Player Core 2 Preview: The Swashbuckler, Remastered

Ok, my interest is piqued. I look forward to seeing the finished product.

I like that picture. Does this mean that Swashbucklers get fun things to do with bucklers?

Good addition with the Bravado trait. Let's hope that the "I activate my powers with skill checks" class gets an auto-scaling skill.

I wasn't meaning to have swashs to gain panache for free, I was saying that swashs should recharge panache with any skill actions regadless of your subclass

So, again, I think if we look at the archetypal concept the class embodies, "gain panache from any skill" moves away from that archetype. Making a RK check? Administering first aid? Etc. In a less rules-focused RPG this would be the place where the game would say "GM awards panache for any appropriate action" and specific skill checks would not have to be identified - it would be about how you used the skill rather than what skill you used. But I don't think anyone wants that for PF2E; for this system, and given the massive success of organized play, nobody really wants a core class mechanic that uses 'GM discretion' to decide whether it works or not.

(optimally, also giving you auto-scaling in that skill)

Yeah, we don't know yet whether it will be "temporary panache on fail instead of auto-scaling" or "temporary panache on fail AND auto-scaling." We just gotta wait I guess.

It feels like many people forget how classes are designed in PF-2E. The Swashbuckler is and this might sound crazy to some. NOT a skill class, it's a combat first class like Fighter, Barbarian and Ranger. It doesn't fill the skill archetype like Rogue, Investigator or Thaumaturge. That is where you guys are missing why they don't get auto-scaling skills. I won't lie and say Inventor isn't weird for breaking the mold with auto-crafting.

Even the Playtest Commander is skill-forced with auto-warfare lore and high INT. Most 8 Hit Point classes that aren't magical are skill focused, having 10 Hit Points means your a full combat martial.

So as far as the Bravado trait goes I see them going one of two ways with it. ways I will call the Sorcerer path and the Druid Path

The Sorcerer path is all the actions that grant panache have Bravado for all swashbucklers. HOWEVER, you get a bonus to the trait specific to your style, or some extra effect from it.

The Druid Path is yes the Bravado trait is limited, by default, to your style's method and tumble through, an a lot of existing feats have it added, BUT there will also be feats that allow you to gain bravado the way other style's do.

Bravado sounds amazing. My read is that Swashbuckler is almost certainly going to get Bravado on nearly all of the actions that generate panache, just because it would be confusing otherwise.

Twirling Throw sounded amazing when I didn't read it very carefully, and then I read it more carefully and saw that it has the Finisher trait.

Ouch.

No thanks. :(

Bravado sounds amazing. My read is that Swashbuckler is almost certainly going to get Bravado on nearly all of the actions that generate panache, just because it would be confusing otherwise.

Twirling Throw sounded amazing when I didn't read it very carefully, and then I read it more carefully and saw that it has the Finisher trait.

Ouch.

No thanks. :(

Yeah, I think that complication is being seriously overlooked here.

Even in isolation, that throwing finisher is unique (in a bad way) in that the finisher enables an entirely new and separate form of attack compared to the regular strikes, throwing at considerable range. All the other finishers are enhancements to strikes you otherwise normally perform. If you take Twirling Throw, you cannot rely on the finisher to be available at all times, and consequently must otherwise invest in a thrown weapon build if they wish for throwing to be their main shtick. This means that the weapon-return part is nearly worthless. Leaving the finisher to grant the privilege of a long range in exchange for burning your precious finisher. This leaves the Feat as a good(ish) option for PCs that want to just barely dip into the thrown playstyle with a weapon trait; and means that the Feat is basically a trap option for those PCs who are building a throwing weapon character.

Major yikes.

Furthermore, the L2 and L4 finisher Feat options that already exist are far more appealing generally, though they are melee. "Strike to hit two foes in one attack" and "inflict off-guard until the end of your next turn on hit" are both far and away more appealing than this throwing Feat. It is hard to picture the throwing-curious player who would spend a Feat for this inferior option that is in direct competition.

I really don't know what Paizo has against thrown weapon builds, but they really seem to consider the power budget of the option far, far higher than players do. Especially when the propulsive trait exists for many ranged weapons, I really do not understand this bit of their design.

exequiel759 wrote:

I wasn't meaning to have swashs to gain panache for free, I was saying that swashs should recharge panache with any skill actions regadless of your subclass

So, again, I think if we look at the archetypal concept the class embodies, "gain panache from any skill" moves away from that archetype. Making a RK check? Administering first aid? Etc.

On a second thought, there's probably some actions that shouldn't give panache, though I think keeping the current actions that grant panache and giving them to all swashsbucklers wouldn't be a bad idea. If you want to sometimes demoralize a foe I don't see why wouldn't you gain panache frim that if you aren't a braggart. A scoundrel rogue can still use Dread Striker to also proc off-guard with demoralize too. This + bravado could allow a certain playstyle in which you don't focus on any skill in particular but are decent enough in multiple of them, allowing you to be somewhat versatile though less accurate skills-wise.

