Dispensible: Rogues

Seriously, lady, you're just going to snag on everything.

     Here's where it's going to start getting tricky.
     I define "rogues" as anybody who is not combat-based, with a lot of skills (mostly in the spheres of sneaking, disabling devices, and picking locks), and the trapfinding special feature. This is usually a rogue, but it could also be any of the base classes from the Complete Adventurer supplement (like the scout, spellthief, or ninja; although none of them do it as well as a rogue).
     Which leads to an inherent problem with the D&D rule system when it comes to rogues. Trapfinding is defined as the ability to search and disarm any trap with a DC over 20. So it does not matter how many ranks your ranger has in Search; if the trap is too tough, he won't be able to find it without trapfinding. And it is only available as a class feature. There are no feats that grant this ability. 
     Now, my first instinct as to how to make rogues dispensible is to introduce a little house-rule called "Screw Trapfinding." In this variant, trapfinding is either a feat that anybody can get, or isn't necessary at all and anybody can find/disarm a trap with any DC so long as they can make the roll. Of course, as with most house rules, this leads you down a slippery slope of alterations. Because even with Screw Trapfinding in effect, you still only have one class with Disable Device as a class skill (rogues) and two classes with Search (rogues and rangers). So you might find yourself having to allow other classes to take these skills as class skills, or else wind up in the same situation. Would it make sense to let wizards have Disable Device, since they can be rather tinkery if they want? That's up to you and the game you're running, I guess. But the point is, there are other d20 games (like the Star Wars RPG) in which trapfinding doesn't exist. Does that mean traps don't exist in this game? Don't count on it. It just means that there isn't a special class that is defined to deal with them.
     Some people will also talk about the find traps spell, but I'm just going to ignore that entire topic. Remember when we were talking about spells that nobody ever wastes a slot on? That's one of them. For starters, it's a 2nd level spell, which means you don't get it until 3rd level. Also, it's only available to clerics (not even all divine casters; just clerics). Finally, it specifically does not allow you to disarm the trap, just to find it. A handful of gravel tossed down a hallway or poking a door with a stick will let you find half the traps out there, so what the hell good is that?
     When you get around the trapfinding issue, then you start to really that the rogue is utterly dispensible. Yes, they get more skill points than any other class, but that doesn't mean they are the only characters who have skills. It just might mean that the other characters have to pick up some slack. I've played in two campaigns now where there has been a rogue and a ranger and they were both equally stealthy, so you don't need a rogue for the sneaky bits. Also, as far as damage output goes, a good fighter or sorcerer is much more consistent (and doesn't have to go hide whenever there's undead or constructs or something else that isn't susceptible to sneak attacks).
     And, as was commented in my into post to this series, playing without a rogue does not mean that the party is necessarily stymied by every locked door or obviously trapped corridor. It just means that the party has to find other ways around. True, those ways are likely to involve brute force, but hey, if that's the kind of game you're playing, who cares? Some people like to just smash everything; so long as it's fun, have at.
     I like the rogue class, don't get me wrong. But really--and I'm just as upset to realize this--if you take away the trapfinding monopoly they have, they are utterly replaceable as a class.