What drives a poor reputation for the Rogue class?

[Skrum]

Last game, rogue drank potion of haste. He could drop a healing potion on a downed party member AND sneak attack on the same turn. Also, while hasted: Hasted action attack once. Regular action ready an attack to attack the enemy when the enemy does anything. Result: Off-turn sneak attack.

Clever! I stand corrected

[JellyPooga]

Clever! I stand corrected

Your not knowing this before now is a bit like me coming into a conversation about Fighters and going off about how bad Polearm Master is because the bonus action attack is "only a d4". I'd technically be entirely correct, but I'd also be completely missing the point and running my mouth about something I simply do not realise the significance of. Off-turn Sneak Attack is bread and butter for a Rogue. A basic assumption that you're trying to achieve. You cannot weigh in on a Rogue (DPR) argument without knowing this. I mean, for all the numbers that were being run upthread, was this not even considered? Was the Rogue being compared based on a single turn of damage instead of their damage per round? The Rogue does not engage the enemy in the same way that most other Classes do; Rogues are setting up, playing false, leaving opportunity open and staying flexible; that's their playstyle. A Fighter has to invest (Feats, ASI, etc.) in both melee and ranged to be effective at both; the Rogue just needs to exist to be nearly as good at both; do you see the difference that makes?

but in this analogy, rogues don't get any leveled spells. And that's exactly their problem.

Not having on-demand nova options is not a drawback. It's a different playstyle and (from your statement I quoted above) one that you do not appear to understand, let alone appreciate. The Wizard doesn't have the Rogues on-demand mobility. The Fighter doesn't have the Rogues on-demand Expertise. The Barbarian actually cares about being caught in a Fireball, so ideally wants to get out of dodge before having it dropped on his head, thereby not doing his job of drawing aggro whilst he does it. The Rogue? Yeah he doesn't care that the Wizard threw a Lightning Bolt down the corridor he's currently engaging the enemy in because he takes half damage even when he fails his save. The "standard" of having buttons to push that have greater effect is predicated largely on having ideal circumstances. The Rogues entire schtick is being reactive to opportunity as it's presented, not to build specifically for a single specialised event (such as "I'm in melee with my favourite weapon to hand" or "I have a nice discreet package of enemy mooks in fireball formation as a target"). The only time a Rogue is caught unprepared is when they have zero equipment or they're finally out of HP; can the same be said for a Wizard? Cleric? Barbarian?. It's all well and good saying "the Wizard has a spell for that" but did the Wizard actually prepare that spell today or are we just assuming they have 100% foresight? About the closest competitor for the Rogues flexibility (and skill set) is the Druid and a lot of that comes from Wildshape which comes with its own, obvious drawbacks (opposable thumbs being a major one!).

the underrated benefit of just being able to throw themselves into the thick of things.

Have you run the numbers on Uncanny Dodge? I've already given you a Rogue that has comparable AC to a Fighter (better, even, in some cases), so now add Uncanny Dodge. d10 HD provides 1+lvl additional HP compared to d8. Uncanny Dodge provides +(attack damage/2)HP per round. Assuming a combat encounter lasts 4 rounds and the Rogue is hit once per round for 10 damage per hit (which is a pretty reasonable amount of damage for a creature to deal with a single attack, across a range of CR), the Rogue already mitigated as many additional HP that a 20th level Fighter would have over the Rogue after a single encounter. And they can tank that amount of damage and still be standing at level 5 (assuming they have at least 21HP to start with...which they do, even with Con 8). And you say a Rogue can't throw themselves into the thick of things and tank a couple of hits for the party? Yes, the Rogue can only do it against one attack per round. Yes, the Rogue has to give up the potential to deal off-turn Sneak Attack to do it. But the point is that they can do it and they have the option of doing it. Want to talk about underrated? Yeah. The Rogue is criminally (pun intended) underrated because they continue to be viewed through the lens of peoples expectations and assumptions rather than the actual rules as they are being presented. Please feel free to run you own numbers on what Uncanny Dodge actually does to the Rogue effective HP pool compared to the Fighter or even Barbarian (noting also that the Rogue only needs a Reaction to use Uncanny Dodge compared to the Barbarian requiring a Bonus Action and a resource to activate Rage) and come back to me about Rogues tanking.

[Schwann145]

I think people are mistaking the term "selfish" for a pejorative when it's only meant to be a descriptor.
It's about class design and has nothing to do with player choice.

