D&D (2024) Rogue's Been in an Awkward Place, And This Survey Might Be Our Last Chance to Let WotC Know.

[Clint_L]

I would definitely give rogues an extra attack at level 5. It seems odd for them to be the only martial class that doesn't get it. It would be a damage boost, but not a huge one, and given that they are more fragile, I don't mind rogues being higher up the damage charts. It would also offset the damage lost to cunning strike, making rogues more likely to use their fun new toy.

 

[ECMO3]

See, this is exactly why Rogue are underpowered for having such combat-powers. Cuz Spells always win in so many out-of-combat encounters. Skills, something that should have a chance to fail, shouln't cost too many combat-powers like this.

Spells should not always win out of combat unless you have metamagic and subtle spell.

While spells like Invisibility might help you sneak, Suggestion might help you talk your way past guards, and Detect Thoughts let's you read minds, they are also SPELLS with verbal and somatic components and anyone within eyesight and earshot knows you just cast a spell and RAW a lot of them, even a fair number of commoners, will know exactly what spell you just cast.

 

[ECMO3]

As for "versatile", no, not really. Rogues are extremely un-versatile. They rely entirely on Skills, and lean hard on the few skills they have Expertise or Reliable Talent, which they cannot change (unless I've missed something).

This really depends on the build, and in particular their ability scores. Rogue as a class is very SAD relying only on Dexterity, and without need for a high Constitution like other martials. This enables Rogues to boost other abilities more easily than other classes, and this translates to higher skills across the board. The extra ASI helps in this regard too.

Rogues get 2 more proficiencies than others, but no that doesn't "actually do something" in most cases, because the Rogue will only be the best person to be rolling in a few cases. It usually means they just have a couple of skills where they're okay but worse than another PC (i.e. any STR class for Athletics, any WIS class for Perception, any CHA class for social skills).

I disagree with this. Expertise makes up a ton of ground, I've played Rogues with an 8 strength who are the best grapplers in the party.

Clerics and Druids don't have Perception on their skill list, so it is not true to assume they will be better at this than a Rogue. A Rogue or Ranger will usually have the highest passive perception in the party IME. Not always, but usually, and that is before we consider Reliable Talent.

A Rogue can usually play with either a good Charisma or a good Wisdom and that combined with Reliable Talent and Expertise means they will generally be better than most other classes at what they choose to be good at.

Spells can do a lot, but they are limited both by the number known/prepared and by spell slots, and when it comes to high level spells you are pretty much restricted to 1 slot per day.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I've played Rogues with an 8 strength who are the best grapplers in the party.

That's only possible below high level if you didn't have a STR character with Athletics, let alone any other bonuses to grappling. The math is very simple.

STR 8 = -1
Athletics Expertise = +4 at L1-4
Total +3

STR 16 = +3
Athletics Proficiency = +2 at L1-4
Total +5

Assuming you didn't increase your STR but the STR character would, at L9 things look like:

STR 8 = -1
Athletics Expertise = +8 at L9-12
Total +8

STR 20 = +5
Athletics Proficiency = +4 at L9-12
Total +9

Still worse.

So at level 9, when the Proficiency bonus increases again, you're still worse than a generic STR character who didn't take Expertise. At level 11 (7 in playtest) you pull ahead in average total terms because of Reliable Talent. But that's only if the other character has no other benefits to grappling.

Given most games end by level 10, and even most campaigns end around 9-12, you're blowing an Expertise slot to be a slightly below-par grappler, if that's why you're doing it (it makes more sense to put Expertise in Athletics because many Rogues make a lot of Athletics checks when climbing etc. than because of grappling).

This enables Rogues to boost other abilities more easily than other classes, and this translates to higher skills across the board.

No, it doesn't. It simply mathematically doesn't. This is a false claim. They generally have lower totals than other PCs in non-DEX skills unless they take Expertise, in which case if they have a positive stat they can narrow pip them at the post, but it rarely makes sense to do so.

What gives Rogues a real boost is Reliable Talent because that does apply to all skills. When that was at L11 it was fairly pointless as most campaigns were over or winding down by then, but at L7 it'll see a bit more play.

