Quote Originally Posted by Hael View Post
Still if people want a sort of integrated dpr, you would look at something like a six encounter day. With 2 shadowblades a day a Rogue would get something like (1/3) *(39.1) + (2/3) * (34.8) = 36.2 assuming steady aim .. and the barbarian with 4 rages would get something like (2/3) * (46.4) + (1/3) *(42.9) ~ 45.2. assuming reckless attack.

Without advantage the Rogue would have (1/3)*(24) + (2/3) * (22.45) ~ 23 dpr and the Barbarian would have (2/3) *(29.2) + (1/3) * (27.2) ~ 28.5 dpr.
That feels about right to me TBH. Rogues do more damage than I probably give them credit for, but GWM barbs are hard to compete with when it comes to round over round damage in that level range*

But, even when I made the DPS comparison 4 pages ago, my point wasn't that rogues do bad damage - they're in the ballpark of other martial characters. Little lower, but in the ballpark. My point was that IMO, those other martial characters that are doing slightly better damage bring more value to the party by dint of also being tough and/or armored and thus being a battlefield presence. Rogue, as noted, is a "selfish" class (while also relying on others to give them space to work!)

If rogue as doing 15% more damage than barb, like that'd be a better place for them; they're the glass cannon martial striker.
If rogue was doing the same damage but had a series of notable damage mitigation abilities, that's a better place for them.
If rogue was doing the same damage but also was doing some cool CC stuff, that'd be a great place for them.

*I also want to point that rogue's and barb's type of steady damage is not where the meta of the game is. A paladin or gloom stalker ranger will do less damage over 10 rounds than a barb, but they dealt more in the first 2 or 3 and that's what actually matters.