Versus #8!

[Cranthis]

I'm going to give you guys two 3.5 classes, sometimes drastically different, sometimes very similar. I want to hear your opinions on who would win between the two, and why. The only rule is "Don't use tiers as your only means of explanation". This isn't any sort of contest, it is just a side by side comparison of classes.

Today's versus: Scout vs Rogue

Assume both are level 6 (this will not always be the case)

Use your own logic, and your own builds if you want, and explain which side you think wins.

This thread is for gathering general opinions, and is not intended to copy anything similar that may have been done already, excluding my own posts.

No book limit

[Kane0]

Yay! Another Versus! And one that i know both classes for!

Scout Advantages:
Higher skill floor
Ranger Synergy
Easier to get Skirmish than Sneak Attack
Skirmish grants AC bonus
Better initiative and Fortitude
Faster movement speed
Bonus Feat
Skill list - Survival (not as impressive as UMD)
More HPs
Slightly better at sneaking

If you can find a way to make a full attack and move then Scout becomes an infinitely more attractive option, though at level 6 you'll be making between 1 to 3 attacks a round anyway so it may or may not be a concern.

Rogue Advantages:
Higher 'skill ceiling'
Sneak attack damage higher than Skirmish
Much more support from splats
Much more synergy thanks to splats
Skill list - UMD!
Trap sense

So at level 6 using straight Scout or Rogue I'd say Scout gets the advantage except for a lack of UMD. As you level up the rogue gets better damage and abilities like improved evasion that even things out, though he won't get HiPS which is always handy.

Quick Google search revealed:

Encard wrote this on the WotC forums:
Scout vs. Rogue
Perhaps the most obvious comparison to make, the Scout and rogue are both stealth- and skill-heavy classes with precision damage and survival abilities. However, they have their notable differences.
The Scout’s precision damage is at half-progression compared to a rogue’s, but also gives an AC bonus; triggering requires completely different setup than a rogue’s, and usually rewards staying from an enemy rather than getting near them. The Scout will have a better Fort save and Init check, assuming all else is equal, due to Battle Fortitude – this makes them more likely to actually make their hit-and-run attack and more likely to survive some dangers. Movement and stealth in natural areas is easier for the Scout, and roughly equal to a rogue’s in cities – against magical impediments the Scout also wins out thanks to Freedom of Movement. Blindsense and Blindsight are also useful in this vein, no matter when the Scout is. The bonus feats help loosen up the requirements for various Scout builds. With a d8 hit die, scouts are also slightly more durable.

The rogue, on the other hand, has a larger skill list – notably, the rogue’s list includes Use Magic Device, whereas the Scout’s smaller list includes Survival. The rogue’s sneak attack damage, though at times harder to set up, is easier to score multiple attacks with and has twice the damage progression of skirmish. Improved Uncanny Dodge protects the rogue from other rogues, a benefit the Scout doesn’t have, and trap sense, defending against traps – an all-too-common hazard in many games. A rogue also gets four special abilities, which can be extremely helpful – of note are Improved Evasion, Slippery Mind and Opportunist.

All in all, a Scout is actually superior to a pure rogue in terms of movement, stealth and observational information-gathering. A rogue, on the other hand, has better skills and survival abilities. Combat superiority depends greatly on the build and situation – Scouts have an easier time triggering their bonus damage, but rogues have twice as much of it.


Edit: Not Swordsaged!

[Venusaur]

I think Rogues have the advantage, even if they only crush the scouts with the sheer weight of their books. Swift Hunter is pretty boss, however.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Another close one, but I'm gonna back the rogue on this one. Higher damage output, (note that skirmish doesn't work on any of the things that sneak attack doesn't work on) and a slightly broader skill list (which includes UMD, while the scout's doesn't) is just enough to tip it, IMO.

[toapat]

I think this is the first close one in a while.

Rogue:
has better support
has better precision damage
has some unique class features

Scout:
was written with better understanding of the system
Is pretty relyable

I would say:

Rogue is better at utility
Scout is better at combat

[Quellian-dyrae]

If we're talking a straight fight, scout, pretty much hands down. Both have Uncanny Dodge, which stops Sneak Attack but not Skirmish.

If it's more...which class would you rather use/could you use more effectively...it's pretty even. Scout doesn't have the sheer damage power rogue does, but can get it somewhat more reliably and with a few good build options can even full attack with it, circumvent some immunities, and so on. Rogue I believe has a slightly better skill set. I do kind of like scout's supplemental abilities more. I suppose all else being equal I'd probably lean scout, but only just.