It feels like many people forget how classes are designed in PF-2E. The Swashbuckler is and this might sound crazy to some. NOT a skill class, it's a combat first class like Fighter, Barbarian and Ranger. It doesn't fill the skill archetype like Rogue, Investigator or Thaumaturge. That is where you guys are missing why they don't get auto-scaling skills. I won't lie and say Inventor isn't weird for breaking the mold with auto-crafting.

Even the Playtest Commander is skill-forced with auto-warfare lore and high INT. Most 8 Hit Point classes that aren't magical are skill focused, having 10 Hit Points means your a full combat martial.

I would hardly call a class that requires skill checks to have its class features active not be a skill-based class. Thaumaturge isn't a skill class, its an Esoteric Lore class, with tome thaums being more of a skill class in general. Inventor is similar with Crafting. Giving a swashbuckler auto-scaling in either Acrobatics or its style's skill doesn't make it a skill monkey, it would put them on par with the other classes in the system that require skill checks to activate their class features. If those two extra 2 HP are limiting the swashbuckler then they can take them away for all I care. I don't know why a swashbuckler has to be more meaty when if anything it would make more sense for the class to have 8 + Con HP per level since most people would assume a swash should be more "nimble" and not as "bulky" HP-wise.

On a second thought, there's probably some actions that shouldn't give panache, though I think keeping the current actions that grant panache and giving them to all swashsbucklers wouldn't be a bad idea.

Which actions will have bravado? It's a mystery wrapped in a riddle surrounded by an enigma...which will be solved in August. :) To me, it didn't sound like "every style can now use every other style's panache-generators." What it sounded like is "Bravado is going to be added to a bunch of skill checks that are not currently panache-generators for anyone." But we will have to see. And heck, it could be both!

I would hardly call a class that requires skill checks to have its class features active not be a skill-based class.

It's kind of in the middle, isn't it? You need to *have* the skill and possibly keep the skill up to some extent, otherwise you might find yourself getting more and more check-10 crit fails. But the fact that you don't have to succeed means you probably don't have to minimax your character around your panache generator in order to keep the swash playable. You can take that attribute bump in Str or Wis instead of Cha if you want to, and still feel like your Performance-for-panache generator is in good shape.

It feels like many people forget how classes are designed in PF-2E. The Swashbuckler is and this might sound crazy to some. NOT a skill class, it's a combat first class like Fighter, Barbarian and Ranger. It doesn't fill the skill archetype like Rogue, Investigator or Thaumaturge. That is where you guys are missing why they don't get auto-scaling skills. I won't lie and say Inventor isn't weird for breaking the mold with auto-crafting.

Even the Playtest Commander is skill-forced with auto-warfare lore and high INT. Most 8 Hit Point classes that aren't magical are skill focused, having 10 Hit Points means your a full combat martial.

The issue with Swashbuckler is not that it should be a Skill class. It's that it has two skills that you are essentially locked into. Acrobatics and whatever the skill is for your Style. With base skill increases, you don't have room to increase another skill to Expert until 11th level. They have less skill flexibility than a Fighter. Braggarts are Intimidation and Acrobatics until 11th level, etc. Maybe Bravado will make it less automatic to take Acrobatics on every build, but as it stands before the remaster, this is where we are. The way around that is taking the Acrobat dedication to get scaling Acrobatics and at least free up one skill choice.

Part of the design of 2E was to encourage players to take options to do a lot of different things. Designing a class that has more than half of its Skill increases locked into two skills is counter to that idea.

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

It feels like many people forget how classes are designed in PF-2E. The Swashbuckler is and this might sound crazy to some. NOT a skill class, it's a combat first class like Fighter, Barbarian and Ranger. It doesn't fill the skill archetype like Rogue, Investigator or Thaumaturge. That is where you guys are missing why they don't get auto-scaling skills. I won't lie and say Inventor isn't weird for breaking the mold with auto-crafting.

Even the Playtest Commander is skill-forced with auto-warfare lore and high INT. Most 8 Hit Point classes that aren't magical are skill focused, having 10 Hit Points means your a full combat martial.

The issue with Swashbuckler is not that it should be a Skill class. It's that it has two skills that you are essentially locked into. Acrobatics and whatever the skill is for your Style. With base skill increases, you don't have room to increase another skill to Expert until 11th level. They have less skill flexibility than a Fighter. Braggarts are Intimidation and Acrobatics until 11th level, etc. Maybe Bravado will make it less automatic to take Acrobatics on every build, but as it stands before the remaster, this is where we are. The way around that is taking the Acrobat dedication to get scaling Acrobatics and at least free up one skill choice.

Part of the design of 2E was to encourage players to take options to do a lot of different things. Designing a class that has more than half of its Skill increases locked into two skills is counter to that idea.

Exactly. Even Barbarians and Fighters aren't trying to gun for Athletics all the time. I'm currently playing a Recall Knowledge Fighter who's going all in on Lores and Occultism leveraging their level 1 Recall + Strike feat to give info on various baddies.

But Swashbucklers are dependent on their Skills especially lower levels to get the Panache going. Which means we can forget about Swashbucklers attempting to deviate from the same skill choices. They are so monotonous to build for other roles. All that high dex but struggles to be able to invest in Thievery or Stealth because they want to boost their Style skills.

