Steady Aim is amazing

[nickl_2000]

I know there is definitely a downside since you can't hide or take other bonus actions, but Stead Aim was allowed in our first Post-Tashas game last week and I loved it.

We were in a battle where there wasn't really a good place to hide and my Wizard companion was hurting badly. So, my AT stepped between the bad guy archers and the Wizard to give him cover and used Steady Aim to guarantee Advantage and Sneak Attack each turn. It turned out absolutely amazing to have that option available. I also found it great for both first rounds of combat when my rogue went first and no one else was around to trigger a sneak attack. No need to burn the reaction when shield or uncanny dodge is available.

[sayaijin]

I think the best part of it is that while being sneaky and hiding all the time is thematic for rogues, the rules for hiding made it cumbersome and kinda unrealistic at times.

Instead, you can refluff it however you want, but mechanically it's the same as hiding and popping out, but easier for everyone.

[Droppeddead]

I know there is definitely a downside since you can't hide or take other bonus actions, but Stead Aim was allowed in our first Post-Tashas game last week and I loved it.

We were in a battle where there wasn't really a good place to hide and my Wizard companion was hurting badly. So, my AT stepped between the bad guy archers and the Wizard to give him cover and used Steady Aim to guarantee Advantage and Sneak Attack each turn. It turned out absolutely amazing to have that option available. I also found it great for both first rounds of combat when my rogue went first and no one else was around to trigger a sneak attack. No need to burn the reaction when shield or uncanny dodge is available.

Well, at least for the turns after that, since you can't use it if youäve moved the same turn. ;) But es, I imagine thta it can be very useful. :)


I think the best part of it is that while being sneaky and hiding all the time is thematic for rogues, the rules for hiding made it cumbersome and kinda unrealistic at times.

Instead, you can refluff it however you want, but mechanically it's the same as hiding and popping out, but easier for everyone.

Mechanically what it does is to remove the need for actual cover to hide behind and not requiring a role to succeed to get the advantage, which makes it better for the Rogue. Then again, you're trading away all of your mobility so in the end it's probably a fair trade. If nothing else, it's less cumbersome, just like you say.

[nickl_2000]

Well, at least for the turns after that, since you can't use it if youäve moved the same turn. ;) But es, I imagine thta it can be very useful. :)


Alright, that is fair. The first round of combat I used it to snipe an archer goblin who didn't have a chance to get a shot off. The 3rd round I had a regular sneak attack due to the Paladin being in melee. The 4th and 5th I used it while providing cover to the wizard even though the Paladin was also in melee. If I don't need (or want) to move that advantage is amazing.

[Gignere]

Alright, that is fair. The first round of combat I used it to snipe an archer goblin who didn't have a chance to get a shot off. The 3rd round I had a regular sneak attack due to the Paladin being in melee. The 4th and 5th I used it while providing cover to the wizard even though the Paladin was also in melee. If I don't need (or want) to move that advantage is amazing.

Yeah steady aim really opens up some options for the rogue, and I don’t need to constantly be looking for cover, stay around cover, etc..

I found it really great like you said when I am high in initiative and no enemy has engaged yet. Steady aim boom advantage and sneak attack.

It’s also fantastic when a teammate offs the enemy you are fighting and the next one is at distance with no one around them.

[Chaosmancer]

I've got my first combat with Steady Aim coming up, and I'm interested if I'll end up using it. Because I'm playing a Theif and I've got a ton of alchemical items that I normally throw as a bonus action, so it will be interesting to see if this feels worth it at all.

[jaappleton]

I made an Elf Rogue Scout with Elven Accuracy that I played in a one shot, using Aim.

I figured I would crit pretty often.

We had three combats. I rolled 3d20 every attack. I attacked maybe.... 14 times?

I crit once. XD

Granted, I never missed. Not once. Which was great! Wasn’t quite the crit fishing I’d hoped for, bad luck there.

Still, solid build.

[Gignere]

I made an Elf Rogue Scout with Elven Accuracy that I played in a one shot, using Aim.

I figured I would crit pretty often.

We had three combats. I rolled 3d20 every attack. I attacked maybe.... 14 times?

I crit once. XD

Granted, I never missed. Not once. Which was great! Wasn’t quite the crit fishing I’d hoped for, bad luck there.

Still, solid build.

A little unlucky, without expanded crit range you are expected to crit roughly 14% per attack with advantage so about 1/7 advantaged attacks. So given 14 attacks you would expected to have crit 2x.

However on the flip side you were expected to miss about 2x too, assuming CR appropriate encounters, so not missing once at all you are doing pretty good.

[Gtdead]

Steady Aim is probably the best thing that happened to Rogue in this edition. It went from a "let's hope DM lets me Hide in combat/stealth mechanics are paramount/hope the party has a good meatshield that enemies want to attack" class to a very reliable one at what it does. I used to favor the ranger as the martial skillmonkey because it was more consistent but now I can safely say that I like the Rogue. more.

