Rouges in campiagns

[Butler121]

Do say your Dm was doing a campiagn were the players entered the story one by one, and the first session was just 1 player and the Dm, and the player was a Rouge, their sneak attack relise on an ally fighting with you, so in a solo fight they would be screwed. But would you still choose the Rouge class.

[Tvtyrant]

No, I would prefer to play a blush, it has more independent play and isn't as garish.

[Reevh]

Sure I'd still play the rogue. It's one session vs. the whole rest of the campaign. You can deal with having sub-par sneak attack for one session. In fact, you'll be roughly on par with a dual wielding fighter for damage that session.

[Kane0]

Sure, just choose Swashbuckler.

[Waterdeep Merch]

Just one session of missing 1d6 damage? Assuming you're fighting things reasonably close to your CR (oh boy is it low), you should kill most things in a single turn anyway.

A goblin is CR 1/4 and has 7 hp. Assuming a Dex of 16, a dagger does 5.5 average damage, a shortsword does 6.5, and a rapier does 7.5. The dagger can be dual-wielded to get an even 7, and that's the lowest average damage you're likely to be doing at this level.

And this goblin is considered a hard threat! (for good reason. If it gets in two hits before you get your's, you're probably dead)

[Lunali]

Sure, just choose Swashbuckler.

Or arcane trickster, or just rely on ranged attacks + hide.

[sophontteks]

This should not be something to be upset about. Step back a second. Think about your character and roleplay how they would act in that situation. Lose this obsession with always having your maximum damage. It'll ruin the game for everyone if you get upset by things like this.

[Laserlight]

For one session out of a campaign? You're making a decision on what character you want to play for a campaign, based on whether you get your full damage for one single session?

[JumboWheat01]

You're supposed to do damage with rogues? Not make good use of your skill and mechanical utility? Being a Striker's all fine and dandy, but there's a lot more to a rogue than getting a Sneak Attack.

[JellyPooga]

I literally cannot think of a Class I'd rather play solo than a Rogue...except maybe a Bard if I were starting at a level higher than 2.

Have a look at Level 1 for any Class:

- Barbarian. Yeah, you got HP, but very little else.
- Bard. Yeah, I might, but nothing has really got off the ground yet. Maybe from lvl.3 onwards, but lvl.1? No.
- Cleric. OK, Cleric has some potential, but I'd be wary of dumping Charisma if I knew I had to go solo (even for only one session) and I certainly wouldn't want to dump Str/Dex/Con, making Cleric in this scenario really quite MAD.
- Druid. No Wild Shape? No dice.
- Fighter. Fighter hit good, but no talky good. Pass.
- Monk.............just no.
- Paladin. No Smite. No spells. Nope.
- Ranger. This isn't the Class you're looking for. Move along.
- Sorcerer. Yeah...you gonna die.
- Warlock. You gonna die quicker than a Sorcerer.
- Wizard. The Warlock looks like a tanky Barbarian next to you.

By comparison, the Rogue has Skill Proficiencies, Expertise and hits as hard as a Fighter (because let's face it, you don't need an ally to trigger Sneak Attack...you just need to use your skills). Spellslingers might have to decide which pillar of play to spend their limited resources on (which really aren't that impressive with only lvl.1 spells to rely on) and other Martial classes are really only a sort of kinda good at combat at this level compared to anyone else (heck, the difference between a lvl.1 Fighter and a lvl.1 Wizard in melee can largely be boiled down to the armour they're wearing). The Rogue, though? They've got very competitive, if not slightly above the curve, damage output as well as resource-less solutions to non-combat scenarios (assuming good Skill/Expertise choices). I might almost consider Rogue to be at their best at lvl.1 compared to other Classes.

If the game is starting at higher level than 1...weeeeeell, things might be a little different.

[RSP]

Inquisitive works well to get solo SA

[diplomancer]

Rouges are very useful for disguise kits, and I believe you can also use them to cast Friends.

[Butler121]

Now say you were starting with 5 people and 4 of the are Spellers and you had to choose a martial class, what would you choose.

[JumboWheat01]

Depends on the casters. More often than not, casters need a meat shield, so something like a Barbarian or a Fighter. If there's a Bard, I might be less inclined for a Rogue, since a Bard covers the skill utility just fine without their spells, but if not and they don't need a meat shield, from having something like a War Cleric or a Moon Druid, then definitely a Rogue. Would be inclined towards Ranger if we're gonna have a big outdoors campaign.

