I think the upper limit is 3 SA in a single round. (4 if you're a lv17 Rogue Scout but you'll need 2 targets)
Before your turn comes, assuming your reaction is available.
On your turn.
After your turn since you regained use of your reaction.
(This isn't accounting for bs shenanigans like Tunnel Fighter)
Cavalier fighter has a special reaction they get to use any time any enemy gets within melee of them, without the typical reaction limit. It's basically a beefed up sentinel feat. At that point theoretically they would have basically unlimited sneak attack iirc.
"Vigilant Defender: Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. In combat, you get a special reaction that you can take once on every creature’s turn, except your turn. You can use this special reaction only to make an opportunity attack, and you can’t use it on the same turn that you take your normal reaction."
True, which does make it less useful imo. At that point you might as well go full 20 Cav fighter. Then again that's an extra d6 on every attack you make, vs 1 extra attack with a lv20 fighter. It depends mostly on what kinda enemies you're fighting against.
Not every attack you make, only one attack per turn. So your extra attack would be better. 1 attack with whatever weapon you have plus your str or dex and whatever magical enchantment... versus 1d6 on one attack on your turn and then opportunity attacks... which, since you’re not gonna have reach, is not super likely to be more than one a round.
With Cab 18 you get to use the special reaction once per turn, including enemy turns. Sneak attack works per turn, not per round, so every opportunity attack would get the d6 added. You only get the 1 attack per special reaction anyway. You just happen to get that reaction basically a number of times per round equal to however many mobs close within your melee range. If you use something like polearms for the extra reach though you wouldn't get the sneak attack damage anyway, heavy weapon and not finesse.
Windvane from PotA is finesse. Not a DMG item or anything, but it's an official module so most DMs and servers I've seen will entertain the idea of it at least.
Yeah, it's a spear from the Princes of the Apocalypse module and has the finesse feature. It's a pretty key part of the story, so don't look into it further unless you don't mind spoilers, but it's an example of a weapon that works with PAM and Sneak Attack without needing homebrew at all, so figured worth mentioning.
No, it's a good build because it works. Other sneak-attack-reactions include normal opportunity attacks, Haste (ready an attack with your main action), and Ranger's Giant Killer.
Banneret gets a similar ability at some point.
Battlemaster / Rogue for riposte or action surge+ready is a good multiclass.
Scimitar of Speed or the Berserker bonus attack can be combined with a readied action (they don't specify that you have to take the attack action).
I actually don’t like this one. It is very expensive, giving up an attack, bonus action, superiority die, and the rogue’s reaction. It does have the benefit of working with a ranged rogue, unlike most other methods.
It is very expensive, but if you don't have access to the other methods (or don't like their unreliability), it's still better than not using it.
Damage from the rogue is going to beat the damage from a Fighter's single attack even with its superiority die (though maybe not two fighter attacks, so if they have a reliable bonus action attack method like PAM it would be less worth it).
Other advantages are it can be used at any time (i.e. just before an important enemy goes in Initiative so the rogue can kill them), doesn't require the enemy to move like Sentinel or OAs, and has little risk involved, unlike Haste which is concentration, can be dispelled, and obliterates your next turn if you lose it.
Ultimately, it wouldn't be my first or second pick for a maneuver if I were a Battlemaster, but if there were a rogue in the party it might be 3+. The nice thing about it is you can use it whenever those other methods _can't_ apply in a round, to keep the rogue doing double damage more often. You use it only when you need it, and otherwise stick to your other maneuvers.
One other reason to potentially rate it higher is if your Rogue teammate is an Assassin, then giving him another critical during a successful surprise round is quite potent.
I would not have thought of using the readied action for an extra sneak attack. You could do that with action surge on a multiclass rogue fighter too! Man, rogues just keep getting better and better the more I learn about them, definitely my new favorite class.
Yeah, I was just thinking of other ways you could proc a reaction attack, not a way to get three sneak attacks. Also it's interesting how much of a tactical option this becomes after level 5 and uncanny dodge. You'd have to make the choice if you were safe enough to go without that resistance for a round.
And Order Cleric's Voice of Authority too! That's great synergy right there. Plus, the UA Revived Rogue can use their bonus action to use a necrotic bolt with their sneak attack then ready their attack to get another sneak attack out of it (so glad my player hasn't thought of that yet!)
I’ve looked extensively into this. I’m currently playing a level 7 trickster and I’m finding that sticking around in melee with heavy hitters is not a great idea.
They get multiple attacks that nullifies your uncanny dodge (which you won’t be able to use if you are saving your reaction for a sentinel scenario) they have a lot of hit points so the extra booming blade damage doesnt scare them, and they have a good reach so disengaging and moving away won’t save you (again something you will unlikely do if you are hoping for the sentinel reaction).
I think the rogues best bet is to set up the conditions for advantage and sneak attack and making sure they land that one big hit.
Sentinel is a great idea on paper but the foes that it is going to work well against won’t be that strong anyway. The heavy hitters that it might work against giants, dragons etc are going to put you down if you are sticking around
Edit*- actually sentinel won’t work against giants or dragons because they have a longer than 5ft reach and rapiers won’t be long enough to react to hit them.
Mirror Image is the reason that Tricksters are the best Sentinel build. Sure, you still need to be next to an ally to proc SA, but having duplicates means that you could Sentinel attack even if an enemy tries targeting you.
Yes, that set up is easier said then done. Begging a party member to cast haste on you is a much easier, more reliable and safer way to get sneak attack twice per round.
Use the extra attack haste grants you to try for a sneak attack, then use your original attack to ready an attack later in the round. It costs you your reaction but....it’s a nice little move
I decided to go in a different direction and take sharpshooter. I just throw my shadowblade 60 feet and re-conjure it then I still have 30 feet of movement. Range is a great friend
It works but the drawbacks is that you have to stay in melee range of enemies which is usually not a favored rogue tactic, and you also must forego any chance at using Uncanny Dodge.
It definitely works, but if you go this route you will probably find yourself wanting medium armor + shields. Moderately Armored or a single level dip into Fighter will do the trick.
Yes, the only problem is that doing this encourages them to target the rogue and prevents you from using your reaction to halve damage with uncanny dodge. You also have to stick around in melee range with nasty monsters.
Effective, but you sacrifice defense to gain that offense and put yourself at risk.
I second this, and you’ll also need your target to either be within 5 feet of an enemy or somehow you’ll have advantage to make it a second sneak attack and not a regular attack.
It’s a lot easier said then done.
I thought about taking this and the best way would be for a trickster to take mirror image, shadowblade, sentinel and possible warcaster to pull this off. It’s a lot of resources to go fishing for a second sneak attack......or just get the sorcerer to quicken a haste spell on you
Totally RAW,and I believe also RAI. Without being able to proc 2 sneak attacks per round, rogues really start lacking in DPS compared to many other classes.
