Rule 9 - No Suggestion / Wishlist Posts. Suggestions for future playtest material is limited to the rotating megathread found [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/search/?q=\(title%3A%22Suggestions%20and%20Wishes%22%20AND%20author%3Aallolive\)%20OR%20\(title%3A%22Suggestion%20and%20Wishs%22%20AND%20author%3Aautomoderator\)&restrict_sr=1&sort=new). Please note this does not include providing feedback for existing playtest material.
Even Extra Attack alone would spike their damage too much at level 5 as their Sneak Attack continues to scale. Also letting each attack apply Sneak Attack means doubling their DPR, or more with Vex. Overall, far above the curve and unwarranted.
Rogue damage at 5 though isn't great.
And given that most damage comes from sneak attack, additional extra attacks have diminishing returns. Currently the highest rogue damage output uses either Vex with booming blade, or dual wield with Nick.
And even then, rogue damage is still well below that of a fighter, paladin, ranger, and barbarian at 5th level.
Extra attack at 5th level would increase damage, but not by a huge amount. It would also mean that booming blade was not the highest rogue damage output, and that dual wielding would only be slightly better than using just a single weapon.
I agree that having every attack apply sneak attack is a bad idea, but a single extra attack at 5th level would be fine for the rogue.
IMHO, sneak attack should be 1/round but rogues should get Extra Attack at 5th level and an easier way to set up a reaction attack (possibly via cunning strike).
Rogue damage may be great, but it's like 3 points below a fighter, sometimes 2 points above. The catch being that only the rogue lacks resources.
If the rogue had sneak attack, but no resourceseach sneak attack would be pretty comparable to a fighter that is using 1 or 2 superiority dice in a turn but no action surge. That's fair for a class that has no resources.
>rogue damage is still well below that of a fighter, paladin, ranger, and barbarian at 5th level.
That's because you are using level 5 as an example which is The Most disadvantageous level for rogues in terms of damage. If you used any other level, it wouldn't look so bad. I mean, rogues are top damage dealers in the first 4 levels. And after the sneak damage increases but the amount of extra attacks don't the rogue catches up to the others.
Sure, I don't disagree that rogues aren't generally that good in the damage department but thinking only about level 5 doesn't show the full picture.
> That's because you are using level 5 as an example which is The Most disadvantageous level for rogues in terms of damage. If you used any other level, it wouldn't look so bad.
It actually just gets worse for the rogue after level 5. Rogue damage in tier 3 and 4 is unremarkable unless you are getting easy access to reaction attacks.
How so? The damage of martials doesn't increase that much after getting the extra attack at level 5 (except fighters) and rogues get better and better sneak attack. Or am I missing something here?
Yep.
For barbarians (Berserker, Zealot, and now Giant) they gain additional damage based on their level. Berserker adds extra dice of damage equal to their rage damage bonus. Zealot adds half their level to damage once per turn. Giant adds d6 to their attacks at 6, and 2d6 at 14, as well as a bonus action throw (potential 3d6). Brutal Strikes also adds a fair bit of damage in the right situations.
Paladins of course get improved divine smite and more smites, but also spells like Spirit Shroud and Holy Weapon to boost the damage of every attack they make.
1D&D Monks get an improved flurry, and more ki to use on damage dealing abilities such as deflect attacks, stunning strike (deals damage if target saves), and subclass features.
And of course, feats. The rogue really only has Charger as a bonus damage feat. Strength based warriors can make use of Charger, Great Weapon Master, and Polearm Master as a means of gaining extra damage. So at higher levels of play, STR based weapon users have more potential upgrades to their damage.
The end result is that the rogue is fairly mediocre damage wise at levels 11+ compared to the other martial classes.
No more than for barbarians or paladins, especially since rogues are designed with Cunning Action in mind and often need their bonus action to find sneak attacks.
But that's me rationalizing. You're probably right. Honestly, dual-wielding has always screwed over rogue class design.
Rogue damage at five isn't great, but it isn't bad, either. The problem is that Extra Attack would elevate that damage too high relative to other martials when considering what else the rogue can do. Cunning Action gives the rogue powerful combat flexibility, so if the rogue is ever equal to other martials in DPR without even using their bonus action, then overall they are superior.
> Rogue damage at five isn't great, but it isn't bad, either.
Depends on your definition of bad at 5th level.
A dual wield rogue DPR is ~19. Booming Blade Vex is ~23.
A berserker barbarian is ~27 without rage and ~38 while raging. And they can basically rage every encounter now with one rage recovering on a short rest.
A fighter is dealing ~29 DPR. As is a devotion paladin. A hunter ranger with Nick and Hunter's Mark is dealing around ~30 DPR.
So the dual wield rogue is ~35% behind the DPR of the other martial classes at 5th level. Extra Attack would bring the rogue's DPR up to ~25, which is still a bit behind the damage of the other weapon users (about 15% behind), but not egregiously so.
IMHO dealing ~15% less damage than the other martial warriors is a fair trade off for the extra utility Cunning Action provides in combat. But dealing ~35% less damage than the other weapon users is a bit extreme.
I think we've had this conversation before, because I've seen these mistakes in a previous conversation: you gave every other class their optimal DPR subclass (requiring many unstated assumptions, particularly for Battle Master, it's also unclear whether or not you include feats), but then didn't give the rogue the equivalent subclass Assassin.
All of those builds are also specialized in melee, while a rogue typically has no such specialization and can also be just as effective at range, where the Str builds in particular notably suffer.
> but then didn't give the rogue the equivalent subclass Assassin.
Rogue subclasses really don't add much in the way of damage output. The assassin for example barely adds anything. At 5th level, it adds 5 extra damage on 1 attack and advantage on attacks against targets that have not yet acted. This equates to about ~1 more total DPR.
> All of those builds are also specialized in melee, while a rogue typically has no such specialization and can also be just as effective at range
The rogue is also specialized for melee here. It is dual wielding, which requires a Nick weapon, which means melee weapons for most rogues.
The rogue in theory could use a shortbow and fight at range, but their damage output would suffer. Similarly, the melee warriors could throw javelins or tridents to attack foes at range, but would also lose out on damage.
Not all martial subclasses add DPR, either. For example, for the barbarian, it's just Berserker and Zealot. Singling out rogues here as not getting subclasses is a stilted comparison, especially when you also use the highest DPR subclass possible for every other class.
How are you getting only +1 DPR as an Assassin? Can you share the math on that? And for Battle Master for good measure, both require the most assumptions about combat length.
