Compare a half-orc wolf totem vs a high elf arcane trickster, using the standard array, and with no feats. Who's outputting the greater DPR, and by how much?
The Barbarian gets 1d12+STR+2 at lvl 2. The Rogue gets 2d6+DEX at level 2, maybe an extra 1d8 from booming, but at this level I find it doubtful when even goblins have ranged attacks. Cunning Action and Reckless attack both give advantage at this level, so I consider it every turn.
Advantage, Barbarian. At level 3, the rogue pulls slightly ahead in terms of personal DPR, but only by about 1 damage. Meanwhile, the wolf barbarian is granting advantage to their allies, which in turn means party DPR is going up, which realistically should be added to the comparison. The amount added, however, is variable depending on whom is in the party. That's the problem with support characters in dpr calculations. So, lets use a different animal for simplicity sake - we'll go bear, since tanking damage has no bearing on dpr.
Level 5. Barb gets another attack, rogue gets more sneak attack and a bit of damage from Booming Blade. (1d12+STR+2) x 2 versus 4d6+DEX+1d8, or 25 v. 22. Advantage, barbarian.
At level 7, the rogue learns shadowblade and gets another sneak attack die. This would normally push the rogue up by about 5 points of damage, but.... at this point, every member of the party should realistically have a magic weapon. Not only are you giving up a magic weapon (accuracy boost is important!!) to cause that extra damage for the few turns you have Shadowblade active, but remember that it uses the same spell slot as Invisibilty, which is a huge, huge boon for a rogue who goes out scouting.
Starting at level 9, Rogues pull slightly ahead with turn-by-turn dpr thanks to another sneak attack die, but... barbs are getting brutal critical. I am not going to start looking into who does more damage on a crit.
After this, rogues continue to jump in power slightly every two levels, while barbarians mainly get defensive or exploratory features.
So, that'd be tier 3 (level 11) when the rogues realistically pull significantly ahead in terms of DPR, and that's with spells enhancing their damage with one of the best rogue subclasses for damage using magic from non-core book sources. Meanwhile, a subclass with no bonus to damage is roughly keeping pace without any feats, leaning entirely on the base barbarian chasis. And there's only two barb subclasses that don't provide more damage at early levels, making this a comparison between the lowest damaging barb versus the highest damaging rogue.
So, I really have to give the advantage to Barbarians for tier 1 / tier 2 gameplay in terms of DPS. Its only in tier 3 and 4 that rogues pull ahead.
Compare a half-orc wolf totem vs a high elf arcane trickster, using the standard array, and with no feats. Who's outputting the greater DPR, and by how much?
The Barbarian gets 1d12+STR+2 at lvl 2. The Rogue gets 2d6+DEX at level 2, maybe an extra 1d8 from booming, but at this level I find it doubtful when even goblins have ranged attacks. Cunning Action and Reckless attack both give advantage at this level, so I consider it every turn.
Advantage, Barbarian. At level 3, the rogue pulls slightly ahead in terms of personal DPR, but only by about 1 damage. Meanwhile, the wolf barbarian is granting advantage to their allies, which in turn means party DPR is going up, which realistically should be added to the comparison. The amount added, however, is variable depending on whom is in the party. That's the problem with support characters in dpr calculations. So, lets use a different animal for simplicity sake - we'll go bear, since tanking damage has no bearing on dpr.
Level 5. Barb gets another attack, rogue gets more sneak attack and a bit of damage from Booming Blade. (1d12+STR+2) x 2 versus 4d6+DEX+1d8, or 25 v. 22. Advantage, barbarian.
At level 7, the rogue learns shadowblade and gets another sneak attack die. This would normally push the rogue up by about 5 points of damage, but.... at this point, every member of the party should realistically have a magic weapon. Not only are you giving up a magic weapon (accuracy boost is important!!) to cause that extra damage for the few turns you have Shadowblade active, but remember that it uses the same spell slot as Invisibilty, which is a huge, huge boon for a rogue who goes out scouting.
Starting at level 9, Rogues pull slightly ahead with turn-by-turn dpr thanks to another sneak attack die, but... barbs are getting brutal critical. I am not going to start looking into who does more damage on a crit.
After this, rogues continue to jump in power slightly every two levels, while barbarians mainly get defensive or exploratory features.
So, that'd be tier 3 (level 11) when the rogues realistically pull significantly ahead in terms of DPR, and that's with spells enhancing their damage with one of the best rogue subclasses for damage using magic from non-core book sources. Meanwhile, a subclass with no bonus to damage is roughly keeping pace without any feats, leaning entirely on the base barbarian chasis. And there's only two barb subclasses that don't provide more damage at early levels, making this a comparison between the lowest damaging barb versus the highest damaging rogue.