Combining it with elven accuracy is nice, but I think it's better for the higher levels. Sharpshooter (for cover and maximizing range) and Mobile (free disengage and extra movement speed) are more important for Ranged/Melee rogues respectively IMO. So by the time Rogue gets these, 20 DEX, EA is fine, although I'd still prioritize Alert.

[Hael]

My issue with the ability is that it competes with XBE, so the overal dps gains is marginal at best (and likely negative a good portion of the time).

[kingcheesepants]

So the title of this thread really threw me off, I assumed that you were going to be talking about aiming while mounted (on your stead) but then you totally switch the topic to steady aim and I realized oh it must've been a typo. But then I thought wait could you use steady aim while on your stead and still get the bonus while your mount is moving around? I would lean no but RAW there doesn't seem to be any problem with it and it's never come up at my table, so maybe yes?

[nickl_2000]

So the title of this thread really threw me off, I assumed that you were going to be talking about aiming while mounted (on your stead) but then you totally switch the topic to steady aim and I realized oh it must've been a typo. But then I thought wait could you use steady aim while on your stead and still get the bonus while your mount is moving around? I would lean no but RAW there doesn't seem to be any problem with it and it's never come up at my table, so maybe yes?

So, I just noticed that typo, prior to reading this, and fixed it in the OP :smallbiggrin:

That being said, by RAW you can absolutely use Steady Aim on top of a horse. When a horse moves it is using it's movement not yours. In general, there is nothing stopping you from having a horse dash it's full movement. Then then PC dismounting and uses it's remaining movement to run/dash.


Overall, that is an interesting idea for a rogue kiting. You get a riding horse dashing for 120 feet per round, the rogue uses steady aim and can keep out of combat.

[Gignere]

So, I just noticed that typo, prior to reading this, and fixed it in the OP :smallbiggrin:

That being said, by RAW you can absolutely use Steady Aim on top of a horse. When a horse moves it is using it's movement not yours. In general, there is nothing stopping you from having a horse dash it's full movement. Then then PC dismounting and uses it's remaining movement to run/dash.


Overall, that is an interesting idea for a rogue kiting. You get a riding horse dashing for 120 feet per round, the rogue uses steady aim and can keep out of combat.

Yeah it’s a combo I thought of using once phantom steed comes online for my AT / BS multi class character. Use phantom steed and steady aim to have both mobility and sneak attacks.

[Catullus64]

I don't play in a combat with my Rogue for a few days, so hold my opinion lightly until then, but just on the face of it, I can't stand this feature. I feel like a jerk for saying this in a thread created to praise this feature, but there it is.

People are talking about how it grants the benefits of hiding without the drawbacks of situational dependence, like that's a good thing. Hide-and-snipe Rogue was already a boring playstyle, and it's not improved by essentially removing the only dynamic element. Say what you like about combat stealth in D&D (I certainly will, it's a vague mess), but it at least requires more mental engagement with terrain and positioning than this does.

I also dislike how it disincentives Rogues from taking advantage of their superior mobility, which is one of the features that makes them very interesting to play. After trying it out, I fully expect to swear off ever using this feature again, and to ask my DM to hold me to it, because I just know that that guaranteed advantage will tempt me into a more static and uninteresting combat performance.

I'm also not sure that Rogues needed this change. If generating reliable Sneak Attacks without hiding or melee allies is a problem for you, there are two subclasses that already provide additional ways to proc SA. This feature certainly does not fix the problem Rogues have of ranged combat being more tempting than melee combat; if anything, it exacerbates it.

Also, this is a minor, edge-case gripe, but Versatile Trickster is now worse by comparison

[Gignere]

I don't play in a combat with my Rogue for a few days, so hold my opinion lightly until then, but just on the face of it, I can't stand this feature. I feel like a jerk for saying this in a thread created to praise this feature, but there it is.

People are talking about how it grants the benefits of hiding without the drawbacks of situational dependence, like that's a good thing. Hide-and-snipe Rogue was already a boring playstyle, and it's not improved by essentially removing the only dynamic element. Say what you like about combat stealth in D&D (I certainly will, it's a vague mess), but it at least requires more mental engagement with terrain and positioning than this does.

I also dislike how it disincentives Rogues from taking advantage of their superior mobility, which is one of the features that makes them very interesting to play. After trying it out, I fully expect to swear off ever using this feature again, and to ask my DM to hold me to it, because I just know that that guaranteed advantage will tempt me into a more static and uninteresting combat performance.

I'm also not sure that Rogues needed this change. If generating reliable Sneak Attacks without hiding or melee allies is a problem for you, there are two subclasses that already provide additional ways to proc SA. This feature certainly does not fix the problem Rogues have of ranged combat being more tempting than melee combat; if anything, it exacerbates it.

Also, this is a minor, edge-case gripe, but Versatile Trickster is now worse by comparison

Try it out first before you knock it. I find it made playing a rogue even more strategic. Do I move, not move? I’m in melee do I bonus action disengage or risk it all with steady aim?

Before steady aim, if I ended up with an enemy and I can’t sneak attack it I pretty much just bonus action disengaged, it’s not even a choice/decision just gtfo. Now I can choose to stand my ground and hope to DPR it down instead of just default running away.