Clerics and Druids don't have Perception on their skill list

Meaningless.

They can get it from a Background, and given Custom Backgrounds are intended to be the norm (word of god from WotC themselves), that's just an irrelevance. It's literally disingenuous. This isn't BG3.

A Rogue can usually play with either a good Charisma or a good Wisdom and that combined with Reliable Talent and Expertise means they will generally be better than most other classes at what they choose to be good at.

Once you get to L11 or L7, depending on version, sure, Reliable Talent is extremely powerful in a system as RNG-dominant as D&D. It completely changes the math. At say, L7 it makes the 1-9 range into 10, so the lowest you can roll is 10 + Stat + Proficiency/Expertise, so for a DEX skill likely 10 + 4 + 3 or 10 + 4 + 6 - meaning you literally can't fail a DC15 or DC20 check respectively, rather than having a 35% chance and a 45% chance of failure respectively. That's absolutely huge.

Even with lower stats, like say, a +2 CHA, and mere Proficiency in Persuasion, you're hitting DC15 100% of the time, which the Bard with Expertise in Persuasion and +4 CHA cannot say - with +4 +6, the Bard still need to roll an 5 or above - a 20% outright failure chance compared to your 0%.

If 5E had Take 10 and Take 20 like it should, it would be less of an issue. But given 5E's love of RNG absolutely screwing everyone who doesn't get Reliable Talent or something similar (I think one Bard subclass gets it for social skills), this is a game-changer. With DMs who don't cheat the designed system and make a 1 fail skill rolls it means Rogues can, like casters, kind of "assert fiction" on lower DC skill checks - checks the DM would definitely want to roll on another PC!

Spells can do a lot, but they are limited both by the number known/prepared and by spell slots, and when it comes to high level spells you are pretty much restricted to 1 slot per day.

If the playtest Wizard goes live, the "prepared" angle for Wizards is effectively removed with the specific kinds of spells that compete with Rogues and other skill users. Let's hope that doesn't happen. Also, being realistic - it's relatively rare to see this be a major issue - it's not that skills don't get used, but if you have to succeed at something, you use a spell. Reliable Talent is the only ability in the game that really challenges that. But what it means is that before the level where Rogues get it, they're not particularly notably good at skills, nor "versatile" - especially as more classes are now getting Expertise.

They also lack versatility in combat - they're sorta okay at damaging one guy per round and they have reasonable but not stunning mobility. They can't deal significant damage to multiple enemies. They can't survive multiple attackers. At least the playtest lets them inflict some conditions, albeit at the cost of doing even less damage.

We can certainly say this - the playtest Rogue, if it goes live, will be more versatile than the current Rogue.

(As an aside Reliable Talent is genuinely pretty great, but the biggest obstacle it faces is DMs who don't quite "get" it - i.e. DMs who want a 1 to always fail, so make you still fail on a 1 after Reliable Talent, even though the ability specifies 1-9 counting at 10, or more insidiously, DMs who just "devalue" it, and don't see a check pass achieved that was as "as good" as one rolled "correctly", or who just start using higher DCs as soon as Reliable Talent comes online. I don't think it's conscious malice or the like, but there are certainly DMs out there who are "oppositional" to Reliable Talent, even if they've never consciously thought "I don't like this ability". You saw some similarly oppositional behaviour re: Take 10 and Take 20 in 3.XE/PF1, I note. Personally I don't quite get it, but I've seen it in action.)

 

[ECMO3]

That's only possible below high level if you didn't have a STR character with Athletics, let alone any other bonuses to grappling. The math is very simple.

Which is common.

A Rogue with an 8 strength starts at +3 with expertise at 1st level, which is pretty darn good, better than the vast majority of enemies you are going to face. That goes to +5 at 5th level and +7 at 9th.

Sure a strength based martial with athletics will be just about as good or better until high level ... if you have one in the party, which is not uncommon, but is not universal either.

So at level 9, when the Proficiency bonus increases again, you're still worse than a generic STR character who didn't take Expertise.

