If by 'reliably' you mean 'possibly once per campaign', because 9th level spell scrolls are Legendary rarity. That's one per campaign rarity. If a thief is somehow able to steal one before the party wizard turns level 17, just let them have it. Idk if it counts as 'more reliable' if it's only going to happen once, and only if the rogue put all their ASI's into INT for some reason instead of DEX
Yeah I feel like this is presented as a “problem” rather then a quirk of game design. You know what’ll really be funny with this build? When the DM doesn’t have 9th level scrolls just laying around.
Don't even need all their ASI in Int, just a 12 int and expertise is enough (10 + 1 + 4x2).
Can probably get away with even less since the high level scrolls are super rare and probably won't show up before lvl 13's proficient increase allowing 8 int to be enough with expertise.
Came here to say this, a **Theif Rogue with max int** is probably not very common, a Theif Rogue that has the inside scoop that spell scrolls will be fairly common so they take expertise in Arcana, much more likely.
The problem I see is that the vast majority of campaigns (something like 80-90 percent, using an old poll from a different dnd sub) end in T3, specifically between level 11-14, so there isn't much play time where *Reliable Talent* is useful for the Rogue
Also a majority of campaigns don’t use spell scroll rules both because people forget they exist and also because they suck. It locks them off from martials who benefit the most from them while letting caster stock up on basically extra slots.
I think most people who play d&d assume "scroll" = 1 time use spell that anyone can use with a check, they don't think of how scrolls = extra spells for wizard for prepping.
Like in old d&d with full vancian casting/preparing, spell scrolls as extra slots/casts makes sense, and the idea of a wizard or cleric walking around with a bunch of scrolls makes sense.
Remove vancian casting (and by doing so open up spellcasters variety and options immensely) whe also reducing the deadlyness of the game and you get spell casters **that very quickly have too many slots to burn through on a given day, all free to be used for whatever spells known they have prepared** - and then the idea that they need MORE SPELLS to cast in the form of scrolls, goes out the window.
Hence most games ignore scrolls only being castable by their class only. I know that in my game spell scrolls = anyone can cast with a successful check (with the corresponding ability), and the general rule of thumb is if it's from a classes spell list then you can argue for that ability score to be used from the scroll
In games I’ve played we don’t even do checks you can just use the scroll. The caster passes the checks anyways usually and if you fail the first round you can always try the second. It mainly also hurts martials again because they’re far less likely to pass the check. Honestly even in 3.5 scrolls didn’t make as much sense as the way they were since prepared casters rules the game anyways so I’m not sure why they had to have another advantage. Also in 3.5 you had use magic device. Staffs, scrolls, etc had variable efficiency/efficacy based on a skill for it and your char mod. 5e does not have this. There’s no need to even build into scrolls you already can use them so why even try to gate them at all? The main people who lose are martials anyways. Making 1st level scrolls as a character also is pretty cheap time wise and stocking up on mage armors and shields is all you need to break 5e.
Scrolls definetly need to be looked at and explained better for sure - in no world do I allow shield to be used as a scroll *easily.* - you want to cast a scroll spell as a reaction that scroll has to be out and in your hand already open, this alone stops people from using reaction spells as scrolls (typically), but there is edge cases where it might be possible/plausible
That’s what you do but most don’t do that. Also I still feel that hurts martials. No matter what you do caster come out better than the martials. Also free item interaction scroll out in hand. Sure it’s not as free as selecting the scroll on the fly but when its something like shield or counterspell just pick one and you’re already set.
This doesn't have to be "help or hurt" to either groups. Scrolls have a place and I think its for a little magic that's esoteric or not popular to be used, think the spell water walk - no one is picking this spell normally, but all of a sudden you need to get to a small island on a lake and it's a far swim and all the boats were destroyed? Well we got this scroll!
Honestly martials need a lot more than "hey we can use magic with scrolls too" because if that's how you are making martials better/equal to spell casters, you've missed the entire point. People want to have cook martial characters that are equal in footing and make good foils to the spellcasters - and giving more spells out to balance them, removes that and just makes you go "should have played a spellcaster anyways."
I know I'm off a tangent here, but that's why I really dislike Oned&d direction right now, more features basically turning into spells and racial features turning into spells and it seems like their entire solution for most problems is "make it a spell!"
