D&D 5E The Scout Rogue - how did it work out?

[Greg K]

On another note, how smooth is the transition between rogue and scout at level three? I've always banned the scout sub-class because I worry the transformation is too jarring. On the other hand, I'd really like to be able to offer it to my players in the new world I'm creating.
As I wrote in a prior thread after Xanathar's was released and in which you were a participant, the transition bugged me. Like the Valor Bard which was called out in an episode of Mearls's Happy Fun Hour, it breaks guidelines on both class design and subclass acquisition that were set during the development of the PHB after several classes were created.
Additionally, I posted my solutions in the same thread (which was prior to me deciding not to run 5e) , I created an optional level 1 Wilderness Rogue variant that swaps specific skills and one of two tool proficiencies for Thieves' Tools. I had also created an alternate class ability that can be swapped for Thieves Cant.

 

[THEMNGMNT]

I for one am still interested in hearing how the Scout Rogue worked out.

 

[Ancalagon]

Well, unless you have specific questions about it, I can't tell you much more.

I loved it, it is my favorite rogue subclass, skirmisher has been great and i love having the speed boost. I only got to level 12, so didn't get to have fun with ambush master, but for a rogue gaining advantage on initiative and advantage on your target for your allies is a nice treat. It makes hitting the solo BBEG really important on the first round I would think.

If you are considering it, I would recommend it.

First you are one of the very few people that gave actual play feedback (so thank you for that!), but most of the thread has been more speculative, or complaining about certain particularities of the rules (that really aren't specific to the scout).

Second - is it viable in a non-wilderness focused campaign?

 

[DND_Reborn]

First you are one of the very few people that gave actual play feedback (so thank you for that!), but most of the thread has been more speculative, or complaining about certain particularities of the rules (that really aren't specific to the scout).

Second - is it viable in a non-wilderness focused campaign?

Well, you're welcome. Unfortunately we do tend to get caught up in tangents in a thread--

Are you talking more city/social or dungeon crawls or what?

 

[nogray]

I, too, am playing a scout. The campaign is only at level 5, though, and we started at level 3, so there hasn't been a whole lot of play time.

I was perfectly viable in the city encounters; rogues are just that awesome, anyway. I am looking forward to the next phases of the campaign, though, as we seem to be about to travel overland for a while.

Skirmish does compete with uncanny dodge, though, so since I picked that up this past level, the skirmishing has not been as frequent.

 

[cbwjm]

Honestly, if I’m going Eldritch Knight, I’d probably either go Human + Mage Initiate, or take a race that gave spells (ie High Elf or Tiefling).

Which is great if those are the races you want to be, but if I want to play a dwarf EK channelling magic into his warhammer, I'm out of luck on that until level 3. This is my main problem with classes that don't gain their subclass at level 1. I feel like, if you know you want to be a magical warrior (or a scout, in reference to the thread), you should be able to start as that instead of waiting a couple of levels.

 

[Ancalagon]

I was perfectly viable in the city encounters; rogues are just that awesome, anyway.

That does not surprise me in the least. Thank you for the feedback.

Skirmish does compete with uncanny dodge, though, so since I picked that up this past level, the skirmishing has not been as frequent.

Hmmm.... that's a bit of a problem eh? :/

 

[Guest 6801328]

Level 1-2 in 5e are... training wheels. Nothing wrong in starting at level 3 if everyone knows the rules. I perfectly know what you mean though, and it's a problem with several classes. Eldritch knight, I'm looking at you....

As I just mentioned in another thread, I had my monk use a staff for levels 1-2, but fluffed it as a wooden sword. Upon reaching level 3 her sensei deemed her worthy of using a real longsword.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Hmmm.... that's a bit of a problem eh? :/

Not so much in my experience.

Keep in mind you use your reaction at the end of an enemy's turn. So, if an enemy attacks you an never hits, you aren't using Uncanny Dodge and can instead use your reaction to move away.

Now, depending on how your DM runs the enemies, this next part might or might not work. Some DMs rule all enemies are acting simultaneously, it is just that the DM must determine the results of those actions one at a time. If, the DM doesn't do it this way, if you have three enemies nearby and one is able to move close enough, attacks you and then ends it's turn, you can use your reaction before the other enemies can move in. This has save my PC from being overwhelmed a few times and I found it very useful.

Rogues are notorious when it comes to action economy. If I Uncanny Dodge, I can't get a Opportunity Attack (and possibly more sneak attack damage); if I two-weapon fight, I can't use my bonus action for Cunning Actions, etc. You have to pick and choose and let the situation dictate what is the best option and when is the best time to spend your precious bonus actions and reactions.

 

[Todd Roybark]

If that feels authoritarian, that's fine. Then I'm authoritarian. If the game wasn't fun, my players would have quit. I'm also very specific about the potential players I choose to invite. Some might call that gatekeeping. If so, I'm a gatekeeper. I simply find it prudent

That is fine...many games are ran like that. As I have gotten older, my priorities as a gamer have altered. I care less about making the perfect rules set, or having the "correct aesthetics".
I care more about getting myself as the DM, out of the way of player choices.
It is why I prefer rules lite systems..I wouldn't want to go back to 3e or Pathfinder.

I also want to apologize for using the term authoritarian. It was late/early in the morning and a less loaded term would have better fit the tone I was intending. I remember yoi detailing some of the characters your group had, and they sounded wonderfully cool...so it peaked my curiosity to find you also prefer to gatekeeper content.