So, I really have to give the advantage to Barbarians for tier 1 / tier 2 gameplay in terms of DPS. Its only in tier 3 and 4 that rogues pull ahead.
Yeah this is good take on it for the most part.
Rogues do not have a great way of getting ADV by themselves and if they do its generally at the sake of their BA (Aim, Hiding, etc...) which takes away the off hand shortsword and thus makes it hard for them to keep up damage wise. That off hand attack adds a lot to their damage numbers in a feat-less game.
Overall its in the barbs favor for the majority of the tiers people play in (T1 and T2) and if you start to include feats it is very much in favor of the barb if they pick up GWM and PAM.
At 5th-level, with a conservative +3 modifier, the barbarian is swinging for 23 [(1d12+3+2)*2] damage. A rogue with booming blade with the same modifier is hitting for 22.5 (1d8+3+1d8+3d6). A respective +4 modifier each widens the gap from 0.5 to 1.5. By the same token, the rogue could instead be using green-flame blade and potentially hit a second target for 4.5+INT (1d8+INT) damage; which would put it ahead of the barbarian still. Nevermind the utility of BB, which can lock down a melee opponent better than even a barbarian can accomplish with a one-handed weapon and a little grappling.
Either way, the rogue is pulling ahead by 7th-level. And when the barbarian is getting their +3 to rage and +5 to strength at 9th-level for an average of 30 damage, the rogue is now dealing a base 31.5 with either cantrip. The good news is, if they're working side-by-side, then they both probably have advantage and it's going great. It's a narrow lead, but it's a lead nonetheless. Though, admittedly, this is one of the lower DPR paths a barbarian can take; if not the lowest. Even a Battlerager who always sacrificing their first attack of the fight to initiate a grapple, and fights with a d8 weapon, is going to average more damage over three rounds.
We could also make the rogue an archer who's using a shortbow instead of a rapier. Perhaps they're also a Thief who uses their Cunning Action to hit an enemy with a vial of acid for 7+DEX (2d6+DEX) damage. Granted, that's dependent on having the funds to regularly restock and doesn't have great range. But it's a solid amount of damage that not a lot of creatures resist.
My point is that the rogue is not nearly as bad as anyone claims it to be. I don't know why people are so obsessed with DPR and ranking, but they are. I mean, that AT rogue is just going to keep outpacing the Totem Warrior for its entire career after 7th-level. And that cantrip lets it beat even a fighter's 4 attacks with the GW fighting style. At a score of 58:53, in case you're wondering. The rogue, with a cantrip, is outputting at least 10 more per round, on average, than a Zealot with 24 Strength. Having a secondary target or rider effect trigger just sweetens the pot.
And heaven forbid the high elf rogue is a Thief who could potentially pull off both the cantrip and the acid trick on different targets. But this is also why I loathe white room theory-crafting. None of it matters one whit once the dice start rolling.
At 5th-level, with a conservative +3 modifier, the barbarian is swinging for 23 [(1d12+3+2)*2] damage. A rogue with booming blade with the same modifier is hitting for 22.5 (1d8+3+1d8+3d6). A respective +4 modifier each widens the gap from 0.5 to 1.5. By the same token, the rogue could instead be using green-flame blade and potentially hit a second target for 4.5+INT (1d8+INT) damage; which would put it ahead of the barbarian still. Nevermind the utility of BB, which can lock down a melee opponent better than even a barbarian can accomplish with a one-handed weapon and a little grappling.
Either way, the rogue is pulling ahead by 7th-level. And when the barbarian is getting their +3 to rage and +5 to strength at 9th-level for an average of 30 damage, the rogue is now dealing a base 31.5 with either cantrip. The good news is, if they're working side-by-side, then they both probably have advantage and it's going great. It's a narrow lead, but it's a lead nonetheless. Though, admittedly, this is one of the lower DPR paths a barbarian can take; if not the lowest. Even a Battlerager who always sacrificing their first attack of the fight to initiate a grapple, and fights with a d8 weapon, is going to average more damage over three rounds.
We could also make the rogue an archer who's using a shortbow instead of a rapier. Perhaps they're also a Thief who uses their Cunning Action to hit an enemy with a vial of acid for 7+DEX (2d6+DEX) damage. Granted, that's dependent on having the funds to regularly restock and doesn't have great range. But it's a solid amount of damage that not a lot of creatures resist.
