Player Core 2 Preview: The Swashbuckler, Remastered

I think comparing swashbucklers to fighters is unfair because, even if they kinda fill similar niches and people would associate them with each other, I feel the closest comparison mechanics-wise to the swashbuckler are rogues and investigators.

Rogues have...
* 8 + subclass + Int trained skills.
* Sneak Attack (1d6 at 1st, 2d6 at 5th, 3d6 at 11th, and 4d6 at 17th).
* more ways to proc sneak attack more easily (Surprise Strike, subclass, feats).
* twice as many skill feats.
* twice as many skill increases.

Investigators have...
* 5 + subclass + Int trained skills.
* bonuses to skills (Pursue a Lead).
* Int to attack 1/round (Devise a Stratagem).
* Strategic Strike (1d6 at 1st level, 2d6 at 5th level, 3d6 at 9th level, 4d6 at 13th level, and 5d6 at 17th level).
* twice as many skill feats (restricted to Int, Wis, or Cha-based skills).
* twice as many skill increases (restricted to Int, Wis, or Cha-based skills).

Swashbucklers have...
* 5 + subclass + Int trained skills.
* a scaling bonus to speed and a flat bonus to certain skills that requires a set up (Panache)
* features that enable you to gain panache (subclass, Tumble Through, feats).
* Precise Strike (2 / 2d6 at 1st level, 3 / 3d6 at 5th level, 4 / 4d6 at 9th level, 5 / 5d6 at 13th level, and 6 / 6d6 at 17th level).
* three more skill feats than normal.

Rogue is the one that has the slowest scaling on its damage steroid, though unlike both swashbucklers and investigators, it can be used multiple times per round. Rogues are also the one with the highest amount of skill increases and skill feats (literally 1 skill feat ahead from investigators since they don't receive one at 1st level, and they aren't restricted unlike an investigator) though in a sense an investigator's Pursue a Lead compensates that with a higher accuracy with skills (mostly because they don't rely on physical attributes that much, though the feature as a whole has its problems, which I believe are going to be fixed in the Remaster).

With that in mind, what does the swashbuckler bring to the table? They are worse martials than rogues and arguably than investigators too, they have less trained skills (since investigators are Int-based), less skill feats, and less skill increases than both investigators and rogues, which do have features make it easier for them to proc their features but they don't need them to proc their damage steroid (unlike a swashbuckler that NEEDS panache to have precise strike, they can't flank to get it or have a class feature dedicated to get panache without a check). Damage-wise a swashbuckler beats an investigator, but the rogue is still ahead of both, and even when swashbucklers are more reliant on skills because they need them to activate their damage steroid (unlike rogues who use them to have easier access to it) the swashbuckler is the one that doesn't have more skill increases or an auto-scaling skill like an inventor or thaumaturge. It's like the swashbuckler took the worse of all classes (inventor and thaumaturge didn't exist when swash released, but we still don't know the full picture with the swashbuckler, so I'll asume that, besides bravado, the swashbuckler is still the same for this argument) so how many things should be improved or added in the class to be comparable to at least those two?.

Bravado indirectly increases damage and lessens the need of skills, but the class is IMO still in need of some more "oomph" to stand on its own better. We haven't seen the full class yet, so it could be that most of the problems of the class were fixed already, but I feel some of the problems with the class are so fundamental in the class that even in the best case scenario the swashbuckler is still going to lag behind a rogue, which to be fair would be fine since the rogue is one of the best classes of the system already. Against fighters, I don't really think much can be done because its hard to compete against higher proficiencies.

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

Yeah, I think his most well-known victory was when midway through his first big fight he draws a pistol.

'Surprise pistol draw' cited as characteristic of Sparrow in Pirates of the Caribbean? I feel old now. So, so old lol.

I'm saying that when I think of Jack Sparrow's rare victories in fights, I think of him pulling a gun on Will. I'm not saying that when I think of surprise pistol draws, I think of Jack Sparrow. Don't sign up for the nursing home just yet.