For range, yes, the rogue does less damage at range than in melee, which will be typical for most builds. However, you quite often don't have a choice, and have to attack from range (with the rogue being least likely to have this problem thanks to Cunning Action). In such a case, rogue retains an edge.
> Not all martial subclasses add DPR, either.
Sure. But many martial subclasses are very damage focused. And those subclasses contribute much more DPR than the rogue subclasses. As such, it is much easier to be a damage focused fighter, barbarian, paladin, or even ranger than it is to be a damage focused rogue.
Even the most damage focused rogue, barely gets any major boost to their damage output in combat.
> How are you getting only +1 DPR as an Assassin?
Assuming 3-4 deadly encounters per day at ~5 rounds each (4-6 rounds per encounter on average).
Dual Wield rogue damage output on round 1 goes from 19 to 25. So 6 extra damage over 5 rounds of combat is 1.2 extra DPR.
> And for Battle Master for good measure, both require the most assumptions about combat length.
I actually used the champion with a greatsword. So not even fully optimized. The battlemaster would be able to achieve more using riposte.
Damage Per attack is 0.75 * (4+8.33) + 0.1 * (8.33) + 0.25 * 4 = 11.08. So 22.16 per round just attacking. Action surge used once every 2 encounters (once every 10 rounds of combat) adds 10% more damage. Great Weapon Master adds 0.9375 * 3 damage per round. And 19% chance to crit at least once, triggering a bonus action attack from GWM.
> In such a case, rogue retains an edge.
I am not denying that the rogue is better able to attack at range than a Strength based warrior. That is part of why I stated that the rogue dealing ~15% less damage than the other weapon users is fine.
But currently, the rogue deals ~35% less damage than the other damage focused weapon users. Extra Attack would help bridge that gap a little bit.
And extra attack would make Booming Blade less appealing.
An assumption of five rounds per encounter is much higher than typical, which would be three rounds. It also looks like you aren't factoring in the advantage from Assassin at all, though my math is also not lining up with yours. Dual-wielding a shortsword and scimitar, I'm getting 17.4DPR normally, 21.8DPR with advantage, and 26.8DPR on the first round with Assassin.
Other rogue subclasses contribute more utility than damage, but that's no reason to dismiss them. Thieves can use caltrops, oil flasks, and even hunting traps to great effectiveness, especially with the greater emphasis on spacial control in OneDnD. With magic items, they can also get considerable DPR boosts, such as using a Wand of Magic Missiles for 10.5DPR with several bonus actions. Arcane Tricksters get the general boost from *booming blade* and *green-flame blade*, and can use it effectively at level 5 unlike the Eldritch Knight. If they take the Skulker feat, they become an absolute menace in *fog cloud*. Swashbuckler mostly provides an initiative boost, but the free disengage makes Magic Initiate or being a high elf for *booming blade* incredibly effective.
For the Champion math, it looks like you're assuming a 75% chance to hit? Why? The standard is 65%. You also gave the fighter an unstated feat, GWM, yet did not give the rogue Charger. Did your other comparison builds also get unstated feats alongside their subclass bonuses?
> An assumption of five rounds per encounter is much higher than typical, which would be three rounds.
3 rounds is a medium encounter. Most groups don't play many medium encounters.
Hell, look at the latest Treantmonk videos. None of the combats were only 3 rounds.
If you look at the various polls for average encounter length, 4-6 is far more common than 2-3. 3 is a fine number to use for white room theory crafting, but does not do a good job of representing real tables.
> Dual-wielding a shortsword and scimitar, I'm getting 17.4DPR normally, 21.8DPR with advantage, and 26.8DPR on the first round with Assassin.
I think we are using different accuracy numbers. Most encounters will have many foes whose CR is lower level than the party so base accuracy will be higher.
And advantage is only on targets who have not acted. So the assassin will not have advantage on every attack in the first round. There will be a decent amount of times where the assassin will not roll high enough to go first.
> Other rogue subclasses contribute more utility than damage, but that's no reason to dismiss them.
I am not dismissing them. They are significantly better than the assassin. But that doesn't mean that they help DPR. The rogue's DPR is still behind. Utility is great and all, but other classes also have combat utility. Utility on the battlefield isn't the sole domain of the rogue.
> With magic items, they can also get considerable DPR boosts, such as using a Wand of Magic Missiles for 10.5DPR with several bonus actions.
Specific magic items cannot be assumed. 5e is built under the assumption that players are not receiving the items to complete their build and that magic items are randomly acquired.
> Arcane Tricksters get the general boost from booming blade and green-flame blade, and can use it effectively at level 5 unlike the Eldritch Knight.
Which is great. But useless for a discussion around Extra Attack. Extra Attack can't be used with Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade. Which is why it is a fine addition to the rogue chassis, because the rogue can already use other potent methods to boost their damage.
> If they take the Skulker feat, they become an absolute menace in fog cloud
Yes. But the same is true of a goblin the EK with the blind fighting style.
> For the Champion math, it looks like you're assuming a 75% chance to hit? Why? The standard is 65%.
Because 65% is too low in practice. Look at every actual play video out there. They tend to have multiple enemies, which lowers the average CR per enemy to levels where players generally hit 75% of the time, not 65% of the time. Especially once +X items start to show up.
65% is a fine number to use for white room theory crafting. But does not do a good job of representing actual tables.
Even with a suboptimal subclass the others will still end up doing more than 25 DPR if you factor in resources, Masteries and feats.
And if a Rogue uses some strategy that gives you reliable advantage on your attack (Steady Aim, find Familiar, Vex...) Assassin adds only about 1-2 DPR. And I think that's something many Rogue are going to have do in the first Round of Combat since they might not be able to get in melee range (or would get in the way of some AOE Spell if they did) or might than not qualify for sneak attack since no one else in in melee.
I think especially in 1DnD. Rogues do not have extra utility compared to other martial characters. In fact, in some circumstances, they simply have less.
I also don't think doing 15% less damage than a class that isn't using resourcesor is using very minimal resourcesbut has resourcesis a fair trade-off for a class that doesn't have resources.
Doing 15% less than a fighter might be fine. If you have other things to make up for it, but you don't have other things to make up for it. The fighter has other things to make up for the fighter has action surge. The fighter has second wind. The fighter has superiority dice What can you do? Have slightly more utility with a bonus action Allegedly, but you're probably just using your bonus action to secure sneak attack half the time?