My point is that the rogue is not nearly as bad as anyone claims it to be. I don't know why people are so obsessed with DPR and ranking, but they are. I mean, that AT rogue is just going to keep outpacing the Totem Warrior for its entire career after 7th-level. And that cantrip lets it beat even a fighter's 4 attacks with the GW fighting style. At a score of 58:53, in case you're wondering. The rogue, with a cantrip, is outputting at least 10 more per round, on average, than a Zealot with 24 Strength. Having a secondary target or rider effect trigger just sweetens the pot.
And heaven forbid the high elf rogue is a Thief who could potentially pull off both the cantrip and the acid trick on different targets. But this is also why I loathe white room theory-crafting. None of it matters one whit once the dice start rolling.
Ignoring feats completely and the AC calcs sure.
Mostly the barb will do better due to at will advantage. I posted my work to show without feats they are closer than I expected but the rogue is behind if they don't have ADV.
If you add feats it's firmly towards the barb with GWM+PAM
We've had this discussion, already. Any disparity that already exists between the classes is further exasperated once feats, especially ones with a focus on combat, are added to the mix. They're a variable best left by the wayside. If you need to use an optional rule to say why one class is better than another, then you've already lost the argument.
That goes double for when you need 2 out of 5 ASIs to acquire two very specific feats. (And, really, the same boring cookie-cutter combo? Come on.) Not only does the rogue not need feats to deal more than respectable damage, but they get another ASI.
And why you're bringing up dual-wielding with a shortsword, I'll never know. After the loss of a rapier, it's only another 2.5 DPR. And that's before you factor in how it removes other options, like their Cunning Action or the ability to cast a BB/GFB.
Rogues do not have a great way of getting ADV by themselves and if they do its generally at the sake of their BA (Aim, Hiding, etc...) which takes away the off hand shortsword and thus makes it hard for them to keep up damage wise. That off hand attack adds a lot to their damage numbers in a feat-less game.
For the record, I consider rogues proc'ing Advantage using Cunning Action to be pretty reliable. Which, yes, takes away from using two hands, but I consider that a trap choice anyways.
They're a variable best left by the wayside. If you need to use an optional rule to say why one class is better than another, then you've already lost the argument.
With all due respect, I'm going to have to disagree. It's extremely relevant, given that it's insanely common to use feats. If you are going with "no optional rules" then you shouldn't be using shadowblade nor the bladesinger cantrips. Books past the core 3 are optional, and more spells just adds unnecessary complications.
They're a variable best left by the wayside. If you need to use an optional rule to say why one class is better than another, then you've already lost the argument.
With all due respect, I'm going to have to disagree. It's extremely relevant, given that it's insanely common to use feats. If you are going with "no optional rules" then you shouldn't be using shadowblade nor the bladesinger cantrips. Books past the core 3 are optional, and more spells just adds unnecessary complications.
That's fair. I didn't factor shadow blade into my math, but cutting out extraneous books is something I can get behind. And if that means excising BB/GFB from the math, then so be it. I suppose, then, it's worth comparing just the PH entries. And then, perhaps, use the PH+1; in an incremental assessment.
The rogue is still outclassing the Totem Warrior barbarian by 9th-level, if just barely. By 20th-level, the gap is still comparable to the BB vs Zealot. That said, the Berserker can beat the DPR of the rogue with Frenzied Rage. Given enough levels, the rogue will get close. But they'll never quite keep up. And you can just forget it if Retaliation is regularly triggered.
Rogues consistently outperform TWF fighters; sans Action Surge. Paladins start off on-par, but quickly need to resort to spells like divine favor to keep up. They can take a sizable lead with magic weapon and Extra Attack at 5th-level. But by 9th-level, the rogue has more or less tied with them again. And they don't pull ahead of TWF rangers with hunter's mark until Tier 4; excluding Hunter features, of course. I haven't done full archetype breakdowns, but a melee hunter might actually be pretty good.
Can agree that it's easier than ever for a rogue to get ADV.... They just seem to lose more by using their BA is what my point was as cunning action isn't just a way to get it and you lose versatility but that's understandable if you're shooting for damage.
And yeah the feats thing is 100% appropriate as it's a rule most tables use and ignoring them is just stupid...
In that regard, Cunning Action is a lot like Action Surge. Both are incredibly versatile abilities. But where one can't be used for everything, it can be used ad nauseum.
What Steady Aim really does is even out the ranged rogue. The dual wielding rogue has two opportunities to deal sneak attack damage. Now the ranged rogue effectively always will as well. The rapier rogue still struggles though as it only has one opportunity.
What Steady Aim really does is even out the ranged rogue. The dual wielding rogue has two opportunities to deal sneak attack damage. Now the ranged rogue effectively always will as well. The rapier rogue still struggles though as it only has one opportunity.
