scout redisgn discussion

[Mystify]

Scouts are widely considered to be very weak. I've seen some in play, and they were downright pathetic.

They are meant to be a light, mobile class. I think this is a worthwhile archetype, and deserves more love. The main issue is skirmish.

skirmish advances at half the rate of sneak attack. Furthermore, it only activates after you move, so you can generally only apply it to a standard action, or improved multishot, which has really annoying attack penalties on top of their low BaB. Contrast with a rouge, which has twice as much damage per hit, and not only is getting itereative attacks, but will probably be dual wielding the damage.

It seems to me that if you are designing a mobile class, the focus should be on making single strikes matter. This would work with the mobile archery strategy, or with spring attacks, both of which fit the class's archetype.

The AC bonus for skirmish seems reasonable enough, so lets focus on altering the damage:

skirmish:
A scout relies on mobility to deal extra damage. She deals an extra 1d6 +dexpoints of damage on the first attack she makes during any round in which she moves at least 10 feat. This extra damage increases by 1d6 for every level gained above first.

This may not be as high as a rouges total damage output, but at least it is as good as an on-level caster with a blasting spell. Though the caster could probably hit multiple targets.

To make it more interesting, also allow their skirmish to work with ambush feats, and add the ambush feats to their bonus feat list. This will allow them penalize their enemy with their strike as well.

This still doesn't match up to the potential damage output of a rouge, but they do have the advantage of mobility to help keep them alive.

I still feel like the class is a bit weak. Any suggestions?

[Big Fau]

You are overlooking several abilities that allow the Skirmish feature to trigger every round (Travel Devotion, for example). The fact that Skirmish triggers off of movement/round is what makes it a bit easier to trigger than Sneak Attack.


Oh, and Swift Hunter is what fixes the Scout.

[PersonMan]

1. It's a rogue, not rouge.
2. This should probably go in Homebrew.
3. I'd say putting a cap based on level to the bonus damage would be a good idea, otherwise it's a great dip class at high levels where you're going to have a pretty good dexterity anyways.

Eventually, I'd advise a sort of 'free attack/free action' system when the Scout moves enough - so if they keep moving, they get more attacks, etc.

[Flickerdart]

Wait, so you're taking away the awesome and easily achievable Skirmish dice in favour of something terrible that's wasted if you happen to roll poorly on a single attack, and even at maximum level deals pitiful damage?

It is quite simple to make a Scout that puts out 4d6 Skirmish by level 6, on every attack he makes (compared to the Rogue's 3d6), and that ignores one creature type's immunity to precision damage. This Scout also makes full attacks every round, despite moving, and has more BAB, feats and HP than a Rogue. By the end of his career at level 20, this Scout will swing 8d6 on every one of his attacks (10d6 for a few round each day), thus dealing nearly twice as much damage as your "fix" even if he never bothered to pick up bonus attacks in his career.

[Daftendirekt]

Scouts are widely considered to be very weak.

Since when? :smallconfused:

I know I'll be repeating a bit of what's already been said, but: Swift Hunters are probably the best non/low-magic archers out there (sure, you can do melee swift hunters, but let's be honest, ranged are better). And who the hell plays a scout without going Swift Hunter? Scout 3-4 (depending how badly you want the bonus feat at 4), the rest ranger, and a cloistered cleric dip if you can swing it to get Knowledge and Travel Devotions -- which you can get even without the dip, just not as easily nor as many times a day in the case of Travel Devotion, with no Turn Undead attempts to fuel it.

[Mystify]

You are overlooking several abilities that allow the Skirmish feature to trigger every round (Travel Devotion, for example). The fact that Skirmish triggers off of movement/round is what makes it a bit easier to trigger than Sneak Attack.


Oh, and Swift Hunter is what fixes the Scout.

Its dead easy to trigger, yes, but also pathetically weak. I've never had any real difficulty triggering sneak attack. there are a million ways to do it. And if you can move and full attack with a scout, you could do it as a rouge, move to flanking, and murderize things quite effectively. Why should you need to reach out to obscure abilities in unrelated splatbooks just to make your own class function?