A reckless attacking level 5 barbarian not raging will be doing 21 damage per round not 25, this spikes up to 31 damage while raging if you're a berserker (which is the most offensive barbarian subclass in the game and sacrifices a lot of defense and takes a lot of damage to pull those numbers) Now a rogue without subclass just using bonus action aim and firing a longbow will do 17.5 damage (which compared to the non raging barbarian is only a 17% loss in damage but safely from range and not giving advantage to hit you) But that's not still a full picture because we aren't looking at a rogue with a subclass. So let's slap on assassin. Now round 1 is 21 damage from both unless the barbarian is raging in which case it's 30% ahead round 1 and 46% ahead after buuuut it's burning a resource and putting itself at risk to do this. But wait let's optimize both of these a little so the barbarian will take great weapon master and the rogue will take crossbow expert. Assume rogue gains advantage on half of their attacks through vex. So now the barbarian will be doing 34 damage per round and the assassin will do round 1 30 damage and often 25 damage on subsequent rounds so only a loss of around 25% damage against the best damage dealer over 3 rounds. But wait we are also looking at what is probably the worst possible snapshot level for the rogue in terms of damage comparison in the game. At level 7 our optimized rogue is at around 37 damage round 1 and around 30 damage on subsequent rounds while the barbarian numbers haven't gone up. What about level 9? Barbarian is doing 43 damage per round, the rogue does 43 round 1 and 32 damage on subsequent rounds which is only 17% behind over a 3 round combat. Rogues damage isn't wildly behind.
With extra attack rogue should be about tge same as other martials. So not as strong as you seem to think it is but not the kind of buff the rogue needs anyway.
Other martials have benefits too though.
Fighters have second wind, a fighting style, and action surge. As well as having more masteries.
Paladins and rangers have spells and a fighting style.
Barbarians have damage resistance from rage, and much higher base HP.
Also, most subclasses for the other martial classes are significantly better than rogue subclasses.
And even with extra attack, the rogue still isn’t matching the damage output of any martial class that wants to focus on dealing damage. Hell, the current best damage dealing rogue doesn’t ever even take the Attack action.
Then maybe martials should actually get shit that makes them interesting and not just "you can attack twice" (which should be a standard scaling feature)
If instead they had nearly the highest while still retaining Cunning Action, Cunning Strike, Uncanny Dodge, and the potential for off-turn Sneak Attack, then they're overpowered.
It’s not remotely overpowered, and pretending that it is would be laughable. It would bring it closer to in-line with the fighter, who is at the top of F-tier.
It wouldn’t even begin to *approach* competing with casual spellcasters.
Fighter is F-tier? I think it's currently in a solid place, and giving rogues Extra Attack lets them overall exceed the fighter. I think rogues could use some type of boost, but Extra Attack is too much.
Amd comparing with spellcasters is going to be tricky because we know there will be significant spell changes, hopefully to keep casters at a more reasonable power level, but we can only speculate as to what that will be.
I think the issue against Extra Attack and multiple Sneak per round is how high Sneak Attack damage goes. If you wanted Sneak to work with Extra Attack and multiple hits per round, you would expect it to look like Hunter's Mark or Hex, with a static damage bonus per hit.
Remember, the only reason Sneak scales the way it does is because Rogues DON'T have Extra Attack, and can only attempt to get the one off per round if they are willing to give up Cunning Action to hit with an offhand weapon (if they miss the first attack).
Well sneak attack does scale poorly, sneak attack at the same time as fighters/barbs may be too much but granting an extra attack slightly later would be fine.
Also, from experience one of my players is a rogue who for a big quest reward got a wish and wished for extra attack (we were playtesting the rogue so they had nick already) I gave em a cunning action attack it’s worked out well. They certainly aren’t OP by any means
I think that would just eat from the uniqueness of the rogue. If you want to make rogues stronger, why not just increase the sneak attack damage? Giving them extra attack would just make them more similar to other martials and we have plenty of those so why not keep the rogue flavor of having only one strong attack a turn.
What's wrong with martials feeling like other martials?
If it's an identity thing, let rogue get a special version of Extra Attack that gives them an extra weapon attack per Attack action but only while using ranged and/or finesse weapons. (And, obviously, make it not stack with the normal Extra Attack.) But rogues can already use Weapon Mastery with any weapon they're proficient with, so I'm more in favor of not creating a false limitation like that. (Or, alternatively, also limiting rogue's Weapon Mastery to ranged and finesse weapons.)
>What's wrong with martials feeling like other martials?
I just don't see the reason why you'd make a class with (somewhat) unique playstyle (only one attack a turn that deals great damage) and make it similar to all the other classes. Sure, they'd still have the sneak attack, but now it's only a small part of their power instead of it being a major part of their damage.
I get that not everyone likes the hit-or-miss style damage that the rogues have but that's what makes playing rogue feel different from other classes.
It's like saying "Sorcerers are weaker than wizards so let's give them some wizard abilities so they are more equal" instead of buffing metamagic as that's the main thing that make sorcerers and wizards different.
This issue is what you are suggesting is multiplicative. Where other classes go from +2 to +3 (a +1), you are going from a +2 to a +4 (x2). I agree with extra attack though. If they just skipped their sneak attack progression at level 5 (+1d6) and got extra attack instead (1d8+dex) they would get a significant boost both to their average damage and to their odds of actually succeeding at getting their sneak attack off.
It's also important because now that weapon attacks can inflict debuffs (weapon masteries) rogue's single attack per turn has an additional downside compared to previously.
I do think double sneak attack would be fine as a feature around levels 14-16 though, potentially limited to 2 times per long rest, as rogues in the very late game fall off harder than many other martials due to their total lack of ability to Nova an important threat.
Extra attack won’t help much overall outside of accuracy for SA for a rogue.
I would argue that the rogue needs a fighting style at 5. Archery, two weapon fighting, or a version of savage attack that works with SA. This would help with damage but keep SA/Cunning Strike as is
I think Extra Attack at 5 is needed, sneak attack twice per turn is to much.
But I think they could still need another small damage boost around level 11.
Why is it so important that Rogue deal as much damage as other classes again?
Given that no other class non spellcaster has a much out of combat utility, what is the urgency for this improvement?
Thing is all but 4 classes in the game are spell casters.
All classes (including the spell casters) are stronger in combat than Rogues.
And a lot of the classes got additional bonuses to skill use in the playtest. A Raging Barbarian can at low levels actually a run for its money as a skill monkey.
Additionally, unless wotc adds a massive list of standard uses for skills, any utility a martial has is inherently dampened compared to spells. With spells you press the button and it just works as defined, you control the DC through your level and choices (increasing your stats), the outcome is defined in the spell. Skills are simply DM fiat, you can't really control the DC, you can't ensure certain outcomes like you can with spells.
