Why is the wording different between Inquisitive and Swashbuckler Rogues' Sneak Attack-related subclass...
Swashbuckler rogues' Rakish Audacity feature lets them attack a lone target with Sneak Attack, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 47):
You also gain an additional way to use your Sneak Attack; you don't need advantage on the attack roll to use your Sneak Attack against a creature if you are within 5 feet of it, no other creatures are within 5 feet of you, and you don't have disadvantage on the attack roll. All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you.
Inquisitive rogues' Insightful Fighting Feature lets them gain insight on a target and use Sneak Attack against them as well, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 46):
As a bonus action, you can make a Wisdom (Insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated, contested by the target's Charisma (Deception) check. If you succeed, you can use your Sneak Attack against that target even if you don't have advantage on the attack roll, but not if you have disadvantage on it.
A player of mine raised a good point. Swashbucklers specifically say All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you, meaning you still need to use finesse/ranged weapons. The Inquisitive rogue doesn't say so. While I'm pretty sure they still require finesse/ranged weapons, I'm actually wondering whether I am correct.
Is there any reason for this wording difference? Or should we just assume the remainder of Sneak Attack conditions still apply?
dnd-5e class-feature rogue sneak-attack
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
add a comment |
Swashbuckler rogues' Rakish Audacity feature lets them attack a lone target with Sneak Attack, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 47):
You also gain an additional way to use your Sneak Attack; you don't need advantage on the attack roll to use your Sneak Attack against a creature if you are within 5 feet of it, no other creatures are within 5 feet of you, and you don't have disadvantage on the attack roll. All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you.
Inquisitive rogues' Insightful Fighting Feature lets them gain insight on a target and use Sneak Attack against them as well, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 46):
As a bonus action, you can make a Wisdom (Insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated, contested by the target's Charisma (Deception) check. If you succeed, you can use your Sneak Attack against that target even if you don't have advantage on the attack roll, but not if you have disadvantage on it.
A player of mine raised a good point. Swashbucklers specifically say All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you, meaning you still need to use finesse/ranged weapons. The Inquisitive rogue doesn't say so. While I'm pretty sure they still require finesse/ranged weapons, I'm actually wondering whether I am correct.
Is there any reason for this wording difference? Or should we just assume the remainder of Sneak Attack conditions still apply?
dnd-5e class-feature rogue sneak-attack
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
While the question is phrased like a "designer reasons" question, what it's actually asking is basically just "Does the Inquisitive rogue's Insightful Fighting feature failing to mention that other Sneak Attack rules still apply mean Inquisitives can Sneak Attack without finesse/ranged weapons?" If this is the case, it might be better to edit the question to ask it that way directly in the title.
– V2Blast
Dec 8 at 7:02
add a comment |
Swashbuckler rogues' Rakish Audacity feature lets them attack a lone target with Sneak Attack, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 47):
You also gain an additional way to use your Sneak Attack; you don't need advantage on the attack roll to use your Sneak Attack against a creature if you are within 5 feet of it, no other creatures are within 5 feet of you, and you don't have disadvantage on the attack roll. All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you.
Inquisitive rogues' Insightful Fighting Feature lets them gain insight on a target and use Sneak Attack against them as well, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 46):
As a bonus action, you can make a Wisdom (Insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated, contested by the target's Charisma (Deception) check. If you succeed, you can use your Sneak Attack against that target even if you don't have advantage on the attack roll, but not if you have disadvantage on it.
A player of mine raised a good point. Swashbucklers specifically say All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you, meaning you still need to use finesse/ranged weapons. The Inquisitive rogue doesn't say so. While I'm pretty sure they still require finesse/ranged weapons, I'm actually wondering whether I am correct.
Is there any reason for this wording difference? Or should we just assume the remainder of Sneak Attack conditions still apply?
dnd-5e class-feature rogue sneak-attack
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
Swashbuckler rogues' Rakish Audacity feature lets them attack a lone target with Sneak Attack, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 47):
You also gain an additional way to use your Sneak Attack; you don't need advantage on the attack roll to use your Sneak Attack against a creature if you are within 5 feet of it, no other creatures are within 5 feet of you, and you don't have disadvantage on the attack roll. All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you.
Inquisitive rogues' Insightful Fighting Feature lets them gain insight on a target and use Sneak Attack against them as well, as long as they don't have disadvantage (XGtE, p. 46):
As a bonus action, you can make a Wisdom (Insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated, contested by the target's Charisma (Deception) check. If you succeed, you can use your Sneak Attack against that target even if you don't have advantage on the attack roll, but not if you have disadvantage on it.
