"If you cannot solve a problem with violence, you start raging, endure the incoming pain with a laughter, until you can solve the problem with violence."
Rouges are B tier. The community just sees every min/max Rogue dex/char/wiz get a headband of intellect and take skills as a lvl 1/4 feat drop into the role without trying. It is built for the Role...on accident. Even Assassin and Thief can become reality good at...anything if they have an ASI and Expert in front of them. It's baked into the class. Arcane Trickster, Phantom, and Soulknife are the most flexible. All of them should take Ritual Caster (for different reasons), and all of them get abilities that change reality. So yeah, it's B tier...but it can perform like S tier with some time and imagination.
Not sure it should make them S-Tier, but I think you guys did underestimate the Reliable Talent class feature that all Rogues get. It's not really "playing by the rules" anymore when all your Investigation, Perception, and Stealth skill checks are automatically in the 20s; you effectively cannot fail most of the time.
This + theives can't makes rogue easy A. And I feel the same way about warlocks, 3/4 of their pact boons help with investigating and their limited spell slots compared to spells known means they are going to have a few investigation gems on their list regardless of build in addition to good charisma. And A is supposed to be for the classes that will be good regardless of build.
Yes, but remember: sometimes, often when out of combat, you can make a passive check, what means taking 10. It's not as guaranteed as rogue's feature, but it comes up often enough for reliable talent to not be a must-have.
@lygophile I don't understand what you mean. You needn't know something is present to suspect that it is and look for it. And taking 10 is expressly something for out of comabt and that your character is specialized at. This way, the bard with +8 to their musical instrument rolls who's NOMINALLY a virtuoso who's good at thier art doesn't just get murdered because the dice keep rolling low single digits.
@lygophile If it's not in combat ---> you can use passive. Especially in the situation that you KNOW there's something there, I'd say that justifies using a passive minimum.
With the artificer Monty never takes the infusions into account, and there are a couple of those geared towards investigation. Items that let you cast certain spells like detect magic and charm person. Stuff like the helm of telepathy or wand of secrets or eyes of the eagle, that you could take and is available to every artificer. And they round out the class a lot, and should be acknowledged. Also tool expertise can be used to gain knowledge about the craft, and they can just buff skill with guidance and flash of genius to really high levels. 3rd strongest after bard and wizard, very solid A from me.
I agree 100% about giving 3rd spot to the artificer. Partially because of everything you mentioned, but on top of that, it's also 1 of only 2 classes in the game with intelligence as their main stat. Monty mentioned how much of a benefit that is in and of itself for the wizard, but that applies just as much for the artificer. I'm playing one in a campaign rn (lvl 1-6 so far) that isn't even specifically built for investigation (apart from just being curious I guess), but within our party, that role has always naturally fallen on me (esp as we don't have a wizard or bard), and I really haven't noticed any big gaps in the tools i have available for it.
The wizard is as much, if not more than, a built investigator as many of the other classes. It is easy to say that any wizard is able to cast Detect Thoughts as a ritual, but who has that in their book? "Even a blasty Invoker can...". A blasty Invoker would pass on Scorching Ray, Acid Arrow, and Shatter (let alone Enlarge/Reduce, Flaming Sphere, Hold Person, Invisibility, Levitate, Web, etc., etc.) for their two picks to get Detect Thoughts? It then becomes entirely up to chance, and the whim of the DM, whether or not that wizard would find an investigate type spell in a book or scroll that they looted. TL;DR A cleric or a druid can get ANY available spell the next day; a rogue or a bard has their skills baked in, always at their fingertips. A wizard has to choose their spells carefully, or get a lucky find, to be effective as an investigator.
how many wizards have you had at your table? in my experience, the wizard ends up collecting a LOT of spells that they usually don’t use every day from scrolls and others’ spellbooks, especially rituals. furthermore, they get two spells in the book per level up, so that’s four for each level of spell, not two. i think if you aren’t giving the wizard at your table a whole bunch of other spells for them to collect, then you should change that practice.
Detect thoughts is not a ritual...and finding spells in the form of defeated wizard enemies or loot or just buying them is a lot more common than made out to be. Just check published adventures, there's plenty of scrolls you can find in the fixed loot you find in most published adventures.
Speaking of the Cleric's spell list, in this week's session, our DM's murder mystery got completely derailed because the Cleric used Speak with Dead to ask the victim who killed him!
And the derail could have been prevented if the DM either had him murdered from behind, poisoned, murdered by someone disguised, murdered via a proxy, murdered via trap.
@@Aro2001 True; the DM was not expecting Speak with Dead! That one spell definitely doesn't make a Cleric the S tier, but it is another tool in the investigator's kit.
@@Hesauce True. As a player I would be mourning anti-climatic ending since I love a good whodunit. Though with murder by proxy, it could lead to more story and more characterization because it then leads to the mystery of who ordered the hit.
I think you missed a factor about the rogue. One of the most handy options for gathering information is Thieves' Cant. Thieves' Cant allows one to gather information from "not-so-legal" sources, which may have high underground positions depending on the campaign. Wizards have many spell slots as an option, but the rogue just needs to ask the right people.
@@lkriticos7619 not even expertise. It’s just proficiency. Any ability check with proficiency, not just expertise. In A5e, it only affects expertise, but that’s a different system
@@ClaireBear_yt Rogues get 4 skill proficiencies and 2 expertises at level one. Aside from that, they also get Thieves' tools and Thieves' Cant. You are already well equipped at level 1 in terms of information gathering. Funny, Wizards get spells but Thieves' Cant ^^
@@lkriticos7619 expertise doubles your proficiency. Say you have expertise in thieves tools, stealth, sleight of hand, and deception at level 11, and proficiency in a bunch of other things due to perhaps taking the skilled feat. Reliable talent will let you roll a minimum of 10 + modifiers on ALL of the skills you are *proficient* in. Not *just* ones with expertise.
Paladin gets zone of truth and knows if the person passes. They just beat the crap out of em until they fail then you interrogate em. Paladin also gets great social skills. D tier. How?
This just reminds me of Borderlands, Tiny Tina’s Bunkers and badasses when she tells Brick to roll for initiative, and he says “I punch the initiative!” (He also punches the dwarven king and kills him when he was supposed to ask him for help.)
"I cast detect thoughts." "The club bounces off the king's head. You are now aware that the king does not currently have any thoughts." "I'm going to put a subtle tracking device on the enemy. Later, I will follow." "The blood trail goes cold after a few steps. You find a discarded boot with a hole in, and you get your upturned nail back." "I will ask these plants if a band of goblins have gone by recently." "You did that." "Can I see any invisible creatures?" "No." "I question the guard." "The guard questions you back for... 7 points of bludgeoning damage." "Find traps." "You charge through the dungeon, setting off all the traps. You are very painfully aware of their exact locations." Wizard: "could be worse..."
Monty is always down on artificers not having high level spells. Meanwhile he's all about the Arcane Trickster, which has less casting than the Artificer.
@@willhughes5762not a full caster; 1/3 caster, I believe is the term. You lose raw "magic" to get your infusions (i.e. magic items) - similar to warlock invocations.
@@Audentior_ItoArtificer is a 1/2 in the same vain as a Paladin or Ranger. Arcane Tricksters and Eldritch Knights are 1/3 casters. Full caster = Spellcasting at level 1 Half caster = Spellcasting at level 2 One-third caster = Spellcasting at level 3
It surprises me that you definitely talk about the Interrogation part of the investigator role when talking about Bards, but that Paladins are lumped in with fighters and Monks Sure, Paladins aren't full caster and they don't have skill expertise. But they (should) have a good charisma score and get some really good investigative spells like Zone of Truth and a bunch of "locate" and "detect" divination spells. I am not arguing that Paladins are A tier by any means, but they definitely have more investigative tools than the other D-tier classes, like, a lot more. Given the lack of other C-tiers, that's where I'm putting it.
@@DParkerNunya I don't think it's quite that high, Clerics in this ranking straddle the line between B and C and all the relevant Paladin spells are on the Cleric spell list. Clerics get those spells faster and can choose them the night before if they know they're going on an investigation. It also would put Paladins in the same tier as Druids, Rogues and Rangers which I also don't think is quite deserved. Still a lot better than Fighters and Barbarians though.
It's one of the spells on their list that I get most excited about the potential of. For instance, walk by a seedy bar, cast, and just wait and watch, as people start saying things they probably shouldn't be saying.
All this tier rankings just push me to create an entire party of barbarians with my friends and resolve all stealth missions, all investigations and social media aspects with brute force xD love the content guys!!
I DM for a party consisting of barbarian, a fighter, and a sorcerer with a very low intelligence. I can confirm, this is what their investigation looks like lol.
If my players did that, they would probably encounter a small mindflayer colony about 3 sessions in, so the next session we would start by rolling new characters.
Artficer is definitely an A. Tool Expertise gives them expertise in any tool they are proficient in. With Xanathar’s rules you can use many tools in various ways to do investigation. Plus Flash of Genius and spell casting... Not S tier but solid A+
Monty's tied up in spells. Granted, I don't really play spell casters that much, just because that's not my game. But I like playing skill monkey's, and like to rely on things that I don't have to worry about running out of, like spell slots.
Play Bard then It is a Skill Monkey with Spells, same amount of expertise and half prof to everything else. You even get to have zero skill restrictions The only difference is no evasion abilities and no reliable talent (they again get Jack of All Trades instead). Now you have all of the good stuff that doesn't run out and all of the good spells that do run out, win-win
True, it’s easier not having to track spells vs. a skill check - but the sheer power that spells unlock is unmatched (in this instance). Being able to speak with dead, turn invisible, teleport around, charm people, read their thoughts… it’s just stuff that is unmatched by a skill monkey class.
@@Dwhizzle it's matched by RPing and using *your effing brain* instead of a sheet of paper. Magic doesn't always gets you results and it shouldn't. People know damn well to cover up their tracks from magic in a world where it's a norm. Bard tries - spell gone, regardless of result, waste more slots. Rogue tried - one of many opportunities gone, find another one using ya brains. Consistency beats surges of power any day
@@jpjfrey5673 listen, I’m not saying I disagree on the RP side - but that’s not what this video is about. They’re trying to objectively grade who is the *best* at this job. And magic is far too powerful compared to a character with a high skill check. Take it up with wizards if you think it’s unfair.
39:00 "I was suprised that the rogue was the number one ranked..." I think the reason lies within the question. The question was "which class is the best Investigator". That question does not limit it to the opportunities and features a certain build might allow for, but also the fantasy of playing a certain archetype. The "best Investigator" might not be the class best at investigating, but rather the class that is the best at scratching that narrative itch. Rogues scratch that itch for being a Private Eye. Wizards scratch the itch of being a (Magic) Scientist. And CSI or CDC just doesn't have the appeal to beat the private sleuth.
Yes, scratching the narrative itch is the only reason anyone would ever play an inquisitive rogue. Where as a player who wants to RP an investigator and actually solve mysteries would pick some kind of spell caster and roleplay them as such.
You asked who is the best investigator and a lot of investigation is leg work, like talking to folks (bard), or stake outs, or picking locks, or hunting for clues, or tailing people, or sneaking places. Magic like detect thoughts etc can help that, but rogues can ALWAYS do those things whereas wizards and bards need spell slots. Magic can be a boon but they aren't constant boons.
and more important without the right background the bard and the wizards don't know how to investigate, they lack the knowledge how criminology works, lack of thieves cunt. +11 to the skill check don't matter if aren't use properly, know "what to ask" and to "who" is infinite more important
Well, Ritual casting means you do not need spell slots for ritual spells. Detect magic, divination, augury, contact other plane are insane investigation tools and cost no spell slots. Also hunting for clues (investigation skill) is an int skill for wizards and it's an obvious auto pick for all wizards, you'd be just a fool for not picking it. Arcana as well for magical investigations (imho the majority of d&d investigations have some magic based stuff in it), and as for picking locks, that is a tool prof so can be learned by anyone using the downtime training rules in the PHB. And the other investigative stuff not included in here, THEN you can use spell slots for.
I differ with them philosophically in terms of whether someone is good at filling a role if they can do it reasonably well throughout the adventuring day or do it extremely well but only a limited number of times and potentially needing plenty of prep time to do it. I prefer the former, they prefer the latter.
It might depend on whether the casters in the party like to “do cool things” scenically through an adventuring day and are willing to be weaker in eventual combats as a result, as opposed to the casters being stingier with their slots and doing whatever possible to solve problems before resorting to spending resources.
Honorable mention: Knowledge Domain cleric. Just a straight up inquisitor, absolutely. I'm playing one right now. I don't shine in combat, but boy do I shine helping solve mysteries. The major blind spot is the lack of Detect Thoughts, but 1) you get a channel divinity version of it and 2) you could pick it up with a feat.
Slight typo in the final slide--Monty has the Artificer as a B, but it shows up as an A for both. Other than that, I was initially unsure about Ranger at B, thinking "what ranger is going to take speak with animals as one of their four spells known?" But then I remembered that the new optional class features from Tasha's gives speak with animals to all rangers, and lets them cast it once per day for free. So in some ways they will actually be more reliable in this role than the Druid will be (not all druids will have speak with animals prepared at all times).
Yeah, the optional rules from Tasha's really open up the ranger to a bunch of different possibilities. When the Dudes sort of wrote off the Natural Explorer feature in an urban campaign I was thinking to myself "but why wouldn't you use Deft Explorer for that campaign and double your perception or investigation proficiency bonus instead? (+learn two languages)"
Honestly in regards to the rogue, one interesting thing is that every subclass save for maybe the thief gets at least something to help with their investigation skills. Obviously some are better than others, the Arcane Trickster gives them access to the spells they would need, albeit later than most classes being a 1/3 caster and the Inquisitive and Mastermind are basically designed with being the investigator in mind, but the others also gain access to something that can be used for investigative purposes.
In terms of the Phantom and Scout not being great for investigation, I’ll actually have to disagree. Though admittedly Nature and Survival aren’t necessarily the first things people think of for investigation, they can certainly still be helpful in some ways for finding clues. The Scout not only gets proficiency in both, but also expertise in both, so while a bit more circumstantial they can still be helpful. Meanwhile while I’ll admit I was probably stretching a bit when I said the Phantom got something, there is still some potential use in terms of the soul trinkets. Specifically being able to ask a question of one of the souls. Also the floating proficiency you get can help in a more boring way. Though I’ll admit, I probably consider the Phantom the second worst one given the highly situational nature of the main feature I was thinking of. Though I am curious, going through the skills of the thief, which one(s) do you feel are helpful for an investigation? I would assume fast hands I’d probably the one, but I’d like to know anyways.
Also one separate note. I would also say that if you’re playing a higher level one shot or campaign, that’s when the thief can shine in terms of features. I would probably say it’s one of the most back loaded classes in the game.
@lygophile I was kinda thinking of Fast Hands because I could absolutely see it being useful to gain access to and get the most information out of an area that you only have a very limited amount of time to do so. Even outside of situations where initiative is rolled, effectively you can do twice as much as usual. Second Story work is also useful for sure, though it definitely seems at least a bit more situational. I do agree though Supreme Sneak is garbage and is kinda the exception when I say the Thief is really back loaded. Taking all this into account I’ll acknowledge that the Thief is better at investigation than the Phantom, though we’ll have to agree to disagree about the Scout. Though, I feel this does strengthen my point where every rogue gets at least something to help with investigation, and I can confidently include the Thief here as well.
Just going to bring up that I’m just comparing the rogues to eachother. Is a circle of the land Druid better at investigation than a scout rogue? Possibly yes, but that was always beside the point I’m trying to make here. Hell I could well be wrong about whether the Scout is better than the thief in investigation, but I’m also not really trying to make rankings for how each rogue subclass helps the investigation role. I’m just trying to say that they all help in some way. Anyways, not too sure if we’re going to continue discussing this but if we aren’t, thanks for your time. Edit: One other thing I forgot to mention about the Scout is that they get extra movement which would also be helpful. Didn’t bring it up earlier though as I’m not too sure I should count it.
Oops didn’t see the other comment there. I will agree that the soul trinkets thing probably was a stretch, I think my logic at the time of writing was if there was another murder shortly before I arrived but that’ll probably never come up. What was I thinking there? Though you raise a good point about the passing through walls part, honestly almost forgot about that ability despite the fact that it’s probably better and way less circumstantial than the soul trinket thing. However, I still say it’s probably the least useful mostly because it comes online fairly late, level 13 if memory serves, whereas the other features come online at Level 9 at the latest (still kinda late but not quite as bad).
@@HallowedKeeper_ yeah, I think they're the weakest Beatdown class and they're pretty poor Frontliners, but they're at WORST a high B in every other role. A single Bard can do so much.
Yes, Bards in 5e are amazing. It makes perfect sense for nearly every Class Tier Ranking to say that, when in doubt, a Bard could probably fulfill X role.
Rouges just fell more like a real investigator. They gather information stay down low blending in, feeling more like a person with real investigative skills than someone just someone casting a spell. Thieves Cant is a way to get information with other seedy people secretly, sometimes from a den or guild, sometimes from a captured enemy. Expertise lets you dominate any investigation or related skill roll. Lock picking and sneaking are both helpful for finding and gathering clues and information. You can still get things like detect magic, and various speak to or understand language spells with races, feats, or through some subclasses, but the fact you’re more limited on when you can use them make it all the more interesting when you decide to. You don't get every spell that can help, but I feel like if you're just saying, well, spells are the answer to everything, then, of course, Rogue doesn't win, nor will any martial class in anything not tanking; spells are just to good at covering you for everything you want to do. You could probably just charm people and command them to answer your questions and be done with half of your investigation. But Rouges can do it too and do it in a more entertaining less, I just did the auto success cast a spell on the corpse, and it says who killed them way. They can blend in with other criminals to get intel, break into houses to find evidence, and sneak into the prison or hospital to talk to a key witness under protection. They my not be optimal depending on how you look at it but they feel optimal.
The rogue will do fine, so long as the task can be done with their current skill proficiencies and Expertise. But if they need to see what is inside the king's personal room without risking a diplomatic incidence, it gets a lot more problematic.
@@fendelphi Yes but that's the point. Your on an adventure risks will need to be taken. If your just going to use magic to bypass the risks what's the point of the adventure. What's the point of stealth and lockpicking if not to break in. Or the point of persuasion if not to convince someone to let you in. Maybe disguise kit into a maid. Again magic is always an option too. My last line in my first comment is me stating the none magic options are not always optimal. But just as an example let's say your the wizard and you need in and it's still low level your best options are charm person, invisibility, passwithout trace maybe spider climb. You likely don't have them all prepaid so you long rest and switch assuming you have them all. The rouge no worse off in most cases unless you went really weird your going to have stealth likely thieves tools. Even if not your dex is giving it +4 or 5 at this point. I find most Rouge get proficient in deception or persuasion. Depending on background or subclass you can have disguise kit phantom would even let you change a skill out. If invisibility or something like spider climb is a must there are potions to give them. You also don't just have the two skills uou an expert in you have usually 6 - 8 skills proficiencies more if your trying to be a skill monkey. Magics great but creativity and skill can be just as good. Sorry my comments are so long I just like giving examples.
