Talk:Scoundrel (3.5e Class)

Ratings

Ganteka Future is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.

I'd like to like this class. It's interesting and I've played a character full-classed in it (at 7th level so far) and building another along with a previous one-shot test and...making a character in this class is unusually unfriendly and difficult. I ran into a problem of constantly needing feats with BAB+1 requirements that you'd need at first level to be most effective/fulfill your character basics when you have the capacity to actually get them and simply be unable to get them because of that. The class basically demands you use Dexterity with having Eager Strike and Sneak Attack to get the drop on foes quickly, but doesn't provide any means of Weapon Finesse, so that's a feat spent just to use the class. In general I found I had to split my ability modifiers into three primary stats (Dexterity for attack and AC, Intelligence to play the skill game and Charisma to actually be good at those skills competitively to be a scoundrel). Average human Strength and Wisdom with just slightly above average Constitution with 32 point buy basically means (oh, and we house-ruled a d8) having to spend basically every feat I had (and took two flaws) just to pull-off a bare-bones functional character for what I was going for at 5th level, house-ruling away some prerequisites and getting extra house-ruled bonus feats. This class is starved just to do what it should out of the box. Which is a shame, because as I said, I'd like to like it. Currently, the theme of making a character in this class is "sacrifices", because you're really going to have to focus on what you absolutely need rather than enjoying picking what you want for fun. Also, we house-ruled the refresh for maneuvers to refresh one as a move action. I mention all this house-ruling for a reason... because the DM was the author of the article.

Leziad likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.

I really want to like this class more. However it has a few problems, for one medium bab and greatly delayed sneak attack progression make it almost strictly inferior to the rogue. Now the maneuvers should make up for it but the recovery method is plain bad (as swordsage, please waste a feat so it not horrible!). Considering how they get no bonus feats having to spend one to use your main class feature properly is just cruel. The specialized maneuvers look fun, sadly since they need to be readied as normal they compete with the discipline maneuvers, which mean by level 7 or so you will stop using your specialized maneuvers entirely. Recommendation: A simple fix would be to give them good base attack bonus and make their recovery mechanism as a simple move action. Not so easy fix would be reviewing the specialized maneuvers and make them scale better, which would involve probably dividing them in levels. The specialized maneuvers grew on me, as some are actually useful for the entire game. I also approve of adding weapon finesse a as bonus feat at 1st level.

Swordsage recovery, really?

I fail to understand why you use the worst form of recovery in existence for this class, considering that this class can't even mitigate for it using Adaptive Style due to its prerequisites. Please change it to hard-wire the benefits of Adaptive Style into this class' recovery. For the children. - MisterSinister 19:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Already spoke to you this in chat, but for general FYI... I actually dislike the swordsage mechanic and often houserule or handwave it elsewhere. But since my games =/= other games I stuck with the WotC method. Anyway I'll slip it into the adaptive section. -- Eiji-kun 20:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Sample Encounter

Hi, would you mind if I added the sample encounter? It's the only thing that looks unfinished here, and I've been wanting to finish the Complete Sublime to the extent that it can be done.

I was thinking on something like: The Painstalker (3.5e NPC).--Eromythic (talk) 23:13, 13 February 2022 (UTC)