D&D (2024) Maybe this is a bit late, but let's talk about Rogue's Niche, and What Rogue Should Be.

[James Gasik]

I think the issue is that many DMs don't have ideas on multiple obstacles with different DCs.

Only classes with the Expertise class feature are good at multiple skill checks on the same PCs.

The skill monkey is bad if you only call for the same 4 checks or only call for DC10 or DC15 checks.

Which can happen in a combat heavy game where few skill checks are made. It's kinda like a bard in a low social game or a fighter in an mostly social game.

The Rogue's strength is when the DC calls for a lot of different checks and sometime a few hard ones. Their Out of Combat power is balanced with its Combat power.

The Rogue's combat power is narrow in use because the exploration and social power is wide in use.

Yeah basically, if you set DC's based on expecting non-Rogues to be able to succeed, the Rogue's benefits trivialize most ability checks. If you set DC's based on only expecting Rogues to be able to succeed, then Rogues become a must-have, which is contrary to 5e's design, which expects almost any party configuration to be able to equally contribute, so nobody ever feels forced to play a given class (how well 5e meets that design goal I won't comment on at the moment).

Starfinder ran into this very problem with their Operative class- having an Operative in the party mostly made anyone else using skills kind of irrelevant. You ask for a DC 15 check and this guy is like "uh...35. No, 36" (some hyperbole, but not much).

I mean, think about this. By Tier 3, a Rogue can potentially have a skill bonus of +13 and Reliable Talent says they can't possibly roll less than a 23. I once played a Rogue with Perception Expertise who owned a Robe of Eyes in AL, and the DM just kind of threw up his hands any time there was a hidden thing or enemies who were intended to ambush the party. An encounter with invisible Duergar assassins got turned inside out.

My friend was tellling me about a character in Critical Role who took Observant and had a passive Perception in the 30's (I don't know how accurate this is, but it's not impossible to do).

You can suddenly find entire sections of the game removed from most play if you don't scale the game to the Rogue's level. But rather than step back from that ledge, many other classes are purportedly being buffed to be able to occasionally reach these heights in 2024.

Expertise is simply put, the bane of the skill system.

The Rogue really shouldn't have "skill use" as their hat, if that means they are "so good at skills it's basically their system, and other classes are sometimes allowed to play too".

What I suggest is that the Rogue be allowed to do more with skills than other classes. Using Stealth to hide where others can't, being able to climb along ceilings, and so on. We see a little of this with the Thief, who can, for example make skill checks in record time, like opening a lock or disabling a trap with a bonus action (!), which runs right into the DM's declaration of how long it takes to perform said actions (forcing them to either allow the Rogue superhuman speed or nerf the Thief's ability).

Also, there should be more combat uses of skills, so that the Rogue has other interesting things to do than shoot a crossbow. They should be proficient in all manner of thrown weapons like acid, oil, holy water. Able to spread caltrops and spill marbles more efficiently. Handing out potions with bonus actions! Actually using and setting traps! Their stealth shouldn't be trivialized by some special sense, allowing them to actually skulk about (and definitely shouldn't be trivialized by pass without trace). Rogues should be able to hide in plain sight, throw flash powder, and not need a ring of invisibility to actually function effectively.

The Rogue will get some neat things to do with their Sneak Attack dice in 2024, but as long as the most effective status effect is dead, and thus making damage king, the Rogue is going to be in a rough position if they aren't main damage dealers.

 

[Vaalingrade]

To the point, Niche Protection is outmoded design; You should be asking for parity instead. Being good enough to do things in every pillar of play, while doing them differently, is plenty enough to establish a unique and interesting playstyle. Which is the real thing needed to justify a classes existence, and make them fun to play.

I endorse this message.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Expertise is simply put, the bane of the skill system.

i'd argue it's only this because of how sparse it's applied so that when it does turn up it's this massive standout, if expertise were more common amongst the classes it would be far less disruptive to the skill system, hypothetically if everyone got minimum 1 expertise and the rogue got it on all their skills that would be less of a blip in the expetations of setting the DC's

 

[aco175]

why on earth would we want to do this though??? i read this in the same way i would've read 'let's take away the fighter's martial weapon and heavy armour proficiencies', martial's damage is pretty bad and fighter is already low on the totem pole, if we want to improve the rogue then do that, don't drag other classes down.

Wasn't 5e supposed to have feats as an option when it came out. People liked feats from earlier editions and would want to take them to change up from the standard class abilities and such. However going from being able to raise your STR to 18 and getting +1 more to hit and damage to taking something that grants you +10 damage tends to throw the power out of whack, even if you do not buff away the -5 to hit part.

