So I got this question after seeing this video that compares the rogue to the fighter in regards to damage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZTEAmrvt-c

If you look at rogues in a vacuum vs a fighter without magical weapons or subclasses, the rogue is fairly comparable to the higher not going NOVA. But the moment you add magical weapons, feats, subclasses, and going NOVA then the fighter will do MASSIVELY more damage. Some of the arguments I have seen against the higher has been:

1) The rogue doesn't need to expend resources to sneak attack vs the fighter needing to expend a resource to action surge and can't do so again until they short rest again. On one hand this true, but on the other hand dealing as much as 3x more damage than the rogue with a much smaller drop off in damage in the case of misses, and at the pace most D&D games go (1-3 encounters vs the 5-6 encounters), the cost vs benefit is something to consider.

2) rogues have better out of combat skill. The issue here is that D&D really is a combat game first with nearly every class being combat balanced first.

So what are your guys thoughts on the balancing of rogues vs other martial classes?

Damn, the astrologists must've declared a week of "Martial class problems" posts. This is the 7th or 8th I've seen in the past 4 days.

2. Is not even that guaranteed. While reliable talent and expertise are great, fighters got a couple (resource using) ways to boost skill checks and barbarian primal knowledge can make them quite excellent mono stat scouts on top of existing strengths.

In general rogues biggest issue is progression, (that one dnd playtest fixed then reverted cause of published content) means rogue comes online too late at which point its comparative advantages are pretty meh.

This video literally just came out and I just found it interesting since he brought numbers and charts on the damage output of the rogue vs the fighter.

Rogue is my second favorite class, and my favorite marshall.

No, it can't compare damage to a fully kitted, meta playing Fighter, Barbarian, or Paladin. But that doesn't matter to me. It's a blast to play. Hiding, sneak attack, zipping around the battlefield with bonus action dash and disengage, taking half damage with Uncanny Dodge, these make it so much more fun than anything the others can do. That's not even accounting for subclass goodies.

and at the pace most D&D games go (1-3 encounters vs the 5-6 encounters), the cost vs benefit is something to consider.

WotC doesn't, and shouldn't, balance the game around 1-3 encounters. You can't balance a game around people who aren't running the game in the intended manner.

In D&D5e why would you ever compare fighters without accounting for magical weapons as it's assumed, by the system, that they will have a plethora of magical items and weapons at their disposal. 🤦

The issue is that not even WotC made campaigns operate at a 5-6 encounter rate.

I generally have to agree with your #2 point. Rogues do a lot of stuff out of combat.

That said, combat is 1/3rd of DnD content so it's still very important. I find that rogues tend to be more effective with ranged attacks like bows than your typical fighter. It doesn't have to be this way, but fighters tend to be beefier, less dexterous. Sometimes, you will find a fighter dedicated to a dex based build, but not too often.

Additionally, action surge is awesome but if the DM doesn't give your rest time between those 3 encounters you mention, then the fighter doesn't overwhelm in EVERY combat.

Truth is, Dnd is a cooperative game and the classes are meant to be different in terms of utility and combat strength. It's not meant to be balanced perfectly for combat. That's intended, not a flaw in the system.

That's the thing, Rogue is worse without items but even worse with items

Yeah this...

AT ITS BEST CASE scenario the rogue JUST BARELY trails the fighter. The moment you add subclasses, feats, and gear the rogue is left in the dust.

Published campaigns are also not how D&D is intended to be run. Modules are intended for DM's who are just starting out or don't have prep time. That's literally why they exist. They're not great examples.

glad I wasn't the only one who noticed lmao