It’s always a decision now move, steady aim, or hide so much fun.

[sayaijin]

Also, this is a minor, edge-case gripe, but Versatile Trickster is now worse by comparison

Versatile Trickster was already pretty bad. It still has the advantage that you can still move, so it's not completely obsoleted by steady aim.

I've always assumed that 13th and 17th level AT subclass features were underpowered compared to other subclasses because of access to spellcasting.

[Morty]

I don't play in a combat with my Rogue for a few days, so hold my opinion lightly until then, but just on the face of it, I can't stand this feature. I feel like a jerk for saying this in a thread created to praise this feature, but there it is.

People are talking about how it grants the benefits of hiding without the drawbacks of situational dependence, like that's a good thing. Hide-and-snipe Rogue was already a boring playstyle, and it's not improved by essentially removing the only dynamic element. Say what you like about combat stealth in D&D (I certainly will, it's a vague mess), but it at least requires more mental engagement with terrain and positioning than this does.

I also dislike how it disincentives Rogues from taking advantage of their superior mobility, which is one of the features that makes them very interesting to play. After trying it out, I fully expect to swear off ever using this feature again, and to ask my DM to hold me to it, because I just know that that guaranteed advantage will tempt me into a more static and uninteresting combat performance.

I'm also not sure that Rogues needed this change. If generating reliable Sneak Attacks without hiding or melee allies is a problem for you, there are two subclasses that already provide additional ways to proc SA. This feature certainly does not fix the problem Rogues have of ranged combat being more tempting than melee combat; if anything, it exacerbates it.

Also, this is a minor, edge-case gripe, but Versatile Trickster is now worse by comparison

I agree. I already found my ranged rogue boring when I played her without this feature. With it, she could have just... stood in place and made one attack with advantage after the other. Before I at least had to run around and find somewhere to hide. This would turn her into a glorified crossbow-turret. She'd only need to reposition if enemies came into melee with her.

And yes, reliably getting sneak attacks really wasn't something rogues needed help with. Failing anything else, targeting an enemy already in melee with another party member is usually an option. What rogues needed was something to do that's not sneak attacking at nauseam and this... is the opposite.

[nickl_2000]

I don't play in a combat with my Rogue for a few days, so hold my opinion lightly until then, but just on the face of it, I can't stand this feature. I feel like a jerk for saying this in a thread created to praise this feature, but there it is.

People are talking about how it grants the benefits of hiding without the drawbacks of situational dependence, like that's a good thing. Hide-and-snipe Rogue was already a boring playstyle, and it's not improved by essentially removing the only dynamic element. Say what you like about combat stealth in D&D (I certainly will, it's a vague mess), but it at least requires more mental engagement with terrain and positioning than this does.

I also dislike how it disincentives Rogues from taking advantage of their superior mobility, which is one of the features that makes them very interesting to play. After trying it out, I fully expect to swear off ever using this feature again, and to ask my DM to hold me to it, because I just know that that guaranteed advantage will tempt me into a more static and uninteresting combat performance.

I'm also not sure that Rogues needed this change. If generating reliable Sneak Attacks without hiding or melee allies is a problem for you, there are two subclasses that already provide additional ways to proc SA. This feature certainly does not fix the problem Rogues have of ranged combat being more tempting than melee combat; if anything, it exacerbates it.

Also, this is a minor, edge-case gripe, but Versatile Trickster is now worse by comparison

I'm not sure I agree with the rest of your statement. My experience is that it gave me more options not less, which I will never get mad at. However, the part that you have in bold is 100% absolutely correct. Versatile Trickster is kind of pointless.

[Dork_Forge]

I'm not sure I agree with the rest of your statement. My experience is that it gave me more options not less, which I will never get mad at. However, the part that you have in bold is 100% absolutely correct. Versatile Trickster is kind of pointless.

Not losiing your movement for a turn is nice though

[nickl_2000]

Not losiing your movement for a turn is nice though

True, but losing the action to casting Mage Hand in combat is rough. If you have the ability to pre-cast then it makes sense.

[Gignere]

True, but losing the action to casting Mage Hand in combat is rough. If you have the ability to pre-cast then it makes sense.

There are times the hand will be out already when you get into combat. Like opening a locked door and find behind it a roomful of enemies. Figure your mage hand should still be around for 5 rounds or so.

[sayaijin]

There are times the hand will be out already when you get into combat. Like opening a locked door and find behind it a roomful of enemies. Figure your mage hand should still be around for 5 rounds or so.

Kinda makes me wish that telekinetic feat increased the duration of mage hand too.

[Chaosmancer]

I don't play in a combat with my Rogue for a few days, so hold my opinion lightly until then, but just on the face of it, I can't stand this feature. I feel like a jerk for saying this in a thread created to praise this feature, but there it is.

