Improved Sneak Attack

[Max Caysey]

I'm looking for ways to improve the sneak attack dice from d6 to d what ever...

Can anyone help please?

[Yuki Akuma]

Sacred Strike (Book of Exalted Deeds) increases your sneak attack dice to d8s against evil creatures.

This is literally the only way I know to do it in 3.5.

The feat Craven (Champions of Ruin) adds +1 damage per character level to your sneak attacks, which is pretty good (each +1 is essentially like bumping one d6 up to a d8).

If Pathfinder is okay, the Knife Master (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue/archetypes/paizo---rogue-archetypes/knife-master) Rogue archetype improves sneak attacks with daggers, kukris, punching daggers and other "knife" weapons to d8s, in return for reducing sneak attacks with anything else to d4s.

Note that this wouldn't stack with Sacred Strike - Sacred Strike would simply make all your sneak attacks against evil creatures d8s, and you'd use the Knife Master dice otherwise.

[Sephoris]

It's not larger dice, but again from Pathfinder, there's some bad damage protection in the Powerful Sneak and Deadly Sneak talents, which bump your minimum damage on each die to 2 and 3 respectively. Powerful Sneak alone is pretty lousy, giving you a whopping extra .166... expected damage per die. Deadly Sneak at least bumps that up to half a point of damage per die, which isn't amazing but isn't too shabby. And it gets a little more value for being bad damage protection, for those cases where particularly bad damage would mean not punching through DR or keeping up with regeneration or something like that.

And of course, these will stack badly with any effect you find to actually roll larger dice, because they'll then apply to less of the die's range. But it's something that'll squeeze some more damage out of sneak attacks.

[Tokuhara]

It's not larger dice, but again from Pathfinder, there's some bad damage protection in the Powerful Sneak and Deadly Sneak talents, which bump your minimum damage on each die to 2 and 3 respectively. Powerful Sneak alone is pretty lousy, giving you a whopping extra .166... expected damage per die. Deadly Sneak at least bumps that up to half a point of damage per die, which isn't amazing but isn't too shabby. And it gets a little more value for being bad damage protection, for those cases where particularly bad damage would mean not punching through DR or keeping up with regeneration or something like that.

And of course, these will stack badly with any effect you find to actually roll larger dice, because they'll then apply to less of the die's range. But it's something that'll squeeze some more damage out of sneak attacks.

Or if like me, your d6's are numbered 1-3 twice

[Prince Raven]

The problem I have with increasing dice size is that I have 40 d6s and only 1 d8.

[O.j.s]

Use Polymorph, become a Kelvezu (MM2) and gain 8d6 SA, +14 Natural Armor, Poison DC 31 and Dex 31.

[Irk]

try this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-226095.html)

[magwaaf]

I'm looking for ways to improve the sneak attack dice from d6 to d what ever...

Can anyone help please?

pathfinder knife master archtype. makes them d8's starting at level 1

[Hua]

Why would you ever buff sneak attack? It is grossly overpowered already. We house rule nerf it. We have 3 DMs that take turns running campaigns and we all agree with that. Since everyone knows in advance, anyone deciding to play a rogue does so with the same expecation.

[Elricaltovilla]

Why would you ever buff sneak attack? It is grossly overpowered already. We house rule nerf it. We have 3 DMs that take turns running campaigns and we all agree with that. Since everyone knows in advance, anyone deciding to play a rogue does so with the same expecation.

How is sneak attack grossly overpowered? And how does your DM go about merging it?

[Ravens_cry]

I have to agree. Lots of creatures are outright immune, and while there is ways around several of them, many creatures are just un-sneak-attackable. If anything, I'd expand the possible list of things it can affect, like Pathfinder did.
Unless you are playing a very, very low optimization game, I can't see how it's 'over powered' exactly.

[Hua]

It is over powered because 2 rogues will beat 2 fighters every time, at least at mid to higher levels. Yes there are defenses against rogues, but having everyone under a blur spell is crazy. Undead, contructs, elementals and oozes are immune, but the basic creatures are not.

A 9th level mage casts magic missle as his go-to for single target spell a lot, and does 17.5 damage (on average). A 9th level rogue with flanking (and they should almost always get to that) getts the same 17.5 damage from SA, plus they get the weapon damage, and magic damage, and str damage, and buffs damage (like from bard). And they then swing again for similar. Yes they will miss sometimes, but not often on first attack and second attack just piles on. At higher level it is worse.

