Quote Originally Posted by Skrum View Post
Like, what does it mean to be a skills guy? Having a decent survival and perception check? Clerics do that just fine, as do druids, by dint of having way higher wisdom.

Scouting is...well it's a contentious topic. But I personally don't think the value of scouting is such that it's worth whatever rogue is paying for it. Not even close.
Actually I think there is value in having a set of critical skills on one single character, as it means they can accomplish more and make use of these skills together.

As an example, our current tier 3 game, the monk has Stealth and Perception. But he doesn't have Athletics, Investigation, or Thieves' Tools. So even if he scouts ahead, what he can accomplish while out ahead is limited. He may be able to make some checks and succeed at them, but not consistently, and the chances go down as the DCs go up.

If we had a rogue, their minimum roll on Stealth and Perception would be somewhere around 18, or 22 with Expertise. And it can be 15 with Investigation and Thieves' Tools, or 19 with Expertise (depending on ability scores of course).

Point being, a rogue could move ahead of the party with Stealth, perceive enemies and secret doors and traps with Perception, discover mechanisms to open those secret doors or disarm those traps with Investigation, then disarm them with Thieves Tools, climb to hard to reach locations where these mechanisms are located with Athletics, balance along beams or narrow ledges with Acrobatics, etc.

I can't assist the monk when he goes ahead, despite having +5 on Investigation, because I have -1 and Disadvantage on Stealth checks. So I do think that splitting skills across a party can sometimes cause deficiencies, and I think there is value in a character that starts with at minimum 6 skill proficiencies and that also has native Expertise.