They have two opportunities. But the problem is that without heavy investment. That offhand hit is miniscule. it doesn't mean much on it's own. Without having Feats and Fighting Styles involved it's a d6 damage at best which means it's average damage of 3. At all levels. It requires a feat to push it up to d8 that makes the average damage of 4. And it requires picking up the fighter feat to be able to add +attribute to the damage which is often equal to or higher than the average damage of the weapons die roll. So any hit with the second weapon is purely relying on the Sneak attack Damage entirely for any round that your offhand hits without these things.
This is why Dual wielding is kind of a trap. it just doesn't have the punch or even the reduced punch that dual wielding had standard as part of older editions. It really feels like just a hanger on for anything but a specialized build these days and mostly for certain classes. For other classes there is just so much else to be doing with that Bonus Action rather than attacking. And the Rogue tends to be one of them. In real play there is a lot of things to do with that bonus action that the white room theory crafting right now doesn't account for.
What Steady Aim really does is even out the ranged rogue. The dual wielding rogue has two opportunities to deal sneak attack damage. Now the ranged rogue effectively always will as well. The rapier rogue still struggles though as it only has one opportunity.
Ehhhh.... ish? Thieves can throw sand in their opponents' eyes. Inquisitives can detect the opportune moment to attack. All rogues can Hide and then sneak attack.
While Steady Aim is best with a ranged rogue, because no one likes their speed dropping to zero, Stead Aim has the major advantage of being an action of last resort. Can't hide + attack for sneak attack? No allies nearby? Subclass doesn't have an alternative? This gives you chance to always have the ability to Sneak Attack on your turn. You're left exposed, but that's the trade off - damage for not hiding.
I see that my comment is being misconstrued so I'll elaborate.
I know any rogue can use steady aim including the rapier rogue. What I meant here was that Aim is the only option and it's not very good, particularly for Swashbucklers which is the subclass I most consider a rapier rogue. Because they're using a single rapier, they only have 1 roll on the d20 to deal SA damage unless they use Aim. Dual weild rogues still get 2 rolls of a d20 to get sneak attack damage, the bonus action attack being optional if the first hits and the rogue would rather use cunning action. The bonus action attack may be small on it's own but it can deal sneak attack damage if the main attack missed. That's why it's good. It's not a trap because it gives you that much needed second shot at sneak attack.
Yes. I know you can deal sneak attack damage without getting advantage. I am talking about hit probability. Having advantage makes you much more likely to hit and deal damage. Without advantage, the typical rogue deals fairly low damage when you consider things like hit chance. With advantage, the average damage a rogue can do becomes much better. Realistically, before this addition, a ranged rogue was at a considerable disadvantage unless the DM was liberal with the hide action. The rapier rogue was basically just going to do subpar damage over time. Now there are options for on demand advantage and the damage output is much more consistent and your chance of critically hitting roughly doubles. This amounts to a very respectable average damage per round. If you want an example: if you have a 50% chance to hit, advantage ups that chance to hit to 75%. This is why I originally argued that rogues needed on demand advantage through flanking. Aim works great though.
Hopefully that clears up my admittedly ambiguous post.
I see that my comment is being misconstrued so I'll elaborate.
I know any rogue can use steady aim including the rapier rogue. What I meant here was that Aim is the only option and it's not very good, particularly for Swashbucklers which is the subclass I most consider a rapier rogue. Because they're using a single rapier, they only have 1 roll on the d20 to deal SA damage unless they use Aim. Dual weild rogues still get 2 rolls of a d20 to get sneak attack damage, the bonus action attack being optional if the first hits and the rogue would rather use cunning action. The bonus action attack may be small on it's own but it can deal sneak attack damage if the main attack missed. That's why it's good. It's not a trap because it gives you that much needed second shot at sneak attack.
Yes. I know you can deal sneak attack damage without getting advantage. I am talking about hit probability. Having advantage makes you much more likely to hit and deal damage. Without advantage, the typical rogue deals fairly low damage when you consider things like hit chance. With advantage, the average damage a rogue can do becomes much better. Realistically, before this addition, a ranged rogue was at a considerable disadvantage unless the DM was liberal with the hide action. The rapier rogue was basically just going to do subpar damage over time. Now there are options for on demand advantage and the damage output is much more consistent and your chance of critically hitting roughly doubles. This amounts to a very respectable average damage per round. If you want an example: if you have a 50% chance to hit, advantage ups that chance to hit to 75%. This is why I originally argued that rogues needed on demand advantage through flanking. Aim works great though.
Hopefully that clears up my admittedly ambiguous post.
Advantage only makes you much more likely to hit if your are very prone to rolling the middling numbers or have only ok attack modifiers so you need to raise those middling numbers up. Rogues do not always suffer from this issue however. So sometimes they are not getting as much out of advantage as advantage gives in general. They can become a bit of an exception that proves the rule.
