I just don't see the damage or utility, sneak attack falls behind soo much behind the DPR of other melee or ranged combatants - could someone show me why rogues should be picked for martial prowess and not just face/ skill monkey characters?

Rogue is the most mobile martial chassis in the game, allowing them to specialise in hit-and-run tactics.  They can reliably set up conditions to land a sneak attack, Disengage to slink away without eating an OA (or other Cunning option as appropriate), and typically take much less damage than the other frontliners as a result.  This makes them excellent finishers and decent controllers, giving them a useful niche that's more about tactical play than raw damage output.  Combat-focused archetypes tend to lean into one or more of these aspects, as well.

They are not as powerful as other martials without being creative.  That said there are a lot of things that bring certain subclasses or builds up to par:

Booming Blade and Green Flame Balde either through magic initiate or Arcane Trickster will increase damage substantially.

Using your mage hand as an Arcane Trickster or fast hands as a Thief can help a ton.  A Thief can use a lot of things with fast hands, including alchemists fire, oil and holy water.  plus things like caltrops, ball bearings, hunting traps.  they can also pickpocket enemies in battle, doing things like stealing secondary weapons or their spell focus etc.  These all boost damage, reduce enemy damage or set up favorable conditions.  The Arcane Trickster can do a lot of this with a Mage Hand, although some DMs don't allow oil/alchemists fire etc. with mage hand legerdemain.

I'll add in Rogues do have some pretty good burst potential when they also have very good team synergy.

Say for instance you have a grave cleric, that grave cleric can set up their path of the grave to grant you double damage on your sneak attack. This is a trait very useful for rogues since instead of the rogue attacking 2-4 times a round, they only attack once, but they hit very hard. So that single damage vulnerability gives a LOT of potential value.

Or say you have a battlemaster fighter who took Commanders Strike. Because sneak attack specifies you proc sneak attack once per turn, not once per round, if you can find a way to attack outside of your turn, you proc sneak attack again!

Or one of my favorite things the shepherd druid in one group did for me, so we were able to stop an enemy from escaping and capture him. My rogue was the only one who could reliably keep up with him and still attack, so they had a hawk totem follow the bandit as far as possible so I could still get sneak attack as I chased him down. Made securing that target for getting information much easier.

Okay, say you're a level 17 Assassin that suprises a target the the Grave Cleric makes vulnrable.

you stab them with your... +3 dagger? so you're doing 2d4+8 18d6, which on a failed Con save is doubled and due to the cleric is doubled again...

76x2x2= 304dmg (a perfect storm, which begs the question of how the cleric applied the vulnrability first)

A Fighter at lv17 could just sneak in and with a +3 polearm... 7 attacks for 7d10+126 (164.5) ...and they can do this twice... add in a hold person from said cleric and your blowing the Assassin out of the water. I get what you're saying about the bonus action disengage hide or dash but you just don't seem to have the bite to go with that hit and run... hence my confusion

In terms of strict DPS, yes, rogues fall behind.

1. Rogues have a huge amount of non-combat and non-DPS utility
2. They can maintain their usual full DPS without expenditure of resources
3. They can be pretty good at avoiding damage, thus also not consuming healing resources

Rogues were never meant to be front line combatants, like rangers, bards and monks they are skirmishers dodging in and out to trim the edges of melees. Also like rangers, bards and monks they are skill monkeys and those skills are there to make up for the lack of spells and the poorer fighting skills. They are capable combatants but it was never meant to be their forte. One of the problems with 5e as often played is that it is very combat centric so any non combat abilities tend to fall by the wayside unless we as players push our DMs to include them. When that happens rogues start to be more interesting and a larger part of a party.

I had a longer answer, but after reading through things the answer to me is clear.  No.  Don't play a rogue.  They will never measure up to what you want for martial damage.

GWF and Sharpshooter don't really work with a rogue (and the risk to hit on their sneak attack on sharpshooter possibly makes it inadvisable to begin with).  They don't get extra attack let alone 3 attacks.  Green flame blade or booming blade won't close that gap.

Quote from Elfdope >>

GWF and Sharpshooter don't really work with a rogue (and the risk to hit on their sneak attack on sharpshooter possibly makes it inadvisable to begin with).

True, though with a sniper rogue, ignoring cover and increased range can be worth the feat alone.

Rogues are S-Tier, I don’t know what you’re talking about. Remember, Sneak Attack works on Opportunity Attacks too.

Yeah, that was my conclusion - good out of combat, really good. But combat is not their thing.

So lets consider in this reguard another aspect, say the fighter is a battlemaster, the rogue is an assassin, we have a grave cleric and a glamour bard.

Assassin does his thing of making sure he always goes first in combat to capitalize on assassinate. Does a **** ton of damage (not gonna bother calculating damage)
Bard goes next and Hold Person/Hold Monster, succeeds.
Grave cleric uses path to the grave. Next attack doubles in damage.
Fighter with commanders strike has a choice now, either he can: A. Attack and do a lot of damage, or B. He can capitalize on the rogue's single attack hitting very hard alongside of it being at advantage and sneak attack applied since a turn has passed. This is a complete increase in damage all around, and the fighter just had to sacrifice an attack to do it.
Assuming the enemy is still alive, rinse and repeat.