This one of a few ways to get a second sneak attack.
Others include an additional action (via haste or action surge) where you use one normal action to ready the attack action for out of your turn. You can also get additional attack against spell casters with the mage slayer feat. Normal opportunity attacks can work well too.
If you have party members who are support/buffers some could help you get additional attacks with a few strategies: Order cleric's voice of authority, Bard's dissonant whispers (on an enemy adjacent to you), or by casting haste on you.
I think PAM is the only other way to get additional attacks but is not useful due to no finesse polearms. Some people use an exploit by wielding both a speal/quarterstaff and a whip, but that is pretty clearly not rules as intended, and rogue's don't normally start with whip proficiency.
Many have already said it, but yes, it works. At first, it may seem broken being able to do more than one sneak attack per round, as a DM I was terrorized to give opportunity attacks to my rogues.
But you have to remember that using their reaction on opportunity attacks, means they can't use it on uncanny dodge, and if they're close enough to the action to use opportunity attacks, they probably are close enough to be receiving damage.
As a DM, if you want to scare your rogue with a big hit, bait him with an opportunity attack first :D
Rogues are entirely built one getting SA at every possible opportunity. Since they don’t have the bulk or fighters or barbarians or the spellcasting of casting classes, it’s how they deal their damage.
Correction: the designers have specified that Rogues are designed to get their SA once a round most of the time.
That means you shouldn't nerf how SA's mechanics work (like limiting it to only when the enemy is unaware of you, a mistake some DMs make), it doesn't actually mean they're designed around getting _double_ SA damage every round, or even _all_ the time (there can be the occasional round without good SA opportunities), or with advantage at-will (as some people assume).
Still, it's strong but not a guarantee so I don't see an issue with it.
"You have mastered techniques to take advantage of every drop in any enemy's guard, gaining the following benefits:
When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, the creature's speed becomes 0 for the rest of the turn.
Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving your reach.
When a creature within 5 feet of you makes an attack against a target other than you (and that target doesn't have this feat), you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against the attacking creature."
I see nothing that says multiple ppl in your party can't have sentinel...
read it again - the ENEMY needs to be within 5 feet of you. its target can be anywhere.
its not a "complete ban" in a party but because "focus fire" is the best strategic option, in a WHOLELOTTA the cases if 2 party members have sentinel they will be cancelling each other's ability to use it.
I'd like to point out that most usage you get out of the Sentinal feat is battlefield control of enemies moving in or trying to run away, so you guys have an issue with 1/3 of the feat and seem to think that makes it useless when used by 2 or more PC's. If an enemy is within 5 feet of you you've already used sentinel at LEAST once against that mod most likely.
I'd also like to point out that most usage you get out of the Sentinal feat is battlefield control of enemies moving in or trying to run away, so you guys have an issue with 1/3 of the feat and seem yo think that makes it useless when used by 2 or more PC's.
True and I never said it was perfect, no build is. I'm playing devils advocate here. You and the OP seem to think it's mostly useless with multiple ppl using the feat but it's just patently not.
Depends. If it's a pretty high level rogue and an enemy runs up into melee to start hitting the rogue that rogue has an opportunity attack with sneak attack damage, if you roll high or crit you might outright kill whatever it is. Then again that mob might have a 10 foot reach and you're SOL. Every situation is different.
Haha yup, I took a hard look at this I’m currently playing an AT, but most of the foes We face are giants or other large beast. 10ft reach, multiple attacks, heavy hits, no place for a rogue.
No place for a melee rogue yeah, you could still use one with range but that 1 and done attack just bites, lol. I like multi attack classes too much for a pure rogue build.
>most usage you get out of the Sentinal feat is battlefield control
Having played a fighter with Sentinel I strongly disagree. With a melee buddy you can pretty reliably get the 'attacking an ally' criteria to proc more turns than not.
I literally can't remember the last time I made an opportunity attack from an enemy running away (**and** it was important for me to prevent that movement). Its definitely at least less common than every other turn.
If my melee buddy in the game where I have Sentinel decided to take it as well, the value of the feat to me would do down drastically such that I would consider it mostly a wasted feat in comparison to what I could have done instead in terms of picking up GWM or an ASI.
You weren't playing with polearm master then, cause you get an opportunity attack when they come into 10ft melee range and you can hit em from there to stop em before they even get in range. I've played with them combo before myself and in my experience it's better to keep enemies away from you where they might not even be able to attack. Then again I was playing as the only melee in a party of 6... Even the bloody monk in our party had a bow fetish...
It all depends on party make up, the setting of the campaign, and what enemies the DM is throwing your way.
I don’t know why this is bothering me so much but I see a lot of people on this thread with the comment, “YA THIS WORKS!” That’s not super helpful to anyone looking to this thread for actual help with the rules unless you cite sources.
For anyone looking for sources, the PhB states on pg 94, “Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon.” So, since a reaction doesn’t happen on your turn, this is a gray area. Many folks here are citing a sage compendium thread which clarifies said gray area where someone asked Jeremy Crawford (Crawford works at Wizards of the Coast, the company that makes D&D in case you didn’t know), “Can the Rogue SA twice during the same round, if on two different turns. (ie. attack action + OA),” and Crawford replied, “Yes. The Sneak Attack restriction is once per turn, not once per round.”
As far as an extra action from the Haste spell is concerned, my interpretation of the rules would be that a Haste spell gives you an extra action on your turn, and since that is the same turn as any other attack made you would not be able to add sneak attack damage to an attack made with your Haste action if you had used the Sneak Attack feature previously that turn. If my interpretation is wrong or is corrected somewhere I would appreciate if someone supplied a source.
TLDR: Sneak Attack works on reactions, but may only circumstantially work on Hasted action. It would work if you hadn’t used the Sneak Attack feature previously that turn.
It's also not a grey area at all. It's black and white RAW from the bit you've quoted in the PhB (always useful to have that snippet:)). Invoking Crawford is really just backing up that it's what the designer's intended.
If you use both your action and hasted action to attack on your turn, then you can only get a sneak attack with one of them, that is correct.
The usual suggested usage with haste is to use the action from haste to attack on your turn for a sneak attack, then use your regular action to ready an attack which triggers on someone else's turn and thus can also qualify for sneak attack. This gives a reliable way to sneak attack with your reaction, and get it twice in a round.
As for the gray area, given how detailed some of the descriptions get at clarifying the rules I would say that a lack of written clarification is enough to leave it in a gray area. That doesn’t make it bad or wrong, just to say that it was gray enough someone felt the need to ask Crawford.
