I can't tell you with absolute certainty that it would be overpowered relative to the alternatives. I can tell you that getting +1d6 damage per level on each attack is brutally high damage, and will only exacerbate rocket tag. Such a rogue would be able to kill himself in a single round with little difficulty for almost his entire career. That's not a good design.
A rogue would do roughly 1d6/level + 1d6 damage with each attack. His hit die is 1d8 per level. Therefore, if he hits himself (or, for the sake of clarity, a different creature which we assume has identical stats to the rogue), he would deal enough damage that a single blow would be lethal. Eventually, the slightly higher hit die would even this out - but eventually, the rogue gets multiple attacks. My point is that combat would not be expected more than a single round or two with this system. And a system with such short combats is not healthy.
8d8+1d4+Str isn't as impressive as you make it out to be.
Assuming a 14 Str Rogue (Highest I usually see), you're dealing an average of 40 damage. And that's only on one attack a round.
By that level you could have a Barbarian that deals something like 2d6+25 damage easily on a Power Attack (Average of 32, just 8 damage less) and he has a higher chance to-hit and can deal that without requiring a charge (meaning he can get an iterative attack, likely at a similar to-hit as the Rogue's main hit).
Average is 1 damage less per SA dice for the regular 1d6, add one or two because they probably use a Shortsword at least.
So the average for a non-Knife Master would be 31, 32 with a Longsword.
For reference, average damage for 1d6 is 3.5, 4.5 for 1d8.
Even with a high Str Rogue you're not doing all that much more (add 2 damage for 18 Str), and the Impact dagger does a whopping 1 extra damage on average.
It's still not a huge difference when the class has worse saves, less HP, less to-hit, and relies on special circumstances.
Making the Rogue a glass cannon isn't overpowering.
What about scout? 8th level, the use acrobatics to move 10 feet and sneak attack with 8d6+1d8.
Scout doesn't add any damage, just makes the conditions easier to achieve for the first hit. Look above, I posted 32 damage as average for this, the same as the Barbarian's single swing. 34 with 18 Str.
Instead of giving rogues more sneak attack dice, I just let them sneak attack more often. I allow half sneak attack damage (roll normally and then reduce by half) to apply if the target is suffering from a debilitating condition (GM discretion). If the player is creative and descriptive enough with how they exploit the debilitating condition, I sometimes allow them to apply full sneak attack damage in that instance.
Sorry, could someone give me a link for these "impact daggers." I can't seem to find them anywhere.
Though now I look at it, you can't put it on a dagger.
|
Really? Oh I didn't read that well enough. Still, I think a high level rogue will be doing more damage then they should, given the fact that the average finesse rogue will do 21d6 damage with a rapier at 20th level, the earthbreaker-weilding rogues I know will be doing 22d6. Also, though scout doesn't add damage, the scouts I know wield morningstars. Still I think that rogues doing wizardish as a class feature damage is overpowering. Even with a str. penalty, thats a lot of damage. IF you do this, I suggest that a consequence should come with this. My average for this with a 10 str. is about 84-88 damage. with the high str. rogues the averge raises a bit. Note that 1). my averages are often miscalculated 2). Most of the people I play with roll high enough with their rogues as is 3). A rogue also has things that make them much more versatile, and making them do large damage per attack with three attacks seems a little against their description(personal view not always fact, just seems a tad unfitting) and 4). This makes really trivial encounters where rogue flanks with barbarian and takes out Tarrasques in 1 minute, with the right players.
That didn't really answer either of my questions though. A wizard can cast a save-or-die spell and "kill himself." The example I used as a Magus, One hit from a spell combat with an intensified shocking grasp could also "kill himself."
Although, I didn't take into account archtypes, especially knife master.
That's because spellcasters are objectively superior to everybody else.