A Swashbuckler who does not max Acrobatics and the key skill for the fighting style they chose sounds odd to me.

If the player does not want to play a PC that maxes those, why play a Swashbuckler ?

The bravado trait specifies you gain panache from immune targets, doesn't that free up Acrobatics for people who want more skill flexibility? Why Tumble Through a zombie if I can just mock them relentlessly? (Haven't played a Swash so I might be missing something obvious)

Thank goodness. Playing a braggart swashbuckler through the Slithering was one of the worst experiences I've ever had in PF2e. It wasn't even the oozes that were frustrating. That was almost four years ago, and I still fail to convince myself to ever play swashbuckler again.

Thank goodness. Playing a braggart swashbuckler through the Slithering was one of the worst experiences I've ever had in PF2e. It wasn't even the oozes that were frustrating. That was almost four years ago, and I still fail to convince myself to ever play swashbuckler again.

Now you can much more easily boost that precision damage that they're immune to.

MaxAstro wrote:

Bravado sounds amazing. My read is that Swashbuckler is almost certainly going to get Bravado on nearly all of the actions that generate panache, just because it would be confusing otherwise.

Twirling Throw sounded amazing when I didn't read it very carefully, and then I read it more carefully and saw that it has the Finisher trait.

Ouch.

No thanks. :(

Yeah, I think that complication is being seriously overlooked here.

Even in isolation, that throwing finisher is unique (in a bad way) in that the finisher enables an entirely new and separate form of attack compared to the regular strikes, throwing at considerable range. All the other finishers are enhancements to strikes you otherwise normally perform. If you take Twirling Throw, you cannot rely on the finisher to be available at all times, and consequently must otherwise invest in a thrown weapon build if they wish for throwing to be their main shtick. This means that the weapon-return part is nearly worthless. Leaving the finisher to grant the privilege of a long range in exchange for burning your precious finisher. This leaves the Feat as a good(ish) option for PCs that want to just barely dip into the thrown playstyle with a weapon trait; and means that the Feat is basically a trap option for those PCs who are building a throwing weapon character.

Major yikes.

Furthermore, the L2 and L4 finisher Feat options that already exist are far more appealing generally, though they are melee. "Strike to hit two foes in one attack" and "inflict off-guard until the end of your next turn on hit" are both far and away more appealing than this throwing Feat. It is hard to picture the throwing-curious player who would spend a Feat for this inferior option that is in direct competition.

I really don't know what Paizo has against thrown weapon builds, but they really seem to consider the power budget of the option far, far higher than players do. Especially when the propulsive trait exists for many ranged...

It's a perfectly fine feat if you want a ranged finisher. I don't see a problem

A Swashbuckler who does not max Acrobatics and the key skill for the fighting style they chose sounds odd to me.

If the player does not want to play a PC that maxes those, why play a Swashbuckler ?

I can easily think of Swashbuckler concepts that wouldn't need or want Acrobatics (or at least, not to max it. Plenty would be fine with Trained and a high dex, if they didn't need Acrobatics for Panache), but if you aren't increasing it currently, your class doesn't function normally. You at least have some choice for the second skill by choosing your Style.

The point, though, is that every other class has more skill flexibility than Swashbuckler. Even classes that rely heavily on a skill typically only rely on one skill.

A Swashbuckler who does not max Acrobatics and the key skill for the fighting style they chose sounds odd to me.

If the player does not want to play a PC that maxes those, why play a Swashbuckler ?

If I want to play a fencer I shouldn't be forced into taking Acrobatics as a second skill. I chose fencer because I wanted to feint, but I do need Acrobatics too in case I can't feint a target. As I said in an earlier comment, a thaumaturge doesn't have this problem and can exploit a weakness even on failure, and an inventor also can't run into a situation in which they can't overdrive. Even a scoundrel or mastermind rogue if they can't feint or RK for whatever reason they can still flank with their allies, which doesn't require the player to spend resources into it. A pre-Remaster swashbuckler is AFAIK the only class that can run into an encounter and not have access to its class features, and while the new bravado helps with that, the problem of swashs being locked into two skills like Ferious Thune said remains because you still have to be somewhat decent at them.

If Tumble Through has bravado then it somewhat alleviates that, because a Dex-based class is going to be naturally good at Acrobatics even if just trained (and more so if the +1 to checks that generate panache when you already have panache is changed to work when you don't have it instead) but beign locked into a skill in a class that requires that skill to work feels bad and I don't see a reason why, even with bravado, to have one auto-scaling skill with a swash when there's other classes that do have it and are way more efficient and have less prone to run into situations in which they are left unable to do anything about it.

Also, a swashbuckler has more skill feats than an average character. Wouldn't that make it a skill class too?

A Swashbuckler who does not max Acrobatics and the key skill for the fighting style they chose sounds odd to me.

If the player does not want to play a PC that maxes those, why play a Swashbuckler ?

That's exactly the point. It is a non-choice. You get the same increases as everyone else and they're all going to be going into the same exact skills.

Swashbuckler pre-remaster is a mess because you are spamming the same two skills to get panache.