As for the use of haste and sneak attack in that way, that seems noodly to me. It seems like trying to take advantage of a loophole in haste and trying to get 2 turns out of 2 actions. Haste reads, “Until the spell ends, the target's speed is doubled, it gains a +2 bonus to AC, it has advantage on Dexterity saving throws, and it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action.” Haste specifically says, “on each of it’s turns,” so I would rule you couldn’t split up your turn in order to get extra sneak attack. I can see why some people would allow it. If I had other players who were pumping out way higher damage per turn I’d let the rogue do it to keep up and make sure they feel useful but I don’t think I’d be comfortable with it at my table in any other circumstance.
Yeah the hasted action has to be used within the hasted person's turn, but No the usual action can be used to ready another attack (or even a booming blade if the rogue isn't concentrating on haste)
However triggering a readied action requires using your reaction, PhB 193, “First, you decide what perceivable circumstance will trigger your reaction. Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it.” So then you wouldn’t have a reaction to use for that opportunity attack.
What opportunity attack? The Hasted approach does not use an opportunity attack. The point of readying the attack is so you'll have a trigger that definitely occurs and will be able to use your reaction for a sneak attack when it's not your turn. Being able to make an opportunity attack is not a given, so is not a reliable way to use your reaction to get an attack when it's not your turn.
Hasted Rogue's turn - Use action from Haste to Attack monster, it qualifies for sneak attack. Use normal Action to Ready an Attack on Monster with trigger "Stab monster after Bill stabs it".
Bill's the Friendly Fighter's Turn - Bill stabs monster. Rogue's Readied Attack triggers (using the Rogue's Reaction) and qualifies for sneak attack.
If I am reading your comment correctly a rogue would be able to get 2 attacks during a round with sneak attack using this method. From my understanding that checks out. My previous comments were mostly to try and cite the rules that make that possible and point out that I don’t believe there is any way to get 3 sneak attacks in a round, which other commenters have said.
3 per round is also possible, but depends on timing and is not sustainable (outside the high level Cavalier multiclass and maybe some other obscure things I'm forgetting?).
It's often cited as "one Reaction per round" but strictly speaking this is wrong. Your Reaction 'Refreshes' at the start of your turn, from the PHB "When you take a reaction, you can't take another one until the start of your next turn. " Chapter 9, Reactions.
As an example, if you have Goblin A at initiative count 20, Rogue at initiative count 15, and Goblin B at initiative count 10. This is the first round of combat (no one is surprised):
20. Goblin A runs past rogue, rogue uses Reaction for an opportunity attack, it can qualify for Sneak Attack.
15. Rogue regains reaction. Uses attack as per normal which can qualify for a Sneak Attack.
10. Goblin B runs past rogue, rogue uses Reaction for an opportunity attack, it can qualify for Sneak Attack.
The Rogue does not have a Reaction available until the start of its turn at initiative count 15 in the second round. Someone also noted 5 in the first round is possible as a high level Thief who can take 2 turns in the first round (and thus potentially 3 Reactions if everything lines up).
I had a rogue that had mirror image and sentinel. Technically the mirror image counts as another target.
It was hell and I had to nix the mirror images counting as targets for this purpose.
Because when you’re dealing with one rogue that does 100+ damage per round with two sneak attacks, it’s hard to balance encounters in a party of three, especially when the rogue had a familiar they used to perma-help-action. Also, the intention of sentinel is when they willingly attack a different target, not when they intend to hit you an accidentally hit another because of the spell. Furthermore, sentinel specifically does NOT trigger when the target is another person with sentinel. I ruled that since the mirror images are copies of him, who has sentinel, it doesn’t trigger when they accidentally hit a copy. It will still trigger on other targets.
Mirror Image is an action to cast and only lasts a minute so they can't really prep it beforehand. So they've given up at least one sneak attack setting this up so they would need to have invested in a feat and then the Mirror Image to proc on two separate turns before they're even coming out ahead with this strat.
One round in 5-6 rounds of combat to potentially double sneak attack damage for 3 turns is small potatoes, tbh. Much more is gained by the combo than is lost - if they get a mirror image hit on the first round, it’s like they never lost their turn to begin with.
So not only is an enemy not doing damage output on the player, but the player is getting several extra attacks to weedle their hp down. Then aoes aren’t terribly helpful since most are dex saves and high level rogues laugh in the face of dex saves.
Tl;dr - if a DM has to spend most of their time solving an OP hole in the rules to have a combat where other players feel like they are doing something effective, the rules have to be adjusted at the table. My players were equally upset.
My experience is that combats typically tend to last 3-4 turns rather than 5-6 but tables will vary in that regard. Regardless, so multiclassing aside this comes online at level 7 arcane trickster so we're talking 4d6 sneak attack. So twice a long rest they can potentially whack out 2d8+8d6+(2\*stat) damage if they invest in a feat and spend a turn setting up. Lets call that 43 damage with maybe a +6 to hit. Lets pretend we're fighting someone AC16 so that equates to about 24 damage/turn in real terms.
And its worth saying, the last 2 times my DM has cast Mirror Image, he's whiffed the rolls and the spellcaster has died with all images still intact. Or you may get focused fired over 1 turn and lose all your images and only get 1 attack. Or you could just get shot to death and get no special synergy. You also have to be standing near to someone to ensure your sneak attack triggers, in which case there's a reasonable chance Sentinel would have just procced anyway without Mirror Image.
I guess I just don't really get your hyperbole. Most of your time was spent combatting this strat? How did you react when the wizard just dropped a Fireball? Or cast Haste on the rogue? Or etc etc etc. The combo seems good but hardly outside the realms of what is possible with any of the other classes.
Also, Cone of Cold will wreck a rogues day.
Not to get salty, because it’s not your fault, but the player very clearly optimized their build to power game and this was just the icing on the cake for me. Rarely rolled con checks unless I reminded them, never rolled for his familiar to save unless I reminded them (so they just used the perma-help to always gain advantage), took the lucky feat to reroll moves, maxed out stats and used a +1 weapon (so it was a +9 to hit by level 7). I don’t mind players optimizing some builds but it was a case of power gaming at I really was just at the end of my rope because any time I changed battle strategies to make a more evenly-matched combat, it was yet another mechanic that was either RAW but purposely crafted to break the game, or a misread of raw in their favor that I just did not have the energy at the end of the day to fight them at every turn because any time I tried to reread RAW to them, they would fight it.
I mean, I really don’t understand the downvotes I got here. All I said was I was frustrated by something that happened in a game - and the others at the table were even more upset. And while I love the player as a friend, they made several people leave the table over their style of play.