I limited the skirmish to 1/round specifically so the power boost wouldn't multiply with any such tricks. I don't think that is how the class should function.

I also dislike the feats that let you multiclass two classes, and get the superstar ability of one stacking on the other. If its what fixes scout, then why can't scout stand on its own?Its like the feat that lets you give swashbuckler sneak attack progression. If the class needs another class's main feature added to it, then the class is in obvious need of revision.

1. It's a rogue, not rouge.
2. This should probably go in Homebrew.
3. I'd say putting a cap based on level to the bonus damage would be a good idea, otherwise it's a great dip class at high levels where you're going to have a pretty good dexterity anyways.

Eventually, I'd advise a sort of 'free attack/free action' system when the Scout moves enough - so if they keep moving, they get more attacks, etc.
1. I know, I'm just really bad at spelling it for some reason. You dno't need to hvae all the lteetrs of wsods in the rhgit odrer to mkae it redaalbe, so wehn I raed it the rouge/rogue distiticonn is lsot.
2. I don't see a homebrew forum. Is it someplace weird or am I just blind?
3. But it only works once per round when you move. If it was a general bonus, I'd agree. And dipping in the class means you lose a BaB.

So you are advising something more like dervish? I'd rather it play nicely with spring attack.

[Daftendirekt]

Spring Attack is awful. Precisely because of things like Pounce or Travel Devotion, which have already been mentioned. Basically, you're saying that people should ignore a solid feat that's already in place that makes the class pretty damn good just because you're not a fan of two-class feats (there being quite a few of them).

[Flickerdart]

Its dead easy to trigger, yes, but also pathetically weak. I've never had any real difficulty triggering sneak attack. there are a million ways to do it. And if you can move and full attack with a scout, you could do it as a rouge, move to flanking, and murderize things quite effectively. Why should you need to reach out to obscure abilities in unrelated splatbooks just to make your own class function?
Scout doesn't need content from "unrelated splatbooks" to function. It functions far better with CAdv material than Rogue does with PHB material. It also doesn't need a babysitter to deal its bonus damage, unlike the Rogue. Hell, just grabbing Greater Manyshot makes Scout work wonders - and Scouts actually make effective archers with the feat, whereas not even the Rogue's babysitter can help it deal Sneak Attack damage at range.

Your proposal basically makes Scout worthless. Damage is generally considered to be the saving grace of non-ToB melee - with greasing of the right wheels, spike damage is a lot higher from a pouncer than a Warblade. And yet a single 9th level strike (that simply deals 100 damage) outdoes your Scout "fix" at its own game completely (since 20d6 average is only 70, 30 less than the maneuver the Warblade has been flaunting for 3 levels by now) while still having the entire rest of the class available.

[Mystify]

Wait, so you're taking away the awesome and easily achievable Skirmish dice in favour of something terrible that's wasted if you happen to roll poorly on a single attack, and even at maximum level deals pitiful damage?

It is quite simple to make a Scout that puts out 4d6 Skirmish by level 6, on every attack he makes (compared to the Rogue's 3d6), and that ignores one creature type's immunity to precision damage. This Scout also makes full attacks every round, despite moving, and has more BAB, feats and HP than a Rogue. By the end of his career at level 20, this Scout will swing 8d6 on every one of his attacks (10d6 for a few round each day), thus dealing nearly twice as much damage as your "fix" even if he never bothered to pick up bonus attacks in his career.
Ok, my fix is weak. What if the skirmish die increaseing feats added 4x as many die(since I multiplied skirmish by 4) and required correspondingly more to qualify? now it boosts to 28d6, 36d6 if you tumble by them first, and 44d6 a few times per day all told. At their full accuracy.


And in my experience, the first attack per round will hit, unless you roll a 1, and a lucky enchantment will practically negate that.