For example, I consider the Monk to be the "king" of the "selfish classes" because everything it's designed to do is to the benefit of itself only. How you're able to leverage those personal benefits to the overall benefit of the party has nothing to do with it.
Compare this to, say, a Paladin who provides benefit not only to themselves but their nearby allies as well; a "selfless" class.
The easy, direct, comparison here would be Diamond Soul vs Aura of Protection. Both classes get abilities that improve all their saves, but the Monk doesn't share. "Selfish."

[Kane0]

For example, I consider the Monk to be the "king" of the "selfish classes" because everything it's designed to do is to the benefit of itself only.

I think Monks largely get a pass because of the omnipresent Stunning Strike. Once you land one of those its a chance for everyone in the party to dogpile the victim.

Coincicentally, that basically led my thought process on the devious strike concept.

[LudicSavant]

Rogues can indeed be built as tanks. Grab an Arcane Trickster, get them a shield and some defensive spells, toss on features like Evasion an Uncanny Dodge, punish people who walk away from you with a Booming Sneak Attack, etc.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

This has nothing to do with the Rogue Class and everything to do with sending a character on a solo mission. That character could be a Druid in Wildshape, a Warlock with Gaseous Form and Invisibility, a Fighter with Stealth proficiency or a Barbarian with a death wish. Again, I'll ask for any actual proof that the Rogue is in any way more selfish a Class than any other. Not, I'll add, more selfish as an individual character, player, party playstyle, GM fiat or stereotyped expectation made of fairy dust and wishful thinking that suggests it to be so...I want a rule or actual feature that makes the Rogue, one of the only Classes in the game that actively benefits as an actual rule from being a team player, selfish.

The original question is about reputation. That's going to be driven by things that happen at the table more than what's written in the book. I have no interest in proving or indeed arguing that the rogue is selfish by rule.

[JellyPooga]

The original question is about reputation. That's going to be driven by things that happen at the table more than what's written in the book. I have no interest in proving or indeed arguing that the rogue is selfish by rule.

Sooo...would it not benefit the game as a whole to rectify that groundless reputation by reinforcing what the actual rules are and the image they should garner, rather than proliferating a false perspective that might mislead even experienced players who are used to other Classes, let alone new players, into believing something that is, as you admit by being unwilling to argue the case, baseless?

[Skrum]

You cannot weigh in on a Rogue (DPR) argument without knowing this. .

I am of course aware that rogue benefits uniquely from off turn attacks - I had just never considered the particular interaction between rogues and haste.

Their off turn attacks conflict directly with them defending themselves of course. As does Steady Aim with anything else they want to do. I will grant - and have granted, since the beginning of this thread - that rogue is perfectly functional. Truenamer or 3e Samurai they are not. But you playing Schrodinger's Rogue and giving them credit for EVERYTHING they can do, all at once, does not convince me they are better than last place among 5e classes. That indeed is a huge problem for them: they can do some stuff. But not at the frequency they need to. If they dash, they can't disengage. If they disengage, they can't hide. If they give themselves advantage (a large factor in their DPR), they can't do ANY of those things cause they can't move. If they're tough, they also lose a ton of DPR. Unfortunately for rogue, there's class options that are not so burdened by the action economy.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Sooo...would it not benefit the game as a whole to rectify that groundless reputation by reinforcing what the actual rules are and the image they should garner, rather than proliferating a false perspective that might mislead even experienced players who are used to other Classes, let alone new players, into believing something that is, as you admit by being unwilling to argue the case, baseless?

Are you going to go table-to-table evangelizing about it? A discussion of the rules in a vacuum on a dying hobbyist forum isn't going to change the reputation of the class when behavior at individual tables is what drives that reputation.

[Dr.Samurai]

Wizard: Dude, why did you let that monster run right past you? You didn't even hit him with your l33t Booming Blade Sneak Attack Opportunity Attack!
Rogue: Yeah well, I have to keep using Uncanny Dodge to protect myself. But it would have been pretty sick if I was able to make that attack right?
Wizard: *rolls death save* Yeah, real sick...

[Blatant Beast]

Can you point me to where the Rogue has any rule that is more selfish than any other class? I've already noted several specific abilities the Rogue has that are explicitly the opposite, geared specifically toward team play. So far, the only evidence that the Rogue is selfish I've seen is based on individual playstyle (which is a player issue, not a class one) or baseless expectation.