And your selling the rapier rogue far short. I've played several of them and they are not at any kind of notable disadvantage to dual wielding and often are at an advantage over them because they end up being far more mobile through other uses of their bonus action. Restricting Rapiers just to Swashbucklers because that's your mental image of a rapier wielder is really a dis-service not only to the Swashbuckler to also rogues in general. Because most things that make the rapier good on a Swashbuckler actually make it just as good on any other rogue. The Dual Wielding Rogue of editions past that was always the pushed archetype has really fallen behind when it comes to 5e and in some ways it holds the rogue back to continue to force it down that path.
> “Advantage only makes you much more likely to hit if your are very prone to rolling the middling numbers or have only ok attack modifiers so you need to raise those middling numbers up. Rogues do not always suffer from this issue however.”
Not all of us rogues use loaded dice.
Besides, the problem isn’t always missing. Sometimes the problem is doing lots of “theoretical” damage to a target that has low hitpoints and thus is limited to the amount of “actual” damage inflicted. I mean dead is dead either way but Rogues can’t really distribute damage like multi-attack classes can.
> “Advantage only makes you much more likely to hit if your are very prone to rolling the middling numbers or have only ok attack modifiers so you need to raise those middling numbers up. Rogues do not always suffer from this issue however.”
Not all of us rogues use loaded dice.
Besides, the problem isn’t always missing. Sometimes the problem is doing lots of “theoretical” damage to a target that has low hitpoints and thus is limited to the amount of “actual” damage inflicted. I mean dead is dead either way but Rogues can’t really distribute damage like multi-attack classes can.
A lot of those other martial Classes actually aren't good at distributing damage either. Dead is Dead and unless your DM is rediculously generous in letting you take things back using that smite on an enemy that was actually largely dead wastes it just as much as the over flow of Sneak Attack. The foe for either one could have required more than what the weapon could have done but far less than the actual total as a possible scenario.
But the truth is that the Fighter and the Monk with their larger abundance of attacks and smaller bonuses spread out amongst them are actually far more efficient with their damage. But this efficiency is not the same thing as DPR, DPR doesn't actually care about efficiency or overflow. It only cares about the total damage regardless of waste that was output during that round.
Part of playing a rogue smartly is actually in how you choose your targets. If you know your going to do a lot of damage. Prioritizing a healthier target over a low hp enemy unless it's something that really needs to be removed from the field to the point that the excess wasted damage form any source is worth it. The rogue most of the time is better served going after different targets in successive rounds and only focusing on a single big target when needs necessitate such as against a BBEG or against something that poses some serious threat to things like your casters in the back line. This is part of the reason that the rogue has things like infinite ability to disengage or dash to get around the battlefield.
I see that my comment is being misconstrued so I'll elaborate.
I know any rogue can use steady aim including the rapier rogue. What I meant here was that Aim is the only option and it's not very good, particularly for Swashbucklers which is the subclass I most consider a rapier rogue. Because they're using a single rapier, they only have 1 roll on the d20 to deal SA damage unless they use Aim. Dual weild rogues still get 2 rolls of a d20 to get sneak attack damage, the bonus action attack being optional if the first hits and the rogue would rather use cunning action. The bonus action attack may be small on it's own but it can deal sneak attack damage if the main attack missed. That's why it's good. It's not a trap because it gives you that much needed second shot at sneak attack.
I feel like the problem here is that you think of the Swashbuckler as the "rapier rogue" when, in truth, its always been the dual wielder rogue. Their level 3 abilities are effectively designed to allow you to function like a rogue, slipping in and out of combat, but without relying on your bonus-action Cunning Action ability and still land your Sneak Attack. This was done to specifically free up your bonus action for dual wielding.
There was a similar thing with the Sword bard. The original playtest had the sword flourishes use the bonus action, but people complained - they wanted a dual wielding dervish. So, final result was using flourishes as part of your Attack action.
Now, I'm not saying that you can't have a rapier-swashbuckler, but using a rapier to the full ability is going to require leaning on the base Rogue chassis. Or take the dual wielding feat and get a parrying dagger to go along with the rapier. The whole point of the parrying dagger is to be a tiny shield (+1AC) and to have a backup in case you miss with the first strike with the rapier - when you get too close, no one can hit with a rapier, so a tiny backup weapon was used.
Yes. I know you can deal sneak attack damage without getting advantage. I am talking about hit probability.
I stand by my earlier statement in my previous post. If you're that worried about double dice... then use the Hide action. Swashbucklers are actually a bit better than usual at it, since you can hit, then run away without provoking an attack, then bonus action Hide.