Which gets me to another slightly related point. Wouldn't a real swashbuckler spice up their rotation?

And in a videogame context, I do not remember a single action game stylish protagonist that was a spammer. Dante is pretty much a swashbuckler in spirit with his fighting style. He isn't getting SSS rank by using the same abilities over and over again. You are rewarded for trying to be as cool as he is in cutscenes. One of his ultimate moves in DmC 5 can't even be performed work if you aren't at a high style ranking.

I hope Bravado feats alleviate this skill spam feeling. Having other activities to generate panache and not be shut down by mindless precision immune foes would be incredible.

It's a perfectly fine feat if you want a ranged finisher. I don't see a problem

Its because it doesn't have a lot of synergy with people who want to take it. There are three primary people who want this:

1.) Thrower's Bandolier User (throws lots of weapons)
2.) Thrown Switch Hitter User (throws 1 weapon and needs it to return)
3.) Melee Focus with throwing as a backup ('might' throw their 1 weapon)

The feat doesn't interact with quickdraw so player #1 can't use it same turn to draw/throw unless they spend an action (eliminating the use case of quickdraw), they use shurikens, or they were lucky enough to quick draw for a melee strike and can use the finisher as their second strike (but its much more likely you crit fail here since its your second strike).

Player #2 needs a way to throw when not doing a finisher so if they're investing in a returning rune the feat is redundant (it only adds 20-40ft range). When you think about thrown weapons in existence there are already 60ft 1d6 weapons (i.e., boomerang), so you're spending a 4th level feat to buy a L0 weapon trait (that is very feel bad).

Player #3 isn't going to spend 2 feats (flying blade + this feat) on something they only plan on doing part time. Even if they did it has to be their primary weapon because there is no way to share runes with a thrown weapon in the game. If that is the case there is no way you want that crit fail effect because your mainline weapon is now up to 60ft away.

So really the only way to use this feat is be player #1 and dedicate a good portion of your thrower's bandolier to shurikens so you don't get stuck having to waste actions drawing even after spending a feat on quickdraw. Since quickdraw isn't in the class this competes with when you'd take that feat via rogue/ranger/gunslinger so this drives you to selecting duelist as an archetype (which duplicates large parts of a swashbuckler's existing kit so sort of sucky to take it). Also, lots of folks don't want to use shurikens and will be put off by this (I don't think that is a big deal since you can re-contextualize a shuriken to daggers or w/e without issue IMO)

TLDR it just mechanically fails to interact well with the intended players that want it. It feels like it was written in isolation without consideration for the rest of the rules or items available to thrown weapon users.

I've never really gotten the locked in skill increases complaint. I'm more receptive to arguing the Swashbuckler should get automatic increases to compensate for their lack of raw power in combat. And it's a little awkward only being able to increase one of your two skills at a time.

But conceptually, I don't understand why you'd play the class if you weren't interested in being as acrobatic as possible. If you just want a fencer, free hand fights are hella good. You can use archetypes like Aldori Duelist to round out the flair. Finishers are unique to the swashbuckler, but most people found them underwhelming, and fighters have plenty of two action strikes which can cover a similar niche of devoting your whole turn to one big melee strike.

Which gets me to another slightly related point. Wouldn't a real swashbuckler spice up their rotation?

But this I agree with. The swashbuckler subclasses feel like they were made partially just so it had a subclass, and partially to make a complicated class a little easier to play by reducing turn to turn choices. It has never felt like a necessary balance restriction, and it creates a less dynamic gameplay loop.

It's not inconceivable that Quick Draw is now part of the Swashbuckler's kit in Player Core 2.

And in a videogame context, I do not remember a single action game stylish protagonist that was a spammer.

Really? You don't find a combo of button pushing that works really well and use it over and over again? Personally I think a lot of videogames are hugely repetitious. Movies and books can have their protagonists succeed by using different tricks all the time, but in these cases the author/director decides the outcome - not a heuristic. Deus sine Machina. :)

I think "many many action options that are equally good at beating the same opponent" is a very praiseworthy and ambitious goal for a TTRPG to have, but it's also difficult to design. I look forward to bravado creating more variety in skill use to create panache, but I'm guessing that no matter how many options Paizo gives us, acrobatics - i.e., "move across the battlefield in a way that gives me a bonus or them a penalty" is always going be a contender for MVP panache generator. It's just hard to avoid. Likewise for other tactics where a PC has invested so many proficiency and attribute bumps in it that they are 20-40% more likely to succeed at it than some other action: that's now the "repeat button combo" for them. Repetition of good tactics is probably not something a rules-heavy TTRPG can escape. You need a more 'theater of the mind' approach to get that.

***
The precision immune thing has not been addressed by the preview. I'm not sure it will be by PC2. We will have to see. As one of the other posters cynically noted, we may get lots of new and different ways to create a damage bonus to which many things are immune.

Now I really want to combine the recent Awakened Animal Ancestry and the new Swash Style to have my very own Rascally Rabbit character.

Given that "many of your swashbuckler styles might state that certain actions gain the bravado trait.", I'd guess that all the actions that give panache for current Styles will gain the Bravado trait,because it would be weird if only some did when they're all equal currently, and that the rascal will have an action called Dirty Trick that has the Bravado trait.