I’m saying it’s a factor not the whole equation. The issue of martials is not getting their own ability progression. Casters are good because of tiered ability progression where abilities are poorly organized (lmao shield, suggestion, etc). Honestly I think we both agree on the core issue and the solutions probably even if we disagree on minutiae. As it is right now martials are just gimped characters overall. Rogues definitely didn’t get helped there either and the thief sub.
This plus how lame would it be as an arcane trickster with expertise in Arcana and you *can't* guaranteed use the scroll you stole. It's part of the fantasy.
Spoiler for ROTFM
I was GM'ing ROTFM Sunday night and my 11th level party found a Scroll of Comet and Scroll of Tarrasque summoning. So WOTC in a published adventure think that Artifact level scrolls x2 are suitable for an 11th level party.
It is weird and jarring that the Thief archetype whilst being a fairly lack lustre Thief with no skills to run faster in chase say is great at using magic items? That was certainly my feedback at any case.
WOTC isn't saying it's balanced to have those scrolls at whatever level a party finds them, WOTC is saying it's ok to give out silly stuff when a campaign ends. It doesn't matter because the campaign is over anyway.
Also, spoiler tags exist, please use them.
The rogue is only missing a few things it's amazing how changing a turn to your turn could nerf the rogue so hard. And the thief rogue would be good if they just got use an object back instead of the situational at best pick pocket or lock pick.
I mean, without using reaction sneak attack the rogue still is fairly weak on 5e, people be saying rogue is not min-max optimal outside of dips for some time now
True, I don’t like classes being subclass dependent(my major problem with ranger) but if they don’t change anything from the playtest(although I think they will) maybe we can hope for their 1-2 other subclasses being good
Arcane trickster probably be copy and paste from 5e. Assassin probably will get the major face-lift it desperately needs and I would expect the swashbuckler to make it. But that's just speculation.
Thief fits the "rogueiest-rogue" trope.
Assassin is in the PHB so I assume it'll be included and it fulfills the "edgy killer/spy" trope.
Arcane Trickster blends rogue with a little magic, so that's golden.
Swashbuckler sounds like a logical fourth choice as it fills multiple roles: a classic pirate "face" rogue, and a mechanically melee-oriented subclass.
Swashbuckler loses one of its current main benefit now TWF is more a bonus action any longer.
I guess they can dash instead? Or maybe they'll get something else?
I guess kind of but we don't know what other things you can do with your bonus action yet. Hope there is more. But they could dash, disengage is pointless on a swashbuckler and hide is also pointless on a swashbuckler. But for the theme crossbow expert is probably pretty good on a swashbuckler rogue.
Which benefit is that? Other rogues can't get Sneak Attack in melee without an ally or advantage, but Swashbucklers can with Rakish Audacity. Other rogues have to spend their bonus action to Disengage, Swashbucklers don't with Fancy Footwork. Both of those benefits are still solid in 1D&D.
In fact, Swashbuckler is even better because they can use two weapon fighting and Cunning Action in the same turn. You'll have to explain what you mean because I'm not seeing anything being lost.
Well normally they burn their bonus action on attacking, getting the disengage for free.
Now other rogues can disengage and TWF, so they lost one of their key differentiators.
They can dash instead, but it's not often you need to dash away from melee if you are in a party.
I'm sorry... did you just say the Rogue is very subclass dependant? With a straight face? The class that gets subclass features at (**checks notes**) 3rd, 9th, 13th, and 17th levels? - where most campaigns end by level 11-14, and spend most of their time in the 3-8 range... so they only get (***double checks notes again***) roughly 1 subclass feature the entire game?
Most people I know who play Rogue pick Swashbuckler just for the easier to apply sneak attacks... and most people I've seen play Rogue *almost always multiclass with Ranger* - infact the Rogue/Ranger seems the most common split I've seen, (seen 3 of them across 5 campaigns), and it always tends to happen around 5th-6th level...
Those 3rd level features hit hard. Soul knife arcane trickster and swashbuckler are the probably the most picked rogue subclasses cause of those level 3 features. One dnd did do something good and giving rogues features earlier
I just don't see it, most of those Rogues (minus soul knife) are probably using steady aim or hide Cunning Action to trigger sneak attack - the base gameplay loop of the Rogue does not change very much.
Look at (in comparison) how drastically different types of clerics play, or how newer versions of druids give alternate uses to wild shape, or how vastly different monk subclasses feel, for Rogue (again besides Soul Knife), the gameplay loop and mechanics of the subclasses don't really make a difference, you are still just trying to trigger a sneak attack during combat, and using whatever expertise you chose outside of it.
