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

[Clint_L]

I think this misses two key points however.

1) The UA 6 rogue received a ~90% approval rating. It did exceptionally, incredibly well. And we have not seen the full impact in play yet of their abilities.

2) If the fighter and Barbarian got better at skills (and the general consensus I saw for Fighter and Barbarian non-combat utility in the 2014 version was "if you have literally no other options available, might as well try") then they took a step forward... but that doesn't mean the rogue took a step back. They didn't also need to get better at skills, so that the fighter and barbarian were still the worst choice.



Well... I'm not sure about this. Because there is a lot more going on than we have seen in direct play yet.

For example, everyone is saying that the monk is blowing the rogue out of the water in combat... but everyone seems to be thinking that the rogue isn't using their new abilities.

At level 11 a Thief rogue can: Bonus action Hide with a potential +13 stealth. Current rules in UA 6 state it is a DC 15 to achieve the invisible condition. Then they can attack with advantage and use two of their cunning strikes. They can use Withdraw and Supreme Sneak which means that they can move half their speed without provoking opportunity attacks and if they end in cover they do not lose the invisible condition.

It does cost them 7 damage, but with reliable talent they are sitting at a minimum of 23 stealth, which cannot be broken, perma-invisibility and after the first turn they don't need to bonus action hide, and they can dual-wield this entire time with a hand crossbow, because those are light and the nick property will allow them to make a free attack.

Now sure, this requires a terrain suitable to constant stealth, but in that terrain... what exactly can an enemy do except attempt to flee? Supreme Sneak's wording might not even allow an enemy to ready an action to hit the rogue as they hit the enemy.

And this is one build of one subclass. The Swashbuckler can potentially hold off a crowd of enemies by themselves with Awe. And we haven't seen what the Soul Knife can do at all. So I am not convinced that the rogue is as outclassed as people keep assuming, because they seem to not be accounting for the new tactics that weapon masteries and cunning strikes open up.

At level 11 my Mercy monk can solo an adult dragon. Easily. She's WAY faster than a rogue, even while carrying a friend. Up walls or across water. She's making five attacks per round if she wants, or "only" three if she chooses to also take the dodge action, (or two attacks using dodge as a bonus action, which also comes with free disengage and temporary hit points). And she's not exactly a slouch with +9 stealth.

Right now, the rogue is the best choice for a skirmisher. They will soon be a distant second. Far distant. And I do think that making other classes better at skills de facto makes rogues, not worse, but less needed.

 

[Chaosmancer]

At level 11 my Mercy monk can solo an adult dragon. Easily. She's WAY faster than a rogue, even while carrying a friend. Up walls or across water. She's making five attacks per round if she wants, or "only" three if she chooses to also take the dodge action, (or two attacks using dodge as a bonus action, which also comes with free disengage and temporary hit points). And she's not exactly a slouch with +9 stealth.

Right now, the rogue is the best choice for a skirmisher. They will soon be a distant second. Far distant. And I do think that making other classes better at skills de facto makes rogues, not worse, but less needed.

Not a slouch at stealth with their +9, but every time they attack they are spotted by the dragon.

Give the Thief rogue a shortbow, they have 80 ft of range, and a minimum stealth of 23. An adult Black dragon (first I turned to) has a passive perception of 21, and blindsight 60 ft. With the rogue capable of moving 75 feet a turn, attacking from 80 ft away and their minimum result beating the Dragon's passive... how exactly is the dragon going to hit them? The rogue can attack them from cover, constantly without breaking stealth, and the dragon can't claw or bite an enemy it cannot find. Acid Breath the area? Evasion alongside the bonus to their save from the cover, and potentially Uncanny dodge (I'd need to double check phrasing)

Now, I will grant, this requires an environment which the Rogue can hide in, but Black Dragon's are swamp dwellers, there is plenty of water and plant life to provide cover for the Rogue. So, it becomes imminently possible for the rogue to solo this dragon as well.

 

[Minigiant]

Please send me your rules for sharknadoes and time pits.

Sharknado

A Sharknado is 2 20-foot-radius, 100-foot-high cylinders. One cylinder, the source funnel, is always either above shark infested water or in the Plane of Elemental Water. The end funnel is elsewhere moves 3d10 feet in a random direction every turn.