Since when? :smallconfused:

I know I'll be repeating a bit of what's already been said, but: Swift Hunters are probably the best non/low-magic archers out there (sure, you can do melee swift hunters, but let's be honest, ranged are better). And who the hell plays a scout without going Swift Hunter? Scout 3-4 (depending how badly you want the bonus feat at 4), the rest ranger, and a cloistered cleric dip if you can swing it to get Knowledge and Travel Devotions -- which you can get even without the dip, just not as easily nor as many times a day in the case of Travel Devotion, with no Turn Undead attempts to fuel it.
So... a scout should be a ranger? That just tells me scout is not good enough to stand on its own.

Actually, if anything, swift ambusher seems more appealing. Get skirmish AND sneak attack progression. There are plenty of ways to get sneak attacks reliably.

--------
Ok, I'll conceed that scout's don't have to be as weak as I thought. However, I was judging based on a pure scout. Your effective scouts are still relying on not being scouts, and utilizing specific abilities to optimize them into something useful. A straight scout without that is just pathetic. Even with multishot.

[Flickerdart]

I contend that, were my Scout 20 and your Rogue 20 to meet on the field of battle, you would die every single time while I hold my sides and chortle dismissively.

Naturally, assuming no UMD shenanigans (which Scout can match with Apprentice Spellcaster anyway) or ACF shuffling (since your premise is that the default Rogue class is vastly superior to the default Scout class).

Additionally, I am using a duel as an example because both classes have a very similar set of tools for bypassing obstacles, and share a tier, so a same game test will not really demonstrate anything.

[Mystify]

I contend that, were my Scout 20 and your Rogue 20 to meet on the field of battle, you would die every single time while I hold my sides and chortle dismissively.

Naturally, assuming no UMD shenanigans (which Scout can match with Apprentice Spellcaster anyway) or ACF shuffling (since your premise is that the default Rogue class is vastly superior to the default Scout class).
I've seen dozens of rouges able to murder everything on the battlefield without a second thought. Every scout I has seen has ran around, missing horribly and plinking for minor damage, then getting squished horribly by the monster when it decides to kill them.

And PvP is a poor metric for class balance. For instance, a rouge's best methods of sneak attack are flanking or hiding. Your duel eliminates the former, and scout specifically counters the latter. That has little to do with actual combat effectiveness.

Anyways, we could both sit around in 100% fortification armor and be reduced to base weapon damage. There goes the class feature in question, rendering the entire thing pointless.

[Flickerdart]

I've seen dozens of rouges able to murder everything on the battlefield without a second thought. Every scout I has seen has ran around, missing horribly and plinking for minor damage, then getting squished horribly by the monster when it decides to kill them.
Anecdotal evidence isn't.


And PvP is a poor metric for class balance. For instance, a rouge's best methods of sneak attack are flanking or hiding. Your duel eliminates the former, and scout specifically counters the latter. That has little to do with actual combat effectiveness.

Really? Being unable to flank or hide whenever you feel like has little to do with actual combat effectiveness? Laughable. Scout actually has class features built in that allow him to use Skirmish effectively (Hide in Plain Sight, Freedom of Movement, hello!) while the Rogue has neither exceptional hiding capability nor a way to replace flanking. So while the Rogue is so very easy to shut down, the Scout endures.
You could always take an option to grant yourself a flanking ally if you really wanted, though, or find a creative way to deny Dexterity to AC. These options do exist. A Rogue can be quite competent in a duel.



Anyways, we could both sit around in 100% fortification armor and be reduced to base weapon damage. There goes the class feature in question, rendering the entire thing pointless.
If you think that 100% fortification armour is going to save you, then the result of the duel is predetermined more than it was already.

But I will accept your concession on the point that a Rogue needs a whole 'nother character to be effective, while a Scout doesn't.

[Manateee]

Tack on a ToB maneuver selection, same as any melee class.

For schools, probably Iron Heart, Tiger Claw. Then dig up maybe 2 homebrew archery schools and one for melee. There's no shortage of options.

[Mystify]

Anecdotal evidence isn't.

Really? Being unable to flank or hide whenever you feel like has little to do with actual combat effectiveness? Laughable. Scout actually has class features built in that allow him to use Skirmish effectively (Hide in Plain Sight, Freedom of Movement, hello!) while the Rogue has neither exceptional hiding capability nor a way to replace flanking. So while the Rogue is so very easy to shut down, the Scout endures.
You could always take an option to grant yourself a flanking ally if you really wanted, though, or find a creative way to deny Dexterity to AC. These options do exist. A Rogue can be quite competent in a duel.