@@yohlazy I think you are missing the point here. It is not that Rogues cant be investigators. They surely can. But we are talking about being "The Best" investigators, and magic simply gives you many more options. A Bard have many of the same skills and expertise as a Rogue(and even get half proficiency in a bunch of stuff) AND they have magic. That is why Rogues are not the S tier Investigator. On the flipside, an Investigator type Rogue does not really rely on spell slots and similar, so they are always great to have around if your spellcasters do not have a fitting spell available.
@@fendelphi I think your missing my point I was answering them when they asked why so many people listed rouge so high. Like I said it's not that they are optimal but they feel optimal. In some occasions they can even be better like if the enemy is using detect magic a lot or can see through illusions but magic is in almost all circumstances better. It's why I said martial class really can't do anything better but tank. The situation really has to present itself for magic to not be the best solution to almost every problem. If anything that might be a problem all it's own as it really undermines what other classes can do.
@@yohlazy That they "feel" optimal is simply a question about roleplaying though. Remember, this is from a "base class" perspective, no matter what kind of subclass you pick. Rogues have a tendency to focus on stealth and other Dex based skills, which obviously will make infiltration easier. But that is only a small part of being an Investigator. And it is hardly unique, when you have classes such as Rangers and Bards which can be just as good at stealth with their various skills and abilities(no spells involved). An investigator can also be a researcher who gather all the clues, sometimes provided from other party members, then use their skills to connect the dots. The more a class can use diverse forms of investigation, the higher rated it is for that role. The "magic vs skill based" is really a question about the expected vs the unexpected. Spells can provide great solutions, if you have the right spell for the job already prepared. Skills are broad in application and can be used without preparation, which makes them awesome in many common situations("think fast" scenarios), and can have very high skill modifiers(especially for Rogue), but they cant be used as creatively or for very specialized investigations. And just as a wizard could have anti-magic fields to keep spells from infiltrating their tower of secrets, they could have magical warning systems that a non-magic user will not be able to detect. A class that can use both types can be roleplayed, and played, in many ways. The Bard might have the appearance of a typical ministrel, but is in fact an agent of the crown, using their charm, and other talents, to get various bits of info from half-drunk tavern patrons or talkative streetmerchants, then act on it with a mix of spell enhanced investigations and covert infiltration. You could roleplay a Ranger into something similar of a Rogue, keeping to the shadows, observing their surroundings, and quietly produce results, through a mix of magic and skills.
I think you need to bound rankings by tier. I agree magic makes a difference, but spell accumulation takes a lot of levels. Especially considering the majority of games are under 10th level
I agree. Wizard investigator is only as good as spells he happen to have written to book. Not all spells are merely 'gimme', there's a lot work, dedication and even luck needed for full spell book.
The Investigator is an interesting role. I almost feel like 50+% of the role is how much of an investigator the Player is, not the character. The character can come up with some of the clues, have investigation skill/expertise, have a high intelligence, wisdom, or charisma, have other skills like history, nature, perception, survival that can help, but often it's the player who has to really put it together.
This is so true. I find myself filling this role regardless of my character build in nearly every party. I love solving mysteries and if a player puts something together on their own without needing a roll, any character can be an excellent investigator.
This is messed up. If a DM allows a character with low ability scores to solve difficult problems without rolling, they are not doing their job properly. The whole idea behind a character is that their scores determine how well they can do something. If we say that a player solving something equals the character solving something without rolling, you may as well allow your wizard decapitate the big bad without rolling with a knife on his first attack.
@@charleshodgdon6168 But by the same token, you can't give me a riddle I know the answer to and then not expect me to share the answer with the table, especially since you can't just roll intelligence to solve the riddle. this is the classic problem with puzzles. Most DMs wouldn't allow your 18 INT character to immediately solve a puzzle, and they also won't allow you to just roll intelligence to auto-solve it, but they expect that you if you the player solves it, and you happen to be playing a character with "low intelligence" that you shouldn't be allowed to solve the puzzle. And if you just allow rolling... what's the point of detailing the puzzle? the details don't matter, it is just an Intelligence check versus a static DC.
@@charleshodgdon6168 The Tomb of Annihilation would be super easy and really boring if it was just a bunch of Intelligence (Investigation) checks. Someone would just go for a high Intelligence and expertise Investigation and breeze through the Temple of the Nine Gods.
I feel one thing that's underrated about artificers is that they can change their prepared spell list daily. With classes like the bard and even the wizard you have to select spells and build for that role, but with an artificer you can just wake up and take "Locate Object" and "Enhance Ability" and "Invisibility" when a bard or a wizard might easily pass up on those for other options. Also artificers are wayyyyyyy less MAD than paladins or rangers which are the other main half casters, which really allows them to focus on just intelligence, which means more spells prepared, more uses of some class abilities, and more feats for investigations. They also get ritual casting unlike other half casters and (even full casters like sorcerers) They're the second best investigator class in my opinion (after the wizard).
Interesting, I have not yet played an artificer, but these are good points. It's almost as if the designed weakness of being a half-caster was being balanced by the Prepared and Ritual casting flexibility. Thanks for pointing that out.
100%. My artificer quickly became the party's de facto investigator, even before he multiclassed with rogue. I think the only reason artificers are half casters is that they would be OP as full casters. They can add spells from any caster class to their spell books, and scribe scrolls for any class, and use scrolls for any class. This can be done for any level of spell, thereby giving them a workaround to cast any spell at any level from any class, in addition to all of the other stuff they can do. By 7th level, they can attune to any magical object regardless of class restrictions, attune to more magic items than any other class, and their ability to make or modify magic items can only be challenged by high level wizards. There's no reason an artificer must have a low CHA score. In the original Eberron source book, an artificer's magic ability is based on their CHA. It was changed to INT in the D&D 5e books when they imported the class.
Spells are an incredibly powerful tool in the game but I think you guys are over looking a very important question when you do these rankings, and that is... "What happens when those spells fail?" Mind reading and control spells are a good additive for a decent Charisma, but aren't a good substitute for a bad one. For example if you fail a Charisma check usually things don't escalate over it, but if you fail to read someone's mind with a spell this are most likely to come to blows or at least shut down the conversation. Also a good DM seeing a player having an over reliance on spells will punish that in my opinion.
If you look at the movie "To Cast a Deadly Spell" (RIP Fred Ward), The Dresden Files, or Travis Willingham's character in Exandria Unlimited (amazing series by the way) ... the most compelling thing about those detectives is that they're non-magic users in a world of the arcane, surviving on their wits and hard skills rather than magic carpets and fairy dust. I play D&D for the story, so min-maxing doesn't really appeal to me for questions like this, which seems to be a roleplaying question. Wizards only have the advantage if by "investigation" you mean, "Hey DM, I cast a spell - tell me what the secret is."
And even then, the DM doesn't have to. Legend Lore is a good example of it: you're not given precise information, only cryptic wisdom on the matter. Detect Thoughts doesn't work if the victim of it is smart (and it should be AWARE that.... spells like this exist and must be prepared for it) and Speak with Dead crumbles if the victim got killed in *any* normal way murder works - with the killer being unseen or unidentifiable
I understand what you're saying, but the Wizard's player can roleplay just as effectively as any other player AND has the game's best spell list and ritual casting feature. I agree that they underestimate several classes, but it's hard to overrate the Wizard.
Investigations are something where a team of characters with different skill sets can really amplify each other's efforts, which also can make for adventures where everyone can participate in different ways even outside of combat.
I feel like we’re relying far too much on expecting magic to be a problem solving factor. Sure, the casters can pull a lot off, but then they don’t have the resources to use for other stuff that they’re expected to do. The rogue can accomplish pretty much all of these factors without having to expend a vital party resource.
@@collinbeal and then you remember that suspects won't sit still for ten minutes so you can cast the spell to read their minds, nor will any of the various other time sensitive actions an investigator has to take be possible.
A couple more words to counter Speak with Dead: When people are being murdered to the point of it being a mystery, *those people get killed in a way THAT DOESN'T REVEAL TO THE VICTIM WHO'S KILLING THEM!* That's the whole point!!!!!
@@ventrue7 Bards get Glibness at 15. And only if they choose it. And it only works for CHA skills. And it only helps if they have those skills, which is too bad since investigation is primarily INT and WIS Meanwhile Rogues get Expertise at 6 while Bards have to wait till 10
@@barbagianniv0lante107 Imagine this: Wizard with skill expert-investigation feat, +5 int, enhance ability spell. By lvl 8 this wizard has +11 investigation and rolls with advantage. By lvl 13 it's +15 and rolls with advantage. At lvl 17+, +17 and rolls with advantage. BOOM! Super-elite investigator beating everyone else in sheer skill, Plus they have their spells to complement their ridiculous investigation skill checks.
I’m currently playing a Kenku arcane trickster rogue, and I wanted to build him as an intelligent scoundrel who is cunning in many ways At level 6 he has a +9 investigation thanks to expertise and the Dungeon Dudes house ruled ability array While it is true that he doesn’t have access to a lot of spells he is still very capable, and it feels more bad ass relying on talent rather than magic. Just like how Batman is cooler than Superman
I am currently playing a inquisitive inquisitive rogue Kenku and man it is tough communication wise and gathering information when you're limited with speaking
The thing about using limited resources like spells for investigation instead of unlimited resources like skills, is you don't have them later. Let's say you finally reach the end of the trail of clues and find your Big Bad (assuming he hasn't already skipped town because you've been spending ten minutes to ritually cast Detect Magic on every room you walk into); now it's time for the boss fight, and your spellcasters are mostly tapped out from casting all those investigative spells. (A lot of those really useful spells, like Detect Thoughts, See Invisibility, and Locate Object/Creature, aren't actually rituals!) Ideally, spellcasting should support mundane investigation, not supplant it. Use a spell when your investigation hits a wall, or when you need a piece of information *right now* because you're on a timer. Otherwise you might find yourself moving too slowly to close the case, or low on resources when the investigation turns violent.
I think it's strange that the Rogue is constantly knocked for having to "play by the rules" in terms of using their skills, but I would think there's much more flexibility in using skills than being bound by the exact spell descriptions that are in your spellbook. Detect Magic can only tell you so much by the spell's rules, Detect Thoughts could always be bypassed with a successful save, etc. Additionally, in a world where magic exists, its unrealistic to imagine mysteries where the entire thing could be unraveled by a low level spell. If Druids exist in this world, would anyone commit crimes undisguised in full view of pets or plants? If Clerics exist, why would you let a victim see you before you murdered them? Ultimately I think the Investigator role is mostly down to player and their own RP, along with the DM and what mystery they present. In that regard I see Rogues and Bards pulling ahead for just being able to roll ridiculously high basically no matter what.
Those are all reaches. Spells like detect magic tell you so much more than you are giving it credit for its criminal. Also, assuming everyone knows everyone else’s capabilities in the entire world is silly. On that note the only reason we know so much about everything in this world is the internet and mass communication. That isnt a thing in dnd
@@Jellypope I mean it's campaign and setting dependent. If it's in a poor, isolated, unknowledgable area, certainly there are things people wouldn't know. I'm just saying there's definitely quite a lot of settings where NPCs would have this knowledge and I think it's largely being ignored.
Ya. I give Bards a slight edge because magic DOES help, but how does a wizard get S tier without expertise and no social skills, Perception, or Survival? Sure. The wizard might have the knowledge to solve a puzzle, but they won't be able to find the puzzle in the first place without wasting a lot of spells which will definitely slow them down. If a Wizard is going to waste a 2nd or 3rd level spell to make sure they can get past the door or get info from a suspect. And Monty always says 'you have to make your bard's spells that way' on every one of these. As if the party or GM is going to wait for a long rest in order for a wizard to change their spells around? Not likely. If the dungeon has a puzzle, you have to solve it right then and there. Wizard A (Maybe even B). Rogue A. Bard S.
If your wizard only gets 2 skills at game start, what's the chance they take 2 knowledge skills? And if they do, they dont have Insight or Investigation. So ya, having a third or fourth skill at game start is really helpful.
Love the rogue. They can pick the lock, sneak in, find the safe behind the portrait, open the safe, pull out important documents, and switch them with counterfeit documents. And do all that in disguise as a butler/maid so they can just saunter on out Edit: most of what I described is basically resource free. Even with ritual spells (which I love) the wizard may need to be sparing with their spells and spell selections
Ressource free but not risk free - you fail your lockpicking roll - what to do? Wizards can cast silence in an area. Misty step through the keyhole - and the wizards can just copy the real documents (magic) and put them back again. No need to counterfeit. And if something goes bad - you just teleport out or make yourself invisible. If the rogue gets caught - what to do? Maybe you have been playing with a very friendly DM - but yeah the rogue is definitely not the best.
They said this with the neogotiator too, but there's sort of a meta-game element to social and investigative reactions. If you're a player that has an aclimation to being charismatic or asking the right questions that can optimize your experience playing these positions despite class. Of course that's not the only factor, spells, and skill checks are good, but it's amazing how variable the actual Player skill set can shake things up.
yes, yes you are, lol. rogues know literally nothing about celestials, fey, fiends, undead, magic in general, or the history of the realm - just who has money and how to get it.
@@alexiamapel2956 says who? If you think that Rogue's wouldn't know anything about celestials, fiends and fey in a fantasy based world is a really dumb take.
Yes, this is now a buddy cop film wizard and rogue as investigators. They report to the straight laced paladin captain who is dealing with the mess the barbarian has made.
It seems a bit misleading to punish rogues so hard because "they have to pick the right subclass" to be great and yet you give a pass to all spell casters? It's not like every spell casters just gets those spells. Wizards have to choose them as deliberately as a rogue does their subclass. The S tier, based on your description, means it's almost impossible not to fall into that role to some degree and be good at it...but a blaster wizard is not going to be as good as an expertise rogue.
I agree. Just because Wizards get the spellbook and preparation mechanic doesn't mean that they'll have the opportunity to take every spell. While not as hard-locked of a choice as subclass/Expertise picks, it's not trivial by any means!
Yeah, I love these dudes and I'm happy they admit their bias for spellcasters, but man they really love them 😅 I think Wizards are great and can be amazing for an Investigator, BUT they NEED the spells, same for Bard. You might not get those spells unless you hard choose them and for Bard that can be quite punishing. Rogues are amazing because they just DO it effortlessly. What I love about D&D is that there isn't really a right or wrong, its all subjective and that's what I love about the game, so even then I can't be mad about their choices because their opinions are still valid 🙂
I hear you, but I have never played a wizard that didn’t have suggestion, detect thoughts, and charm person. They are all great spells that do well even in higher levels of play. It’s also relatively cheap to take these spells because it is 2 second levels and a first. If you want to be the best interrogator that gets clean information boom, it’s yours. High int pick up prof in investigation, you find a clue. All you need is a clue and you can use those spells to follow up on it.
The issue wizards have is the DM not throwing them any spell books or spell scrolls that they can copy into their own spell book. They may have the widest array of spells, but they can't access them until they come across either of these outside of leveling.
the dmg does suggest that most spell scrolls can simply be purchased for gold in town, and that many major cities have libraries that contain spell books as well for the levels 1-3 spells. whether or not your dm allows that is their call, but i've never had a problem with any of my tables in terms of finding spells
If you take the Sage background, you should know where to find spells by default. If you know where to find 'secrets of the multiverse', you should know who has a spellbook you need. Cue haggling, bargaining, training montages, and heists.
I'm currently playing an Investigator character, a Half-Orc Rogue (Inquisitive)/Bloodhunter (Lycan). So much fun, easily one of my favorite archetypes!
Interesting build, but you clearly only took inquisitive for the flavor. literaly any other rouge subclass would have offerd you useful abilities. Cause that subclass is such a disappointment.
I think the Rouge has the best ability to get information on the down-low. Wether it be connections with the guilds or blending in with the general public, a Rogue can almost hide in plain sight.
While Wizards, bards, and every other spell caster can literaly hide in plane sight. With spells like Disguise self, Invisability and so-on. Unfortunelly, anything the rogue can do, investigative wise, a spell caster can do far better.
@@zanecrane3687 I mean, if we're just going to assume that a spellcaster always has a spell for any situation, you could argue the wizard is S tier for every role.
@@Dramatic_Gaming Well considering that they can potentally have a spell for any situation and that Druids and Clerics Always know all their spells. Yes, they are prepared. Especially if they know how their DM likes to play.
@@zanecrane3687 But what if magic is noticed? In a world where magic is a thing, logically the other side would also have tools to bamboozle and detect enemy spellcasters. Sorcerers can get away with some things because they have metamagic, but they're still not going to be able to get around see invisibility or detect magic. The rogue's advantage in this case is they can truly go under the radar with people skills alone. They can find things out specifically because they're not using the cheat codes which get them banned.
@@Chameleonradio The other side could then just hire other rogues to sus them out. So much for expertise in stealth if the DM makes an NPC with expertise in Perception. Plus, how is a rogue going to disable a magical trap without a spellcaster? Rogues are week to spell casters. And Spellcasters are only weak to other spellcasters.
Totally sees monty's point on wizards, but i'd like to point out that most of the Wizard's spells which might help on investigations are present on the bard's spellist, things like telepathic bond, enhance ability invisibility and even detect thoughts. A point can be made that Wizards's skills are more centered to investigations but I think that when we take expertise and bardic inspirations into consideration both become really comparable on their capabilities (with the high charisma being a tie braker)
My problem with wizard is I've played with a lot of wizards who just aren't going to want to spend that spell slot using scrying or anything else that doesn't set people on fire. Just because they can do something doesn't mean they will.
the problem with the bard is that they don't get enough spells known to justify taking any of those spells. i've never had a player play a bard who took detect magic, detect thoughts, or frankly almost any of the divination spells because they'd have to give up a lot of combat potential to take them, whereas the wizard loses nothing by doing that.
@@alexiamapel2956 Weird. My standard bard has both Detect Magic and Detect Thoughts; I don't see why a bard would take more than one damaging spell every couple of levels, because otherwise they're sacrificing utility potential. Bards have much better things to do in combat than try to kill people, many of which involve either cantrips or class features rather than spells.
I'm building a detective warlock myself. Custom lineage, skill expert perception, investigator background and observant. 23 passive perception at level 5, baby! I chose the Great old one patron - the beholder daelkyr from eberron - all the sight invocations and a pact of the chain familiar. Not only does he see everything, he can see through walls, detect all magic, send a familiar (and later an arcane eye) to scout around, detect thoughts, scry... All while still being a very effective combatant with eldritch blast and it's invocations and spells like Hunger of Hadar, Evard's Black Tentacles and Summon Shadowspawn. I love my little paranoid fella.
It's funny I've been tinkering with an Investigator subclass for fighters because the quintessential gumshoe (think Dick Tracy) definitely strikes me as that kind of vibe. I thought It'd be very fun to have an intelligent fighter that loses some combat prowess but gains a much more diverse set of abilities to make them useful for more than just cracking skulls!