But the thing is you are doing this with an 8 strength and still able to do it effectively. You are also better than all the dex-based Fighters, even if they did take athletics

How many partys have a strength based martial at all? Probably about 50%.

No, it doesn't. It simply mathematically doesn't. This is a false claim. They generally have lower totals than other PCs in non-DEX skills unless they take Expertise, in which case if they have a positive stat they can narrow pip them at the post, but it rarely makes sense to do so.

Not IME. Most of the Rogues I play start with a 16+ in either Wisdom or Charisma, and as often as not a 13-14 in the one of those that is not a 16.

On top of this, they have both more skill proficiencies and better skill choices than most of the Wisdom or Charisma classes.

Warlocks don't have Persuasion on their skill tree, Paladins don't have Deception. Clerics and Druids don't have perception.

Also keep in mind Rogues get an extra ASI as well.

They can get it from a Background, and given Custom Backgrounds are intended to be the norm (word of god from WotC themselves), that's just an irrelevance. It's literally disingenuous. This isn't BG3.

If they want to do that, but that is not without consequences; especially roll play consequences.

I'm not saying they can't get perception, they can but usually they are behind both the Rogue and the Ranger in these skills. More often than not a Cleric or Druid is just going to rely on their wisdom as being "good enough"

Even with lower stats, like say, a +2 CHA, and mere Proficiency in Persuasion, you're hitting DC15 100% of the time, which the Bard with Expertise in Persuasion and +4 CHA cannot say - with +4 +6, the Bard still need to roll an 5 or above - a 20% outright failure chance compared to your 0%.

But unless you got really bad rolls, why would you play a Rogue with only a +2 if you wanted to be good at Persuasion.

You put your scores where you want to put them.

Also a Bard is going to generally be better than a Rogue at these, but other Charisma classes won't be.

If the playtest Wizard goes live, the "prepared" angle for Wizards is effectively removed with the specific kinds of spells that compete with Rogues and other skill users. Let's hope that doesn't happen. Also, being realistic - it's relatively rare to see this be a major issue - it's not that skills don't get used, but if you have to succeed at something, you use a spell. Reliable Talent is the only ability in the game that really challenges that. But what it means is that before the level where Rogues get it, they're not particularly notably good at skills, nor "versatile" - especially as more classes are now getting Expertise.

I think it is relatively rare for a Wizard to have spells prepared to consistently compete with the Rogue out of combat.

This is especially true at high levels, where the number of prepared spells becomes a serious limfac. Sure knock is great at unlocking doors, but I have never seen a 10th level Wizard with it prepared. Likewise Suggestion and Detect Thoughts is awesome out of combat, but at 10th level I've only seen those prepared on enchantment Wizards and characters who took Telepathic feat respectively.

Disguise Self can be awesome out of combat, but unless it is a racial spell, again I don't see it prepared on high-level casters.

Low level casters often have one or two of these kinds of spells, but they don't have excess slots to use them often.

They also lack versatility in combat - they're sorta okay at damaging one guy per round and they have reasonable but not stunning mobility. They can't deal significant damage to multiple enemies. They can't survive multiple attackers. At least the playtest lets them inflict some conditions, albeit at the cost of doing even less damage.

Arcane Tricksters and Thiefs are two of the most versatile characters I have played in combat.

Mage Hand Legerdemain or fast hands are freaking awesome in combat. Use it to steal an enemies spell focus or component pouch and now he can't cast spells with a material component. Use oil or holy water or caltrops or tie a rope around an enemies ankle or a host of other things.

I had a Glasya Tiefling Arcane Trickster who played combat like she was Kevin from the movie home alone, doing all sorts of things with her Mage hand, her Raven familiar and Illusions. She also had a 20 Charisma, Hex through Fey Touched (for disadvantage on intelligence or wisdom checks) and expertise in Deception.

 

[Mistwell]

This really depends on the build, and in particular their ability scores. Rogue as a class is very SAD relying only on Dexterity, and without need for a high Constitution like other martials. This enables Rogues to boost other abilities more easily than other classes, and this translates to higher skills across the board. The extra ASI helps in this regard too.




