D&D 5E Shield Master vs Two Weapon Fighting on a rogue

[TrueBagelMan]

So I build a shield Master rogue and I’m wondering if two weapon fighting is better damage wise. The rogue has a +7 in Athletics and has proficiency in heavy armor since are table allows UA. (Eldritch Armor) Now mathematically what is better damage wise? Two separate attacks without advantage or one with advantage?

 

[Mort]

So I build a shield Master rogue and I’m wondering if two weapon fighting is better damage wise. The rogue has a +7 in Athletics and has proficiency in heavy armor since are table allows UA. (Eldritch Armor) Now mathematically what is better damage wise? Two separate attacks without advantage or one with advantage?

Is your table allowing the old interpretation of shield master? As errata'd the shove comes only after the attack - so getting advantage due to it doesn't quite work.

FYI, in my game I allow it to come first, but even with that knowledge no one has taken the feat.

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

So I believe I commented on this in the other thread you posted. While I'm struggling to find the exact handful of threads from a few years back, I did find this thread:

D&D 5E - A use for True Strike

This isn't an argument or anything, I think true strike is broken (in the underpowered way) but I think these combos are decent enough: Level 3 sorcerer, Brass/Gold Draconic, Quickened & Twinned Metamagic. So, first round, cast Quickened Burning Hands and cast twinned True Strike as an action...

www.enworld.org

that sort of hits on the same thing. It's a bit outside of my math skillset to do the calculations myself, but if what that thread and the others I recall from the past concluded they decided that in most cases you are better off having two attacks instead of one with advantage. However, there are a number of factors to be considered such as:
1) Will it be a sneak attack? In this case it is iffy though I personally would much prefer to have two chances for sneak attack damage to land than a single advantage that still might miss. That said, you are more likely to crit with advantage than not.

2) Is the attack using a resource? I.e. if the attack is a spell using a slot that does nothing on a miss (i.e. guiding bolt), advantage is preferable to keep from wasting spell slots.

3) Does action economy matter in this instance? Like will the villain get away or succeed in their grand plan if not stopped THIS round? Advantage is likely higher priority unless...

4) Is one attack likely to kill them? If so advantage all the way.

5) Speaking of trying to hit: does the enemy have a high AC? You'll probably prefer advantage over two attacks. The exact "sweet spot" depends on build/feats/magic items/etc. but generally speaking AC of around 18+ is where you'll start seeing advantage start to really matter.

The point is context matters.

 

[Mort]

But to answer your actual question :

For a rogue, two attacks seems to be better. With advantage, you're, at best, hitting once. With 2 attacks you're likely to hit twice, so more damage (even if it's only a bit more).

Plus, assuming the shove is allowed first - you still have to succeed. If you do THEN advantage and you get 2 rolls to hit. If not - one roll as normal. With TWF you get 2 rolls no matter what.

For a fighter the shove (for prone) is amazing because you can get 2,3 , or even 4 attacks (more with action surge). For the rogue you're trading 2 attacks for 1 - even with advantage it's unlikely to be worth it.

 

[Mort]

Also, with Shield Master, you're giving up your bonus action for advantage. This means you will lose the big benefit of cunning action nearly every round.

If you're using 2 weapons, you have more options. If you hit with the first attack (and get sneak attack etc.) , you can then decide if you want to attack again - or use cunning action for a whole lot of options. Seems more versatile.

 

[Oofta]

In general, I think wielding two light weapons will be the best option. You don't need a feat and if you miss with your primary attack, you can always use your bonus action to do your secondary attack. A rogue's damage potential comes from getting in sneak attack far more than getting multiple attacks. If you hit with your primary you still have your bonus actions for other things like disengaging to get out of melee.

With shield master* you will always use your bonus attack. Yes, it increases your chance of getting a critical but only a little bit.

Having said that if you don't find your bonus action useful for other rogue things, take the shield master*. Criticals with sneak attack are really nice and add up.

*Assuming you're allowed to use the shove before the attack. It's kind of a pointless feat if you cannot IMHO.

 

[Mort]

Having said that if you don't find your bonus action useful for other rogue things, take the shield master*. Criticals with sneak attack are really nice and add up.

*Assuming you're allowed to use the shove before the attack. It's kind of a pointless feat if you cannot IMHO.

This is true (criticals being awesome with sneak attack).

But really, if you can't find a, good use for your bonus action with a rogue - something is just not right!

Heck, in many campaigns (with a slightly permissive DM) using your bonus action to hide and then attack will give you the same advantage you get with Shield Master.

And you can save the feat for two weapon fighting (which, BTW, allows the shove just like shield master - if you really need it, unlikely a DM would allow the SM shove but not with TWF). Or just take an ASI, fight better with two weapons and still be able to shove when needed.

 

[Ancalagon]

I think it's pretty clear the shield rogue will do less damage...

But the defense bonus is nice. What about a swashbuckler? Can't she swash a buckler? That would be a very resilient character.

 

[Oofta]

I think it's pretty clear the shield rogue will do less damage...

But the defense bonus is nice. What about a swashbuckler? Can't she swash a buckler? That would be a very resilient character.

Not so sure on that. You'd have to run the numbers, but the off-hand attack for the rogue doesn't add their dex modifier to damage. So if you don't take a feat you're adding less than 3.5 extra damage per round (or less because shield version could use a rapier instead of short sword). If you take the dual weapon feat you only lose 1 AC and can dual wield rapiers. On the other hand, you can use your bonus action for something else if you hit with your primary.

The shield master increases their chance to hit by the same amount while also being more likely to get a crit on their sneak attack. But they're always using their bonus action. On average, especially at mid-to-high levels, they're going to do more damage.

Unless of course there's multi-classing going on which may be the case because rogues don't get proficiency with shields. Putting on a shield you aren't proficient with means disadvantage on any ability check, saving throw, or attack roll that involves Strength or Dexterity and you can't cast spells.

 

[TrueBagelMan]

I will explain what I’m making. So I plan on going into hexblade for hex, shield proficiency, whip proficiency and go to third level to get pact of the blade. (creative I know) Since my table allows UA I plan on getting Eldritch Armor to use strength for damage. Then I can cast Hex to give who I’m attacking disadvantage on on athletics or acrobatic checks for Shield Master. If we go against something that is a size larger or has great Athletes or Acrobatics the sorcerer (We always have a sorcerer of some kind) casts Enlarge/Reduce or Enhance Ability depending on the situation. (Sometimes neither)