D&D (2024) Rogue Weapon mastery and Pact weapons

[Horwath]

Sneak attack and cantrips basically don't do enough damage.
There's a reason why rogues are regarded as weak.

Personally I'm leaning towards casters attempting to deal damage for the most part is a waste of time. Casting a fireball for example most of the time is a waste of a 3rd level slot and you may as well hold up a sign saying idiot.

I've had my suspicions for a while but new MM more or less confirmed that theory. There's niche scenarios where it's a good idea.

at low levels cantrips are sad-noise for auto attacks of other classes.
true strike fixed this a little, but without fighting styles and masteries and other attack rider, it's still the weakest at will from all.

ah higher levels, using cantrips is waste of an action in 90% of the time.

fireball is good if you can hit the BBEG and about 5+ mooks.

and damage spells scale horribly with upcasting.

 

[Staffan]

Sneak attack and cantrips basically don't do enough damage.

Sneak attack more or less keeps up with fighter damage. When the fighter gets their second attack, the rogue sneak attacks for +3d6. When they get their third, it's +6d6. The sneak attack might be a little lower than a great-weapon fighter focusing on big damage, but it stacks up pretty well against anyone taking a more balanced approach to offense and defense.

But if you believe rogue damage is too low, I believe it's better to seek solutions within the rogue class and change it to be more useful/hard-hitting rather than try to compensate with multiclassing and dubious interpretations of what can combine with sneak attack.

Personally I'm leaning towards casters attempting to deal damage for the most part is a waste of time. Casting a fireball for example most of the time is a waste of a 3rd level slot and you may as well hold up a sign saying idiot.

Fireball is bad if you're fighting a single opponent, but pretty awesome if you can catch 3+ foes in it. You might not kill them, but it sure makes the frontliners' jobs a lot easier.

 

[Zardnaar]

Sneak attack more or less keeps up with fighter damage. When the fighter gets their second attack, the rogue sneak attacks for +3d6. When they get their third, it's +6d6. The sneak attack might be a little lower than a great-weapon fighter focusing on big damage, but it stacks up pretty well against anyone taking a more balanced approach to offense and defense.

But if you believe rogue damage is too low, I believe it's better to seek solutions within the rogue class and change it to be more useful/hard-hitting rather than try to compensate with multiclassing and dubious interpretations of what can combine with sneak attack.

Fireball is bad if you're fighting a single opponent, but pretty awesome if you can catch 3+ foes in it. You might not kill them, but it sure makes the frontliners' jobs a lot easier.

Opportunity cost. Bit more damage vs paralyzing them/shutting them down completely.

Or using a better spell.

5.5 true strike+ sneak attack isn't dubious btw. Only if you're mixing up 5.0 rules.

 

[ECMO3]

Allowing the combination of cantrips and sneak attack seems like it would be excessive.

It is not excessive, especially comapred to Fighters and Paladins, it is less than those classes would do at most levels.

 

[ECMO3]

Sneak attack more or less keeps up with fighter damage. When the fighter gets their second attack, the rogue sneak attacks for +3d6.

No it doesn't.

A Fighter that is swinging a Maul with an 18 strength at level 5 is doing 4d6+8 (20.5)

A Vex-Nick fighter dual wielder is doing 3d6+12 (22.5)

A sword and board dueling Fighter is doing 2d8+12 (21).

A Rogue is doing 1d8+3d6+4 (18.5). With truestrike it would be 22, still less than a top damage fighter.

This is without considering feats that substantially increase the Fighter damage, while feats only marginally increase the Rogues damage.

And this is only part of the story. On top of doing more damage total in the white room, splitting the damage among more attacks also means more damage delivered due to "smaller bites" and more attacks means more uses of weapon mastery. On top of this the fighter has a higher AC, more hit points, action surge and is better at ability checks.

At level 5 a Fighter has the Rogue generally outclassed in all 3 pillars and in the combat pillar specifically the only thing the Rogue has going for it is better mobility.

