2 overpowered things

Hello,
After 4 seasons with 2 differents groups i can say that trip and two-weapon strike are overpowered.
Trip -> I think that it needs a saving throw or a challenge check...
Two-weapon strike -> with this feat a rogue can make sneak atack every turn
Regards

Stay Awhile and Listen!

I agree with both.
If the saving throw for Trip were 10 + STR/DEX mod + the highest number on a spent martial damage die roll (or maybe not the roll) it would be a little more challenging.

With Two-Weapon strike and Sneak attack overpowering, I think its important for the DM to maintain his or her right to suppress overpowering players. In this instance I would say the entire action is used to gain advantage, because of that you can't now get rid of it to do more damage on a hit.
Or to counteract this, the feat could be changed to "the next weapon attack made has disadvantage." This could be explained by the focus required to make an attack with advantage, and having disadvantage for coming out of the tunnel-vision and back into the fight. If that makes any sense. 
Toronto Dungeon Master
I don't think trip is overpowered because the action needed to recover from it is not even significantly limiting - it's just 5' of movement, at least in all cases except a fighter of 5th or higher level deciding to significantly reduce his damage potential (it's actually like cutting it in half at 5th level) just to perform a special ability.

If there were a 2nd roll involved (meaning one other than the attack roll) that could prevent the maneuver from working... that would just drive players into not even trying that maneuver because it has extra chance to fail where others, or just dealing more damage, do not - and that is a bad thing.

Plus, it is strictly limited in the size category of creature it works on so it is even less powerful in that aspect.

As for two-weapon strike and sneak attack... I don't think it is too powerful because it has both a feat requirement that doesn't play into the potency directly (meaning the feat it requires you to have is effectively doing nothing every round you use two-weapon strike), and a level requirement - those are things that entitle the feat to some "oomph".

Basically, what you are calling overpowered I see as being the exact intent of what that feat does - gives rogues willing to take the risk of getting in melee an eventual benefit over the strategy that costs less feats and carries less risk (sneaking about and getting advantage that way every other round)

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

Yeah being knocked prone is results in the terrible inconvenience of a 5' movement penalty to stand back up again, so uh... yeah. That should be bigger. 
Epic fantasy action adventure! - free ebook
Yeah being knocked prone is results in the terrible inconvenience of a 5' movement penalty to stand back up again, so uh... yeah. That should be bigger. 


Well, any melee attack made against a prone character before they stand up is made with advantage, so that's probably a little inconvenient.
Yeah being knocked prone is results in the terrible inconvenience of a 5' movement penalty to stand back up again, so uh... yeah. That should be bigger. 

Well, any melee attack made against a prone character before they stand up is made with advantage, so that's probably a little inconvenient.

It's the combination of the two states that really bothers me.  If the fighter trips you, then all attacks against you have advantage... until your turn, at which point it costs you practically nothing to end the condition.  Depending on how the initiatives stagger, the fighter just gave advantage to everyone else in the party... or nobody at all.

I can foresee a lot of fighters delaying initiative until right after the monster goes, to maximize the effect.  It's kind really kind of gimmicky, at that level.

The metagame is not the game.

 I think its important for the DM to maintain his or her right to suppress overpowering players.



It's important for the core rules to make it clear to players that these more obvious overpowering plays are impossible, or at least suffer from a significant drawback.

Trip should always be a contest.  That's the opponent's way out.  Fail the contest, and you're screwed.  The tripper might need a distinct penalty of some sort to discourage every fight becoming "sweep the leg."  :P

Trip should always be a contest.  That's the opponent's way out.  Fail the contest, and you're screwed.

It is a constest as currently written. The contest is called an attack roll.

The tripper might need a distinct penalty of some sort to discourage every fight becoming "sweep the leg."  :P

They have a distinct penalty, it's called not doing nearly as much damage - or in the case of a non-fighter, it's called not dealing any damage at all.

Any further penalty gets into the realm of former editions, where either you just plain don't have rules for it and have to rely on the DM coming up with something, or where the penalties are stacked so heavily as to make attempting the action absolutely worse in all ways for all situations than just striking for damage... or the case of 4th edition where choosing to have the ability to trip someone meant you gave up some other option that is probably less situational.

So far D&DN is shaping up to be the only version of D&D in which "combat maneuvers" are actually something that a player (who hasn't decided to specifically build a character just to focus on them) will think about using at some point, rather than always attacking with no more purpose than to deal damage.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but sneak-attack seems rather nerfed to begin with, when you consider that it makes you lose advantage. At least with two weapons, you're increasing the likelihood (and therefore the expected damage) slightly.

Also, maybe sneaking around with two long-swords should impose Disadvantage on sneaking and tumbling about, making it hard to get the advantage in the first place.
I think you have to be careful thinking that sneak attack is overpowered.  Here is a rough example of why:

Consider @ 11th level (Assumes started with 18 dex and bumped to 20 by 11th level, and assumes a +1 weapon)
Rogue has a + 9 to hit (5 from stat 3 from class 1 from sword)
Monsters AC ranges from 14 to 17 (a selection of threats level 10-14)
Lets just assume d8+6 weapon (5 stat 1 magic) 6d6 martial dice.

Against ac 14: Chance to hit [with advantage, no sneak attack] 5 or better = 96%, avg damage 4.5+6 + 6*(3.5) = 31.5 
So chance to hit x damage = (.96)31.5 = 30.24 average damage per round.
 
Against ac 14 chance to hit [without advantage (w/ sneak attack)]  = 80% avg damage = 4.5+6 +(2)6*(3.5) = 52.5
(.80)52.5= 42 average damage per round.

Sneak Attack adds (on average) about 12points

Against AC 17 (8 or better) the chance to hit with advantage = 87.75
(.8775)31.5 =  27.64 damage
Without = 65
(.65)52.5 = 34.125

sneak attack adds about 6.5 points

If you needed an 11 to hit (AC 20)
Advantage 75% to hit (.75)(31.5) = 23.63
without 50% chance to hit (.5)(52.5) 26.25

sneak attack adds about 3 points.

In the Case of trip the fighter loses 3.5 - 7 points of damage (1-2 martial dice) to trip.  Also can only trip, at most, large creatures.  This closes the damage gap considerably.

Two Weapon Strike the only downside is that you have to spend two feats.  So I do think this might be a bit too good.

Its important to point out the gap is even smaller with a character that starts with a 16-7 dex or doesn't have a magic weapon.  I personally think monster ac may be too low by 1-2 points (at least at this level)

[Edit] also keep in mind that rolling with advantage increases your chance to crit on the attack by nearly 5% over no advantage.

[Credit to Online Dungeon Master for the handy table of advantage and disadvantage]
Hi, all. Sorry for being obtuse, but I've looked through the Playtest Packet III and I can't find any reference to the "trip" mechanic that has been referred to. Could someone direct me to it? Is it a use of the "knock down" action in combination with something else?

"As the good archmage often admonishes me, I ought not let my mind wander. It's too small to go off by itself"

Danilo Thann

It is in the manuevers section. 
It is in the manuevers section. 


All I had was the iteration that goes to level 10. I guess I missed or didn't recieve the email about the release of the new Packet in December, which adds levels 11-20 Frown  That explains why I didn't know what you lot were discussing. Sorry. 

"As the good archmage often admonishes me, I ought not let my mind wander. It's too small to go off by itself"

Danilo Thann