Other than creatures immune to SA, a rogue will out DPS a fighter and that is just wrong. The fighter should to be the best melee person, because others get spells and abilities to buff and be more versitile. A rogue, which is designed to be the utilitary person, with many skill type abilities and defense against spells (evaision) should not out perform in melee.

The Nerf we do is that SA ONLY applies on the first attack, so the second and third attack do not get the extra dice of damage. It pulls the rogue back in line with other classess.

[Squirrel_Dude]

It is over powered because 2 rogues will beat 2 fighters every time, at least at mid to higher levels. Yes there are defenses against rogues, but having everyone under a blur spell is crazy. Undead, contructs, elementals and oozes are immune, but the basic creatures are not. What? All the fighters have to do is prevent flanking (get in a corner), or get a power attack + combat brute + shock trooper charge to drop one of the rogues at the start of the fight, or wield spiked chains/guisarmes, and trip the rogues so they can't move around, or be better at archery and gun them down from range, or do one of the many other things to deal with a rogue.

Once the rogue can't get sneak attack it's a squishy target that get's instagibbed by a fighter's full attack.

[eggynack]

It is over powered because 2 rogues will beat 2 fighters every time, at least at mid to higher levels. Yes there are defenses against rogues, but having everyone under a blur spell is crazy. Undead, contructs, elementals and oozes are immune, but the basic creatures are not.

A 9th level mage casts magic missle as his go-to for single target spell a lot, and does 17.5 damage (on average). A 9th level rogue with flanking (and they should almost always get to that) getts the same 17.5 damage from SA, plus they get the weapon damage, and magic damage, and str damage, and buffs damage (like from bard). And they then swing again for similar. Yes they will miss sometimes, but not often on first attack and second attack just piles on. At higher level it is worse.

Other than creatures immune to SA, a rogue will out DPS a fighter and that is just wrong. The fighter should to be the best melee person, because others get spells and abilities to buff and be more versitile. A rogue, which is designed to be the utilitary person, with many skill type abilities and defense against spells (evaision) should not out perform in melee.

The Nerf we do is that SA ONLY applies on the first attack, so the second and third attack do not get the extra dice of damage. It pulls the rogue back in line with other classess.
Suffice to say that you are very very very (very very) wrong. Sneak attack is roughly comparable to other damage sources, if a little on the underpowered side, except it requires set up to use. Basically, you should try to substantiate your claim that a rogue deals more damage than a two handed melee guy, because every set of numbers I've run has indicated that the two handed melee guy will deal more. They're also more capable of doing combat maneuvers, like tripping, intimidation, and bull rushing, so that's another edge they have in combat. A rogue is still generally more powerful, because they many abilities that work in out of combat contexts, but that doesn't make them anywhere near overpowered. They sit at tier four, with fighters at tier five, and the lowest tier being tier four. Nerfing rogues to make wizards happy, who are comfortably tier one, is ridiculous.

Edit: Direct damage is the thing that wizards are probably worst at, but seriously, why is your wizard using magic missile as his main damage spell? He's so much higher level than that it's insane. You're not even accounting for metamagic. Just, I dunno, make it an orb of fire or something. If you think that a rogue's ability to flank is consistent, wait until you see an orb of fire with searing spell on it. Nothing's getting away from that.

[Medic!]

A rogue giving up his sneak attack dice on one attack to drop an enemy's AC by 5 is a lot scarier to me than the sneak attack damage. Especially if it's coupled with someone using a maneuver like Leading the Attack or Vanguard Strike. Suddenly your baddie's got an effective -9 to their AC and everyone gets power-attack boners to beat it about the head with. Much scarier than a few d6.


EDIT: I know exactly where you're coming from though, at our table at home, the guys who always play rogues like to do the evil little half-grin and go "Sneak-attack!" and spend 30 minutes shaking their fistful of dice, then high-fiving eachother afterwards. Or they did, until I gave up my monks and warlocks to play a debuff-focused caster a few times and started doing things like beating a lvl 10 druid toe to toe with a lvl 4 sorc or using a cleric to turn a lich into a walking lip-guitarist. (Obviously optimization at home isn't a level playing field) :smallamused:

[juicycaboose]

Why exactly do you have a problem with the fact that a melee-oriented character (heck even a ranged rogue) like the rogue is able to deal more damage than a wizard's magic missile when a) the rogue needs to set up the sneak attack, i.e flanking, flat-footed and b) the rogue needs to succeed on an attack roll while the wizard's magic missile does not??

