I'm not investing in trapping skills (see my listed skill layout). The rogue is only there to facilitate low-tier TA enhancements, as listed. If I push my rogue levels off until later, it means later access to those enhancements, which are really what make the build tick. I'm mostly using this build for a past life, so putting a rogue level at cap would be somewhat wasted, as then I wouldn't get to the enhancements that make it work until far later than I even have use for them. c;
Once again, low-hanging 25% morale bonus to doublestrike 10 out of every 12 seconds (plus a +3W attack on that cooldown). I'm fairly certain that'll add up to more than SA dice on a barb. I'll crunch the numbers against the venomed blades, since the melee power scaling is nice, but there's also the fact that some things are immune to the poison from that enhancement, whereas doublestrike works just as well on everybody. Shiv and sly flourish addressed next...
I really don't see why I should take sly flourish or shiv. They
lower my threat generation, arguably not a great thing on any barbarian. Sly flourish has some damage, but I think one attack with a larger critical threat range pales in comparison to near-constant 25% doublestrike. Shiv is just like a worse version of sly flourish. I don't get anything out of it at all unless I invest heavily in bluff AND sneak attack. Even if I were to invest in bluff just for the CC effect of shiv, I plan to run silver flame pots (hence the base nine in a lot of scores) so my CHA score would give me an instant -4.
Oh, and haste boost: it's definitely nice. But with AP stretched thin, I still prefer constant 25% DS to the limited number of haste boosts per rest. Plus, I always forget to use action points.
A nice thought, but the AP are stretched so thin as it is. UMD in this case isn't so much for healing (where the enhancement is unarguably useful), but rather for utility. Weapon usage, raise dead scrolls, shield scrolls, invis scrolls, etc. As such, I just can't see investing 8AP for something so marginally useful, especially since I am also not planning on hitting traps.
TL;DR:
Thanks for the insights. Many of them don't apply to my goals for the build, but I'll do some checking on venomed blades to see if the damage is greater than the 25% doublestrike I'd have to give up. Cheers~
EDIT: I started with the idea that it's not unreasonable at all to expect
at least 100 damage on hit from this build. So 25% DS means that every fourth hit, I get an extra 100 damage. In other words, 25 damage per hit, or thereabouts. Venomed Blades gives 1d8 poison damage scaling with 200% melee power, or an average of 4.5*(100+2*melee power/100). To make that work out in favor of venomed blades, we'd need 228 melee power. If you've ever worked out how much melee power a build in general gets, you'll know this is unfeasable.
Melee power in this build comes from three sources only (until epics): THF line (gives 6 melee power), Greater Rage (gives 10 melee power), and Frenzy (gives 5 melee power). Total melee power, 21. It's a bit shy of the 228 we need to make Venomed Blades worth it. TL;DR: Doublestrike is still better.