Another situation you could potentially find yourself in, say your in combat and the fighter goes in and is fighting 2-3 mobs. Wizard in the back gets an enemy on him and is in a position where he can't defend himself (say an enemy came in after combat started) Wizard is getting his face bashed in. You as the fighter COULD run back to help him assuming another frontliner is caught in a situation where they can't run to aid the wizard, but you risk taking two opportunity attacks unless you choose to swap to a ranged option, having to drop your current weapon to do so (assuming you're using a heavy crossbow and not a hand crossbow) and take a single shot at disadvantage, which might or might not kill this enemy attacking the wizard.
A rogue, having the mobility to deal with this new threat can disengage from their current position run at it(or shoot it), sneak attack, dealing a pretty respectable amount of damage and potentially either take out the enemy immediately, or be a bigger threat to that enemy than the wizard currently is (assuming your DM doesn't have a personal vendetta against the wizard and is trying to rip them in two) Which with the rogue having a pretty reliable form of damage mitigation with uncanny dodge, can take a hit much better than the wizard can, and force the wizard to not have to spend their next turn disengaging or praying they don't miss with shocking grasp (assuming they even took that cantrip)
Fighter now can continue fighting their current targets, ripping and tearing like fighters normally do, knowing the backline is still covered cause the rogue's got everyone's backs.

Quote from Cheeky_Hamster >>

Yeah, that was my conclusion - good out of combat, really good. But combat is not their thing.

 I....I don't know how you ended up at such a wildly ludicrous conclusion my guy. Truly astounding. Absolutely gobsmacked.

Rogues use NO resources to do their stuff. They hop in, stab, get out. Using a dagger for your example is doing a disservice. Most would use either shortswords, rapiers, shortbows, or some type of crossbow. Saying because they can't stay in the front line and tank like a fighter and therefore you shouldn't play one misses the purpose of a rogue. The way of the rogue is to hit and run or shoot from afar, you make your one hit a ******* amazing hit. And if you get hit you have all sorts of ways to just avoid that damage, you get like 3 abilities just from the base class alone to avoid getting hit. Sharpshooter works with a rogue just fine, its easy as **** to get advantage in this game and get a bunch of stacking bonuses too, so that -5 really isn't that much of a problem until higher CRs.

Just because you can't get GWM doesn't suddenly make the class shit, you gotta actually look at the damn class and look at what its MEANT to do and judge it based on that. What the rogue is meant to do is hit and run tactics/snipe from afar and under cover, dodge a bunch of damage, and to pull of creative tactics in combat to change the dynamic besides just doing damage or banishing the enemy (stealing the focus, picking up a knocked out weapon, etc). Falling a little behind in damage is fine, as extra attack doesn't need to be here. That's not part of the rogue's niche or chassis and it doesn't need to be. A class' power and use doesn't start and end on whether or not it gets extra attack.

Looking at the subclasses, let's see what else you can get to advance your dodgy self and avoid all that damage or deal out more damage:

1. Spellcasting
2. ADV for going first and crit on any surprised bois, double damage at the creature at the capstone
3. Pass an insight check and you get sneak attack on that target always as long as you don't have dis. An extra 3d6 at the capstone for your sneak
4. Can do help action as a bonus action AT RANGE. Also you can make an attack that hits you hit someone else within 5 ft. of you, lol
5. Have your horrific wails do half your sneak dice in damage to another creature after you've already sneaked someone else on your turn; Get advantage on death and con saves; Can go into a ghost form with a 10 ft. fly speed (with hover) and you can walk through objects and have all attacks be at dis against you, WHILST STILL BEING ABLE TO ATTACK! ON A BONUS ACTION; Do wails from the grave and have it affect both creatures at capstone
6. reaction move away from a creature that ends its turn within 5 ft. of you, without opp attacks; +10 ft. walk/climb/swim speed; Advantage on Initiative; bonus action attack that can benefit from sneak even if you've already used it this turn as long as its on another target at capstone
7. Add a psion die to any ability check you're proficient in when you fail; Telepathically communicate with someone (helps win combat if DM doesn't allow battle chit chat); Free psychic damage weapon; Use your psychic blades to ******* teleport where you throw it ON A BONUS ACTION; Free non-concentration invisibility (functions as spell, but isn't a spell) once a day or you can expend a die for; Can stun a creature at capstone when using your blades.
8. CHA mod to initiative; Can sneak if you have no creatures within 5 ft. of you other than your target; FREE MOBILE FEAT (sans speed increase); Pass persuasion check to make the target have dis on all attacks against anyone but you and they can't opp attack anyone but you (until your allies hit them lol); BA advantage on your next acro or athletics check you make; Can once a rest reroll a missed attack with advantage at capstone
9. Bonus action item use/thieves' tools check/sleight of hand check; Climb speed and increased jump distance equal to your dex mod; ignores all class, race, and level requirements on the use of magic items; Can just take TWO TURNS in the first round of combat at the capstone.

