Class tiers in terms of Rogue

[Mara]

I found the *best* way to organize classes is placing them in comparison around the rogue using three important metrics of the game. No that's not combat, exploration, and social encounter prof. The metrics I use are Utility, DPR, and Survivability. Personally, I value utility over the other two, but that is subjective and campaign dependent. There are plenty of ways to play the game where the other aspects are more important. So instead of a fixed tier list, I'm going to list these qualities for each class in terms of +,=,- rogue proficiency in the metric.

Class : rogue Utility/DPR/Survivability
Barbarian: rogue - + +
Bard: rogue + - -
Cleric: rogue + - +
Druid: rogue + - +
Fighter: rogue - + +
Monk: rogue = - +
Paladin: rogue - + +
Ranger: rogue = + -
Rogue: rogue = = =
Sorcerer: rogue + - -
Warlock: rogue + - -
Wizard: rogue + - -

[Tanarii]

Sorcerers and warlocks do less DPR than a rogue? Over what time frame?

[ad_hoc]

Why not combat/social/exploration?

If you can only contribute to combat you are going to be bored for 2/3 of game time. That seems like a bad character to me.

[AvatarVecna]

"Extra extra! Wizards have less utility than rogues!"

[JNAProductions]

Let me rate 'em, see how similar we are.




Utility
DPR
Survivability


Barbarian
-
+
+


Bard
+
-
-


Cleric
=
-
+


Druid
=
-
=


Fighter
-
+
+


Monk
-
=
+


Paladin
-
+
+


Ranger
-
+
+


Rogue
=
=
=


Sorcerer
+
=
-


Warlock
=
+
-


Wizard
+
-
-

[djreynolds]

I found the *best* way to organize classes is placing them in comparison around the rogue using three important metrics of the game. No that's not combat, exploration, and social encounter prof. The metrics I use are Utility, DPR, and Survivability. Personally, I value utility over the other two, but that is subjective and campaign dependent. There are plenty of ways to play the game where the other aspects are more important. So instead of a fixed tier list, I'm going to list these qualities for each class in terms of +,=,- rogue proficiency in the metric.

Class : rogue Utility/DPR/Survivability
Barbarian: rogue - + +
Bard: rogue + - -
Cleric: rogue + - +
Druid: rogue + - +
Fighter: rogue - + +
Monk: rogue = - +
Paladin: rogue - + +
Ranger: rogue = + -
Rogue: rogue = = =
Sorcerer: rogue + - -
Warlock: rogue + - -
Wizard: rogue - + +

This actually very interesting way to look at things, would you mind if I incorporated this into something else.

[SharkForce]

fighter really doesn't get much more survivability than rogue. uncanny dodge, evasion, will save proficiency, and potentially stealth combine to make rogues very similar in terms of survivability.

there are differences, but ultimately it is really close in most cases.

i also agree that sorcerers can do more damage than a rogue. not fully at-will, but sorcerers can throw up to 3 fire bolts per round if they're willing to spend sorcery points on it, and that's pretty solid damage.

[Mara]

"Extra extra! Wizards have less utility than rogues!"Hahaha that was a typo.

[The Hellbug]

fighter really doesn't get much more survivability than rogue. uncanny dodge, evasion, will save proficiency, and potentially stealth combine to make rogues very similar in terms of survivability.


Sure, rogues get some neat defensive tools, but I think it's worth noting that the biggest portion of their ability to avoid damage (cunning action to hide/disengage) comes at the cost of other party members taking damage. They are far less durable when actually under fire than fighters since fighters get their durability from better armor proficiencies, bigger hit dice, and the ability to gain hit points back. Also, are you sure rogues get wisdom save proficiency? I could have sworn they got int and dex.

[Silavor]

Also, are you sure rogues get wisdom save proficiency? I could have sworn they got int and dex.

Their level 15 feature, Slippery Mind, also gives them Wis proficiency.

[Kryx]

I think a binary approach is quite limited.

For DPR I think it's quite important to know by how much that damage is different.
You say a Fighter has more survivability, but is that quantifiable? More AC? More HP? How does that stack against options like uncanny dodge, evasion, slippery mind, etc?
Utility can vary quite wildly based on what it provides. Spells provide more utility in every case, expect Ranger and Paladin. Yet I don't see a rogue being able to summon a mount, create a zone of trurth, create water, cure diseases, etc.

I don't see the value in such limited and binary lists.

[Sception]

Sure, rogues get some neat defensive tools, but I think it's worth noting that the biggest portion of their ability to avoid damage (cunning action to hide/disengage) comes at the cost of other party members taking damage. They are far less durable when actually under fire than fighters since fighters get their durability from better armor proficiencies, bigger hit dice, and the ability to gain hit points back. Also, are you sure rogues get wisdom save proficiency? I could have sworn they got int and dex.

Eh. The hit die and self healing are relevant, but ime better AC, like stealth, tends to just funnel damage towards other party members. A stealthing rogue can actually decrease the burden of party damage if they're able to force attacks back onto a bulkier fighter or paladin. It mostly comes down to whether the rogue is the squishiest party member. If so, stealthing is absolutely a good idea. If not, it depends on whether the attacks they would have taken are going to a harder or softer target instead.

[silveralen]

Having two combat aspects and one non combat aspect certainly weights you towards certain types of combat heavy playstyles. That might be okay if it examined every aspect, but These categories aren't really all inclusive, it basically ignores the things most monks and wizards would be doing in combat, which is arguably more valuable than pure DPR. They are ignored primarily because rogue lacks this almost entirely (at least this edition) so it makes sense as practically anyone would be better (including battle master fighter) with little distinction between them. If you used arcane trickster rogue you might be able to get a decent measure though.

So, with that in mind, I'd suggest damage (includes burst, DPR, and boosts), damage mitigation (includes personal and support, such as stunning enemies or buffs/debuffs to improve it) and utility (out of combat abilities, as well as any combat abilities that fall outside the above two). Still combat biased, but it actually includes every aspect rather than just a couple.

[Mara]

Having two combat aspects and one non combat aspect certainly weights you towards certain types of combat heavy playstyles. That might be okay if it examined every aspect, but These categories aren't really all inclusive, it basically ignores the things most monks and wizards would be doing in combat, which is arguably more valuable than pure DPR. They are ignored primarily because rogue lacks this almost entirely (at least this edition) so it makes sense as practically anyone would be better (including battle master fighter) with little distinction between them. If you used arcane trickster rogue you might be able to get a decent measure though.

So, with that in mind, I'd suggest damage (includes burst, DPR, and boosts), damage mitigation (includes personal and support, such as stunning enemies or buffs/debuffs to improve it) and utility (out of combat abilities, as well as any combat abilities that fall outside the above two). Still combat biased, but it actually includes every aspect rather than just a couple.
Utility also includes combat utility. That's why I have open hand monk and rogue with equal utility.

Expanding the categories is fine but then social and exploration utility are lumped into one "out of combat utility". Which is an odd distinction to make. Assassin damage can be useful in social situations and tanking effects is very useful in exploration, making other categories part of other categories. Currently, Utility is the catch-all category not encompassed by DPR and survivability which are less subjective to measure. The three do not influence one another by definition. This "Utility" doesn't include DPR or Survivability. It's everything the other two aren't.

[silveralen]

Utility also includes combat utility. That's why I have open hand monk and rogue with equal utility.

Expanding the categories is fine but then social and exploration utility are lumped into one "out of combat utility". Which is an odd distinction to make. Assassin damage can be useful in social situations and tanking effects is very useful in exploration, making other categories part of other categories. Currently, Utility is the catch-all category not encompassed by DPR and survivability which are less subjective to measure. The three do not influence one another by definition. This "Utility" doesn't include DPR or Survivability. It's everything the other two aren't.

But, at the end of the day, are we really measuring anything important with those two categories? Stunning or disabling an enemy far outweighs merely reducing the damage of their attacks or having an extra couple AC or hit points. Average damage per turn isn't as useful as how that damage is distributed, being able to dump a lot of damage in one hit or spread damage across multiple targets is often more valuable than a few extra points of average damage per turn (the big argument against champion fighter compared to battlemaster).

So that's why I don't feel this is particularly useful. If DPR and survivability were that important barbarian would put the other melee classes to shame, when in reality he struggles to keep up with most of them.

[Mara]

I also value utility higher than the other categories.

But that is subjective and campaign dependent.

[Reshazedek]

I found the *best* way to organize classes is placing them in comparison around the rogue using three important metrics of the game. No that's not combat, exploration, and social encounter prof. The metrics I use are Utility, DPR, and Survivability. Personally, I value utility over the other two, but that is subjective and campaign dependent. There are plenty of ways to play the game where the other aspects are more important. So instead of a fixed tier list, I'm going to list these qualities for each class in terms of +,=,- rogue proficiency in the metric.

Class : rogue Utility/DPR/Survivability
Barbarian: rogue - + +
Bard: rogue + - -
Cleric: rogue + - +
Druid: rogue + - +
Fighter: rogue - + +
Monk: rogue = - +
Paladin: rogue - + +
Ranger: rogue = + -
Rogue: rogue = = =
Sorcerer: rogue + - -
Warlock: rogue + - -
Wizard: rogue + - -

So with the exception of Monk and Ranger everything's either better or worse than rogue? Interesting baseline.