A counterargument for "spellcasting makes everything better" is.... a smarter DM. Noob DMs don't know how to deal with ritual casts and divination. Savvy DMs are aware that their NPCs should be aware that magic exists and cover up their tracks. Detect Magic? No magic was used to create a mystery, it expired or covered up by Magic Aura. Speak with Dead? Victim doesn't know who killed them because that's the point of assassination. Scrying/Clairvoyance? Nondetection is a relatively cheap spell in terms of magic, and those who would battle the investigators would either have that or Amulet of Proof Against Detection and Location - a cheap magic item - on them. Also Private Sanctum. Detect Thoughts? Same argument as Scrying, not to mention that any wannabe assassin or conspirator would be *aware* that such magic exists and train to mind blank themselves or swallow a death pill. And Speak with Dead doesn't guarantee truthful answers. Magic is countered by using common sense. Skills aren't. Skills complement the player's ability to think. Also the argument for Rogues being B falls apart when one realizes that "S tier if you build it" applies to Bards in much the same way: you must *build* an investigator Bard. Except the Bard suddenly stops being good at everything else at the cost of taking limited spells to be an investigator while Rogue just gets better at what they're already set out to do. Reliable Talent only requires them to be proficient in a skill to effectively use their passive score as their lowest floor. Bards don't have that, and *can't* have that until Glibness is learned, 4 levels after Rogues get their bonus to every skill they know and not just CHA ones
Thank you. I mean I understand that spellcaster has an edge against Jon casters buts that's assuming that you have unlimited spell slots or enough to not run out of it. Rouge due to them not relying on them to be good, they can literally be good at the skill if you choose to be so. If you play your card right you might cover all the exploration and social element's. Also, I think this is based on DM interpretation, magic isn't something invisible or something that doesn't affect the physical world. Because for me I assume that it's something present, something that those who studied Arcana can identify the type of spell that was used.
A counter to rogue is that their character has to be built to be an investigator as well. Most Rogues pick up Dex heavy abilities which are generally pointless in Investigations except in certain cases where it only helps you begin the actual investigating part using something like Stealth, but not all investigations are behind closed areas. Added onto that, Reliable talent is an 11th level ability and only works for skills you're proficient in, so again you must build to be an investigator. As Rogue, you are either dumping INT, CHA, or both, so one is bound to lag behind while Bards get Jack of All Trades that gives them tons of utility without really needing to choose well in their skill proficiencies. And yes, Spells aren't the end all/be all, but they add to utility. Plus, not every investigation is a murder or a cover up, so to say spells don't work is a little insincere. And Bards aren't offensively focused, so they tend to have social manipulation and detect spells very frequently. If I were to tell a new player to create a character randomly and all they knew was what stat scores were most important for their class, the Bard comes out on top as the investigator.
@@harrisonpayne50 See, the weird thing is, as a Rogue, I dump Str and make Wis a 0 mod. I typically go Arcane Trickster, sure, but even when I'm not, having Int and Cha in the positives matters. Especially Cha, as your only hope in not getting killed if you fail a stealth is talking your way out. The Dudes have always been a tad overzealous when it comes to spells. Spells are strong, yes, but the rogue should be at least an A-.
@@harrisonpayne50 1) Rogues get DEX first and foremost, and the *only* DEX skill every Rogue is basically obliged to get is Stealth. They get 3 more, plus 2 from the background, plus possibly race. They don't "focus" on DEX abilities because those abilities are built-in for them, which can't be said about Bards. 2) Typical Rogues dump STR, not mental stats. INT and WIS are stats a Rogue can be great with in addition to their essential DEX and they get 1 more ASI than the rest so they can easily afford taking a +2 to make their already bristling skill variety even higher. Jack of all trades doesn't compare to Reliable Talent or number of proficiencies since the +2 bonus to all skills at 11th level doesn't compare to using your passive score as your minimum roll. And once again, Bards get less skills and get Expertise *4 levels later than Rogues.* Congrats, you're slightly better at stuff you're not proficient with, but are *worse* at stuff that you're *meant to be good at* than an (often) edgy boi in a cloak! What's the point of having a team if your main shtick is to be *slightly* on par with your teammates but not as amazing at the thing you're *meant* to be far and beyond everyone else? Because Rogue doesn't have that problem - they know what they're good at 3) Bards have limited spells known and if they take those investigation options, they are not helpful in combat aside from giving out d8s or insulting enemies. And those slots they burned could've been used in the very same day for winning the possible fight. Rogues are as effective before investigation as they are after it, their longevity and statistical stability of success beats "powerful but situational" of Bards. 4) Bard doesn't come out on top for anything. They're the obligatory joke class that is ight at everything but best at nothing. If you want a real investigator with nothing but stats in mind, Wizard beats Bard by the volume of spells and rituals, and Rogue beats by sheer skill and consistency. Bard exists to exude horni memes
@@harrisonpayne50 I played a Rogue where my INT and STR were my weakest stats but I was still averaging an 18-20 on INT checks due to proficiency and expertise before hitting 11. Rogue's are built to succeed
Artificer infusions give them a major edge in exploration and finding clues. They're also prepared spellcasters, so they can bring whatever spells they need including locate object and locate plants and animals. In addition, they have trinkets they can use to barter for information and the intimidating presence of a half caster in heavy armor.
On the druid it's important to also talk about wild shape for exploration and detection. Like change into a dire wolf or a dog to smell the criminal that has just escape, or change into a snake to detect invisible creature very easily
I know Sherlock Holmes was briefly mentioned but I think it's a great example of non-magical things that are crucial for investigation. Things like avoiding being seen, blending into the environment, and having an information network. Those are all things rogues tend to have over other classes.
I say Bard. They get the Detect spells, Speak with X spells, Comprehend spells, and social manipulation spells ON TOP of skill proficiency/expertise and Jack of All Trades that allows them to be built very inefficiently and still be able to fit the role. This also allows them to save spell slots and JoAT gives them half proficiency in just about everything which lets them really take over an investigation that isn't as simple as needing one or two spells/skills. Edit: And this is without ANY consideration of subclass abilities.
First of all, love these videos! This has been a fun series to follow. Now, for my gripe: the Bard getting A/S tier in everything... I just don't see it. Yes, they can choose to specialize in certain areas like the Investigator, but they don't have enough spells known to be devoted to it and also excel at everything else. Seems a lot more like a B ranking to me in those areas. I think Negotiator and Supporter are the only two roles I would have them as A/S in because their spell lists (heavy enchantment/control), innate class abilities (Inspiration, extra proficiencies/expertise), and high charisma makes them a natural at those areas. Wizard I'm okay with on the basis that they're Intelligence-based and can learn a TON of spells.
Bards are… basically the WoTC version of a cheat code. They can be anything in the game and have a multitude of build options that allow them to basically play any role in the game. Their skill expertise and their spellcasting just put them miles ahead of a lot of the other classes.
Of course, to play devil's advocate, the B ranking by the Dudes' definition can't go higher than A, while the A ranking can get bumped up to S with a good build. That seems like exactly what the Bard class as a whole is, at least for Investigator, Support, Utility, etc. You can build a Bard to be A/S in almost every role in the party (but only 1 or 2), or you can build your bard to be A/B in just about every party role at the same time. But you can't build your Bard to fill every role at the A or S tier simultaneously.
@@chrisvossler8795 Good point... I suppose that's maybe where my differentiation in opinion lies then. I don't really see them as "S" tier in anything except for Support and Negotiator, which they admittedly deserve - and Support is tied with Cleric and Druid. I could certainly see how they're able to reach "A" tier on a lot of other areas, however. To me, that's indicative of a B ranking. All a matter of opinion, I guess. :)
Yeah, their love for Bards seems a bit off. I said this in their infiltrator video's comments... a preparation half-caster (artificer) with a ton of options for infiltration and availability between spells and subclasses with room for ASIs due to being extremely SAD is just "Obviously a C", then the spells-known caster who still has to build for it at the detriment of everything else is borderline S? Gtfo.
@@AnaseSkyrider bard is REALLY hurt by the fact that it only gets a certain number of spells known. That’s the big balance in them. If you’re taking all the Infiltrator spells, you’re not taking any of their other great stuff and that’s why it’s a B for me. Easy to build an A or even S-tier Infiltrator, yes, but it’s costly. Wizard is so GOAT because it has both the spell list and the ability to prep whatever they want, so I can at least see why Monty gave them S tier here. Same reason why I love Druids so much. Clerics, Paladins, and Artificers have similar pros but fall off a bit with more limited (yet still good) spell lists.
Investigation works so well as a framework for a quest in D&D exactly because no class can really do it all, but almost all of the classes can contribute something: Artificer - tool proficiencies & Int skills - can figure out poisons, mechanical devices, deal with traps, find clues Bard - social skills - convincing someone to tell you something or show you something is so versatile, plus so many skill proficiencies can complement any strategy of investigation Cleric - Insight & Medicine, Speak with Dead, Scrying - figuring out who is lying or what killed someone are very useful for unravelling mysteries Druid - Medicine & Survival, Speak with X, Scrying - figuring out what killed someone and where it went by following tracks is extremely helpful in any investigation, not to mention using Wildshape or Wild Companion to follow a suspect without being noticed or for a stake out Paladin - Zone of Truth + Charisma skills + Find Steed - if you need to chase down a suspect and force them to confess then the Paladin is your go-to Barbarian - Intimidation, Grappling & fast movement - chasing down a suspect or torturing out info is their go-to, but if you need to break a trap or use the good old "trigger the trap to find out what it does" they can do that too. Monk - Insight + Fast movement + acrobatics - if you need to run across rooftops, or through alleys to catch a suspect, or if you need someone to go into a potentially dangerous situation without looking like they are armed to the teeth, the Monk is your go-to. Rogue - Fast movement + acrobatics + stealth + traps + Sleight of Hand- following a suspect without being noticed, dealing with traps, chasing down suspects, planting evidence or stealing evidence or subtly acquiring that item you need to scry on someone the rogue is who you look to. Wizard - Int skills + Find Familiar + utility Rituals - need to decipher an encoded message? need to find something hidden by illusions? need to know something? the wizard is who you ask. Sorcerer/Warlock - See Bard & Wizard The only one who is really left out is Fighter...
The rogue being the same tier as a Sorcerer or a warlock just doesn't seem right, they have thief's cant, expertise and a lot of subclasses that add something unique for investigation and gathering information, also role-playing wise the first class to come in mind when thinking of gathering information is the rogue.
@@KnicKnac I think they're only considering the class itself. Subclass wise, they're not even considering them individually but more as a "potential" of the class.
I think one of the core reasons why your ranking is so different from your community's ranking is that you really need to define the specifics of every role in much more details than you currently do. I understand that it's a generic chart for all roles, but it will lead to that, because it's generic. For investigation, there are _many_ things to take into account. Environment (city/nature/social/dungeon ?), ability scores (WIS/INT/CHA ?), skills (proficiencies/expertises/half-proficiencies), spells (divination anyone ? pls), *spell mechanics* (having access to the entire spell list = A ; as opposed to having to learn a few very specific spells, which means having to specialize/build for it = B), base features, etc. An investigator can be a detective, observant, maybe intelligent, maybe not, maybe social, maybe not ; or a researcher, maybe oblivious, maybe not, very intelligent, maybe social, maybe not ; or a talker, maybe oblivious, maybe not, maybe intelligent, maybe not, and very social, etc. That's just based off of ability scores. After that there are skills, that will create different capacities for investigation, then spellcasting, for even more variation. I'm building my first Bard, and I'm sorry but I'm discovering that in terms of spells, the Bard absolutely _has_ to build for investigation in regards to his spells, or else it's just a worse rogue with an overly silvery tongue. Yes you'll talk your way into getting information, but that's still kept fair, just like for the rogue. So it's build dependent, because you have to select spells, on top of context dependent, to get to S tier, making the Bard a B by your ranking system. Now talking one's way out of things is a way to go about an investigation, of course, but ten that's just as "fair" as what the rogue does, minus the security of always getting at least a 10. For that reason, I would say an unlimited 10 on any roll that has proficiency, which can absolutely include all investigating skills, whatever ability score they rely on, is arguably better than Jack of All Trades. It could also be argued that it's build dependent, but it seems to me that most Rogue builds generally go for a good amount of investigator skills anyway. But Reliable Talent is too good in my opinion. Now if we want to talk about spells, we can do that, but we're going to have to talk about not only the spells themselves, but also the spellcasting mechanics. Having to choose spells to _learn_ in order to then spend slots to cast them is wildly different from alrealy knowing all the spells of your class and having to prepare the ones you want to cast pretty much at will as long as there are available slots. In that regard, Cleric spellcasting is strictly superior to Bard spellcasting, or even Wizard spellcasting. Ritual casting is a matter of time, preparation, and knowledge, but that means if you're pressed for time, you can't really ritual cast a spell, making the Wizard generally worse in that regard, if you didn't think you'd have to use those spells, then you haven't prepared it, so ritual or not, a Cleric/Druid can't cast it anyway, so is worse in that regard, and if you never learned that spell, Bard or Wizard, doesn't matter, you can't cast it, so they are worse in that way. The one thing I get from that is that, if a Cleric/Druid wants to be an investigator, he can do it and not be boxed into that role for the whole campaign. That's his role for the day, and that's it, and he is helped with his high WIS. For the other classes, there are more restrictions to their spellcasting, and they might be better than the Cleric/Druid, but they are boxing themselves into that role, making it a build thing, and again, according to your ranking system, relegating them to B at best. Then I don't think you're being completely fair to Paladin, specifically . Paladin at least has the low level divination or enchantment spells and the CHA, while the Monk has the high WIS and potentially the skills. D-tier feels unfair for both of them, maybe is for the Monk, but I'm pretty sure Monk is better than Fighter. All in all, I think the two classes that are the most consistently and generally better on average at being investigators, are the Cleric and the Rogue (in no particular order-can't make up my mind), closely *followed* (and not preceded) by the Bard and the Wizard. All Clerics are extremely flexible with their spells and have access to most if not all divination spells, plus some enchantment spells, and have a high perception, all of that regardless of their subclass. Similarly, Rogues have a lot of unlimited good skills, and then it depends on the build (specific skill proficiencies). But unlimited and free is… pretty damn good, nearly unbeatable if you ask me. Then WIS skills and INT skills are generally high because many skill proficiencies. Then Investigation is relevant in any context, Perception is relevant in any context, while Insight, Persuasion, Intimidation, are limited to social situations. But in a social context, Investigation and Perception will add up to the social skills. So overall, that's the main reason I put Rogue above Bard. Not by a lot, but still.
I feel like soulknife should have gotten more consideration with the Rouge archetypes. Between psy bolstered knack boosting your skills and psychic whispers allowing communication regardless of language. It's a pretty potent package.
Every form of investigation that puts you on a timer(less than 10 minutes) is going against the strength of the Wizard as an investigator. If they do not have the right spells prepared, they really do not have a lot going for them in terms of the investigation. Also, every spell prepared for this specific role removes options for your general offense or utility during that adventure day. On the other hand, as a Researcher(that aspect of Investigation that is done during downtime), they are the best there is, if they have the spells needed in their spellbook. The reason why I think Wizard is not S tier, is because everything takes longer and more preperation, compared to a class like the Bard, which can pick a few potent and reliable investigation spells, but also various proficiencies and expertise, or provide another character Bardic Inspiration if they are better at a specific field in certain situations. This might result in them not having "the best solution" at every given moment, but they will have "a solution" no matter what. And that is what makes the Bard S tier. Example, you need to sneak into a guarded house to find some hidden documents. Unless you have the exact spells needed, the Wizard will find it difficult to sneak into such a building, find the documents and get out again without being spotted. Even if they have spells like Invisibility or Fly available, as well as a spell to unlock any doors or find secret compartments, they still need a decent Stealth score to avoid detection(and every spell used with a verbal component risk being detected). It would require a long list of specific spells for this one task, but you could pull it off with little effort, if you have said skills prepared and ready to go. On the other hand, a Bard can either do the investigation themselves due to their high skill proficiency and magic capabilities(either bringing Fly or Invisibility), rely on their social skills to get access, or alternatively enhance the capabilities of an ally to do the investigation instead(which technically is also possible for the Wizard, except they cant provide Bardic Inspiration).
Agreed. It strikes me as a rare mystery indeed in which the PCs have unlimited amounts of time to carry out each stage of their investigation. Better an imperfect solution right now than an ideal solution in ten minutes that you don't have.
Funny, I do play a fighter investigator. eldritch knight subclass as it was pretasha so I have a good int. Tasha did give the battlemaster manouver for investigation and insight. (i picked it up with a feat) and as an aside the fighters numerous ASI allows to pick up feats for investigations (observant etc). And as a EK there's a few spells to pick up too.
The thing about the rogue is every effective one has the tools to "find traps" and these translate into investigation skills. Being able to remove them and enter things that people want to keep you out of helps as well and that glorious expertise.
I absolutely love that you mentioned Harry Dresden because I'm currently listening to the Dresden Files audiobooks. This is a great series that you guys are doing. Keep up the great work.
I feel like those tier list are based under the assumption the wizard will have an easy acces to every spell of their spell list. I mean scrolls can be rare and/or pricy, I saw a lot of tables where wizards only had to rely on their level up spells and few scrolls to fill their spellbooks.
I definitely built my last wizard as an investigator/utility. I figured (correctly) that he'd be the only one with any Int. and loaded up on those skills, adaptive movement and battlefield control spells, and made DPR the rest of the party's problem. It worked out just fine. Our Pally ran interrogations and I did everything else in this party role.
I love how often your guys refer to Harry Dresden. Wizard P.I. All the way. Anyone watching this video who hasn’t tried Jim Butcher’s Dresden Files owes it to themselves to give it a read.
The Paladin has spellcasting to complement its charisma skills. The spells command, detect hood and evil, detect magic, detect poison and disease are all 1st level spells that could help quite a bit with various investigations. Level 2 spells include locate object, and zone of truth for gathering information or searching around. The Divine sense base class ability could also be used during investigations.
I actually gotta disagree and say the Artificer is my S ranking. It has spells, albeit half caster, double proficiency (expertise) with thieves tools, can make the right tool for the job on the fly, naturally high investigation due to a high intellect score AND the ability to make infusions, make magic items, and the double proficiency with tools also helps with crafting any items needed for the investigation. In other words, Artificers have more consistent, persistent, and flexible methods to deal with investigations, all of which are key. During an investigation, objects that relate to a tool should consider the person's proficiency (expertise with Artificer) with those tools in the roll. Did the killer use poison? Alchemy. Cut made by a particular blade? Smithing. Possibly escaped through a hidden door? Thieves' tools. You get the idea. The Bard may have charisma and spells, but wont match the swiss army knife array of tricks the Artificer can bring and if those spell slots are used up, the Artificer is still going strong. Also, investigation checks are only matched if you choose the expertise for it. I think the idea of having charisma as the main stat for an investigator is more like James Bond. Instead think of Sherlock Holmes, he did not work well with people AT ALL but is known as the best fictional detective and investigator in history and based off of a real guy with the same mannerisms. The Wizard can match the investigation checks and also has a ton of spell slots, but again same issue: heavy reliance on those spells, whereas the Artificer's remains reliable at all times regardless of spell slots.
Fantastic video, fun timing since I recently made an "Investigative Journalist" character, and in the end was deciding between Bard, Arcane Trickster Rogue, and Wizard, and ended up going with the Bard.
I think rogue is the best investigator, due to their reliable talent, cause there are multiple circumstances where magic just might not work. Underdark - bye bye scrying, wizards tower, possibly many defense mechanisms against other magic, and creatures immune to or resistant to spells affecting the mind, or simply a dead magic zone. Hard evidense like listening to a conversation you weren't meant to hear or letters or documents are often easier to get a hold of if all your skills are reliable that being said spells are powerfull amplifiers and can often make the job easier.
This isn’t a jab at Kelly or Monty, but spellcasting is just so good in DND. It’s good enough that, according to many people including the Dungeon Dudes, spellcasters tend to overpower the martials even in the roles the martials are supposed to fill. It’s very unfortunate that it ends up this way: hopefully when 5.5 or whatever comes out in a few years, the gap between the two groups will narrow significantly.