[Lord Haart]

A 9th level mage casts magic missle as his go-to for single target spell a lot, and does 17.5 damage (on average).

I think that it would be better to agree that you are playing in a very, very, very low-optimised game where the fact that rogues don't have an option of trading their auto-leveling sneak attack dice for extra hp at 1:1 basis does come in play and make them relatively good (and many other maxims and expectations that you may often hear on this forum don't hold true for as long as none of players gets interested at improving his character's capacities and no new book-savvy players join the game), than to run the math (which shows quite inarguably just how hard is is for a rogue to achieve damage output comparable with a bog-standart fighter-who-power-attacks-with-a-two-hander-and-a-PA-increasing-feat-or-two-which-is-what-he-gets-those-bonus-feats-for, not to mention a competent lvl 9 blaster wiz/sorc). It is still a very dubious reason to houserule anything away from the rogue, mind you (it's like houseruling for snowbordists to walk half of any distance they travel because people who try to get through the snow on cars are not buying this whole "winter tires" thing), but if your group is better that way, do it at your own discretion — preferably with full understanding of the implications.

[Yuki Akuma]

Okay let's actually take a look at this mathematically rather than just repeatedly telling the wrong person he's wrong.

Two Human adventurers with the elite array. One is a Fighter, the other is a Rogue.

Fighter: Str 15, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 8
Feats: Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Martial Study (Charging Minotaur)

Rogue: Str 12, Dex 15, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 8, Cha 13
Feats: Craven, Martial Study (Clinging Shadow Strike)

Wielding a greatsword, the Fighter charges an opponent, using Power Attack:
+4 to hit, 2d6+5 damage (average 12)

Wielding a rapier, the Rogue flanks the opponent the Fighter just charged, and activating Clinging Shadow Strike:
+3 to hit, 3d6+2 damage (average 12)

Next turn, Fighter, unable to charge, just Power Attacks:
+4 to hit, 2d6+5 damage (average 12)

Next turn, having expended his use of Clinging Shadow Strike, the Rogue just attacks:
+3 to hit, 2d6+2 damage (average 9)

Let's skip to 6th level now.

Fighter: Str 16, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8
Feats: A lot. The important ones are Power Attack, Improved Bull Rush, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper.

Rogue: Str 12, Dex 16, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 8, Cha 13
Feats: Craven, Martial Study (Clinging Shadow Strike), Weapon Finesse, Martial Stance (Island of Blades)

Fighter charges an opponent, using Power Attack, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper all at once.
+11 to hit (Shock Trooper making the penalty from Power Attack a penalty to AC instead), 2d6+40 damage (average 47)

Rogue flanks the opponent Fighter just charged, although from any angle he likes (even right next to Fighter) thanks to Island of Blades. He activates Clinging Shadow Strike and attacks:
+10 to hit, 5d6+7 damage (average 25)

Next turn, Fighter just Power Attacks, because he doesn't want his friend to lose the flanking bonus:
+5 to hit, 2d6+16 damage (average 23)
He could move away to set up another charge, but he wants to be kind to his Rogue friend and let him keep the flanking bonus.

Rogue, grateful for the flank, Sneak Attacks:
+10 to hit, 4d6+7 damage (average 21)

And so on. The Rogue picks up Shadow Blade at level 9, letting him add his Dexterity modifier to his attacks (and at this point, he can actually attack twice per turn!). At level 12, he can pick up Assassin's Stance, adding +2d6 to his sneak attacks (although he gives up the ability to flank from any angle if he uses it). He deals respectable damage, but is still outclassed by the Fighter.

The Fighter, meanwhile, does the smart thing and multiclasses into Psychic Warrior, so he can do full attacks at the end of a charge (he knew he put that 12 into Wisdom for a reason!).

[Max Caysey]

Why would you ever buff sneak attack? It is grossly overpowered already. We house rule nerf it. We have 3 DMs that take turns running campaigns and we all agree with that. Since everyone knows in advance, anyone deciding to play a rogue does so with the same expecation.

I SO disagree!

[VariSami]

@ Yuki Akuma: Otherwise good but I am relatively sure that non-initiator classes have an effective Initiator level of 0 at level 1 and as such, cannot learn any Martial Maneuvers at that level.

Also, the Fighter can also get Pounce with Lion Totem Barbarian which i believe is probably a bit better than a dip in Psychic Warrior.