That'd leave tumble through (and improvised panache actions via DM discretion) as the weak points that don't give Panache when you fail.

it said "many", though - not "all".

So Bravado actions will be readily available to those who seek them, but there's the suggestion that at least one of the styles won't have one.

I note that the remaster has done a lot to strengthen initially weak builds. I'd expect to see that here, as well. For example, gymnast already has some pretty strong use cases. I wouldn't be surprised to see it lacking a built-in Bravado.

Man, the more I think about it, the more I like Twirling Throw. Throwing things across the battlefield doesn't really fit with my vision of a Swashbuckler... not as a regular attack thing. Even throwing Swashbucklers should be closer to the action, IMHO. But a Finisher? Yeah, the big throw as a Finisher, that works for me. Very cinematic.

Looking forward to getting more details on Bravado. Why isn't PC2 here yet, again? *grin*

Yeah, I think that complication is being seriously overlooked here.

Even in isolation, that throwing finisher is unique (in a bad way) in that the finisher enables an entirely new and separate form of attack compared to the regular strikes, throwing at considerable range. All the other finishers are enhancements to strikes you otherwise normally perform. If you take Twirling Throw, you cannot rely on the finisher to be available at all times, and consequently must otherwise invest in a thrown weapon build if they wish for throwing to be their main shtick. This means that the weapon-return part is nearly worthless. Leaving the finisher to grant the privilege of a long range in exchange for burning your precious finisher. This leaves the Feat as a good(ish) option for PCs that want to just barely dip into the thrown playstyle with a weapon trait; and means that the Feat is basically a trap option for those PCs who are building a throwing weapon character.

Major yikes.

Furthermore, the L2 and L4 finisher Feat options that already exist are far more appealing generally, though they are melee. "Strike to hit two foes in one attack" and "inflict off-guard until the end of your next turn on hit" are both far and away more appealing than this throwing Feat. It is hard to picture the throwing-curious player who would spend a Feat for this inferior option that is in direct competition.

I really don't know what Paizo has against thrown weapon builds, but they really seem to consider the power budget of the option far, far higher than players do. Especially when the propulsive trait exists for many ranged weapons, I really do not understand this bit of their design.

I think it's worth noting here that this is follow-on to another feat, that that other feat is also clearly doing something to enable a thrown weapon style in some fashion, and that we don't know what that other feat does. So... it might be a bit early to assume that this feat is broken for lack of certain fundamental functional requirements. We dont' currently know.

Now I really want to combine the recent Awakened Animal Ancestry and the new Swash Style to have my very own Rascally Rabbit character.

Puss in Boots is now entirely playable.

To be fair Sanity, Flying Blade is already published and there's no indication it is changing. It's pretty good on its own.

"You’ve learned to apply your flashy techniques to thrown weapons as easily as melee attacks. When you have panache, you apply your precise strike damage on ranged Strikes you make with a thrown weapon within that weapon’s first range increment. The thrown weapon must be an agile or finesse weapon. This also allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike for Confident Finisher and any other finisher that includes a Strike that can benefit from your precise strike."

TheWayofPie wrote:

And in a videogame context, I do not remember a single action game stylish protagonist that was a spammer.

Really? You don't find a combo of button pushing that works really well and use it over and over again? Personally I think a lot of videogames are hugely repetitious.

The specific game series TheWayofPie references, Devil May Cry, and similar games like Bayonetta or Hi Fi Rush, do their best to discourage that kind of spamming. You have a "style meter" which raises as you land combos and don't get hit. But the more you spam the same moves the less you get in the meter. Said meter determines how much rewards and currency you receive. While you can technically spam your way through the game, the game will tell you you're doing a bad job constantly.

To be fair Sanity, Flying Blade is already published and there's no indication it is changing. It's pretty good on its own.

"You’ve learned to apply your flashy techniques to thrown weapons as easily as melee attacks. When you have panache, you apply your precise strike damage on ranged Strikes you make with a thrown weapon within that weapon’s first range increment. The thrown weapon must be an agile or finesse weapon. This also allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike for Confident Finisher and any other finisher that includes a Strike that can benefit from your precise strike."

Ah. I'd missed that. I'm still pretty patchy on the swashbuckler feat list.

I expect that it will be changed, if only to allow for longer-ranged Twirling Throws to get precise strike damage.

...and, if that's true, then it means that Twirling Throw is basically just giving you the (high) chance of return and lifting the range penalties... because Flying Blade is *already* giving you the ability to pull a finisher with a thrown weapon.

...or maybe Twirling Throw is just a bit rubbish. I don't expect that that's what's going on, as it would be unusual to include a rubbish feat as the one feat you toss out on a preview like this, but I'll acknowledge that it's at least possible.

Wt Deceiver wrote:

Given that "many of your swashbuckler styles might state that certain actions gain the bravado trait.", I'd guess that all the actions that give panache for current Styles will gain the Bravado trait,because it would be weird if only some did when they're all equal currently, and that the rascal will have an action called Dirty Trick that has the Bravado trait.