Yes. I know you can deal sneak attack damage without getting advantage. I am talking about hit probability.
I stand by my earlier statement in my previous post. If you're that worried about double dice... then use the Hide action. Swashbucklers are actually a bit better than usual at it, since you can hit, then run away without provoking an attack, then bonus action Hide.
Melee rogues typically don’t get advantage from hiding because they have to break cover to get into melee range to attack anything.
The Barbarian gets 1d12+STR+2 at lvl 2. The Rogue gets 2d6+DEX at level 2, maybe an extra 1d8 from booming, but at this level I find it doubtful when even goblins have ranged attacks. Cunning Action and Reckless attack both give advantage at this level, so I consider it every turn.
Advantage, Barbarian. At level 3, the rogue pulls slightly ahead in terms of personal DPR, but only by about 1 damage. Meanwhile, the wolf barbarian is granting advantage to their allies, which in turn means party DPR is going up, which realistically should be added to the comparison. The amount added, however, is variable depending on whom is in the party. That's the problem with support characters in dpr calculations. So, lets use a different animal for simplicity sake - we'll go bear, since tanking damage has no bearing on dpr.
Level 5. Barb gets another attack, rogue gets more sneak attack and a bit of damage from Booming Blade. (1d12+STR+2) x 2 versus 4d6+DEX+1d8, or 25 v. 22. Advantage, barbarian.
At level 7, the rogue learns shadowblade and gets another sneak attack die. This would normally push the rogue up by about 5 points of damage, but.... at this point, every member of the party should realistically have a magic weapon. Not only are you giving up a magic weapon (accuracy boost is important!!) to cause that extra damage for the few turns you have Shadowblade active, but remember that it uses the same spell slot as Invisibilty, which is a huge, huge boon for a rogue who goes out scouting.
Starting at level 9, Rogues pull slightly ahead with turn-by-turn dpr thanks to another sneak attack die, but... barbs are getting brutal critical. I am not going to start looking into who does more damage on a crit.
After this, rogues continue to jump in power slightly every two levels, while barbarians mainly get defensive or exploratory features.
So, that'd be tier 3 (level 11) when the rogues realistically pull significantly ahead in terms of DPR, and that's with spells enhancing their damage with one of the best rogue subclasses for damage using magic from non-core book sources. Meanwhile, a subclass with no bonus to damage is roughly keeping pace without any feats, leaning entirely on the base barbarian chasis. And there's only two barb subclasses that don't provide more damage at early levels, making this a comparison between the lowest damaging barb versus the highest damaging rogue.
So, I really have to give the advantage to Barbarians for tier 1 / tier 2 gameplay in terms of DPS. Its only in tier 3 and 4 that rogues pull ahead.
Yeah this is good take on it for the most part.
Rogues do not have a great way of getting ADV by themselves and if they do its generally at the sake of their BA (Aim, Hiding, etc...) which takes away the off hand shortsword and thus makes it hard for them to keep up damage wise. That off hand attack adds a lot to their damage numbers in a feat-less game.
Overall its in the barbs favor for the majority of the tiers people play in (T1 and T2) and if you start to include feats it is very much in favor of the barb if they pick up GWM and PAM.
At 5th-level, with a conservative +3 modifier, the barbarian is swinging for 23 [(1d12+3+2)*2] damage. A rogue with booming blade with the same modifier is hitting for 22.5 (1d8+3+1d8+3d6). A respective +4 modifier each widens the gap from 0.5 to 1.5. By the same token, the rogue could instead be using green-flame blade and potentially hit a second target for 4.5+INT (1d8+INT) damage; which would put it ahead of the barbarian still. Nevermind the utility of BB, which can lock down a melee opponent better than even a barbarian can accomplish with a one-handed weapon and a little grappling.
Either way, the rogue is pulling ahead by 7th-level. And when the barbarian is getting their +3 to rage and +5 to strength at 9th-level for an average of 30 damage, the rogue is now dealing a base 31.5 with either cantrip. The good news is, if they're working side-by-side, then they both probably have advantage and it's going great. It's a narrow lead, but it's a lead nonetheless. Though, admittedly, this is one of the lower DPR paths a barbarian can take; if not the lowest. Even a Battlerager who always sacrificing their first attack of the fight to initiate a grapple, and fights with a d8 weapon, is going to average more damage over three rounds.
We could also make the rogue an archer who's using a shortbow instead of a rapier. Perhaps they're also a Thief who uses their Cunning Action to hit an enemy with a vial of acid for 7+DEX (2d6+DEX) damage. Granted, that's dependent on having the funds to regularly restock and doesn't have great range. But it's a solid amount of damage that not a lot of creatures resist.