[eggynack]

Also, the Fighter can also get Pounce with Lion Totem Barbarian which i believe is probably a bit better than a dip in Psychic Warrior.
Spirit lion totem, and you are correct that it makes a significantly better dip. Between spirit lion totem giving you pounce on a constant basis, whirling frenzy giving you an extra attack when you use it, and wolf totem giving improved trip without prerequisites, barbarian makes an excellent melee dip.

[Yuki Akuma]

@ Yuki Akuma: Otherwise good but I am relatively sure that non-initiator classes have an effective Initiator level of 0 at level 1 and as such, cannot learn any Martial Maneuvers at that level.

Also, the Fighter can also get Pounce with Lion Totem Barbarian which i believe is probably a bit better than a dip in Psychic Warrior.

I usually go by a rule that says IL bottoms out at 1. I guess that must be a house rule, apologies. I suppose the Rogue could get Clinging Shadow Strike by retraining or something along those lines. Perhaps a Fighter dip at level 2. :smallwink:

I was trying to stick to a middling level of optimisation - if I'd optimised out the wazoo I'd have been typing that post all day.

[eggynack]

I was trying to stick to a middling level of optimisation - if I'd optimised out the wazoo I'd have been typing that post all day.
Eh, I usually just shorthand it as something like fighter 2/barbarian 2 with spirit lion totem, wolf totem, whirling frenzy, power attack, improved bullrush, and shock trooper. The extension tends to lead to something like runescarred berserker. Also, the character is often a water orc, cause reasons. I sometimes write a lot more on the topic, because people tend to ask what I'm talking about when I present a build stub like this, but it's a simple thing in theory. I also sometimes toss on an extended tripping build, and maybe some intimidation if I'm in the mood. It's not really necessary to talk about that here, because this is the damage discussion power hour, but they're all components of a fuller version of a theoretical finished character.

[Firebug]

And using someone's previous comment about wizards...

At level 6, Magic Missile will shoot 3 bolts for 1d4+1 damage a piece.
3d4+3 average 10.5 damage.
So the Rogue looks a little overpowered, as does the Fighter.

But thats using a level 1 spell when the Wizard has level 3 ones available.
Fireball would be 6d6 (average 21 damage) to a single target, but more likely to hit 2-4. With some ability to shape the area (rod/feat/whatever) you are likely to hit all enemies.

But wait! Fireball is argued by many to be terrible. Stinking Cloud can literally shut down an entire encounter (nauseated means you get 1 action, a move action).

[Phaederkiel]

unfortunately, hua has not chimed in again.

I mean, he is right in the aspect that a good rogue can make a bad fighter jelaous easily. If a group has discovered how to build a working two weapon rouge, but not how to powerattack, a rogue is better.

If the dm cannot play the opponents clever enough to shut dow flanking situations, it is just the same.
(interestingly, by shutting down flanking, the dm normally allows charging, which completely reverses the situation)

last but not least, if hua thinks the barbarian is a worse damagedealer than the fighter, there is something wrong. Even without any optimisation, the barb does 2 to 3 damage more per attack, and hits better. With optimization, the barbarian easily outdamages even a dungeouncrashing fighter. Lion totem / whirling frenzy / city web enhancement, keen falchion, shocktrooper... the damage is significant.

Obviously, a rogue can also be optimized to a scary extent. but out of the box, the classes that have a higher bab and are less setup-dependent hit harder.

[Yuki Akuma]

A good Monk can make a bad Artificer jealous.

[jaybird]

Guys I think he's trolling. Cmon.

[eggynack]

Guys I think he's trolling. Cmon.
I'm honestly somewhat doubtful of that. This is far from the first time that I've seen someone present rogues as overpowered and absurd damage dealers. It's not even nearly the first time I've seen someone use sneak attack only working on the first attack in a round as a "fix". They're both surprisingly common ideas, so I'm inclined to assume he's sincere until proven otherwise.

Edit: Although, using a 9th level wizard casting magic missile as the magic damage baseline might be a new one, so you may have a point. That one hurt my head a little.