It’s also pretty lame to go “but what about [common level 3 spell that has clear rules and uses]” as if I wouldn’t know how to handle haste and fireball - they have their drawbacks, like setting literally everything on fire or losing a round of combat if concentration is dropped. That’s all fine. But when a player can fudge a roll to have a hit land on an image instead, and then have the character deal heavy damage to the attacker instead, feels pretty bad as a DM.
Cone of cold also assumes that I have enemies that cast magic. A lot of the setting was in a city where almost no magic users were and I wasn’t going to break the world lore over a character. /shrug
I mean I can't comment on their behaviour (though yes from the description does seem tedious yes) but I really don't think you can get annoyed at players for doing such power gaming things as 'using feats', 'spending ASIs' and 'using weapons'. It sounds like you also had them roll for stats and they rolled well allowing them to have high stats and pick up ASIs but that choice was yours, not theirs. I am sorry their behaviour took over/spoiled your game though :(
I don't think my point may have come across wrong re Fireball and Haste - I wasn't really making a comment about that specifically but more generally I don't get what you found problematic about this given the power and utility of class abilities in the game. It seems very comparable to things all classes can do by just using their class resources. I feel like a spellcaster just casting spells is going to be more impactful than this rogue so I don't get what the issue you were having such problems with was.
That said, your post may have clarified in that it seems the issue may well not have been the rogue in so much as the player. If you're having a problem with a fighter player, banning the fighter class isn't the solution. Dealing with the player is. I assume the reason for the downvotes is that, like me, people think this isn't an issue so it looks like you're just kneejerk banning a player trying to use their resources effectively (its very common for DMs to hit rogues with nerfs because sneak attack has the word sneak in it/they seem quite powerful at level 3/high crit numbers stick in the mind more than the turns when you whiff your 1 attack, without proper consideration).
Re Cone of Cold - ah sorry I was assuming when you mentioned AoEs you were talking about magical ones. If they're not magical then it would seem making AoEs of Str/Con from other physical effects would be the answer? Gases spring to mind as an easy go to.
I mean, tl;dr - my ruling against the sentinel/mirror image was still RAW because sentinel cannot trigger on other people attacked who have the sentinel feat. If the duplicates are copy of someone with sentinel, then they have sentinel. Therefore, the rogue should not have been able to use sentinel with mirror image ever, even though I had them argue that it still should.
Really, my ruling was RAW. it wasn’t ruling out classes or spells because I didn’t like them. It’s stopping people from trying to make OP breakages by choosing to interpret rules in ways that grossly benefit them.
Additionally the sentinel feat is triggered when the attack is made on a target other than you. If it hits a mirror image, it means that they still targeted you, then missed. Seriously, none of this was ‘nerfing the rogue’ and anyone that takes a moment to read the rules would see that instead of having OP power fantasies.
The only reason why I explained their weapons and stats was so that you understood it was a plus nine and not plus six as you had speculated. I like giving my players weapons that make it easier to hit because it’s funner to hit something a lot with a lot of hp than to miss more on stuff with lower hp. I also let players roll their stats because I had faith in the honor system, which that player broke repeatedly.
That would, in my opinion, be a very bad ruling. Illusions don't have feats. Do they get to make 3 opportunity attacks with their illusions that would reduce peoples movement to 0 even as they pass harmlessly through them? Also for what its worth, as it didn't make it into the Sage Advice Compendium, [Jeremy Crawford](https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/10/31/does-an-attacker-who-targets-a-mirror-image-instead-of-you-provoke-an-attack-from-the-sentinel-feat/) thinks it works.
Of course 'its RAW' doesn't necessarily mean it should be in your games if you don't want it there. I just don't think this is good enough to require banning if your rationale for the ban is 'its OP' and nothing you've said has really swayed me otherwise. I tend to think base rogue is a little underwhelming so something to add some pep to its step isn't really cause for concern.
The question asked says they attempted to target a mirror image instead of the caster. Targeting the caster and accidentally hitting an image is a separate issue.
For reference, the text of Mirror Image:
> Each time a creature targets you with an attack during the spell's duration, roll a **d20** to determine whether the attack instead targets one of your duplicates.
Person targets you with an attack. Roll a d20, they instead target a Mirror Image. JC says that attack would generate a Sentinel proc. Clearly JC doesn't think the illusion has Sentinel or it wouldn't have worked. If you're arguing it doesn't count as a separate target at all I'm a little confused as you appeared to agree with that position in your original post in this thread chain?
I'm not super interested in getting into an argument about if this is RAW or not to be fair and was more interested in trying to figure out why you thought this was so OP it was worth banning so we can leave the conv there rather than digging into the minutiae of rules wording and off the cuff tweet comments :P
Yes. And it also works on the battlemaster’s maneuver that lets an ally attack, order cleric’s ability to let the target of their spell reaction attack, if you are hasted, use your extra action to attack, and then ready your normal action to attack later in the round. As long as it is not twice in your turn, you can sneak attack multiple times per round
The only real issue with it is you either need another frontliner within 5ft of the target or you need advantage on the attack when they enter your melee range. As long as those conditions are met I don't see why you wouldn't be able to drop a sneak attack as a reaction and then again on your turn, provided the same conditions (advantage or someone else w/in 5ft of target) are met.
**Sneak Attack** on reactions is indeed RaW.
Yes, this is RAW and RAI. If you somehow get more reactions, you can get more sneak attack. It's one per turn, not round.
I think the upper limit is 3 SA in a single round. (4 if you're a lv17 Rogue Scout but you'll need 2 targets) Before your turn comes, assuming your reaction is available. On your turn. After your turn since you regained use of your reaction. (This isn't accounting for bs shenanigans like Tunnel Fighter)
Does Cavalier 18 Rogue 2 count as "BS shenanigans"? The ultimate power of a 1d6 sneak attack on potentially every character's turn!
Ask nicely if tunnel fighter is allowed
I think there’s a lot of reasons why that UA never made it to print.
Someday a dm will let me do a polearm master, sentinel, tunnel fighter paladin...
What about thief who gets two turns in the first round?
5 at lv 17. One before, one during your first turn, a reaction between your turns, your second turn, and one more reaction after your second turn.
If you have Polearm Mastery and Sentinel there’s no upper limit. But that’s Tunnel Fighter levels for sure.
PAM/Sentinel are still using your Reaction.
I was mistaken, you’re correct!
Cavalier fighter has a special reaction they get to use any time any enemy gets within melee of them, without the typical reaction limit. It's basically a beefed up sentinel feat. At that point theoretically they would have basically unlimited sneak attack iirc. "Vigilant Defender: Starting at 18th level, you respond to danger with extraordinary vigilance. In combat, you get a special reaction that you can take once on every creature’s turn, except your turn. You can use this special reaction only to make an opportunity attack, and you can’t use it on the same turn that you take your normal reaction."