People are talking about how it grants the benefits of hiding without the drawbacks of situational dependence, like that's a good thing. Hide-and-snipe Rogue was already a boring playstyle, and it's not improved by essentially removing the only dynamic element. Say what you like about combat stealth in D&D (I certainly will, it's a vague mess), but it at least requires more mental engagement with terrain and positioning than this does.

I also dislike how it disincentives Rogues from taking advantage of their superior mobility, which is one of the features that makes them very interesting to play. After trying it out, I fully expect to swear off ever using this feature again, and to ask my DM to hold me to it, because I just know that that guaranteed advantage will tempt me into a more static and uninteresting combat performance.

I'm also not sure that Rogues needed this change. If generating reliable Sneak Attacks without hiding or melee allies is a problem for you, there are two subclasses that already provide additional ways to proc SA. This feature certainly does not fix the problem Rogues have of ranged combat being more tempting than melee combat; if anything, it exacerbates it.

Also, this is a minor, edge-case gripe, but Versatile Trickster is now worse by comparison


My gut says that the option will not be as "obvious" as you think it will be. Sure, if you have no fear of the enemy closing with you, then you can just steady aim all day long. But you have to consider what the enemy will do before you make that decision.

And, yeah, the sneak rules could be interpretted in many ways. The most common I saw was a player running to cover, hiding, then immediately breaking cover for advantage and sneak attack. Then just using the same cover repeatedly. I know a lot of DMs wouldn't allow that, but it made the rogue turns "roll stealth +10 with advantage, beat passive perception, roll attack with advantage". Now it would be... roll attack with advantage. Far quicker.

[Gignere]

My gut says that the option will not be as "obvious" as you think it will be. Sure, if you have no fear of the enemy closing with you, then you can just steady aim all day long. But you have to consider what the enemy will do before you make that decision.

And, yeah, the sneak rules could be interpretted in many ways. The most common I saw was a player running to cover, hiding, then immediately breaking cover for advantage and sneak attack. Then just using the same cover repeatedly. I know a lot of DMs wouldn't allow that, but it made the rogue turns "roll stealth +10 with advantage, beat passive perception, roll attack with advantage". Now it would be... roll attack with advantage. Far quicker.

It also doesn’t obligate DMs to have random covers around to accommodate the rogue. Before steady aim my first question in combat or in a new area was invariably is there cover? So there is less disruption with the DM to tell his story.

[Yakmala]

Which Rogue sub-classes do you feel benefit the most from Steady Aim and which the least? Which ones can best exploit it? Which ones have had other sub-class abilities rendered less useful because of it?

[iTreeby]

I really want to try a multiclass with echo knight and steady aim. You can shoot around partial cover with your echo while standing still.

[Chaosmancer]

Which Rogue sub-classes do you feel benefit the most from Steady Aim and which the least? Which ones can best exploit it? Which ones have had other sub-class abilities rendered less useful because of it?

For me personally, I think the Thief struggles with it. I've got a Batman thief who has a lot of items to throw in combat with Fast Hands, so my bonus action is pretty full.

Swashbuckler also immediately pops out to me as an option that won't get a lot of mileage out of Steady Aim. Their normal style of combat is far too mobile.

Thematically, it is great for assassins. The sniper Aesthetic is great for them, and they really don't have a lot of subclass specific bonus actions.


I'd personally call it a wash for Arcane Tricksters. I get the idea that mage hand is less applicable, but it still can be used for melee attacks, and lets them still move in and attack.

Scout could be rough, they have a lot of mobility style abilities that get turned off by this. But they actually also have a reaction movement which is still viable. So... eh. Maybe a wash?

I've never really seen any Inquisitives or Masterminds, but both seem like they still get mileage out of their abilities and may not use Steady Aim.

Phantom loves this, since like the Assassin they don't have a lot of other bonus actions. But, it is also risky, because their abilities at level 9 require them to be close.


Soulknife doesn't really need this. Can't see them getting much value out of it.

[Greywander]

True, but losing the action to casting Mage Hand in combat is rough. If you have the ability to pre-cast then it makes sense.
Things like this are why I feel like Mage Hand for ATs (and things like Disguise Self cast via Mask of Many Faces) should have a permanent duration. Or, change the casting time to a bonus action, and allow you to manipulate the hand using the same bonus action. The thing is (a) it's at-will, and (b) it doesn't require concentration, so inevitably players will figure out that they can just cast it every 6 seconds so that it's always up and running when combat starts. But that breaks immersion. It's so much simpler to just let at-will spells with no concentration (and even the ones that do use concentration) have a permanent duration, particularly if they're cast on yourself (something like, say, Misty Visions could be problematic since you could maintain the illusion well beyond the normal duration without returning to the location you put it, whereas both Disguise Self and Mage Hand are always going to be nearby within the casting range).

In general, a spell you can cast at-will should have a permanent duration (until you dismiss the spell). Possibly with the exception that the normal duration starts once the spell effect is out of range (e.g. if you use Misty Visions and move further away from the Silent Image than what the range of the spell is). This allows a spell to expire if you're not there, but allows things like self-buffs to remain permanently without needing to bother with the hassle of recasting them. I could see a potential for drama as you try to find a secluded spot to renew your Disguise Self every hour, but I could also see it being within the spirit of that invocation for the effect to not require periodic renewing.