Both the source and end funnel sucks up any Large or smaller objects and creatures that aren’t secured to anything and that aren’t worn or carried by anyone. A creature can make a DC 19 Strength saving throw to avoid this.

Any sucked up object or creature must make a DC19 Dexterity saving throw on the start of it's turn or take 2d6 bludgeoning damage and remain trapped in the sharkando.

During a sharknado, the source funnel teleports 1d4 sharks into the end funnel. It teleports reef sharks if above a reef, hunter sharks if above the ocean, and giant sharks if in the Plane of Elemental Water. Sharks and any other creature that breathes water can breath normally in a sharknado. Swim speeds are halved in either funnel and one can travel to the other funnel by swimming 50 feet up to the portal in the middle of each. Flight is impossible without making a Strength saving throw first.

In either funnel is disrupted by water or air controlling magic or by touching each other, both funnels disappear. All sharks remaining in both funnels fall from the sky. All sharks are allowed to make a bite attack against one creature while failing.


Time pit
A creature in a Time Pit must make a DC 15 Charisma save or become one with the pit. Those one with the pit are either sped up or slowed down (their choice) as if affected by the haste or slow spell. A person can make the save again to delink from the pit or choose the other effect. Dragons always succeed at this saving throw.

Those one with the pit age or deage to dust or nothingness respectively if they stay one with the pit for more than 1 minute. Delinking with a time pit, has a 1 in 2 for chance of returning you to your original age, 1 in 4 to an age of your choice, or 1 in 4 change of speeding you to your maximum or minum adult age. Dragons can freely choose their age.

DC 20 Survival or DC 25 Arcana to recall info of sharknados or time pits.

 

[Soulknife_Infiltrator]

I think this misses two key points however.

1) The UA 6 rogue received a ~90% approval rating. It did exceptionally, incredibly well. And we have not seen the full impact in play yet of their abilities.

They were having a ~90% approval rating cuz the UA7 and UA8 were later things. If Rogue was in the UA8, trust me it won't be getting ~90% approval.

 

[Chaosmancer]

They were having a ~90% approval rating cuz the UA7 and UA8 were later things. If Rogue was in the UA8, trust me it won't be getting ~90% approval.

Based on what study with what results?

It is possible that the improvements to the monk would make people rate the rogue lower, but we have no evidence to assume that that ever happened in any of the surveys. We have no reason to assume that a class that got improved scored lower because another class got improved even more. I know I largely looked at each class in isolation to see how it was meant to function.

Even with the release of UA8, I am not currently convinced that the Rogue is going to be doing poorly in the future, simply because other classes also got boosts. Because I am not convinced that I should be looking at a Rogue against every other class, and comparing them only where the rogue is weaker than that class. For example, while Monks are faster than the rogue on paper, Monk combat involves getting into and being within melee. The Rogue does not have that limitation, and is equally comfortable with a crossbow 80 ft away. So while the monk may be able to triple dash and cover 150 ft, they can't attack. The Rogue can double dash 60 ft and still hit a target 80 ft away, for a total engagement of 140 ft. Slightly less distance, but still an effective attack. A monk might have very powerful damage mitigation, but the rogue can be hiding 80 ft away from the enemy, giving them no recourse into attacking them at all, let alone damaging them. And Monks have poorer skills than Rogues.

I simply don't see the rogue as any worse off now than they were in UA6.

 

[Clint_L]

Not a slouch at stealth with their +9, but every time they attack they are spotted by the dragon.

So? She can go toe-to-toe with that dragon. Let's see the rogue try. Note that an adult red dragon has a passive perception of 23 and a fly of 80'. The breath weapon is pretty worthless against either the rogue or monk, but the dragon can just eat the rogue's face; uncanny dodge will only help it against one attack.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

At level 11 my Mercy monk can solo an adult dragon. Easily. She's WAY faster than a rogue, even while carrying a friend. Up walls or across water. She's making five attacks per round if she wants, or "only" three if she chooses to also take the dodge action, (or two attacks using dodge as a bonus action, which also comes with free disengage and temporary hit points). And she's not exactly a slouch with +9 stealth.