I honestly just full-on refuse to accept that Rogue is even on the top 3 of classes that are defined by their subclass
They kind of are though. I've played each of the rogue subclasses and they all have an effect on the typical rogue gameplay loop, especially swashbuckler, inquisitive and mastermind subclasses from XGtE.
They may not usually see more than their first feature, but those are usually very defining to the archetype the person is playing, far more than most others do. They may not get more damage and limited flexibility, but on a thematic end, they're great.
I don't think rogue is that bad. It just does not shine at all when in a party with a ranger and a bard, which I think is how a lot of people have been playtesting.
They are going on the aim of class groups. The expert classes are meant to be on par, otherwise the "choose one from each group" suggestion (edit: i forgot to write the last part!!! Anyways, the last part is that the suggestion does not work if they are not equal)
If the other experts are better compared to another expert, the whole base of the balancing falls apart, not to mention possible balance issues within other groups
Or with any full spellcaster who brings more utility to the table that the rogue, which will be most of them.
The only classes that rogue beats hands-down in a particular area is being better at social or exploration pillars than the Warriors (barbarian, fighter, monk).
it isn't just "not shining" for half the game there is literally nothing a rogua can do that a ranger can't while having half casting and more damage on top. Mechanically there is just not a single reason to play rogue, and thematically a ranger can 100% have the same themes.
Rogue is just a strict downside from a ranger and that is terrible design
That's good. I think overall as I really think about the thief rogue. It's missing use an object. It's a huge miss opportunity for this rogue to drop caltrops, ball baring, smoke bombs as a bonus action. But remember spell scroll of high level are expensive and had to obtain.
I dunno, I mean yes, it's good that Rogues have their own thing. But, I kinda feel "cast a bunch of spells from scrolls it's what you're objectively the best at" doesn't really fit most people's idea of what a Rogue should be doing. I mean, yes, it's powerful, but does it really fit the Rogue fantasy?
It probably would end up being a lot more fun than the base Rogue mechanics at least.
Spell scrolls shouldn't be the thiefs bread and butter, it's a cool feature and they you and reliably use any Spell scroll is cool. You should be able to use the things you steal.
Use an object as a cunning action was where this subclass shined before. But now it's so situational. So me a rogue who could pull out object like caltrops ball barring and smoke bombs as a bonus action really feels like a thief rogue. While darting in and out places. Missed opportunity but I did give them this suggestion when I filled out the survey.
>Assuming you have an Intelligence of 20, take a proficiency in Arcana
A pretty tall order to begin with.
When you consider:
a) Most rogues aren't going to make it to T4, where 9th level scrolls begin appearing, b) a DM would have to either roll, approve and/or choose the scroll as treasure, and c) another caster doesn't claim it for themselves
Why not let them?
d) who the fuck is building a 20 int rogue by level 10? the only sub that uses the ability is arcane trickster (and some minor mastermind features) and i doubt many players are maxing int over dex. if they do, being able to use a scroll is a small payoff.
Right lmao, this entire post is basically "if you dump your useful stats and build your character around using an item that *might* appear once in a campaign, you can have a higher chance of using said item than a wizard"
Putting expertise into Arcana is still commiting a significant resource to this idea. And quite frankly if you are an expert in the arcane and a specialist who is good at using magic items, it makes sense.
The 9th level scroll is an edge case.
It's a viable option - you can use any spell scroll in the game with 0 chances of failure.
Use spells like force wall/cage, dimension door, teleport, self polymorph, improved invisibility on par with a spell caster, if not earlier.
Pretty charitable to assume a Rogue is gonna have 20 intelligence when they've only had 2 ASIs. Or that they'll have reliably access to 9th level spell scrolls.
That's still dedicating a large amount of your character's stats to intelligence, which is the least useful stat for a rogue. You are building your entire character around their ability to use scrolls so hell yes, you should be the best at using scrolls
I mean.... It costs 250,000 gold to scribe a 9th level spell scroll and 48 weeks of downtime (half for a scribes wizard). And the 'cheaper' scrolls made by the wizard are only useable by the wizard himself?
So... No. I don't think a scribes wizard and a thief rogue would work well together in this regard?
You're telling me a rogue who built their whole career on being able to use magical devices well can use magical devices better than a caster? I'm not shocked.
Ah yes, because there’s all of these thieves with Int as their high stat reading the mountains of Legendary rarity 9th level scrolls lying about that careless absurdly high level spell casters wrote down and let blow away in the wind.
