Talk:Spyglass Scout (3.5e Class)

Balance Point

This class needs one, an I'm tentatively suggesting Moderate, although Low could also be possible. Sneak Attack plus no other sources of combat damage and not a huge amount of utility and no UMD isn't exactly keeping all the greatest virtues of the rogue chassis. - TG Cid (talk) 12:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

-Ah, I wasn't finished, yet! Look again. I've added many abilities. Does this offset the problems you mentioned? Or does it still seem too weak?

I wouldn't say it's a question of too weak or too strong; it's all relative based on the balance range you are trying to achieve. So is it Very High, even with the addition of Hide Party and the like? Probably not, especially given the number of divinations and such that can simply reveal you without effort in a Very High game with casters everywhere. But is it bad to be a Moderate level class? No, not really. If it is to get there, though, it may need a little bit of a boost. I think the meat of this class could be crunched into ten or so levels that look like so:

1. Spyglass, Sneak Attack +1d6, Track, Trapfinding
2. Woodland Stride, Trap Sense (scaling to equal one half of class level)
3. Sneak Attack +2d6, Unentangle
4. Evasion, Camouflage
5. Sneak Attack +3d6, Leave No Trace
6. Hide in Plain Sight
7. Sneak Attack +4d6, Improved Evasion
8. Calm Animals
9. Sneak Attack +5d6, Swift Unentangle
10. Hide Party

I may have left some things out, but that seems like the crux of it. My primary concern is that some of the things I omitted (the +2 bonuses to skills, for example) are just weak to the point of me not even factoring them into a crunch. I would like to see more of a scouting theme in here; the spyglass is given at first level but no other part of the class really keys off it. Instead it becomes a cross between a ranger and a rogue while not really measuring up to either (which is saying something given the ranger's relative weakness when compared to casters and such.

I think some actual scouting/spotting abilities would be a nice addition. For example, if the Spyglass Scout could be used as a spotter to coordinate the ranged attacks of allies. - TG Cid (talk) 15:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Eh, give them a ring of blink and they can do as well as a rogue apparently can. --Ghostwheel (talk) 15:35, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

So apparently a ring of blinking is the equivalent of Use Magic Device now. Anyone with SA can use it and become awesome. Fair enough. - TG Cid (talk) 15:46, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

By the way, I added UMD. Why not. I'm not clear on who qualifies for that one, but this class isn't exactly a powerhouse, so I don't see a problem.

I agree.

Good points. I do think that it might be something I could compress into fewer levels. It helps to know I'm not the only person who thinks so.

I like the +2 enhancements as little extras, just to make the class more attractive than, say, a rogue taking the track feat. But those bonuses aren't meant to be impressive, just extra.

I'll make some changes after more comments come my way. Thanks for the input.