Really? Oh I didn't read that well enough. Still, I think a high level rogue will be doing more damage then they should, given the fact that the average finesse rogue will do 21d6 damage with a rapier at 20th level, the earthbreaker-weilding rogues I know will be doing 22d6. Also, though scout doesn't add damage, the scouts I know wield morningstars. Still I think that rogues doing wizardish as a class feature damage is overpowering. Even with a str. penalty, thats a lot of damage. IF you do this, I suggest that a consequence should come with this. My average for this with a 10 str. is about 84-88 damage. with the high str. rogues the averge raises a bit. Note that 1). my averages are often miscalculated 2). Most of the people I play with roll high enough with their rogues as is 3). A rogue also has things that make them much more versatile, and making them do large damage per attack with three attacks seems a little against their description(personal view not always fact, just seems a tad unfitting) and 4). This makes really trivial encounters where rogue flanks with barbarian and takes out Tarrasques in 1 minute, with the right players.
20d6 averages 70 20d8 averages 90. it also doesn't multiply on a crit, and has extremely difficult set up time.
a raging barbarian does more DPR on a raging pounce with a better accuracy bonus, better Armor Class, better saves, and a lot more HP.
Multiplying SA might be a bit much in conjunction with this change.
That's a ridiculous amount of dice. Enough to make the "Wheeeee! Dice!" factor actually work for once.
And I'm pretty sure people would get mad at you if you started rolling 40-60d6 all the time.
|
not in conjunction, in lieu of. like a different way to address the same concern.
it could be rolled into the Sneak Attack class feature as follows:
If a rogue can catch an opponent when he is unable to defend himself effectively from her attack, she can strike a vital spot for extra damage.
The rogue's attack deals extra damage anytime her target would be denied a Dexterity bonus to AC (whether the target actually has a Dexterity bonus or not), or when the rogue flanks her target. This extra damage is 1d6 at 1st level, and increases by 1d6 every two rogue levels thereafter. Should the rogue score a critical hit with a sneak attack, this extra damage is not multiplied . Ranged attacks can count as sneak attacks only if the target is within 30 feet.
With a weapon that deals nonlethal damage (like a sap, whip, or an unarmed strike), a rogue can make a sneak attack that deals nonlethal damage instead of lethal damage. She cannot use a weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage in a sneak attack, not even with the usual –4 penalty.
The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot. A rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment.
Eh. Not nearly as good or useful, and doesn't really fix the issues with SA (the overall weakness and situational nature of it). It just makes a situational ability more powerful even more situationally.
Having SA upgrade at every level doesn't unbalance things and at least gives it a power boost.
|
|
Rynjin,
how is SoVaerie McDeadersun's proposal (d6 every level) less situational than my proposal (finesse multiplication)?
an increase in base damage and critical damage both amount to a very similar increase to overall damage, by an index of approximately 5%. the exact mathematics are beyond me yet, but i am confident enough to say that they are similar enough.
why shouldn't a Sneak Attack damage bonus multiply? Thematically and Mechanically? if it did automatically, or situationally (ie with a finesse weapon only), would this potentially break the class feature? unless somebody can use math to show me that this is so, i would maintain that it would not.
that said, i agree that Sneak Attack dice should be rolled more often, in more circumstances, as a quality inherent to the ability itself. this is however another argument.
cheers.
Because one applies every time Sneak Attack happens, whereas one applies whenever SA happens AND a crit is rolled.
The latter is almost exponentially less likely to occur.
I allow all dice* to multiply on a sneak attack. It lets rogues do a CdG effectively compared to other classes. You'd quite honestly have thought that a lowish-level rogue would be able to slit a sleeping man's throat with a dagger, but he'd be much better off leaving it to the barbarian with the axe.
* including Vital Strike (which is UP as it stands) and flaming/etc weapons.
But back to the OP question: I would not do this. There's more to life than combat, and more to combat than DPR. Fix the rogue another way.
|
|
I think I recall hearing of a feat in 3.5 where sneak attack dice increased by one step. I don't know if there is one for PF, but if there IS a pf thing that does this, I know people who would make knife master rogues that do 2d6 per two levels. That would get to 40d6 at 20th level. That combined with multiplying on a crit and vorpal daggers, and you have one badass rogue, What with scarring jaberwocks and IKing demons before barbarians get one swing.
If your going to compare a single sneak attack to a single big hit each time you compare, of course things are going to look very ugly for the Rogue.
So we compare multiple Sneak Attacks to multiple big hits.
Math stays the same, just gets bigger.