I disagree with this. Expertise makes up a ton of ground, I've played Rogues with an 8 strength who are the best grapplers in the party.

Clerics and Druids don't have Perception on their skill list, so it is not true to assume they will be better at this than a Rogue. A Rogue or Ranger will usually have the highest passive perception in the party IME. Not always, but usually, and that is before we consider Reliable Talent.

A Rogue can usually play with either a good Charisma or a good Wisdom and that combined with Reliable Talent and Expertise means they will generally be better than most other classes at what they choose to be good at.

Spells can do a lot, but they are limited both by the number known/prepared and by spell slots, and when it comes to high level spells you are pretty much restricted to 1 slot per day.

This is my experience as well. Our rogue has the highest perception and also a low strength but took athletics proficiency and expertise in athletics and are exceptionally good at it.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

How many partys have a strength based martial at all? Probably about 50%.

That's a wild asspull of a figure.

I don't believe it for one second. In my personal experience, if there are four or more party members, the chances of one of them being a STR based martial approaches 100%. Looking at Let's Plays and podcasts and Twitch and so on, it's probably like 95%+ but to be fair most of those involve 5+ people groups.

It's certainly a lot higher than 50% though, that's just something I don't think even you believe.

On top of this, they have both more skill proficiencies and better skill choices than most of the Wisdom or Charisma classes.

Warlocks don't have Persuasion on their skill tree, Paladins don't have Deception. Clerics and Druids don't have perception.

Rogues only get 2 more Skill proficiencies than other classes, you know that right?

Also you keep making this truly meaningless point about "not in their skill list", which is just irrelevant because of custom backgrounds. I've literally never seen a high-WIS character who didn't have Perception, either from their background or race.

But unless you got really bad rolls, why would you play a Rogue with only a +2 if you wanted to be good at Persuasion.

I think you've totally misunderstood the point.

My point is even with low investment, Reliable Talent makes the Rogue better than Bard. You seem to be reading it the other way around, but I haven't made a typo or ADHD error, so that's on you.

I'm not saying they can't get perception, they can but usually they are behind both the Rogue and the Ranger in these skills.

No.

This is mathematically false. They will almost always be ahead. Wisdom is, at best, the third pick for a Ranger (STR or DEX, CON, then WIS). It is at best the second pick for a Rogue with a deathwish. It is the first pick for a Cleric or Druid, and it is trivial to pick up Perception from background or race with either.

The "usually" here is totally false.

I think it is relatively rare for a Wizard to have spells prepared to consistently compete with the Rogue out of combat.

As I said, the Wizard will have the spells prepared needed for the "serious" situations, whereas the Rogue and other skill classes will be allowed to deal with situations where failure IS an option. This is a bit sad, especially as Reliable Talent lets the Rogue also not fail (unless DMs mess with it).
Otherwise you seem to be missing the point, and also avoiding the issue that the last time we saw the Wizard in the playtest, it no longer needed to prepare ANY utility spell you could wait a few minutes for (which is 95% of them). Really hoping that gets nerfed.

Mage Hand Legerdemain or fast hands are freaking awesome in combat. Use it to steal an enemies spell focus or component pouch and now he can't cast spells with a material component. Use oil or holy water or caltrops or tie a rope around an enemies ankle or a host of other things.

I had a Glasya Tiefling Arcane Trickster who played combat like she was Kevin from the movie home alone, doing all sorts of things with her Mage hand, her Raven familiar and Illusions. She also had a 20 Charisma, Hex through Fey Touched (for disadvantage on intelligence or wisdom checks) and expertise in Deception.

This is 100% DM Fiat. None of this is rules-supported, and it's absolutely down to you having a very generous DM who liked what you were doing. Some of it is explicitly against the rules - tying a rope around someone's foot in combat has to be an attack, for god's sake, and Mage Hand cannot attack!