I only contest the claim because it is obviously part of the Rogues poor reputation, but I've yet to be convinced it's based on anything but stereotypes rather than rules.

When I used the phrase "selfish class" to describe the 5e Rogue class, I was not making any reference to normative judgments on morality, I certainly was not thinking about D&D PvP or stealing from the party or other such actions.

I described the Rogue class as "selfish" because the base class abilities, (and most of the subclass abilities as well), are focused on the Rogue PC and not their friends.

The common Rogue play pattern of Hide, Pop out and Sneak Attack, go back and Hide, is "selfish", in the sense that often-times, the Rogue is not an available target for the opposition.

A Rogue, (or any PC), that is not taking their share of damage, can become problematic, as balancing incoming damage across a Party, is an important resource management tool.

Hide N' Sneak-Attack, as a tactic, places a larger burden of the incoming damage share on the remaining party members.

Evasion, as an ability, also plays into this disparity. Quite a bit of damage in 5e, calls for Dexterity Saving Throws for half damage. The Rogue and Monk have taken no damage, but the rest of the party is bedraggled from loss, is something I see quite a bit in play. The Fighter and Bard want to take a Short Rest, and the Rogue wants to keep on going, because Rogues only Short Rest for Hit Points....which is yet another point in which the Rogue is not on the same resource use path as some other classes, and a potential source of conflict.

Tactical habits also become ingrained. The Arcane Trickster/Bladesinger in my 20th level game, almost never will tank a creature, despite the fact that when their Bladesong is active, they have the highest AC in the party, and have the Shield spell and Uncanny Dodge to boot.

In the player's mind, their Rogue circles around the combat, waiting for a chance to strike, even though, their actual abilities make them an excellent choice for wading into the thick of things, and thriving.

Rogues, as a class, also generally lack control abilities, which in part explains why Arcane Trickster is as effective as it is; spells allow control. Other Rogue subclasses can throw nets, but let's face it, most players are not playing a Rogue, to throw nets. Grapple and lack of Extra Attack has been discussed enough, earlier.

Bardic Inspiration, is for me, the gold standard of a simple, yet flavorful ability, that subtly boosts the survivability of an Adventuring Group.

An Arcane Trickster with Silvery Barbs, can certainly aid their friends, and bring woe to their foes, just as a Thief with Healer Feat can be an excellent healer, but a player has to work at it. Paladins and Bards on the opposite end of the spectrum, have to work hard to not help their friends.

Rogues are great as the "fifth man" of an Adventuring Group, but I would likely prefer someone to play another class in a 4 person Adventuring Group, as it would open up other options.

[JellyPooga]

But you playing Schrodinger's Rogue and giving them credit for EVERYTHING they can do, all at once, does not convince me they are better than last place among 5e classes. That indeed is a huge problem for them: they can do some stuff. But not at the frequency they need to. If they dash, they can't disengage. If they disengage, they can't hide. If they give themselves advantage (a large factor in their DPR), they can't do ANY of those things cause they can't move. If they're tough, they also lose a ton of DPR. Unfortunately for rogue, there's class options that are not so burdened by the action economy.

There's where we differ. Where you see competition for action resource, I see opportunity. Can the Rogue use Uncanny Dodge and off-turn Sneak Attack on the same turn? No. But they can Dash or Disengage to be in a position where they're able to take advantage of one or the other and still get to use their Action to attack, grapple or whatever else they're doing on their own turn. If the Rogue has a problem of competing action economy, it's because unlike most other Classes, the Rogue has the option of or are encouraged to play for actively taking more actions both on and off their turn. A Fighter is not incentivised to take an Opportunity or Readied attack in the same way a Rogue is, so they don't. A Rogue actively benefits from doing so. A Rogue that isn't using their Bonus Action and Reaction in as many rounds as possible is definitely missing out in a way that other classes either aren't or can't even begin to appreciate. A Wizard using Bonus Action or Reaction spells is burning twice as bright but half as long and that's a problem. Not so for the Rogue; it's expected that they just...do more. Just less effectively. 1+1+1+1 is the same as 2+2 or 3+1, but you're looking at the 1's and comparing them to the 3's rather than comparing the sum.