If you think that 100% fortification armour is going to save you, then the result of the duel is predetermined more than it was already.

But I will accept your concession on the point that a Rogue needs a whole 'nother character to be effective, while a Scout doesn't.

No, I said they need another character to be effective against a scout, ie.e a class specifically designed to counter stealth. And thats just against their basic tricks, I could pull out other ones.
And I didn't say it would save me. I said it negated the snake attack and skirmish damage, meaning that your damage output has nothing to do with your class. If you have a scout with a bow and no skirmish, I could make a rouge with a bow and no sneak attack just as easily.

But unless you are withing 30 feet to start, they would probably never see each other in the first place. Your speed bonus is +20ft enhancement bonus, so my items would beat out your class feature, and I would be at least as fast as you. You have concealment in natural terrain and hide in plain sight, I can use my bluff skill to create distraction and duck behind a tree. And I can do that inside.

But anyways, I do concede that I had severely underestimated the scout.

[Big Fau]

Tack on a ToB maneuver selection, same as any melee class.

For schools, probably Iron Heart, Tiger Claw. Then dig up maybe 2 homebrew archery schools and one for melee. There's no shortage of options.

Setting Sun and Desert Wind, not Iron Heart. SS and DW really like the Scout.

[Person_Man]

Improving Skirmish will only mildly improve the Scout. The Scout needs dramatically more resources if it's going to be moved up a Tier, such as spells, psionics, soulmelds, vestiges, maneuvers, or a homebrew power or talent system of some sort. The chassis of 8 Skill points, 3/4 BAB, and a smattering of damage bonuses and static defensive/utility abilities is doomed to failure from the start.

[Seharvepernfan]

I did a couple things to make scouts better in my houserules without resorting to swift hunter or ToB.

1. TWFers can attack with each weapon on a standard attack. Doesn't work with spring attack, but still a step in the right direction.
2. Skirmish is the same type of damage as power attack bonus damage, except with projectile weapons which are still precision.
3. They gain sudden strike at the same progression as their skirmish AC bonus.

On a different note, I made TWF/improved/greater/supreme automatic to people with the Bab and Dex to qualify for them.

[Flickerdart]

Improving Skirmish will only mildly improve the Scout. The Scout needs dramatically more resources if it's going to be moved up a Tier, such as spells, psionics, soulmelds, vestiges, maneuvers, or a homebrew power or talent system of some sort. The chassis of 8 Skill points, 3/4 BAB, and a smattering of damage bonuses and static defensive/utility abilities is doomed to failure from the start.
T4 isn't really "doomed to failure".

[Godskook]

Scouts are widely considered to be very weak.

Not around here, they're not.


I've seen some in play, and they were downright pathetic.

Bad anecdote, much like pointing out the horrible cleric, druid and artificer I've had at my table who all failed to outclass the scout.


They are meant to be a light, mobile class. I think this is a worthwhile archetype, and deserves more love. The main issue is skirmish.

Scouts have exactly 3 'problems'(read: reasons they're not in a higher tier):

1.They don't have a spell-like mechanic(spells, powers, maneuvers, etc).

2.Their damage is precision based(Almost entirely fixed by swift hunter)

3.Their skill list blows for a rogue-equivalent(Personally, I houserule that they have the Rogue's skill list).


skirmish advances at half the rate of sneak attack. Furthermore, it only activates after you move, so you can generally only apply it to a standard action, or improved multishot, which has really annoying attack penalties on top of their low BaB. Contrast with a rouge, which has twice as much damage per hit, and not only is getting itereative attacks, but will probably be dual wielding the damage.

1.Manyshot penalties are comparable to iterative penalties.

2.You're comparing archery vs twf. Stick to apples or oranges. Don't cherrypick one or the other depending the point you want to make.

