Retiering the Classes: Ninja, Rogue, and Scout

[eggynack]

Here we have the roguelikes. The two only classes with 8+int skill points a level, and the ninja, with its 6+int backed by some emphasis on stealth. Core to all three of these classes is their emphasis on non-combat situations, all of them relying on some form of precision damage to seriously help in combat, the rogue and ninja with the rather similar sneak attack and sudden strike respectively, and the scout with its more movement oriented skirmish. The question for these classes is how much skill use and the attendant non-combat abilities in general can compensate for relatively weak combat capabilities.

Ninja (CAdv, 5): Sudden strike inevitably draws somewhat unfortunate comparisons to sneak attack, because the lack of flanking activation and book support makes it quite a bit weaker, and the loss of two skill points a level is another meaningful downside. Still, sporadic invisibility from a low level is really solid, and the other ninja abilities are occasionally quite useful as well.

Rogue: The classic skillmonkey, and the namesake of this group. Excellent skill use, relatively easy to activate precision damage, reasonable abilities, and, as a core class, inevitably above average splat support.

Scout (CAdv, 10): Skirmish's activation method is of interest compared to the other two, but the loss of damage hurts. As the name implies though, a great deal of scouting is possible here, both on the hide side, through camouflage and hide in plain sight, and on the spotting side, through blindsense and way down the line blindsight. Some of the bonus feats are quite good as well.

What are the tiers?

The simple answer here is that tier one is the best, the home of things on the approximate problem solving scale of wizards, and tier six is the worst, land of commoners. And problem solving capacity is what's being measured here. Considering the massive range of challenges a character is liable to be presented with across the levels, how much and how often does that character's class contribute to the defeat of those challenges? This value should be considered as a rough averaging across all levels, the center of the level range somewhat more than really low and really high level characters, and across all optimization levels (considering DM restrictiveness as a plausible downward acting factor on how optimized a character is), prioritizing moderate optimization somewhat more than low or high.

A big issue with the original tier system is that, if anything, it was too specific, generating inflexible definitions for allowance into a tier which did not cover the broad spectrum of ways a class can operate. When an increase in versatility would seem to represent a decrease in tier, because tier two is supposed to be low versatility, it's obvious that we've become mired in something that'd be pointless to anyone trying to glean information from the tier system. Thus, I will be uncharacteristically word light here. The original tier system's tier descriptions are still good guidelines here, but they shouldn't be assumed to be the end all and be all for how classes get ranked.

Consistent throughout these tiers is the notion of problems and the solving thereof. For the purposes of this tier system, the problem space can be said to be inclusive of combat, social interaction, and exploration, with the heaviest emphasis placed on combat. A problem could theoretically fall outside of that space, but things inside that space are definitely problems. Another way to view the idea of problem solving is through the lens of the niche ranking system. A niche filled tends to imply the capacity to solve a type of problem, whether it's a status condition in the case of healing, or an enemy that just has too many hit points in the case of melee combat. It's not a perfect measure, both because some niches have a lot of overlap in the kinds of problems they can solve and because, again, the niches aren't necessarily all inclusive, but they can act as a good tool for class evaluation.

Tier one: Incredibly good at solving nearly all problems. This is the realm of clerics, druids, and wizards, classes that open up with strong combat spells backed up by utility, and then get massively stronger from there. If you're not keeping up with that core trio of tier one casters, then you probably don't belong here.

Tier two: We're just a step below tier one here, in the land of classes around the sorcerer level of power. Generally speaking, this means relaxing one of the two tier one assumptions, either getting us to very good at solving nearly all problems, or incredibly good at solving most problems. But, as will continue to be the case as these tiers go on, there aren't necessarily these two simple categories for this tier. You gotta lose something compared to the tier one casters, but what you lose doesn't have to be in some really specific proportions.

Tier three: Again, we gotta sacrifice something compared to tier two, here taking us to around the level of a swordsage. The usual outcome is that you are very good at solving a couple of problems and competent at solving a few more. Of course, there are other possibilities, for example that you might instead be competent at solving nearly all problems.

Tier four: Here we're in ranger/barbarian territory (though the ranger should be considered largely absent of ACF's and stuff to hit this tier, as will be talked about later). Starting from that standard tier three position, the usual sweet spots here are very good at solving a few problems, or alright at solving many problems.