Schrodinger's Rogue is one that does everything all on the same turn, yes. What I'm advocating is the Rogue that does a lot in one round, yes, but they do it consistently from one round to the next, as appropriate to the situation at hand. In a hall of infinite (and varied) encounters, just about every Class but the Rogue runs out of spells and other resources before the Rogue finally says "I'm beat" because again, the Rogue's only limited resource is HP and they're really really good at reserving those when they need to. In addition to that, the Rogues breadth of abilities means that he is useful across more of those encounters than just about anyone else; melee, ranged, skills, exploration, social; it's not even a thought exercise to build a Rogue that participates across the board because that's just a baseline, run-of-the-mill Rogue before adding any specialisation or further versatility.

Schrodingers Spellcaster, on the other hand, appears to have infinite spell slots and perfect foresight, despite actual Classes and individual characters in actual play being far more limited. Far more of a problematic argument than the Rogue I present, IMO.

When I used the phrase "selfish class" to describe the 5e Rogue class, I was not making any reference to normative judgments on morality, I certainly was not thinking about D&D PvP or stealing from the party or other such actions.

And yet those very things have been brought up in this thread to denigrate the Class, despite that being a player problem.

The common Rogue play pattern of Hide, Pop out and Sneak Attack, go back and Hide, is "selfish", in the sense that often-times, the Rogue is not an available target for the opposition.

A Rogue, (or any PC), that is not taking their share of damage, can become problematic, as balancing incoming damage across a Party, is an important resource management tool.

Hide N' Sneak-Attack, as a tactic, places a larger burden of the incoming damage share on the remaining party members.

Evasion, as an ability, also plays into this disparity. Quite a bit of damage in 5e, calls for Dexterity Saving Throws for half damage. The Rogue and Monk have taken no damage, but the rest of the party is bedraggled from loss, is something I see quite a bit in play. The Fighter and Bard want to take a Short Rest, and the Rogue wants to keep on going, because Rogues only Short Rest for Hit Points....which is yet another point in which the Rogue is not on the same resource use path as some other classes, and a potential source of conflict.

Tactical habits also become ingrained. The Arcane Trickster/Bladesinger in my 20th level game, almost never will tank a creature, despite the fact that when their Bladesong is active, they have the highest AC in the party, and have the Shield spell and Uncanny Dodge to boot.

In the player's mind, their Rogue circles around the combat, waiting for a chance to strike, even though, their actual abilities make them an excellent choice for wading into the thick of things, and thriving.

Do you not see how this is not an issue of the Class, but the player? You point out yourself that the AT/Bladesinger player would be better placed in the thick of things according to the numbers on their character sheet and yet somehow it's a fault of or encouraged by features of the Class? Likewise, Rogues can certainly benefit from peek-a-boo tactics, but are by no means limited to them and there's a strong argument that they are better served as a switch hitter, using both ranged and melee depending on which is the most beneficial in the moment. Again, it's a player choice not to engage and take themselves out of the target pool; after all, no-one is forcing any Rogue to even take Stealth proficiency, let alone Expertise.

Rogues, as a class, also generally lack control abilities, which in part explains why Arcane Trickster is as effective as it is; spells allow control. Other Rogue subclasses can throw nets, but let's face it, most players are not playing a Rogue, to throw nets. Grapple and lack of Extra Attack has been discussed enough, earlier.

Most Rogue subclasses offer some degree of control, whether it's the Arcane Trickster using "traditional" spell control, the Swashbuckler drawing aggro or the Thief manipulating terrain elements with Fast Hands. It might not look like the nice discreet function of a spell, but there's far more than just nets (really, nets? I didn't think anyone used those ) for less-than-magical control elements. That said, I do tend to agree that Rogues in general do not have much in the way of control elements in the traditional sense.

Bardic Inspiration, is for me, the gold standard of a simple, yet flavorful ability, that subtly boosts the survivability of an Adventuring Group.

I agree. I think the Bard is a strong contender for best designed Class in the game (that and Paladin).

An Arcane Trickster with Silvery Barbs, can certainly aid their friends, and bring woe to their foes, just as a Thief with Healer Feat can be an excellent healer, but a player has to work at it. Paladins and Bards on the opposite end of the spectrum, have to work hard to not help their friends.

Rogue is an advanced Class, yes. They're hard to "get right" precisely because they come with a whole heap of undeserved baggage (Thief. PvP. Lone Wolf. Squishy) on top of a playstyle that is really quite different to that of other Classes and their "push button, do thing until you run out of buttons" dynamic.

[Sorinth]

When I used the phrase "selfish class" to describe the 5e Rogue class, I was not making any reference to normative judgments on morality, I certainly was not thinking about D&D PvP or stealing from the party or other such actions.