 

[Zardnaar]

No it doesn't.

A Fighter that is swinging a Maul with an 18 strength at level 5 is doing 4d6+8 (20.5)

A Vex-Nick fighter dual wielder is doing 3d6+12 (22.5)

A sword and board dueling Fighter is doing 2d8+12 (21).

A Rogue is doing 1d8+3d6+4 (18.5). With truestrike it would be 22, still less than a top damage fighter.

This is without considering feats that substantially increase the Fighter damage, while feats only marginally increase the Rogues damage.

And this is only part of the story. On top of doing more damage total, more attacks also means more damage delivered due to "smaller bites" and it means more uses of weapon mastery. On top of this the fighter has a higher AC, more hit points, action surge and is better at skill checks.

At level 5 a fighter has the Rogue outclassed in all 3 pillars and in the combat pillar specifically the only thing the Rogue has going for it is better mobility.

Yup. We can start a thread. Rogues DO Suck.

Think there's a good tier 1 crossbow build.

But yeah level 4 barbarian with cleave and hew can be hitting for something like 5d6+5, 2d6+2 and 2d6+5.

 

[Horwath]

Opportunity cost. Bit more damage vs paralyzing them/shutting them down completely.

Or using a better spell.

5.5 true strike+ sneak attack isn't dubious btw. Only if you're mixing up 5.0 rules.

it's sad that as a rogue, your are basically forced into getting true strike somehow to get even close to martial damage.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

No it doesn't.

A Fighter that is swinging a Maul with an 18 strength at level 5 is doing 4d6+8 (20.5)

A Vex-Nick fighter dual wielder is doing 3d6+12 (22.5)

A sword and board dueling Fighter is doing 2d8+12 (21).

A Rogue is doing 1d8+3d6+4 (18.5). With truestrike it would be 22, still less than a top damage fighter.

This is without considering feats that substantially increase the Fighter damage, while feats only marginally increase the Rogues damage.

And this is only part of the story. On top of doing more damage total in the white room, splitting the damage among more attacks also means more damage delivered due to "smaller bites" and more attacks means more uses of weapon mastery. On top of this the fighter has a higher AC, more hit points, action surge and is better at ability checks.

At level 5 a Fighter has the Rogue generally outclassed in all 3 pillars and in the combat pillar specifically the only thing the Rogue has going for it is better mobility.

I'm going to take issue with those numbers, partly because a rogue would generally use an off-hand weapon or steady aim, and partly because you're not actually including chance to hit, which gives Rogue a boost.
They also have a smoother progression than other martials, so looking at when the fighter damage gets its highest spike may also skew the overall impression somewhat.

Rogues aren't going to be beating berserker barbarians at dealing damage at this level, but they do better than you portray.

 

[Zardnaar]

it's sad that as a rogue, your are basically forced into getting true strike somehow to get even close to martial damage.

Yup you're dealing 4.5 levels of rogue damage arguesbly less.

True strike only buys you time doesn't scale well for rogues.

Bard can pretty much do rogues job as well at least to goid enough level. Good enough plus primary cast wins vs better and middling damage.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm going to take issue with those numbers, partly because a rogue would generally use an off-hand weapon or steady aim, and partly because you're not actually including chance to hit, which gives Rogue a boost.
They also have a smoother progression than other martials, so looking at when the fighter damage gets its highest spike may also skew the overall impression somewhat.

Rogues aren't going to be beating berserker barbarians at dealing damage at this level, but they do better than you portray.

They font brat anyone at damage although crossbow build and true srrike can do ok tier 1.

Then they get beaten by all the strikers level 5ish iirc. Assuming they're half decent (twf or gwf+feat).

Paladin, Barbarian, Fighter, Ranger doesn't really matter.

Berzerker Barbarian beats everything until much later in game.

5.0 has 4 classes I think are good 1-20
5.5 has 7 or 8.

Barbarian and Rogue aren't on either list.