That'd leave tumble through (and improvised panache actions via DM discretion) as the weak points that don't give Panache when you fail.

it said "many", though - not "all".

So Bravado actions will be readily available to those who seek them, but there's the suggestion that at least one of the styles won't have one.

I note that the remaster has done a lot to strengthen initially weak builds. I'd expect to see that here, as well. For example, gymnast already has some pretty strong use cases. I wouldn't be surprised to see it lacking a built-in Bravado.

Gymanst is easily the worst style. Its pretty much the only style that forces you to either generate panache and wait for next round to spend it or spend panache with a MAP penalty. It also easily has the worse feats out of all the styles (Flamboyant Athlete would be more useful if you could use it outside of combat). I played one from 1st to 6th level and honestly I didn't like it at all. I asked my GM to switch to fencer and while I still had a ton of problems with the class overall it felt way smoother to play overall. If, for whatever reason, you are playing a swashbuckler that keeps panache for as long as possible, then I guess gymnast is fine, but at that point I'd ask why you are not playing a fighter or Strength-based rogue instead.

Gymanst is easily the worst style. Its pretty much the only style that forces you to either generate panache and wait for next round to spend it or spend panache with a MAP penalty.

I don't think that makes it 'worst'. It is certainly the most different. But you already determined the standard combat strategy for Gymnast characters - gain Panache one round, then spend it the next.

Also, Gymnast has one of the best Panache generating actions of the set, so even those rounds where all you do is grapple/trip don't feel like much of a waste. There are non-Swashbuckler characters who build for grapple/trip even if it doesn't give any benefits other than the normal results of using those actions. The only one with comparable levels of popularity is Braggart using Demoralize. Feint and Bon Mot aren't bad, but isn't something that non-Swashbuckler characters tend to use unless it synergizes with another character. And Fascinate isn't worth mentioning as a combat strategy.

Gymanst is easily the worst style. Its pretty much the only style that forces you to either generate panache and wait for next round to spend it or spend panache with a MAP penalty. It also easily has the worse feats out of all the styles (Flamboyant Athlete would be more useful if you could use it outside of combat). I played one from 1st to 6th level and honestly I didn't like it at all. I asked my GM to switch to fencer and while I still had a ton of problems with the class overall it felt way smoother to play overall. If, for whatever reason, you are playing a swashbuckler that keeps panache for as long as possible, then I guess gymnast is fine, but at that point I'd ask why you are not playing a fighter or Strength-based rogue instead.

If you're focused on athletics maneuvers, then the circumstance bonus is nice, Agile Maneuvers brings some value to the table, and Derring-Do offers benefits like you just can't get anywhere else.

Admittedly, if the thing you want to do with your day is finishers, then gymnast isn't bringing much to the table... and there's this weird thing where it's kind of underwhelming until level 10 when it's suddenly totally not. That... okay, fair. That should probably get smoothed out. Still, if you're all about the grabbing and the tripping, then "Roll twice, almost every time" is still a hell of a drug.

Gymnast style actions target both reflex and fort, provide significant benefits most parties instead of just groups who target will saves, and can lock down enemies. They also get a sick synergy with derring do. They are also really interesting with the new claw dancer archetype, which lets them squeeze extra strikes into their non-finisher rounds. They are a bit janky, but they certainly aren't "easily the worst style."

Oh, but Agile Maneuvers is also pointless in the remaster so I expect it to be replaced.

They are also really interesting with the new claw dancer archetype, which lets them squeeze extra strikes into their non-finisher rounds.

goes and looks at clawdancer

Huh. That one's... really not bad.

...and yeah, it does have some clear synergies with gymnast swashbucklers. Wheeling Grab in particular has some obvious shiny, it has some clear athletics synergies (especially with grabs) and it's got a neat little bit of general swashbuckler synergy in abscission shards - gives you a nice post-finisher action, for those times that you were using something other than Bleeding Finisher. Also, both attacks are finesse, and the weapon profiles are really not bad for finesse weapons. Getting a nice stance-based unarmed attack in one feat rather than two is pretty shiny. Getting two different stance-based attacks is even better, and it has some pretty workable ways to shift into one or the other without additional actions, just because.

Oh, but Agile Maneuvers is also pointless in the remaster so I expect it to be replaced.

...or possibly to stack?

It feels like many people forget how classes are designed in PF-2E. The Swashbuckler is and this might sound crazy to some. NOT a skill class, it's a combat first class like Fighter, Barbarian and Ranger. It doesn't fill the skill archetype like Rogue, Investigator or Thaumaturge. That is where you guys are missing why they don't get auto-scaling skills.

I see what you're saying. Now hear me out.

Can Fighter do what it is known for without skill checks? What about Barb or Ranger?

And yet the Thaumaturge has auto-advancing Esoteric Lore because it kinda needs it to be good at Thaumaturging.

TheWayofPie wrote:

And in a videogame context, I do not remember a single action game stylish protagonist that was a spammer.