I described the Rogue class as "selfish" because the base class abilities, (and most of the subclass abilities as well), are focused on the Rogue PC and not their friends.

The common Rogue play pattern of Hide, Pop out and Sneak Attack, go back and Hide, is "selfish", in the sense that often-times, the Rogue is not an available target for the opposition.

A Rogue, (or any PC), that is not taking their share of damage, can become problematic, as balancing incoming damage across a Party, is an important resource management tool.

Hide N' Sneak-Attack, as a tactic, places a larger burden of the incoming damage share on the remaining party members.

Evasion, as an ability, also plays into this disparity. Quite a bit of damage in 5e, calls for Dexterity Saving Throws for half damage. The Rogue and Monk have taken no damage, but the rest of the party is bedraggled from loss, is something I see quite a bit in play. The Fighter and Bard want to take a Short Rest, and the Rogue wants to keep on going, because Rogues only Short Rest for Hit Points....which is yet another point in which the Rogue is not on the same resource use path as some other classes, and a potential source of conflict.

Tactical habits also become ingrained. The Arcane Trickster/Bladesinger in my 20th level game, almost never will tank a creature, despite the fact that when their Bladesong is active, they have the highest AC in the party, and have the Shield spell and Uncanny Dodge to boot.

In the player's mind, their Rogue circles around the combat, waiting for a chance to strike, even though, their actual abilities make them an excellent choice for wading into the thick of things, and thriving.

Rogues, as a class, also generally lack control abilities, which in part explains why Arcane Trickster is as effective as it is; spells allow control. Other Rogue subclasses can throw nets, but let's face it, most players are not playing a Rogue, to throw nets. Grapple and lack of Extra Attack has been discussed enough, earlier.

Bardic Inspiration, is for me, the gold standard of a simple, yet flavorful ability, that subtly boosts the survivability of an Adventuring Group.

An Arcane Trickster with Silvery Barbs, can certainly aid their friends, and bring woe to their foes, just as a Thief with Healer Feat can be an excellent healer, but a player has to work at it. Paladins and Bards on the opposite end of the spectrum, have to work hard to not help their friends.

Rogues are great as the "fifth man" of an Adventuring Group, but I would likely prefer someone to play another class in a 4 person Adventuring Group, as it would open up other options.

Not sure how Evasion is selfish because they don't take damage, like I can understand your point about hiding and therefore not being targettable can lead to more damage dealt to the rest of the team which could be selfish but mitigating sorry but no. They were still targeted by the spell/trap/effect the fact that they mitigate the damage just means the healer doesn't have to cast spells on them and can help others instead which if anything is the opposite of being selfish.

And speaking of the hide every round tactic, just because the Rogue hid doesn't mean an enemy won't chase after them to try attack them. Like a Rogue hiding behind a tree and popping out every round to attack the orc war party doesn't prevent an orc from running up to that tree and attacking the Rogue.

Yeah the rogue doesn't have much in the way of directly buffing allies but that's true for quite a few classes and doesn't make any of them selfish.

[Witty Username]

Wizard: Dude, why did you let that monster run right past you? You didn't even hit him with your l33t Booming Blade Sneak Attack Opportunity Attack!
Rogue: Yeah well, I have to keep using Uncanny Dodge to protect myself. But it would have been pretty sick if I was able to make that attack right?
Wizard: *rolls death save* Yeah, real sick...

That definitely can happen, although if they pop uncanny dodge that does mean they used an attack, monster runs up to wizard and says boogah boogah is also a thing that happens.

Kinda like how every time I am saving rage on the easy combat is the combat I take a crit from the great Lady Doom.

[Pex]

And yet those very things have been brought up in this thread to denigrate the Class, despite that being a player problem.

Because it was and is a problem. In the past disruptive players played rogues. Thieves in 2E. Not all rogue players, but players who played rogues. Nowadays it's not limited to rogues. It can be wizards who cast Fireball not caring party members are in the area. Druids who wildshape to play a separate Lone Wolf game with the DM passing notes. Bards who charm party members. Barbarians who attack during the middle of negotiations. There are still rogue players who steal from the party.

I agree it's a player thing, but that does not take away the poor reputation rogues get. The class inherited the stigma from how they were played in previous editions.

[stoutstien]

Rogues could definitely use better counterplay options but all the notably good ones were unintentional IMO.

