D&D 5E Why are Rogue features untouchable for other classes?

[ScuroNotte]

Uncanny Dodge would be something I'd try to keep wholly unique to the rogue.

You can offer a variance of it as for the Monk's Step of the Wind. Can offer a choice of 2 of the 3. I can see the Ranger having both Hide and Dash. "Dashing" through the woods in hot pursuit of their prey.

 

[BacchusNL]

You can offer a variance of it as for the Monk's Step of the Wind. Can offer a choice of 2 of the 3. I can see the Ranger having both Hide and Dash. "Dashing" through the woods in hot pursuit of their prey.

I think you are confusing Cunning Action and Uncanny Dodge? Like I said, I can easily see how bonus action hide or dash can be given to some classes or races that fit the flavour. A unique reaction like Uncanny dodge; not so much.

 

[ScuroNotte]

I think you are confusing Cunning Action and Uncanny Dodge? Like I said, I can easily see how bonus action hide or dash can be given to some classes or races that fit the flavour. A unique reaction like Uncanny dodge; not so much.

I did confuse the 2. Sorry

Though Uncanny Dodge is offered to Hunter Ranger at 15th level as an option

 

[MoonSong]

Especially with Tasha out, we see features from other classes available as feats. However, it seems that rogues abilities are untouchable. Why can't there be a feat of just expertise of 2 proficient skills, Cunning action, or evasion. There is a variant of Evasion as part of the shield master feat, but why not just offer evasion as a feat. For the ranger I was hoping for 2 skill for expertise. WoTC thought it was crucial to have expertise in Survival and nature that they gave the Rogue Scout proficiency in those skills and then expertise. For the Ranger, they just offered 1 skill for expertise.
I find it remarkable when a homebrew is created with a rogue feature people come out complaining about that is the rogue's feature. Or if you have to give it, only with limitations. However, there was no or minimal complaint with the creation of the Rogue scout, who far surpasses the Ranger in outdoor survival and tracking.

Additionally, never saw the rogue lack for damage so was surprised they were given a damage boost through Steady Aim. Now a ranged Rogue can take Archery, to go along with sharpshooter and Steady Aim. With advantage, they have a higher chance of a Crit. with the ranged rogue having less risk of being exposed to a attacks than a melee rogue.

Sorry, just had to vent.

I don't have the book yet, so I don't know which material got it and which material didn't. But if you want expertise somehow, there's the prodigy feat?

 

[Mistwell]

You can have cunning action when you pry it from my cold dead hands!
I am with you on expertise. Should be a feat.

 

[ScuroNotte]

I don't have the book yet, so I don't know which material got it and which material didn't. But if you want expertise somehow, there's the prodigy feat?

Xanathar's Guide has prodigy. But my point was why not straight expertise? For Fighting Initiate, it doesn't offer 1 style and your stuck with that style. Its the full feature of martial characters in that it allows you to change it later on.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Balance.

I don't buy this. Multiclassing exists. If it were actually a balance problem then everyone would dip rogue 2 like people dip warlock 2. There's clearly a cost that's too high for the feature to be worthwhile. It's just a matter of finding it.

 

[ScuroNotte]

You can have cunning action when you pry it from my cold dead hands!
I am with you on expertise. Should be a feat.

I'll cast Feign Death first, then pry it

 

[DND_Reborn]

Reasons such as offering class-defining features as feats is just one of the many reasons why I don't like TCoE.

As for Expertise being a feat--it already is in a fashion with Prodigy.

Other subclasses often get the ability to add double your proficiency bonus, such as the Knowledge Domain for clerics and such.

 

[Scott Christian]

I don't buy this. Multiclassing exists. If it were actually a balance problem then everyone would dip rogue 2 like people dip warlock 2. There's clearly a cost that's too high for the feature to be worthwhile. It's just a matter of finding it.

I humbly disagree. This is what I think they would say. So I can be way off. But it can be balance because multiclassing has a cost. If you lower the cost (i.e. widen the restrictions) then you do have a greater chance of losing balance. I also said I think the reason is class distinction, which might be even more important. Just my two cents.