Not going to quote the long message, but I’ll add an additional comparison. To me, Laughing Shadow Magus plays a lot like Swashbuckler in combat, only it doesn’t feel as bad. It’s mobile, has speed bonuses, cool tricks it can pull like Dimensional Assault, uses a light weapon, and tries to set up a big hit. The action cost is probably even a little higher for Magus, but spellstrike starts charged, so you aren’t spending extra actions just to be able to do your main thing, at least the first time. When you do recharge Spellstrike, there’s no chance it fails. And you have ways to combine recharging spellstrike with other useful actions, without a chance of failure. You do have to spend an extra action if you want your Arcane Cascade benefits, but again, no chance you’re going to fail to enter the stance. Damage without Spellstrike is comparable. Damage with. spellstrike cantrip vs a finisher is also comparable. Damage with spell strike and a ranked spell is better. It does take two actions to spellstrike vs one for a finisher, but since the spell would typically be two actions anyway, that feels like you’re using less actions. And there’s the possibility of one action focus spells.

Action economy for a Magus is not good, and it still feels better than Swashbuckler.

I would assume the goal would be that a fighter, in a generic environment (an empty room, a barren plain, etc.) should usually win, while in a swashbuckler should usually win in an environment that favors them (a ship, an opera house, a crowded market).

Not going to quote the long message, but I’ll add an additional comparison. To me, Laughing Shadow Magus plays a lot like Swashbuckler in combat, only it doesn’t feel as bad. It’s mobile, has speed bonuses, cool tricks it can pull like Dimensional Assault, uses a light weapon, and tries to set up a big hit. The action cost is probably even a little higher for Magus, but spellstrike starts charged, so you aren’t spending extra actions just to be able to do your main thing, at least the first time. When you do recharge Spellstrike, there’s no chance it fails. And you have ways to combine recharging spellstrike with other useful actions, without a chance of failure. You do have to spend an extra action if you want your Arcane Cascade benefits, but again, no chance you’re going to fail to enter the stance. Damage without Spellstrike is comparable. Damage with. spellstrike cantrip vs a finisher is also comparable. Damage with spell strike and a ranked spell is better. It does take two actions to spellstrike vs one for a finisher, but since the spell would typically be two actions anyway, that feels like you’re using less actions. And there’s the possibility of one action focus spells.

Action economy for a Magus is not good, and it still feels better than Swashbuckler.

If I had to point out the worst part of the swashbuckler is that you have to jump through a lot of hoops to effectively use an slightly stronger version of sneak attack, while a rogue can do it as many times as they want and the only thing they need is to stand within the vicinity of an enemy that's also within the vicinity of one ally.

The same happens with investigators btw.

Well, and Rogue has ways to get rid of whatever hoops they have. Gang Up means sneak attack a vast majority of the time as long as you have a melee partner, and now it buffs them, too. Opportune Backstab is better than Opportune Riposte, and you can get sneak attack on it. Which brings me back ti Rogue doing swashbuckler things better than Swashbucklers, while still having a lot to contribute outside combat.

This reminds me. I hope in the remaster that Opportune Riposte will trigger on a miss instead of a crit miss.

Not going to quote the long message, but I’ll add an additional comparison. To me, Laughing Shadow Magus plays a lot like Swashbuckler in combat, only it doesn’t feel as bad. It’s mobile, has speed bonuses, cool tricks it can pull like Dimensional Assault, uses a light weapon, and tries to set up a big hit. The action cost is probably even a little higher for Magus, but spellstrike starts charged, so you aren’t spending extra actions just to be able to do your main thing, at least the first time. When you do recharge Spellstrike, there’s no chance it fails. And you have ways to combine recharging spellstrike with other useful actions, without a chance of failure. You do have to spend an extra action if you want your Arcane Cascade benefits, but again, no chance you’re going to fail to enter the stance. Damage without Spellstrike is comparable. Damage with. spellstrike cantrip vs a finisher is also comparable. Damage with spell strike and a ranked spell is better. It does take two actions to spellstrike vs one for a finisher, but since the spell would typically be two actions anyway, that feels like you’re using less actions. And there’s the possibility of one action focus spells.

Action economy for a Magus is not good, and it still feels better than Swashbuckler.