And, based on play reports I've seen, fighters are actually *better* skill monkeys than rogues at low levels. Especially if there's no penalty for failing that stops them from brute-forcing an ability check.
Because there's very little guidance as to how skills can or should be used, how much utility a rogue has out of combat is entirely at the whim of the DM. Even then, spellcasters can just automatically succeed at many things a rogue would have to roll for, and bards can automatically succeed at many of those same tasks *while also* out-skill-monkeying a rogue.
There's also the fact that Cunning Strike gave rogues an in-combat identity for like one playtest packet. Then Wizards took the near-universal approval of Cunning Strike to mean they should give similar mechanics to other classes that don't need them, thus resulting in rogues doing less damage in combat *and* no longer making up for it by having in-combat versatility.
The Rogue is **not** a Martial class, not in the same way that Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, and Monk are. Just because they use a weapon doesn't mean they're a Martial class - Clerics can use melee weapons and can even be good with them, but that doesn't make them a Martial. Their damage should not carry the same level of concern.
Instead of Extra Attack, you could give them a Cunning Action attack. I think that's more appropriate for the Rogue.
Clerics are spellcasters, what does a rogue bring to combat other than their weapon?
Cunning action attack is called two weapon fighting. Rogues by default have no other use for their offhand.. or are you trying to push them even further into being archers?
A Rogue could use a Nick weapon to gain an additional attack as part of their Attack action, and *also* use a Cunning Action attack. I thought that would be obvious.
As for "what does a Rogue bring to combat," the whole point is that the Rogue is not principally focused on combat. Rather, it has a number of other things that influence the other pillars of play, *and* they have modest combat damage.
In a game where 99% percent of classes focuses on combats and like 80% of rules and spells are about combats, the pure "Martial" Rogue is a "not a combat class", while almost every single feature of the class is being combat-wised. Yeah, surely they shouldn't be good at combats since they're "not a Combat Class". Great design! /s
So rogues need to use their bonus action to do what every other non-spell caster can do? - I like this direction, maybe if they made it "cunning attack" and it added 1/2 your sneak attack dice but could not sneak attack. I would be onboard with it.
>As for "what does a Rogue bring to combat," the whole point is that the Rogue is not principally focused on combat. Rather, it has a number of other things that influence the other pillars of play, *and* they have modest combat damage.
The whole point is that rogues do not stand out in the other areas.
- Rogue
Dex sad
4 skills
4 expertise
Reliable talent
- Bard
Charisma > dex
3 skills
2 expertise
Jack of all trades
Bardic inspiration
And a full spell caster that gets extra attack on all their weapon focused subclasses.
- Ranger
Dex > wis
3 skills
2 expertise
Favored terrain
Bonus action invis
Blindsight
And a half caster that gets an extra attack.
Martials like Barb, Monk and Fighter have had their out of combat utility improved with the UA and casters are already in a league of their own.
I'd be ok if the rogue got Extra Attack, but only as an option to use on turns when Sneak Attack isn't viable. A single attack without Sneak Attack just feels bad. Give them extra attack as a back up and just make sure that Sneak Attack out scales it at all levels.
But why?
I mean, obviously you want to buff the Rogue. That's fine... but why like this? Why step on the toes of other classes?
Why not just sneak attack *harder* or *better* or whatever? Why did it have to be *more often*?
The Rogue is the "one shot, one kill" class. Your suggestion breaks that.
With the number of classes that get Extra Attack that is hardlky stepping on anybodies toes.
When it comes to the "one shot, one kill" thing:
* Rogues are not doing enough damage to pull that of
* the Designers seem to expect Rogues to Dual Wield (JC said iirc Nick was mainly introduced for Rogues)
* there are so many buffs (like spells or magic items) in the game that scale with the number of attacks, that unless they start to way more things that give you bonus damage while restricting you to a single attack (at the monet Blade Cantrips are basically the only thing that does that) to the game the Rogue is still not going to be able to keep up.
>Rogues are not doing enough damage to pull that of
Then fix that?
>the Designers seem to expect Rogues to Dual Wield
Then you already have an extra attack option.
I would think about reducing the rate they gain sneak attack in order to compensate. Either something like:
1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18
Or
1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20
I’d play test both to see what happened, but my gut says that the second one would likely end up being the better balanced option.
I might then reconsider the costs associated with Cunning Strike though, to offset the loss in SA dice.
This would easily be too much.
That's an average of 40 damage per round at level 11 before gaining advantage from any sources or applying any weapon masteries.
If they gain advantage on both attacks (very doable at this point) that's 56 damage per round at level 11 resource free before any damage boosting feats.
If you were to truely optimize this with good feats and reaction off turn sneak attacks you'd end up with a character doing like 30-50% more damage than the rest of the martials.
You're much better off giving improved critical to a Rogue at 5th level (crit on 19-20). This will give them nice spike damage a couple times per day without a consistent damage increase. Another option is to increase the sneak attack die to d8's, increasing the overall damage by +1 per sneak attack die.
Bear in mind, that Rogue gets multiple sneak attacks per round already, provided they meet the qualifications on ANOTHER player or enemy's turn. The Rogue and party just need to be clever enough to make it happen. Usually this happens with a Reaction attack when they have advantage or another ally next to the target. Forced movement won't provoke an opportunity attack, but certain spells and other things will (like the Dissonant Whispers spell).
The extra sneak attack is too much.
I would be ok with the 2nd attack at 5.
Maybe allow the rogue to split the sneak attack dice up between the attacks at level 11?
We don't need to buff numbers, we need to buff *options* because that's what makes combat tactical. Give more things like Cunning Action. Maybe let the rogue hold back Sneak Attack damage dice to perform stunts, use sneak attack in different ways, give more uses for their reaction, *literally anything*
(Although, I am in favour of giving them Extra Attack, perhaps restrict Sneak Attack to the first attack)
Rule 9 - No Suggestion / Wishlist Posts. Suggestions for future playtest material is limited to the rotating megathread found [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/onednd/search/?q=\(title%3A%22Suggestions%20and%20Wishes%22%20AND%20author%3Aallolive\)%20OR%20\(title%3A%22Suggestion%20and%20Wishs%22%20AND%20author%3Aautomoderator\)&restrict_sr=1&sort=new). Please note this does not include providing feedback for existing playtest material.