3.There's several levels where skirmish damage can outpace sneak attack, but overall, the two stay comparable over the most relevant parts of the game. Late-game, the Scout lags behind due to Craven and weapon enhancements, but swift hunters can catch up via FE damage, as well as ranger spells that provide SA or other bonuses.

[Mystify]

Not around here, they're not.

Well, they were in the circles I played in.



Bad anecdote, much like pointing out the horrible cleric, druid and artificer I've had at my table who all failed to outclass the scout.

He was just a normal scout, with the normal skirmish feats and the greater manyshot chain. A typical scout build, and it simply flopped. We also had a ranged rouge who was death incarnate. What am I supposed to think when I see skirmish being pathetic next to sneak attack?



Scouts have exactly 3 'problems'(read: reasons they're not in a higher tier):

1.They don't have a spell-like mechanic(spells, powers, maneuvers, etc).

2.Their damage is precision based(Almost entirely fixed by swift hunter)

3.Their skill list blows for a rogue-equivalent(Personally, I houserule that they have the Rogue's skill list).

They are not rouges, they accomplish a somewhat different role. They have plenty of abilities that a rouge does not get to make up for it.


1.Manyshot penalties are comparable to iterative penalties.

you lose the reliable upper half of the attacks are are stuck in the unreliable sequence of attacks. This scales up against more powerful enemies extremely poorly, esp. on top of a 3/4 BaB. Your attacks are coming in comprable to the third attack of a fighter, which is pretty weak.


2.You're comparing archery vs twf. Stick to apples or oranges. Don't cherrypick one or the other depending the point you want to make.

I was just comparing the prefered weapon styles of each. rouges use TWF, scouts use bows. Comparing their relative effectiveness seems prudent


3.There's several levels where skirmish damage can outpace sneak attack, but overall, the two stay comparable over the most relevant parts of the game. Late-game, the Scout lags behind due to Craven and weapon enhancements, but swift hunters can catch up via FE damage, as well as ranger spells that provide SA or other bonuses.
See, swift hunter is precisely why scouts are weak. All that says is that if you take a ranger, and add on the skirmish damage, you end up with an effective character. Despite Ranger's supposed to be an effective character anyways. You can't just have a scout, you have a ranger with scout abilities. That is a completely different matter than a scout being a good class.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Well, they were in the circles I played in.[/quote]

Okay, so the scout could have just continually lowed roll, had lower stats, or some of similar misfortune.



They are not rouges, they accomplish a somewhat different role. They have plenty of abilities that a rouge does not get to make up for it.

Primary combat ability for both classes boils down to "Meet specific requirement, roll silly numbers of d6s for damage." It's precision damage for both classes, but that's the gist of it.


you lose the reliable upper half of the attacks are are stuck in the unreliable sequence of attacks. This scales up against more powerful enemies extremely poorly, esp. on top of a 3/4 BaB. Your attacks are coming in comprable to the third attack of a fighter, which is pretty weak.

And the rogue's aren't? Both classes are 3/4 BAB, rely heavily on rolling Xd6 for their damage and have numerous other abilities outside of combat.


See, swift hunter is precisely why scouts are weak. All that says is that if you take a ranger, and add on the skirmish damage, you end up with an effective character. Despite Ranger's supposed to be an effective character anyways. You can't just have a scout, you have a ranger with scout abilities. That is a completely different matter than a scout being a good class.

Or you have a scout with ranger abilities. The preferred method is doing a 4/16 split, generally with the 16 being ranger. You can do Scout 20 or Scout 10/Scout PrC 10 or something similar with things like Travel Devotion, charge attacks and so on.


The fact still remains that, given the same "rolls" (Stats, HP, Attacks, et al.), the Scouts have more reliable damage via their skirmish as is compared to your proposed "fix."

[Mystify]

Okay, so the scout could have just continually lowed roll, had lower stats, or some of similar misfortune.

or just plain old didn't have the same damage output.




Primary combat ability for both classes boils down to "Meet specific requirement, roll silly numbers of d6s for damage." It's precision damage for both classes, but that's the gist of it.

And the rogue's aren't? Both classes are 3/4 BAB, rely heavily on rolling Xd6 for their damage and have numerous other abilities outside of combat.