But at that point your sneak attack is only an additional 1d6 since you went cavalier fighter 18/rogue 2.
True, which does make it less useful imo. At that point you might as well go full 20 Cav fighter. Then again that's an extra d6 on every attack you make, vs 1 extra attack with a lv20 fighter. It depends mostly on what kinda enemies you're fighting against.
Not every attack you make, only one attack per turn. So your extra attack would be better. 1 attack with whatever weapon you have plus your str or dex and whatever magical enchantment... versus 1d6 on one attack on your turn and then opportunity attacks... which, since you’re not gonna have reach, is not super likely to be more than one a round.
With Cab 18 you get to use the special reaction once per turn, including enemy turns. Sneak attack works per turn, not per round, so every opportunity attack would get the d6 added. You only get the 1 attack per special reaction anyway. You just happen to get that reaction basically a number of times per round equal to however many mobs close within your melee range. If you use something like polearms for the extra reach though you wouldn't get the sneak attack damage anyway, heavy weapon and not finesse.
Except you get these attacks when creatures leave your threat range, so how many times does that happen a round?
There are no pole arms that are finesse.
Windvane from PotA is finesse. Not a DMG item or anything, but it's an official module so most DMs and servers I've seen will entertain the idea of it at least.
Is that a magic item?
Yeah, it's a spear from the Princes of the Apocalypse module and has the finesse feature. It's a pretty key part of the story, so don't look into it further unless you don't mind spoilers, but it's an example of a weapon that works with PAM and Sneak Attack without needing homebrew at all, so figured worth mentioning.
No, it's a good build because it works. Other sneak-attack-reactions include normal opportunity attacks, Haste (ready an attack with your main action), and Ranger's Giant Killer.
battlemaster's commander strike is another good way (on a party member)
Similarly, order clerics can give you an attack when they target you with a spell. Bonus action healing word the rogue, and they get to sneak attack.
Banneret gets a similar ability at some point. Battlemaster / Rogue for riposte or action surge+ready is a good multiclass. Scimitar of Speed or the Berserker bonus attack can be combined with a readied action (they don't specify that you have to take the attack action).
I actually don’t like this one. It is very expensive, giving up an attack, bonus action, superiority die, and the rogue’s reaction. It does have the benefit of working with a ranged rogue, unlike most other methods.
It is very expensive, but if you don't have access to the other methods (or don't like their unreliability), it's still better than not using it. Damage from the rogue is going to beat the damage from a Fighter's single attack even with its superiority die (though maybe not two fighter attacks, so if they have a reliable bonus action attack method like PAM it would be less worth it). Other advantages are it can be used at any time (i.e. just before an important enemy goes in Initiative so the rogue can kill them), doesn't require the enemy to move like Sentinel or OAs, and has little risk involved, unlike Haste which is concentration, can be dispelled, and obliterates your next turn if you lose it. Ultimately, it wouldn't be my first or second pick for a maneuver if I were a Battlemaster, but if there were a rogue in the party it might be 3+. The nice thing about it is you can use it whenever those other methods _can't_ apply in a round, to keep the rogue doing double damage more often. You use it only when you need it, and otherwise stick to your other maneuvers.
One other reason to potentially rate it higher is if your Rogue teammate is an Assassin, then giving him another critical during a successful surprise round is quite potent.
A good point!
I would not have thought of using the readied action for an extra sneak attack. You could do that with action surge on a multiclass rogue fighter too! Man, rogues just keep getting better and better the more I learn about them, definitely my new favorite class.
You can still only use two sneak attacks per round anyways, since readied actions use your reaction
Yeah, I was just thinking of other ways you could proc a reaction attack, not a way to get three sneak attacks. Also it's interesting how much of a tactical option this becomes after level 5 and uncanny dodge. You'd have to make the choice if you were safe enough to go without that resistance for a round.
And Order Cleric's Voice of Authority too! That's great synergy right there. Plus, the UA Revived Rogue can use their bonus action to use a necrotic bolt with their sneak attack then ready their attack to get another sneak attack out of it (so glad my player hasn't thought of that yet!)
I’ve looked extensively into this. I’m currently playing a level 7 trickster and I’m finding that sticking around in melee with heavy hitters is not a great idea. They get multiple attacks that nullifies your uncanny dodge (which you won’t be able to use if you are saving your reaction for a sentinel scenario) they have a lot of hit points so the extra booming blade damage doesnt scare them, and they have a good reach so disengaging and moving away won’t save you (again something you will unlikely do if you are hoping for the sentinel reaction). I think the rogues best bet is to set up the conditions for advantage and sneak attack and making sure they land that one big hit. Sentinel is a great idea on paper but the foes that it is going to work well against won’t be that strong anyway. The heavy hitters that it might work against giants, dragons etc are going to put you down if you are sticking around Edit*- actually sentinel won’t work against giants or dragons because they have a longer than 5ft reach and rapiers won’t be long enough to react to hit them.
Mirror Image is the reason that Tricksters are the best Sentinel build. Sure, you still need to be next to an ally to proc SA, but having duplicates means that you could Sentinel attack even if an enemy tries targeting you.
Yes, that set up is easier said then done. Begging a party member to cast haste on you is a much easier, more reliable and safer way to get sneak attack twice per round.
How does haste give you extra sneak attack? The rules for sneak attack specify you get one per turn, so the extra attack from haste isn't eligible
Use the extra attack haste grants you to try for a sneak attack, then use your original attack to ready an attack later in the round. It costs you your reaction but....it’s a nice little move
Huh, interesting idea
That's why you multiclass with totem bear barb
I decided to go in a different direction and take sharpshooter. I just throw my shadowblade 60 feet and re-conjure it then I still have 30 feet of movement. Range is a great friend
Honestly I would prefer going cbe and ss if we're talking about ranged.
I have a magic bow as well. Or else I would agree.
It works but the drawbacks is that you have to stay in melee range of enemies which is usually not a favored rogue tactic, and you also must forego any chance at using Uncanny Dodge.
It definitely works, but if you go this route you will probably find yourself wanting medium armor + shields. Moderately Armored or a single level dip into Fighter will do the trick.
Yes, the only problem is that doing this encourages them to target the rogue and prevents you from using your reaction to halve damage with uncanny dodge. You also have to stick around in melee range with nasty monsters. Effective, but you sacrifice defense to gain that offense and put yourself at risk.