Combat is most certainly their thing. Any character that doesn't multiclass is almost always weaker than a monoclass character, until the later levels. That's why multiclassing is optional. Cuz it breaks the ******* game.

The way he came up with the conclusion is simple.  The raw damage numbers don't support the rogue being an elite martial damage dealer.  None of the subclasses really change that.  At 10d6 for a sneak the average damage from that is 35 damage.  Compared to a sharpshooter or great weapon fighter with 3+ attacks and they nearly cover the damage just with the feat damage.  The sharpshooter or gwf is doing probably close to double rogue damage from 11th level on.  A couple subclasses can close the gap a little but not reliably.  But why should they be better at martial combat compared to a fighter/ranger/paladin?  That isn't their thing.

Best class at skills, insane mobility (probably best there), and extremely reliable baseline damage that steadily increases with level and uses no resources.

I find reliable talent to be an extremely good gauge of telling if someone wants to play a rogue.  If you look at reliable talent and immediately love how awesome it is then you will do well as a rogue. If instead you say "I already have expertise I should go get extra attack from something else" well rogue probably isn't for you outside of a few levels.

Don’t forget that Sneak Attack also works on OAs, that doubles that 35 to 70 DPR just from SA alone. An Arcane Trickster with BB/G-FB is lookin’ pretty from 11+ themselves. The only downside to a rogue is if they miss.

But there is no way to you get an opp attack every round.  I doubt you opp attack as a rogue more than once every 4 rounds.  The GWF can also opp attack and if its a PAM with sentinel probably easier.    Also the chance of missing is a serious problem on a BB/GFB Arc trickster.  Its one attack to get your damage. 

To me what is most interesting is in a world without Great weapon fighter and sharpshooter the rogue stays pretty close for its entire lifetime.

It’s not just OAs, any attack on another’s turn will proc another SA, so something like a Sentinel Attack will also work for Instance.

Remember, you can’t look at a single class in a vacuum like this, “teamwork makes the dream work.” 

Quote from Elfdope >>

The way he came up with the conclusion is simple.  The raw damage numbers don't support the rogue being an elite martial damage dealer.  None of the subclasses really change that.  At 10d6 for a sneak the average damage from that is 35 damage.  Compared to a sharpshooter or great weapon fighter with 3+ attacks and they nearly cover the damage just with the feat damage.  The sharpshooter or gwf is doing probably close to double rogue damage from 11th level on.  A couple subclasses can close the gap a little but not reliably.  But why should they be better at martial combat compared to a fighter/ranger/paladin?  That isn't their thing.

Best class at skills, insane mobility (probably best there), and extremely reliable baseline damage that steadily increases with level and uses no resources.

I find reliable talent to be an extremely good gauge of telling if someone wants to play a rogue.  If you look at reliable talent and immediately love how awesome it is then you will do well as a rogue. If instead you say "I already have expertise I should go get extra attack from something else" well rogue probably isn't for you outside of a few levels.

 

 > But why should they be better at martial combat compared to a fighter/ranger/paladin?

Did I say they were better? No. Read the post again. It's like saying X animal is better than Y animal because it evolved a certain way, they adapted to live in their own way so you can't say X is better in a vacuum. You have to measure for what its meant to do. If the only measure you havefor combat effectiveness is DPR then I guess Forcecage, Banishment, Confusion, Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Dimension Door, Earthbind, Entangle, Wall of Force, and all non-damaging spells are just shit spells then cuz they don't do any damage.

A slightly lower DPR doesn't mean suddenly combat is lackluster. You know what's lackluster? A fighter just saying "I attack" 3x times a turn and that's the only damn thing he does. When a monster only has an attack for their action and that's all they do. That's boring. What's sucky is the monotony of combat. Again, if your only measure is DPR then you're missing the forest for the trees. This is a tactical game, there's more to it than just big numbah means more gooder.

I completely agree.  I love rogues for all the ways they make combat and the game fun.  But the original poster is not really talking about that.  He wants damage.  He isn't going to find it here and to him its going to feel lackluster. Not everyone loves rogues for being rogues.  That is cool.

Quote from Elfdope >>

I completely agree.  I love rogues for all the ways they make combat and the game fun.  But the original poster is not really talking about that.  He wants damage.  He isn't going to find it here and to him its going to feel lackluster. Not everyone loves rogues for being rogues.  That is cool.

 I know, but he also said why would anyone pick them for their martial prowess and then proceeded to say because DPR is god and the rogue's DPR isn't as good as a fighter's that suddenly the rogue was bad in combat and only good in non-combat. Trying to get across the answer to his question, that DPR isn't the end all be all of combat and the martial prowess of the rogue comes from its way of moving across the battle field and its different combat strategies than just "I smack it 50 times until it dies".