But rouges can do it without taking a -8 to hit and still get more attacks. And are more likely to have flanking on top of that. The scout has half the base sneak attack die, and get it in a form that is normally incompatable with full-rounds.




Or you have a scout with ranger abilities. The preferred method is doing a 4/16 split, generally with the 16 being ranger. You can do Scout 20 or Scout 10/Scout PrC 10 or something similar with things like Travel Devotion, charge attacks and so on.

Yeah, you are level 16 ranger with scout abilities added in. I keep being told that is the preferred way to do it, and that is pretty much a ranger, with scout abilities in addition. If you take a base class, and add on any other classes's main damage feature, not matter how mediocre, you are going to end up with something good.
Unless you have pounce, which is itself of questionable balance, you are still only getting one attack with a charge.
Invoking travel devotion is an ability that takes the class and makes it functional, but has nothing to do with the class otherwise.





The fact still remains that, given the same "rolls" (Stats, HP, Attacks, et al.), the Scouts have more reliable damage via their skirmish as is compared to your proposed "fix."
my current version of the proposed fix would get 36d6, on a single, highly accurate attack. It basically multiplies all of their skirmish by 4, but only applies it to 1 attack. Unless you are getting more than 4 hits per turn, that version hits harder from the skirmish. With a significantly lower feat investment, as well.

[Godskook]

Well, they were in the circles I played in.

You'd be surprised how many times that statistical analysis proves anecdotal evidence wrong.


He was just a normal scout, with the normal skirmish feats and the greater manyshot chain. A typical scout build, and it simply flopped. We also had a ranged rouge who was death incarnate. What am I supposed to think when I see skirmish being pathetic next to sneak attack?

You're comparing to entire character sheets based solely on class, when a great many other choices and random effects are in play, such as:
-Race
-Magic Items
-Attributes
-Luck
-Party favoritism
-Self-fulfilling prophecy


They are not rouges, they accomplish a somewhat different role. They have plenty of abilities that a rouge does not get to make up for it.

In the 4-man party, rogues and scouts fill the same 'slot' on the team, that's all I meant by that.


you lose the reliable upper half of the attacks are are stuck in the unreliable sequence of attacks. This scales up against more powerful enemies extremely poorly, esp. on top of a 3/4 BaB. Your attacks are coming in comprable to the third attack of a fighter, which is pretty weak.

Um, unless you get 16 BAB, you're only taking a -6 on your rolls, and 40 AC is 'high' according to MMI. Mild optimization would yield a +34(+11 dex, +5 enhancement, +5 insight, +15 BAB, +2 'invisible', +1 high ground, +1 PBS, -6 GMS). That'd miss only on a 5 or less. Better optimization could easily take it high enough to auto-hit the entire MMI.

And the 'invisible' bonus is available through a couple different methods, while high ground is via flight(which is reasonably available by lvl 20).


I was just comparing the prefered weapon styles of each. rouges use TWF, scouts use bows. Comparing their relative effectiveness seems prudent

Both classes can handle both styles, and while it may seem prudent to mix your comparison, it isn't.


See, swift hunter is precisely why scouts are weak. All that says is that if you take a ranger, and add on the skirmish damage, you end up with an effective character. Despite Ranger's supposed to be an effective character anyways. You can't just have a scout, you have a ranger with scout abilities. That is a completely different matter than a scout being a good class.

Actually, the following are all respectable builds:

Ranger 1/Scout 18/Cleric 1
-Gets freedom of movement as an Ex ability

Ranger 4/Scout 15/Cleric 1
-Gets 16 BAB using fractional BAB rules

Scout 20
-Is a scout, but with swift hunter.
-Trades FE: Mage for Blindsight
-Requires Faerun material

What Ranger offers a Swift Hunter, while handy, isn't *ever* required beyond what's minimally needed to access swift hunter. Also, you can substitute Barbarian 1 for Cleric 1 to get a melee swift hunter.