I have to wonder if these rankings overrate spells as an ability. Given that an adventuring day has 24 hours, and trails do grow cold, spellcasters are great in the morning and early afternoon, but rogues and rangers, like Captain America, can do this all day. I think in the end I just don't like the shirt shrift my sneaky bois have been getting.
I'm inclined to agree. Honestly, I'd rather spend my adventuring day conducting my investigation with skills that don't run out rather than spending limited resources, so that when we reach the end of that trail of clues and find the Big Bad who's responsible for the problem, the party still has all those spell slots for the boss fight.
I haven’t even watched the full video yet, and I’m so proud of you two for what you’re creating and putting another kickstarter out there. Keep it going, dudes!
I've had a rogue dip divination wizard in my head for about three years now. I go back and fore on whether I should stick with a one or two lvl dip or go full multiclass for the Inquisitive. But I feel like it could really ruin a DM's day in a mystery/espionage heavy campaign: Expertise in perception and investigation, thieves tools, Observant feat for the fun lip reading side quests and passive skills, detect thoughts, arcane eye eventually, a familiar you can cast invisibility on, two daily auto succeed/failures on whatever.
One thing they didn't mention about the bard is that Jack of all trades means that they'll be solid at the very least even if he doesn't have the proficiency. Also the inspiration dice makes your teammates more competent as well Edit: ok inspiration dice is only for other creatures, but still, it makes your party way more competent as a whole
Pact of the tome warlock will have ritual casting and will add as many rituals as found to their tome, many eldritch invocations also are at will investigation tools. If you go the ancient ones subclass, you also get a bunch of divination spells.
In my opinion this is the best investigator: Knowledge Cleric 17/ Rogue 1 / Divination Wizard 2 The cap stone feature of knowledge cleric is just insane. Just meditate and watch what happened, case closed.
The spell Enhance ability is on the Artificer, bard, cleric, druid, and sorcerer spell list. Artificer, cleric, and druid are prepared casters so they have the ability to pick that spell up the next day if it’s felt like it’s needed. Ranger and wizard get it too per Tasha’s.
Listening in on conversations is a part of investigating as well. Comprehend languages should be able to work most of the time but not when the NPCs are using Thieves Cant.
I've played an investigator character from lv 1 to 20, arcane trickster 16 / divination wizard 3 / knowledge cleric 1. A lot of knowledge expertises, low level spells like detect magic, identify, suggestion, detect thoughts, and a selection of feats for that role (keen mind, observant). I took pallid elf as race (for advantage on insight and investigation, and rise my passive senses' scores). Even with a wizard in my party, we always were discussing about clues we discovered, helping each other (granting advantage for both). That was an awesome investigation-type table.
Guessing: S- Rogue A- Artificer, Bard, Ranger, Wizard B- Druid, Cleric, Sorcerer C- Paladin, Warlock D- Barbarian, Fighter, Monk POST: So what's irking me here is that the guys are just assuming that a wizard is going to have every spell for any situation, which I don't really think is fair. If you go by that logic, you could make a reasonable arguement that the Wizard is the S tier for every role in the game. IMO, the S tier should be the class that, stripped down to the studs and built as close to a 'standard' as possible and no RP taken into account, can get the most done in a role with as little player decision-making as possible. Unless you just choose to actively build them poorly, almost any Rogue will incidentally be a good investigator purely because their primary stats fall in line with investigative skills. Can a Wizard surpass a Rogue with just a few spell and RP choices? Yes, but that still depends on a player choosing ro play the wizard that way.
@@Miggy19779 I never said spellcasting wasn't powerful. I even admitted as much in my own prediction since I gave all the full casters at least a B rank. The issue I have is specifically in how they approached the wizard by assuming it will just have evry spell it could possibly need. If the wizard does have those spells, then yeah, the wizard will probably be the best. But unlike clerics and druids, wizards have to actually *choose* to learn those spells. They don't have access to their full spell list like the other two, so grading the wizard as if it does is giving it an unfair leg up over other classes. Look at it this way: if you grade the wizard in each role by assuming it will just have the spells it needs in any situation, you could make the arguement that the wizard is the S tier in *every* role.
@@Dramatic_Gaming With 44 spells by lvl 20, that averages nearly 5 spells per spell level without even taking into account scrolls or defeating wizard baddies and stealing their spellbooks. That means they could have 1 spell each level for each role. Damage? they can do with just a couple of spells like animate objects. Battlefield control? Wall of Force/Slow/Hypnotic pattern/Forcecage. Investigation? Scrying, contact other plane, divination, augury, detect thoughts, find object. Skill monkey? Borrowed knowledge, enhance ability. Tank? Planar binding earth elementals. All this within their 44 known spells. They can't do healing though, but then, damage mitigation is FAR more efficient than healing anyway and they do it well too. So they are not quite, but almost S tier in every role. THAT is why Monty rates them so highly.
Personally I have tried a bit of an exploration/investigation type ranger (with cha dumpstat) and I honestly think it has a pretty big overlap with the rogue. Druid brings more to the table then a rogue if you compare from the rangers point of view. Imo it's ranger-druid-rogue in that order in b tier. Rogues don't get abilities to magically sense stuff in the wilderness, they don't get spells to talk to animals. Having an additional +4 on investigation doesn't help you if you don't have the means to arrive at the spot you would have to be to apply those skills. Having the rogue at that 1 final push of making a check is what they are good at, but every step of the way, until those checks are served on a silver platter the rogue is like a kid just along for the ride. The druid will be easily able to pick up the trail but might not be able to stick to the trail, and the ranger is pretty likely to pick up the trail while having fairly good checks to solve the mystery. Ever since I have started playing dnd, I have started liking rogues less and less and less. They are worth considering for a maximum 3 level dip, but trying to outroll magic is a near impossible task. Outdamaging multiattack is a near impossible task. Outskirmishing a monk is a difficult task. Thinking he can be more jack of all trades then either the jack himself or the master of the spellbook is silly to even think of. Is there anything that it is best in, even at being good at everything? To me it just feels like there's a couple of classes overshadowing the rogue in any area of the game. It feels like a bard and a ranger, without to much focus, can do 100% what the rogue does and so much more. Also, 1 last thing. With my ranger I managed 7 languages by level 3 without any investment. I don't even see the rogue copy that.
I sort of agree with this, only I can't really say I blame the Dungeon Dudes for it, because 5e as a whole favors spellcasters. They're constantly getting new spells while the martial classes have weak Level 11-20 abilities and very few QOL updates.
Wizards also only get two skills. There's 4 knowledge skills and investigation. They are pretty limited. And if you compare their use of skills to rogues or bards they really fall short. It's like you can conjure a rope but that doesn't mean you can climb it when you need to. They will always be held back by bad rolls and limited skills.
two skills, two background skills (usually going to play a sage for arcana and history, let’s be real), and you can easily pick an ancestry that gives you another skill or two. also, they don’t need to climb that rope, they’re going to misty step up or feather fall down. it’s a bit glib, but magic really can let you do anything, and the two spells mentioned aren’t even specialist spells. having access to full spellcasting lets you just ignore many of the obstacles that a rogue can easily cartwheel around with invisibility, teleportation, divination, etc.
I feel like a lot assumptions are made here about the sort of game these potential investigators are measured by. Here are some examples: The wizard won't always find a place from which to copy every spell that would serve them in their investigation attempts. Detect Thoughts generally is ruled to be unaffected by the languages spoken by the target (except for creatures without any) but RAW a DM could rule that a goblinoid's thoughts are expressed in the goblin language. Also while we're on the subject of languages, I feel like it should be pointed out that if a vital clue is written in Thieves Cant, you're going to need to find someone to interrogate/translate unless you're a rogue. Pesonally, I feel like the warlock might be deserving of a higher ranking. It doesn't feel right to say that the gap between the baseline and a specialized build is big when the choices involved (familiar with invisibility, book of secrets if scrolls and spellbooks are ubiquitous in the setting, etc) are those that most players would make anyway for 2/3 of all possible warlock builds (pact of tome and chain). Last thing, are the optional class features from Tasha's considered to be valid base class options for the purpose of ranking? Because if so, that's a big boost for the Ranger, especially the additional spells and Primal Awareness feature.
I would still put Wizard at a B. To your points about the cleric and druid, you still have to pick the right spells and build your character that way. Yes, INT 20 gives you +5 to investigation, but you have to choose to be proficient. You still have to choose the right spells (Detect Thoughts, Detect Magic, etc). Wizard is not a supreme investigator by default. Baseline rogue gets Reliable Talent ad Blindsense (granted, at higher levels). The class mechanics give you investigative abilities. Rogue also wants to be good at finding stuff, even if that stuff is expensive loot or a trap. You do not have to go out of your way to be even just "good" at investigating as a rogue. For a wizard, you DO have to intentionally build to be good at it. Class mechanics do not inherently give you investigative skills or abilities. I keep coming back to this, lolololol. By your own chart, S is "best in game, REGARDLESS of subclass choice." I'm just not sure what baseline wizard skills make them inherently good at investigating? Compared to a rogue, who even if they don't have investigator in mind, will have the skills to do the job already. Want to be a thief? You still need skills to FIND the loot to begin with; that same skill will help you find clues. Want to be a master assassin? The skills you need to lay an ambush (perception or investigation to scout your target area) are still good for finding clues. You don't need to go out of your way to pick skills for a rogue the same way you do a wizard. Wizard is only S if you build them that way. I think your bias is really showing here. I'd say B for wizard, and a minimum of A for rogue. You say it yourself; wizard only works if you choose the right spells, and even then, saves might fail, detecting magic doesn't tell you everything, etc.. Wizards still have to "play by the rules."
the reason why wizard are good investigators is the same why wizards are ultimate utility caster they can expand their spell book by just finding spell scroll or books and spending some money and time, so they could have lots of useful spells outside thier main role, they also don't have to prepare rituals
I don't know of any Wizard I have ever played or seen play, that did not put investigation as one of their proficient skills....2 from class, 2 from background and 1 from variant human for eg covers Arcana, History, Investigation, and 2 others of your choice. If you do not pick Investigation and arcana as basically mandatory for any wizard there's something wrong with your decision making skills.
First off I agree with you on bard and wizard. Honestly, they are probably tied. I’d probably give them both As, no S tier and then no additional As to other classes. You guys hit the nail on the head. Spell casting is so incredibly powerful in 5e. ANYTHING a martial can do can be matched or exceeded by a spell caster. “Tanking”, shield, absorb elements, silvery barbs, dodging while concentrating on impactful spells….extremely cheap armor dips or access. Damage (I mean a lvl 3 conjure animals can almost do as much DPR as a lvl 20 CBE/SS battle master. Spirit guardians, animate objects…. It’s a bit even funny. Utility…investigation, support, whatever…. It’s not even close. It’s just such a powerful tool.
Magic is such a game changer in D&D 5e. I thing magic-users tend to dominate in 5e more than any other edition. I think players choosing certain classes to fit these roles you are ranking in D&D are drawing on more of those classes’ traditional roles from older editions rather than really delving and thinking about how those classes would really succeed in those roles in D&D 5e.
Nah, 3 and 3.5 casters were absurdly broken, far beyond what they are in 5e. Magic is stronger in 5e than AD&D, 2e, and 4e, but definitely not the strongest it's ever been.
I enjoy this series. It offers valuable insights. One thing I'd like to see is what classes can fill multiple roles and do them fairly well, such as which classes have the most S, A or B rankings. Often with a smaller party, it's valuable to have characters who are good at many things.
So far -- eliminating unanimous B, C, and D ratings -- it appears Artificers, Bards, and Druids are leading the pack by being good at four categories each. I originally thought B ratings were relevant, but then I remembered they were build-specific.
tbf inquisitive rogue can sense invisile creatures at some point. also no detect thougts but when you start rolling 31's in insight (the checks only matter until 30 as per the DMG) you start seeing where the bs comes in. Bottom line is, if you wanna play sherlock holmes, a man that waslks into a room and knows everything, you do inquisitive. The inquisitive rogue is so good you should put rogue at A breaking the spirit of it, or at least acknowledge that at its best rogue is an S
That ability is literally useless. You have to already know or suspect that there is an illusion or something hidden. And if you do, you don't learn anything about it. You just know there is something nearyby. So at best, you can save the wizrd a divination spellslot, and let them solve the mystery. Plus you can only use the ability a few times per long rest.
@@zanecrane3687 if you are playing the class right you can use it 5 times. When you end up in the city ball surrounded by aristocratic types and instantly find out 4 of them are Dopplers you wanna have it
@@KakosKairos that's not how that ability works. It literally tells you nothing about what is triggering it. You guess doppelgangers, could actually be rich people using Illusions to make themselves more beautiful. Either way it's only within 30 ft of you and like I said before you don't learn anything whatsoever about what might be causing it. That is why the ability is useless. At that level just get the wizard to cast true sight on you or someone else with good perception. That is literally infinitely more useful than that useless 13th lvl Inquisitive ability.
I definitely agree with Bard being S-tier. High charisma for social, spells for investigation, expertise. Expertise in a skill with a dumped 8 intelligence puts it at the same level as a wizard with maxed int by level 20. Expertise is such an important aspect for many roles. That being said, not many bards put the expertise in those knowledge skills over their charisma ones. Wizards CAN be good at investigation. Wizards get fewer skill proficiencies than the bard, so the wizard may not even be proficient with that one skill you need. Wizards do get ritual casting and that can be a great boon to have the spells on hand. However, every class can get wizard ritual casting if they spend an ASI on a feat. Additionally, since wizards get so many spells to choose from, they are starved for choices to add to their spellbook. Aside from 8x level 1 spells, wizards only get 4 spells per spell level as they level up. Are you going to take detect thoughts or locate object or web or invisibility or... too many choices leaving the wizard often stuck in a role based on spells in their spellbook. They might know the spell, but they might not as well. Now the DMs do typically bail the wizard out by giving extra spellbooks or spell scrolls or give them other wizards that are willing to let the player copy spells. Unfortunately, I dont get to play at those tables where the dm gives out tons of gold and downtime and the magic walmart of magic items, so I havent experienced that. Warlocks are the dark horse to me. With their eldritch invocations, they can be at least as good at investigation as the wizard. Having detect magic as an at-will spell means that they can find the spy using disguise self or detect the magic mouth or glyph of warding. They can potentially read every language. they can cast spells like arcane eye or even gain an improved form of true-sight by seeing the true shape of shape-shifters. Since they get their spells back on short rest, it's ok to pump out their spells to use their magic and assume they will get a short rest before fighting.
I think Paladin and Monk are slept on, they deserve C. Paladin has zone of truth, good social abilities, the ability to detect some creature types and magic etc, the monk has high wisdom, usually good stealth and the cobalt soul one can extort truth.
Yeah paladins deserve a C tier. Being able to change spells every long rest helps a lot here. Combining high persuasion with some potentially useful spells like locate object or zone of truth will make you at least a decent second investigator. If your main investigator is a wizard, you fill in that social role and a few spells they might not have.
i would argue that Sherlock Holmes is also a wizard. he knows a lot and have high intelligence and he sucks at being social :D this is why every investigator needs their social helper :D
I think people sleep on wildshape for investigation missions. You keeps all you're mental stats and proficiencies and gain those of the creature. It really adds to a druids ability to ascertain what's going on
My psi-warrior fighter is actually the investigator in my party. His high int mixed with his powers allow for quite a bit of skill in that field. I think "investigator" is just a clunky role compared to the others listed. What does an "investigator" do? In D&D its rarely more than an investigation role combined with player ability. Sure, things like speak with [blank] can help, but usually its just look around, roll investigation, then the players discuss. Its just not as specific as say frontliner or infultrator are.
The timing of this is mind-blowing. I'm literally building an investigator character RIGHT NOW for playing in my first ever 5e campaign. Fortunately I'm blessed with an amazing DM, and he actually homebrewed a Rogue subclass a few days ago called Investigator. Which I'm pretty sure would be S-tier on this list.
“If you can’t solve a problem with violence, you are solving the wrong problem.” -Barbarian
If violence doesn’t solve your problem, you’re probably not using enough
Ya don't need to find the hidden door if you break down all the walls
"If you cannot solve a problem with violence, you start raging, endure the incoming pain with a laughter, until you can solve the problem with violence."
A quote from a book I read decades ago “killing people never solves the problem, but it can buy you time to find a better solution”
Rouges are B tier. The community just sees every min/max Rogue dex/char/wiz get a headband of intellect and take skills as a lvl 1/4 feat drop into the role without trying. It is built for the Role...on accident. Even Assassin and Thief can become reality good at...anything if they have an ASI and Expert in front of them. It's baked into the class. Arcane Trickster, Phantom, and Soulknife are the most flexible. All of them should take Ritual Caster (for different reasons), and all of them get abilities that change reality. So yeah, it's B tier...but it can perform like S tier with some time and imagination.
Not sure it should make them S-Tier, but I think you guys did underestimate the Reliable Talent class feature that all Rogues get. It's not really "playing by the rules" anymore when all your Investigation, Perception, and Stealth skill checks are automatically in the 20s; you effectively cannot fail most of the time.
This + theives can't makes rogue easy A. And I feel the same way about warlocks, 3/4 of their pact boons help with investigating and their limited spell slots compared to spells known means they are going to have a few investigation gems on their list regardless of build in addition to good charisma. And A is supposed to be for the classes that will be good regardless of build.
Yes, but remember: sometimes, often when out of combat, you can make a passive check, what means taking 10. It's not as guaranteed as rogue's feature, but it comes up often enough for reliable talent to not be a must-have.
@lygophile I don't understand what you mean. You needn't know something is present to suspect that it is and look for it. And taking 10 is expressly something for out of comabt and that your character is specialized at. This way, the bard with +8 to their musical instrument rolls who's NOMINALLY a virtuoso who's good at thier art doesn't just get murdered because the dice keep rolling low single digits.
@lygophile If it's not in combat ---> you can use passive. Especially in the situation that you KNOW there's something there, I'd say that justifies using a passive minimum.
@lygophile Right, but opposed rolls are different. That's more or less combat of a different sort.
With the artificer Monty never takes the infusions into account, and there are a couple of those geared towards investigation. Items that let you cast certain spells like detect magic and charm person. Stuff like the helm of telepathy or wand of secrets or eyes of the eagle, that you could take and is available to every artificer. And they round out the class a lot, and should be acknowledged.
Also tool expertise can be used to gain knowledge about the craft, and they can just buff skill with guidance and flash of genius to really high levels.
3rd strongest after bard and wizard, very solid A from me.
Agreed
Monty hates half casters lol
@@fatewalker indeed. That is the impression I am getting.
I agree 100% about giving 3rd spot to the artificer. Partially because of everything you mentioned, but on top of that, it's also 1 of only 2 classes in the game with intelligence as their main stat. Monty mentioned how much of a benefit that is in and of itself for the wizard, but that applies just as much for the artificer. I'm playing one in a campaign rn (lvl 1-6 so far) that isn't even specifically built for investigation (apart from just being curious I guess), but within our party, that role has always naturally fallen on me (esp as we don't have a wizard or bard), and I really haven't noticed any big gaps in the tools i have available for it.
Absolutely, artificer should rank higher. If Arcana and History don't help with the investigator role, what do they do?