Furthermore, most of this could be done by any PC who had Mage Hand (Legerdemain doesn't really help here, with the exception of stealing a spell component pouch - stealing a spell focus would be impossible in combat, that's got to be an attack - even then very few enemy casters use spells requiring components), which, I should note, is a cantrip not a Rogue ability, so really supports my point about Rogues NOT being versatile because you have to rely on having a cantrip!

I'm sure you had a good time with that PC and the kindly DM you played with, but that doesn't make Rogues themselves versatile. It means cantrips and spells + a very generous DM = a good time.

 

[tetrasodium]

That's a wild asspull of a figure.

I don't believe it for one second. In my personal experience, if there are four or more party members, the chances of one of them being a STR based martial approaches 100%. Looking at Let's Plays and podcasts and Twitch and so on, it's probably like 95%+ but to be fair most of those involve 5+ people groups.

It's certainly a lot higher than 50% though, that's just something I don't think even you believe.

Rogues only get 2 more Skill proficiencies than other classes, you know that right?

Also you keep making this truly meaningless point about "not in their skill list", which is just irrelevant because of custom backgrounds. I've literally never seen a high-WIS character who didn't have Perception, either from their background or race.

I think you've totally misunderstood the point.

My point is even with low investment, Reliable Talent makes the Rogue better than Bard. You seem to be reading it the other way around, but I haven't made a typo or ADHD error, so that's on you.

No.

This is mathematically false. They will almost always be ahead. Wisdom is, at best, the third pick for a Ranger (STR or DEX, CON, then WIS). It is at best the second pick for a Rogue with a deathwish. It is the first pick for a Cleric or Druid, and it is trivial to pick up Perception from background or race with either.

The "usually" here is totally false.

As I said, the Wizard will have the spells prepared needed for the "serious" situations, whereas the Rogue and other skill classes will be allowed to deal with situations where failure IS an option. This is a bit sad, especially as Reliable Talent lets the Rogue also not fail (unless DMs mess with it).
Otherwise you seem to be missing the point, and also avoiding the issue that the last time we saw the Wizard in the playtest, it no longer needed to prepare ANY utility spell you could wait a few minutes for (which is 95% of them). Really hoping that gets nerfed.

This is 100% DM Fiat. None of this is rules-supported, and it's absolutely down to you having a very generous DM who liked what you were doing. Some of it is explicitly against the rules - tying a rope around someone's foot in combat has to be an attack, for god's sake, and Mage Hand cannot attack!

Furthermore, most of this could be done by any PC who had Mage Hand (Legerdemain doesn't really help here, with the exception of stealing a spell component pouch - stealing a spell focus would be impossible in combat, that's got to be an attack - even then very few enemy casters use spells requiring components), which, I should note, is a cantrip not a Rogue ability, so really supports my point about Rogues NOT being versatile because you have to rely on having a cantrip!

I'm sure you had a good time with that PC and the kindly DM you played with, but that doesn't make Rogues themselves versatile. It means cantrips and spells + a very generous DM = a good time.

I agree with all of this and will add that I don't like the way that spell swap thing pressures the wizard to take a bunch of possibly useful niche and edge case spells rather than daily driver regularly useful spells while still having a spell list almost entirely available to the other arcane classes who add noteworthy class features on top of spells

 

[ECMO3]

That's a wild asspull of a figure.

I don't believe it for one second. In my personal experience, if there are four or more party members, the chances of one of them being a STR based martial approaches 100%. Looking at Let's Plays and podcasts and Twitch and so on, it's probably like 95%+ but to be fair most of those involve 5+ people groups.

It's certainly a lot higher than 50% though, that's just something I don't think even you believe.

IME most partys are 4 or 5 players. If we are talking about a Rogue being in the party already that leaves 3-4 other characters split between 12 classes.

I think it is unlikely that you have more than one other martial if you already have a Rogue and more martials are Dex-based than are strength based. Finally, a fair number of parties dispense with actual martials for melee altogether and use Bladesingers or Hexblades as their melee characters.