[Hua]

Ok, A few responses.
1. I can't have said "thinks the barbarian is a worse damagedealer than the fighter, there is something wrong" given I never ever mentioned barbarians at all.
2. Reach weapons and chains will not stop flanking as the rogue can just tumble in.
3. If your wizard thows a fireball into melee where the his companion fighter is, he better be ready to run. Thus I was using a single target only spell. A fireball against a single target will do pretty close to the same damage as magic missle if the target makes the save, and there is that issue of hitting your friends. Stinking cloud is indeed a potent spell and radically adjusts the battle field. It is also irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Sorching ray would have been a better example for you to use. And I somehow doubt that when you guys run a wizard you never use Magic Missle. Nobody uses only MM, but almost all use it. Especailly against a single target.
4. If you run the math, USING JUST CORE 3.5 RULES AND FEATS, against targets that can be sneak attacked, a rogue will do more damage than a fighter, in general. No, this is not always true, but in genearl will be. If buff the heck out of the AC of the target than the lower BAB for the rogue will cause him to miss enough to change the outcome. A mid level rogue will do more damage to a Fire giant, for example, than a mid level fighter.

My entire objection is based on the view that in melee, the fighter SHOULD be supreme, as that is pretty much his main job (yes I know they can be ranged as well, but I'm talking melee here). Why do we need to take a generalist, which is what a rogue is designed to be, and make him do the job of one of the other classes better than they do? A rogue can use wands and such, with UMD skill, but he isn't and shouldnt be a better healer than a cleric.

All of this is under the expecation that the rogue is in a group with others, fighting things like orcs, dragons, giants, outsiders and the like. In such situations, the rogue should not be doing more damage than the classes that are designed for dealing damage. Rogues get more skills and versatility than anyone else so they can fill gaps and certain needs. They can do combat but they should not be supreme at it. A fighter may be able to break down a door, but he is unlikly to pick the lock and just open it, as that is not his job.

[eggynack]

2. Reach weapons and chains will not stop flanking as the rogue can just tumble in.
That's really only true in core, where you don't have access to stuff like thicket of blades. In core, a rogue is one character. You may not be aware of that, but it's true. You can't always assume that you'll have a flanking buddy, and that that guy will be able to successfully flank.


3. If your wizard thows a fireball into melee where the his companion fighter is, he better be ready to run. Thus I was using a single target only spell. A fireball against a single target will do pretty close to the same damage as magic missle if the target makes the save, and there is that issue of hitting your friends. Stinking cloud is indeed a potent spell and radically adjusts the battle field. It is also irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Sorching ray would have been a better example for you to use. And I somehow doubt that when you guys run a wizard you never use Magic Missle. Nobody uses only MM, but almost all use it. Especailly against a single target.
Very few people use magic missile, at least among people who are trying to play in an optimal manner. Its only advantage is sheer consistency, and you already have orb of force by that level which outdoes magic missile in every conceivable way.


4. If you run the math, USING JUST CORE 3.5 RULES AND FEATS, against targets that can be sneak attacked, a rogue will do more damage than a fighter, in general. No, this is not always true, but in genearl will be. If buff the heck out of the AC of the target than the lower BAB for the rogue will cause him to miss enough to change the outcome. A mid level rogue will do more damage to a Fire giant, for example, than a mid level fighter.
Prove it. All of the math I've seen has indicated that this is untrue, and you haven't really presented any evidence for your claims. Besides, I don't know what heavenly force decreed that this is a core only discussion. In fact, the very nature of this thread indicates that it is not one.



My entire objection is based on the view that in melee, the fighter SHOULD be supreme, as that is pretty much his main job (yes I know they can be ranged as well, but I'm talking melee here). Why do we need to take a generalist, which is what a rogue is designed to be, and make him do the job of one of the other classes better than they do? A rogue can use wands and such, with UMD skill, but he isn't and shouldnt be a better healer than a cleric.

All of this is under the expecation that the rogue is in a group with others, fighting things like orcs, dragons, giants, outsiders and the like. In such situations, the rogue should not be doing more damage than the classes that are designed for dealing damage. Rogues get more skills and versatility than anyone else so they can fill gaps and certain needs. They can do combat but they should not be supreme at it. A fighter may be able to break down a door, but he is unlikly to pick the lock and just open it, as that is not his job.
The thing of it is, fighters suck. Seriously, they're about the third worst class in core. If you're going to nerf everything that completely destroys the fighter, you're going to need to start with things that aren't the rogue, and then you're going to have to prove that rogues obsolete a fighter under the normal rules, because you haven't. The problem with what you're saying, the biggest problem anyway, is that you're trying to nerf a middle of the road class to get in line with a bottom of the barrel class. Why don't you also nerf fighters, because they're so much better at fighting than monks? Why don't you also nerf barbarians, because they're better at fighting than fighters? Also, what are you doing to nerf the druid? Those guys obsolete fighters in ways rogues can't even dream of. Fighters aren't the supreme melee guys, because they're just a pile of feats. It has nothing to do with the rogue.