In any case, it just seems like it's easier and avoids shenanigans if we assume that the AT always starts combat with the hand out, even when surprised.

[kingcheesepants]

Things like this are why I feel like Mage Hand for ATs (and things like Disguise Self cast via Mask of Many Faces) should have a permanent duration. Or, change the casting time to a bonus action, and allow you to manipulate the hand using the same bonus action. The thing is (a) it's at-will, and (b) it doesn't require concentration, so inevitably players will figure out that they can just cast it every 6 seconds so that it's always up and running when combat starts. But that breaks immersion. It's so much simpler to just let at-will spells with no concentration (and even the ones that do use concentration) have a permanent duration, particularly if they're cast on yourself (something like, say, Misty Visions could be problematic since you could maintain the illusion well beyond the normal duration without returning to the location you put it, whereas both Disguise Self and Mage Hand are always going to be nearby within the casting range).

In general, a spell you can cast at-will should have a permanent duration (until you dismiss the spell). Possibly with the exception that the normal duration starts once the spell effect is out of range (e.g. if you use Misty Visions and move further away from the Silent Image than what the range of the spell is). This allows a spell to expire if you're not there, but allows things like self-buffs to remain permanently without needing to bother with the hassle of recasting them. I could see a potential for drama as you try to find a secluded spot to renew your Disguise Self every hour, but I could also see it being within the spirit of that invocation for the effect to not require periodic renewing.

In any case, it just seems like it's easier and avoids shenanigans if we assume that the AT always starts combat with the hand out, even when surprised.

I was kinda in the same boat as you thinking that at will spells should just stick around. But then I had a session where mask of many faces having an hour duration was extremely relavent. The bad guy was disguising himself as a friendly NPC and doing the good ol' which one will you kill deal with the PCs who were having none of it. They tied and gagged both of them and waited for the disguise to run out and slit his throat once it did. It was a bit anticlimactic but a clever and effective way to deal with the problem that wouldn't have been possible if the disguise never wore off.

[Greywander]

I'm going to guess that was probably Alter Self or some other shapeshifting spell or ability, or else a stronger illusion ability. Disguise Self should fail if you touch the person, as your hand would pass through the illusory parts of the disguise. You could probably use Disguise Self to just change colors and patterns, making it infallible (since there are no intangible parts), but that won't really let you disguise yourself as someone else, especially not someone specific. You could also use the illusionist's Illusory Reality to make part of the disguise real for a short time.

But yeah, there are times where something like that would matter. And that was indeed a clever way to deal with the issue, I'm sure the DM was pulling their hair out. And hey, it might have been anticlimactic, but it feels great to outsmart the villain. Putting in the effort to come up with a plan or do something create that trivializes a powerful enemy is exhilarating, not boring (as many DMs might fear). It's only when it requires no effort to trivialize an encounter that it becomes boring (although easy encounters can be a good way to relax after a difficult section of the adventure, sometimes you just want to wreck a horde of goblins in a one-sided battle).

[Mr Adventurer]

Steady Aim is probably the best thing that happened to Rogue in this edition. It went from a "let's hope DM lets me Hide in combat/stealth mechanics are paramount/hope the party has a good meatshield that enemies want to attack" class to a very reliable one at what it does.

??? What are you taking about? I've been playing a rogue for 7 levels so far and haven't been relying on Advantage in the slightest.

And even then, the conditions you list are extremely common in typical encounters. "DM follows the rules". "There's melee combat".


So the title of this thread really threw me off, I assumed that you were going to be talking about aiming while mounted (on your stead)

Steed.


True, but losing the action to casting Mage Hand in combat is rough. If you have the ability to pre-cast then it makes sense.


Kinda makes me wish that telekinetic feat increased the duration of mage hand too.


Things like this are why I feel like Mage Hand for ATs (and things like Disguise Self cast via Mask of Many Faces) should have a permanent duration. Or, change the casting time to a bonus action, and allow you to manipulate the hand using the same bonus action.

The absolute number 1 handicap on the Arcane Trickster is the action cost of activating the Hand. My favourite theory crafted workaround is now Bladesinger 6, but that's a hefty multiclass.

Disagree that at-will should equal permanent, though.

[Sception]

6 levels /is/ a hefty multiclass, but arcane trickster / bladesinger was a popular multiclass already. And a proper one, too, rewarding more lengthy investments in both sides instead of just the 1 to 3 level dips that are more common in 5e multiclassing.

[Morty]

Scout could be rough, they have a lot of mobility style abilities that get turned off by this. But they actually also have a reaction movement which is still viable. So... eh. Maybe a wash?


Being able to book it as a reaction whenever an enemy ends their turn next to you sounds like it'd play pretty well with steady aim.

[Segev]

It also doesn’t obligate DMs to have random covers around to accommodate the rogue. Before steady aim my first question in combat or in a new area was invariably is there cover? So there is less disruption with the DM to tell his story.