If it's, who would you rather have in your party, I'd probably lean rogue. Damage matters.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I see a one-on-one between these two playing out more like a sniper-battle than a typical slugfest. Who knows how many rounds of sneaking around each other, just waiting for the other guy to make the first low hide/move silently roll followed by a handful of ranged attacks. Rinse and repeat until one or the other is dead.

The rogue's a walking corpse on open ground though.

[Snowbluff]

Staggering Strike. Ambush feats in general, actually.

Though, the rogue is going to have to dip to get HiPS.

[Boci]

Staggering Strike. Ambush feats in general, actually.

Though, the rogue is going to have to dip to get HiPS.

That will create a catch 22 though if the rogue doesn't win initiative and hit with their first attack.

[Acanous]

Well, Scout has always been a better Dovahkiin chassis all round, while Rogue, though it does get more mileage out of Dragon Shouts (Fus ro Dah in particular) is going to have a really hard time at such a low level, especially since they can't stop time. The Scout can actually USE his survival that low, while the Rogue's UMD isn't high enough to matter yet.

Later on, Rogue would outstrip scout, especially as more build room and supplimental options opened up or were squeezed in. At lv 6? It goes to the Scout.

[Snowbluff]

That will create a catch 22 though if the rogue doesn't win initiative and hit with their first attack.

Yeah, which sucks. But if they do hit first, the stagger will cripple the Scout pretty horrendously. The save is fort vs. the damage done +10 which is crazy powerful.

I'd also like to point out that Rogue has UMD as a skill, while Scout does not. I think I'd rather have a rogue in my party just for that reason alone. I'm not sure if it should go into this fight, since it would both make it fair and unfair at the same time.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Really, too close to tell. Scout has Uncanny Dodge which negates Sneak Attack, which means the Rogue's only real hope is UMD WBLomancy.

[Cranthis]

I like how this is going.

[Gwendol]

Rogue: though the context of the setting does matter and may tilt the balance towards the scout.

If in a dungeon-oriented campaign, with enemies immune to skirmish, rogue comes out heavily on top due to skills, abilities, and the option to take penetrating strike.

In an open space/above ground/nature setting the scout may shine, although the rogue can be built to keep up (Daring Outlaw, I'm looking at you).

At higher levels the rogue inches ahead thanks to UMD.

For preference in a party, I'd favor the rogue over the scout in general. On a one on one situation the setting will be important, if not the deciding factor. Unless the rogue can easily go into hiding some way or another during the duel, the scout is likely to both out-damage and outlast his opponent.

[Rejakor]

Rogue. Rogue rogue rogue.

Dear god rogue.

Rogue gets 3 attacks, with +3d6 sneak attack damage to each, on his thrown knives/acid flasks. So that's 3d4+6(str)+9d6, or 44 damage on a sneak attack full attack.


Assuming he can get a flank, his second round damage is either 1d4+2+3d6 (15) or 2d4+4+6d6 (30) (full attack). More if a friendly wizard casts grease and he can use projectiles.

This is with the very basic optimization of taking the Core feats Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, and Two Weapon Fighting.

His Attack Bonus is lower than the scout's, but with flasks, it doesn't usually matter and even with knives it should be alright.

With Craven, a wand of Hunter's Eye, or any number of other crap that goes up.


Scout gets, at this level, one attack for 1d8+3+2d6, or, 13.5 damage. If he has travel devotion and has dipped cloistered cleric, he gets 2d8+6+4d6 on his full attack, i.e. 27 damage.

If his level 6 feat is Improved Skirmish, and he has the room to move, he can increase that damage to 1d8+3+4d6 and 2d8+6+8d6, respectively. The problem is, travel devotion + cleric dip is fiddly and all other means of getting skirmish on a full attack before greater manyshot are higher level. Furthermore, the scout can't get the third attack a rogue can, unless he blows his range advantage his class gives him. There are also no real other feats or anything beyond a few magic items (archers bracers, spell storing arrows) that give him any bonuses, and all of those are things the rogue can get as well (as well as stuff that increases sneak attack, that the scout cannot get).

The thing the scout gets that the rogue doesn't in combat at this level is swift movement and longer range.

But compared to the nova potential of the rogue, i'd say that's weaker. Travel Devotion + Improved Skirmish + Point Blank Shot + Rapid Shot gets you a 2 attack full attack at this level, i.e. the combo above, but that requires a human for the bonus feat and all feats tied up, whereas a Rogue can get Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, and Two Weapon Fighting as any race (or with a pair of Gloves of the Balanced Hand).