I guess finishers are comparable with spellstrike w/cantrips until level 5 after that it stops being close because cantrips scale way better than the precision damage

I don't think this is going to be addressed in pc2, but the main problem with swashbuckler is finisher ending attacks for the round. I calculated situations where the swashbuckler does more damage by never using finishers and attacking multiple times per round.

I would either get rid of finishers ending attacks or add in a map reduction on finisher attacks.

Along those lines, I wish finishers had been the culmination of a series of smaller attacks instead of the one big attack. You’ve hit your opponent twice this round? Spend panache and make a third attack without MAP penalty and with extra damage and/or a cool effect. Then instead of dancing or tumbling around or doing something else that doesn’t really give you an effect you want just to use your basic abilities, you are attacking, and actually using a finisher to finish your attacks.

But I’ve strayed even farther away from realistic things to expect from the remaster than I already had.

So, about Zorro and so on...

The way I see it, there is no such thing in fiction as a swashbuckler class. A swashbuckler can be a fighter (Ivanhoe), a barbarian (Rob Roy), a rogue (Dick Turpin), a ranger (Robin Hood), a bard (Scaramouche), a soldier (D'Artagnan), a sailor (Sindbad), a pirate (Jack Sparrow), a spy (the Scarlet Pimpernel), a courier (Mikhail Strogoff), an archaeologist (Indiana Jones), or anything really. Probably not a swashbuckling cleric, but even that is not out of the question.

Swashbuckling is about exuberance, attitude and style, thrill-seeking to the point of recklessness, supreme confidence to the point of arrogance, and an absolutely massive dose of Romanticism. As a class this makes them hard to pin down and even harder to explain. "Are you like, a pirate?" No. "Oh, more like a musketeer, then?" No... but kind of?

That’s fair enough, and if the class were full of big swing abilities (as opposed to big damage abilities), that might feel better to me. Make an attack with a lower chance of success, but if you do succeed, you do something close to crit succeeding. If you fail, however, you get a penalty close to crit failing. A class that either succeeds spectacularly or fails spectacularly feels more like a swashbuckler to me than a class that gains confidence and effectively power from failing.

Shortly after PaizoCon I ran across a discussion about what people thought Bravado was, and part of it was that they thought Bravado was going to be accept a penalty on or after an action in order to automatically gain Panache. I think that could have given a similar feel. You take a wild action and look good doing it, but afterward you’re more vulnerable. High risk high reward.

I think the basic problem I have with finishers is that obviously this is the attack you want to make without MAP, since you want to land it, so you want it to be the first attack (and hence only) in a round, but then you're left with two more actions where there isn't an obvious use for them.

My hope is that the Swashbuckler will have a bunch of good ways to spend actions on things that aren't attacks.

I think the basic problem I have with finishers is that obviously this is the attack you want to make without MAP, since you want to land it, so you want it to be the first attack (and hence only) in a round, but then you're left with two more actions where there isn't an obvious use for them.

My hope is that the Swashbuckler will have a bunch of good ways to spend actions on things that aren't attacks.

This is why I didn't like gymnast at all when playing one. You can't generate panache and make a finisher in the game round, and unlike other subclasses that have MAPless actions, if you try to generate panache and fail you can still make a regular attack to do some damage, while using Athletics is also going to reduce your MAP for your regular attacks. When I switched to a fencer its was like day and night. I was perfectly capable of doing Stride > Feint > Finisher every single turn, or at least every single turn I succeeded the feint, which felt way smoother and better action economy-wise.

Nice! Twirling throw looks great. Easy enough to have throwers bandoliers as insurance on a crit fail.

I think the basic problem I have with finishers is that obviously this is the attack you want to make without MAP, since you want to land it, so you want it to be the first attack (and hence only) in a round, but then you're left with two more actions where there isn't an obvious use for them.

My hope is that the Swashbuckler will have a bunch of good ways to spend actions on things that aren't attacks.

But isn't this the risk/reward people have been saying about just a few posts above?

A single finisher at full MAP is the safest option, yes, but it's also the less rewarding.

A finisher after a normal attack can bring your damage way up... but has a much higher chance of whiffing. Which feels exactly like the risk/reward.

