D&D 5E (2014) TCoE - Rogue's Steady Aim

[ZickZak]

I've been browsing Tasha's Cauldron of Everything these past two days and I have one question:

Does the Rogue's optional feature Steady Aim that they get at level three replace their Archetype feature at level three?

Thanks!

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No. Its an addition.

 

[ZickZak]

So why does it say this?

This section offers an additional
feature that you can gain as a rogue. Unlike
the features in the Player’s Handbook, you
don’t gain the feature here automatically.
Consulting with your DM, you decide whether
to gain the feature in this section if you meet
the level requirement noted in the feature’s
description.

 

[Charlaquin]

So why does it say this?

This section offers an additional
feature that you can gain as a rogue. Unlike
the features in the Player’s Handbook, you
don’t gain the feature here automatically.
Consulting with your DM, you decide whether
to gain the feature in this section if you meet
the level requirement noted in the feature’s
description.

Because unlike features in the player’s handbook, you don’t get the Steady Aim feature automatically. You have to consult with your DM, who will decide whether or not you gain it when you reach 3rd level.

It doesn’t replace any existing features, it’s just an optional bonus feature that DMs can decide to give to rogues or not give to them.

 

[DEFCON 1]

And although it doesn't say it explicitly... I would imagine that many DMs will require these new abilities to be a feature swap, rather than a straight addition. That way the classes don't become overtly more powerful than what they are from the straight PHB.

I'd venture a guess that they probably received negative feedback on how they did the one-for-one swaps of class features in the UA, as I'm sure some people probably said they'd want both abilities (the swap out and the swap in) and want to get rid of a different ability instead. But as that would have required a whole bunch of explanation on what kind of swaps were and were not balanced (because of the whole "ribbon ability" thing)... they just said "You can have this if the DM says it's okay", figuring that each DM would make their own decision on what would be allowed and balanced for their game.

 

[Don Durito]

Do they actually bother to explain the reason for the ‘steady aim’ feature. (One would assume it’s because sneak attack is supposed to be used just about every round and ambiguities around hide create problems for Ranged rogues).

Because if you’re going to ask DMs to make this decision they should at the very least be given the information to make an informed decision.

 

[jasper]

As a straight addition....
As a bonus action, you give yourself advantage on your next attack roll on the current turn. You can use this bonus action only if you haven’t moved during this turn, and after you use the bonus action, your speed is 0 until the end of the current turn.
***
So BURN your MOVE and BONUS action. I have no problem with this.

 

[Krachek]

I wonder if some DM will venture into allowing Tasha features piece by piece?

 

[NotAYakk]

There are a lot of ways for a rogue to get sneak attack in 5e.

Hide is contentious. If you allow duck-behind-cover, hide, shoot around corner, you basically get the steady aim back when you get cunning action (with a check).

But the Hide rules are intentionally vague, so a rogue who wants to snipe at all like that has to rely on DM fiat for it to work.

This looks like an attempt to permit a rogue to reliably get sneak attack, even without an ally in melee range. It has a cost (bonus action and movement) which isn't trivial; but for a rogue in a sniper nest, it ain't bad.

For a melee PC, it is usually worse than an offhand attack (2 rolls for 1 attack < 1 roll for each of 2 attacks).

I could see a Paladin who was already going Assassin 3 (for alpha strike pain) making use of this. They can be sword+board and get an improved chance to land a crit so long as they stay put, without burning their offhand for another swing and losing that AC.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Here's the rule I want to see in supplements: "You may not use this feature unless your DM agrees AND you (and the other players) buy him/her/them the book."