The last three 1-20 campaigns I completed had the following makeup (with the melee characters in bold and my PCs in red):

Rogue, Sorlock, Wizard (Bladesinger), Fighter (dex)
Monk, Druid, Bard/Warlock, Ranger
Fighter (strength), Rogue/Fighter (strength), Druid, Sorlock, Artificer

Current campaigns I am playing in:

Wizard, Paladin (strength), Barbarian (strength), Druid, Rogue - currently 9th level
Wizard, Monk, Rogue, Rogue/Bard - currently 3rd level

So yeah, when it comes to partys with a Rogue, I think about 50% is a pretty good guess that also have a strength-based martial who is proficient in Athletics.

Rogues only get 2 more Skill proficiencies than other classes, you know that right?

Yes, or another way to put it is they get twice as many proficiencies through class as most classes do. They also have the best list of skills except for Bard.

Also you keep making this truly meaningless point about "not in their skill list", which is just irrelevant because of custom backgrounds.

You realize that you can only 2 proficiencies through a custom background right?

I've literally never seen a high-WIS character who didn't have Perception, either from their background or race.

So I guess you have never seen a Cleric with the Acolyte background or a Druid with a hermit backgroun? Pick up the starter set and look at the pregrenerated characters you will find one.

A lot of Clerics have perception, but it is not universal and a lot of players (a majority) will want to play a background (custom or not) which fits their character idea.

If it is a matter of just picking skills, and you want Perception, you are right it is easy to get, but that is not how most people play when it comes to selecting a race and background.

This is mathematically false. They will almost always be ahead. Wisdom is, at best, the third pick for a Ranger (STR or DEX, CON, then WIS). It is at best the second pick for a Rogue with a deathwish. It is the first pick for a Cleric or Druid, and it is trivial to pick up Perception from background or race with either.

This is absolutely not true.

Wisdom is #2 at worst on every Ranger I can remember seeing played and a fair amount have Wisdom as #1. I play more Rangers than any other class, and when I play a Ranger with average rolls I usually play with a 10 or 12 Constitution. I usually play a Fey Wanderer and I am usually going Wisdom-Dex-Charisma as my top 3 abilities, in that order. Usually I am keeping a 16 Dex until my Wisdom is 20, but I have also played with a 14 Dex.

Usually Charisma is my second stat with a Rogue and Wisdom my 3rd, but sometimes those are reversed and sometimes I will take Intelligence as one of them. In any case Constitution is 5th and Strength is 6th.

Finally it is not mathematically false. It is false to say that Clerics always have perception proficiency. That is factually untrue.

Players overvalue Constitution, is generally the most worthless stat in the game and if you are trying to build a character good at skills putting anything above a 10 in Cosntitution is a MATHEMATICALLY the worst stat to invest in when it comes to having good skills. If you are running around playing Rogues and Rangers with average rolls and dedicate 14+ Constitution, that explains why your Rogues and Rangers are not good at skills. With average rolls my Rogues are going to have a 10 Con and my Rangers a 10 or a 12.

The "usually" here is totally false.

It is totally true.

This is 100% DM Fiat. None of this is rules-supported, and it's absolutely down to you having a very generous DM who liked what you were doing. Some of it is explicitly against the rules - tying a rope around someone's foot in combat has to be an attack, for god's sake, and Mage Hand cannot attack!

It is all rules supported.

Tying a rope around someone's foot is not an attack. You can argue it is improvise an action, but there are no rules for making an attack to tie off a rope and would not logically be an attack. There are also manacles which are an object and would clearly be "use an object" action to apply, it would seem to me tying a rope is similar.

The mage hand spell says in it explicitly that it can "pour out the contents of a vial"

Minor Illusion is a spell with specific rules around it and requiring an action to investigate.

Almost all of this is covered in the rules.

Furthermore, most of this could be done by any PC who had Mage Hand (Legerdemain doesn't really help here, with the exception of stealing a spell component pouch - stealing a spell focus would be impossible in combat, that's got to be an attack - even then very few enemy casters use spells requiring components), which, I should note, is a cantrip not a Rogue ability, so really supports my point about Rogues NOT being versatile because you have to rely on having a cantrip!

Not true. Some of this comes explicitly from MHL which provides for additional things you can do with the hand beyond what is detailed in the spell. Specifically, the following comes from the AT subclass and MHL:

"You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature."

