D&D 5E Want a better Rogue? Build a Wizard. Or why play a Rogue?

[pogre]

Well then, what is a rogue? Rogues are good at stealthing, disarming traps, scouting, dealing damage and being a skillmonkey. In particular, they can be a very good party face.

Under certain circumstances, wizards can outperform them at certain tasks. A wizard can’t outperform them at all their tasks.

Even then, it is very campaign dependent. A campaign where wizards don’t receive access to a lot of new spells means the wizard is giving up more useful spells to perform rogue tasks.

Excellent points.

 

[FrozenNorth]

I agree in some respects, but consider the four character party - Is a rogue worthwhile of one of those spots? That is the question, in a sense, my player has posed. If you can mostly cover that niche with another mainstay (wizard) - then it frees up a slot for a better team player like a monk or bard.

As someone pointed out earlier we can quickly delve into white room discussions about a single character, but that is honestly not what my player is doing. They are asking, in the context of a party dynamic, what makes a rogue worthwhile?

Which is a pretty weird way of looking at it. I don’t think a rogue is necessary for a party. I think you need someone who is stealthy, who can pick locks, and good with skills. You can split those capabilities among several party members, and that’s OK. However, a monk or bard can probably cover the rogue’s role more easily than a wizard.

 

[Dausuul]

I agree in some respects, but consider the four character party - Is a rogue worthwhile of one of those spots? That is the question, in a sense, my player has posed. If you can mostly cover that niche with another mainstay (wizard) - then it frees up a slot for a better team player like a monk or bard.

Each class brings several things to the table. (Well, except fighters. Fighters bring just one thing to the table. But they bring an awful lot of it.) Any given function can be covered in different ways by different classes.

A wizard with divination spells can mostly cover the scouting function of the rogue, but cannot match the rogue's sustained single-target damage or the rogue's social skills (charm spells can be effective in the moment but you face severe backlash when they wear off).

All that said, if the player doesn't feel like he personally can get much value out of the rogue... he's probably right. If you can't see the potential in a class, you aren't going to be very good at reaching that potential. But that doesn't mean the potential isn't there.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Each class brings several things to the table. (Well, except fighters. Fighters bring just one thing to the table. But they bring an awful lot of it.) Any given function can be covered in different ways by different classes.

A wizard with divination spells can mostly cover the scouting function of the rogue, but cannot match the rogue's sustained single-target damage or the rogue's social skills (charm spells can be effective in the moment but you face severe backlash when they wear off).

All that said, if the player doesn't feel like he personally can get much value out of the rogue... he's probably right. If you can't see the potential in a class, you aren't going to be very good at reaching that potential. But that doesn't mean the potential isn't there.

You said what I was trying to more clearly and without being (unintentionally) insulting. Kudos!

 

[Undrave]

Each class brings several things to the table. (Well, except fighters. Fighters bring just one thing to the table. But they bring an awful lot of it.) Any given function can be covered in different ways by different classes.

A wizard with divination spells can mostly cover the scouting function of the rogue, but cannot match the rogue's sustained single-target damage or the rogue's social skills (charm spells can be effective in the moment but you face severe backlash when they wear off).

All that said, if the player doesn't feel like he personally can get much value out of the rogue... he's probably right. If you can't see the potential in a class, you aren't going to be very good at reaching that potential. But that doesn't mean the potential isn't there.

And I'm pretty sure that's a feature and not a bug.

 

[Ashrym]

I don’t think a rogue is necessary for a party.

I don't think any class is necessary for a party. That's a good thing.

 

[pogre]

All that said, if the player doesn't feel like he personally can get much value out of the rogue... he's probably right.

More than that - it probably is a reflection of how I run my campaign. I'm not really big on a lot of social skill rolls and I run a lot of combat in D&D. So, I think, kind of the opposite of your inference here, the player is very perceptive about the limitations of the class relative to my campaign and how I run D&D.

 

[Ashrym]

More than that - it probably is a reflection of how I run my campaign. I'm not really big on a lot of social skill rolls and I run a lot of combat in D&D. So, I think, kind of the opposite of your inference here, the player is very perceptive about the limitations of the class relative to my campaign and how I run D&D.

cunning action

 

[jgsugden]

A rogue feels different than a wizard. If you wat the feel of a rogue, play a rogue.

Seriously. If you only care about what option is best at something, we'd all be educed to just playing one of four builds. Play a character, not an optimized set of stats, and play the type of character you want to play.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

So far as arcana checks go wizards are potentially not even as good at being wizards as rogues are. There are certainly a number of wizard spells that radically up a rogue's game, that's why they built a whole rogue subclass around dabbling in wizardry, and in several cases (the most extreme is probably shadow blade) there are wizard spells better for rogues than they are for wizards. The arcane trickster is better at using a mage hand than any mage. Charm and disguise oriented spells are superior if you then have the social or stealth skills to augment them, which are much more likely to be found on a rogue or bard.

Which is all just to say that a) many classes are awesome in various ways others are not quite as good in, even where it fits the theme of the class without that quality, and b) these class specialties may actually be of more value to some other class, but that is part of why they are more balanced for the class that gets them. The school of war magic's Arcane Deflection for example, is way more useful for a class that isn't going to want to cast a spell the next round whereas for the wizard it is often just a wimpier version of the shield spell that makes them less powerful the next turn.