5e rogue importance?

[Shin Okada]

Assuming that we will play an adventure involves much dungeon crawling (say, White Plume mountain) using 5e rules, how much important to have a pure-rogue?

Should we have at least one dedicated dexterity-based-rogue?

Or some other class with a level dip of rogue (for proficiency to Thieve's Tools and Expertise class feature) is enough?

How about a character of completely different class (say, a Barbarian) who is just proficient in Perception skill and Thieve's Tools (from background)?

 

[Leatherhead]

You don't need a Rogue in 5e. At all.

DCs only realistically go up to 30. The background + a good stat score will cover all but the most daunting situations that would call for a Rogue. And if you need anything better than that, a Bard can do everything a Rogue can do, sometimes better than a Rogue can do it (thanks to spells!)

 

[Oofta]

I would say that no single class is required in 5E. With the right background(s) you can cover the important bits of the rogue, perhaps just not quite as well.

I have fun playing rogues, but whenever I DM I just tell people to play what they want and we'll figure out a way to make it work.

 

[Treantmonklvl20]

Rogues are no longer an essential part of a party in 5e. The same is true of other previously thought "essential" classes as well (like the Cleric for example).

Previous editions provided Rogues/Thieves with unique abilities to find traps, stealth, and opening locks. None of these abilities are unique anymore.

With a Criminal Background, any character gains proficiency in Thieves Tools as well as proficiency in the steath skill.

Finding traps is usually now done with Investigation (Int) or Perception (Wis), in both cases, other classes are as good or superior to a Rogue.

The Rogue does have the ability to gain expertise in select skills, allowing them to have a larger bonus than otherwise possible, but this too is not unique. A Bard will be getting more expertise skills than a Rogue of equal level by level 5. Humans can take a racial feat providing expertise. However, even more importantly, expertise is simply not required. Rogues simply aren't the best at most "thief" style skills.

Opening locks: Any character with Thieves Tools can open a lock. For particularly tough locks, nothing beats the knock spell, though a Knowledge Cleric can get a definite runner up there.
Finding Traps: Depends if it's an investigation or Perception roll, but generally I like either Clerics/Druids or Wizards for this one.
Removing Traps: Once you know what a trap is, circumventing it requires no particular skill, and Rogues have no special abilities in this regard.
Stealth: If you want someone good at stealth in the party, Look to the party Ranger or Druid - they can make the whole party better at stealth than a Rogue.
Basic Dungeon Crawling Tactics: This is a function of playstyle, not class. Technically, I would suggest none beat the Wizard in the number of tools available for this kind of thing, even without spell slot expenditure. Right from level 1.

Not dissing Rogues here. Rogues have lots of interesting abilities and options, but the idea they are somehow irreplacable, in almost any situation, is not the case.

 

[Kobold Stew]

The only unique contribution a Rogue can bring that benefits the party is Expertise in Thieves' Tools and (arguably) fluency in Thieves' Cant.

Everything else can be replicated in another way.

 

[iserith]

Typically when someone says "we need a rogue," it's because there is a perception of needing a character that can pick locks and disable traps. Anyone with proficiency in thieves' tools (such as a criminal or urchin character) can do that. The rogue can take expertise in thieves' tools though which is nice, but a bard can take that as well.

Some of this also depends on how the DM handles traps and locks. In my games, a rogue with the thief subclass is very valuable in a dungeon because of Fast Hands. Because of the way I set times for dungeon tasks, this means cutting a typical trap interaction down to 20 minutes instead of 30 minutes or a locked door or chest interaction to less than 10 minutes. This means there are fewer wandering monster checks for the party. (And if two other PCs Work Together with the thief and grant the rogue two more tasks during the exploration turn, a trap can be found, figured out, and disarmed in 10 minutes, or two fewer wandering monster checks than normal in that scene.)

 

[Cyber-Dave]

You need the group, as a whole, to have members that together can manage decent perception, investigation, and thieves' tools. It is nice to have someone with a decent stealth skill. Rogues can be a huge boon, but as with every class in the edition, there are other ways to achieve that goal than a rogue.

 

[cmad1977]

In my experience/opinion no class is strictly necessary anymore.


The first group I ran for in 5e had a
Hunter as their front line warrior
Land Druid as their primary healer
Sorcere
Rogue.

They did fine:

 

[Ancalagon]

You don't need a rogue as has been well explained by the others. However, that being said, rogues are a ton of fun to play in 5e

 

[Kobold Stew]

The rogue can take expertise in thieves' tools though which is nice, but a bard can take that as well.

As an aside, I think this is not the case.

Bards and the new Prodigy feat allow anyone to have expertise in a skill, but not a toolset. It is the only niche the Rogue actually has (and of course many DMs probably don't mind allowing a set of tools).