present edition.

Ok, so you're basically agreeing that it was how your group played that influenced the damage done by the thief? If this is the case, I'm with you totally. But this doesn't mean the thief was built by design to be a top damage dealer.

 

[aramis erak]

Rogues can still deal immense damage. A level 20 rogue with the assassin subclass using purple worm poison (bit pricey per usage, but hey) can deal over 320 damage during a surprise attack, which is enough to kill almost anything in the Monster Manual. The example is a bit extreme but assassins make better use of poison than anyone else (except maybe fighters).

A rogue with the thief subclass can pump out a lot of damage if it gets its hands on a wand that includes a blast spell. Since thieves can activate items as a bonus action they can sneak attack and blast in one round which can ramp up quite quickly.

Poison isn't doubled on a crit.
He's getting 2 attacks, and doing 11d8 or so with each, plus a d4 (offhand dagger)... doubled on a crit. so 22x4.5=99 expected on that crit, maximum 176 each...
he can, in theory, get to about 356 in one round... but he's more likely to do around 101.
The level 20 assassin ability allows a potential double again, to an expected total of around 400 on a crit, or 200 without...
Adding the poison is gratis.

 

[Ellington]

Poison isn't doubled on a crit.
He's getting 2 attacks, and doing 11d8 or so with each, plus a d4 (offhand dagger)... doubled on a crit. so 22x4.5=99 expected on that crit, maximum 176 each...
he can, in theory, get to about 356 in one round... but he's more likely to do around 101.
The level 20 assassin ability allows a potential double again, to an expected total of around 400 on a crit, or 200 without...
Adding the poison is gratis.

You're wrong on two accounts.

Poison does get doubled on a crit, just like everything that follows an attack roll. Also, rogues can't sneak attack more than once a round so using an offhand doesn't do much aside from being a backup plan in case your first attack misses.

Also, where are you getting the d8s from? Sneak attack is d6.

 

[Eejit]

Poison isn't doubled on a crit if it allows a save, it is doubled if it's an integral part of the attack with no save - however I believe only certain monsters have that so some polymorph/wildshapes.

http://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/2014/11/24/critical-poison/

 

[Ellington]

Poison isn't doubled on a crit if it allows a save, it is doubled if it's an integral part of the attack with no save - however I believe only certain monsters have that so some polymorph/wildshapes.

http://thesageadvice.wordpress.com/2014/11/24/critical-poison/

Ok, makes sense. Still doubled by the level 17 ability, thoug, so the damage is still hefty.

 

[aramis erak]

You're wrong on two accounts.

Poison does get doubled on a crit, just like everything that follows an attack roll. Also, rogues can't sneak attack more than once a round so using an offhand doesn't do much aside from being a backup plan in case your first attack misses.

Also, where are you getting the d8s from? Sneak attack is d6.

You have to in fact resolve the weapon's damage to determine if the poison even gets into the target; it's not the same damage roll.

Also, see https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/536683487517224961

Robert Wallace ‏@rwallace8665 Nov 22
@JeremyECrawford DMG Poisons: If you crit with a poison coated weapon, do you double poison dice because crit, or not because saving throw?

Jeremy Crawford
‏@JeremyECrawford
@rwallace8665 The intent is no. The saving throw, not the attack, determines whether the poison takes effect after a hit.

I stand corrected on the d6 vs d8; poor lighting.

So, that's an expected 1d8+10d6 (rapier) for 4.5+35=39.5+5 =44.5 +39.5 on crit = 84. x2 for level 20, 168. plus another 1d8+5 becomes (2d8+5)x2= 28 expected for the second strike, plus another 1d4+5 for the offhand, again bumped for 1st round and level 20 (2d4+5)x2=20. so 216+ poison. which will be either 2 or 3 at up to 45 (10d8)... which is the strongest poison I've seen (Guardian Naga) tho' 42 (12d6) (Purple Worm) is almost as good...
Gotta remember, Sneak only applies once per turn.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

In editions before 3rd edition, rogues were not close to being damage dealers. Only their first strike was substantial. Then it went down from there. Maybe there were situations where he can hide again and get another attack, but those were few.
Add only +1/2 level BAB (ok, it was THAC0 back then) and you look at minor damage compared to a weapon specialized high strength fighter.

in 3rd edition it changed, because you theoretically added 1d6/2levels, but practically many enemies were immune to that. A rogue could not even scratch a barbarian after he gets uncanny dodge and some DR.

In 4th it changed. The rogue was a quite good damage dealer, but it lacked the real alpha strike. The thief of essentials was better in that regard. Could bring someone down fast but had less trick up his sleeve.

In 5th edition I feel, the rogue is where he needs to be. The assassin specialization has an easy time surprising foes and deal substantial damage in the first round of combat. With his defensive perks, even if the first attack does not kill his victim outright, leaves him with a good chance to win a 1 on 1 fight.

Even though the rogue has no two attacks, an off hand weapon for a 1 on 1 helps, especially when you have advantage. You can decide to use the off hand attack after knowing if the first attack hits. If it hits, bonus action to disengage or dash away. If it does not hit, try again.

Edit: didn´t read the whole thread, forgot a page or two... So thers said basically the same as I do.
So my advice: use a poison that offers you ongoing advantage. And save up inspiration. This way you can sneak attack more than on the first turn in combat.

 

[Ahrimon]

One thing that stuck out to me in this conversation was passing down a used girdle of giant strength. That's less than 1% to get one, 53 on a % in 2e for the Girdles, Hats, and Helms sub table.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Well yeah...

People seem to be missing the point with backstab. The point isn't that 1e/2e backstab is an impossible-to-use ability (it wasn't, especially if the thief were buffed with invisibility, boots of elvenkind, et cetera), but that the one essentially-once-per-combat attack is insufficient to turn the thief into the number one damage dealer. At the high levels being discussed (13+), the 1e thief's THAC0 *with the +4 bonus from backstab* is still 2 higher than the fighter's, ranger's etc. base. Then there's the fact that the thief is getting one attack to the fighter's two (or 5/2 with specialization post-UA). THEN there's the fact that the fighter is also potentially getting +3 double specialization bonus to hit, almost certainly has higher Strength, and is using a weapon with a bigger damage die. THEN you consider the fact that the fighter/ranger/whatever can do this every round, potentially *from range* (and post-UA, longbow specialization was deadly), and has a bit more staying power from high AC and hp compared to the thief. It's not even close.

[MENTION=12630]Ahrimon[/MENTION]: Yeah, the girdle of giant strength thing amuses me. If you played A1-4 followed by GDQ1-7 as I did, there's precisely ONE such item. Given the above analysis, it's going to the fighter, not the thief. So those assuming that the thief has said girdle are assuming that the party has at least two such items (more if there are two or more fighters, rangers, paladins, cavaliers, or barbarians in the party).

Rogues really became situational damage dealers in 3e, and "real" damage dealers in 4e. Before that they were scouts, pickpockets, and utility characters. The 5e rogue appears to balance the three pillars quite well; the assassin option definitely packs a punch, and not having everything be immune to sneak attack allows the rogue to focus on dealing damage, but at the same time the rogue doesn't outclass the fighter or barbarian in DPR.

 

[Joe Liker]

Ok, makes sense. Still doubled by the level 17 ability, thoug, so the damage is still hefty.

At level 20, good luck finding a monster that isn't resistant or immune to poison.

So most of the time, it's still not going to matter.