Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9376334" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Ah, I knew I was getting something wrong.So that would be Fighter 5 at 24.5 and Rogue 5 at 22.5, while Fighter 11 is at 33 and Rogue 11 is at 33. SO the change is instead of continuously leading the fighter in damage, the Rogue is 2 points behind at the level the fighter doubled their damage output, and is tied by level 11.       Going back to the rough accuracy math I did before, Fighter 5 is 14.7 and Rogue 5 is 16.02, and Fighter 11 is 19.8 while Rogue 11 is 24.84... putting Rogues back as doing more damage than the fighter, on average, at each break point.So wait, have we gone from "the rogue is too weak and has no place, the fighter can outperform them" to "the fighter is now useless because the rogue has everything" without changing a single fact on the field? Because I just demonstrated again that, if both sides are dual-wielding, the Rogue is doing superior damage on average. And remember, these are just the two break points where Fighter damage spikes, the rogue gets more damage every two levels. Personally? I don't think there is an issue. Rogue is doing superior to sword and board and dual-wielding fighter, potentially even with archer fighter (both lose second attack, fighter gains accuracy, rogue doesn't. But Rogue can continue with likely advantage on every attack and fighter can't) meaning it is only when you have pure damage build fighters are they out-damaging rogues, which they should absolutely do. We don't need a new class. We need people to stop jumping to conclusions.</blockquote>

Verification