Tier five: We're heading close to the dregs here. Tier five is the tier of monks, classes that are as bad as you can be without being an aristocrat or a commoner. Classes here are sometimes very good at solving nearly no problems, or alright at solving a few, or some other function thereof. It's weak, is the point.

Tier six: And here we have commoner tier. Or, the bottom is commoner. The top is approximately aristocrat. You don't necessarily have nothing in this tier, but you have close enough to it.

The Threads

Tier System Home Base


Tier System Home Base


The Fixed List Casters: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, and Warmage


The Obvious Tier One Classes: Archivist, Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Sha'ir, and Wizard


The Mundane Beat Sticks (part one): Barbarian, Fighter, Samurai (CW), and Samurai (OA)


The Roguelikes: Ninja, Rogue, and Scout


The Pseudo-Druids: Spirit Shaman, Spontaneous Druid, Urban Druid, and Wild Shape Ranger


The Jacks of All Trades: Bard, Factotum, Jester, and Savant


The Tome of Battlers: Crusader, Swordsage, and Warblade


The NPCs: Adept, Aristocrat, Commoner, Expert, Magewright, and Warrior


The Vaguely Supernatural Melee Folk: Battle Dancer, Monk, Mountebank, and Soulknife


The Miscellaneous Full Casters: Death Master, Shaman, Shugenja, Sorcerer, and Wu Jen


The Wacky Magicists: Binder, Dragonfire Adept, Shadowcaster, Truenamer, and Warlock

The Rankings

Ninja: Tier four

Rogue: Tier four

Scout: Tier four

And here's a link to the spreadsheet.

[Troacctid]

Rogue is a fine class that is better than any T5 and worse than any T3, putting it squarely—and, I think, comfortably—in Tier 4.

The other two are just variants that do not substantially increase or decrease the class's power level (I would argue both are slightly weaker due to nerfed skills and reduced splat support, but they're still close). Also T4.

[eggynack]

Yeah, that sounds about right. Not sure if any of these are particularly controversial, though I've obviously been surprised in the past. Dunno if I should be happy because I picked such close together classes, or unhappy that it's a pretty samey setup. Not a big deal in the latter case. If people just aren't particularly interested in this one, then it'll just speed up the next one. Either way, I'll second the three four ratings.

[Efrate]

Rogue is tier 4,the poster child of tier 4.

I would say scout is t4, but its pretty bad,especially since the errata on mounted skirmish. Swift hunter adds a lot, but that is not inherent in the class. You are an ok scout, with a few abilities to scout well, but there are enough to be meaningful. I'd still rather have a ranger up front. Good skills, outdoor focused, but no UMD hurts. Also no open lock though it makes sense from a lore perspective seems a fairly blatant oversight for your dungeon delving style skill monkey with trapfinding.

Ninja I would say is tier 4, but a weird case. They have a couple of very nice tricks, but their limit uses, being a bit MAD, and sudden strike being much harder to activate than either skirmish or sneak attack. The only base class that gets poison use natively means you can with a little investment, or minor creation in either form, be a decent debuffer on some enemies, something your other two brethren have a harder time doing, provided you fight things you can poison. You have more applicable skills in a social setting than scout, but fewer skill points, but your can infiltrate quite well, but fewer skills on an already kind of MAD class means you can't put much into int. Lack of UMD hurts you a bit more since you have fewer points and minor cha synergy for some of your social/infiltrating skills.

Also unarmed strike like a monk should have been a class feature at some point, just maybe a few levels behind, just because ninjas. I think you can maybe play one in a more social oriented setting with poison access/valid targets and a more cloak and dagger style game and maybe hit t3, but I have no idea.

[Zaq]

No love for the Spellthief? I assume that it'll fall under a future round of "skill-heavy characters with some magic support" (so Spellthief, Bard, PsyRogue, Lurk, maybe Factotum, etc.)? Or maybe "level 4 casters" (Spellthief, Paladin, Ranger, Hexblade)?

Anyway, my biggest problem with the Rogue (aside from how easy WotC made it to turn off their primary mode of attack, which is itself a problem) is their lack of staying power. Rogues are fragile (low HP, mediocre AC), and since they tend to do a lot of burst damage with a good round of Sneak Attack, they can draw a lot of enemy attention without a lot of class-native ways to deflect that attention. Hiding is all well and good, but Rogues don't have a class-native way to get HiPS or to otherwise hide from something they've already stabbed. That's one of the biggest reasons I've never been able to pull the trigger and bring a pure Rogue to the table, as much as I like the idea of them.