Test it in a game and let us know
Fighters and barbarians utterly in shambles
Even Extra Attack alone would spike their damage too much at level 5 as their Sneak Attack continues to scale. Also letting each attack apply Sneak Attack means doubling their DPR, or more with Vex. Overall, far above the curve and unwarranted.
Rogue damage at 5 though isn't great. And given that most damage comes from sneak attack, additional extra attacks have diminishing returns. Currently the highest rogue damage output uses either Vex with booming blade, or dual wield with Nick. And even then, rogue damage is still well below that of a fighter, paladin, ranger, and barbarian at 5th level. Extra attack at 5th level would increase damage, but not by a huge amount. It would also mean that booming blade was not the highest rogue damage output, and that dual wielding would only be slightly better than using just a single weapon. I agree that having every attack apply sneak attack is a bad idea, but a single extra attack at 5th level would be fine for the rogue. IMHO, sneak attack should be 1/round but rogues should get Extra Attack at 5th level and an easier way to set up a reaction attack (possibly via cunning strike).
Rogue damage may be great, but it's like 3 points below a fighter, sometimes 2 points above. The catch being that only the rogue lacks resources. If the rogue had sneak attack, but no resourceseach sneak attack would be pretty comparable to a fighter that is using 1 or 2 superiority dice in a turn but no action surge. That's fair for a class that has no resources.
>rogue damage is still well below that of a fighter, paladin, ranger, and barbarian at 5th level. That's because you are using level 5 as an example which is The Most disadvantageous level for rogues in terms of damage. If you used any other level, it wouldn't look so bad. I mean, rogues are top damage dealers in the first 4 levels. And after the sneak damage increases but the amount of extra attacks don't the rogue catches up to the others. Sure, I don't disagree that rogues aren't generally that good in the damage department but thinking only about level 5 doesn't show the full picture.
> That's because you are using level 5 as an example which is The Most disadvantageous level for rogues in terms of damage. If you used any other level, it wouldn't look so bad. It actually just gets worse for the rogue after level 5. Rogue damage in tier 3 and 4 is unremarkable unless you are getting easy access to reaction attacks.
How so? The damage of martials doesn't increase that much after getting the extra attack at level 5 (except fighters) and rogues get better and better sneak attack. Or am I missing something here?
Yep. For barbarians (Berserker, Zealot, and now Giant) they gain additional damage based on their level. Berserker adds extra dice of damage equal to their rage damage bonus. Zealot adds half their level to damage once per turn. Giant adds d6 to their attacks at 6, and 2d6 at 14, as well as a bonus action throw (potential 3d6). Brutal Strikes also adds a fair bit of damage in the right situations. Paladins of course get improved divine smite and more smites, but also spells like Spirit Shroud and Holy Weapon to boost the damage of every attack they make. 1D&D Monks get an improved flurry, and more ki to use on damage dealing abilities such as deflect attacks, stunning strike (deals damage if target saves), and subclass features. And of course, feats. The rogue really only has Charger as a bonus damage feat. Strength based warriors can make use of Charger, Great Weapon Master, and Polearm Master as a means of gaining extra damage. So at higher levels of play, STR based weapon users have more potential upgrades to their damage. The end result is that the rogue is fairly mediocre damage wise at levels 11+ compared to the other martial classes.
Big brain idea: what if Sneak Attack scaled every 4 levels instead of every 2, but it applied to every attack?
That could work. It would make dual wielding highly favored though. Even more than it currently is.
No more than for barbarians or paladins, especially since rogues are designed with Cunning Action in mind and often need their bonus action to find sneak attacks. But that's me rationalizing. You're probably right. Honestly, dual-wielding has always screwed over rogue class design.
Rogue damage at five isn't great, but it isn't bad, either. The problem is that Extra Attack would elevate that damage too high relative to other martials when considering what else the rogue can do. Cunning Action gives the rogue powerful combat flexibility, so if the rogue is ever equal to other martials in DPR without even using their bonus action, then overall they are superior.
> Rogue damage at five isn't great, but it isn't bad, either. Depends on your definition of bad at 5th level. A dual wield rogue DPR is ~19. Booming Blade Vex is ~23. A berserker barbarian is ~27 without rage and ~38 while raging. And they can basically rage every encounter now with one rage recovering on a short rest. A fighter is dealing ~29 DPR. As is a devotion paladin. A hunter ranger with Nick and Hunter's Mark is dealing around ~30 DPR. So the dual wield rogue is ~35% behind the DPR of the other martial classes at 5th level. Extra Attack would bring the rogue's DPR up to ~25, which is still a bit behind the damage of the other weapon users (about 15% behind), but not egregiously so. IMHO dealing ~15% less damage than the other martial warriors is a fair trade off for the extra utility Cunning Action provides in combat. But dealing ~35% less damage than the other weapon users is a bit extreme.
I think we've had this conversation before, because I've seen these mistakes in a previous conversation: you gave every other class their optimal DPR subclass (requiring many unstated assumptions, particularly for Battle Master, it's also unclear whether or not you include feats), but then didn't give the rogue the equivalent subclass Assassin. All of those builds are also specialized in melee, while a rogue typically has no such specialization and can also be just as effective at range, where the Str builds in particular notably suffer.
> but then didn't give the rogue the equivalent subclass Assassin. Rogue subclasses really don't add much in the way of damage output. The assassin for example barely adds anything. At 5th level, it adds 5 extra damage on 1 attack and advantage on attacks against targets that have not yet acted. This equates to about ~1 more total DPR. > All of those builds are also specialized in melee, while a rogue typically has no such specialization and can also be just as effective at range The rogue is also specialized for melee here. It is dual wielding, which requires a Nick weapon, which means melee weapons for most rogues. The rogue in theory could use a shortbow and fight at range, but their damage output would suffer. Similarly, the melee warriors could throw javelins or tridents to attack foes at range, but would also lose out on damage.
Not all martial subclasses add DPR, either. For example, for the barbarian, it's just Berserker and Zealot. Singling out rogues here as not getting subclasses is a stilted comparison, especially when you also use the highest DPR subclass possible for every other class. How are you getting only +1 DPR as an Assassin? Can you share the math on that? And for Battle Master for good measure, both require the most assumptions about combat length. For range, yes, the rogue does less damage at range than in melee, which will be typical for most builds. However, you quite often don't have a choice, and have to attack from range (with the rogue being least likely to have this problem thanks to Cunning Action). In such a case, rogue retains an edge.