The wizard is as much, if not more than, a built investigator as many of the other classes. It is easy to say that any wizard is able to cast Detect Thoughts as a ritual, but who has that in their book? "Even a blasty Invoker can...". A blasty Invoker would pass on Scorching Ray, Acid Arrow, and Shatter (let alone Enlarge/Reduce, Flaming Sphere, Hold Person, Invisibility, Levitate, Web, etc., etc.) for their two picks to get Detect Thoughts? It then becomes entirely up to chance, and the whim of the DM, whether or not that wizard would find an investigate type spell in a book or scroll that they looted.
TL;DR A cleric or a druid can get ANY available spell the next day; a rogue or a bard has their skills baked in, always at their fingertips. A wizard has to choose their spells carefully, or get a lucky find, to be effective as an investigator.
how many wizards have you had at your table? in my experience, the wizard ends up collecting a LOT of spells that they usually don’t use every day from scrolls and others’ spellbooks, especially rituals. furthermore, they get two spells in the book per level up, so that’s four for each level of spell, not two. i think if you aren’t giving the wizard at your table a whole bunch of other spells for them to collect, then you should change that practice.
Detect thoughts is not a ritual...and finding spells in the form of defeated wizard enemies or loot or just buying them is a lot more common than made out to be. Just check published adventures, there's plenty of scrolls you can find in the fixed loot you find in most published adventures.
Speaking of the Cleric's spell list, in this week's session, our DM's murder mystery got completely derailed because the Cleric used Speak with Dead to ask the victim who killed him!
And the derail could have been prevented if the DM either had him murdered from behind, poisoned, murdered by someone disguised, murdered via a proxy, murdered via trap.
@@Aro2001 but why do that? Reward your players for outsmarting you!
@@Aro2001 True; the DM was not expecting Speak with Dead! That one spell definitely doesn't make a Cleric the S tier, but it is another tool in the investigator's kit.
@@Hesauce True. As a player I would be mourning anti-climatic ending since I love a good whodunit.
Though with murder by proxy, it could lead to more story and more characterization because it then leads to the mystery of who ordered the hit.
@@Aro2001 I mean, props to the DM not making something up on the fly.
I think you missed a factor about the rogue. One of the most handy options for gathering information is Thieves' Cant. Thieves' Cant allows one to gather information from "not-so-legal" sources, which may have high underground positions depending on the campaign. Wizards have many spell slots as an option, but the rogue just needs to ask the right people.
They also have reliable talent. Which means that after a point when they have expertise in an investigative skill they can't roll below a twenty.
@@lkriticos7619 not even expertise. It’s just proficiency. Any ability check with proficiency, not just expertise. In A5e, it only affects expertise, but that’s a different system
@@ClaireBear_yt Not sure I understand?
@@ClaireBear_yt Rogues get 4 skill proficiencies and 2 expertises at level one. Aside from that, they also get Thieves' tools and Thieves' Cant. You are already well equipped at level 1 in terms of information gathering. Funny, Wizards get spells but Thieves' Cant ^^
@@lkriticos7619 expertise doubles your proficiency. Say you have expertise in thieves tools, stealth, sleight of hand, and deception at level 11, and proficiency in a bunch of other things due to perhaps taking the skilled feat. Reliable talent will let you roll a minimum of 10 + modifiers on ALL of the skills you are *proficient* in. Not *just* ones with expertise.
"Spellcasting is such a gamechanger" +
"Social situations pop up often during investigations" =
"Paladin belongs in D along with Fighter and Monk" 🤔
Yeah, that made me wonder if Paladin should be promoted to C.
They are really biased. I would like to see in the end how each class was ranked in every role.
Paladin gets zone of truth and knows if the person passes. They just beat the crap out of em until they fail then you interrogate em. Paladin also gets great social skills.
D tier.
How?
Paladins literally get free castings of detect evil and good
Monty’s humor for the barbarian just killed me. It’s like someone was writing a resume for a barbarian applying to be a detective!
This just reminds me of Borderlands, Tiny Tina’s Bunkers and badasses when she tells Brick to roll for initiative, and he says “I punch the initiative!” (He also punches the dwarven king and kills him when he was supposed to ask him for help.)
I love Kelly's reaction in the background.
"I cast detect thoughts."
"The club bounces off the king's head. You are now aware that the king does not currently have any thoughts."
"I'm going to put a subtle tracking device on the enemy. Later, I will follow."
"The blood trail goes cold after a few steps. You find a discarded boot with a hole in, and you get your upturned nail back."
"I will ask these plants if a band of goblins have gone by recently."
"You did that."
"Can I see any invisible creatures?"
"No."
"I question the guard."
"The guard questions you back for... 7 points of bludgeoning damage."
"Find traps."
"You charge through the dungeon, setting off all the traps. You are very painfully aware of their exact locations."
Wizard: "could be worse..."
@@Torthrodhel More please. 🥺
@@pdonettes Yes
Monty is always down on artificers not having high level spells. Meanwhile he's all about the Arcane Trickster, which has less casting than the Artificer.
It feels like he doesn't like the steam punk vibe
It's baffling how much he praises the Arcane Trickster, but just can't handle the faster spell progression of an Artificer
I honk the rough just has so many skills to make up for it. Artificer is a full caster so it feels like progression should be fast just my opinion
@@willhughes5762not a full caster; 1/3 caster, I believe is the term. You lose raw "magic" to get your infusions (i.e. magic items) - similar to warlock invocations.
@@Audentior_ItoArtificer is a 1/2 in the same vain as a Paladin or Ranger. Arcane Tricksters and Eldritch Knights are 1/3 casters.
Full caster = Spellcasting at level 1
Half caster = Spellcasting at level 2
One-third caster = Spellcasting at level 3
It surprises me that you definitely talk about the Interrogation part of the investigator role when talking about Bards, but that Paladins are lumped in with fighters and Monks
Sure, Paladins aren't full caster and they don't have skill expertise. But they (should) have a good charisma score and get some really good investigative spells like Zone of Truth and a bunch of "locate" and "detect" divination spells.
I am not arguing that Paladins are A tier by any means, but they definitely have more investigative tools than the other D-tier classes, like, a lot more. Given the lack of other C-tiers, that's where I'm putting it.
I'd even argue that it could be a low B
@@DParkerNunya I don't think it's quite that high, Clerics in this ranking straddle the line between B and C and all the relevant Paladin spells are on the Cleric spell list. Clerics get those spells faster and can choose them the night before if they know they're going on an investigation.
It also would put Paladins in the same tier as Druids, Rogues and Rangers which I also don't think is quite deserved.
Still a lot better than Fighters and Barbarians though.
"There might be some hidden gems on the Paladin spell list."
Zone of Truth: "Am I a joke to you?"
as a spell, yeah it's a joke lol
Merle's signature spell.
Most Paladins don't seem to remember that they have a spell list.
Paladin's also tend to have one or two charisma skills which is useful for interrogations. Definitely more useful than a fighter.
It's one of the spells on their list that I get most excited about the potential of. For instance, walk by a seedy bar, cast, and just wait and watch, as people start saying things they probably shouldn't be saying.
All this tier rankings just push me to create an entire party of barbarians with my friends and resolve all stealth missions, all investigations and social media aspects with brute force xD love the content guys!!
I DM for a party consisting of barbarian, a fighter, and a sorcerer with a very low intelligence. I can confirm, this is what their investigation looks like lol.
The murder hobo investigation unit.
@@Sirfinchyyy I'm dying.
I have a video of my group surprising my DM by revealing that all of us went Barbarian, and we murder-hoboed our way through the rest of the dungeon
If my players did that, they would probably encounter a small mindflayer colony about 3 sessions in, so the next session we would start by rolling new characters.
Barbairian: " i look for traps" DM: " how?" Barb: "i walk forward and see if one springs"
100% find and activate traps. Every paladin and barbarian’s purpose in investigation
Good ol' "Con-based Trap Detection".
Stop drop and roll
@lygophile dodge action doesn't give you advantage on saving throws that's silly. It gives disadvantage on attack rolls against you
Spike pit do not concern Grunk. Grunk break puny spikes with fists, climb out of pit, get cool scars.
Artficer is definitely an A. Tool Expertise gives them expertise in any tool they are proficient in. With Xanathar’s rules you can use many tools in various ways to do investigation. Plus Flash of Genius and spell casting... Not S tier but solid A+
Monty's tied up in spells. Granted, I don't really play spell casters that much, just because that's not my game. But I like playing skill monkey's, and like to rely on things that I don't have to worry about running out of, like spell slots.
Play Bard then
It is a Skill Monkey with Spells, same amount of expertise and half prof to everything else. You even get to have zero skill restrictions
The only difference is no evasion abilities and no reliable talent (they again get Jack of All Trades instead).
Now you have all of the good stuff that doesn't run out and all of the good spells that do run out, win-win
True, it’s easier not having to track spells vs. a skill check - but the sheer power that spells unlock is unmatched (in this instance). Being able to speak with dead, turn invisible, teleport around, charm people, read their thoughts… it’s just stuff that is unmatched by a skill monkey class.
@@Dwhizzle it's matched by RPing and using *your effing brain* instead of a sheet of paper. Magic doesn't always gets you results and it shouldn't. People know damn well to cover up their tracks from magic in a world where it's a norm. Bard tries - spell gone, regardless of result, waste more slots. Rogue tried - one of many opportunities gone, find another one using ya brains. Consistency beats surges of power any day
@@jpjfrey5673 listen, I’m not saying I disagree on the RP side - but that’s not what this video is about. They’re trying to objectively grade who is the *best* at this job. And magic is far too powerful compared to a character with a high skill check. Take it up with wizards if you think it’s unfair.
39:00 "I was suprised that the rogue was the number one ranked..."
I think the reason lies within the question. The question was "which class is the best Investigator". That question does not limit it to the opportunities and features a certain build might allow for, but also the fantasy of playing a certain archetype.
The "best Investigator" might not be the class best at investigating, but rather the class that is the best at scratching that narrative itch.
Rogues scratch that itch for being a Private Eye. Wizards scratch the itch of being a (Magic) Scientist.
And CSI or CDC just doesn't have the appeal to beat the private sleuth.
Yes, scratching the narrative itch is the only reason anyone would ever play an inquisitive rogue. Where as a player who wants to RP an investigator and actually solve mysteries would pick some kind of spell caster and roleplay them as such.
I’ve met a couple of cdc intelligence agents that honestly would fit very well as high level rogues XD
You asked who is the best investigator and a lot of investigation is leg work, like talking to folks (bard), or stake outs, or picking locks, or hunting for clues, or tailing people, or sneaking places. Magic like detect thoughts etc can help that, but rogues can ALWAYS do those things whereas wizards and bards need spell slots. Magic can be a boon but they aren't constant boons.
and more important without the right background the bard and the wizards don't know how to investigate, they lack the knowledge how criminology works, lack of thieves cunt. +11 to the skill check don't matter if aren't use properly, know "what to ask" and to "who" is infinite more important
Wizards have ritual casting, many great investigation spells do not need spell slots - detect magic, augury&divination (tasha's), contact other plane.
Well, Ritual casting means you do not need spell slots for ritual spells. Detect magic, divination, augury, contact other plane are insane investigation tools and cost no spell slots. Also hunting for clues (investigation skill) is an int skill for wizards and it's an obvious auto pick for all wizards, you'd be just a fool for not picking it. Arcana as well for magical investigations (imho the majority of d&d investigations have some magic based stuff in it), and as for picking locks, that is a tool prof so can be learned by anyone using the downtime training rules in the PHB. And the other investigative stuff not included in here, THEN you can use spell slots for.
I differ with them philosophically in terms of whether someone is good at filling a role if they can do it reasonably well throughout the adventuring day or do it extremely well but only a limited number of times and potentially needing plenty of prep time to do it. I prefer the former, they prefer the latter.
It might depend on whether the casters in the party like to “do cool things” scenically through an adventuring day and are willing to be weaker in eventual combats as a result, as opposed to the casters being stingier with their slots and doing whatever possible to solve problems before resorting to spending resources.
Honorable mention: Knowledge Domain cleric.
Just a straight up inquisitor, absolutely. I'm playing one right now. I don't shine in combat, but boy do I shine helping solve mysteries. The major blind spot is the lack of Detect Thoughts, but 1) you get a channel divinity version of it and 2) you could pick it up with a feat.
@cak01vej me too. Divination or war magic subclasses work best IMO
The Barbarian is a very deep class for investigator, they get the D is for Destruction rating
With the right build they can be Catastrophic.
Slight typo in the final slide--Monty has the Artificer as a B, but it shows up as an A for both.
Other than that, I was initially unsure about Ranger at B, thinking "what ranger is going to take speak with animals as one of their four spells known?" But then I remembered that the new optional class features from Tasha's gives speak with animals to all rangers, and lets them cast it once per day for free. So in some ways they will actually be more reliable in this role than the Druid will be (not all druids will have speak with animals prepared at all times).
Yeah, the optional rules from Tasha's really open up the ranger to a bunch of different possibilities.
When the Dudes sort of wrote off the Natural Explorer feature in an urban campaign I was thinking to myself "but why wouldn't you use Deft Explorer for that campaign and double your perception or investigation proficiency bonus instead? (+learn two languages)"
Honestly in regards to the rogue, one interesting thing is that every subclass save for maybe the thief gets at least something to help with their investigation skills. Obviously some are better than others, the Arcane Trickster gives them access to the spells they would need, albeit later than most classes being a 1/3 caster and the Inquisitive and Mastermind are basically designed with being the investigator in mind, but the others also gain access to something that can be used for investigative purposes.
In terms of the Phantom and Scout not being great for investigation, I’ll actually have to disagree. Though admittedly Nature and Survival aren’t necessarily the first things people think of for investigation, they can certainly still be helpful in some ways for finding clues. The Scout not only gets proficiency in both, but also expertise in both, so while a bit more circumstantial they can still be helpful. Meanwhile while I’ll admit I was probably stretching a bit when I said the Phantom got something, there is still some potential use in terms of the soul trinkets. Specifically being able to ask a question of one of the souls. Also the floating proficiency you get can help in a more boring way. Though I’ll admit, I probably consider the Phantom the second worst one given the highly situational nature of the main feature I was thinking of. Though I am curious, going through the skills of the thief, which one(s) do you feel are helpful for an investigation? I would assume fast hands I’d probably the one, but I’d like to know anyways.
Also one separate note. I would also say that if you’re playing a higher level one shot or campaign, that’s when the thief can shine in terms of features. I would probably say it’s one of the most back loaded classes in the game.
@lygophile I was kinda thinking of Fast Hands because I could absolutely see it being useful to gain access to and get the most information out of an area that you only have a very limited amount of time to do so. Even outside of situations where initiative is rolled, effectively you can do twice as much as usual. Second Story work is also useful for sure, though it definitely seems at least a bit more situational.
I do agree though Supreme Sneak is garbage and is kinda the exception when I say the Thief is really back loaded.
Taking all this into account I’ll acknowledge that the Thief is better at investigation than the Phantom, though we’ll have to agree to disagree about the Scout. Though, I feel this does strengthen my point where every rogue gets at least something to help with investigation, and I can confidently include the Thief here as well.
Just going to bring up that I’m just comparing the rogues to eachother. Is a circle of the land Druid better at investigation than a scout rogue? Possibly yes, but that was always beside the point I’m trying to make here. Hell I could well be wrong about whether the Scout is better than the thief in investigation, but I’m also not really trying to make rankings for how each rogue subclass helps the investigation role. I’m just trying to say that they all help in some way. Anyways, not too sure if we’re going to continue discussing this but if we aren’t, thanks for your time.
Edit: One other thing I forgot to mention about the Scout is that they get extra movement which would also be helpful. Didn’t bring it up earlier though as I’m not too sure I should count it.
Oops didn’t see the other comment there. I will agree that the soul trinkets thing probably was a stretch, I think my logic at the time of writing was if there was another murder shortly before I arrived but that’ll probably never come up. What was I thinking there? Though you raise a good point about the passing through walls part, honestly almost forgot about that ability despite the fact that it’s probably better and way less circumstantial than the soul trinket thing. However, I still say it’s probably the least useful mostly because it comes online fairly late, level 13 if memory serves, whereas the other features come online at Level 9 at the latest (still kinda late but not quite as bad).
"I'm tempted to give the Bard the S" is quite the recurring theme in these videos.
"Jack of all trades, also master of a few trades."
They're very versatile and excel at whatever you want them to.
Bards are definitely the build your own role class.
To be fair, Bards are REALLY good in 5e. They may struggle in damage at times, but......everything else is really good
@@HallowedKeeper_ yeah, I think they're the weakest Beatdown class and they're pretty poor Frontliners, but they're at WORST a high B in every other role. A single Bard can do so much.
Yes, Bards in 5e are amazing. It makes perfect sense for nearly every Class Tier Ranking to say that, when in doubt, a Bard could probably fulfill X role.
Rouges just fell more like a real investigator. They gather information stay down low blending in, feeling more like a person with real investigative skills than someone just someone casting a spell. Thieves Cant is a way to get information with other seedy people secretly, sometimes from a den or guild, sometimes from a captured enemy. Expertise lets you dominate any investigation or related skill roll. Lock picking and sneaking are both helpful for finding and gathering clues and information. You can still get things like detect magic, and various speak to or understand language spells with races, feats, or through some subclasses, but the fact you’re more limited on when you can use them make it all the more interesting when you decide to. You don't get every spell that can help, but I feel like if you're just saying, well, spells are the answer to everything, then, of course, Rogue doesn't win, nor will any martial class in anything not tanking; spells are just to good at covering you for everything you want to do. You could probably just charm people and command them to answer your questions and be done with half of your investigation. But Rouges can do it too and do it in a more entertaining less, I just did the auto success cast a spell on the corpse, and it says who killed them way. They can blend in with other criminals to get intel, break into houses to find evidence, and sneak into the prison or hospital to talk to a key witness under protection. They my not be optimal depending on how you look at it but they feel optimal.
The rogue will do fine, so long as the task can be done with their current skill proficiencies and Expertise.
But if they need to see what is inside the king's personal room without risking a diplomatic incidence, it gets a lot more problematic.
@@fendelphi Yes but that's the point. Your on an adventure risks will need to be taken. If your just going to use magic to bypass the risks what's the point of the adventure. What's the point of stealth and lockpicking if not to break in. Or the point of persuasion if not to convince someone to let you in. Maybe disguise kit into a maid. Again magic is always an option too. My last line in my first comment is me stating the none magic options are not always optimal. But just as an example let's say your the wizard and you need in and it's still low level your best options are charm person, invisibility, passwithout trace maybe spider climb. You likely don't have them all prepaid so you long rest and switch assuming you have them all. The rouge no worse off in most cases unless you went really weird your going to have stealth likely thieves tools. Even if not your dex is giving it +4 or 5 at this point. I find most Rouge get proficient in deception or persuasion. Depending on background or subclass you can have disguise kit phantom would even let you change a skill out. If invisibility or something like spider climb is a must there are potions to give them. You also don't just have the two skills uou an expert in you have usually 6 - 8 skills proficiencies more if your trying to be a skill monkey. Magics great but creativity and skill can be just as good. Sorry my comments are so long I just like giving examples.
@@yohlazy I think you are missing the point here. It is not that Rogues cant be investigators. They surely can. But we are talking about being "The Best" investigators, and magic simply gives you many more options. A Bard have many of the same skills and expertise as a Rogue(and even get half proficiency in a bunch of stuff) AND they have magic.