My point is that the rogue is not nearly as bad as anyone claims it to be. I don't know why people are so obsessed with DPR and ranking, but they are. I mean, that AT rogue is just going to keep outpacing the Totem Warrior for its entire career after 7th-level. And that cantrip lets it beat even a fighter's 4 attacks with the GW fighting style. At a score of 58:53, in case you're wondering. The rogue, with a cantrip, is outputting at least 10 more per round, on average, than a Zealot with 24 Strength. Having a secondary target or rider effect trigger just sweetens the pot.
And heaven forbid the high elf rogue is a Thief who could potentially pull off both the cantrip and the acid trick on different targets. But this is also why I loathe white room theory-crafting. None of it matters one whit once the dice start rolling.
Ignoring feats completely and the AC calcs sure.
Mostly the barb will do better due to at will advantage. I posted my work to show without feats they are closer than I expected but the rogue is behind if they don't have ADV.
If you add feats it's firmly towards the barb with GWM+PAM
We've had this discussion, already. Any disparity that already exists between the classes is further exasperated once feats, especially ones with a focus on combat, are added to the mix. They're a variable best left by the wayside. If you need to use an optional rule to say why one class is better than another, then you've already lost the argument.
That goes double for when you need 2 out of 5 ASIs to acquire two very specific feats. (And, really, the same boring cookie-cutter combo? Come on.) Not only does the rogue not need feats to deal more than respectable damage, but they get another ASI.
And why you're bringing up dual-wielding with a shortsword, I'll never know. After the loss of a rapier, it's only another 2.5 DPR. And that's before you factor in how it removes other options, like their Cunning Action or the ability to cast a BB/GFB.
For the record, I consider rogues proc'ing Advantage using Cunning Action to be pretty reliable. Which, yes, takes away from using two hands, but I consider that a trap choice anyways.
With all due respect, I'm going to have to disagree. It's extremely relevant, given that it's insanely common to use feats. If you are going with "no optional rules" then you shouldn't be using shadowblade nor the bladesinger cantrips. Books past the core 3 are optional, and more spells just adds unnecessary complications.
That's fair. I didn't factor shadow blade into my math, but cutting out extraneous books is something I can get behind. And if that means excising BB/GFB from the math, then so be it. I suppose, then, it's worth comparing just the PH entries. And then, perhaps, use the PH+1; in an incremental assessment.
The rogue is still outclassing the Totem Warrior barbarian by 9th-level, if just barely. By 20th-level, the gap is still comparable to the BB vs Zealot. That said, the Berserker can beat the DPR of the rogue with Frenzied Rage. Given enough levels, the rogue will get close. But they'll never quite keep up. And you can just forget it if Retaliation is regularly triggered.
Rogues consistently outperform TWF fighters; sans Action Surge. Paladins start off on-par, but quickly need to resort to spells like divine favor to keep up. They can take a sizable lead with magic weapon and Extra Attack at 5th-level. But by 9th-level, the rogue has more or less tied with them again. And they don't pull ahead of TWF rangers with hunter's mark until Tier 4; excluding Hunter features, of course. I haven't done full archetype breakdowns, but a melee hunter might actually be pretty good.
Can agree that it's easier than ever for a rogue to get ADV.... They just seem to lose more by using their BA is what my point was as cunning action isn't just a way to get it and you lose versatility but that's understandable if you're shooting for damage.
And yeah the feats thing is 100% appropriate as it's a rule most tables use and ignoring them is just stupid...
In that regard, Cunning Action is a lot like Action Surge. Both are incredibly versatile abilities. But where one can't be used for everything, it can be used ad nauseum.
What Steady Aim really does is even out the ranged rogue. The dual wielding rogue has two opportunities to deal sneak attack damage. Now the ranged rogue effectively always will as well. The rapier rogue still struggles though as it only has one opportunity.
The rapier rogue can use Steady Aim, as well. It's not just for ranged attacks.
They have two opportunities. But the problem is that without heavy investment. That offhand hit is miniscule. it doesn't mean much on it's own. Without having Feats and Fighting Styles involved it's a d6 damage at best which means it's average damage of 3. At all levels. It requires a feat to push it up to d8 that makes the average damage of 4. And it requires picking up the fighter feat to be able to add +attribute to the damage which is often equal to or higher than the average damage of the weapons die roll. So any hit with the second weapon is purely relying on the Sneak attack Damage entirely for any round that your offhand hits without these things.
