D&D 5E Xanathar's Guide to Everything: Rogue Scout

[OB1]

One thing is clear from all of these previews. I'm going to need to find more time to play D&D!

I imagine that this is going to be an insanely popular class choice.

 

[ScuroNotte]

Because they want to play a character with magic and/or an animal companion? A lot of players create characters simply based on what they want to play after all, and not for optimization....

For me it's not for optimization. It is playing a ranger that I envision (and no magic but that's just me).
My point is having expertise in nature and survival is a ranger's forte, not a rogues. As I said, WoTC wouldn't give a ranger a flat expertise in survival, only for 3 terrains spread over 10 levels.
So when a party needs a character for tracking, survival skills, etc. there is no need to call for a ranger. You can now have a class that can perform two functions in one.
And current animal companion is less than desirable in my opinion.

 

[GlassJaw]

I wonder if they this to satisfy the ask for spell-less ranger, or at least the mobile, guerilla, wilderness skirmisher.

That said, I would like to have a Scout option for both Fighter and Rogue.

 

[Greg K]

Crawford is the nuts and bolts, numbers and facts guy: Mearls is the strategy and grand design guy.

With their powers combined...

I become more grateful for the SRD and the ability to find 5e material produced by both fans and professional third parties?

 

[BookBarbarian]

I, for one, will miss the Scout Fighter.

Me too.

I liked the fighter scout.

Me too.

That said, I would like to have a Scout option for both Fighter and Rogue.

Me too.

The way the Fighter Scout got a neat way to improve Wilderness related ability checks, and good incentive to not wear Heavy armor made it my favorite Wilderness Warrior class. Without it I'm refluffing ranger spells at not spells (and being annoyed at having to use the spell system at all) or refluffing ritual spells on a Totem Warrior.

The Scout Rogue is fine for those that want it. I'm glad they got it, but I want a Wilderness Warrior not a Wilderness Rogue.

 

[GlassJaw]

The Scout Rogue is fine for those that want it. I'm glad they got it, but I want a Wilderness Warrior not a Wilderness Rogue.

Why not both?

I'm still of the belief that the subclass system will support "generic" subclasses, or subclasses that would work for multiple classes. I've done some brainstorming on this as a side project but haven't had much time to devote to it yet.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Why not both?

I'm still of the belief that the subclass system will support "generic" subclasses, or subclasses that would work for multiple classes. I've done some brainstorming on this as a side project but haven't had much time to devote to it yet.

I literally said I'm glad those that wanted the Scout Rogue got it. I was expressing that I personally prefer one over the other. Never once did I say "Everybody should only have the one I like".

So I don't understand why you're asking me "Why not both?"

 

[Horwath]

So, to be a decent ranger...you have to multiclass 3 levels in rogue

 

[guachi]

Level six rogue scout - six skills at expertise.
Level six fighter - four skills total.

WTB: scout fighter.

Fighter is the most played class. It needs the most options.

 

[Morrus]

No embedded video, transcript, or even a brief intro?