Ranger can be dipped for Rapid Shot, as a scout, but that means no Improved Skirmish (as it requires 2d6/+1 skirmish in order to take it, so you can have at most 1 level out of scout by 6th in order to take it).

So yeah, advantage rogue in combat at level 6.

SKILLS

Rogues and Scouts both get 8+Int. The problem is, the rogue list is better. And it has more int-based skills on it, which is why a common stat choice for rogues is Dex/int. Scouts get a lot of wis based skills, which while rogues need it for spot and listen, they don't need it so much for heal or survival or whatever else. So rogues will have on average more int than scouts.

Rogues also have all the cha based skills, and UMD, and scouts do not.

Bluff and Diplomacy are typically more useful than Sense Motive, and UMD is the most powerful skill in the game.

While Survival and Kn: Nature might be useful sometimes, most DnD campaigns deal with more humanoids than animals, and more underground areas and cities than wilderness survival challenges.

So, advantage, rogue.


In terms of dipping and whatnot, Rogue is usually a better dip than Scout, the sole exception being swift hunter. Rogue 1 gives you a bunch of good skills, and a feat if you're using feat rogue, rogue 2 gives you evasion (tied for earliest of any class in the game) and another feat for feat rogue, and as such can be a great dip for any melee or archery build.


So yes, Rogue > Scout, although the differences between them are relatively small, especially as you go up levels the rogue will start outpacing the scout.

The one area the scout outpaces rogue is if you have someone bad at optimizing or new to the game - the scout is obvious (bar the manyshot thing) but many rogues will go 2 dagger melee flank rogue wearing leather armour route, and get their asses handed to them on a platter.

[Kane0]

I disagree, unless you're arguing for choosing a rogue vs a scout for a party needing a skill character.

- Rogue needs to work really hard to get his sneak attack on the scout. He has to get/maintain a flank and remain within 30'
- Scout can skirmish pretty easily
- Scout can stay out of rogues range fairly easily, even easier with far shot
- Rogue can use UMD, but that gives scout more time to act.
- Rogue = situational big risk for big reward where scout = reliable averageness
- Even though rogue gets more attacks, but the more he makes the bigger the chance of him doing less and less damage.
- Rogue has edge on build options and customization, but scout is a more complete package
- Scout is slightly less feat starved for ranged combat, which is how he will be engaging the rogue. Exception: small, enclosed area to fight in.
So on average the scout would win out in the open, the rogue would win in a cramped dungeon.

Edit: My entire post.

[Rejakor]

I figure we are talking 'as a class to take' not 'in pvp', because pvp depends largely on build and tactics, not the features of the class.

[Snowbluff]

Yeah, this would make sense as a 'what class to take' since it would make a lousy fight, and UMD is unfair.

[Kane0]

Woo! It took 8 versus threads, but I think this is the first with majority of arguments around which to use over who would win in a fight.

[Cranthis]

Woo! It took 8 versus threads, but I think this is the first with majority of arguments around which to use over who would win in a fight.

Either way is good with me.

[Snowbluff]

I always argue for the class I'd rather play. I just go with the fight since everyone is doing it.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Rogue. Rogue rogue rogue.

Dear god rogue.

Rogue gets 3 attacks, with +3d6 sneak attack damage to each, on his thrown knives/acid flasks. So that's 3d4+6(str)+9d6, or 44 damage on a sneak attack full attack.Did you miss Uncanny Dodge on the Scout? So no sneak attacks for j00.



Assuming he can get a flank, his second round damage is either 1d4+2+3d6 (15) or 2d4+4+6d6 (30) (full attack). More if a friendly wizard casts grease and he can use projectiles.If we are talking party support, then the Scout has access to all that, and Balance is a class skill for Scout, so it won't necessarily make him flat-footed either.


This is with the very basic optimization of taking the Core feats Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, and Two Weapon Fighting.

His Attack Bonus is lower than the scout's, but with flasks, it doesn't usually matter and even with knives it should be alright.

With Craven, a wand of Hunter's Eye, or any number of other crap that goes up.For both parties, mind, and the Scout has a better ability to apply his precision-based damage.


Scout gets, at this level, one attack for 1d8+3+2d6, or, 13.5 damage. If he has travel devotion and has dipped cloistered cleric, he gets 2d8+6+4d6 on his full attack, i.e. 27 damage.Scout can also TWF/Rapid Shot, don't forget.