Far too many variables than "you're the only martial in the party."

[Lunali]

Now say you were starting with 5 people and 4 of the are Spellers and you had to choose a martial class, what would you choose.

Rogue, with arcana expertise, nothing like being the expert on magic when you're the only non-caster.

[Butler121]

Now say it's the other way around.

[JumboWheat01]

The lone caster in a party of martials? Bard, Cleric or Druid, something with healing power, even if I don't specialize in said healing power (by being a Cleric but not a Life Domain, for instance.) Sure, in-combat healing isn't the greatest, but being able to patch others up afterwards is good to have.

[Hairfish]

Now say it's the other way around.

What is the purpose of these questions? You're clearly not playing in a game where you're both the only non-caster and the only caster in a 5-person party.

[Butler121]

What is the purpose of these questions? You're clearly not playing in a game where you're both the only non-caster and the only caster in a 5-person party.
It's called curiosity.

[Hairfish]

It's called curiosity.

Okay, we'll do this the hard way.

For what reason are you curious about the answers to these questions? You started a thread just to ask them, so there must be a reason.

[JumboWheat01]

But not all rogues are thieves, some are just skilled adventurers, some dexterous swashbucklers, some smooth talkers, and yes, some are thieves.

[Lunali]

Understand. Also understand only half of us refer to them in a non-insulting manner. Plus, rogue used to mean thief or bard. So while thief may be too narrow, rogue is too broad.

A character based on real world bards could easily fall into the rogue class instead of the bard class, so I don't think that's really a problem.

[MeeposFire]

No, I would prefer to play a blush, it has more independent play and isn't as garish.

If you hadn't done it I would have.

[Reevh]

If for no other reason, they should change the name of this class back to thief. I cringe every time I see this. Might as well call it pill of shift.

I think you mean theif.

[Misterwhisper]

It is one game session...

As probably one of the safest level 1 characters due to expertise and versatility.

Not seeing the issue here.

[KorvinStarmast]

This should not be something to be upset about. Step back a second. Think about your character and roleplay how they would act in that situation. Lose this obsession with always having your maximum damage. It'll ruin the game for everyone if you get upset by things like this. That's a good start, in terms of how to approach the game.

For one session out of a campaign? You're making a decision on what character you want to play for a campaign, based on whether you get your full damage for one single session? I was scratching my head also.

.. there's a lot more to a rogue than getting a Sneak Attack. Heck yeah.

{snipped}
By comparison, the Rogue has Skill Proficiencies, Expertise and hits as hard as a Fighter (because let's face it, you don't need an ally to trigger Sneak Attack...you just need to use your skills).
{snip}
The Rogue, though? They've got very competitive, if not slightly above the curve, damage output as well as resource-less solutions to non-combat scenarios (assuming good Skill/Expertise choices). I might almost consider Rogue to be at their best at lvl.1 compared to other Classes. There is a lot to like: hide, then attack from hiding, advantage, and sneak attack ... yay rogue! :smallbiggrin:

If for no other reason, they should change the name of this class back to thief. I cringe every time I see this. Might as well call it pill of shift. I think that ship sailed about the time AD&D 2e was published. (I played a lot of AD&D 1e and OD&D thieves. Yes I did. I have such a thief/rogue bias, it isn't funny.

For the OP: your rogue has at least six skills, may be 8 if rogue is a half elf, at level 1, and you have two expertise slots.

Expertise
At 1st level, choose two of your skill proficiencies, or one of your skill proficiencies and your proficiency with thieves’ tools. Your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses either of the chosen proficiencies.
Between Stealth and Deception, you can avoid any combat you don't like the terms of.

Rule Number 1: never accept combat except on your own terms. (That is from Sun Tzu and about 100 other experts on the theory of combat). Good rule to live by as a rogue.

[Reevh]

Rule Number 1: never accept combat except on your own terms. (That is from Sun Tzu and about 100 other experts on the theory of combat). Good rule to live by as a rogue.

This is likely to depend on your DM. Sure, if you can sneak around and see your enemies before they see you, this makes sense. But if the campaign starts out, you're just having a drink in a bar, and some angry half-orc lady rocks up and punches you in the face, you're rolling for initiative.