Overall, though, Rogues have an obviously fantastic base for skills, and when Sneak Attack works, it's likely to be among the best sources of damage in a party without a Mailman or an Ubercharger. Skills have some limitations that magic doesn't, but they're still an excellent way of solving problems (or of finding new trouble to get into). So Rogues have several different ways to contribute to the party, and if nothing goes wrong, those tricks are generally pretty darn nice to have around. The downside is simply that there's a lot of room for those tricks to fail. Sneak Attack is really easy to foil (any form of concealment will do it, Uncanny Dodge will do it, being immune to crits will do it, etc.), and that's pretty frustrating when you consider how much of a Rogue's ability to contribute to combat is tied up in that one ability. (Skills, too, are not always fully effective, depending on how the GM runs things. Social skills can be either godly or useless, and the same is true for stealthy skills.)

Rogues are traditionally the poster children for T4. There's a small part of me, though, that wants to nudge them closer to T3. They're easy to turn off, but they also have several different ways to contribute to the party's bottom line. I dunno. I can't really back up a strong argument that they should be higher than T4, so I guess you can count me as a vote for T4 at least to start, but I'd like to hear some discussion about other options. There's so many different ways to build an effective Rogue, after all, and even one single Rogue character is likely to have a few different selling points once they've made it out of the early levels. I don't feel like they're just good at one thing, which is kind of a defining feature of T4. The trouble is that they're good at a variety of things that are easier than most to get shut down.

I think Scouts are pretty solidly T4 as well. I like Scouts more than is perhaps strictly warranted, but I think they're a reasonably well-designed class overall, even though they have a few flaws (like the fact that there comes a point when Skirmish is an active liability unless you have a way to full attack after a move, just because of the way that 3.5's combat system is designed). I think part of the reason that I like them is because I like combat that involves tactical movement, and it's rare for a 3.5 class to actively encourage that sort of thing. I even tend to like pure Scouts over Swift Hunters, mostly because I like having 8 + INT points instead of 6 + INT points, and also because I genuinely like Scout class features. (Though I admit that it's nice to get full BAB for Greater Manyshot, and more importantly, it's nice to be able to Skirmish against your FE.) I feel like the Scout is what the Ranger should have been in the first place, though that's partially because I really dislike the PHB Ranger (it's decent once you get a ton of ACFs and a ton of splat support for the spell list, but even then, Rangers never seem to have a niche to me). The skill list is less versatile than the Rogue's, but it's not like you'll run out of ways to spend your skill points. Overall, though, I see them as a reliable T4. They can contribute pretty well out of combat, and they can do okay in combat if you build them right, but there's a certain amount of legwork (pun minimally intended) to be done to keep their main trick functional.

The Ninja is the weakest of these three classes, and I think it's the weakest by quite a lot. If their invisibility had a gentler use limit, they'd be pretty decent, but it's basically impossible to have enough ki to last all day. The difference between Sudden Strike and Sneak Attack really is just that big—it's remarkably difficult to trigger Sudden Strike after the first round of combat without going invisible, and it's really hard to have enough invisibility to cover the entire adventuring day. (By the time you do have enough ki to go all day, a nontrivial cross-section of your foes will be able to ignore invisibility, which sucks.) The fact that they're MAD is bad, and the fact that they lose their invisibility (and thus their one unique and interesting feature) if they wear armor is a real downside that people tend to overlook. Other than Sudden Strike and invisibility, their class features are actually fairly lackluster, though the ability to hit material targets while ethereal is either unique or nearly unique. All told, though, I think the Ninja fails in a lot of places that the Rogue doesn't, and I think it's basically a T5 class. Its tricks are too limited to hit T4, if you ask me.

[eggynack]

No love for the Spellthief? I assume that it'll fall under a future round of "skill-heavy characters with some magic support" (so Spellthief, Bard, PsyRogue, Lurk, maybe Factotum, etc.)? Or maybe "level 4 casters" (Spellthief, Paladin, Ranger, Hexblade)?

Something like that, probably the latter, I'm thinking. It seemed too magically oriented to toss into this more mundane skill themed thing.

[eggynack]

Things're kinda dead here, with nearly a full day since the last not-me post. I assume it's cause of a lack of interest in tiering these classes. So, I put up the tier ratings for the thread, all fours, and am planning to open up the next thread sometime tomorrow. It's not too big a deal, cause again this thread's rating and discussion will remain open in the longer term, but it feels weird to put up a rating on four votes, even relatively homogeneous ones.

