Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Zardnaar" data-source="post: 6992482" data-attributes="member: 6716779">As a primary weapon. If you can't melee someone of course pull out a bow. This thread is about a tendency of Rogues in 5E to default to a bow which to me is actually such a bad option you have in effect nerfed your PC.  In one case IRL one Rogue player asked me why his Rogue was sucking and I told him to get his ass into melee. The following week he was still hovering at the back plinking away for not much damage with a short bow. This is compounded by the Rogues mobility where some players use them as skirmishers that hang back as far as they can and often not achieve much.  Even worse some of them do not ready an action and just fire a short bow for 1d6+3 (or 4 or 5) damage. This happens a bit due to dex based rogues winning initiative a lot. There are basically 3 types of Rogues in 5E.Brave Rogues (Rogues that melee)*snip vulgarity; please keep it clean -Darkness* Rogues ("Scouts" or "Skirmishers")Brutal Rogues (keyed off strength or dex as secondary stat) So why is using a bow so bad? Put simply because melee is so much better as the Rogue is built around sneak attack. A good Rogue wants to maximise that sneak attack potential and this means getting in melee and using 2 weapons. In effect you have doubled your chance of hitting and getting in sneak attack damage.Also short bow 1d6+whatever.Rapier 1d8+ whatever. Elves and multiclass rogues get an upgrade to a long bow but the basic Rogue deals more damage with a rapier.  The other reason is firing into melee imposes a -2 penalty to hit. So not only have you halved your chance to get a sneak attack in you have sucked up a further -2 penalty a lot of the time to get that sneak attack in.  Around about now though someone may bring up the sharp shooter idea. This negates the -2 penalty for firing into melee. Ok kewl now you are back to where a normal rogue is not using a feat so its more or less a wash. You do get to use the -5/+10 part of sharpshooter but I would like to point out why it is a bad idea for rogues. With a Ranger or fighter using those feats you get multiple attacks and as long as around 50% of your attacks can be expected to hit the -5/+10 part of the sharp shooter feat is worth using. The -5 part causing a miss is hard on rogues as you have also missed out on dealing sneak attack damage. If you can get buffed and get your hit ratio above 50% the Rogue is also limited to a single attack and +10 damage on that is not that impressive compared to multi attacking PCs getting +10 damage per attack.  A melee Rogue can easily get +5-+10 damage without the -5 penalty. A single level of fighter gives you the two weapon style which lets you add dex to damage with your off hand. The sharpshooter feat also requires a feat to use as well (well duh) and fails to take into account the opportunity cost. A melee Rogue can take sentinel and try to get in extra sneak attacks probably dealing more damage overall than the sharpshooter Rogue using -5/+1-0 damage. Or the Rogue could take magic initiate pick up Green Flame Blade, mage armor (+1 AC) and another cantrip gaining an extra dice or more damage anyway without having to take a -5 penalty. A dual wielding Rogue can also use 2 rapiers for an extra 1d8 damage and +1 AC (via a feat) and gains the ability to switch between a bow and rapier in the same round (or draw another weapon for TWF). If that TWF Rogue has that fighter level they deal an extra 1d8+3 minimum extra damage and double their chance to sneak attack. How is that sharpshooter feat looking now? But Zard you may ask this also over looks the other main appeal of a *snip vulgarity; please keep it clean -Darkness* Rogue, that being the Rogue gets to avoid taking damage. That is technically true but this should only matter for low level rogues and parties lacking healing. At 5th level you get uncanny dodge and the difference between a a Rogues AC and a warriors AC is often 1 or 2 points. Not only is having an extra body at on the front lines diverting NPC attacks it is also reducing NPC's damage potential via uncanny dodge. If you get hit hard then default to using a bow and hiding at the back. Rogues still have hit dice based healing to use, clerics exist along with the healing domain and healer feat.  The final point is a bit more metagame based. Magic short swords, rapiers, and daggers tend to me more common than magic bows in published adventures. Magic hand crossbows do not seem to exist in WotC APs. A bonus to hit is way better for a Rogue than most other class and there are a few finesse weapons in PotA for example.  Now I am not saying never use a bow but is is the weaker option. If you are low on hit points or lack the range by all means use one. Just do not default to using a bow. If you are using a bow and finding your Rogue to be underwhelming that is why.</blockquote>

Verification