Really? You don't find a combo of button pushing that works really well and use it over and over again? Personally I think a lot of videogames are hugely repetitious. Movies and books can have their protagonists succeed by using different tricks all the time, but in these cases the author/director decides the outcome - not a heuristic. Deus sine Machina. :)

I think "many many action options that are equally good at beating the same opponent" is a very praiseworthy and ambitious goal for a TTRPG to have, but it's also difficult to design. I look forward to bravado creating more variety in skill use to create panache, but I'm guessing that no matter how many options Paizo gives us, acrobatics - i.e., "move across the battlefield in a way that gives me a bonus or them a penalty" is always going be a contender for MVP panache generator. It's just hard to avoid. Likewise for other tactics where a PC has invested so many proficiency and attribute bumps in it that they are 20-40% more likely to succeed at it than some other action: that's now the "repeat button combo" for them. Repetition of good tactics is probably not something a rules-heavy TTRPG can escape. You need a more 'theater of the mind' approach to get that.

***
The precision immune thing has not been addressed by the preview. I'm not sure it will be by PC2. We will have to see. As one of the other posters cynically noted, we may get lots of new and different ways to create a damage bonus to which many things are immune.

Pathfinder typically does it well enough thanks to monster design and solid feat design (for the most part). A well designed battlefield also prevents spam.

But yes as another poster mentioned videogames are much more well designed now and almost all new action games have such solid move design that you can’t spam one dominant strategy or have a system that punishes you heavily for doing so.

almost all new action games have such solid move design that you can’t spam one dominant strategy or have a system that punishes you heavily for doing so.

That can't possibly be true.

There are way too many people out there who enjoy and prefer "spam X to win" gameplay. Designers wouldn't just abandon that segment of the marketplace entirely.

TheWayofPie wrote:

almost all new action games have such solid move design that you can’t spam one dominant strategy or have a system that punishes you heavily for doing so.

That can't possibly be true.

There are way too many people out there who enjoy and prefer "spam X to win" gameplay. Designers wouldn't just abandon that segment of the marketplace entirely.

Specifically, PF2 Fighter and Barbarian are pretty good at spam Strike to win. Kineticist was added to fill the role of spam magic to win.

I've never really gotten the locked in skill increases complaint. I'm more receptive to arguing the Swashbuckler should get automatic increases to compensate for their lack of raw power in combat. And it's a little awkward only being able to increase one of your two skills at a time.

But conceptually, I don't understand why you'd play the class if you weren't interested in being as acrobatic as possible. If you just want a fencer, free hand fights are hella good. You can use archetypes like Aldori Duelist to round out the flair. Finishers are unique to the swashbuckler, but most people found them underwhelming, and fighters have plenty of two action strikes which can cover a similar niche of devoting your whole turn to one big melee strike.

Is it that hard to imagine that a Wit or a Fencer Swashbuckler might want to invest in Diplomacy and Deception before they would want to invest in Acrobatics? Or that any Swashbuckler might want to be better at anything that isn’t combat related than they are at Acrobatics?

I think I suffer from being a bit hyperbolic at times and exaggerate my statements a little (I probably should become an influencer and do clickbait titles? lol). But I digress. Gymnast isn't bad per se, but I feel what someone wants to do when playing a swashbuckler is being a flashy nova striker, which the gymnast doesn't allow as "efficiently" due to how the "optimal" way of playing one doesn't encourage the nova playstyle that other styles do (braggart has a similar problem too, but let's keep the discussion around gymnast in this case). To be completely honest, I totally forgot about derring-do and agile maneuvers existing, though in the case of agile maneuvers I feel its kind of a trap option? Let me explain; you are likely going to use your first offensive action in combat to do an Athletics action to generate panache, which doens't have MAP, and likely spend it to do a finisher either on that turn or in the next one (which would also restrict further attack actions in that turn, so Athletics actions are prohibited too). What I'm trying to say is that you really aren't doing a ton of maneuvers with MAP unless you fail the first time. Is the feat good? Yes, but its more like a backup of sorts.

The thing is, if you want to play a grappler, tripper, or shover, while arguably the swashbuckler would be the most "consistent" while doing so, a fighter is arguably more accurate (due to not having Dex as KAS) and still has its higher martial proficiencies. A gymnast has to effectively trade doing finishers more often (thus damage) to do what its subclass wants them to do. Obviously these actions impose penalties that indirectly increase the damage of allies, but so do when a fighter or barbarian uses them, so after having played a gymnast I don't really see a reason to play a gymnast when I could be playing that does the same thing and still has other things to do. If Agile Maneuvers is buffed to further reduce MAP to -3 and -6 if you use an agile weapon then I guess being the equivalent of the flurry ranger but just for maneuvers would be a great boost to the subclass, though I still think it should do something else. Probably a 4th level feat that allows you to grapple and trip against a target using the same MAP as two actions or smh like that. This is probably the only style that benefits from that +1 to panache-generating actions when you already have panache, so probably a way of dealing damage while doing those actions could be nice too (so Crushing Grab but with trip and shove too, and if you have panache, you add your precise strike damage on top of your Strength).

If panache is easier to get then I hope the have no combat effect but get panache easier style gets some love.
Also damage likely still low.
This will make early game play feel better, bump the class up to ok.
Hopefully there's changes to make it stand out mechanically and not just thematically. Some opportune riposte buffs to make it actually be something enemies want to avoid would be nice.

