Balancing act - giving rogues d8 hit die

[Old Gumphrey]

...

A wizard or sorcerer with the right spells can fight really well too, and fighters can never cast spells. The important thing here is that the fighter is a better fighter, and is also able to stand fast in very heavy melee. When heavy melee hits rogues, they start dropping fast.

Fighters are what I like to call the "when it hits the fan" class. They are the only class that can be utterly nasty in combat at any given time of any given day in any given situation. Rogues can deal some nice damage, sure. That's part of their niche. But what happens when you fight a golem? Wow. That rogue went from useful to dead weight. He can maybe take one or two good hits before he has to withdraw. The spellcasters can't even do that. Only a barbarian could likely deal more damage than a fighter and he still won't have the staying power if he starts botching attack rolls. Even in rage he won't match the sheer AC and stamina the fighter has to offer.

That said, I think rogues are more than fine with d6 HP, but they are certainly not an overpowered class. While they have a good niche (and fill it well) but the "what if"s are far too great to compare them to a true fighter.

 

[Darklone]

I prefer Crothian's idea as well. I think lowering SA damage to a d4 is too much. Increasing the average hit points per level by 1 isn't a big deal. In fact, it's just under the value of a feat, as Improved Toughness grants more than that. If you really wanted to balance it out by reducing sneak attack though, just hack off the first or last step, thereby limiting the rogue to a total SA of +9d6. Personally, if I was to use SA to balance it out, I would move the first step to 2nd-level and drop the last step.

What? How is Improved Toughness better than a d6 to d8 hitpoints increase? I think it's worse... (d8 hitpoints are two additional hitpoints at level 1 and one more every next level, Imp Toughness gives one per level and you cannot take it at lower levels).

 

[Staffan]

I prefer Crothian's idea as well. I think lowering SA damage to a d4 is too much. Increasing the average hit points per level by 1 isn't a big deal.

Lowering sneak attacks: -1 damage per odd level.
Increasing HD: +1 hp at every level, +1 more at first.

Seems rather equal to me.

 

[Scion]

Taking this to the extreme, what would stop you at that point from doing both? Drop SA to d4 and reduce skill points to 6 and make their hd a d10.

If that happened the reasons to be a fighter are.. well.. you can get weapon specialization.. yeah.. that is it

 

[Crothian]

There's a big difference between allowing one and allowing two.

But to answer your question, fighter still gets the better BAB and the feats. d10 HD is one not what makes a fighter a fighter.

 

[Scion]

But if someone wants one then it is just as easy to want two. There is little difference other than saying, 'this one is ok, that one is, but together they are too much'. That is fine of course, but it is always a bit difficult to explain other than just being arbitrary.

Fighter feats are cool, but the rogue gets a special ability every level save two. Most of these abilities are better than a lot of feats

Still, not terribly constructive. I think that he is better off picking up toughness and dipping for a level of barbarian and a level of fighter. It will knock off one die of damage, grant a whole lot of powers and hp for him. Plus it will add a lot of flavor, without needing to worry