If his level 6 feat is Improved Skirmish, and he has the room to move, he can increase that damage to 1d8+3+4d6 and 2d8+6+8d6, respectively. The problem is, travel devotion + cleric dip is fiddly and all other means of getting skirmish on a full attack before greater manyshot are higher level. Furthermore, the scout can't get the third attack a rogue can, unless he blows his range advantage his class gives him. There are also no real other feats or anything beyond a few magic items (archers bracers, spell storing arrows) that give him any bonuses, and all of those are things the rogue can get as well (as well as stuff that increases sneak attack, that the scout cannot get).Scout can Dervish with the best of them, man. A one-level dip in Pouncebarian instead of Cleric nets you an overall higher BAB and, well, pounce. This plus TWF = serious pain.


The thing the scout gets that the rogue doesn't in combat at this level is swift movement and longer range.

But compared to the nova potential of the rogue, i'd say that's weaker. Travel Devotion + Improved Skirmish + Point Blank Shot + Rapid Shot gets you a 2 attack full attack at this level, i.e. the combo above, but that requires a human for the bonus feat and all feats tied up, whereas a Rogue can get Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, and Two Weapon Fighting as any race (or with a pair of Gloves of the Balanced Hand).So wait, you're saying that the Rogue can get Gloves of the Balanced Hand but the Scout can't?


Ranger can be dipped for Rapid Shot, as a scout, but that means no Improved Skirmish (as it requires 2d6/+1 skirmish in order to take it, so you can have at most 1 level out of scout by 6th in order to take it).Perhaps you forgot the Scout4 bonus feat?


So yeah, advantage rogue in combat at level 6.Not really


SKILLS

Rogues and Scouts both get 8+Int. The problem is, the rogue list is better. And it has more int-based skills on it, which is why a common stat choice for rogues is Dex/int. Scouts get a lot of wis based skills, which while rogues need it for spot and listen, they don't need it so much for heal or survival or whatever else. So rogues will have on average more int than scouts.However, this also means Scouts have a higher Will save since so many of their skills are Wis dependent.


Rogues also have all the cha based skills, and UMD, and scouts do not.

Bluff and Diplomacy are typically more useful than Sense Motive, and UMD is the most powerful skill in the game.

While Survival and Kn: Nature might be useful sometimes, most DnD campaigns deal with more humanoids than animals, and more underground areas and cities than wilderness survival challenges.

So, advantage, rogue.I wouldn't necessarily say that. Perhaps your experience has been largely urban, but Scouts work just fine subterranean (better than Rogues, actually), and they both work out on par in urban.


In terms of dipping and whatnot, Rogue is usually a better dip than Scout, the sole exception being swift hunter. Rogue 1 gives you a bunch of good skills, and a feat if you're using feat rogue, rogue 2 gives you evasion (tied for earliest of any class in the game) and another feat for feat rogue, and as such can be a great dip for any melee or archery build.Wheras Scout gets Trackless Step, bonus to Fort save (going to be the weakest either of the classes has), Bonus feat (for Improved Skirmish), and extra bonus to AC. So defensively, the Scout is in a much better postion. Plus he shuts down the Rogues's Sneak Attack whereas the Rogue cannot shut down Skirmish.


So yes, Rogue > Scout, although the differences between them are relatively small, especially as you go up levels the rogue will start outpacing the scout.

The one area the scout outpaces rogue is if you have someone bad at optimizing or new to the game - the scout is obvious (bar the manyshot thing) but many rogues will go 2 dagger melee flank rogue wearing leather armour route, and get their asses handed to them on a platter.

Ummm... no. Scout is just as versatile, and a much higher potential for damage output than the Rogue has, plus more likely to actually get it to LAND. Who needs wands of Gravestrike/Vinestrike/Golemstrike when you can simply take undead, constructs, and plants as favored enemies and use Swift Hunter to re-enable precision-based damage?

The only way Rogue can come out the clear winner is to WBLomancy UMD. He's got literally no other option in this match-up, because his opponent has Uncanny Dodge.

[Snowbluff]

Schneekey I don't think you know what potential means.

[Kane0]

Thats a lot like how my response to Rejakor looked too before I edited my entire post lol.

Rogue does have better damage in a best case scenario, it's just that the scout's best case scenario is achieved much more easily.

Anyway, I think it comes down to risk vs reward. Rogue offers more for more, where Scout is for those who aren't inclined to gamble.