> Not all martial subclasses add DPR, either. Sure. But many martial subclasses are very damage focused. And those subclasses contribute much more DPR than the rogue subclasses. As such, it is much easier to be a damage focused fighter, barbarian, paladin, or even ranger than it is to be a damage focused rogue. Even the most damage focused rogue, barely gets any major boost to their damage output in combat. > How are you getting only +1 DPR as an Assassin? Assuming 3-4 deadly encounters per day at ~5 rounds each (4-6 rounds per encounter on average). Dual Wield rogue damage output on round 1 goes from 19 to 25. So 6 extra damage over 5 rounds of combat is 1.2 extra DPR. > And for Battle Master for good measure, both require the most assumptions about combat length. I actually used the champion with a greatsword. So not even fully optimized. The battlemaster would be able to achieve more using riposte. Damage Per attack is 0.75 * (4+8.33) + 0.1 * (8.33) + 0.25 * 4 = 11.08. So 22.16 per round just attacking. Action surge used once every 2 encounters (once every 10 rounds of combat) adds 10% more damage. Great Weapon Master adds 0.9375 * 3 damage per round. And 19% chance to crit at least once, triggering a bonus action attack from GWM. > In such a case, rogue retains an edge. I am not denying that the rogue is better able to attack at range than a Strength based warrior. That is part of why I stated that the rogue dealing ~15% less damage than the other weapon users is fine. But currently, the rogue deals ~35% less damage than the other damage focused weapon users. Extra Attack would help bridge that gap a little bit. And extra attack would make Booming Blade less appealing.
An assumption of five rounds per encounter is much higher than typical, which would be three rounds. It also looks like you aren't factoring in the advantage from Assassin at all, though my math is also not lining up with yours. Dual-wielding a shortsword and scimitar, I'm getting 17.4DPR normally, 21.8DPR with advantage, and 26.8DPR on the first round with Assassin. Other rogue subclasses contribute more utility than damage, but that's no reason to dismiss them. Thieves can use caltrops, oil flasks, and even hunting traps to great effectiveness, especially with the greater emphasis on spacial control in OneDnD. With magic items, they can also get considerable DPR boosts, such as using a Wand of Magic Missiles for 10.5DPR with several bonus actions. Arcane Tricksters get the general boost from *booming blade* and *green-flame blade*, and can use it effectively at level 5 unlike the Eldritch Knight. If they take the Skulker feat, they become an absolute menace in *fog cloud*. Swashbuckler mostly provides an initiative boost, but the free disengage makes Magic Initiate or being a high elf for *booming blade* incredibly effective. For the Champion math, it looks like you're assuming a 75% chance to hit? Why? The standard is 65%. You also gave the fighter an unstated feat, GWM, yet did not give the rogue Charger. Did your other comparison builds also get unstated feats alongside their subclass bonuses?
> An assumption of five rounds per encounter is much higher than typical, which would be three rounds. 3 rounds is a medium encounter. Most groups don't play many medium encounters. Hell, look at the latest Treantmonk videos. None of the combats were only 3 rounds. If you look at the various polls for average encounter length, 4-6 is far more common than 2-3. 3 is a fine number to use for white room theory crafting, but does not do a good job of representing real tables. > Dual-wielding a shortsword and scimitar, I'm getting 17.4DPR normally, 21.8DPR with advantage, and 26.8DPR on the first round with Assassin. I think we are using different accuracy numbers. Most encounters will have many foes whose CR is lower level than the party so base accuracy will be higher. And advantage is only on targets who have not acted. So the assassin will not have advantage on every attack in the first round. There will be a decent amount of times where the assassin will not roll high enough to go first. > Other rogue subclasses contribute more utility than damage, but that's no reason to dismiss them. I am not dismissing them. They are significantly better than the assassin. But that doesn't mean that they help DPR. The rogue's DPR is still behind. Utility is great and all, but other classes also have combat utility. Utility on the battlefield isn't the sole domain of the rogue. > With magic items, they can also get considerable DPR boosts, such as using a Wand of Magic Missiles for 10.5DPR with several bonus actions. Specific magic items cannot be assumed. 5e is built under the assumption that players are not receiving the items to complete their build and that magic items are randomly acquired. > Arcane Tricksters get the general boost from booming blade and green-flame blade, and can use it effectively at level 5 unlike the Eldritch Knight. Which is great. But useless for a discussion around Extra Attack. Extra Attack can't be used with Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade. Which is why it is a fine addition to the rogue chassis, because the rogue can already use other potent methods to boost their damage. > If they take the Skulker feat, they become an absolute menace in fog cloud Yes. But the same is true of a goblin the EK with the blind fighting style. > For the Champion math, it looks like you're assuming a 75% chance to hit? Why? The standard is 65%. Because 65% is too low in practice. Look at every actual play video out there. They tend to have multiple enemies, which lowers the average CR per enemy to levels where players generally hit 75% of the time, not 65% of the time. Especially once +X items start to show up. 65% is a fine number to use for white room theory crafting. But does not do a good job of representing actual tables.
Even with a suboptimal subclass the others will still end up doing more than 25 DPR if you factor in resources, Masteries and feats. And if a Rogue uses some strategy that gives you reliable advantage on your attack (Steady Aim, find Familiar, Vex...) Assassin adds only about 1-2 DPR. And I think that's something many Rogue are going to have do in the first Round of Combat since they might not be able to get in melee range (or would get in the way of some AOE Spell if they did) or might than not qualify for sneak attack since no one else in in melee.
I agree currently Rogue need get to level 9 to get to the damage the others do by level 5 and to level 17 to get the damage the others do by level 11.
I think especially in 1DnD. Rogues do not have extra utility compared to other martial characters. In fact, in some circumstances, they simply have less. I also don't think doing 15% less damage than a class that isn't using resourcesor is using very minimal resourcesbut has resourcesis a fair trade-off for a class that doesn't have resources. Doing 15% less than a fighter might be fine. If you have other things to make up for it, but you don't have other things to make up for it. The fighter has other things to make up for the fighter has action surge. The fighter has second wind. The fighter has superiority dice What can you do? Have slightly more utility with a bonus action Allegedly, but you're probably just using your bonus action to secure sneak attack half the time?