[Blatant Beast]

5e is the only edition of D&D, in which I can remember heated arguments between players about when to take a Rest...(Short Rests, to be precise)....and the Evasion quotient of damage resistance furthers the disparity that fuels the argument.

Fizban's Platinum Shield, the Interception Fighting Style, a Redemption Paladin's Aura of the Guardian, are a sample of examples of Damage Reduction that help others.

PCs with Evasion, ideally, should be standing in front of their comrades without Evasion, to give a half cover bonus to their comrades on Dexterity Saving Throws, but in play, I've never seen a Rogue be willing to do this ....it seems to be a tactic that is not part of the zeitgeist of the player base.

The devs could just as easily include a "Jumping into the line of fire" ability rider in Evasion or Uncanny Defense, in which like Clint Eastwood playing a Secret Service Agent, the Rogue launches themselves in front of an attack, and takes the damage, while giving their teammate the benefit of their damage reduction. That sort of design space is just not explored for Rogues.

The Expert Sidekick in Tasha's has more party facing features, than a Mastermind Rogue.

[LudicSavant]

The Expert Sidekick in Tasha's has more party facing features, than a Mastermind Rogue.

Ugh, the Mastermind is such a wasted opportunity.

- Help as a short range bonus action is only a sidegrade to Cunning Action (if we're being optimistic) and only gets less relevant with levels.
- Their level 9 feature is a reprise of the Battle Master's infamously dysfunctional level 7 ribbon. Most ribbon features are bigger than this, and it's the Mastermind's whole feature.
- Their level 13 feature requires a creature within 5 feet of you, and for them to be granting you cover against an attack, and then for your to use your Reaction on it for modest gains over Uncanny Dodge. It actually does something (albeit a situational something), but it's sure not much.
- Their level 17 feature means you can now spoof a second level spell (if you make a successful check). Great, I would have liked this to get my conspiracy started about a dozen levels earlier, please.

[Skrum]

Re: mastermind

I've never been more underwhelmed by a subclass before. My current character, a level 6 wild magic barb level 4 soul knife, originally had mastermind. He's more built for toughness/tanking than damage, and since wild magic has some support elements, I thought mastermind would be perfect.

I used the ability maybe 3 times in 5-6 games. It was so weak. Taking my bonus action and thus an attack to give advantage on one thing. Just did not have the sauce I expected. By the last 2ish games, I started to forget I even had that ability.

The thought of spending by bonus action for that on a pure rogue.... Oh heck no

[Witty Username]

I agree it's a player thing, but that does not take away the poor reputation rogues get. The class inherited the stigma from how they were played in previous editions.

Kinda like how Paladins have the reputation of being party police.

[Dr.Samurai]

That definitely can happen, although if they pop uncanny dodge that does mean they used an attack, monster runs up to wizard and says boogah boogah is also a thing that happens.

The issue is just making these sweeping claims about how the rogue plays out, which can't be substantiated except in actual gameplay.

When I hear things like (paraphrasing) "there's little value in having Expertise in multiple skills" and "rogues can be tanks because of Uncanny Dodge and Warcaster" it immediately tells me I'm playing a different game than the people making these claims. So it becomes obvious to me that their opinion is limited to their playstyle, as mine are to mine, and we can't go around making these claims about a class.

I would much rather have a rogue that can perform consistently well at the out of combat challenges the party faces, and still contribute to damage/kills in combat, than someone tricked out to the gills with spells/features/multiclassing because they have some weird need to prove to... someone? that they can excel at every role as good or better than anyone else.

At least with the former I know what I'm getting. With the latter, it's whatever their whim is, and inevitably they're going to be checking in on everyone's turn "Well, actually, I can do that, so maybe you can do something else with your turn..."

Thanks, but I'd rather not every turn be a negotiation with Captain Do-It-All. I prefer distinct party roles with some minor overlap, instead of people trying to be Superman asking why Flash is on the team.

[LudicSavant]

Inquisitive is better off than the Mastermind, but still underwhelming. As a big fan of the detective archetype, I feel like this was another big missed opportunity in Xanathar's.

Ear for Deceit goes obsolete at level 11, doing literally nothing after that point. Before then, it only applies to Insight checks to detect if a creature is lying (rather than insight checks in general), and the bonus is paltry -- if it even applies at all, since it doesn't benefit passive insight, which the book suggests using for checks where the DM wouldn't want to reveal if you passed or failed.

