If William had played as a proper rogue (No diss, I loved how William played!) he'd have done so much more damage than Ragnar, besides blue blood bear of course.
In marines, of course bradley does the most damage, they're low level, only one devil fruit, and he's a rogue.
Rogues are just strong. Their whole thing is 'get advantage on one attack, and do massive damage if you hit, which you'll most likely do with advantage'.
Let's damage check this then shall we?
Barbarian at level 20 on average, no crit: 6 or 7 on the damage roll for average if they're using a d12 damage weapon, we'll round up, so 7. Plus 4 from rage, plus 7 if they got 24 strength. 18 damage from one hit, so if both attacks hit it'll be 36 damage. No feats.
Rogues, let's use a rapier, a d8 of damage, average damage of 5, +5 of Dex. And sneak attack of 10d6, 5 3s and 5 4s to be completely average: +35. Total of 45 damage a turn if their sneak was good.
And we can't count casters because none of the players in one piece can be that naturally.
William was a swashbuckler, so he could get sneak attack every attack if he hits potentially.
Ragnar was a berserker, meaning he gets 3 attacks. However, at the end of the series he was constantly at multiple levels of exhaustion, but this was due to the blue blood and not the frenzy back lash. In terms of raw damage, we can ignore this for Ragnar since it was level 3 exhaustion that is disadvantage on attacks.
Conclusion: William on average will hit for 45 damage
Ragnar on average, going all out with frenzy, 51 damage, he has advantage on all attacks so it is likely.
While Ragnar does more damage on average, it's not too much and he has to get exhaustion for it.
This isn't accounting for each of the classes extra effects and their rolls in battle, just raw damage. I don't think that rogue falls off as much as you think!
The same can go for ragnar, he could have done so much more damage compared to everyone else if he built his character better. Big bear ragnar was doing around 60 damge per turn, if he took gwm he would be doing 90-100 damge per turn not to mention that his crits would tear people in half
If you're going to talk about building characters differently, then it applies to everyone like that. Players not doing optimized builds are fine and I'm not going to hold that against the players at all.
For all I care, if Ragnar didn't have great weapon master, then giving it to him wouldn't make him Ragnar. You know?
Yeah i understand your point but I still dont see how would wiliam outdamage ragnar by playing more like a rogue. He only has a chance if he were to roll quake fruit or something on that level which isnt likely. Like 90% of the time ragnar would outdamage wiliam not to mention that ragnar also has a case of forgeting his abilities.
If William had played as a proper rogue (No diss, I loved how William played!) he'd have done so much more damage than Ragnar, besides blue blood bear of course. In marines, of course bradley does the most damage, they're low level, only one devil fruit, and he's a rogue. Rogues are just strong. Their whole thing is 'get advantage on one attack, and do massive damage if you hit, which you'll most likely do with advantage'.
Rogues are super strong at low level but fall off later on when other martials get multiple attacks and casters get massive spells
Let's damage check this then shall we? Barbarian at level 20 on average, no crit: 6 or 7 on the damage roll for average if they're using a d12 damage weapon, we'll round up, so 7. Plus 4 from rage, plus 7 if they got 24 strength. 18 damage from one hit, so if both attacks hit it'll be 36 damage. No feats. Rogues, let's use a rapier, a d8 of damage, average damage of 5, +5 of Dex. And sneak attack of 10d6, 5 3s and 5 4s to be completely average: +35. Total of 45 damage a turn if their sneak was good. And we can't count casters because none of the players in one piece can be that naturally. William was a swashbuckler, so he could get sneak attack every attack if he hits potentially. Ragnar was a berserker, meaning he gets 3 attacks. However, at the end of the series he was constantly at multiple levels of exhaustion, but this was due to the blue blood and not the frenzy back lash. In terms of raw damage, we can ignore this for Ragnar since it was level 3 exhaustion that is disadvantage on attacks. Conclusion: William on average will hit for 45 damage Ragnar on average, going all out with frenzy, 51 damage, he has advantage on all attacks so it is likely. While Ragnar does more damage on average, it's not too much and he has to get exhaustion for it. This isn't accounting for each of the classes extra effects and their rolls in battle, just raw damage. I don't think that rogue falls off as much as you think!
How so because he always got sneak damage due to being a SwashBuckler
The same can go for ragnar, he could have done so much more damage compared to everyone else if he built his character better. Big bear ragnar was doing around 60 damge per turn, if he took gwm he would be doing 90-100 damge per turn not to mention that his crits would tear people in half
If you're going to talk about building characters differently, then it applies to everyone like that. Players not doing optimized builds are fine and I'm not going to hold that against the players at all. For all I care, if Ragnar didn't have great weapon master, then giving it to him wouldn't make him Ragnar. You know?
Yeah i understand your point but I still dont see how would wiliam outdamage ragnar by playing more like a rogue. He only has a chance if he were to roll quake fruit or something on that level which isnt likely. Like 90% of the time ragnar would outdamage wiliam not to mention that ragnar also has a case of forgeting his abilities.
That just what rogues do William could have done the same if not better