wilderness rogue vs melee swift hunter?

[Warrnan]

My friend really wants to use a 2 weapon fighting ranger. Usually I know archery ranger/scout does decent damage and utility but he wants melee.

I'm thinking a typical rogue3/swashbucklerX/cleric1 for some travel devotion dual wield sneak attack.

But I know strength based melee swift hunters are a "thing". How viable are they vs a Daring outlaw build considering they have to move every round and do half damage (+5d6 @lvl19) compared to daring outlaws(+10d6@lvl19)?

When scouts get the splitting bow it puts them equal but a melee scout won't get that.....

Thanks for your help everyone. :)

[Rebel7284]

Some things to consider:

Improved Skirmish (http://dndtools.eu/feats/complete-scoundrel--60/improved-skirmish--1560/) brings the numbers closer together.

Sneak attack can be more difficult to trigger. You may not always find flat footed opponents and flanking can be difficult to achieve.

Rangers have better skill list, better class features, and more interesting alternate class features.

Also, there is the issue with immunities to precision damage. Swift Hunter allows you to ignore it for multiple creature types while Rogues get that ability to deal half damage to immune targets in Dungeonscape.

Also note that if Mystic Ranger from Dragon Magazine is allowed, Rangers become reasonable casters.

Even a normal Ranger with Sword of the Arcane Order (http://dndtools.eu/feats/champions-of-valor--28/sword-of-the-arcane-order--2875/) can provide good utility.

I personally like swift hunter builds a lot more than daring outlaw, it has more issues in tight quarters where it can't move around, but otherwise, a ranger tends to have more options.

[Warrnan]

Well I'm certainly glad his idea of a melee ranger is viable. Thanks for the insight.

Happy adventures to you comrade!