A player of mine raised a good point. Swashbucklers specifically say All the other rules for Sneak Attack still apply to you, meaning you still need to use finesse/ranged weapons. The Inquisitive rogue doesn't say so. While I'm pretty sure they still require finesse/ranged weapons, I'm actually wondering whether I am correct.
Is there any reason for this wording difference? Or should we just assume the remainder of Sneak Attack conditions still apply?
dnd-5e class-feature rogue sneak-attack
dnd-5e class-feature rogue sneak-attack
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
edited Dec 8 at 7:00
V2Blast
19.3k354119
19.3k354119
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
asked Dec 7 at 17:23
BlueMoon93
12.5k965131
12.5k965131
While the question is phrased like a "designer reasons" question, what it's actually asking is basically just "Does the Inquisitive rogue's Insightful Fighting feature failing to mention that other Sneak Attack rules still apply mean Inquisitives can Sneak Attack without finesse/ranged weapons?" If this is the case, it might be better to edit the question to ask it that way directly in the title.
– V2Blast
Dec 8 at 7:02
add a comment |
While the question is phrased like a "designer reasons" question, what it's actually asking is basically just "Does the Inquisitive rogue's Insightful Fighting feature failing to mention that other Sneak Attack rules still apply mean Inquisitives can Sneak Attack without finesse/ranged weapons?" If this is the case, it might be better to edit the question to ask it that way directly in the title.
– V2Blast
Dec 8 at 7:02
While the question is phrased like a "designer reasons" question, what it's actually asking is basically just "Does the Inquisitive rogue's Insightful Fighting feature failing to mention that other Sneak Attack rules still apply mean Inquisitives can Sneak Attack without finesse/ranged weapons?" If this is the case, it might be better to edit the question to ask it that way directly in the title.
– V2Blast
Dec 8 at 7:02
While the question is phrased like a "designer reasons" question, what it's actually asking is basically just "Does the Inquisitive rogue's Insightful Fighting feature failing to mention that other Sneak Attack rules still apply mean Inquisitives can Sneak Attack without finesse/ranged weapons?" If this is the case, it might be better to edit the question to ask it that way directly in the title.
– V2Blast
Dec 8 at 7:02
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Inquisitive rogues still follow all the other rules for Sneak Attack
Nothing in the class feature says they don't follow the other rules, so they still do.
Trying to figure out why the 5e designers used specific wording in a given location and not in others is an exercise in futility, but in this case I would wager it is because of the length of the exceptions to the rules present.
The Swashbuckler has a lengthy, multi-part condition to allow a completely new way to Sneak Attack (in addition to the 2 all Rogues start with), and by the end you could easily expect it to list all of the rules you need to follow; the bolded text explains that this isn't so and the other rules still apply.
The Inquisitive's exception is more straightforward; you replace the requirement "Need Advantage" with "Pass the check".
Since there are fewer words and rules mentioned, a reader is less likely to assume that all the other rules are overridden.
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
I think this answer could be improved by providing more explanation for what the Insight check allows the Inquisitive Rogue to do. i.e. Passed insight check =/= can sneak attack. But rather passed insight check = sneak attack no longer requires advantage.
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:01
@Winterborne How is it now?
– GreySage
Dec 7 at 21:38
Perfect, thanks for taking the time to edit
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:58
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136958%2fwhy-is-the-wording-different-between-inquisitive-and-swashbuckler-rogues-sneak%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Inquisitive rogues still follow all the other rules for Sneak Attack
Nothing in the class feature says they don't follow the other rules, so they still do.
Trying to figure out why the 5e designers used specific wording in a given location and not in others is an exercise in futility, but in this case I would wager it is because of the length of the exceptions to the rules present.
The Swashbuckler has a lengthy, multi-part condition to allow a completely new way to Sneak Attack (in addition to the 2 all Rogues start with), and by the end you could easily expect it to list all of the rules you need to follow; the bolded text explains that this isn't so and the other rules still apply.
The Inquisitive's exception is more straightforward; you replace the requirement "Need Advantage" with "Pass the check".
Since there are fewer words and rules mentioned, a reader is less likely to assume that all the other rules are overridden.
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
I think this answer could be improved by providing more explanation for what the Insight check allows the Inquisitive Rogue to do. i.e. Passed insight check =/= can sneak attack. But rather passed insight check = sneak attack no longer requires advantage.
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:01
@Winterborne How is it now?
– GreySage
Dec 7 at 21:38
Perfect, thanks for taking the time to edit
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:58
add a comment |
Inquisitive rogues still follow all the other rules for Sneak Attack
Nothing in the class feature says they don't follow the other rules, so they still do.