You know, like whether a creature is lying.

Eye for Detail lets you use a worse version of the Search action as a bonus action. This is very situationally useful for when you need to find a hidden creature mid-combat and your passive perception failed you, but it's still a pretty small feature.

Insightful Fighting is the main draw of their level 3 kit, making it somewhat easier to qualify for sneak attack. But even here it's finnicky: it requires a successful all-or-nothing check from a non-primary stat as a bonus action, still doesn't counter disadvantage, and needs to be used again every time you switch targets. And on turns that you use it, you're not generating actual advantage with Steady Aim or Hide or the like.

Their level 9 feature gives you Advantage on Perception and Investigation checks if you move at half speed.

If used for trapfinding, this is... well, it's asking the entire party to cut their rate of progress in half. But if you're in a situation where speed is no object, it's a useful bonus to good skills, albeit ones that use two different non-primary stats. This is the best non-combat feature that Inquisitives get.

Their level 13 feature, Unerring Eye, is mostly limited to non-combat use by its Action requirement, and moreover... doesn't actually do much. See, you need to already suspect something is up if you're going to use the very limited-use action in the first place (it's only wis/day, and wis is not your main stat), and all the action tells you on a success is that something is up, but not what. Yeah thanks for that, Sherlock.

For an ability that bills itself flavorwise as "your senses are almost impossible to foil" it... makes your senses pretty easy to foil, especially for a tier 3 character that's supposed to be dedicated to detection. Compare this 2/day effect to the sort of things that level 13+ Diviners are spamming out of Matryoshka Doll spell slots. Yeah, this is... not a good feature. It would be a ribbon if you got it at level 1. You know, like Divine Sense.

Their level 17 feature, Eye for Weakness, just gives you +10.5 average damage against a creature that's afflicted by your Insightful Fighting. I mean, sure, I'll take a little extra sneak attack damage, but it's just a little. Not enough to actually catch you up to the Rogue subclasses that do better damage.


___

Inquisitive is basically an entire subclass for Advantage on two skills while moving slowly, and sometimes qualifying for sneak attack when you otherwise wouldn't. Given how deep the well is for high fantasy detectives, they sure didn't draw much from it.

[Blatant Beast]

I do mostly agree regarding the Inquisitive being a missed opportunity.
It might be fun to go through all the Rogue Subclasses on the Playground, sometime.
I will say, that I think the Inquisitive in Tier 1 is a decent Rogue option, because Insightful Fighting is an effective solution to Kitting issues with Rogues.

I am ok with Ear for Deceit sunsetting at 11th level with Reliable Talent coming online, but that should be accounted for in the overall power budget.

Steady Eye, in actual play, is not too bad, because often times one is not exploring in combat. In effect, the moving at half speed, can get handwaved away. Now that said, Advantage on Perception/Investigation checks for a half speed penalty at 9th level is a bad rate.

Unerring Eye is just bad. You spend you action to confirm that your suspicion that stuff might be messing with you is correct, without receiving confirmation of what exactly is messing with you, and what it is doing.
No **** Sherlock, this is D&D, everything is messing with you...paranoid players ask questions, any Rogue can get the same result, by just asking questions.

Eye for Detail is worded in a way, that a RAW style DM might rule the ability does not work on Invisible creatures, because the wording of the ability specifies only "hidden" creatures and objects. Epic Fail..thankfully most DMs allow the ability to detect invisible things as well, in my experience.

[Theodoxus]

Inquisitive is the epitome of lone wolf subclasses though. "Ok, Jimmy is going to play detective for the next 20 minutes, Tom and I are going to go play X-Box, let us know when something our characters can do turns up."

Seriously, detective plots are great to watch on video, but no one I know wants to be Watson or Alfred at the table top.

[Dr.Samurai]

I've never been more underwhelmed by the commentary on D&D features.

Optimizers: You're not playing D&D unless you're using Pass Without Trace to Stealth everywhere and get Surprise on all your enemies yo!
Optimizers: Steady Eye sucks because it makes you move slow.
Actual Real Life D&D: You have to move at a Slow Pace in order to make use of Stealth.

As I said above... people are playing their games differently, including ignoring parts of them, and drawing conclusions on various classes and mechanics. Take it all with a grain of salt, it may not apply at your table.

[Blatant Beast]

Inquisitive is the epitome of lone wolf subclasses though. "Ok, Jimmy is going to play detective for the next 20 minutes, Tom and I are going to go play X-Box, let us know when something our characters can do turns up."