Things like agile finisher, dual finisher, precise finisher, certain finisher, and etc make this tactic more and more appealing as well.

The Swash in my campaign doesn't really have issues tearing things up and his main routine (except against the rare single boss encounters) is Strike followed by Dual finisher while also having agile finishers.

The Raven Black wrote:

I really believe the Acrobat archetype originated as Swashbuckler feats that they decided to make available to all classes.

While I certainly don't mind a class feat which gives you autoscaling Acrobatics, the fact that taking the dedication feat locks you into taking two more feats from the archetype before you can take another archetype kinda sucks. Well, aside from the thing that many Swashbuckler class feats are too good to not take and therefore taking so many archetype feats is not that interesting, but still.

Don't forget, Acrobat has 2 skill feats so it only costs 1 2nd class feat if you can wait to take them.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the basic problem I have with finishers is that obviously this is the attack you want to make without MAP, since you want to land it, so you want it to be the first attack (and hence only) in a round, but then you're left with two more actions where there isn't an obvious use for them.

My hope is that the Swashbuckler will have a bunch of good ways to spend actions on things that aren't attacks.

But isn't this the risk/reward people have been saying about just a few posts above?

A single finisher at full MAP is the safest option, yes, but it's also the less rewarding.

A finisher after a normal attack can bring your damage way up... but has a much higher chance of whiffing. Which feels exactly like the risk/reward.

Things like agile finisher, dual finisher, precise finisher, certain finisher, and etc make this tactic more and more appealing as well.

The Swash in my campaign doesn't really have issues tearing things up and his main routine (except against the rare single boss encounters) is Strike followed by Dual finisher while also having agile finishers.

Not exactly, no. The first issue is that Swashbuckler needs to consistently get finisher damage in order to keep up. The second is that you have to do something other than attack to recharge it. Could you Strike, Finisher, Try to gain Panache? Sure. But self-imposing the Press trait on Finishers is just a bad idea. A -4 or -5 penalty is crippling in this system. What I was talking about was taking a penalty elsewhere in order to get a better result. Or expanding the chance to crit succeed but also expanding the chance to crit fail.

For example, make a risky attack. If you hit, you deal finisher damage. Whether or not you hit, you take a -2 circumstance penalty to AC until the start of your next turn.

Or, attempt a broad feint. If you succeed by 5 or more, you crit succeed, but if you fail by 5 or more, you crit fail.

The idea is not to make you worse at attacking for a chance to do extra damage. It’s to make you better at attacking or whatever you are trying to do at the expense of being worse at something else temporarily, or by making the consequences of failing worse.

shroudb wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the basic problem I have with finishers is that obviously this is the attack you want to make without MAP, since you want to land it, so you want it to be the first attack (and hence only) in a round, but then you're left with two more actions where there isn't an obvious use for them.

My hope is that the Swashbuckler will have a bunch of good ways to spend actions on things that aren't attacks.

But isn't this the risk/reward people have been saying about just a few posts above?

A single finisher at full MAP is the safest option, yes, but it's also the less rewarding.

A finisher after a normal attack can bring your damage way up... but has a much higher chance of whiffing. Which feels exactly like the risk/reward.

Things like agile finisher, dual finisher, precise finisher, certain finisher, and etc make this tactic more and more appealing as well.

The Swash in my campaign doesn't really have issues tearing things up and his main routine (except against the rare single boss encounters) is Strike followed by Dual finisher while also having agile finishers.

Not exactly, no. The first issue is that Swashbuckler needs to consistently get finisher damage in order to keep up. The second is that you have to do something other than attack to recharge it. Could you Strike, Finisher, Try to gain Panache? Sure. But self-imposing the Press trait on Finishers is just a bad idea. A -4 or -5 penalty is crippling in this system. What I was talking about was taking a penalty elsewhere in order to get a better result. Or expanding the chance to crit succeed but also expanding the chance to crit fail.

For example, make a risky attack. If you hit, you deal finisher damage. Whether or not you hit, you take a -2 circumstance penalty to AC until the start of your next turn.