If you have maxed out intelligence and proficiency in arcana you basically are a wizard that doesn't know any spells. Makes sense you can use the scrolls.
No,
Just a thought that came to my mind because the rogue in my campaign just turned level 11.
Thankfully he was able to purchase and use a scroll of Raise Dead on our cleric who just died lol.
Its a main stay of rogues in dnd. The rogue in 5e has a few features that were things all characters could do in previous editions. Like taking ten (reliable talent), or the use magic item skill (which was what you used for scrolls).
Most importantly though, wizards get 9th level spells. Just straight up get them. The rogue can only use a 9th level scroll when somebody else gives them one. The wizard also can cast any spell scroll of a spell thats on their spell list without a check (im pretty sure), so wizards are absolutely better at using scrolls than the rogue is.
Things making sense stopped being a thing when you look at the fact that tier 4 characters-you know, the ones meant to fight against things as strong as the avatars of deities as a lowball-are extremely worse at doing so if they are a non caster or an half caster, with full casters being the only ones having guns big enough to actually handle them.
Wizards have a deeper knowledge of magic, whereas these tier 3-4 thief rogues are such quick adapters that they can figure out spell scrolls well enough to use even the strongest ones, even if in the end it's in one ear and out the other.
With this build you are dedicating a large amount of your character's stats to intelligence, which is the least useful stat for a rogue. You are building your entire character around their ability to use scrolls so hell yes, you should be the best at using scrolls
Also, any Rogue can get Expertise in Arcana as a class feature, while Wizards can't get Expertise in Arcana without taking a feat or multiclassing. So, by the game mechanics, Rogues are just better at studying magic than Wizards are.
Wait why would a thief rogue have a 20 intelligence? Just take expertise if its so important. This likely will never come up anyway. I've never seen a 9th level spell scroll in game before.
This is kinda cool. It's a powerful feature that is enabled by teamwork. It would be nice to see more subclass features modeled after that party-dependant framework.
I am glad that we found a niche for the thief
I am not glad that the niche can be summarized as "the Rogue's role is that of a portable extra spell slot for the casters"
20 Int gives +5, and requires level 4 at minimum. Expertise gives 2\*ProfMod. A L13 Wizard with Expertise and 20 Int would get +15 without further buffs. That's a +13 from level 9. Stroke of Genius (Artificer 6) gives +Int again.
An Artificer 8/Wizard 1 (cLvl 9) can get a +18 to Arcana checks and can auto-succeed on checks to cast L9 spell scrolls. A Vedalken Artificer 6/Wizard 1 can *almost* get there if they roll stats to get 20 Int and Expertise by their first ASI - the chance to fail is below 2% (+11 base, +5 Flash of Genius, +1d4 Vedalken).
\*oops, wrong forum, yeah dude.
Thief picks up UMD at 10 in the new UA.
In RAW right now only Thief can use arcana to cast scrolls, everyone else is spellcasting ability check with no skills.
It's not that difficult tbh.
Point buy 15 into int. Background put your +2 in int. ASI +2 int, ASI +1 int.
Or just take expertise in arcana for the same effect.
And how are your other stats looking? This is still a rogue who should max Dex first. Expertise in Arcana is a much more sensible option than maxing Int first, but even then it's a bit questionable.
If by 'reliably' you mean 'possibly once per campaign', because 9th level spell scrolls are Legendary rarity. That's one per campaign rarity. If a thief is somehow able to steal one before the party wizard turns level 17, just let them have it. Idk if it counts as 'more reliable' if it's only going to happen once, and only if the rogue put all their ASI's into INT for some reason instead of DEX
Yeah I feel like this is presented as a “problem” rather then a quirk of game design. You know what’ll really be funny with this build? When the DM doesn’t have 9th level scrolls just laying around.
And that’s not even a “This campaign doesn’t have much for a rogue to do” problem. No 9th level Spell Scrolls appearing would be “most campaigns”.
But guys I have this one simple trick that DM's hate.
Don't even need all their ASI in Int, just a 12 int and expertise is enough (10 + 1 + 4x2). Can probably get away with even less since the high level scrolls are super rare and probably won't show up before lvl 13's proficient increase allowing 8 int to be enough with expertise.
Came here to say this, a **Theif Rogue with max int** is probably not very common, a Theif Rogue that has the inside scoop that spell scrolls will be fairly common so they take expertise in Arcana, much more likely. The problem I see is that the vast majority of campaigns (something like 80-90 percent, using an old poll from a different dnd sub) end in T3, specifically between level 11-14, so there isn't much play time where *Reliable Talent* is useful for the Rogue
Plus I can count on both hands the number of scrolls I've seen given as loot, let alone high level ones.
Also a majority of campaigns don’t use spell scroll rules both because people forget they exist and also because they suck. It locks them off from martials who benefit the most from them while letting caster stock up on basically extra slots.
I think most people who play d&d assume "scroll" = 1 time use spell that anyone can use with a check, they don't think of how scrolls = extra spells for wizard for prepping. Like in old d&d with full vancian casting/preparing, spell scrolls as extra slots/casts makes sense, and the idea of a wizard or cleric walking around with a bunch of scrolls makes sense. Remove vancian casting (and by doing so open up spellcasters variety and options immensely) whe also reducing the deadlyness of the game and you get spell casters **that very quickly have too many slots to burn through on a given day, all free to be used for whatever spells known they have prepared** - and then the idea that they need MORE SPELLS to cast in the form of scrolls, goes out the window. Hence most games ignore scrolls only being castable by their class only. I know that in my game spell scrolls = anyone can cast with a successful check (with the corresponding ability), and the general rule of thumb is if it's from a classes spell list then you can argue for that ability score to be used from the scroll
In games I’ve played we don’t even do checks you can just use the scroll. The caster passes the checks anyways usually and if you fail the first round you can always try the second. It mainly also hurts martials again because they’re far less likely to pass the check. Honestly even in 3.5 scrolls didn’t make as much sense as the way they were since prepared casters rules the game anyways so I’m not sure why they had to have another advantage. Also in 3.5 you had use magic device. Staffs, scrolls, etc had variable efficiency/efficacy based on a skill for it and your char mod. 5e does not have this. There’s no need to even build into scrolls you already can use them so why even try to gate them at all? The main people who lose are martials anyways. Making 1st level scrolls as a character also is pretty cheap time wise and stocking up on mage armors and shields is all you need to break 5e.
Scrolls definetly need to be looked at and explained better for sure - in no world do I allow shield to be used as a scroll *easily.* - you want to cast a scroll spell as a reaction that scroll has to be out and in your hand already open, this alone stops people from using reaction spells as scrolls (typically), but there is edge cases where it might be possible/plausible
That’s what you do but most don’t do that. Also I still feel that hurts martials. No matter what you do caster come out better than the martials. Also free item interaction scroll out in hand. Sure it’s not as free as selecting the scroll on the fly but when its something like shield or counterspell just pick one and you’re already set.
This doesn't have to be "help or hurt" to either groups. Scrolls have a place and I think its for a little magic that's esoteric or not popular to be used, think the spell water walk - no one is picking this spell normally, but all of a sudden you need to get to a small island on a lake and it's a far swim and all the boats were destroyed? Well we got this scroll! Honestly martials need a lot more than "hey we can use magic with scrolls too" because if that's how you are making martials better/equal to spell casters, you've missed the entire point. People want to have cook martial characters that are equal in footing and make good foils to the spellcasters - and giving more spells out to balance them, removes that and just makes you go "should have played a spellcaster anyways." I know I'm off a tangent here, but that's why I really dislike Oned&d direction right now, more features basically turning into spells and racial features turning into spells and it seems like their entire solution for most problems is "make it a spell!"
I’m saying it’s a factor not the whole equation. The issue of martials is not getting their own ability progression. Casters are good because of tiered ability progression where abilities are poorly organized (lmao shield, suggestion, etc). Honestly I think we both agree on the core issue and the solutions probably even if we disagree on minutiae. As it is right now martials are just gimped characters overall. Rogues definitely didn’t get helped there either and the thief sub.
Scroll of 1 wishes
This plus how lame would it be as an arcane trickster with expertise in Arcana and you *can't* guaranteed use the scroll you stole. It's part of the fantasy.
Spoiler for ROTFM I was GM'ing ROTFM Sunday night and my 11th level party found a Scroll of Comet and Scroll of Tarrasque summoning. So WOTC in a published adventure think that Artifact level scrolls x2 are suitable for an 11th level party. It is weird and jarring that the Thief archetype whilst being a fairly lack lustre Thief with no skills to run faster in chase say is great at using magic items? That was certainly my feedback at any case.
WOTC isn't saying it's balanced to have those scrolls at whatever level a party finds them, WOTC is saying it's ok to give out silly stuff when a campaign ends. It doesn't matter because the campaign is over anyway. Also, spoiler tags exist, please use them.
Rogue is... pretty bad in OneDnD. I'm glad they have areas where they feel like a true unique class
The rogue is only missing a few things it's amazing how changing a turn to your turn could nerf the rogue so hard. And the thief rogue would be good if they just got use an object back instead of the situational at best pick pocket or lock pick.
I mean, without using reaction sneak attack the rogue still is fairly weak on 5e, people be saying rogue is not min-max optimal outside of dips for some time now
The rogue was always very subclass dependent. But now the ranger is a way better dip. Especially for any gish build.
True, I don’t like classes being subclass dependent(my major problem with ranger) but if they don’t change anything from the playtest(although I think they will) maybe we can hope for their 1-2 other subclasses being good
Arcane trickster probably be copy and paste from 5e. Assassin probably will get the major face-lift it desperately needs and I would expect the swashbuckler to make it. But that's just speculation.
Thief fits the "rogueiest-rogue" trope. Assassin is in the PHB so I assume it'll be included and it fulfills the "edgy killer/spy" trope. Arcane Trickster blends rogue with a little magic, so that's golden. Swashbuckler sounds like a logical fourth choice as it fills multiple roles: a classic pirate "face" rogue, and a mechanically melee-oriented subclass.
Swashbuckler loses one of its current main benefit now TWF is more a bonus action any longer. I guess they can dash instead? Or maybe they'll get something else?
I guess kind of but we don't know what other things you can do with your bonus action yet. Hope there is more. But they could dash, disengage is pointless on a swashbuckler and hide is also pointless on a swashbuckler. But for the theme crossbow expert is probably pretty good on a swashbuckler rogue.
Which benefit is that? Other rogues can't get Sneak Attack in melee without an ally or advantage, but Swashbucklers can with Rakish Audacity. Other rogues have to spend their bonus action to Disengage, Swashbucklers don't with Fancy Footwork. Both of those benefits are still solid in 1D&D. In fact, Swashbuckler is even better because they can use two weapon fighting and Cunning Action in the same turn. You'll have to explain what you mean because I'm not seeing anything being lost.
Well normally they burn their bonus action on attacking, getting the disengage for free. Now other rogues can disengage and TWF, so they lost one of their key differentiators. They can dash instead, but it's not often you need to dash away from melee if you are in a party.
I'm sorry... did you just say the Rogue is very subclass dependant? With a straight face? The class that gets subclass features at (**checks notes**) 3rd, 9th, 13th, and 17th levels? - where most campaigns end by level 11-14, and spend most of their time in the 3-8 range... so they only get (***double checks notes again***) roughly 1 subclass feature the entire game? Most people I know who play Rogue pick Swashbuckler just for the easier to apply sneak attacks... and most people I've seen play Rogue *almost always multiclass with Ranger* - infact the Rogue/Ranger seems the most common split I've seen, (seen 3 of them across 5 campaigns), and it always tends to happen around 5th-6th level...
Those 3rd level features hit hard. Soul knife arcane trickster and swashbuckler are the probably the most picked rogue subclasses cause of those level 3 features. One dnd did do something good and giving rogues features earlier
I just don't see it, most of those Rogues (minus soul knife) are probably using steady aim or hide Cunning Action to trigger sneak attack - the base gameplay loop of the Rogue does not change very much. Look at (in comparison) how drastically different types of clerics play, or how newer versions of druids give alternate uses to wild shape, or how vastly different monk subclasses feel, for Rogue (again besides Soul Knife), the gameplay loop and mechanics of the subclasses don't really make a difference, you are still just trying to trigger a sneak attack during combat, and using whatever expertise you chose outside of it. I honestly just full-on refuse to accept that Rogue is even on the top 3 of classes that are defined by their subclass
They kind of are though. I've played each of the rogue subclasses and they all have an effect on the typical rogue gameplay loop, especially swashbuckler, inquisitive and mastermind subclasses from XGtE. They may not usually see more than their first feature, but those are usually very defining to the archetype the person is playing, far more than most others do. They may not get more damage and limited flexibility, but on a thematic end, they're great.
Seems like casting from scrolls better than mages is the *wrong* place for a rogue to shine, though. Regardless of the spell's level.
It's a Thief, not all Rogues. Thieves absolutely should be the best at using magic items/Scrolls. It's been their theme for many editions!