Bravado seems to favor the loop of "get panache, spend panache ASAP" which, admittedly, is how a lot of people wanted to play the Swashbuckler.

I hope that the benefits of "getting Panache, and keeping it until there's a really compelling reason to spend it" will also seem somewhat better than before.

Fun fact: since the class always makes sure you are trained in Acrobatics at 1st level, if you have a +7 Dex at 20th level and make no other effort to increase your Acrobatics score in any way, you will still only crit fail - and thus, fail to acquire panache - an Acrobatics check against a level 20 DC (that is, DC 40) on a natural 1.

No, you really don't need auto-scaling Acrobatics on this class.

EDIT: to be clear, I would love to see auto-scaling, I just disagree that it's necessary for builds that want to do something else with their skill-ups.

TheWayofPie wrote:

almost all new action games have such solid move design that you can’t spam one dominant strategy or have a system that punishes you heavily for doing so.

That can't possibly be true.

There are way too many people out there who enjoy and prefer "spam X to win" gameplay. Designers wouldn't just abandon that segment of the marketplace entirely.

Who are these spam enjoyers? Never met them and don’t know many games the play like that now. Clicker games and idle games are like the closest thing I guess but that’s not even the same thing.

I mean if you have some game examples I’m all ears.

And if fighting games are mentioned, spam only works if someone doesn’t know how to deal with a strategy. Good players can’t be beaten by using the same move over and over again unless the skill and knowledge gap is immense.

Auto-Scaling for something would be nice because you probably always want to max out your acrobatics and your subclass skill, so you have very few resources for other things.

It's not inconceivable that Quick Draw is now part of the Swashbuckler's kit in Player Core 2.

True. There is always some potential context that can improve this. Some things that I think would make this better:

- Larger finesse thrown weapons (1d8 to match tridents) even if they are 2 handed.

- Quickdraw being included in the kit or the class getting a free action draw feature once per round, or buffing flying blade to allow that or act similarly but just for thrown weapons?

- a new 'blazons of shared power or better yet twinning rings' THAT WORKS WITH THROWN WEAPONS. That way if your finisher crit fails you still have a mainline weapon

- Improvements to flying blade that open up cool options (e.g., what if it let you turn any finesse/agile melee weapon into thrown 20ft... that would be really cool!)

But yes as another poster mentioned videogames are much more well designed now

Aside: Well if we give the PC2 millions of hours of playtest using tens of thousands of playtesters, with daily computational data analysis on how much dpr different combinations put out, I'm sure the resulting swashbuckler will have umpteen well balanced ways to generate panache and they will all be equally effective and fund to play. :) Part of the fun, the unique freedom, and yes sometimes the frustration of TTRPGs is they rely much more heavily on human brains than rules sets compared to other games. Because they have to; you can't really design such an open sandbox system on a small budget the way you design a billion-dollar video game, or even a board game where the choices are pretty well fixed. And let's face it - all us fogies got into this - in part - because of the incredible freedom of 'use your imagination' instead of 'bishop moves diagonally.'

Back to the main subject: I hope the remastered swash gives lots of interesting ways to generate panache, for players who want that variety. I also hope it doesn't remove the ability to use one of them over and over again, if that's what a player prefers. I don't want "spam one thing" to be the only way the class works. But I don't the ability to spam one thing and be a fun successful martial to disappear either.

Who are these spam enjoyers? Never met them and don’t know many games the play like that now. Clicker games and idle games are like the closest thing I guess but that’s not even the same thing.

I mean if you have some game examples I’m all ears.

And if fighting games are mentioned, spam only works if someone doesn’t know how to deal with a strategy. Good players can’t be beaten by using the same move over and over again unless the skill and knowledge gap is immense.

It's not going to be fighting games because the people who like this stuff generally aren't going for PVP. It's all about enjoying the process while you utterly shellack a series of hapless computer opponents at a difficulty that lets you engage somewhat but never truly challenges you. It's relaxing and fun, for those of us that enjoy it.

It doesn't have to go all the way down to idle/clicker games. They're just the most extreme version (...and one that I personally try to avoid). You see a lot of this stuff in MMORPGs with the grinding, and those MMORPGs are still out there. You see a lot of it in ARPGs too. There's a bunch of roguelites out there, especially the survivor/bullet-heaven genre, where you don't really *have* many attacks, or where the attacks that you do have tend to be on autofire. metroidvanias often have pretty simple movesets too. Now, metroidvanias don't really count as *pure* action, but they do generally have action components

As for who's like that? Well, I've personally found myself vibing with this guy.

Can Fighter do what it is known for without skill checks? What about Barb or Ranger?

And yet the Thaumaturge has auto-advancing Esoteric Lore because it kinda needs it to be good at Thaumaturging.

I partially agree with that.

The disagreement is that this isn't accounting for the differences in which skills are being granted auto-scaling. There is a difference between getting auto-scaling in crafting (Inventor) or recall knowledge (Thaumaturge) and getting auto-scaling in acrobatics, athletics, diplomacy, or deception.