That is why Rogues are not the S tier Investigator.
On the flipside, an Investigator type Rogue does not really rely on spell slots and similar, so they are always great to have around if your spellcasters do not have a fitting spell available.
@@fendelphi I think your missing my point I was answering them when they asked why so many people listed rouge so high. Like I said it's not that they are optimal but they feel optimal. In some occasions they can even be better like if the enemy is using detect magic a lot or can see through illusions but magic is in almost all circumstances better. It's why I said martial class really can't do anything better but tank. The situation really has to present itself for magic to not be the best solution to almost every problem. If anything that might be a problem all it's own as it really undermines what other classes can do.
@@yohlazy That they "feel" optimal is simply a question about roleplaying though. Remember, this is from a "base class" perspective, no matter what kind of subclass you pick.
Rogues have a tendency to focus on stealth and other Dex based skills, which obviously will make infiltration easier. But that is only a small part of being an Investigator. And it is hardly unique, when you have classes such as Rangers and Bards which can be just as good at stealth with their various skills and abilities(no spells involved).
An investigator can also be a researcher who gather all the clues, sometimes provided from other party members, then use their skills to connect the dots.
The more a class can use diverse forms of investigation, the higher rated it is for that role.
The "magic vs skill based" is really a question about the expected vs the unexpected. Spells can provide great solutions, if you have the right spell for the job already prepared.
Skills are broad in application and can be used without preparation, which makes them awesome in many common situations("think fast" scenarios), and can have very high skill modifiers(especially for Rogue), but they cant be used as creatively or for very specialized investigations.
And just as a wizard could have anti-magic fields to keep spells from infiltrating their tower of secrets, they could have magical warning systems that a non-magic user will not be able to detect.
A class that can use both types can be roleplayed, and played, in many ways.
The Bard might have the appearance of a typical ministrel, but is in fact an agent of the crown, using their charm, and other talents, to get various bits of info from half-drunk tavern patrons or talkative streetmerchants, then act on it with a mix of spell enhanced investigations and covert infiltration.
You could roleplay a Ranger into something similar of a Rogue, keeping to the shadows, observing their surroundings, and quietly produce results, through a mix of magic and skills.
I think you need to bound rankings by tier. I agree magic makes a difference, but spell accumulation takes a lot of levels. Especially considering the majority of games are under 10th level
I agree. Wizard investigator is only as good as spells he happen to have written to book. Not all spells are merely 'gimme', there's a lot work, dedication and even luck needed for full spell book.
The Investigator is an interesting role. I almost feel like 50+% of the role is how much of an investigator the Player is, not the character. The character can come up with some of the clues, have investigation skill/expertise, have a high intelligence, wisdom, or charisma, have other skills like history, nature, perception, survival that can help, but often it's the player who has to really put it together.
This is so true. I find myself filling this role regardless of my character build in nearly every party. I love solving mysteries and if a player puts something together on their own without needing a roll, any character can be an excellent investigator.
100% this. If you are an intelligent person that notices clues or can reason things out it doesn't matter what you are playing
This is messed up. If a DM allows a character with low ability scores to solve difficult problems without rolling, they are not doing their job properly.
The whole idea behind a character is that their scores determine how well they can do something. If we say that a player solving something equals the character solving something without rolling, you may as well allow your wizard decapitate the big bad without rolling with a knife on his first attack.
@@charleshodgdon6168 But by the same token, you can't give me a riddle I know the answer to and then not expect me to share the answer with the table, especially since you can't just roll intelligence to solve the riddle.
this is the classic problem with puzzles. Most DMs wouldn't allow your 18 INT character to immediately solve a puzzle, and they also won't allow you to just roll intelligence to auto-solve it, but they expect that you if you the player solves it, and you happen to be playing a character with "low intelligence" that you shouldn't be allowed to solve the puzzle.
And if you just allow rolling... what's the point of detailing the puzzle? the details don't matter, it is just an Intelligence check versus a static DC.
@@charleshodgdon6168 The Tomb of Annihilation would be super easy and really boring if it was just a bunch of Intelligence (Investigation) checks. Someone would just go for a high Intelligence and expertise Investigation and breeze through the Temple of the Nine Gods.
I feel one thing that's underrated about artificers is that they can change their prepared spell list daily. With classes like the bard and even the wizard you have to select spells and build for that role, but with an artificer you can just wake up and take "Locate Object" and "Enhance Ability" and "Invisibility" when a bard or a wizard might easily pass up on those for other options. Also artificers are wayyyyyyy less MAD than paladins or rangers which are the other main half casters, which really allows them to focus on just intelligence, which means more spells prepared, more uses of some class abilities, and more feats for investigations. They also get ritual casting unlike other half casters and (even full casters like sorcerers)
They're the second best investigator class in my opinion (after the wizard).
Interesting, I have not yet played an artificer, but these are good points. It's almost as if the designed weakness of being a half-caster was being balanced by the Prepared and Ritual casting flexibility. Thanks for pointing that out.
100%. My artificer quickly became the party's de facto investigator, even before he multiclassed with rogue. I think the only reason artificers are half casters is that they would be OP as full casters. They can add spells from any caster class to their spell books, and scribe scrolls for any class, and use scrolls for any class. This can be done for any level of spell, thereby giving them a workaround to cast any spell at any level from any class, in addition to all of the other stuff they can do. By 7th level, they can attune to any magical object regardless of class restrictions, attune to more magic items than any other class, and their ability to make or modify magic items can only be challenged by high level wizards. There's no reason an artificer must have a low CHA score. In the original Eberron source book, an artificer's magic ability is based on their CHA. It was changed to INT in the D&D 5e books when they imported the class.
Spells are an incredibly powerful tool in the game but I think you guys are over looking a very important question when you do these rankings, and that is...
"What happens when those spells fail?"
Mind reading and control spells are a good additive for a decent Charisma, but aren't a good substitute for a bad one. For example if you fail a Charisma check usually things don't escalate over it, but if you fail to read someone's mind with a spell this are most likely to come to blows or at least shut down the conversation. Also a good DM seeing a player having an over reliance on spells will punish that in my opinion.
If you look at the movie "To Cast a Deadly Spell" (RIP Fred Ward), The Dresden Files, or Travis Willingham's character in Exandria Unlimited (amazing series by the way) ... the most compelling thing about those detectives is that they're non-magic users in a world of the arcane, surviving on their wits and hard skills rather than magic carpets and fairy dust.
I play D&D for the story, so min-maxing doesn't really appeal to me for questions like this, which seems to be a roleplaying question. Wizards only have the advantage if by "investigation" you mean, "Hey DM, I cast a spell - tell me what the secret is."
And even then, the DM doesn't have to. Legend Lore is a good example of it: you're not given precise information, only cryptic wisdom on the matter. Detect Thoughts doesn't work if the victim of it is smart (and it should be AWARE that.... spells like this exist and must be prepared for it) and Speak with Dead crumbles if the victim got killed in *any* normal way murder works - with the killer being unseen or unidentifiable
I understand what you're saying, but the Wizard's player can roleplay just as effectively as any other player AND has the game's best spell list and ritual casting feature.
I agree that they underestimate several classes, but it's hard to overrate the Wizard.
Investigations are something where a team of characters with different skill sets can really amplify each other's efforts, which also can make for adventures where everyone can participate in different ways even outside of combat.
I feel like we’re relying far too much on expecting magic to be a problem solving factor. Sure, the casters can pull a lot off, but then they don’t have the resources to use for other stuff that they’re expected to do. The rogue can accomplish pretty much all of these factors without having to expend a vital party resource.
But then you remember that Wizards are ritual casters that expend no resources in casting powerful divination magic
@@collinbeal and then you remember that suspects won't sit still for ten minutes so you can cast the spell to read their minds, nor will any of the various other time sensitive actions an investigator has to take be possible.
Two words for Rogue investigator: RELIABLE TALENT
A couple more words to counter Speak with Dead:
When people are being murdered to the point of it being a mystery, *those people get killed in a way THAT DOESN'T REVEAL TO THE VICTIM WHO'S KILLING THEM!* That's the whole point!!!!!
Also it comes at 11…
@@ventrue7 Bards get Glibness at 15. And only if they choose it. And it only works for CHA skills. And it only helps if they have those skills, which is too bad since investigation is primarily INT and WIS
Meanwhile Rogues get Expertise at 6 while Bards have to wait till 10
@@ventrue7 apparently that doesn't matter since wizards are takin S
@@barbagianniv0lante107 Imagine this: Wizard with skill expert-investigation feat, +5 int, enhance ability spell. By lvl 8 this wizard has +11 investigation and rolls with advantage. By lvl 13 it's +15 and rolls with advantage. At lvl 17+, +17 and rolls with advantage. BOOM! Super-elite investigator beating everyone else in sheer skill, Plus they have their spells to complement their ridiculous investigation skill checks.
I’m currently playing a Kenku arcane trickster rogue, and I wanted to build him as an intelligent scoundrel who is cunning in many ways
At level 6 he has a +9 investigation thanks to expertise and the Dungeon Dudes house ruled ability array
While it is true that he doesn’t have access to a lot of spells he is still very capable, and it feels more bad ass relying on talent rather than magic. Just like how Batman is cooler than Superman
Nice.
Spells in 5e really are easy mode a lot of the time, it's so satisfying to actually use skills, role-playing etc to succeed :)
I am currently playing a inquisitive inquisitive rogue Kenku and man it is tough communication wise and gathering information when you're limited with speaking
The thing about using limited resources like spells for investigation instead of unlimited resources like skills, is you don't have them later. Let's say you finally reach the end of the trail of clues and find your Big Bad (assuming he hasn't already skipped town because you've been spending ten minutes to ritually cast Detect Magic on every room you walk into); now it's time for the boss fight, and your spellcasters are mostly tapped out from casting all those investigative spells. (A lot of those really useful spells, like Detect Thoughts, See Invisibility, and Locate Object/Creature, aren't actually rituals!)
Ideally, spellcasting should support mundane investigation, not supplant it. Use a spell when your investigation hits a wall, or when you need a piece of information *right now* because you're on a timer. Otherwise you might find yourself moving too slowly to close the case, or low on resources when the investigation turns violent.
Then call in the barbarian....
I think it's strange that the Rogue is constantly knocked for having to "play by the rules" in terms of using their skills, but I would think there's much more flexibility in using skills than being bound by the exact spell descriptions that are in your spellbook. Detect Magic can only tell you so much by the spell's rules, Detect Thoughts could always be bypassed with a successful save, etc.
Additionally, in a world where magic exists, its unrealistic to imagine mysteries where the entire thing could be unraveled by a low level spell. If Druids exist in this world, would anyone commit crimes undisguised in full view of pets or plants? If Clerics exist, why would you let a victim see you before you murdered them?
Ultimately I think the Investigator role is mostly down to player and their own RP, along with the DM and what mystery they present. In that regard I see Rogues and Bards pulling ahead for just being able to roll ridiculously high basically no matter what.
Those are all reaches. Spells like detect magic tell you so much more than you are giving it credit for its criminal. Also, assuming everyone knows everyone else’s capabilities in the entire world is silly. On that note the only reason we know so much about everything in this world is the internet and mass communication. That isnt a thing in dnd
@@Jellypope I mean it's campaign and setting dependent. If it's in a poor, isolated, unknowledgable area, certainly there are things people wouldn't know. I'm just saying there's definitely quite a lot of settings where NPCs would have this knowledge and I think it's largely being ignored.
Ya. I give Bards a slight edge because magic DOES help, but how does a wizard get S tier without expertise and no social skills, Perception, or Survival?
Sure. The wizard might have the knowledge to solve a puzzle, but they won't be able to find the puzzle in the first place without wasting a lot of spells which will definitely slow them down. If a Wizard is going to waste a 2nd or 3rd level spell to make sure they can get past the door or get info from a suspect.
And Monty always says 'you have to make your bard's spells that way' on every one of these. As if the party or GM is going to wait for a long rest in order for a wizard to change their spells around? Not likely. If the dungeon has a puzzle, you have to solve it right then and there.
Wizard A (Maybe even B). Rogue A. Bard S.
If your wizard only gets 2 skills at game start, what's the chance they take 2 knowledge skills? And if they do, they dont have Insight or Investigation. So ya, having a third or fourth skill at game start is really helpful.
@@vinspad3 Well including background there'd be at minimum 4, but I do agree that Expertise is just so good for these kinds of puzzles.
Great job as always, but don't forget about wild shape, you can investigate places that others can't, you get keen senses (like smell)
Love the rogue. They can pick the lock, sneak in, find the safe behind the portrait, open the safe, pull out important documents, and switch them with counterfeit documents. And do all that in disguise as a butler/maid so they can just saunter on out
Edit: most of what I described is basically resource free. Even with ritual spells (which I love) the wizard may need to be sparing with their spells and spell selections
Ressource free but not risk free - you fail your lockpicking roll - what to do?
Wizards can cast silence in an area. Misty step through the keyhole - and the wizards can just copy the real documents (magic) and put them back again. No need to counterfeit. And if something goes bad - you just teleport out or make yourself invisible. If the rogue gets caught - what to do?
Maybe you have been playing with a very friendly DM - but yeah the rogue is definitely not the best.
They said this with the neogotiator too, but there's sort of a meta-game element to social and investigative reactions. If you're a player that has an aclimation to being charismatic or asking the right questions that can optimize your experience playing these positions despite class. Of course that's not the only factor, spells, and skill checks are good, but it's amazing how variable the actual Player skill set can shake things up.
"a wizard's greatest strength is knowledge and knowing everything about every situation"
Rogue: am I a joke to you?
yes, yes you are, lol. rogues know literally nothing about celestials, fey, fiends, undead, magic in general, or the history of the realm - just who has money and how to get it.
@@alexiamapel2956 says who? If you think that Rogue's wouldn't know anything about celestials, fiends and fey in a fantasy based world is a really dumb take.
Yes, this is now a buddy cop film wizard and rogue as investigators. They report to the straight laced paladin captain who is dealing with the mess the barbarian has made.
It seems a bit misleading to punish rogues so hard because "they have to pick the right subclass" to be great and yet you give a pass to all spell casters? It's not like every spell casters just gets those spells. Wizards have to choose them as deliberately as a rogue does their subclass. The S tier, based on your description, means it's almost impossible not to fall into that role to some degree and be good at it...but a blaster wizard is not going to be as good as an expertise rogue.
I agree. Just because Wizards get the spellbook and preparation mechanic doesn't mean that they'll have the opportunity to take every spell. While not as hard-locked of a choice as subclass/Expertise picks, it's not trivial by any means!
Yeah, I love these dudes and I'm happy they admit their bias for spellcasters, but man they really love them 😅 I think Wizards are great and can be amazing for an Investigator, BUT they NEED the spells, same for Bard. You might not get those spells unless you hard choose them and for Bard that can be quite punishing. Rogues are amazing because they just DO it effortlessly. What I love about D&D is that there isn't really a right or wrong, its all subjective and that's what I love about the game, so even then I can't be mad about their choices because their opinions are still valid 🙂
I hear you, but I have never played a wizard that didn’t have suggestion, detect thoughts, and charm person. They are all great spells that do well even in higher levels of play. It’s also relatively cheap to take these spells because it is 2 second levels and a first. If you want to be the best interrogator that gets clean information boom, it’s yours. High int pick up prof in investigation, you find a clue. All you need is a clue and you can use those spells to follow up on it.
The issue wizards have is the DM not throwing them any spell books or spell scrolls that they can copy into their own spell book. They may have the widest array of spells, but they can't access them until they come across either of these outside of leveling.
Good point
the dmg does suggest that most spell scrolls can simply be purchased for gold in town, and that many major cities have libraries that contain spell books as well for the levels 1-3 spells. whether or not your dm allows that is their call, but i've never had a problem with any of my tables in terms of finding spells
Eventually, they will hunt down other wizards and loot their shelves.
Spells are basically magic items. Any class can raise their rank with the right magic items.
If you take the Sage background, you should know where to find spells by default. If you know where to find 'secrets of the multiverse', you should know who has a spellbook you need.
Cue haggling, bargaining, training montages, and heists.
I'm currently playing an Investigator character, a Half-Orc Rogue (Inquisitive)/Bloodhunter (Lycan). So much fun, easily one of my favorite archetypes!
Oooooooo! That sounds like such a fun multiclass! 🤩
I feel like Chetney (Travis' character from Critical Role) might be heading down the same path
@@ericboswell7439 That is true. I am very curious to see what Rogue subclass he picks, assuming he goes at least three levels into Rogue
@@fightingfalcon777 I get a feeling that he isn't going to take anymore blood hunter levels until he talks to the Gorgynei/finish that arc.
Interesting build, but you clearly only took inquisitive for the flavor. literaly any other rouge subclass would have offerd you useful abilities. Cause that subclass is such a disappointment.
I think the Rouge has the best ability to get information on the down-low. Wether it be connections with the guilds or blending in with the general public, a Rogue can almost hide in plain sight.
While Wizards, bards, and every other spell caster can literaly hide in plane sight. With spells like Disguise self, Invisability and so-on. Unfortunelly, anything the rogue can do, investigative wise, a spell caster can do far better.
@@zanecrane3687 I mean, if we're just going to assume that a spellcaster always has a spell for any situation, you could argue the wizard is S tier for every role.
@@Dramatic_Gaming Well considering that they can potentally have a spell for any situation and that Druids and Clerics Always know all their spells. Yes, they are prepared. Especially if they know how their DM likes to play.
@@zanecrane3687 But what if magic is noticed? In a world where magic is a thing, logically the other side would also have tools to bamboozle and detect enemy spellcasters. Sorcerers can get away with some things because they have metamagic, but they're still not going to be able to get around see invisibility or detect magic.
The rogue's advantage in this case is they can truly go under the radar with people skills alone. They can find things out specifically because they're not using the cheat codes which get them banned.
@@Chameleonradio The other side could then just hire other rogues to sus them out. So much for expertise in stealth if the DM makes an NPC with expertise in Perception. Plus, how is a rogue going to disable a magical trap without a spellcaster? Rogues are week to spell casters. And Spellcasters are only weak to other spellcasters.
Totally sees monty's point on wizards, but i'd like to point out that most of the Wizard's spells which might help on investigations are present on the bard's spellist, things like telepathic bond, enhance ability invisibility and even detect thoughts. A point can be made that Wizards's skills are more centered to investigations but I think that when we take expertise and bardic inspirations into consideration both become really comparable on their capabilities (with the high charisma being a tie braker)
My problem with wizard is I've played with a lot of wizards who just aren't going to want to spend that spell slot using scrying or anything else that doesn't set people on fire. Just because they can do something doesn't mean they will.
Agreed
the problem with the bard is that they don't get enough spells known to justify taking any of those spells. i've never had a player play a bard who took detect magic, detect thoughts, or frankly almost any of the divination spells because they'd have to give up a lot of combat potential to take them, whereas the wizard loses nothing by doing that.
@@alexiamapel2956 true. The player needs to make a conscious decision to be more investigator than combatant or something else.
@@alexiamapel2956 Weird. My standard bard has both Detect Magic and Detect Thoughts; I don't see why a bard would take more than one damaging spell every couple of levels, because otherwise they're sacrificing utility potential. Bards have much better things to do in combat than try to kill people, many of which involve either cantrips or class features rather than spells.