[Yuki Akuma]

Ah, moving the goalposts.

I think we're done here.

[Irk]

Let us compare at 6th level with just core.

A 6th level rogue with a 16 strength score will deal 5d6+3 with a flaming weapon

a 6th level fighter with a 21 strength score (+2 item), power attack, weapon spec, and a flaming greatsword will deal 3d6+21

rogue: 22 damage
fighter: 31.5 damage
as for the wizard, I won't even try. I'll just say they take improved initiative, increase their dex for a score of about 20 with some item. initiative +9
they cast glitterdust on those fire giants and effectively take them out of the game. That is without any optimizing whatsoever. That is just ingame common sense.

Also, undead are the largest subtype in d and d. sneak attacks don't work against them, not to mention the multifarious constructs and elementals. Also, fortification armor.

[eggynack]

Also, undead are the largest subtype in d and d. sneak attacks don't work against them, not to mention the multifarious constructs and elementals. Also, fortification armor.
Also casters going captain planet (i.e. has on heart of air, water, earth, and fire.) There's other stuff too, like a druid being able to cast the primal line from dragon magic and get uncanny and improved uncanny dodge (sorcerers can do it too, but they don't have the spells known to get some completely unspammable spells that lack versatility). Primal instinct in particular is some sweet business. There's also the many ways of getting concealment. Seriously, sneak attack just isn't nearly reliable enough.

[Irk]

Exactly, and that was just assuming core.

without core, spellcasters get metamgic reducers, celerity, arcane fusion, arcane spellsurge, Ur-Priest, orb spells, energy transformation fields

I mean that's like .000000001% of the list of options available to casters

Even in core, there's iron body!

[icefractal]

Even in core, Magic Missile is not a sensible spell for a 9th level Wizard to use, unless he thinks the enemies are trivial. For just a straightforward damaging spell, try Empowered Scorching Ray. At 9th level, that's 12d6 damage, no flanking required. At 11th level, it will go up to 18d6.

Regarding "Rogues aren't supposed to be good at combat" - that was dropped for a reason.
Real time spent picking a lock: 15 seconds
Real time spent scouting ahead: 5 minutes
Real time spend fighting the trolls: 30 minutes

Combat takes a much bigger chunk of real world time - the kind of time that actually matters. "Sit on the sidelines for 95% of the time we spend playing, and you can be really awesome for the last 5%" is not something many people want to do.

Add this to the fact that some uses of skills are just checking a box, and it matters little what character checked that box. Picking locks, searching for traps - a robot could have done that, and it doesn't provide much potential for roleplaying or decisions.

Finally - Fighter is just incorrectly designed. Look at the Barbarian. It fills the same role, but deals out a lot more pain, survives as well or better, and has more skills. That's what a melee-type should look like, even if you're sticking to core only.

[Lanaya]

Hua - the issue here isn't that rogues are overpowered, it's that fighters suck. They really, really, really suck, and this is especially true if you stick to core only, because power attack is basically the only feat in core that's actually worth taking for a martial character. If you want to balance the game, do it by making fighters better, not making anything that outclasses a fighter worse.

[Phaederkiel]

Hua - the issue here isn't that rogues are overpowered, it's that fighters suck. They really, really, really suck, and this is especially true if you stick to core only, because power attack is basically the only feat in core that's actually worth taking for a martial character. If you want to balance the game, do it by making fighters better, not making anything that outclasses a fighter worse.

hey, improved initiative is quite good too...

improved trip and combat reflexes are nice choices too.

No, fighter has its merits till we hit lvl 7, where the feats you can take run dry.

But fighter is not a damagedealer, but a battlefield controller. And he can be quite good at it, as long as you do not compare him to a caster.

Rogue, on the other hand, is exactly that. A situational damage dealer. A glass cannon. A striker, as 4e puts it.



____________________


and if you want to be a fighter as a damage dealer:
mounted combat, spirited charge, a lance.

now please, nerf fighters, cuz they are too good.

_______________

as a final word: i agree with eggysnack.
You say the math proves? Please show us that math.