[ryu]

Things're kinda dead here, with nearly a full day since the last not-me post. I assume it's cause of a lack of interest in tiering these classes. So, I put up the tier ratings for the thread, all fours, and am planning to open up the next thread sometime tomorrow. It's not too big a deal, cause again this thread's rating and discussion will remain open in the longer term, but it feels weird to put up a rating on four votes, even relatively homogeneous ones.

I mean let's be real here. Considering we aren't anywhere near the top of the tier list where people with anomalous opinions will argue hardest, and that anyone who'd even try to rate these differently would almost certainly face a visible brick wall would you expect the result to be different?

[eggynack]

I mean let's be real here. Considering we aren't anywhere near the top of the tier list where people with anomalous opinions will argue hardest, and that anyone who'd even try to rate these differently would almost certainly face a visible brick wall would you expect the result to be different?

There's some arguments near the bottom of the system too. Some of the biggest discussions back in the other thread were for the various NPC classes, and monk threads are a classic for a reason. I definitely remember some rogue tiering arguments popping up, centered on the power level of UMD and the value we should place on skills in general. And the ninja and scout could plausibly be on the 4-5 line. Also, while the higher tier classes have definitely gotten more talk, the fact remains that this has gotten less talk than the even lower tier beatstick thread. Maybe these classes are just kinda boring, talk-wise. Next thread should be more interesting, anyway. Planning to run the pseudo-druid thread I'd been thinking about since I started this series. Spirit shaman is always good for some talk, and urban druid could be interesting too. Not sure whether spontaneous druid should show up there.

[yellowrocket]

Maybe I just don't have enough experience outside core classes. I always placed the rogue above the barbarian in total abilities, with umd as a class skill, elevating it to tier three through its versitility. Perhaps i over value the ability to create a build to competently fit any campaign setting and the access to magic items that many of the lower tier characters lack.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Rogue and Scout are both T4 for obvious reasons. (By the way, easiest way to activate Skirmish? Two DC 20 Ride checks to fast-mount on one side of the horse and fast-dismount on the other. Moving in the middle is optional; as long as you're back on the ground when you shoot Skirmish works, and by RAW it's only melee full attacks that get penalized).

Ninja... the Ninja might just be crappy enough for Tier 5. Sudden Strike is somewhat harder to activate than Sneak Attack, basically requiring some sort of invisibility or fast-feinting PrC. You don't get armor, so you have to invest in Wis. You very fewer skill points, so you need more Int to compensate. Ki powers are limited enough to be tough to rely on. Rogues are certainly at the top of T4, but Ninjas are a LOT worse.

[Cosi]

Rogue is probably Three. You get enough damage to contribute in combat with TWF sneak attack (not hard to turn on -- a Ring of Blink does the trick), and you get UMD and Diplomacy to cover non combat (plus you're a good skill monkey). You're one of the better skill monkeys in the game (probably worse than Beguiler, but better than the Factotum).

[ryu]

Rogue is probably Three. You get enough damage to contribute in combat with TWF sneak attack (not hard to turn on -- a Ring of Blink does the trick), and you get UMD and Diplomacy to cover non combat (plus you're a good skill monkey). You're one of the better skill monkeys in the game (probably worse than Beguiler, but better than the Factotum).

Excuse me? what?!

[Grod_The_Giant]

Excuse me? what?!

Yeah, I like the Factotum a lot less than the rest of this forum, but there's no way in heck a Rogue beats out the Factotum in SKILLS. (Combat, yes, but the Factotum almost certainly has as many or more points, a bigger list, and decent skill-boosting abilities.)

[eggynack]

Excuse me? what?!

See? Plenty of room for controversial positions and wacky arguments. Maybe I needed to announce it better... Either way, if things keep up at this kinda pace (or, y'know, any kinda reasonable one), starting up a new thread super soon might not be necessary.

[ryu]

See? Plenty of room for controversial positions and wacky arguments. Maybe I needed to announce it better... Either way, if things keep up at this kinda pace (or, y'know, any kinda reasonable one), starting up a new thread super soon might not be necessary.

To be fair, I kinda expected tiers one and three to blow up. This though? This is.... I don't even. Do you understand Eggy? I don't even...

[Cosi]

Excuse me? what?!