[Mystify]

Yes, I've already ackowleged I judged it too poorly. But you have to admit, looking at the class, it looks like it has half the precision damage in a way thats harder to get multiple attacks out of it. And I don't care what you say about it being easier to trigger, I have never seen rogues struggle to get sneak attack except against enemies immune to it, and scouts have the same issues.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I limited the skirmish to 1/round specifically so the power boost wouldn't multiply with any such tricks. I don't think that is how the class should function.
...So you're complaining about the weakness of something after you nerfed it.

2. I don't see a homebrew forum. Is it someplace weird or am I just blind?

It's right underneath the link to the Roleplaying Games section.

[Mystify]

...So you're complaining about the weakness of something after you nerfed it.

I do enough exploiting to be wary of exploitable things in my alterations. If the intent is to make a class viable doing single attacks, then letting them multiply that with multiple attacks can be exploited very quickly.


It's right underneath the link to the Roleplaying Games section.
Ah, its not even in the roleplaying section.
That seems a weird place to classify it.

[Manateee]

Oversight is why 90% of the game works the way it does.

[Big Fau]

Yes, I've already ackowleged I judged it too poorly. But you have to admit, looking at the class, it looks like it has half the precision damage in a way thats harder to get multiple attacks out of it. And I don't care what you say about it being easier to trigger, I have never seen rogues struggle to get sneak attack except against enemies immune to it, and scouts have the same issues.

Fun fact: A Ranger/Scout with Swift Hunter can deal damage similar to a Rogue/Swashbuckler with Daring Outlaw and the ACF that lets you hit enemies normally immune to Sneak Attack. The Ranger/Scout just doesn't have to trade out a class feature to do so.

[Mystify]

Fun fact: A Ranger/Scout with Swift Hunter can deal damage similar to a Rogue/Swashbuckler with Daring Outlaw and the ACF that lets you hit enemies normally immune to Sneak Attack. The Ranger/Scout just doesn't have to trade out a class feature to do so.

how does a swift ambusher rouge/scout with travel devotion and dual wielding fare?

[Thrice Dead Cat]

how does a swift ambusher rouge/scout with travel devotion and dual wielding fare?

With fractional BAB rules (and with some means to get a "10 ft. step"), like a rogue with more sneak attack than normal and a few less skill points. Sadly, because Swift Ambusher only gives you extra skirmish dice on rogue levels and not sneak attack dice on scout levels, you'd probably be looking at something like Scout 3/Rogue 17.

[Gavinfoxx]

Why not just use this??

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170358

[mikau013]

Um, unless you get 16 BAB, you're only taking a -6 on your rolls, and 40 AC is 'high' according to MMI. Mild optimization would yield a +34(+11 dex, +5 enhancement, +5 insight, +15 BAB, +2 'invisible', +1 high ground, +1 PBS, -6 GMS). That'd miss only on a 5 or less. Better optimization could easily take it high enough to auto-hit the entire MMI.

And the 'invisible' bonus is available through a couple different methods, while high ground is via flight(which is reasonably available by lvl 20).


Higher ground only applies to higher ground though. And where are you getting the insight from?


But besides that, (core) rogues are one of the strongest classes in the game. Sure full-casters are stronger but that is obvious and adding some splats really helps them for bypassing sneak attack immunity.
So what I'm saying is that scouts don't need to be as good as rogues are to be viable, just need their own things. Though they could really use something better than what they have now.

[Daftendirekt]

But besides that, (core) rogues are one of the strongest classes in the game.

Since when? :smallconfused:

Easiest way to get their sneak attack is by flanking. Which means the squishy, d6 guy in light armor is right in the monster's face and getting killed. Trust me, I've played several rogues, and this exact thing has happened to them all. I have since given up playing rogues. Also, their most viable melee method (Weapon Finesse and TWF) is gimped to begin with. For the first two levels they can't hit **** due to the +1 BAB requirement on Weapon Finesse, and they're swinging at -2 thanks to TWF, meaning their hit chance is extremely low.


So what I'm saying is that scouts don't need to be as good as rogues are to be viable, just need their own things. Though they could really use something better than what they have now.