That is not explicitly doable with the basic Mage Hand. If the enemy is carrying or wearing his focus, RAW you can take it. DM fiat can overule that, but this is DM fiat overuling RAW.

Also, MHL is a bonus action allowing you do also do an action (or use the mage hand twice).

 

[tetrasodium]

IME most partys are 4 or 5 players. If we are talking about a Rogue being in the party already that leaves 3-4 other characters split between 12 classes.

I think it is unlikely that you have more than one other martial if you already have a Rogue and more martials are Dex-based than are strength based. Finally, a fair number of parties dispense with actual martials for melee altogether and use Bladesingers or Hexblades as their melee characters.

The last 3 1-20 campaigns I completed had the following makeup (with the melee characters in bold and my PCs in red):

Rogue, Sorlock, Wizard (Bladesinger), Fighter (dex)
Monk, Druid, Bard/Warlock, Ranger
Fighter (strength), Rogue/Fighter (strength), Druid, Sorlock, Artificer

Current campaigns I am playing in:

Wizard, Paladin (strength), Barbarian (strength), Druid, Rogue - currently 9th level
Wizard, Monk, Rogue, Rogue/Bard

So yeah, when it comes to partys with a Rogue, I think about 50% is a pretty good guess that also have strength-based martial who is also proficient in Athletics.



Yes, or another way to put it is they get twice as many proficiencies through class as most classes do. They also have the best list of skills except for Bard.


You realize that you can only 2 proficiencies through a custom background right?



So I guess you have never seen a Cleric with the Acolyte background or a Druid with a hermit backgroun? Pick up the starter set and look at the pregrenerated characters you will find one.

A lot of Clerics have perception, but it is not universal and a lot of players (a majority) will want to play a background (custom or not) which fits their character idea.

If it is a matter of just picking skills, and you want Perception, you are right it is easy to get, but that is not how most people play when it comes to selecting a race and background.



This is absolutely not true.

Wisdom is #2 at worst on every Ranger I can remember seeing played and a fair amount have Wisdom as #1. I play more Rangers than any other class, and when I play a Ranger with average rolls I usually play with a 10 or 12 Constitution. I usually play a Fey Wanderer and I am usually going Wisdom-Dex-Charisma as my top 3 abilities, in that order. Usually I am keeping a 16 Dex until my Wisdom is 20, but I have also played with a 14 Dex.

Usually Charisma is my second stat with a Rogue and Wisdom my 3rd, but sometimes those are reversed and sometimes I will take Intelligence as one of them. In any case Constitution is 5th and Strength is 6th.

Finally it is not mathematically false. It is false to say that Clerics always have perception proficiency. That is factually untrue.

Players overvalue Constitution, is generally the most worthless stat in the game and if you are trying to build a character good at skills putting anything above a 10 in Cosntitution is a MATHEMATICALLY the worst stat to invest in when it comes to having good skills. If you are running around playing Rogues and Rangers with average rolls and dedicate 14+ Constitution, that explains why your Rogues and Rangers are not good at skills. With average rolls my Rogues are going to have a 10 Con and my Rangers a 10 or a 12.




It is totally true.



It is all rules supported.

Tying a rope around someone's foot is not an attack. You can argue it is improvise an action, but there are no rules for making an attack to tie off a rope and would not logically be an attack. There are also manacles which are an object and would clearly be "use an object" action to apply, it would seem to me tying a rope is similar.

The mage hand spell says in it explicitly that it can "pour out the contents of a vial"

Minor Illusion is a spell with specific rules around it and requiring an action to investigate.




not true. Some of this comes explicitly from MHL. This comes from MHL:

• You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature.

If the enemy is carrying or wearing his focus, RAW you can take it period. DM fiat can overule that, but this is DM fiat overuling RAW.

That is not explicitly doable with the basic Mage Hand. Also, MHL is a bonus action allowing you do also do an action (or use the mage hand twice).

Strength based fighter barbarian or paladin PCs generally makes up like 30-50% of players at my tables(both AL and regular)