Trying to figure out why the 5e designers used specific wording in a given location and not in others is an exercise in futility, but in this case I would wager it is because of the length of the exceptions to the rules present.
The Swashbuckler has a lengthy, multi-part condition to allow a completely new way to Sneak Attack (in addition to the 2 all Rogues start with), and by the end you could easily expect it to list all of the rules you need to follow; the bolded text explains that this isn't so and the other rules still apply.
The Inquisitive's exception is more straightforward; you replace the requirement "Need Advantage" with "Pass the check".
Since there are fewer words and rules mentioned, a reader is less likely to assume that all the other rules are overridden.
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
I think this answer could be improved by providing more explanation for what the Insight check allows the Inquisitive Rogue to do. i.e. Passed insight check =/= can sneak attack. But rather passed insight check = sneak attack no longer requires advantage.
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:01
@Winterborne How is it now?
– GreySage
Dec 7 at 21:38
Perfect, thanks for taking the time to edit
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:58
add a comment |
Inquisitive rogues still follow all the other rules for Sneak Attack
Nothing in the class feature says they don't follow the other rules, so they still do.
Trying to figure out why the 5e designers used specific wording in a given location and not in others is an exercise in futility, but in this case I would wager it is because of the length of the exceptions to the rules present.
The Swashbuckler has a lengthy, multi-part condition to allow a completely new way to Sneak Attack (in addition to the 2 all Rogues start with), and by the end you could easily expect it to list all of the rules you need to follow; the bolded text explains that this isn't so and the other rules still apply.
The Inquisitive's exception is more straightforward; you replace the requirement "Need Advantage" with "Pass the check".
Since there are fewer words and rules mentioned, a reader is less likely to assume that all the other rules are overridden.
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
Inquisitive rogues still follow all the other rules for Sneak Attack
Nothing in the class feature says they don't follow the other rules, so they still do.
Trying to figure out why the 5e designers used specific wording in a given location and not in others is an exercise in futility, but in this case I would wager it is because of the length of the exceptions to the rules present.
The Swashbuckler has a lengthy, multi-part condition to allow a completely new way to Sneak Attack (in addition to the 2 all Rogues start with), and by the end you could easily expect it to list all of the rules you need to follow; the bolded text explains that this isn't so and the other rules still apply.
The Inquisitive's exception is more straightforward; you replace the requirement "Need Advantage" with "Pass the check".
Since there are fewer words and rules mentioned, a reader is less likely to assume that all the other rules are overridden.
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
edited Dec 7 at 21:54
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
answered Dec 7 at 17:50
GreySage
13.8k44992
13.8k44992
I think this answer could be improved by providing more explanation for what the Insight check allows the Inquisitive Rogue to do. i.e. Passed insight check =/= can sneak attack. But rather passed insight check = sneak attack no longer requires advantage.
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:01
@Winterborne How is it now?
– GreySage
Dec 7 at 21:38
Perfect, thanks for taking the time to edit
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:58
add a comment |
I think this answer could be improved by providing more explanation for what the Insight check allows the Inquisitive Rogue to do. i.e. Passed insight check =/= can sneak attack. But rather passed insight check = sneak attack no longer requires advantage.
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:01
@Winterborne How is it now?
– GreySage
Dec 7 at 21:38
Perfect, thanks for taking the time to edit
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:58
I think this answer could be improved by providing more explanation for what the Insight check allows the Inquisitive Rogue to do. i.e. Passed insight check =/= can sneak attack. But rather passed insight check = sneak attack no longer requires advantage.
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:01
I think this answer could be improved by providing more explanation for what the Insight check allows the Inquisitive Rogue to do. i.e. Passed insight check =/= can sneak attack. But rather passed insight check = sneak attack no longer requires advantage.
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:01
@Winterborne How is it now?
– GreySage
Dec 7 at 21:38
@Winterborne How is it now?
– GreySage
Dec 7 at 21:38
Perfect, thanks for taking the time to edit
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:58
Perfect, thanks for taking the time to edit
– Winterborne
Dec 7 at 21:58
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136958%2fwhy-is-the-wording-different-between-inquisitive-and-swashbuckler-rogues-sneak%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
While the question is phrased like a "designer reasons" question, what it's actually asking is basically just "Does the Inquisitive rogue's Insightful Fighting feature failing to mention that other Sneak Attack rules still apply mean Inquisitives can Sneak Attack without finesse/ranged weapons?" If this is the case, it might be better to edit the question to ask it that way directly in the title.
– V2Blast
Dec 8 at 7:02