Seriously, detective plots are great to watch on video, but no one I know wants to be Watson or Alfred at the table top.

Lol.....
My spouse absolutely leapt at the chance to play Sherlock Holmes at the Table Top.
3/4 of the players were brand new to Roleplaying, so essentially outsourcing the dice rolling to the Inquisitive with Help from my Cleric of Trickery, sped the process along....though it was very much an opportunity to take a break for the rest of the group.

[Dr.Samurai]

If anyone in my group is moving ahead to do something alone, two of us remain engaged with what is going on and talking with the player if they're trying to figure something out (though that knowledge remains OOC, up to him to figure out how his character might discover it). The fourth player definitely zones out. But that player zones out no matter what and is definitely the least vested in the game in general. Like... if it's not his turn in combat he's on another planet.

[Blatant Beast]

Optimizers: You're not playing D&D unless you're using Pass Without Trace to Stealth everywhere and get Surprise on all your enemies yo!
Optimizers: Steady Eye sucks because it makes you move slow.
Actual Real Life D&D: You have to move at a Slow Pace in order to make use of Stealth.

Tomb of Annihilation and Curse of Strahd, are both modules that feature some very rough traps/choices in confined dungeons, where it is very likely that things might possibly be chasing you.

Moving at Half Speed Can Get you Killed, as can opening the wrong door into the closet of ultimate destruction in Tomb of Annihilation. You might as well skip the Inquisitive subclass, and expect to use Enhance Abilities for Advantage on Perception checks.

The great value in Cunning Action, is the modular flexibility in the ability. Steady Eye, takes away some of Cunning Action's modularity, because it creates a penalty that greatly encourages the player to use their Cunning Action to Dash, and not do the other things that the Inquisitive subclass allows like Eye for Detail. Ideally, Steady Eye and Eye for Detail should be used in conjunction, but in play, that does not happen, due to the excessive, and unnecessary speed penalty.

It is just bad design.

[Dr.Samurai]

Tomb of Annihilation and Curse of Strahd, are both modules that feature some very rough traps/choices in confined dungeons, where it is very likely that things might possibly be chasing you.

Moving at Half Speed Can Get you Killed, as can opening the wrong door into the closet of ultimate destruction in Tomb of Annihilation. You might as well skip the Inquisitive subclass, and expect to use Enhance Abilities for Advantage.

A Fighter does not need a potion of Haste to get the most out of their Action Surge. Action Surge, just works, and works with most Fighter Archtypes.

The great value in Cunning Action, is the modular flexibility in the ability. Steady Eye, takes away some of Cunning Action's modularity, because it creates a penalty that greatly encourages the player to use their Cunning Action to Dash, and not do the other things that the Inquisitive subclass allows like Eye for Detail.

It is just bad design.

If you're being chased, than you're taking a -5 penalty to Perception anyways because you're moving at a Fast Pace, you're not really expected to be spotting stuff.

I didn't make the claim that the feature is always useful.

I'm not trying to weaponize differing viewpoints. The thread is about reputation, and I'm pointing out that some of these claims are based on specific assumptions. The rogue has been denigrated because it lacks Pass Without Trace, in this same thread. But in order to use Pass Without Trace, you have to be moving at a Slow Pace. But in the same thread, by the same people, we're told that Steady Eye is bad because you have to move slowly to benefit from it.

A rogue sneaking, even with a party and even with Pass Without Trace, will have a +5 to their Passive Perception/Investigation checks while doing so with Steady Eye. That's a bump up in tier of difficulty. For doing what they were already doing, which is moving slowly. It also addresses a criticism, ALSO FIELDED IN THIS THREAD, about Reliable Talent not playing nice with passive perception/investigation.

So apologies if it comes across as "weaponizing" anything, but some of the commentary in this thread about the rogue is incoherent. And that matters, if people are going to listen to it and judge the class on it.

[LudicSavant]

I've never been more underwhelmed by the commentary on D&D features.

Optimizers: You're not playing D&D unless you're using Pass Without Trace to Stealth everywhere and get Surprise on all your enemies yo!
Optimizers: Steady Eye sucks because it makes you move slow.
Actual Real Life D&D: You have to move at a Slow Pace in order to make use of Stealth.

That's quite a translation of "This is the best non-combat feature that Inquisitives get."

The words you typed bear no resemblance to what optimizers actually told you.