??? What are you taking about? I've been playing a rogue for 7 levels so far and haven't been relying on Advantage in the slightest. You're not sneak attacking much? --oh, wait, as I wrote that, I remembered that they can do it off of allies being adjacent, too. Makes find familiar even more useful to the Arcane Trickster. (I am amused by the mild cheese of a tiny, tiny spider being within five feet and giving the rogue the ability to sneak attack, and arguing whether the target should realize that the spider is actually a threat worth wasting an action to attack and kill.)


The absolute number 1 handicap on the Arcane Trickster is the action cost of activating the Hand. My favourite theory crafted workaround is now Bladesinger 6, but that's a hefty multiclass.

Disagree that at-will should equal permanent, though.To be fair, nothing stops any spellcaster from casting a cantrip every minute. Spellcasting doesn't automatically break stealth, even, if it doesn't involve attacking something. The biggest arguments against it are that it is something that would likely lapse as the caster forgets about it over time (countered by creating some sort of reminder - perhaps your mage hand carries a copper coin that drops if it winks out - or by calling it a "nervous tic" he has developed into a habit), and how annoying it would be for the rest of the party if the caster keeps, for example, making the same gesture and saying, "Mage hand," every 30s to a minute.

Of course, in mage hand's specific case, there's a work-around to the "annoying tic" aspect: the Telekinetic feat removes components. It's a purely mental action. So now all the caster has to do is remember to think to renew it every minute. The only annoying thing would be if he's using the coin-reminder trick, as he'll likely drop the coin every few minutes when he gets distracted from re-upping it once a minute every minute.

[Gignere]

You're not sneak attacking much? --oh, wait, as I wrote that, I remembered that they can do it off of allies being adjacent, too. Makes find familiar even more useful to the Arcane Trickster. (I am amused by the mild cheese of a tiny, tiny spider being within five feet and giving the rogue the ability to sneak attack, and arguing whether the target should realize that the spider is actually a threat worth wasting an action to attack and kill.)

To be fair, nothing stops any spellcaster from casting a cantrip every minute. Spellcasting doesn't automatically break stealth, even, if it doesn't involve attacking something. The biggest arguments against it are that it is something that would likely lapse as the caster forgets about it over time (countered by creating some sort of reminder - perhaps your mage hand carries a copper coin that drops if it winks out - or by calling it a "nervous tic" he has developed into a habit), and how annoying it would be for the rest of the party if the caster keeps, for example, making the same gesture and saying, "Mage hand," every 30s to a minute.

Of course, in mage hand's specific case, there's a work-around to the "annoying tic" aspect: the Telekinetic feat removes components. It's a purely mental action. So now all the caster has to do is remember to think to renew it every minute. The only annoying thing would be if he's using the coin-reminder trick, as he'll likely drop the coin every few minutes when he gets distracted from re-upping it once a minute every minute.

They should have made mage hand for the AT last 10 minutes or an hour, as well as removed all components from the casting for the AT. It really breaks immersion that you can be sneaky while casting a spell that requires V.

Like if it was just somatic you can hide it with sleight of hand, but speaking in a normal voice to cast a spell, I know RAW maybe stealth doesn’t break but speaking in a normal voice people should know you are there.

[nickl_2000]

They should have made mage hand for the AT last 10 minutes or an hour, as well as removed all components from the casting for the AT. It really breaks immersion that you can be sneaky while casting a spell that requires V.

Like if it was just somatic you can hide it with sleight of hand, but speaking in a normal voice to cast a spell, I know RAW maybe stealth doesn’t break but speaking in a normal voice people should know you are there.

Or simply made it so that you can Cast mage hand with cunning action as well as move/use a pre-existing one.

[Segev]

They should have made mage hand for the AT last 10 minutes or an hour, as well as removed all components from the casting for the AT. It really breaks immersion that you can be sneaky while casting a spell that requires V.

Like if it was just somatic you can hide it with sleight of hand, but speaking in a normal voice to cast a spell, I know RAW maybe stealth doesn’t break but speaking in a normal voice people should know you are there.
Isn’t the exact wording a “firm tone” or such? I don’t think it actually says anything about volume, but I’m away from book right now.

The key point here, I think, is that you can’t really cast a spell without people who can see or hear you recognizing that you’re doing something, but if they can’t see you they don’t auto my heart or notice that you’re casting. It’s not replacing Subtle Spell because Subtle lets you do it in plain sight while this requires you to be hidden. But you can keep hidden while doing it.

Maybe the level nine power of an AT should be extending the duration of mage hand to 8 hours, instead of it in addition to the ability to give yourself advantage on attacks against one creature with it. Which is only so-so as a feature, at best.

[Gignere]

Isn’t the exact wording a “firm tone” or such? I don’t think it actually says anything about volume, but I’m away from book right now.

The key point here, I think, is that you can’t really cast a spell without people who can see or hear you recognizing that you’re doing something, but if they can’t see you they don’t auto my heart or notice that you’re casting. It’s not replacing Subtle Spell because Subtle lets you do it in plain sight while this requires you to be hidden. But you can keep hidden while doing it.