I'm building a detective warlock myself. Custom lineage, skill expert perception, investigator background and observant. 23 passive perception at level 5, baby! I chose the Great old one patron - the beholder daelkyr from eberron - all the sight invocations and a pact of the chain familiar. Not only does he see everything, he can see through walls, detect all magic, send a familiar (and later an arcane eye) to scout around, detect thoughts, scry... All while still being a very effective combatant with eldritch blast and it's invocations and spells like Hunger of Hadar, Evard's Black Tentacles and Summon Shadowspawn. I love my little paranoid fella.
It's funny I've been tinkering with an Investigator subclass for fighters because the quintessential gumshoe (think Dick Tracy) definitely strikes me as that kind of vibe.
I thought It'd be very fun to have an intelligent fighter that loses some combat prowess but gains a much more diverse set of abilities to make them useful for more than just cracking skulls!
A counterargument for "spellcasting makes everything better" is.... a smarter DM. Noob DMs don't know how to deal with ritual casts and divination. Savvy DMs are aware that their NPCs should be aware that magic exists and cover up their tracks.
Detect Magic? No magic was used to create a mystery, it expired or covered up by Magic Aura.
Speak with Dead? Victim doesn't know who killed them because that's the point of assassination.
Scrying/Clairvoyance? Nondetection is a relatively cheap spell in terms of magic, and those who would battle the investigators would either have that or Amulet of Proof Against Detection and Location - a cheap magic item - on them. Also Private Sanctum.
Detect Thoughts? Same argument as Scrying, not to mention that any wannabe assassin or conspirator would be *aware* that such magic exists and train to mind blank themselves or swallow a death pill. And Speak with Dead doesn't guarantee truthful answers.
Magic is countered by using common sense. Skills aren't. Skills complement the player's ability to think.
Also the argument for Rogues being B falls apart when one realizes that "S tier if you build it" applies to Bards in much the same way: you must *build* an investigator Bard. Except the Bard suddenly stops being good at everything else at the cost of taking limited spells to be an investigator while Rogue just gets better at what they're already set out to do. Reliable Talent only requires them to be proficient in a skill to effectively use their passive score as their lowest floor. Bards don't have that, and *can't* have that until Glibness is learned, 4 levels after Rogues get their bonus to every skill they know and not just CHA ones
Thank you. I mean I understand that spellcaster has an edge against Jon casters buts that's assuming that you have unlimited spell slots or enough to not run out of it.
Rouge due to them not relying on them to be good, they can literally be good at the skill if you choose to be so. If you play your card right you might cover all the exploration and social element's.
Also, I think this is based on DM interpretation, magic isn't something invisible or something that doesn't affect the physical world. Because for me I assume that it's something present, something that those who studied Arcana can identify the type of spell that was used.
A counter to rogue is that their character has to be built to be an investigator as well. Most Rogues pick up Dex heavy abilities which are generally pointless in Investigations except in certain cases where it only helps you begin the actual investigating part using something like Stealth, but not all investigations are behind closed areas.
Added onto that, Reliable talent is an 11th level ability and only works for skills you're proficient in, so again you must build to be an investigator. As Rogue, you are either dumping INT, CHA, or both, so one is bound to lag behind while Bards get Jack of All Trades that gives them tons of utility without really needing to choose well in their skill proficiencies.
And yes, Spells aren't the end all/be all, but they add to utility. Plus, not every investigation is a murder or a cover up, so to say spells don't work is a little insincere. And Bards aren't offensively focused, so they tend to have social manipulation and detect spells very frequently.
If I were to tell a new player to create a character randomly and all they knew was what stat scores were most important for their class, the Bard comes out on top as the investigator.
@@harrisonpayne50 See, the weird thing is, as a Rogue, I dump Str and make Wis a 0 mod. I typically go Arcane Trickster, sure, but even when I'm not, having Int and Cha in the positives matters. Especially Cha, as your only hope in not getting killed if you fail a stealth is talking your way out.
The Dudes have always been a tad overzealous when it comes to spells. Spells are strong, yes, but the rogue should be at least an A-.
@@harrisonpayne50 1) Rogues get DEX first and foremost, and the *only* DEX skill every Rogue is basically obliged to get is Stealth. They get 3 more, plus 2 from the background, plus possibly race. They don't "focus" on DEX abilities because those abilities are built-in for them, which can't be said about Bards.
2) Typical Rogues dump STR, not mental stats. INT and WIS are stats a Rogue can be great with in addition to their essential DEX and they get 1 more ASI than the rest so they can easily afford taking a +2 to make their already bristling skill variety even higher. Jack of all trades doesn't compare to Reliable Talent or number of proficiencies since the +2 bonus to all skills at 11th level doesn't compare to using your passive score as your minimum roll. And once again, Bards get less skills and get Expertise *4 levels later than Rogues.* Congrats, you're slightly better at stuff you're not proficient with, but are *worse* at stuff that you're *meant to be good at* than an (often) edgy boi in a cloak! What's the point of having a team if your main shtick is to be *slightly* on par with your teammates but not as amazing at the thing you're *meant* to be far and beyond everyone else? Because Rogue doesn't have that problem - they know what they're good at
3) Bards have limited spells known and if they take those investigation options, they are not helpful in combat aside from giving out d8s or insulting enemies. And those slots they burned could've been used in the very same day for winning the possible fight. Rogues are as effective before investigation as they are after it, their longevity and statistical stability of success beats "powerful but situational" of Bards.
4) Bard doesn't come out on top for anything. They're the obligatory joke class that is ight at everything but best at nothing. If you want a real investigator with nothing but stats in mind, Wizard beats Bard by the volume of spells and rituals, and Rogue beats by sheer skill and consistency. Bard exists to exude horni memes
@@harrisonpayne50 I played a Rogue where my INT and STR were my weakest stats but I was still averaging an 18-20 on INT checks due to proficiency and expertise before hitting 11. Rogue's are built to succeed
Artificer infusions give them a major edge in exploration and finding clues. They're also prepared spellcasters, so they can bring whatever spells they need including locate object and locate plants and animals. In addition, they have trinkets they can use to barter for information and the intimidating presence of a half caster in heavy armor.
Disagree with Paladin rating as access to preparation spell casting helps. Zone of truth, divine sense, detect magic etc. B rank.
agreed
On the druid it's important to also talk about wild shape for exploration and detection. Like change into a dire wolf or a dog to smell the criminal that has just escape, or change into a snake to detect invisible creature very easily
I know Sherlock Holmes was briefly mentioned but I think it's a great example of non-magical things that are crucial for investigation. Things like avoiding being seen, blending into the environment, and having an information network. Those are all things rogues tend to have over other classes.
RDJ's Sherlock would be a Multiclass Inquisitive Rogue / Battlemaster Fighter
I say Bard. They get the Detect spells, Speak with X spells, Comprehend spells, and social manipulation spells ON TOP of skill proficiency/expertise and Jack of All Trades that allows them to be built very inefficiently and still be able to fit the role.
This also allows them to save spell slots and JoAT gives them half proficiency in just about everything which lets them really take over an investigation that isn't as simple as needing one or two spells/skills.
Edit: And this is without ANY consideration of subclass abilities.
First of all, love these videos! This has been a fun series to follow. Now, for my gripe: the Bard getting A/S tier in everything... I just don't see it. Yes, they can choose to specialize in certain areas like the Investigator, but they don't have enough spells known to be devoted to it and also excel at everything else. Seems a lot more like a B ranking to me in those areas. I think Negotiator and Supporter are the only two roles I would have them as A/S in because their spell lists (heavy enchantment/control), innate class abilities (Inspiration, extra proficiencies/expertise), and high charisma makes them a natural at those areas.
Wizard I'm okay with on the basis that they're Intelligence-based and can learn a TON of spells.
Bards are… basically the WoTC version of a cheat code. They can be anything in the game and have a multitude of build options that allow them to basically play any role in the game. Their skill expertise and their spellcasting just put them miles ahead of a lot of the other classes.
Of course, to play devil's advocate, the B ranking by the Dudes' definition can't go higher than A, while the A ranking can get bumped up to S with a good build. That seems like exactly what the Bard class as a whole is, at least for Investigator, Support, Utility, etc. You can build a Bard to be A/S in almost every role in the party (but only 1 or 2), or you can build your bard to be A/B in just about every party role at the same time. But you can't build your Bard to fill every role at the A or S tier simultaneously.
@@chrisvossler8795 Good point... I suppose that's maybe where my differentiation in opinion lies then. I don't really see them as "S" tier in anything except for Support and Negotiator, which they admittedly deserve - and Support is tied with Cleric and Druid. I could certainly see how they're able to reach "A" tier on a lot of other areas, however. To me, that's indicative of a B ranking. All a matter of opinion, I guess. :)
Yeah, their love for Bards seems a bit off. I said this in their infiltrator video's comments... a preparation half-caster (artificer) with a ton of options for infiltration and availability between spells and subclasses with room for ASIs due to being extremely SAD is just "Obviously a C", then the spells-known caster who still has to build for it at the detriment of everything else is borderline S? Gtfo.
@@AnaseSkyrider bard is REALLY hurt by the fact that it only gets a certain number of spells known. That’s the big balance in them. If you’re taking all the Infiltrator spells, you’re not taking any of their other great stuff and that’s why it’s a B for me. Easy to build an A or even S-tier Infiltrator, yes, but it’s costly.
Wizard is so GOAT because it has both the spell list and the ability to prep whatever they want, so I can at least see why Monty gave them S tier here. Same reason why I love Druids so much. Clerics, Paladins, and Artificers have similar pros but fall off a bit with more limited (yet still good) spell lists.
Investigation works so well as a framework for a quest in D&D exactly because no class can really do it all, but almost all of the classes can contribute something:
Artificer - tool proficiencies & Int skills - can figure out poisons, mechanical devices, deal with traps, find clues
Bard - social skills - convincing someone to tell you something or show you something is so versatile, plus so many skill proficiencies can complement any strategy of investigation
Cleric - Insight & Medicine, Speak with Dead, Scrying - figuring out who is lying or what killed someone are very useful for unravelling mysteries
Druid - Medicine & Survival, Speak with X, Scrying - figuring out what killed someone and where it went by following tracks is extremely helpful in any investigation, not to mention using Wildshape or Wild Companion to follow a suspect without being noticed or for a stake out
Paladin - Zone of Truth + Charisma skills + Find Steed - if you need to chase down a suspect and force them to confess then the Paladin is your go-to
Barbarian - Intimidation, Grappling & fast movement - chasing down a suspect or torturing out info is their go-to, but if you need to break a trap or use the good old "trigger the trap to find out what it does" they can do that too.
Monk - Insight + Fast movement + acrobatics - if you need to run across rooftops, or through alleys to catch a suspect, or if you need someone to go into a potentially dangerous situation without looking like they are armed to the teeth, the Monk is your go-to.
Rogue - Fast movement + acrobatics + stealth + traps + Sleight of Hand- following a suspect without being noticed, dealing with traps, chasing down suspects, planting evidence or stealing evidence or subtly acquiring that item you need to scry on someone the rogue is who you look to.
Wizard - Int skills + Find Familiar + utility Rituals - need to decipher an encoded message? need to find something hidden by illusions? need to know something? the wizard is who you ask.
Sorcerer/Warlock - See Bard & Wizard
The only one who is really left out is Fighter...
The rogue being the same tier as a Sorcerer or a warlock just doesn't seem right, they have thief's cant, expertise and a lot of subclasses that add something unique for investigation and gathering information, also role-playing wise the first class to come in mind when thinking of gathering information is the rogue.
I feel like they haven't taken into account the classes that get more starting skills than other classes and how much value that provides.
Lineages too. Half-elves get extra along with backgrounds, but still interesting video.
@@KnicKnac I think they're only considering the class itself. Subclass wise, they're not even considering them individually but more as a "potential" of the class.
I think one of the core reasons why your ranking is so different from your community's ranking is that you really need to define the specifics of every role in much more details than you currently do. I understand that it's a generic chart for all roles, but it will lead to that, because it's generic. For investigation, there are _many_ things to take into account. Environment (city/nature/social/dungeon ?), ability scores (WIS/INT/CHA ?), skills (proficiencies/expertises/half-proficiencies), spells (divination anyone ? pls), *spell mechanics* (having access to the entire spell list = A ; as opposed to having to learn a few very specific spells, which means having to specialize/build for it = B), base features, etc.
An investigator can be a detective, observant, maybe intelligent, maybe not, maybe social, maybe not ; or a researcher, maybe oblivious, maybe not, very intelligent, maybe social, maybe not ; or a talker, maybe oblivious, maybe not, maybe intelligent, maybe not, and very social, etc. That's just based off of ability scores. After that there are skills, that will create different capacities for investigation, then spellcasting, for even more variation.
I'm building my first Bard, and I'm sorry but I'm discovering that in terms of spells, the Bard absolutely _has_ to build for investigation in regards to his spells, or else it's just a worse rogue with an overly silvery tongue. Yes you'll talk your way into getting information, but that's still kept fair, just like for the rogue. So it's build dependent, because you have to select spells, on top of context dependent, to get to S tier, making the Bard a B by your ranking system. Now talking one's way out of things is a way to go about an investigation, of course, but ten that's just as "fair" as what the rogue does, minus the security of always getting at least a 10. For that reason, I would say an unlimited 10 on any roll that has proficiency, which can absolutely include all investigating skills, whatever ability score they rely on, is arguably better than Jack of All Trades. It could also be argued that it's build dependent, but it seems to me that most Rogue builds generally go for a good amount of investigator skills anyway. But Reliable Talent is too good in my opinion.
Now if we want to talk about spells, we can do that, but we're going to have to talk about not only the spells themselves, but also the spellcasting mechanics. Having to choose spells to _learn_ in order to then spend slots to cast them is wildly different from alrealy knowing all the spells of your class and having to prepare the ones you want to cast pretty much at will as long as there are available slots. In that regard, Cleric spellcasting is strictly superior to Bard spellcasting, or even Wizard spellcasting. Ritual casting is a matter of time, preparation, and knowledge, but that means if you're pressed for time, you can't really ritual cast a spell, making the Wizard generally worse in that regard, if you didn't think you'd have to use those spells, then you haven't prepared it, so ritual or not, a Cleric/Druid can't cast it anyway, so is worse in that regard, and if you never learned that spell, Bard or Wizard, doesn't matter, you can't cast it, so they are worse in that way. The one thing I get from that is that, if a Cleric/Druid wants to be an investigator, he can do it and not be boxed into that role for the whole campaign. That's his role for the day, and that's it, and he is helped with his high WIS. For the other classes, there are more restrictions to their spellcasting, and they might be better than the Cleric/Druid, but they are boxing themselves into that role, making it a build thing, and again, according to your ranking system, relegating them to B at best.
Then I don't think you're being completely fair to Paladin, specifically . Paladin at least has the low level divination or enchantment spells and the CHA, while the Monk has the high WIS and potentially the skills. D-tier feels unfair for both of them, maybe is for the Monk, but I'm pretty sure Monk is better than Fighter.
All in all, I think the two classes that are the most consistently and generally better on average at being investigators, are the Cleric and the Rogue (in no particular order-can't make up my mind), closely *followed* (and not preceded) by the Bard and the Wizard. All Clerics are extremely flexible with their spells and have access to most if not all divination spells, plus some enchantment spells, and have a high perception, all of that regardless of their subclass. Similarly, Rogues have a lot of unlimited good skills, and then it depends on the build (specific skill proficiencies). But unlimited and free is… pretty damn good, nearly unbeatable if you ask me. Then WIS skills and INT skills are generally high because many skill proficiencies. Then Investigation is relevant in any context, Perception is relevant in any context, while Insight, Persuasion, Intimidation, are limited to social situations. But in a social context, Investigation and Perception will add up to the social skills. So overall, that's the main reason I put Rogue above Bard. Not by a lot, but still.
I feel like soulknife should have gotten more consideration with the Rouge archetypes. Between psy bolstered knack boosting your skills and psychic whispers allowing communication regardless of language. It's a pretty potent package.
Not only that, Phantom has Speak With Dead.... for free
Dudes even made a Soulknife skill monkey build too 😢
Every form of investigation that puts you on a timer(less than 10 minutes) is going against the strength of the Wizard as an investigator. If they do not have the right spells prepared, they really do not have a lot going for them in terms of the investigation. Also, every spell prepared for this specific role removes options for your general offense or utility during that adventure day.
On the other hand, as a Researcher(that aspect of Investigation that is done during downtime), they are the best there is, if they have the spells needed in their spellbook.
The reason why I think Wizard is not S tier, is because everything takes longer and more preperation, compared to a class like the Bard, which can pick a few potent and reliable investigation spells, but also various proficiencies and expertise, or provide another character Bardic Inspiration if they are better at a specific field in certain situations. This might result in them not having "the best solution" at every given moment, but they will have "a solution" no matter what. And that is what makes the Bard S tier.
Example, you need to sneak into a guarded house to find some hidden documents. Unless you have the exact spells needed, the Wizard will find it difficult to sneak into such a building, find the documents and get out again without being spotted. Even if they have spells like Invisibility or Fly available, as well as a spell to unlock any doors or find secret compartments, they still need a decent Stealth score to avoid detection(and every spell used with a verbal component risk being detected). It would require a long list of specific spells for this one task, but you could pull it off with little effort, if you have said skills prepared and ready to go.
On the other hand, a Bard can either do the investigation themselves due to their high skill proficiency and magic capabilities(either bringing Fly or Invisibility), rely on their social skills to get access, or alternatively enhance the capabilities of an ally to do the investigation instead(which technically is also possible for the Wizard, except they cant provide Bardic Inspiration).
Agreed. It strikes me as a rare mystery indeed in which the PCs have unlimited amounts of time to carry out each stage of their investigation. Better an imperfect solution right now than an ideal solution in ten minutes that you don't have.
Funny, I do play a fighter investigator. eldritch knight subclass as it was pretasha so I have a good int. Tasha did give the battlemaster manouver for investigation and insight. (i picked it up with a feat) and as an aside the fighters numerous ASI allows to pick up feats for investigations (observant etc). And as a EK there's a few spells to pick up too.
The thing about the rogue is every effective one has the tools to "find traps" and these translate into investigation skills. Being able to remove them and enter things that people want to keep you out of helps as well and that glorious expertise.
I absolutely love that you mentioned Harry Dresden because I'm currently listening to the Dresden Files audiobooks. This is a great series that you guys are doing. Keep up the great work.
I feel like those tier list are based under the assumption the wizard will have an easy acces to every spell of their spell list. I mean scrolls can be rare and/or pricy, I saw a lot of tables where wizards only had to rely on their level up spells and few scrolls to fill their spellbooks.
I definitely built my last wizard as an investigator/utility. I figured (correctly) that he'd be the only one with any Int. and loaded up on those skills, adaptive movement and battlefield control spells, and made DPR the rest of the party's problem. It worked out just fine. Our Pally ran interrogations and I did everything else in this party role.
I love how often your guys refer to Harry Dresden. Wizard P.I. All the way. Anyone watching this video who hasn’t tried Jim Butcher’s Dresden Files owes it to themselves to give it a read.
The Paladin has spellcasting to complement its charisma skills.
The spells command, detect hood and evil, detect magic, detect poison and disease are all 1st level spells that could help quite a bit with various investigations.
Level 2 spells include locate object, and zone of truth for gathering information or searching around.
