D&D 5E Sneak Attack: Is it broken?

[Leatherhead]

Per turn is not per round. Sneak attack happens on anyone elses turn.

Though "the ally can make 1 additional attack on it's turn" could solve a warlord + rogue issue.

Or you could make the Warlord grant a Reaction Attack. Which would keep the game quick, and keep the Rogues maximum potential damage the same by virtue of eating up their OA chance.

 

[Leatherhead]

People do seem to recognize a certain "fragility" about it though. So, my next question then becomes: Is this "fragility" actually a serious issue for a game like 5e, which explicitly (straight from its designers mouths, as I understood it) doesn't care as much about balance? Or is it just something to remember, e.g. something that should be noted for the DM to try to work around?

Yes, that second bit. everything that could potentially break SA is optional, and if you are using optional stuff it is expected that the DM will adjust their game accordingly, or just roll with it if they find it more fun to do so.

Basically I just get suspicious because it seems like every attack feature under the sun gets called "broken" if, and sometimes only if, it gets paired with Sneak Attack. When an ability appears to single-handedly constrain a significant portion of design space, well...it might not be "broken," but its "fragility" starts to sound like a flaw that could have been avoided. Perhaps even should be avoided.

Most damage problems come from low level combinations, like variant humans getting feats at level 1. +10 damage is essentially an extra attack at that level, for example. At higher levels, those bonuses form less and less of the characters total damage potential, and the trade-offs that were made in order to enable them start to come back and bite the character.

 

[Uchawi]

Most of the problems I find with 5E are not damage related because of bounded accuracy and every class having a good chance to hit/damage. Unless of course you believe everything is too easy to hit/damage and challenge ratings are not reliable. It is the utility side the some classes suffer versus others. And the rogue it pretty well covered from that side compared to a class like a champion fighter.

 

[KingsRule77]

Nope

 

[CapnZapp]

It still isn't Sneak's fault.

 

[Arial Black]

You want Op sneak attack try looking at 3.5sneak attack where it applied to every attack and you could be making 5attacks around for like 10d6

I've been playing 3E/3.5E since it came out, and I'm still playing. Right now we are in a long-running campaign and we have just killed (my first) Tarrasque (yay!). In one round.

Our rogue uses TWF, the rules allow SA on every attack that meets the criteria, and she can usually rely on a flank but she also has other abilities that let SA kick in.

Yet even that is nowhere near 'broken'. The rogue is not the terror of combat, and I've never seen any 3E rogue dominate straight melee combat in the way warrior-type classes do.

5E rogues have the same SA dice, but can only use them 1/turn. Multi-class rogues get fewer SA dice.

Everything is okay.

 

[JediGamemaster]

I've been playing 3E/3.5E since it came out, and I'm still playing. Right now we are in a long-running campaign and we have just killed (my first) Tarrasque (yay!). In one round.

Our rogue uses TWF, the rules allow SA on every attack that meets the criteria, and she can usually rely on a flank but she also has other abilities that let SA kick in.

Yet even that is nowhere near 'broken'. The rogue is not the terror of combat, and I've never seen any 3E rogue dominate straight melee combat in the way warrior-type classes do.

5E rogues have the same SA dice, but can only use them 1/turn. Multi-class rogues get fewer SA dice.

Everything is okay.

in 3.5 my group used to joke that the weapon didn't matter cause every rouge threw x number of shortswords with it, where x was 1/2 level...

 

[TwoSix]

Basically I just get suspicious because it seems like every attack feature under the sun gets called "broken" if, and sometimes only if, it gets paired with Sneak Attack. When an ability appears to single-handedly constrain a significant portion of design space, well...it might not be "broken," but its "fragility" starts to sound like a flaw that could have been avoided. Perhaps even should be avoided.

I would absolutely agree that if designs are avoided specifically to not cause a conflict with sneak attack, then sneak attack is itself the problem. I do think, though, quite a bit of the breathless commentary that "Sneak Attack will be broken with this feature!" is needlessly hyperbolic.

 

[CapnZapp]

I would absolutely agree that if designs are avoided specifically to not cause a conflict with sneak attack, then sneak attack is itself the problem.

Still no.

Then not adding "does not stack with sneak attack" is the problem.

 

[Aimian_Silverflash]

We're 7th level in our 5e campaign, and we've been playing it since beta. We have two rogues, a barbarian, a wizard and a bard (me) in the group.

Rogue #1 is melee-based, and usually gets off at least one sneak attack every combat. It's solid damage, but it hasn't overshadowed the campaign at all.

Rogue #2 is ranged-based, and has the SS feat. When he does his SS thing + SA, he usually drops most things he hits it with. I won't lie, we're 7th level, and he will drop 40+ points on a guy in one hit. The problem? He doesn't always hit. That -5 is painful. But it's usually a once-per-combat thing when he does it, hit-or-miss. So OP? Not really.

We've found the Wizard to be kinda underpowered honestly, unless he is able to AoE. (fireball, etc; hard to do usually unless it's an opener and he rarely wins initative) So he is usually crowd controlling with Slow or Hypnotic Pattern. Generally speaking, single-target DD for a wizard is very poor this edition.

Bard (me) isn't a damage-dealer, he is much more about controlling the field, and making damage happen by casting Dissonant Whispers, provoking AOO's from the melee. He's also the healer, so, ya know, I usually heal a lot.

The broken one? The Barbarian with GWM. Holy crap. We found a pair of gauntlets of ogre power for him, and it's been insanity ever since. He pops GWM + Reckless Attack (so he usually still hits, even though he has -5), and then he gets two attacks a round now, because he's level 7. He usually swings for 30+ points a swing with his greatsword, meaning he drops enemies a lot. -Oh, they died? I get another attack as a free bonus action.

So to answer your question... a big fat NO. SA isn't overpowered this edition. Not by a long shot.