Maybe the level nine power of an AT should be extending the duration of mage hand to 8 hours, instead of it in addition to the ability to give yourself advantage on attacks against one creature with it. Which is only so-so as a feature, at best.

I have never gotten away or let anyone when I DM say I whisper my spell so no one knows I’m casting it. I think the firm tone implies that it is audible, like a normal conversation.

[Segev]

I have never gotten away or let anyone when I DM say I whisper my spell so no one knows I’m casting it. I think the firm tone implies that it is audible, like a normal conversation.

It doesn’t, though. I can whisper firmly. Anybody whose sat next to their siblings in church and been on either side of an argument when they have to keep from upsetting parents by being caught arguing has experienced others doing it, or done it, themselves.

At worst, I might require the caster to roll Stealth again to see if they keep their voice down sufficiently.

The rules are pretty clear about what automatically breaks stealth. Casting a spell is not on that list. (Though some spells involve things that are.)

[Mr Adventurer]

You're not sneak attacking much? --oh, wait, as I wrote that, I remembered that they can do it off of allies being adjacent, too.

Yes, this is the main way I get Sneak Attack; I believe it's supposed to be the most common.


To be fair, nothing stops any spellcaster from casting a cantrip every minute. Spellcasting doesn't automatically break stealth, even, if it doesn't involve attacking something. The biggest arguments against it are that it is something that would likely lapse as the caster forgets about it over time (countered by creating some sort of reminder - perhaps your mage hand carries a copper coin that drops if it winks out - or by calling it a "nervous tic" he has developed into a habit), and how annoying it would be for the rest of the party if the caster keeps, for example, making the same gesture and saying, "Mage hand," every 30s to a minute.

I've posted before about how I don't think this is appropriate - in discussion with you even, I think. I won't revisit all that as I'm not sure it'd be thread-relevant for me to do so... Suffice it to say I really hate such a mechanistic view of the game world and find the proposed narratives a poor band-aid.


Of course, in mage hand's specific case, there's a work-around to the "annoying tic" aspect: the Telekinetic feat removes components.

Absolutely love Telekinetic feat for all the AT problems it solves on top of being super cool in its own right.


Or simply made it so that you can Cast mage hand with cunning action as well as move/use a pre-existing one.

The latter would be my preferred houserule as an AT player. It requires so little change to the text: just change "control" to "cast the spell or control" in the last line of the Mage Hand Legerdemain feature.


I have never gotten away or let anyone when I DM say I whisper my spell so no one knows I’m casting it. I think the firm tone implies that it is audible, like a normal conversation.

This is how I rule it - primarily because I am not in favour of giving spellcasters additional breaks. Spellcasting is magical and obvious - chanting and throwing arcane hand gestures and such - until you have a feature that says otherwise. It doesn't automatically "break Stealth", whatever that means, unless speaking clearly and waving your hands would do so in the circumstances.

[Segev]

Yes, this is the main way I get Sneak Attack; I believe it's supposed to be the most common.No idea what's supposed to be the most common, but sneak attack is supposed to be available "almost every round," is my understanding.


I've posted before about how I don't think this is appropriate - in discussion with you even, I think. I won't revisit all that as I'm not sure it'd be thread-relevant for me to do so... Suffice it to say I really hate such a mechanistic view of the game world and find the proposed narratives a poor band-aid.Quite possibly it was in discussion with me. I question it being "mechanistic," though. If it is something where every moment could be precious, so taking whatever time is represented by the action it takes to cast the spell is sometimes critical, keeping it up all the time so you're never caught without it "up" seems like something a real professional whose life can depend on such critical moments might do.

They know how long it lasts. If it's important to have up in a fight, and being caught in a fight without it makes them less effective to the point it's worth sacrificing action economy to get it up (or going without it reduces your efficacy, but not enough to waste time casting it when moments matter), working to keep it from going down seems important.


Absolutely love Telekinetic feat for all the AT problems it solves on top of being super cool in its own right.It is pretty cool. I wish the Telepathy feat were equally cool; detect thoughts being usable limited times rather than simply letting it be two-way communication is...ehn. I understand why they did it that way...I think. But it's still disappointing.


The latter would be my preferred houserule as an AT player. It requires so little change to the text: just change "control" to "cast the spell or control" in the last line of the Mage Hand Legerdemain feature.One way to fix it would be to have Mage Hand Legerdemain allow you to cast mage hand with Cunning Action, and "if you do" you can get the rest of the benefit. So you're re-casting it every time you want the Advantage. Still costs a bonus action, but doesn't require you to have it already up. Of course, this is, essentially, now, "Use a bonus action to give yourself Advantage."

To be fair, this is a 9th level ability while Steady Aim is a 3rd level ability, so one archetype getting an improved version of Steady Aim is not a problem at a higher level than Steady Aim becomes available.


