What drives a poor reputation for the Rogue class?

[Dr.Samurai]

"Sneaking across balance beams to disarm traps" isn't scouting. I've never seen a familiar disarm a long hallway of traps one by one and then carefully solve a puzzle door to prepare the area for when the party gets there, and that's the claim about why the rogue's scouting is so special compared to literally anyone else who invests in Stealth and Perception. If the familiar goes ahead, or an arcane eye, or whatever, it looks at things and the DM describes what it sees. Takes exactly the same ten to ninety seconds that the description would have taken when the party got there.

Oh, so the familiar isn't replacing the rogue's scouting ability.

This is all true.

However, it's also heavily dependant on how many times those things are actually coming up over the course of an adventuring day.

Casting a spell (or using another limited-use resource) in place of a skill check will obviously burn through resources quite quickly. On the other hand, using limited resources to guarantee success on especially important skill checks would seem perfectly reasonable.

I agree. I'm not saying a spell can't be used ever to solve an out of combat challenge. But that's a far cry from replacing everything a rogue can contribute. It depends on how many skill checks are called for in a day, and how many spell slots you have (and proper spell known/prepared).

Bear in mind that hit points are a limited resource, too. So if you rely on expertise but end up fluffing a key roll (because a d20 is still swingy) and end up taking damage as a result, you're still down a limited resource. It just happens to be a different kind of limited resource.

Yeah, but I'm not sure the "blunder our way through the world tapping the spell button when we need it" is much better in this regard, especially if you're using combat features for out of combat uses. You may be saving HP out of combat, and spending it in combat.

See, this is where our philosophies heavily diverge.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with having all of those. If anything, it sounds exceptionally useful.

Yes, you're not going to be doing all of them at the same time. But so what? The point is not to use all your spells all the time. The point is to have a utility belt of options that are there when you need them. Shield is there to protect you from either a single high-damage attack or a swarm of little ones. Absorb elements can protect you from a lot of damaging spells, AoEs and the like. Silvery Barbs can protect you or an ally from a single attack, whilst also adding Advantage as a bonus. And those three spells are all just Lv1, yet will remain useful throughout a mage's entire career.

Then you've got Counterspell, which is absolutely incredibly when you need it. It's not something you're going to be casting every round or even every fight. But when an enemy wizard throws out Synaptic Static, you (and your party) will be incredibly grateful to have it.

I value flexibility too. But there is a cost associated with it, as with most things.

There is value in consistency and specialization as well. If you're frontlining for the party, and relying on the threat of your OA to keep the enemy from moving, but also need Shield to protect your AC, then you're not Counterspelling or using Silvery Barbs. But, like in my current party, maybe you're the only one that can counterspell, because the other three players are a fighter, monk, and ranger. So maybe you should focus on the unique things you can provide to the party, instead of spreading yourself thin trying to do all the things. If you have these amazing combat spells that impose battlefield control and debilitating conditions, why spend those slots/spells known overshadowing another member of the party with redundancy? You have something powerful and unique that you bring to the table, focus on that.

A thing to add to this because I have checked this math.*

We frequently compare rogue without feat investment to builds with GWM + PAM or the ranged equivalent.

Do we? I thought the original comparison gave the rogue Sharpshooter.