The Factotum doesn't actually do anything. You get spellcasting that is terrible, a bunch of actions you don't have anything to do with, and your access to additional skills basically amounts to "maybe you can convince your DM to let you use Iaijutsu Focus to you get the same thing the Rogue has already". It's a really bad class (also, mechanically non-functional), but it got overrated because JaronK loves them.

On the other hand, the Rogue gets good DPS from sneak attack, the important stuff for skills (UMD, Diplomacy, Trapfinding), and at high levels your bonus feats let you grab totally arbitrary abilities for fun and profit.

Yeah, I like the Factotum a lot less than the rest of this forum, but there's no way in heck a Rogue beats out the Factotum in SKILLS. (Combat, yes, but the Factotum almost certainly has as many or more points, a bigger list, and decent skill-boosting abilities.)

It's a worse skill-monkey, not worse at skills. If you're ranking by pure skill competence, Rogue beats Beguiler by virtue of getting more points.

[eggynack]

To be fair, I kinda expected tiers one and three to blow up. This though? This is.... I don't even. Do you understand Eggy? I don't even...

I actually kinda expected the above, "Better class in the overall group of skill monkeys rather than the best at skills," thing, though I couldn't be sure, and definitely took the other reading at first. Still don't particularly agree with it, but it's somewhat more consistent with the game in a logical sense.

[Zaq]

It's a worse skill-monkey, not worse at skills. If you're ranking by pure skill competence, Rogue beats Beguiler by virtue of getting more points.

I gently disagree here. The Beguiler is INT-SAD, while the Rogue is not. There's a good chance that the Beguiler will get the same number of skill points as a Rogue in the same party, if not more.

[ryu]

The Factotum doesn't actually do anything. You get spellcasting that is terrible, a bunch of actions you don't have anything to do with, and your access to additional skills basically amounts to "maybe you can convince your DM to let you use Iaijutsu Focus to you get the same thing the Rogue has already". It's a really bad class (also, mechanically non-functional), but it got overrated because JaronK loves them.

On the other hand, the Rogue gets good DPS from sneak attack, the important stuff for skills (UMD, Diplomacy, Trapfinding), and at high levels your bonus feats let you grab totally arbitrary abilities for fun and profit.



It's a worse skill-monkey, not worse at skills. If you're ranking by pure skill competence, Rogue beats Beguiler by virtue of getting more points.

Or alchemic crafting, or the ability to far surpass the rogue's DPS with IAF rather than simply meeting it, or making use of the more actions to UMD twice the UMD items in a turn, or knowledge devotion, or even simply having native access to the lack of immunity you have to work for with sneak attack.

[Lans]

Rogue is probably Three. You get enough damage to contribute in combat with TWF sneak attack (not hard to turn on -- a Ring of Blink does the trick), and you get UMD and Diplomacy to cover non combat (plus you're a good skill monkey). You're one of the better skill monkeys in the game (probably worse than Beguiler, but better than the Factotum).

I have issues keeping rogue from tier 3 steming from them not getting enough outside of the damage and skills, and the damage having issues with types and concealment

[Cosi]

Or alchemic crafting

Is "you can craft stuff" supposed to be some huge trump card for the Factotum? The Rogue can craft stuff too, and money is fungible so he can just use his (or the party's) savings from crafting non-alchemical gear on full price alchemical stuff. Or buy a damn scroll of fabricate.

, or the ability to far surpass the rogue's DPS with IAF rather than simply meeting it

or even simply having native access to the lack of immunity you have to work for with sneak attack.

Iaijutsu Focus caps at 9d6, which is less than sneak attack. The Rogue has access to it too (he'll be about a die per ten levels behind the Factotum). Also, it's setting specific 3.0 content.

Also, Iaijutsu Focus is harder to use than sneak attack.

, or making use of the more actions to UMD twice the UMD items in a turn,

That's probably a waste of resources. Combat UMD tends to be about using expensive scrolls to win fights. Getting off more than one is a very marginal advantage.

or knowledge devotion,

Yes, you get a bonus of around 1/5 your knowledge check to attack rolls. I don't really get why people think this is impressive.

I have issues keeping rogue from tier 3 steming from them not getting enough outside of the damage and skills, and the damage having issues with types and concealment

The only class in Tier Three right now is the Warmage. It does damage and doesn't get skills. Doing damage and getting skills seems at least that good.

Immunities to sneak attack are relatively rare, and pretty cheap to beat. It hurts, but the damage is good enough to jump through some hoops.