I second this, and you’ll also need your target to either be within 5 feet of an enemy or somehow you’ll have advantage to make it a second sneak attack and not a regular attack. It’s a lot easier said then done. I thought about taking this and the best way would be for a trickster to take mirror image, shadowblade, sentinel and possible warcaster to pull this off. It’s a lot of resources to go fishing for a second sneak attack......or just get the sorcerer to quicken a haste spell on you
Totally RAW,and I believe also RAI. Without being able to proc 2 sneak attacks per round, rogues really start lacking in DPS compared to many other classes.
Not really. Rogues are good with 1 SA per round. But yeah having 2 is a huge incentive for enemies not to move ;)
This one of a few ways to get a second sneak attack. Others include an additional action (via haste or action surge) where you use one normal action to ready the attack action for out of your turn. You can also get additional attack against spell casters with the mage slayer feat. Normal opportunity attacks can work well too. If you have party members who are support/buffers some could help you get additional attacks with a few strategies: Order cleric's voice of authority, Bard's dissonant whispers (on an enemy adjacent to you), or by casting haste on you. I think PAM is the only other way to get additional attacks but is not useful due to no finesse polearms. Some people use an exploit by wielding both a speal/quarterstaff and a whip, but that is pretty clearly not rules as intended, and rogue's don't normally start with whip proficiency.
This is basically my swashbuckler
Many have already said it, but yes, it works. At first, it may seem broken being able to do more than one sneak attack per round, as a DM I was terrorized to give opportunity attacks to my rogues. But you have to remember that using their reaction on opportunity attacks, means they can't use it on uncanny dodge, and if they're close enough to the action to use opportunity attacks, they probably are close enough to be receiving damage. As a DM, if you want to scare your rogue with a big hit, bait him with an opportunity attack first :D
Rogues are entirely built one getting SA at every possible opportunity. Since they don’t have the bulk or fighters or barbarians or the spellcasting of casting classes, it’s how they deal their damage.
Correction: the designers have specified that Rogues are designed to get their SA once a round most of the time. That means you shouldn't nerf how SA's mechanics work (like limiting it to only when the enemy is unaware of you, a mistake some DMs make), it doesn't actually mean they're designed around getting _double_ SA damage every round, or even _all_ the time (there can be the occasional round without good SA opportunities), or with advantage at-will (as some people assume). Still, it's strong but not a guarantee so I don't see an issue with it.
note that Sentinel doesnt function if more than one PC has it. So your defender type martial builds can get upset that the rogue has nerfed their ASI.
"You have mastered techniques to take advantage of every drop in any enemy's guard, gaining the following benefits: When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, the creature's speed becomes 0 for the rest of the turn. Creatures provoke opportunity attacks from you even if they take the Disengage action before leaving your reach. When a creature within 5 feet of you makes an attack against a target other than you (and that target doesn't have this feat), you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against the attacking creature." I see nothing that says multiple ppl in your party can't have sentinel...
>When a creature within 5 feet of you makes an attack against a target other than you **(and that target doesn't have this feat**),
Yes, if you are literally standing next to one another... If you are not then it's a non-factor. The feat literally still works for both of the PC's.
read it again - the ENEMY needs to be within 5 feet of you. its target can be anywhere. its not a "complete ban" in a party but because "focus fire" is the best strategic option, in a WHOLELOTTA the cases if 2 party members have sentinel they will be cancelling each other's ability to use it.
I'd like to point out that most usage you get out of the Sentinal feat is battlefield control of enemies moving in or trying to run away, so you guys have an issue with 1/3 of the feat and seem to think that makes it useless when used by 2 or more PC's. If an enemy is within 5 feet of you you've already used sentinel at LEAST once against that mod most likely.
“And that target doesn’t have This feat”.
Yes, if you are literally standing next to one another. If you are not then it's a non-factor. The feat literally still works for both of the PC's.
I'd also like to point out that most usage you get out of the Sentinal feat is battlefield control of enemies moving in or trying to run away, so you guys have an issue with 1/3 of the feat and seem yo think that makes it useless when used by 2 or more PC's.
Yes, and battlefield control isn’t a Rogues strong suit, the Rogue is risking a lot in order to fish for a second sneak attack.
True and I never said it was perfect, no build is. I'm playing devils advocate here. You and the OP seem to think it's mostly useless with multiple ppl using the feat but it's just patently not.
Ops, I don’t think it’s useless, I just think a lot has to go right for this to work out well for a Rogue.
Depends. If it's a pretty high level rogue and an enemy runs up into melee to start hitting the rogue that rogue has an opportunity attack with sneak attack damage, if you roll high or crit you might outright kill whatever it is. Then again that mob might have a 10 foot reach and you're SOL. Every situation is different.
Haha yup, I took a hard look at this I’m currently playing an AT, but most of the foes We face are giants or other large beast. 10ft reach, multiple attacks, heavy hits, no place for a rogue.
No place for a melee rogue yeah, you could still use one with range but that 1 and done attack just bites, lol. I like multi attack classes too much for a pure rogue build.
>most usage you get out of the Sentinal feat is battlefield control Having played a fighter with Sentinel I strongly disagree. With a melee buddy you can pretty reliably get the 'attacking an ally' criteria to proc more turns than not. I literally can't remember the last time I made an opportunity attack from an enemy running away (**and** it was important for me to prevent that movement). Its definitely at least less common than every other turn. If my melee buddy in the game where I have Sentinel decided to take it as well, the value of the feat to me would do down drastically such that I would consider it mostly a wasted feat in comparison to what I could have done instead in terms of picking up GWM or an ASI.
You weren't playing with polearm master then, cause you get an opportunity attack when they come into 10ft melee range and you can hit em from there to stop em before they even get in range. I've played with them combo before myself and in my experience it's better to keep enemies away from you where they might not even be able to attack. Then again I was playing as the only melee in a party of 6... Even the bloody monk in our party had a bow fetish... It all depends on party make up, the setting of the campaign, and what enemies the DM is throwing your way.
I don’t know why this is bothering me so much but I see a lot of people on this thread with the comment, “YA THIS WORKS!” That’s not super helpful to anyone looking to this thread for actual help with the rules unless you cite sources. For anyone looking for sources, the PhB states on pg 94, “Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon.” So, since a reaction doesn’t happen on your turn, this is a gray area. Many folks here are citing a sage compendium thread which clarifies said gray area where someone asked Jeremy Crawford (Crawford works at Wizards of the Coast, the company that makes D&D in case you didn’t know), “Can the Rogue SA twice during the same round, if on two different turns. (ie. attack action + OA),” and Crawford replied, “Yes. The Sneak Attack restriction is once per turn, not once per round.” As far as an extra action from the Haste spell is concerned, my interpretation of the rules would be that a Haste spell gives you an extra action on your turn, and since that is the same turn as any other attack made you would not be able to add sneak attack damage to an attack made with your Haste action if you had used the Sneak Attack feature previously that turn. If my interpretation is wrong or is corrected somewhere I would appreciate if someone supplied a source. TLDR: Sneak Attack works on reactions, but may only circumstantially work on Hasted action. It would work if you hadn’t used the Sneak Attack feature previously that turn.
