NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 7944610" data-attributes="member: 6750235">That's not what I was disagreeing with.  It's the premise that a bard replaces a rogue because of skills when a rogue centers more around combat than the skill benefits in play.  Sneak attack, cunning action, evasion, uncanny dodge, and elusive vs expertise, some bonus skills, and reliable talent.  "Skill monkey" isn't what defines either class and isn't a required party role at all.  Skill bonuses are just bonuses in a bigger picture.  The shared bonus skills and expertise is just a small piece of that picture.Then it was a slight side track on bards being less than rogues when it does come to skills.  Bards still aren't the best at anything.  They're just good at a lot of things.It was less of an argument and more of a clarification.  To keep it clarified, yes a lore bard does have a lot of skill benefits if that's something the group is looking for.  I would also point to artificers in that regard because they also gain expertise with thieves' tools where a bard does not, and being INT based already helps with investigation; flash of genius comes early enough to replace expertise if needed.  The other strong alternatives are the knowledge cleric because of knowledge of the ages ability, and rangers who also get a bonus skill plus expertise on WIS/INT checks in their favored terrains.  Both also use WIS for skill synergy with class ability scores.It's a bit of a tangent though.  I'm discussing, not arguing.  I just think you placed too much focus on the bonus skills and expertise in your assessment.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification