Gonna play a scout. I can hear the other players whining already...

[Davelozzi]

Am I correct in guessing that the scout is a new base class from Complete Adventurer?

 

[Seeten]

You are correct Dave. The rogue excels at combat, in a different way than the Scout. At higher levels, a rogue can multi-sneak-attack foes, and can get his sneak every round with feints/flank. the sneak dmg far outstrips the Scouts, and is easy to do more than a few sneaks in a single round, for tons more dmg. If the issue is combat, the Scout does NOT completely outdo a rogue there.

A well built rogue is a vicious and vile combat monster. Then you have skills.

I think Scouts are neat and interesting, but I dont think, at all, they are all a rogue is and a bag of chips. Hit dies and ac bonuses and all are nice, but 6d6 sneak attack 3 times in a round is outrageous. One 3d6 attack at comparable level doesnt thrill me terribly.

Can a Scout take a rogues niche in a group? Yes, but I think thats the point. To allow for Ranger, Scout, Druid, Sorceror to take the place of Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard as a nonstandard party, and still enable your group to take on the majority of challenges. So your fellow players dont say, MAKE A ROGUE!

I dont see this power creep, either. The only class I read in the completes that was outright overpowered IMO is the Warlock. That class is nuts. Everything else has been same or worse than a standard class. Scout not being an exception.

 

[dagger]

Able Learner feat from Races of Destiny would help out a Scout quite a bit.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

My experience has been different. Thus far, nearly all the rogues I've seen in play have emphasized the Tumbling, Balancing, Moving Silently, Hiding aspect of a rogue's skill list. The other stuff is for bards. A Scout is better at that. The rogue needs to contribute well in combat, a d8 hit die, AC bonus, and fighter feats certainly contribute to that. Picking Locks? Our nickname for the fighter's greataxe is "the other key." As things stand now if the rogue flubs the open lock check, we use "the other key" or a Knock spell. So no Open Locks isn't a huge hit. As FireLance has pointed out, the Scout has a lot of ways of dealing with traps other than Disable Device.

There are some few areas in which a rogue can still do better than a scout, but they are few, in my experience.No. They will have plenty of chances to shine, if they specifically build their rogue to do the things a scout can't. Because in any area the scout is proficient, the scout seems to be better.

This is more an aspect of people limiting the horizons of the Rogue class, than the scout eclipsing it. "The other stuff is for bards" is an issue of taste and play preference, not a mechanical truth in any sense.

And as for contributing in combat, by the time the Scout gets all his bonus feats, his bonus to armour class and +5d6 damage, the Rogue is dropping 10d6 extra damage in a sneak attack, and he's using his choice of 4 different bonus abilities.

And those special abilities are very strong. 2 points of Strength damage with every hit is a potent ability, and the Opportunist ability is very strong in any party where the Rogue and the primary melee character have learned to mesh tactics - done right, that's a freebie sneak attack every round.

And if bonus feats are the primary concern, the Rogue can skip the preset special abilities and get 4 bonus feats of his choice - the same number the Scout gains - and his choices aren't limited the way the Scout's are.


The Scout's a good class, there's no doubt about that, and a viable Rogue alternative in a wilderness-heavy game, but it's not a replacement by any means.

 

[Driddle]

Scout/Rogue multiclassing mix?

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

I am currently playing a Druid/Scout multiclass... (well, she will be a Druid/Scout multi once I level her up... just taking my first level in Scout).

This may be a question for the rules forum, but if she had a Speed bow, could she get two attacks in a round and use the Skirmish ability?

 

[MrFilthyIke]

"Well, guys, there's this trap into the last room of the dungeon. I guess that's where all the treasure is. Looks like a pit trap. With my speed bonus and my Jump ranks, I ought to be able to clear it easily."

"Well, guys, there's this trap into the last room of the dungeon. I guess that's where all the treasure is. It looks like a scything blade trap. With my skirmish ability and 5 ranks of Tumble, I should have a +8 bonus to AC if I run by it and try to avoid it. Wish me luck!"

"Well, guys, there's this trap into the last room of the dungeon. I guess that's where all the treasure is. It looks like the trapmakers installed a hidden switch bypass element. If I press this button, we should all be safe."

"Well, guys, there's this trap into the last room of the dungeon. I guess that's where all the treasure is. It looks like an acid blast explosive runes. I might be able to avoid all the damage with my Evasion ability, but maybe the cleric should cast resist energy on me first, just in case."

"Well, guys, there's this trap into the last room of the dungeon. I guess that's where all the treasure is. It's pressure plate activated, so don't step beyond the chalk line I've drawn on the floor. The corridor wall looks pretty sturdy, though, so why don't you guys stay on the alert for trouble while I make some handholds and footholds with these pitons."

A quote so great, it bears repeating.

 

[Estlor]

There are some few areas in which a rogue can still do better than a scout, but they are few, in my experience.No. They will have plenty of chances to shine, if they specifically build their rogue to do the things a scout can't. Because in any area the scout is proficient, the scout seems to be better.

I agree, though, that a rogue built as a face-man wouldn't have this problem. I just don't see rogues being built this way, in my experience. I see far more bards built this way.

Wow, you just repeated the Bard complaints ad nauseum. And considering people don't accuse Bards of power creep, that's a pretty GOOD argument for the Scout being fine as written.

That's the thing - classes like the rogue and the bard (and to an extent the fighter) are VERY flexible. You don't have the luxury of building them however you want when you join a party, you build them to fit the needs of a party on the whole. Would you build a sneaky bard in a party with a rogue? No, just like you wouldn't build a healing bard with a cleric or a "blasting" bard with a wizard or sorcerer. If you have a scout in the party, you build your fighter as something other than an archer and your rogue as more than a trapfinding disarmer. If you try to fill the niche of a class with a generalist class, you're going to lose EVERY TIME. However, the balancing strength of the generalist class IS it's ability to be general. You have the opportunity to say, "So what, Mr. Scout. Can you use any magic item you find? Can you talk someone out of killing you? Let's see you take advantage of flanking."

Building a "scout" rogue with a scout in the party is just irresponsible character development, IMHO.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

This may be a question for the rules forum, but if she had a Speed bow, could she get two attacks in a round and use the Skirmish ability?

Since you need to make a full attack to use the speed bow's power, then, no, unless you find a way to move 10 feet as a free/swift action

AR

 

[Desdichado]

If your character's female, you get great cookies? Sign me up for three boxes of Thin Mints, please.

Really, I agree with PatrickY; the Scout seems to step on the Ranger much moreso than the rogue. But, since the Ranger doesn't really do it for me in terms of meeting the stealthy wilderness hunter type, I'm always on the lookout for classes that can serve as alt.rangers anyway.