This is how I rule it - primarily because I am not in favour of giving spellcasters additional breaks. Spellcasting is magical and obvious - chanting and throwing arcane hand gestures and such - until you have a feature that says otherwise. It doesn't automatically "break Stealth", whatever that means, unless speaking clearly and waving your hands would do so in the circumstances."Speaking clearly" implying "loud enough that people automatically hear you" is a fairly big leap, I think. The hiding rules spell out clearly several things that break stealth. Spellcasting is very notably not on that list. If it were intended to be, it'd very likely be mentioned.

[Mr Adventurer]

"Speaking clearly" implying "loud enough that people automatically hear you" is a fairly big leap, I think. The hiding rules spell out clearly several things that break stealth. Spellcasting is very notably not on that list. If it were intended to be, it'd very likely be mentioned.

It's not a leap I make. Speaking clearly is speaking clearly. If someone could hear you speaking clearly, they could hear you casting a spell with verbal components.

[Greywander]

This is one of the things that bugs me about spell components. I wish they were more mechanical, and less RP. In particular, one of the things that irks me is how a lot of social spells have a V component. Note that the V component is not the suggestion (for Suggestion) or command (for Command), it is a separate incantation that is then followed by the specific suggestion or command. Why this irks me is that people are going to know that you just cast a spell, making the spell almost unusable in social settings without Subtle Spell. At least, if the DM runs things by the book.

With this in mind, I feel like spell components should have been linked to things like "this component will break stealth," "this component tells everyone who can see (or hear?) you that you are casting a spell," "this component requires a free hand," "this component requires you to be able to speak," etc. We have some of this, kind of.

Here's how I might reorganize spell components:

Verbal - Requires that you be able to speak.
Somatic - Requires a free hand.
Material - Requires a specific item. Does not need a free hand, the item only has to be on your person. (If a spell requires a free hand, it will have a somatic component.)
Flashy - Requires dramatic gestures or creates light or other effects. Those who can see you can tell you are casting a spell, and it reveals your presence (if hidden) to those who can see you.
Vociferous - Requires loud incantation or creates noises or other effects. Those who can hear you can tell a spell is being cast, and it reveals your presence (if hidden) to those who can hear you.

This doesn't mean that you aren't handling material components, only that you are able to do so with a hand that isn't free (unless the spell has a somatic component). I could see further separating out components that breaks stealth and components that people can tell is a spell, but I felt like these might overlap a lot. Anyway, this isn't what we have, but maybe they'll do another pass on spell components in a future book (or edition).

[sayaijin]

One way to fix it would be to have Mage Hand Legerdemain allow you to cast mage hand with Cunning Action, and "if you do" you can get the rest of the benefit. So you're re-casting it every time you want the Advantage. Still costs a bonus action, but doesn't require you to have it already up. Of course, this is, essentially, now, "Use a bonus action to give yourself Advantage."

To be fair, this is a 9th level ability while Steady Aim is a 3rd level ability, so one archetype getting an improved version of Steady Aim is not a problem at a higher level than Steady Aim becomes available.



Either this, or the level 13 ability makes mage hand have a "until you dismiss it" duration seem like the best solutions.

The level 9 ability is actually one of the few ways to make a low-int AT rogue work, so I'd hate to take that away.

[Segev]

It's not a leap I make. Speaking clearly is speaking clearly. If someone could hear you speaking clearly, they could hear you casting a spell with verbal components.

If I'm "speaking clearly," how far away can you hear me? If I'm "speaking clearly," can I be heard over a medium-sized crowd at a shopping mall on a relatively calm day? If I'm "speaking clearly" at a table in a restaurant (in 2019 or earlier), can you hear me from four tables over? What if I'm "speaking clearly" in the bleachers at a high-school football game? What about hours before the game, "speaking clearly" to somebody standing at the top while I'm at the bottom of said bleachers?

"Speaking clearly," my point being, doesn't actually imply a volume. It implies clarity. If somebody can hear you, what you're saying is clear. Might be clearly gibberish, but it's not mumbled, slurred, subvocalized, or otherwise hard to understand if it's loud enough to hear from where the listener is. There are no enunciation issues.

If I'm in a theater and I want to lean over to make a comment to my friend (or, if I managed to wrangle one, my date) without disturbing the other guests, I can pitch my voice at a level that - I hope - my companion will hear without it being heard by anybody else. I can still speak clearly while doing this, at most ranges of volume I can manage. (Too quiet and it's not "speaking" anymore, and too loud and similar problems but with different sources of distortion.)

But it's a LOT of dynamic range at which I can "speak clearly."

[Mr Adventurer]

It feels like you are creating a dichotomy which doesn't need to exist. There is a natural range for speaking.

[Segev]

It feels like you are creating a dichotomy which doesn't need to exist. There is a natural range for speaking.

There is. My point is it's quite broad, and that "speaking clearly" needn't be particularly loud nor audible from even a few feet away. Hence why, at worst, I think calling for a new Stealth check to see if you roll low and accidentally drop a syllable into a quiet point or say something too loudly is called for. Not automatically assuming that casting a spell is audible to anybody whose passive perception you'd otherwise compare to the character's stealth check.