Anyone else tired of the miserly begrudging Rogue design of 5E?

[Salthorae]

Lore bards get more skills.

Also the skilled feat allows fighters (who get a lot of feats) to take 3 additional skills...

OK? Lore Bards get 1 more skill than standard rogues. Rogues get Expertise much earlier than Bards, so they're better at their skills from day 1 and Rogues are the only class to can get Expertise via class feature in Thieves Tools.

And... Rogues get more ASI than any other class besides Fighter, so they could also take the skilled feat to get 3 more skills...?

My rogue stacks up just fine with our Dual-wielding Fighter in combat because there are so many ways to gain sneak attack damage, and he outshines the fighter in non-combat because of skills/tools.

 

[CapnZapp]

Another necroed thread!

I feel special.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Finally you do not take a rogue for utility... that is what spell casters are for, they have vastly more utility than a rogue, especially if that spell caster just happens to be a bard... even more so if they are a lore bard.

Maybe you don’t.

I don’t have any players who play rogues for situational nova damage. They play rogues to play a mundane, at-will utility expert.

Also, everyone of them plays rogues to play the guy who can’t be pinned down and wastes enemy actions by completely or almost completely negative the consequences of their attacks and spells.

 

[Ashrym]

I play rogues for the class abilities and skill benefits. Reliable Talent > Peerless Skill because BI dice go fast. Reliable Talent is also there regardless of subclass. The skill benefits and cunning action are the best reasons for the class.

Beyond that sneak attack is easy to get, a bonus ASI is great, uncanny dodge and evasion are solid defensive benefits, and a free third save proficiency in WIS gives better saves than most classes.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I play rogues for the class abilities and skill benefits. Reliable Talent > Peerless Skill because BI dice go fast. Reliable Talent is also there regardless of subclass.

You are comparing abilities gained at levels 11 and 14. This is meaningless for most rouges being played.

The skill benefits and cunning action are the best reasons for the class.

This is true, but it doesn't mean that the Bard isn't outclassing the Rogue until level 11 at skills.

Beyond that sneak attack is easy to get, a bonus ASI is great, uncanny dodge and evasion are solid defensive benefits, and a free third save proficiency in WIS gives better saves than most classes.

The wisdom proficiency comes at level 15 -- again, outside of the reach of most rogues being played. I've seen a rogue take Wis proficiency through the Resilient feat, since level 15 is so far away.

YMMV, of course, but what you are describing is not true for rogues played from level 1.

 

[Hjorimir]

No one picks a Rogue to be more tanky and so being amazing at taking less damage is not something that is relevant to a rogue player. Rogue players want situational nova damage to simulate the sneaky stab you in the vital spot aspect of a rogue, and of course the skill-lord aspect. The skills are mostly correct, although the bard really steps on a rogues toes in D&D5e which isn't good, and the damage aspect is miles behind a good martial character build.

The delta isn't nearly as large as you state on damage (if you're including feats for your "good martial build," I get to include them for my rogue build too). Also, I'm okay with fighters being the best fighters. Rogues are groovy in- and out-of-combat. They bring a ton to a group. Rogue in our 13th level group averages low 40s damage per hit (w/ sneak attack, of course) and coupled with evasion, cunning action, and uncanny dodge is extremely durable. You say "no one picks a rogue to be more tanky," but you and I both know that no group of people is monolithic and I'm sure people have all kinds of crazy reasons for choosing whatever class they want.

 

[Gladius Legis]

This is true, but it doesn't mean that the Bard isn't outclassing the Rogue until level 11 at skills.

Rogues get Expertise at Lv. 1 and 6. Bards at 3 and 10.

So that makes Rogues better with skills at Lv. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9. That's 6 out of the 1st 10 levels that the Rogue is better with skills. Including 4 out of the 5 levels of Tier 2. Not a bad deal.

 

[Horwath]

Lore bards get more skills.

Also the skilled feat allows fighters (who get a lot of feats) to take 3 additional skills each time they take the feat, even ones that are not on their list. This means that even though Fighters only get 2 skills to start, 6 potential feats, where as rogues only get 5. The fighter could use this extra one feat for skilled and have a total of 5 skills... which is one MORE than the rogue. The fighter could then take ONE SINGLE level of rogue and gain a 6th skills freely, and gain expertise in 2 of his skills, including thieves tools. The fighter can rather instantly become about as good as any rogue with skills while retaining his position as a complete combat dominator.

As for the skills almost not failing, that only comes into affect at level 11+, which a lot of players often don't see. For the other half of the rogues career, they can fail just like everyone else.

And Scout rogues get 2 more skills and 2 more expertise, making them again equal to lore bards and with more expertise and sooner expertise.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Rogues get Expertise at Lv. 1 and 6. Bards at 3 and 10.

So that makes Rogues better with skills at Lv. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and 9. That's 6 out of the 1st 10 levels that the Rogue is better with skills. Including 4 out of the 5 levels of Tier 2. Not a bad deal.

We can disagree.
For a player who wants to be a skill monkey, the Bard also gets Jack of Trades at level 2, which helps with all non-proficient skills, and using only the PHB the option of the Lore bard, in my view, makes it zero out of five levels at Tier 2.

And Scout rogues get 2 more skills and 2 more expertise, making them again equal to lore bards and with more expertise and sooner expertise.

Admittedly, the Scout does go some way towards fixing this, and there's no choice in the "two more expertise" (and it assumes you did't have the skills from a background, or whatever). Regardless, and leaving aside the flexibility of also being a full caster, "equal to lore bards" shouldn't be the target, if you want to believe that the skill monkey archetype naturally falls on the Rogue.

 

[Ashrym]

You are comparing abilities gained at levels 11 and 14. This is meaningless for most rouges being played.

It isn't meaningless to me and given that reliable talent comes significantly sooner than peerless skill for lore bards (don't apply a subclass benefit to all bards) it's clear to see rogues have it better from level 11 on.

This is true, but it doesn't mean that the Bard isn't outclassing the Rogue until level 11 at skills.

It hasn't been demonstrated that the bard outclasses the rogue up until level 11 yet. Rogues get another skill proficiency and expertise at 1st level while bards wait until 3rd. Rogues gain more expertise at 6th level while bards wait until 10th level when rogues get the bonus ASI.

The progression gives rogues benefits faster than bards to keep rogues ahead.

The wisdom proficiency comes at level 15 -- again, outside of the reach of most rogues being played. I've seen a rogue take Wis proficiency through the Resilient feat, since level 15 is so far away.

I would take resilience in CON instead and wait for WIS unless I knew we would not play those levels. What you've seen is anecdotal at best and countered by my having seen many high level campaigns with several starting as high level campaigns.

Don't assume everyone is starting at low levels.

YMMV, of course, but what you are describing is not true for rogues played from level 1.

My mileage definitely varies because other than levels 3-5 (which are similar sans the extra rogue skill proficiency) the rogue always has more skill benefits.

A bard subclass knows 2 more proficiencies and that still doesn't add reliable talent or gain expertise at the same rate. I take the skilled feat on every rogue (because I have an extra ASI and it pairs well with reliable talent) and never on lore bards (because 1 less ASI, jack of all trades gives breadth, and peerless skill can be used in a pinch later).

Additionally, cunning action allows for hiding as a bonus action (an early skill mod all rogues gain) and rogue subclasses grant additional skill benefits. For example; fast hands, second-story work, and supreme sneak modify rogue skills for the thief subclass over what bard skills gain.

It's inequitable to compare rogue base class abilities to bards with loremaster benefits.

Bards defeinitely have skill benefits as part of the class but at no point are they superior. Generally they are behind.