Me being a scout.

[Rejakor]

A pouncebarian scout still only does the amount for a rapid shot scout I listed up there.

And it relies on charging, which since scout can't ignore rough terrain until what, level 6, might be a problem for this barb1/scout5 dude.

Scouts can do the Rapid Shot + TWF thrower combo, but they typically want to spend their feats on other stuff as well (Improved Skirmish, Travel Devotion).

At this level a scout has comparable damage to a Rogue's sneak attack via Improved Skirmish, but the rogue's ability to get the 3 attack combo easier means he edges the scout out in nova damage.

I also have no idea what games you've been playing in if you think that Diplomacy and Bluff (even the non-broken houseruled diplomacy) are not worth more than whatever else a scout can do in a city. Not even mentioning Forgery, Gather Information, or Disguise.

Being able to read a scroll of invisibility, or use a wand of reduce person, or grease, or whatever, is not WBLomancy - WBLomancy is when you use WBL to eclipse your class abilities via bought spell use. Occasional spell use is not that. And it's very powerful, whether you want to admit it or not, even at very low levels.



As for all the PVP stuff, I don't really care, i'm not arguing any of that. The scout wins in a cage match cause uncanny dodge, at least usually, or the rogue uses UMD to do something dumb and wins, or whatever. I don't really care about cage matches so if people want to argue about that fine, but i'm not going to bother.

Here is a good point though.

Perhaps you forgot the Scout4 bonus feat?

Right, so what feat out of these ones, that you take at level 4, remembering that your other feats from level are at 1, 3, and 6, gets you both Improved Skirmish and the PBS-RS-TWF combo?


Acrobatic, Agile, Alertness, Athletic,
Blind-Fight, Brachiation†, Combat Expertise, Danger
Sense†, Dodge, Endurance, Far Shot, Great Fortitude,
Hear the Unseen†, Improved Initiative, Improved
Swimming†, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Mobility,
Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Quick Draw, Quick
Reconnoiter†, Rapid Reload, Shot on the Run, Skill
Focus, Spring Attack, Track.

As far as I can tell, it's impossible. You have to give up Improved Skirmish to get it.

Gloves of the Balanced Hand gets you it, but again, the point of scouts is that they can skirmish from range, you're throwing that away as a thrower - whereas a rogue has to be that close regardless.

[ojayaba]

I've noticed that many people are looking at dips and teh like but wasn't the OP about strait rogue vs scout no dips level 1-6?
on that same note, i have to side with scout in this match.
being able to nova for the rogue is great and all but being able to do it more often for the scout is better, not to mention being able to out distance the rogue = win for me.

[Gwendol]

I've noticed that many people are looking at dips and teh like but wasn't the OP about strait rogue vs scout no dips level 1-6?
on that same note, i have to side with scout in this match.
being able to nova for the rogue is great and all but being able to do it more often for the scout is better, not to mention being able to out distance the rogue = win for me.

Huh? You need to move to skirmish, and there is no Penetrating Strike equivalence for the scout that I'm aware of. The rogue triggers SA on an ambush, and when flanking, which the rogue is built for what with being able to tumble across battlefields without drawing AoO's.
Unless the fighting is out in the open where the scout can expect to trigger skirmish damage on every standard action every round, the rogue is going to pull ahead.
This is offset by the improved skirmish feat, but it also requires the scout to have even more room to roam to trigger.

So yes, for an outdoorsy campaign the scout is valuable, but in general the rogue will bring more to the table, especially if played competently.

[dextercorvia]

Right, so what feat out of these ones, that you take at level 4, remembering that your other feats from level are at 1, 3, and 6, gets you both Improved Skirmish and the PBS-RS-TWF combo?



As far as I can tell, it's impossible. You have to give up Improved Skirmish to get it.


Improved Skirmish is a valid choice for your level 4 scout bonus feat.

[eggs]

The problem is the feat's skirmish requirement. Unless you're using polymorph workarounds.

[dextercorvia]

The problem is the feat's skirmish requirement. Unless you're using polymorph workarounds.

Ah. I see it now.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

The problem is the feat's skirmish requirement. Unless you're using polymorph workarounds.

Scout3/Ranger2/Scout1. My 4th level of Scout hits at level 6, with Swift Hunter I can qualify at level 6.

[Snowbluff]

Scout3/Ranger2/Scout1. My 4th level of Scout hits at level 6, with Swift Hunter I can qualify at level 6.

I think he was working on the premise that no dips are involved.