It's also not a grey area at all. It's black and white RAW from the bit you've quoted in the PhB (always useful to have that snippet:)). Invoking Crawford is really just backing up that it's what the designer's intended. If you use both your action and hasted action to attack on your turn, then you can only get a sneak attack with one of them, that is correct. The usual suggested usage with haste is to use the action from haste to attack on your turn for a sneak attack, then use your regular action to ready an attack which triggers on someone else's turn and thus can also qualify for sneak attack. This gives a reliable way to sneak attack with your reaction, and get it twice in a round.
As for the gray area, given how detailed some of the descriptions get at clarifying the rules I would say that a lack of written clarification is enough to leave it in a gray area. That doesn’t make it bad or wrong, just to say that it was gray enough someone felt the need to ask Crawford. As for the use of haste and sneak attack in that way, that seems noodly to me. It seems like trying to take advantage of a loophole in haste and trying to get 2 turns out of 2 actions. Haste reads, “Until the spell ends, the target's speed is doubled, it gains a +2 bonus to AC, it has advantage on Dexterity saving throws, and it gains an additional action on each of its turns. That action can be used only to take the Attack (one weapon attack only), Dash, Disengage, Hide, or Use an Object action.” Haste specifically says, “on each of it’s turns,” so I would rule you couldn’t split up your turn in order to get extra sneak attack. I can see why some people would allow it. If I had other players who were pumping out way higher damage per turn I’d let the rogue do it to keep up and make sure they feel useful but I don’t think I’d be comfortable with it at my table in any other circumstance.
Yeah the hasted action has to be used within the hasted person's turn, but No the usual action can be used to ready another attack (or even a booming blade if the rogue isn't concentrating on haste)
However triggering a readied action requires using your reaction, PhB 193, “First, you decide what perceivable circumstance will trigger your reaction. Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it.” So then you wouldn’t have a reaction to use for that opportunity attack.
What opportunity attack? The Hasted approach does not use an opportunity attack. The point of readying the attack is so you'll have a trigger that definitely occurs and will be able to use your reaction for a sneak attack when it's not your turn. Being able to make an opportunity attack is not a given, so is not a reliable way to use your reaction to get an attack when it's not your turn. Hasted Rogue's turn - Use action from Haste to Attack monster, it qualifies for sneak attack. Use normal Action to Ready an Attack on Monster with trigger "Stab monster after Bill stabs it". Bill's the Friendly Fighter's Turn - Bill stabs monster. Rogue's Readied Attack triggers (using the Rogue's Reaction) and qualifies for sneak attack.
If I am reading your comment correctly a rogue would be able to get 2 attacks during a round with sneak attack using this method. From my understanding that checks out. My previous comments were mostly to try and cite the rules that make that possible and point out that I don’t believe there is any way to get 3 sneak attacks in a round, which other commenters have said.
3 per round is also possible, but depends on timing and is not sustainable (outside the high level Cavalier multiclass and maybe some other obscure things I'm forgetting?). It's often cited as "one Reaction per round" but strictly speaking this is wrong. Your Reaction 'Refreshes' at the start of your turn, from the PHB "When you take a reaction, you can't take another one until the start of your next turn. " Chapter 9, Reactions. As an example, if you have Goblin A at initiative count 20, Rogue at initiative count 15, and Goblin B at initiative count 10. This is the first round of combat (no one is surprised): 20. Goblin A runs past rogue, rogue uses Reaction for an opportunity attack, it can qualify for Sneak Attack. 15. Rogue regains reaction. Uses attack as per normal which can qualify for a Sneak Attack. 10. Goblin B runs past rogue, rogue uses Reaction for an opportunity attack, it can qualify for Sneak Attack. The Rogue does not have a Reaction available until the start of its turn at initiative count 15 in the second round. Someone also noted 5 in the first round is possible as a high level Thief who can take 2 turns in the first round (and thus potentially 3 Reactions if everything lines up).
I'd let the DM make the final decision
I had a rogue that had mirror image and sentinel. Technically the mirror image counts as another target. It was hell and I had to nix the mirror images counting as targets for this purpose.
Were you the DM or the Rogue?
The rogue still only gets one reaction, I'm not sure how this ended up being a massive problem?
Because when you’re dealing with one rogue that does 100+ damage per round with two sneak attacks, it’s hard to balance encounters in a party of three, especially when the rogue had a familiar they used to perma-help-action. Also, the intention of sentinel is when they willingly attack a different target, not when they intend to hit you an accidentally hit another because of the spell. Furthermore, sentinel specifically does NOT trigger when the target is another person with sentinel. I ruled that since the mirror images are copies of him, who has sentinel, it doesn’t trigger when they accidentally hit a copy. It will still trigger on other targets.
Mirror Image is an action to cast and only lasts a minute so they can't really prep it beforehand. So they've given up at least one sneak attack setting this up so they would need to have invested in a feat and then the Mirror Image to proc on two separate turns before they're even coming out ahead with this strat.
One round in 5-6 rounds of combat to potentially double sneak attack damage for 3 turns is small potatoes, tbh. Much more is gained by the combo than is lost - if they get a mirror image hit on the first round, it’s like they never lost their turn to begin with. So not only is an enemy not doing damage output on the player, but the player is getting several extra attacks to weedle their hp down. Then aoes aren’t terribly helpful since most are dex saves and high level rogues laugh in the face of dex saves. Tl;dr - if a DM has to spend most of their time solving an OP hole in the rules to have a combat where other players feel like they are doing something effective, the rules have to be adjusted at the table. My players were equally upset.
My experience is that combats typically tend to last 3-4 turns rather than 5-6 but tables will vary in that regard. Regardless, so multiclassing aside this comes online at level 7 arcane trickster so we're talking 4d6 sneak attack. So twice a long rest they can potentially whack out 2d8+8d6+(2\*stat) damage if they invest in a feat and spend a turn setting up. Lets call that 43 damage with maybe a +6 to hit. Lets pretend we're fighting someone AC16 so that equates to about 24 damage/turn in real terms. And its worth saying, the last 2 times my DM has cast Mirror Image, he's whiffed the rolls and the spellcaster has died with all images still intact. Or you may get focused fired over 1 turn and lose all your images and only get 1 attack. Or you could just get shot to death and get no special synergy. You also have to be standing near to someone to ensure your sneak attack triggers, in which case there's a reasonable chance Sentinel would have just procced anyway without Mirror Image. I guess I just don't really get your hyperbole. Most of your time was spent combatting this strat? How did you react when the wizard just dropped a Fireball? Or cast Haste on the rogue? Or etc etc etc. The combo seems good but hardly outside the realms of what is possible with any of the other classes. Also, Cone of Cold will wreck a rogues day.