This is why Dual wielding is kind of a trap. it just doesn't have the punch or even the reduced punch that dual wielding had standard as part of older editions. It really feels like just a hanger on for anything but a specialized build these days and mostly for certain classes. For other classes there is just so much else to be doing with that Bonus Action rather than attacking. And the Rogue tends to be one of them. In real play there is a lot of things to do with that bonus action that the white room theory crafting right now doesn't account for.
Ehhhh.... ish? Thieves can throw sand in their opponents' eyes. Inquisitives can detect the opportune moment to attack. All rogues can Hide and then sneak attack.
While Steady Aim is best with a ranged rogue, because no one likes their speed dropping to zero, Stead Aim has the major advantage of being an action of last resort. Can't hide + attack for sneak attack? No allies nearby? Subclass doesn't have an alternative? This gives you chance to always have the ability to Sneak Attack on your turn. You're left exposed, but that's the trade off - damage for not hiding.
I see that my comment is being misconstrued so I'll elaborate.
Hopefully that clears up my admittedly ambiguous post.
Advantage only makes you much more likely to hit if your are very prone to rolling the middling numbers or have only ok attack modifiers so you need to raise those middling numbers up. Rogues do not always suffer from this issue however. So sometimes they are not getting as much out of advantage as advantage gives in general. They can become a bit of an exception that proves the rule.
And your selling the rapier rogue far short. I've played several of them and they are not at any kind of notable disadvantage to dual wielding and often are at an advantage over them because they end up being far more mobile through other uses of their bonus action. Restricting Rapiers just to Swashbucklers because that's your mental image of a rapier wielder is really a dis-service not only to the Swashbuckler to also rogues in general. Because most things that make the rapier good on a Swashbuckler actually make it just as good on any other rogue. The Dual Wielding Rogue of editions past that was always the pushed archetype has really fallen behind when it comes to 5e and in some ways it holds the rogue back to continue to force it down that path.
> “Advantage only makes you much more likely to hit if your are very prone to rolling the middling numbers or have only ok attack modifiers so you need to raise those middling numbers up. Rogues do not always suffer from this issue however.”
Not all of us rogues use loaded dice.
Besides, the problem isn’t always missing. Sometimes the problem is doing lots of “theoretical” damage to a target that has low hitpoints and thus is limited to the amount of “actual” damage inflicted. I mean dead is dead either way but Rogues can’t really distribute damage like multi-attack classes can.
A lot of those other martial Classes actually aren't good at distributing damage either. Dead is Dead and unless your DM is rediculously generous in letting you take things back using that smite on an enemy that was actually largely dead wastes it just as much as the over flow of Sneak Attack. The foe for either one could have required more than what the weapon could have done but far less than the actual total as a possible scenario.
But the truth is that the Fighter and the Monk with their larger abundance of attacks and smaller bonuses spread out amongst them are actually far more efficient with their damage. But this efficiency is not the same thing as DPR, DPR doesn't actually care about efficiency or overflow. It only cares about the total damage regardless of waste that was output during that round.
Part of playing a rogue smartly is actually in how you choose your targets. If you know your going to do a lot of damage. Prioritizing a healthier target over a low hp enemy unless it's something that really needs to be removed from the field to the point that the excess wasted damage form any source is worth it. The rogue most of the time is better served going after different targets in successive rounds and only focusing on a single big target when needs necessitate such as against a BBEG or against something that poses some serious threat to things like your casters in the back line. This is part of the reason that the rogue has things like infinite ability to disengage or dash to get around the battlefield.
I feel like the problem here is that you think of the Swashbuckler as the "rapier rogue" when, in truth, its always been the dual wielder rogue. Their level 3 abilities are effectively designed to allow you to function like a rogue, slipping in and out of combat, but without relying on your bonus-action Cunning Action ability and still land your Sneak Attack. This was done to specifically free up your bonus action for dual wielding.
There was a similar thing with the Sword bard. The original playtest had the sword flourishes use the bonus action, but people complained - they wanted a dual wielding dervish. So, final result was using flourishes as part of your Attack action.
Now, I'm not saying that you can't have a rapier-swashbuckler, but using a rapier to the full ability is going to require leaning on the base Rogue chassis. Or take the dual wielding feat and get a parrying dagger to go along with the rapier. The whole point of the parrying dagger is to be a tiny shield (+1AC) and to have a backup in case you miss with the first strike with the rapier - when you get too close, no one can hit with a rapier, so a tiny backup weapon was used.
I stand by my earlier statement in my previous post. If you're that worried about double dice... then use the Hide action. Swashbucklers are actually a bit better than usual at it, since you can hit, then run away without provoking an attack, then bonus action Hide.
Melee rogues typically don’t get advantage from hiding because they have to break cover to get into melee range to attack anything.
Hm. Well, we seem to be running hiding rules wrongly. Huh. Ah well.