D&D 5E Sneak Attack as an action

[I'm A Banana]

Assuming you mean an extra [W], and mean an extra SA die by "roll an extra die", and looking at say, a shortsword, this would result in very significant increase in SA damage over it working if either weapon hits at lower levels (up to 4d6 SA), and a small-but-significant decrease at higher levels (when you have 6d6 SA or more).

Yeah, that wasn't very clear -- 1 extra attack die, and one extra W if it hits, too.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I´d like sneak attack as an action.

I don´t like to see every rogue dual wielding. Instead I would start with higher sneak attack damage. +2d6 sits well with me.

 

[Mistwell]

I´d like sneak attack as an action.

I don´t like to see every rogue dual wielding. Instead I would start with higher sneak attack damage. +2d6 sits well with me.

I've only ever seen rogues in 5e focused on archery and not dual wielding. They already do plenty of damage, particularly if they start the battle with an assassination.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I've only ever seen rogues in 5e focused on archery and not dual wielding. They already do plenty of damage, particularly if they start the battle with an assassination.

We're talking about mathematically accounting for the lost damage in changing the rules, though, and actually his suggestion fails to do that at higher levels, whilst making Rogues even better at very low levels.

If one doesn't care about Rogues losing damage, obviously, it's a non-issue.