IMO, scout is better. Higher HD, more reliable precision damage (which also makes them harder to hit, further adding to survivability), greater mobility, better class features earlier on -- Sure, you get rogue talents. At rogue 10. By that time scout has gotten Trackless Step, Flawless Stride, Camouflage, Blindsense 30 ft. and two bonus feats along with the precision damage. What does rogue get? +3 on saves vs. traps. Both classes get Uncanny Dodge and Evasion during the first 10 levels, so they're roughly the same on that point.

[Mystify]

Since when? :smallconfused:

Easiest way to get their sneak attack is by flanking. Which means the squishy, d6 guy in light armor is right in the monster's face and getting killed. Trust me, I've played several rogues, and this exact thing has happened to them all. I have since given up playing rogues. Also, their most viable melee method (Weapon Finesse and TWF) is gimped to begin with. For the first two levels they can't hit **** due to the +1 BAB requirement on Weapon Finesse, and they're swinging at -2 thanks to TWF, meaning their hit chance is extremely low.


The rogue's dex makes up for their light armour. Their AC is not only fine, at higher levels it can exceed the guy in full plate. There are tons of ways to get sneak attack reliably, some of which are flanking, you also have things like blinking, and greater invisibility. Since their AC is dex-based, and they have uncanny dodge, their AC is hard to negate. Since they are often getting flanking and/or flat-footed, their accuracy is just fine.

In many campaigns I played, pretty basic rouge builds stood up against other highly optimized builds. Uberchargers outshine them, but not much else.

[Hiro Protagonest]

The rogue's dex makes up for their light armour. Their AC is not only fine, at higher levels it can exceed the guy in full plate. There are tons of ways to get sneak attack reliably, some of which are flanking, you also have things like blinking, and greater invisibility. Since their AC is dex-based, and they have uncanny dodge, their AC is hard to negate. Since they are often getting flanking and/or flat-footed, their accuracy is just fine.

In many campaigns I played, pretty basic rouge builds stood up against other highly optimized builds. Uberchargers outshine them, but not much else.

Just because their AC is higher than the fighter's doesn't mean it's relevant. Why? Because pretty much only casters that are using Alter Self/Polymorph/Shapechange + Mage Armor/armor + Shield/shield + Ring of Protection can get a high enough AC to be relevant. And then it's much easier to use a single casting of Displacement.

And what's a "basic" rogue build (unless you were talking about some class that uses make-up :smalltongue:)? Ring of Blinking + Craven + Weapon Finesse + TWF?

[Mystify]

Just because their AC is higher than the fighter's doesn't mean it's relevant. Why? Because pretty much only casters that are using Alter Self/Polymorph/Shapechange + Mage Armor/armor + Shield/shield + Ring of Protection can get a high enough AC to be relevant. And then it's much easier to use a single casting of Displacement.

And what's a "basic" rogue build (unless you were talking about some class that uses make-up :smalltongue:)? Ring of Blinking + Craven + Weapon Finesse + TWF?
People always say that they can't get enough AC to be relevant. I don't understand that. I have made plenty of non-casters that were untouchable at high levels, in a variety of ways. Sure, it takes a serious investment into magic items, but it is completely doable. Its very hard to do it with armor, which may be where the confusion arises, and you do need good AC stats.

Weapon finesse, TWF, perhaps a rogue prestige class, maybe a dip into shadowdancer, sometimes pure rogue, rogues blade, blinking, invisibility from caster support or UMD, there are lots of ways to do it.

[mikau013]

Since when? :smallconfused:

Easiest way to get their sneak attack is by flanking. Which means the squishy, d6 guy in light armor is right in the monster's face and getting killed. Trust me, I've played several rogues, and this exact thing has happened to them all. I have since given up playing rogues. Also, their most viable melee method (Weapon Finesse and TWF) is gimped to begin with. For the first two levels they can't hit **** due to the +1 BAB requirement on Weapon Finesse, and they're swinging at -2 thanks to TWF, meaning their hit chance is extremely low.


Easiest way to get sneak attack is by winning init - :)
At low levels you just throw some daggers with quick draw and higher levels you buy a ring of blinking and throw some flasks.