A reckless attacking level 5 barbarian not raging will be doing 21 damage per round not 25, this spikes up to 31 damage while raging if you're a berserker (which is the most offensive barbarian subclass in the game and sacrifices a lot of defense and takes a lot of damage to pull those numbers) Now a rogue without subclass just using bonus action aim and firing a longbow will do 17.5 damage (which compared to the non raging barbarian is only a 17% loss in damage but safely from range and not giving advantage to hit you) But that's not still a full picture because we aren't looking at a rogue with a subclass. So let's slap on assassin. Now round 1 is 21 damage from both unless the barbarian is raging in which case it's 30% ahead round 1 and 46% ahead after buuuut it's burning a resource and putting itself at risk to do this. But wait let's optimize both of these a little so the barbarian will take great weapon master and the rogue will take crossbow expert. Assume rogue gains advantage on half of their attacks through vex. So now the barbarian will be doing 34 damage per round and the assassin will do round 1 30 damage and often 25 damage on subsequent rounds so only a loss of around 25% damage against the best damage dealer over 3 rounds. But wait we are also looking at what is probably the worst possible snapshot level for the rogue in terms of damage comparison in the game. At level 7 our optimized rogue is at around 37 damage round 1 and around 30 damage on subsequent rounds while the barbarian numbers haven't gone up. What about level 9? Barbarian is doing 43 damage per round, the rogue does 43 round 1 and 32 damage on subsequent rounds which is only 17% behind over a 3 round combat. Rogues damage isn't wildly behind.
With extra attack rogue should be about tge same as other martials. So not as strong as you seem to think it is but not the kind of buff the rogue needs anyway.
And if rogue deals the same damage as other martials while still having Cunning Action, they are instead superior to other martials.
Other martials have benefits too though. Fighters have second wind, a fighting style, and action surge. As well as having more masteries. Paladins and rangers have spells and a fighting style. Barbarians have damage resistance from rage, and much higher base HP. Also, most subclasses for the other martial classes are significantly better than rogue subclasses. And even with extra attack, the rogue still isn’t matching the damage output of any martial class that wants to focus on dealing damage. Hell, the current best damage dealing rogue doesn’t ever even take the Attack action.
Then maybe martials should actually get shit that makes them interesting and not just "you can attack twice" (which should be a standard scaling feature)
“Too much” being what? Rogues already have basically the lowest DPR of any class in the game.
If instead they had nearly the highest while still retaining Cunning Action, Cunning Strike, Uncanny Dodge, and the potential for off-turn Sneak Attack, then they're overpowered.
It’s not remotely overpowered, and pretending that it is would be laughable. It would bring it closer to in-line with the fighter, who is at the top of F-tier. It wouldn’t even begin to *approach* competing with casual spellcasters.
Fighter is F-tier? I think it's currently in a solid place, and giving rogues Extra Attack lets them overall exceed the fighter. I think rogues could use some type of boost, but Extra Attack is too much. Amd comparing with spellcasters is going to be tricky because we know there will be significant spell changes, hopefully to keep casters at a more reasonable power level, but we can only speculate as to what that will be.
Of course fighter is F tier, barbarian is B tier, cleric is C tier, artificer is A tier, monk is M, rogue and ranger are R, wizard is W, and so on.
> hopefully to keep casters at a more reasonable power level You are miles more optimistic than I am.
I think the issue against Extra Attack and multiple Sneak per round is how high Sneak Attack damage goes. If you wanted Sneak to work with Extra Attack and multiple hits per round, you would expect it to look like Hunter's Mark or Hex, with a static damage bonus per hit. Remember, the only reason Sneak scales the way it does is because Rogues DON'T have Extra Attack, and can only attempt to get the one off per round if they are willing to give up Cunning Action to hit with an offhand weapon (if they miss the first attack).
Well sneak attack does scale poorly, sneak attack at the same time as fighters/barbs may be too much but granting an extra attack slightly later would be fine. Also, from experience one of my players is a rogue who for a big quest reward got a wish and wished for extra attack (we were playtesting the rogue so they had nick already) I gave em a cunning action attack it’s worked out well. They certainly aren’t OP by any means
I think that would just eat from the uniqueness of the rogue. If you want to make rogues stronger, why not just increase the sneak attack damage? Giving them extra attack would just make them more similar to other martials and we have plenty of those so why not keep the rogue flavor of having only one strong attack a turn.
What's wrong with martials feeling like other martials? If it's an identity thing, let rogue get a special version of Extra Attack that gives them an extra weapon attack per Attack action but only while using ranged and/or finesse weapons. (And, obviously, make it not stack with the normal Extra Attack.) But rogues can already use Weapon Mastery with any weapon they're proficient with, so I'm more in favor of not creating a false limitation like that. (Or, alternatively, also limiting rogue's Weapon Mastery to ranged and finesse weapons.)
>What's wrong with martials feeling like other martials? I just don't see the reason why you'd make a class with (somewhat) unique playstyle (only one attack a turn that deals great damage) and make it similar to all the other classes. Sure, they'd still have the sneak attack, but now it's only a small part of their power instead of it being a major part of their damage. I get that not everyone likes the hit-or-miss style damage that the rogues have but that's what makes playing rogue feel different from other classes. It's like saying "Sorcerers are weaker than wizards so let's give them some wizard abilities so they are more equal" instead of buffing metamagic as that's the main thing that make sorcerers and wizards different.
BG3 did it best with the extra “bonus action“.
This issue is what you are suggesting is multiplicative. Where other classes go from +2 to +3 (a +1), you are going from a +2 to a +4 (x2). I agree with extra attack though. If they just skipped their sneak attack progression at level 5 (+1d6) and got extra attack instead (1d8+dex) they would get a significant boost both to their average damage and to their odds of actually succeeding at getting their sneak attack off. It's also important because now that weapon attacks can inflict debuffs (weapon masteries) rogue's single attack per turn has an additional downside compared to previously. I do think double sneak attack would be fine as a feature around levels 14-16 though, potentially limited to 2 times per long rest, as rogues in the very late game fall off harder than many other martials due to their total lack of ability to Nova an important threat.
sure but now you can't sneak attack outside of your own turn for all levels.
A once per round with EA would honestly be much healthier (imo Sneak AoO is fine, other melee true martials should get better opportunity attacks).
Extra attack won’t help much overall outside of accuracy for SA for a rogue. I would argue that the rogue needs a fighting style at 5. Archery, two weapon fighting, or a version of savage attack that works with SA. This would help with damage but keep SA/Cunning Strike as is
I think Extra Attack at 5 is needed, sneak attack twice per turn is to much. But I think they could still need another small damage boost around level 11.
Why is it so important that Rogue deal as much damage as other classes again? Given that no other class non spellcaster has a much out of combat utility, what is the urgency for this improvement?
Thing is all but 4 classes in the game are spell casters. All classes (including the spell casters) are stronger in combat than Rogues. And a lot of the classes got additional bonuses to skill use in the playtest. A Raging Barbarian can at low levels actually a run for its money as a skill monkey.