[Flickerdart]

Level 1 core human fighter: Horse, lance, Mounted Combat, Ride-By Attack, Spirited Charge. Elite Array gives him 15 Strength, which translates into a total of +6 to hit (including charging and mounted bonuses) and 3d8+9 damage (average 22.5). 14 Constitution gives him 12 HP, a pretty low number.

A core human rogue, barring bonuses gained from WBL (for an even comparison of the classes) needs to be level 6 to surpass that to-hit (+3 from Dexterity, +4 BAB) and level 11 to surpass that damage (1d6 short sword + 6d6 SA = average 24.5 damage, provided he can get SA).

[SciChronic]

We can't forget that something as simple as Darkness shuts down a rogue's sneak attack ability.

[Flickerdart]

We can't forget that something as simple as Darkness shuts down a rogue's sneak attack ability.
Darkness? Not that stuff that's a rogue's natural environment and primary means of sneaking around the place, surely? The designers wouldn't be that dumb.

[Prince Raven]

I agree we should nerf every class better than Fighter. Let's see, that's Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer... basically all of them.

Also, Flickerdart, you need Ride-By-Attack to qualify for Spirited iirc.

I actually had the same issue with a DM, saying that at high levels the amount of damage a Two-Weapon Fighting Rogue was capable of on a full attack could one-shot a lot of enemies. It's almost like that's what the class was designed to do.

[Flickerdart]

Also, Flickerdart, you need Ride-By-Attack to qualify for Spirited iirc.
Ah right. I had the comparison as Human originally, then removed it for some reason. Fixed.

[Gnarnia]

Why would you ever buff sneak attack? It is grossly overpowered already. We house rule nerf it. We have 3 DMs that take turns running campaigns and we all agree with that. Since everyone knows in advance, anyone deciding to play a rogue does so with the same expecation.

This is one of the most ridiculous houserules I've ever heard of.

Do you also houserule that fighters can't wear platemail because it gives them too much AC?

[Gnarnia]

Ok, A few responses.
1. I can't have said "thinks the barbarian is a worse damagedealer than the fighter, there is something wrong" given I never ever mentioned barbarians at all.
2. Reach weapons and chains will not stop flanking as the rogue can just tumble in.
3. If your wizard thows a fireball into melee where the his companion fighter is, he better be ready to run. Thus I was using a single target only spell. A fireball against a single target will do pretty close to the same damage as magic missle if the target makes the save, and there is that issue of hitting your friends. Stinking cloud is indeed a potent spell and radically adjusts the battle field. It is also irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Sorching ray would have been a better example for you to use. And I somehow doubt that when you guys run a wizard you never use Magic Missle. Nobody uses only MM, but almost all use it. Especailly against a single target.
4. If you run the math, USING JUST CORE 3.5 RULES AND FEATS, against targets that can be sneak attacked, a rogue will do more damage than a fighter, in general. No, this is not always true, but in genearl will be. If buff the heck out of the AC of the target than the lower BAB for the rogue will cause him to miss enough to change the outcome. A mid level rogue will do more damage to a Fire giant, for example, than a mid level fighter.

My entire objection is based on the view that in melee, the fighter SHOULD be supreme, as that is pretty much his main job (yes I know they can be ranged as well, but I'm talking melee here). Why do we need to take a generalist, which is what a rogue is designed to be, and make him do the job of one of the other classes better than they do? A rogue can use wands and such, with UMD skill, but he isn't and shouldnt be a better healer than a cleric.

All of this is under the expecation that the rogue is in a group with others, fighting things like orcs, dragons, giants, outsiders and the like. In such situations, the rogue should not be doing more damage than the classes that are designed for dealing damage. Rogues get more skills and versatility than anyone else so they can fill gaps and certain needs. They can do combat but they should not be supreme at it. A fighter may be able to break down a door, but he is unlikly to pick the lock and just open it, as that is not his job.

Fighters have higher hit points, can wear heavier armor, have a higher base attack bonus, have more access to feats, and you are seriously complaining that it's unfair that a rogue can inflict more damage in a strike if sneak attack lands?

Apart from your lack of understanding about how the power attack feat works, that's just ridiculous.

[aleucard]

Fighters have higher hit points, can wear heavier armor, have a higher base attack bonus, have more access to feats, and you are seriously complaining that it's unfair that a rogue can inflict more damage in a strike if sneak attack lands?

Apart from your lack of understanding about how the power attack feat works, that's just ridiculous.