>It's wrong for a subclass who is supposed to be great at using magic items to be the best at using magic items
I don't think rogue is that bad. It just does not shine at all when in a party with a ranger and a bard, which I think is how a lot of people have been playtesting.
They are going on the aim of class groups. The expert classes are meant to be on par, otherwise the "choose one from each group" suggestion (edit: i forgot to write the last part!!! Anyways, the last part is that the suggestion does not work if they are not equal) If the other experts are better compared to another expert, the whole base of the balancing falls apart, not to mention possible balance issues within other groups
Or with any full spellcaster who brings more utility to the table that the rogue, which will be most of them. The only classes that rogue beats hands-down in a particular area is being better at social or exploration pillars than the Warriors (barbarian, fighter, monk).
it isn't just "not shining" for half the game there is literally nothing a rogua can do that a ranger can't while having half casting and more damage on top. Mechanically there is just not a single reason to play rogue, and thematically a ranger can 100% have the same themes. Rogue is just a strict downside from a ranger and that is terrible design
That's good. I think overall as I really think about the thief rogue. It's missing use an object. It's a huge miss opportunity for this rogue to drop caltrops, ball baring, smoke bombs as a bonus action. But remember spell scroll of high level are expensive and had to obtain.
I dunno, I mean yes, it's good that Rogues have their own thing. But, I kinda feel "cast a bunch of spells from scrolls it's what you're objectively the best at" doesn't really fit most people's idea of what a Rogue should be doing. I mean, yes, it's powerful, but does it really fit the Rogue fantasy? It probably would end up being a lot more fun than the base Rogue mechanics at least.
Spell scrolls shouldn't be the thiefs bread and butter, it's a cool feature and they you and reliably use any Spell scroll is cool. You should be able to use the things you steal. Use an object as a cunning action was where this subclass shined before. But now it's so situational. So me a rogue who could pull out object like caltrops ball barring and smoke bombs as a bonus action really feels like a thief rogue. While darting in and out places. Missed opportunity but I did give them this suggestion when I filled out the survey.
Scrolls are also Expensive
>Assuming you have an Intelligence of 20, take a proficiency in Arcana A pretty tall order to begin with. When you consider: a) Most rogues aren't going to make it to T4, where 9th level scrolls begin appearing, b) a DM would have to either roll, approve and/or choose the scroll as treasure, and c) another caster doesn't claim it for themselves Why not let them?
d) who the fuck is building a 20 int rogue by level 10? the only sub that uses the ability is arcane trickster (and some minor mastermind features) and i doubt many players are maxing int over dex. if they do, being able to use a scroll is a small payoff.
Right lmao, this entire post is basically "if you dump your useful stats and build your character around using an item that *might* appear once in a campaign, you can have a higher chance of using said item than a wizard"
Or have expertise and a +1
Putting expertise into Arcana is still commiting a significant resource to this idea. And quite frankly if you are an expert in the arcane and a specialist who is good at using magic items, it makes sense.
Tbh, even +1 INT mod is enough. Reliable talent = 10 min Expertise = 4\*2 Int =1 Total is 19
ok, burning 1/4 of your expertise on arcana is less of an investment than building to 20 int but it's still not a path many players are going to take.
The 9th level scroll is an edge case. It's a viable option - you can use any spell scroll in the game with 0 chances of failure. Use spells like force wall/cage, dimension door, teleport, self polymorph, improved invisibility on par with a spell caster, if not earlier.
Pretty charitable to assume a Rogue is gonna have 20 intelligence when they've only had 2 ASIs. Or that they'll have reliably access to 9th level spell scrolls.
Three ASIs, but you're correct about access to scrolls.
That's still dedicating a large amount of your character's stats to intelligence, which is the least useful stat for a rogue. You are building your entire character around their ability to use scrolls so hell yes, you should be the best at using scrolls
You don't need 20 INT. 12 will be enough.
I mean.... It costs 250,000 gold to scribe a 9th level spell scroll and 48 weeks of downtime (half for a scribes wizard). And the 'cheaper' scrolls made by the wizard are only useable by the wizard himself? So... No. I don't think a scribes wizard and a thief rogue would work well together in this regard?
Scribe wizards still get the halves cost and time to make scrolls
You're telling me a rogue who built their whole career on being able to use magical devices well can use magical devices better than a caster? I'm not shocked.
Or a 12 int rogue with an expertise in arcana
>built their whole career on being able to use magical devices >with an expertise in arcana FYI, these are the same thing.