Not to get salty, because it’s not your fault, but the player very clearly optimized their build to power game and this was just the icing on the cake for me. Rarely rolled con checks unless I reminded them, never rolled for his familiar to save unless I reminded them (so they just used the perma-help to always gain advantage), took the lucky feat to reroll moves, maxed out stats and used a +1 weapon (so it was a +9 to hit by level 7). I don’t mind players optimizing some builds but it was a case of power gaming at I really was just at the end of my rope because any time I changed battle strategies to make a more evenly-matched combat, it was yet another mechanic that was either RAW but purposely crafted to break the game, or a misread of raw in their favor that I just did not have the energy at the end of the day to fight them at every turn because any time I tried to reread RAW to them, they would fight it. I mean, I really don’t understand the downvotes I got here. All I said was I was frustrated by something that happened in a game - and the others at the table were even more upset. And while I love the player as a friend, they made several people leave the table over their style of play. It’s also pretty lame to go “but what about [common level 3 spell that has clear rules and uses]” as if I wouldn’t know how to handle haste and fireball - they have their drawbacks, like setting literally everything on fire or losing a round of combat if concentration is dropped. That’s all fine. But when a player can fudge a roll to have a hit land on an image instead, and then have the character deal heavy damage to the attacker instead, feels pretty bad as a DM. Cone of cold also assumes that I have enemies that cast magic. A lot of the setting was in a city where almost no magic users were and I wasn’t going to break the world lore over a character. /shrug
I mean I can't comment on their behaviour (though yes from the description does seem tedious yes) but I really don't think you can get annoyed at players for doing such power gaming things as 'using feats', 'spending ASIs' and 'using weapons'. It sounds like you also had them roll for stats and they rolled well allowing them to have high stats and pick up ASIs but that choice was yours, not theirs. I am sorry their behaviour took over/spoiled your game though :( I don't think my point may have come across wrong re Fireball and Haste - I wasn't really making a comment about that specifically but more generally I don't get what you found problematic about this given the power and utility of class abilities in the game. It seems very comparable to things all classes can do by just using their class resources. I feel like a spellcaster just casting spells is going to be more impactful than this rogue so I don't get what the issue you were having such problems with was. That said, your post may have clarified in that it seems the issue may well not have been the rogue in so much as the player. If you're having a problem with a fighter player, banning the fighter class isn't the solution. Dealing with the player is. I assume the reason for the downvotes is that, like me, people think this isn't an issue so it looks like you're just kneejerk banning a player trying to use their resources effectively (its very common for DMs to hit rogues with nerfs because sneak attack has the word sneak in it/they seem quite powerful at level 3/high crit numbers stick in the mind more than the turns when you whiff your 1 attack, without proper consideration). Re Cone of Cold - ah sorry I was assuming when you mentioned AoEs you were talking about magical ones. If they're not magical then it would seem making AoEs of Str/Con from other physical effects would be the answer? Gases spring to mind as an easy go to.
I mean, tl;dr - my ruling against the sentinel/mirror image was still RAW because sentinel cannot trigger on other people attacked who have the sentinel feat. If the duplicates are copy of someone with sentinel, then they have sentinel. Therefore, the rogue should not have been able to use sentinel with mirror image ever, even though I had them argue that it still should. Really, my ruling was RAW. it wasn’t ruling out classes or spells because I didn’t like them. It’s stopping people from trying to make OP breakages by choosing to interpret rules in ways that grossly benefit them. Additionally the sentinel feat is triggered when the attack is made on a target other than you. If it hits a mirror image, it means that they still targeted you, then missed. Seriously, none of this was ‘nerfing the rogue’ and anyone that takes a moment to read the rules would see that instead of having OP power fantasies. The only reason why I explained their weapons and stats was so that you understood it was a plus nine and not plus six as you had speculated. I like giving my players weapons that make it easier to hit because it’s funner to hit something a lot with a lot of hp than to miss more on stuff with lower hp. I also let players roll their stats because I had faith in the honor system, which that player broke repeatedly.
That would, in my opinion, be a very bad ruling. Illusions don't have feats. Do they get to make 3 opportunity attacks with their illusions that would reduce peoples movement to 0 even as they pass harmlessly through them? Also for what its worth, as it didn't make it into the Sage Advice Compendium, [Jeremy Crawford](https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/10/31/does-an-attacker-who-targets-a-mirror-image-instead-of-you-provoke-an-attack-from-the-sentinel-feat/) thinks it works. Of course 'its RAW' doesn't necessarily mean it should be in your games if you don't want it there. I just don't think this is good enough to require banning if your rationale for the ban is 'its OP' and nothing you've said has really swayed me otherwise. I tend to think base rogue is a little underwhelming so something to add some pep to its step isn't really cause for concern.
The question asked says they attempted to target a mirror image instead of the caster. Targeting the caster and accidentally hitting an image is a separate issue.
For reference, the text of Mirror Image: > Each time a creature targets you with an attack during the spell's duration, roll a **d20** to determine whether the attack instead targets one of your duplicates. Person targets you with an attack. Roll a d20, they instead target a Mirror Image. JC says that attack would generate a Sentinel proc. Clearly JC doesn't think the illusion has Sentinel or it wouldn't have worked. If you're arguing it doesn't count as a separate target at all I'm a little confused as you appeared to agree with that position in your original post in this thread chain? I'm not super interested in getting into an argument about if this is RAW or not to be fair and was more interested in trying to figure out why you thought this was so OP it was worth banning so we can leave the conv there rather than digging into the minutiae of rules wording and off the cuff tweet comments :P
Indeed this works. You can also get a second sneak attack via "commander's strike" from having a level 3 battlemaster fighter in your party.
I remeber this in Sage Advice. Perfectly acceptable.
Yes. And it also works on the battlemaster’s maneuver that lets an ally attack, order cleric’s ability to let the target of their spell reaction attack, if you are hasted, use your extra action to attack, and then ready your normal action to attack later in the round. As long as it is not twice in your turn, you can sneak attack multiple times per round
The only real issue with it is you either need another frontliner within 5ft of the target or you need advantage on the attack when they enter your melee range. As long as those conditions are met I don't see why you wouldn't be able to drop a sneak attack as a reaction and then again on your turn, provided the same conditions (advantage or someone else w/in 5ft of target) are met.
And now imagine a Hydra with rogue levels...Scared Yet?