There is also the problem of the weakest class. There will always be one at the bottom to each of us which may not be the same one to each of us. Some may depend on how we play or our table with terms of player maximizing things. How many threads of Fighters Suck or Ranger is the weakest class or We need to nerf Wizards do we have each month. There is always an arm's race with making our favorite but 'weak' class more powerful when looking at certain builds, weather these builds are the normal we should be comparing them to.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Wasn't 5e supposed to have feats as an option when it came out.

Worst rule in the game. (Saying feats are 'optional')

And this is D&D, where encumbrance and the Champion live, so that's saying something.

Edited for clarity.

 

[steeldragons]

Rogue's/Thief's Niche is the Skill-Expert Support Class, non-magical by default. Specialists of the Exploration pillar. Default/First class of the Dexterity ability.

They can help with Combat, but will never deal as much as a Fighter can (support). They can potentially be good/useful in Interactions. Really, this speaks more to the Bard, but I find/think most Rogue/Thief types tend to like being the "lovable scamp" or "sexy seductive scoundrel," also. But they are, at their core, the class that excels in using their preferred skills for Exploration.

Spying. Recon. Infiltration...by Deception/trickery or pure Stealth. Maneuverability (clmibing, escaping grapples, move-attack-move, etc...). Guile/Cunning. Finding and disarming traps. Pocketing the macguffin...and all those "loose coins" just jostling around in that guy's belt pouch. Keeping safe and quiet in the shadows while the rest of the party takes care of the dangerous things. Yes, Sneak Attack. Yes, excel (due to Dex) in ranged, thrown, and/or "finesse" weapons. But that is more about self-defense, keeping themselves alive, and/or that combat supporting role. Not charging in at the head of the line.

The Thief/Rogue is about using their skills...unnoticed or not...to the benefit of themselves and their companions. Be as treacherous and duplicitous/criminal or as altruistic and heroic as you want. But it's about their skills, their dexterity, their ability to excel in Exploration that gives the Thief/Rogue their niche and makes them the third foundational class of the Big Four.

The class should have/needs a skill/proficiency/expertise bonus above and beyond every other class that can be applied to more skills (and/or automatically applies to a base portfolio) than every other class. Sure, other sclasses have proficiencies. Other classes have "expertise." Maybe other classes even have Stealth or can pick locks, themselves...but none of them should be able to "out skill bonus" the Thief/Rogue at what the Thief/Rogue does.

 

[Horwath]

If D&D had a skill system that was worth a damn, we wouldn't be having a problem with the Rogue and Bard in their current roles.

problem with skills is mostly in d20 used for them.
it's super unreliable spread of 19 pts where bonuses rarely go over 15 and on most skills are under 10 is simply too much.

if someone can fail medium difficulty action(DC15) and next second manage to succeed in nearly impossible task(DC30) in the same general area of expertise, then we know that there is something wrong here.
maybe 3d6 is better, average is still the same of all DCs can work, we just eliminate extremes and reduce relative extremes in results of rolls. Spread of 15 pts (3-18) is more reliable. that way is someone can fail DC 15 with +11 to roll, that one cannot succeed at DC30.

or maybe just use d12+4, still the same average but min and max result is reduced by 4.
or d10+5, but I simply like d12 die better than d10.

I'm rather tired of listening to how effective in combat everyone "must" be in the game. It's time to pay attention to the whole experience, not just the combat mini-game.

combat "mini-game" is in most campaigns well over 50% of the things people do and in some it's well over 90% so we cannot just brush that aside.

 

[Minigiant]

Yeah basically, if you set DC's based on expecting non-Rogues to be able to succeed, the Rogue's benefits trivialize most ability checks. If you set DC's based on only expecting Rogues to be able to succeed, then Rogues become a must-have, which is contrary to 5e's design, which expects almost any party configuration to be able to equally contribute, so nobody ever feels forced to play a given class (how well 5e meets that design goal I won't comment on at the moment).

The problem is lack of DM advice due to the designers catered to grognards who don't be told what to do.

The Rogue and other skills classes are supposed to excell at

1. Opposed Checks
2. OPTIONAL Additional Skill Checks

A vital or important skill check is not supposed to be gated behind the Rogue's (or Bard or Ranger) Expertise in 5e.

 

[TiQuinn]

Picking locks and disarming traps is a useless niche nowadays, with DMs mostly moving away from these being core gameplay.

<Mechanic> Well that's yur problem right thar! </Mechanic>

 

[TiQuinn]

If I could go back in time and change one thing re: D&D, it would be to erase the notion of Roles. Not because they are necessarily bad or wrong, but becasue they ended up driving design in a way that I find highly unsatisfying. And worst of all was turning the thief into a cuisinart killing machine. Ugh.

Yes, when we de-emphasized traps, climb things well, and the need to actually be sneaky in a dungeon, we created a problem for this entire class.