Right now, the rogue is the best choice for a skirmisher. They will soon be a distant second. Far distant. And I do think that making other classes better at skills de facto makes rogues, not worse, but less needed.

I highly doubt that difference will be that high in the 2024 books.
I share your assessment that if the UA goes live as it stands now, that the rogue will have a hard time. But there are internal playtsests and I have at least some faith in the main designers to balance the game properly.
Looking at 5e as a whole, the game is quite well balanced. There are only a few stinkers.
I also still believe there are a lot of spells rebalanced in 2024 books. It is just that they did not need us for just some numerical changes or addition of saving throws. We all know what the public thinks about nerfs. So better not ask at all.

 

[Horwath]

Based on what study with what results?

It is possible that the improvements to the monk would make people rate the rogue lower, but we have no evidence to assume that that ever happened in any of the surveys. We have no reason to assume that a class that got improved scored lower because another class got improved even more. I know I largely looked at each class in isolation to see how it was meant to function.

Even with the release of UA8, I am not currently convinced that the Rogue is going to be doing poorly in the future, simply because other classes also got boosts. Because I am not convinced that I should be looking at a Rogue against every other class, and comparing them only where the rogue is weaker than that class. For example, while Monks are faster than the rogue on paper, Monk combat involves getting into and being within melee. The Rogue does not have that limitation, and is equally comfortable with a crossbow 80 ft away. So while the monk may be able to triple dash and cover 150 ft, they can't attack. The Rogue can double dash 60 ft and still hit a target 80 ft away, for a total engagement of 140 ft. Slightly less distance, but still an effective attack. A monk might have very powerful damage mitigation, but the rogue can be hiding 80 ft away from the enemy, giving them no recourse into attacking them at all, let alone damaging them. And Monks have poorer skills than Rogues.

I simply don't see the rogue as any worse off now than they were in UA6.

that is one problem with UA surveys, people perception change over time and with updates.

we should have gotten one last UA with EVERYTHING that was tinkered in all UAs even with last minute changes from last published UA. even if document would be 200 pages.

then with all changes in one place at one time,maybe rating would be different, maybe not.

but for now, people are very satisfied with rogue's UA changes.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

that is one problem with UA surveys, people perception change over time and with updates.

we should have gotten one last UA with EVERYTHING that was tinkered in all UAs even with last minute changes from last published UA. even if document would be 200 pages.

If you do this, there will never be a last document. At some point it is the designers job to make a good game out of all the feedback.

then with all changes in one place at one time,maybe rating would be different, maybe not.

Internal playtesters will have the final say. It is impossible to see all the implications of a design if you just read over it.

but for now, people are very satisfied with rogue's UA changes.

And this should be the guideline for the final class.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So? She can go toe-to-toe with that dragon. Let's see the rogue try. Note that an adult red dragon has a passive perception of 23 and a fly of 80'. The breath weapon is pretty worthless against either the rogue or monk, but the dragon can just eat the rogue's face; uncanny dodge will only help it against one attack.

Okay, so a level 11 Thief Rogue can easily solo a CR 14 Adult Black Dragon, CR 16 Adult Blue Dragon, and then needs some dice luck for a CR 17 Adult Red Dragon.

And sure, they have a Passive 23, but that just means the Rogue needs to roll higher than an 11 on the Stealth roll... and really they only need to do that once depending on how the passive perception vs active perception gets ruled. And does the flight speed matter? Again, it depends on the environment. If the dragon needs to fly higher than 60 ft, then the blindsight is canceled. And if they fly past the rogue, searching for the rogue, then they aren't eating the rogue's face.

Also, at the end of the day, you are arguing that a Rogue who cannot stealth is going to struggle in a solo 1v1 fight. Since when is this a surprise? Since when have we expected Rogues to be toe-to-toe, face-to-face fighters who focus on high armor and defense? Comparatively, this rogue build can handle an arbitrarily high number of Fire Giants, while the Monk is going to struggle taking down 10 Fire Giants since twenty attacks a turn bypass their single attack deflection.