The Divine sense base class ability could also be used during investigations.
I actually gotta disagree and say the Artificer is my S ranking. It has spells, albeit half caster, double proficiency (expertise) with thieves tools, can make the right tool for the job on the fly, naturally high investigation due to a high intellect score AND the ability to make infusions, make magic items, and the double proficiency with tools also helps with crafting any items needed for the investigation. In other words, Artificers have more consistent, persistent, and flexible methods to deal with investigations, all of which are key. During an investigation, objects that relate to a tool should consider the person's proficiency (expertise with Artificer) with those tools in the roll. Did the killer use poison? Alchemy. Cut made by a particular blade? Smithing. Possibly escaped through a hidden door? Thieves' tools. You get the idea.
The Bard may have charisma and spells, but wont match the swiss army knife array of tricks the Artificer can bring and if those spell slots are used up, the Artificer is still going strong. Also, investigation checks are only matched if you choose the expertise for it. I think the idea of having charisma as the main stat for an investigator is more like James Bond. Instead think of Sherlock Holmes, he did not work well with people AT ALL but is known as the best fictional detective and investigator in history and based off of a real guy with the same mannerisms.
The Wizard can match the investigation checks and also has a ton of spell slots, but again same issue: heavy reliance on those spells, whereas the Artificer's remains reliable at all times regardless of spell slots.
Fantastic video, fun timing since I recently made an "Investigative Journalist" character, and in the end was deciding between Bard, Arcane Trickster Rogue, and Wizard, and ended up going with the Bard.
I think rogue is the best investigator, due to their reliable talent, cause there are multiple circumstances where magic just might not work. Underdark - bye bye scrying, wizards tower, possibly many defense mechanisms against other magic, and creatures immune to or resistant to spells affecting the mind, or simply a dead magic zone. Hard evidense like listening to a conversation you weren't meant to hear or letters or documents are often easier to get a hold of if all your skills are reliable that being said spells are powerfull amplifiers and can often make the job easier.
This isn’t a jab at Kelly or Monty, but spellcasting is just so good in DND. It’s good enough that, according to many people including the Dungeon Dudes, spellcasters tend to overpower the martials even in the roles the martials are supposed to fill. It’s very unfortunate that it ends up this way: hopefully when 5.5 or whatever comes out in a few years, the gap between the two groups will narrow significantly.
I have to wonder if these rankings overrate spells as an ability. Given that an adventuring day has 24 hours, and trails do grow cold, spellcasters are great in the morning and early afternoon, but rogues and rangers, like Captain America, can do this all day. I think in the end I just don't like the shirt shrift my sneaky bois have been getting.
I'm inclined to agree. Honestly, I'd rather spend my adventuring day conducting my investigation with skills that don't run out rather than spending limited resources, so that when we reach the end of that trail of clues and find the Big Bad who's responsible for the problem, the party still has all those spell slots for the boss fight.
I haven’t even watched the full video yet, and I’m so proud of you two for what you’re creating and putting another kickstarter out there. Keep it going, dudes!
How did I know before this even got out of the sponsor section that Monty would be choosing the wizard for his S tier. :)
I've had a rogue dip divination wizard in my head for about three years now. I go back and fore on whether I should stick with a one or two lvl dip or go full multiclass for the Inquisitive. But I feel like it could really ruin a DM's day in a mystery/espionage heavy campaign: Expertise in perception and investigation, thieves tools, Observant feat for the fun lip reading side quests and passive skills, detect thoughts, arcane eye eventually, a familiar you can cast invisibility on, two daily auto succeed/failures on whatever.
One thing they didn't mention about the bard is that Jack of all trades means that they'll be solid at the very least even if he doesn't have the proficiency. Also the inspiration dice makes your teammates more competent as well
Edit: ok inspiration dice is only for other creatures, but still, it makes your party way more competent as a whole
Pact of the tome warlock will have ritual casting and will add as many rituals as found to their tome, many eldritch invocations also are at will investigation tools. If you go the ancient ones subclass, you also get a bunch of divination spells.
In my opinion this is the best investigator: Knowledge Cleric 17/ Rogue 1 / Divination Wizard 2
The cap stone feature of knowledge cleric is just insane. Just meditate and watch what happened, case closed.
The spell Enhance ability is on the Artificer, bard, cleric, druid, and sorcerer spell list.
Artificer, cleric, and druid are prepared casters so they have the ability to pick that spell up the next day if it’s felt like it’s needed.
Ranger and wizard get it too per Tasha’s.
Listening in on conversations is a part of investigating as well. Comprehend languages should be able to work most of the time but not when the NPCs are using Thieves Cant.
I've played an investigator character from lv 1 to 20, arcane trickster 16 / divination wizard 3 / knowledge cleric 1. A lot of knowledge expertises, low level spells like detect magic, identify, suggestion, detect thoughts, and a selection of feats for that role (keen mind, observant). I took pallid elf as race (for advantage on insight and investigation, and rise my passive senses' scores). Even with a wizard in my party, we always were discussing about clues we discovered, helping each other (granting advantage for both). That was an awesome investigation-type table.
Guessing:
S- Rogue
A- Artificer, Bard, Ranger, Wizard
B- Druid, Cleric, Sorcerer
C- Paladin, Warlock
D- Barbarian, Fighter, Monk
POST: So what's irking me here is that the guys are just assuming that a wizard is going to have every spell for any situation, which I don't really think is fair. If you go by that logic, you could make a reasonable arguement that the Wizard is the S tier for every role in the game. IMO, the S tier should be the class that, stripped down to the studs and built as close to a 'standard' as possible and no RP taken into account, can get the most done in a role with as little player decision-making as possible. Unless you just choose to actively build them poorly, almost any Rogue will incidentally be a good investigator purely because their primary stats fall in line with investigative skills. Can a Wizard surpass a Rogue with just a few spell and RP choices? Yes, but that still depends on a player choosing ro play the wizard that way.
@Cian Wade yeah, unfortunately wizard bias is a real thing. The guys seriously like to undervalue stats and skills...
@@Dramatic_Gaming Spellcasting is by far the most powerful feature in the whole game, that's why. It's not exactly rocket science.
@@Miggy19779 I never said spellcasting wasn't powerful. I even admitted as much in my own prediction since I gave all the full casters at least a B rank. The issue I have is specifically in how they approached the wizard by assuming it will just have evry spell it could possibly need. If the wizard does have those spells, then yeah, the wizard will probably be the best. But unlike clerics and druids, wizards have to actually *choose* to learn those spells. They don't have access to their full spell list like the other two, so grading the wizard as if it does is giving it an unfair leg up over other classes. Look at it this way: if you grade the wizard in each role by assuming it will just have the spells it needs in any situation, you could make the arguement that the wizard is the S tier in *every* role.
@@Dramatic_Gaming With 44 spells by lvl 20, that averages nearly 5 spells per spell level without even taking into account scrolls or defeating wizard baddies and stealing their spellbooks. That means they could have 1 spell each level for each role. Damage? they can do with just a couple of spells like animate objects. Battlefield control? Wall of Force/Slow/Hypnotic pattern/Forcecage. Investigation? Scrying, contact other plane, divination, augury, detect thoughts, find object. Skill monkey? Borrowed knowledge, enhance ability. Tank? Planar binding earth elementals. All this within their 44 known spells.
They can't do healing though, but then, damage mitigation is FAR more efficient than healing anyway and they do it well too.
So they are not quite, but almost S tier in every role.
THAT is why Monty rates them so highly.
Personally I have tried a bit of an exploration/investigation type ranger (with cha dumpstat) and I honestly think it has a pretty big overlap with the rogue. Druid brings more to the table then a rogue if you compare from the rangers point of view. Imo it's ranger-druid-rogue in that order in b tier. Rogues don't get abilities to magically sense stuff in the wilderness, they don't get spells to talk to animals. Having an additional +4 on investigation doesn't help you if you don't have the means to arrive at the spot you would have to be to apply those skills. Having the rogue at that 1 final push of making a check is what they are good at, but every step of the way, until those checks are served on a silver platter the rogue is like a kid just along for the ride. The druid will be easily able to pick up the trail but might not be able to stick to the trail, and the ranger is pretty likely to pick up the trail while having fairly good checks to solve the mystery.
Ever since I have started playing dnd, I have started liking rogues less and less and less. They are worth considering for a maximum 3 level dip, but trying to outroll magic is a near impossible task. Outdamaging multiattack is a near impossible task. Outskirmishing a monk is a difficult task. Thinking he can be more jack of all trades then either the jack himself or the master of the spellbook is silly to even think of.
Is there anything that it is best in, even at being good at everything? To me it just feels like there's a couple of classes overshadowing the rogue in any area of the game. It feels like a bard and a ranger, without to much focus, can do 100% what the rogue does and so much more.
Also, 1 last thing. With my ranger I managed 7 languages by level 3 without any investment. I don't even see the rogue copy that.
Rogues are finally gonna be S-tier in something!
Edit: NVM the Dungeon dudes are showing their spellcaster bias again…
Rogues can be great investigators, but once again -- there are limits to what can be done with skills alone.
D&D has a spellcaster bias; dont blame the messenger
What's not better than skills and magic combined?
I sort of agree with this, only I can't really say I blame the Dungeon Dudes for it, because 5e as a whole favors spellcasters. They're constantly getting new spells while the martial classes have weak Level 11-20 abilities and very few QOL updates.
@@BoPeep_42 this is a really good point
I just love everything you cool guys do. Super excited for the Sebastian Crowe book
Wizards also only get two skills. There's 4 knowledge skills and investigation. They are pretty limited. And if you compare their use of skills to rogues or bards they really fall short. It's like you can conjure a rope but that doesn't mean you can climb it when you need to. They will always be held back by bad rolls and limited skills.
two skills, two background skills (usually going to play a sage for arcana and history, let’s be real), and you can easily pick an ancestry that gives you another skill or two. also, they don’t need to climb that rope, they’re going to misty step up or feather fall down.
it’s a bit glib, but magic really can let you do anything, and the two spells mentioned aren’t even specialist spells. having access to full spellcasting lets you just ignore many of the obstacles that a rogue can easily cartwheel around with invisibility, teleportation, divination, etc.
@@Hazel-xl8in Basically being confined to a background limits roleplay. Who puts featherfall in their list? lol
I feel like a lot assumptions are made here about the sort of game these potential investigators are measured by. Here are some examples:
The wizard won't always find a place from which to copy every spell that would serve them in their investigation attempts.
Detect Thoughts generally is ruled to be unaffected by the languages spoken by the target (except for creatures without any) but RAW a DM could rule that a goblinoid's thoughts are expressed in the goblin language.
Also while we're on the subject of languages, I feel like it should be pointed out that if a vital clue is written in Thieves Cant, you're going to need to find someone to interrogate/translate unless you're a rogue.
Pesonally, I feel like the warlock might be deserving of a higher ranking. It doesn't feel right to say that the gap between the baseline and a specialized build is big when the choices involved (familiar with invisibility, book of secrets if scrolls and spellbooks are ubiquitous in the setting, etc) are those that most players would make anyway for 2/3 of all possible warlock builds (pact of tome and chain).
Last thing, are the optional class features from Tasha's considered to be valid base class options for the purpose of ranking? Because if so, that's a big boost for the Ranger, especially the additional spells and Primal Awareness feature.
I would still put Wizard at a B. To your points about the cleric and druid, you still have to pick the right spells and build your character that way. Yes, INT 20 gives you +5 to investigation, but you have to choose to be proficient. You still have to choose the right spells (Detect Thoughts, Detect Magic, etc). Wizard is not a supreme investigator by default. Baseline rogue gets Reliable Talent ad Blindsense (granted, at higher levels). The class mechanics give you investigative abilities. Rogue also wants to be good at finding stuff, even if that stuff is expensive loot or a trap. You do not have to go out of your way to be even just "good" at investigating as a rogue. For a wizard, you DO have to intentionally build to be good at it. Class mechanics do not inherently give you investigative skills or abilities.
I keep coming back to this, lolololol. By your own chart, S is "best in game, REGARDLESS of subclass choice." I'm just not sure what baseline wizard skills make them inherently good at investigating? Compared to a rogue, who even if they don't have investigator in mind, will have the skills to do the job already. Want to be a thief? You still need skills to FIND the loot to begin with; that same skill will help you find clues. Want to be a master assassin? The skills you need to lay an ambush (perception or investigation to scout your target area) are still good for finding clues. You don't need to go out of your way to pick skills for a rogue the same way you do a wizard. Wizard is only S if you build them that way. I think your bias is really showing here. I'd say B for wizard, and a minimum of A for rogue. You say it yourself; wizard only works if you choose the right spells, and even then, saves might fail, detecting magic doesn't tell you everything, etc.. Wizards still have to "play by the rules."
the reason why wizard are good investigators is the same why wizards are ultimate utility caster
they can expand their spell book by just finding spell scroll or books and spending some money and time, so they could have lots of useful spells outside thier main role, they also don't have to prepare rituals
I don't know of any Wizard I have ever played or seen play, that did not put investigation as one of their proficient skills....2 from class, 2 from background and 1 from variant human for eg covers Arcana, History, Investigation, and 2 others of your choice. If you do not pick Investigation and arcana as basically mandatory for any wizard there's something wrong with your decision making skills.
First off I agree with you on bard and wizard. Honestly, they are probably tied. I’d probably give them both As, no S tier and then no additional As to other classes.
You guys hit the nail on the head. Spell casting is so incredibly powerful in 5e. ANYTHING a martial can do can be matched or exceeded by a spell caster. “Tanking”, shield, absorb elements, silvery barbs, dodging while concentrating on impactful spells….extremely cheap armor dips or access. Damage (I mean a lvl 3 conjure animals can almost do as much DPR as a lvl 20 CBE/SS battle master. Spirit guardians, animate objects…. It’s a bit even funny. Utility…investigation, support, whatever…. It’s not even close.
It’s just such a powerful tool.
Magic is such a game changer in D&D 5e. I thing magic-users tend to dominate in 5e more than any other edition. I think players choosing certain classes to fit these roles you are ranking in D&D are drawing on more of those classes’ traditional roles from older editions rather than really delving and thinking about how those classes would really succeed in those roles in D&D 5e.
Nah, 3 and 3.5 casters were absurdly broken, far beyond what they are in 5e. Magic is stronger in 5e than AD&D, 2e, and 4e, but definitely not the strongest it's ever been.
I enjoy this series. It offers valuable insights. One thing I'd like to see is what classes can fill multiple roles and do them fairly well, such as which classes have the most S, A or B rankings. Often with a smaller party, it's valuable to have characters who are good at many things.
So far -- eliminating unanimous B, C, and D ratings -- it appears Artificers, Bards, and Druids are leading the pack by being good at four categories each. I originally thought B ratings were relevant, but then I remembered they were build-specific.
tbf inquisitive rogue can sense invisile creatures at some point. also no detect thougts but when you start rolling 31's in insight (the checks only matter until 30 as per the DMG) you start seeing where the bs comes in. Bottom line is, if you wanna play sherlock holmes, a man that waslks into a room and knows everything, you do inquisitive. The inquisitive rogue is so good you should put rogue at A breaking the spirit of it, or at least acknowledge that at its best rogue is an S
That ability is literally useless. You have to already know or suspect that there is an illusion or something hidden. And if you do, you don't learn anything about it. You just know there is something nearyby. So at best, you can save the wizrd a divination spellslot, and let them solve the mystery. Plus you can only use the ability a few times per long rest.
@@zanecrane3687 if you are playing the class right you can use it 5 times. When you end up in the city ball surrounded by aristocratic types and instantly find out 4 of them are Dopplers you wanna have it
@@KakosKairos that's not how that ability works. It literally tells you nothing about what is triggering it. You guess doppelgangers, could actually be rich people using Illusions to make themselves more beautiful. Either way it's only within 30 ft of you and like I said before you don't learn anything whatsoever about what might be causing it. That is why the ability is useless. At that level just get the wizard to cast true sight on you or someone else with good perception. That is literally infinitely more useful than that useless 13th lvl Inquisitive ability.
I definitely agree with Bard being S-tier. High charisma for social, spells for investigation, expertise. Expertise in a skill with a dumped 8 intelligence puts it at the same level as a wizard with maxed int by level 20. Expertise is such an important aspect for many roles. That being said, not many bards put the expertise in those knowledge skills over their charisma ones.
Wizards CAN be good at investigation. Wizards get fewer skill proficiencies than the bard, so the wizard may not even be proficient with that one skill you need. Wizards do get ritual casting and that can be a great boon to have the spells on hand. However, every class can get wizard ritual casting if they spend an ASI on a feat. Additionally, since wizards get so many spells to choose from, they are starved for choices to add to their spellbook. Aside from 8x level 1 spells, wizards only get 4 spells per spell level as they level up. Are you going to take detect thoughts or locate object or web or invisibility or... too many choices leaving the wizard often stuck in a role based on spells in their spellbook. They might know the spell, but they might not as well. Now the DMs do typically bail the wizard out by giving extra spellbooks or spell scrolls or give them other wizards that are willing to let the player copy spells. Unfortunately, I dont get to play at those tables where the dm gives out tons of gold and downtime and the magic walmart of magic items, so I havent experienced that.
Warlocks are the dark horse to me. With their eldritch invocations, they can be at least as good at investigation as the wizard. Having detect magic as an at-will spell means that they can find the spy using disguise self or detect the magic mouth or glyph of warding. They can potentially read every language. they can cast spells like arcane eye or even gain an improved form of true-sight by seeing the true shape of shape-shifters. Since they get their spells back on short rest, it's ok to pump out their spells to use their magic and assume they will get a short rest before fighting.
"the magic Walmart" 😝
I think Paladin and Monk are slept on, they deserve C. Paladin has zone of truth, good social abilities, the ability to detect some creature types and magic etc, the monk has high wisdom, usually good stealth and the cobalt soul one can extort truth.
Cobalt Soul is homebrew. Matt Mercer homebrew, but still homebrew
YES!! Another Great Video. Love these! Also, awesome Harry Dresden refrence. Too cool!!
Yeah paladins deserve a C tier. Being able to change spells every long rest helps a lot here. Combining high persuasion with some potentially useful spells like locate object or zone of truth will make you at least a decent second investigator. If your main investigator is a wizard, you fill in that social role and a few spells they might not have.
Could always pick the Ritual Caster feat for your rogue , then you have access to detect magic and of course all other useful ritual spells .
i would argue that Sherlock Holmes is also a wizard.
he knows a lot and have high intelligence and he sucks at being social :D
this is why every investigator needs their social helper :D
I think people sleep on wildshape for investigation missions. You keeps all you're mental stats and proficiencies and gain those of the creature. It really adds to a druids ability to ascertain what's going on
My psi-warrior fighter is actually the investigator in my party. His high int mixed with his powers allow for quite a bit of skill in that field.
I think "investigator" is just a clunky role compared to the others listed. What does an "investigator" do? In D&D its rarely more than an investigation role combined with player ability. Sure, things like speak with [blank] can help, but usually its just look around, roll investigation, then the players discuss. Its just not as specific as say frontliner or infultrator are.
The timing of this is mind-blowing. I'm literally building an investigator character RIGHT NOW for playing in my first ever 5e campaign. Fortunately I'm blessed with an amazing DM, and he actually homebrewed a Rogue subclass a few days ago called Investigator. Which I'm pretty sure would be S-tier on this list.