The thing you need to pay attention to is that while yes, fighter can stand and trade hits better than a rogue, the playstyles of them are vastly different. Another thing also needs to be taken into account; even in this, the fighter is mediocre at best. It's only benefits that few others get are; 1, it can basically pick up and use anything you put in front of it that isn't either exotic or improvised, and 2, the admittedly large number of feats it gets. 1 is not near as uncommon or even as useful as you'd think, especially since it's 'recommended' for any mundane-focused combatant to get Weapon Focus at some point, and 2 is only as good as the feat lists you have access to (hint; not good enough). They are Tier 5 due to their Wonderbread-like nature, though the feat selection available may bump them up to Tier 4.

Rogues are good at several things, though not the end-all in any by a long shot; they are the original skill-monkey class in 3.5, letting them do all sorts of useful things without having to put something critical on the altar; they are almost tailor-made for sneaky-sneaky, letting them avoid a fight entirely if given the chance; and they get very respectable bonuses to damage (though not spectacular) any time their opponent is flanked, flatfooted, or otherwise denied a Dex bonus. In any one of these things, however, it is very simple to find someone who can do them better, and only marginally more difficult to find someone who can do 2 or even all 3 at least as good, along with some other things. This is why they are solid Tier 4.

I'd like to see a way to get both classes, as well as all others, up to at least Tier 3. When it's even remotely possible for a character to feel useless almost despite optimization, then there is something VERY wrong with that class.

[Ravens_cry]

Also, undead are the largest subtype in d and d. sneak attacks don't work against them, not to mention the multifarious constructs and elementals. Also, fortification armor.
Don't forget the Plant type. While not the most common type to be encountered, unlike Construct or Undead, I do not believe there is a way to get around their sneak attack immunity specifically.
In short, the Rogue dost get shafted in multifarious ways and means.
'Overpowered'? I dost think not, thou popinjay!

[Orran]

Don't forget the Plant type. While not the most common type to be encountered, unlike Construct or Undead, I do not believe there is a way to get around their sneak attack immunity specifically.
In short, the Rogue dost get shafted in multifarious ways and means.
'Overpowered'? I dost think not, thou popinjay!

There is the vinestrike spell. I think it's oozes that don't get a spell for it, for them it's just penetrating strike.

[Ravens_cry]

There is the vinestrike spell. I think it's oozes that don't get a spell for it, for them it's just penetrating strike.
Thou art most certainly right, and oozes art a fairly common type one might encounter.

[TuggyNE]

The thing you need to pay attention to is that while yes, fighter can stand and trade hits better than a rogue, the playstyles of them are vastly different. Another thing also needs to be taken into account; even in this, the fighter is mediocre at best. It's only benefits that few others get are; 1, it can basically pick up and use anything you put in front of it that isn't either exotic or improvised, and 2, the admittedly large number of feats it gets. 1 is not near as uncommon or even as useful as you'd think, especially since it's 'recommended' for any mundane-focused combatant to get Weapon Focus at some point, and 2 is only as good as the feat lists you have access to (hint; not good enough).

While I mostly agree, note that proficiency is unrelated to Weapon Focus; essentially all full BAB classes either grant or require full Simple/Martial Weapon Proficiency. Also, some feats require Fighter levels, though even there a few other classes (*coughWarbladeMartialMonkcough*) can cheat and take those anyway.


Don't forget the Plant type. While not the most common type to be encountered, unlike Construct or Undead, I do not believe there is a way to get around their sneak attack immunity specifically.
In short, the Rogue dost get shafted in multifarious ways and means.
'Overpowered'? I dost think not, thou popinjay!

Vinestrike works fine, but oozes and elementals have no such bypass.

[Ravens_cry]

Vinestrike works fine, but oozes and elementals have no such bypass.
True but even more proving my point, and both are fairly common foes, elemental especially.

[Chronos]

Oozes might be common, but their immunity to sneak attack isn't very relevant. Either you see them in advance, and they're trivially easy encounters even without Sneak Attack, or they ambush you, and you're in trouble no matter what you do.

Elementals, though, I agree are significant.

[Gwendol]

No sensible rogue would ever willingly close to melee with an ooze, so their immunity to SA is more or less irrelevant.

[Yuki Akuma]

No sensible rogue would ever willingly close to melee with an ooze, so their immunity to SA is more or less irrelevant.

It's not as if Rogues need high Wisdom scores...