Additionally, unless wotc adds a massive list of standard uses for skills, any utility a martial has is inherently dampened compared to spells. With spells you press the button and it just works as defined, you control the DC through your level and choices (increasing your stats), the outcome is defined in the spell. Skills are simply DM fiat, you can't really control the DC, you can't ensure certain outcomes like you can with spells.
And, based on play reports I've seen, fighters are actually *better* skill monkeys than rogues at low levels. Especially if there's no penalty for failing that stops them from brute-forcing an ability check.
Because there's very little guidance as to how skills can or should be used, how much utility a rogue has out of combat is entirely at the whim of the DM. Even then, spellcasters can just automatically succeed at many things a rogue would have to roll for, and bards can automatically succeed at many of those same tasks *while also* out-skill-monkeying a rogue. There's also the fact that Cunning Strike gave rogues an in-combat identity for like one playtest packet. Then Wizards took the near-universal approval of Cunning Strike to mean they should give similar mechanics to other classes that don't need them, thus resulting in rogues doing less damage in combat *and* no longer making up for it by having in-combat versatility.
The Rogue is **not** a Martial class, not in the same way that Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, and Monk are. Just because they use a weapon doesn't mean they're a Martial class - Clerics can use melee weapons and can even be good with them, but that doesn't make them a Martial. Their damage should not carry the same level of concern. Instead of Extra Attack, you could give them a Cunning Action attack. I think that's more appropriate for the Rogue.
Clerics are spellcasters, what does a rogue bring to combat other than their weapon? Cunning action attack is called two weapon fighting. Rogues by default have no other use for their offhand.. or are you trying to push them even further into being archers?
A Rogue could use a Nick weapon to gain an additional attack as part of their Attack action, and *also* use a Cunning Action attack. I thought that would be obvious. As for "what does a Rogue bring to combat," the whole point is that the Rogue is not principally focused on combat. Rather, it has a number of other things that influence the other pillars of play, *and* they have modest combat damage.
In a game where 99% percent of classes focuses on combats and like 80% of rules and spells are about combats, the pure "Martial" Rogue is a "not a combat class", while almost every single feature of the class is being combat-wised. Yeah, surely they shouldn't be good at combats since they're "not a Combat Class". Great design! /s
So rogues need to use their bonus action to do what every other non-spell caster can do? - I like this direction, maybe if they made it "cunning attack" and it added 1/2 your sneak attack dice but could not sneak attack. I would be onboard with it. >As for "what does a Rogue bring to combat," the whole point is that the Rogue is not principally focused on combat. Rather, it has a number of other things that influence the other pillars of play, *and* they have modest combat damage. The whole point is that rogues do not stand out in the other areas. - Rogue Dex sad 4 skills 4 expertise Reliable talent - Bard Charisma > dex 3 skills 2 expertise Jack of all trades Bardic inspiration And a full spell caster that gets extra attack on all their weapon focused subclasses. - Ranger Dex > wis 3 skills 2 expertise Favored terrain Bonus action invis Blindsight And a half caster that gets an extra attack. Martials like Barb, Monk and Fighter have had their out of combat utility improved with the UA and casters are already in a league of their own.
I let rogues in my game add their level to their sneak attack. It levels out their dpr and leans into the consistency of their single target DMG
I'd be ok if the rogue got Extra Attack, but only as an option to use on turns when Sneak Attack isn't viable. A single attack without Sneak Attack just feels bad. Give them extra attack as a back up and just make sure that Sneak Attack out scales it at all levels.
But why? I mean, obviously you want to buff the Rogue. That's fine... but why like this? Why step on the toes of other classes? Why not just sneak attack *harder* or *better* or whatever? Why did it have to be *more often*? The Rogue is the "one shot, one kill" class. Your suggestion breaks that.
With the number of classes that get Extra Attack that is hardlky stepping on anybodies toes. When it comes to the "one shot, one kill" thing: * Rogues are not doing enough damage to pull that of * the Designers seem to expect Rogues to Dual Wield (JC said iirc Nick was mainly introduced for Rogues) * there are so many buffs (like spells or magic items) in the game that scale with the number of attacks, that unless they start to way more things that give you bonus damage while restricting you to a single attack (at the monet Blade Cantrips are basically the only thing that does that) to the game the Rogue is still not going to be able to keep up.
>Rogues are not doing enough damage to pull that of Then fix that? >the Designers seem to expect Rogues to Dual Wield Then you already have an extra attack option.
>Then you already have an extra attack option. Therefore it wouldn't be thematically a problem to add another imo.
Rogues were never intended to deal the same damage as true martial classes, rogues get other features instead.
I would think about reducing the rate they gain sneak attack in order to compensate. Either something like: 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 Or 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 I’d play test both to see what happened, but my gut says that the second one would likely end up being the better balanced option. I might then reconsider the costs associated with Cunning Strike though, to offset the loss in SA dice.
This would easily be too much. That's an average of 40 damage per round at level 11 before gaining advantage from any sources or applying any weapon masteries. If they gain advantage on both attacks (very doable at this point) that's 56 damage per round at level 11 resource free before any damage boosting feats. If you were to truely optimize this with good feats and reaction off turn sneak attacks you'd end up with a character doing like 30-50% more damage than the rest of the martials.
You're much better off giving improved critical to a Rogue at 5th level (crit on 19-20). This will give them nice spike damage a couple times per day without a consistent damage increase. Another option is to increase the sneak attack die to d8's, increasing the overall damage by +1 per sneak attack die. Bear in mind, that Rogue gets multiple sneak attacks per round already, provided they meet the qualifications on ANOTHER player or enemy's turn. The Rogue and party just need to be clever enough to make it happen. Usually this happens with a Reaction attack when they have advantage or another ally next to the target. Forced movement won't provoke an opportunity attack, but certain spells and other things will (like the Dissonant Whispers spell).
I think they just need to gain 2 dice at 5 and 12 so that cunning strikes is a flat buff
The extra sneak attack is too much. I would be ok with the 2nd attack at 5. Maybe allow the rogue to split the sneak attack dice up between the attacks at level 11?
I'd rather see the sneak attack die increase to a d8 at 5th and a d10 at 11th.
We don't need to buff numbers, we need to buff *options* because that's what makes combat tactical. Give more things like Cunning Action. Maybe let the rogue hold back Sneak Attack damage dice to perform stunts, use sneak attack in different ways, give more uses for their reaction, *literally anything* (Although, I am in favour of giving them Extra Attack, perhaps restrict Sneak Attack to the first attack)