[ryu]

Uh you do realize that your knowledge skills can easily be over fifty right? Granted that's high optimization, but even at simple 20s a consistent +10 is gonna hit a lot more consistently than the rogue. Part of what I meant by far surpassing their damage.

[Lans]

The only class in Tier Three right now is the Warmage. It does damage and doesn't get skills. Doing damage and getting skills seems at least that good.

Immunities to sneak attack are relatively rare, and pretty cheap to beat. It hurts, but the damage is good enough to jump through some hoops.

I think the tier 3 ranking of warmage counts the ecletic learning ACF and getting extra spells known from feats. A 3rd level cleric spell shuts down sneak attack for days/level, and I'm sure there are other spells that do like wise. What level do you expect to get a ring of blink?

[Cosi]

Uh you do realize that your knowledge skills can easily be over fifty right? Granted that's high optimization, but even at simple 20s a consistent +10 is gonna hit a lot more consistently than the rogue. Part of what I meant by far surpassing their damage.

Uh, you do realize that Knowledge Devotion is capped a +5, right?*

Anyway, you're rolling versus flat-footed touch AC, so it's not like anyone's missing.

Also, if you're rolling massive skill checks, you should be killing people with UMDed staves of holy word, not damage.

*: I mis-spoke a bit in the original post. It's around 1/5 your bonus, not 1/5 your check.

[Cosi]

I think the tier 3 ranking of warmage counts the ecletic learning ACF and getting extra spells known from feats. A 3rd level cleric spell shuts down sneak attack for days/level, and I'm sure there are other spells that do like wise. What level do you expect to get a ring of blink?

Ecletic Learning is what, four spells, one of which is zeroth level? That's not particularly better than UMD + Diplomacy + Trapfinding + other skills.

Ring of Blink is 8th to 10th range. But I think people overstate the difficulty of triggering sneak attack. Also, sneak attack is pretty much by definition easier to trigger than IF, and people seem to give the Factotum credit for that.

[ryu]

Uh, you do realize that Knowledge Devotion is capped a +5, right?*

Anyway, you're rolling versus flat-footed touch AC, so it's not like anyone's missing.

Also, if you're rolling massive skill checks, you should be killing people with UMDed staves of holy word, not damage.

*: I mis-spoke a bit in the original post. It's around 1/5 your bonus, not 1/5 your check.

On your main attacks no. What about your iteratives? Flat footed helps, but it's hardly a guarantee for your entire attack chain.

[Troacctid]

The only class in Tier Three right now is the Warmage. It does damage and doesn't get skills. Doing damage and getting skills seems at least that good.

Immunities to sneak attack are relatively rare, and pretty cheap to beat. It hurts, but the damage is good enough to jump through some hoops.

Warmage is better at dealing damage and also has potent debuffing and battlefield control, without expending any build resources at all—no feats, no items, no advanced learning, it's all native to the class. A single orb of fire is a standard action that does as much damage as two sneak attacks and dazes the target. Fireball is also a standard action that does as much damage as two sneak attacks and can hit all the enemies simultaneously while still dealing half damage on a miss. Again, this is if you picked Toughness in every feat slot and are completely naked except for your component pouch. Rogue is not even in the same weight class.

[ryu]

Warmage is better at dealing damage and also has potent debuffing and battlefield control, without expending any build resources at all—no feats, no items, no advanced learning, it's all native to the class. A single orb of fire is a standard action that does as much damage as two sneak attacks and dazes the target. Fireball is also a standard action that does as much damage as two sneak attacks and can hit all the enemies simultaneously while still dealing half damage on a miss. Again, this is if you picked Toughness in every feat slot and are completely naked except for your component pouch. Rogue is not even in the same weight class.

Indeed. All of this praise is true even though warmages blow goats for pocket change. It's just that tier 4s, while the goat will respond well to advances, refuses to pay for the privilege. Tier 5s the goat refuses outright. It has standards. Tier 6 the farmer stopped before they got in because he was worried about possible diseases.

[Fizban]

Another one for 4's across the board here. All three can do the skills all day which is their main role. Rogue has the original sneak attack which defines the realm of situational damage bonus. Scout and Ninja both have solid variations on those situations with supporting class features. The Ninja's no-armor restriction is bad, but not bad enough to kick it down to 5 when it has actual supernatural abilities backing it up. The worst part is that the Ninja's reliable ranged invisible sudden strike is completely blocked by 2 levels of Barbarian or any other source of Uncanny Dodge, which shows up more as multiclassing and prestige classes increase, but not so much on monsters.