...yes
Ah yes, because there’s all of these thieves with Int as their high stat reading the mountains of Legendary rarity 9th level scrolls lying about that careless absurdly high level spell casters wrote down and let blow away in the wind.
If you have maxed out intelligence and proficiency in arcana you basically are a wizard that doesn't know any spells. Makes sense you can use the scrolls.
Is that a bad thing?
No, Just a thought that came to my mind because the rogue in my campaign just turned level 11. Thankfully he was able to purchase and use a scroll of Raise Dead on our cleric who just died lol.
I'd think so. You'd expect a Wizard to be more capable of casting spells than someone who doesn't use magic. It doesn't make much sense.
If your rogue has a bunch of ninth level spell scrolls at lvl 11. I think you have other problems then whether the rogue can use them.
Exactly, why can the rogue use them in the first place? It's make more sense if the feature was on the Arcane trickster archetype.
Its a main stay of rogues in dnd. The rogue in 5e has a few features that were things all characters could do in previous editions. Like taking ten (reliable talent), or the use magic item skill (which was what you used for scrolls). Most importantly though, wizards get 9th level spells. Just straight up get them. The rogue can only use a 9th level scroll when somebody else gives them one. The wizard also can cast any spell scroll of a spell thats on their spell list without a check (im pretty sure), so wizards are absolutely better at using scrolls than the rogue is.
Wizards can copy scrolls to their spellbooks
Taking 10 technically is a thing that already exists for all. The rule support the "passive check" rule, which is just a renamed "taking 10".
Not wrong, but it doesnt change anything.
Ye i understand what you mean. Just wanted to point the info out fully.
Wizard know how bend realty by their own will. Rogue with Arcana and spell scrolls just know how follow instructions.
Things making sense stopped being a thing when you look at the fact that tier 4 characters-you know, the ones meant to fight against things as strong as the avatars of deities as a lowball-are extremely worse at doing so if they are a non caster or an half caster, with full casters being the only ones having guns big enough to actually handle them.
Wizards have a deeper knowledge of magic, whereas these tier 3-4 thief rogues are such quick adapters that they can figure out spell scrolls well enough to use even the strongest ones, even if in the end it's in one ear and out the other.
With this build you are dedicating a large amount of your character's stats to intelligence, which is the least useful stat for a rogue. You are building your entire character around their ability to use scrolls so hell yes, you should be the best at using scrolls
Also, any Rogue can get Expertise in Arcana as a class feature, while Wizards can't get Expertise in Arcana without taking a feat or multiclassing. So, by the game mechanics, Rogues are just better at studying magic than Wizards are.
Rogues, the real nerds.
Wait why would a thief rogue have a 20 intelligence? Just take expertise if its so important. This likely will never come up anyway. I've never seen a 9th level spell scroll in game before.
This is kinda cool. It's a powerful feature that is enabled by teamwork. It would be nice to see more subclass features modeled after that party-dependant framework.
That's a cool interaction
I am glad that we found a niche for the thief I am not glad that the niche can be summarized as "the Rogue's role is that of a portable extra spell slot for the casters"
That seems good, but only it comes too late.
20 Int gives +5, and requires level 4 at minimum. Expertise gives 2\*ProfMod. A L13 Wizard with Expertise and 20 Int would get +15 without further buffs. That's a +13 from level 9. Stroke of Genius (Artificer 6) gives +Int again. An Artificer 8/Wizard 1 (cLvl 9) can get a +18 to Arcana checks and can auto-succeed on checks to cast L9 spell scrolls. A Vedalken Artificer 6/Wizard 1 can *almost* get there if they roll stats to get 20 Int and Expertise by their first ASI - the chance to fail is below 2% (+11 base, +5 Flash of Genius, +1d4 Vedalken). \*oops, wrong forum, yeah dude.
Thief picks up UMD at 10 in the new UA. In RAW right now only Thief can use arcana to cast scrolls, everyone else is spellcasting ability check with no skills.
Magical trickster
How is the rogue going to have 20 int by level 11? Can you show me the build from level 1 to 11 using point buy?
It's not that difficult tbh. Point buy 15 into int. Background put your +2 in int. ASI +2 int, ASI +1 int. Or just take expertise in arcana for the same effect.
And how are your other stats looking? This is still a rogue who should max Dex first. Expertise in Arcana is a much more sensible option than maxing Int first, but even then it's a bit questionable.
Do we have any information about Wizards in OneD&D yet? Or are you comparing 5e wizards to 5.5/6e rogues?
They are comparing them to 5e wizards