Or, attempt a broad feint. If you succeed by 5 or more, you crit succeed, but if you fail by 5 or more, you crit fail.

The idea is not to make you worse at...

You cannot simultaneously want "consistency" AND risk/reward was my whole point.

Movement+panache+flat footed with tumble, followed by Strike, followed by finisher, can keep this consistent throughout an encounter, action cost wise.

As for finisher landing, at just -3 map and 2 chances to land (agile finisher+dual finisher) it happens a lot more often than it whiffs.

You cannot simultaneously want "consistency" AND risk/reward was my whole point.

Of course you can. Low chance of success for high payout is only one type of risk/reward. There are many situations (in the world)where you succeed at something far more often than you fail, but when you do fail, it’s disastrous. Things can have greater rewards and greater consequences without being more difficult, and that is still a risk/reward trade off. And even when something works consistently, the more you do it, the more likely it is that you will eventually fail.

Having a better chance to succeed at one thing at the expense of a greater chance to fail at another thing is another risk reward trade off.

Dual Finisher is a good feat, yeah. I’m not saying Swashbuckler doesn’t have anything good. That’s also around the level where you start succeeding more often with the panache skills. Though, really, I feel like the class gets to where it needs to be at 10th level when you get some feats to help with action economy.

Does Agile Finisher have a different name? It’s not coming up on Archives of Nethys. I’m inferring that it lowers the penalty for MAP and a finisher? In which case, you are spending a resource (a feat) in order to mitagate the penalty, which is fair.

shroudb wrote:

You cannot simultaneously want "consistency" AND risk/reward was my whole point.

Of course you can. Low chance of success for high payout is only one type of risk/reward. There are many situations (in the world)where you succeed at something far more often than you fail, but when you do fail, it’s disastrous. Things can have greater rewards and greater consequences without being more difficult, and that is still a risk/reward trade off. And even when something works consistently, the more you do it, the more likely it is that you will eventually fail.

Having a better chance to succeed at one thing at the expense of a greater chance to fail at another thing is another risk reward trade off.

Dual Finisher is a good feat, yeah. I’m not saying Swashbuckler doesn’t have anything good. That’s also around the level where you start succeeding more often with the panache skills. Though, really, I feel like the class gets to where it needs to be at 10th level when you get some feats to help with action economy.

Does Agile Finisher have a different name? It’s not coming up on Archives of Nethys. I’m inferring that it lowers the penalty for MAP and a finisher? In which case, you are spending a resource (a feat) in order to mitagate the penalty, which is fair.

Yeah, combination finisher or something like that.

Earlier levels, you still get some payoff with Confident finisher doing damage on a miss.

Imo there simply are too many feats abilities to mitigate the "risk" of doing Finisher as a second attack that I can't see why not risking it consistently against anything that's not a single target boss fight.

There's damage on miss, better map, fortune effects, etc.

It is though indeed a class that imo needs at least some levels before it starts shining. So, a remaster that helps with that curve and make panache vs bosses more reliable is imo what's needed rather than raw power

Yeah that always seemed to be the way to go with swash to boost your potential damage. Sticking to just doing one attack per round as a hard rule would be boring. Plus, your precision damage on regular hits is decent. I wouldn't want to ignore it completely.

In general I would prefer to take feats that let you do cool things than feats to correct for issues with the class, but PF has several of the latter. Dual Finisher is one of those interesting feats for the attacking two opponents aspect.

Combination Finisher is 6th level. Its main competition there is Attack of Opportunity (which is about as strong of competition for a feat slot as you can get), but I can see it being an option people would prefer. That does help make using a finisher second better. Prior to 6th and that feat, I think it’s still a bad idea.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the basic problem I have with finishers is that obviously this is the attack you want to make without MAP, since you want to land it, so you want it to be the first attack (and hence only) in a round, but then you're left with two more actions where there isn't an obvious use for them.

My hope is that the Swashbuckler will have a bunch of good ways to spend actions on things that aren't attacks.

But isn't this the risk/reward people have been saying about just a few posts above?

A single finisher at full MAP is the safest option, yes, but it's also the less rewarding.

A finisher after a normal attack can bring your damage way up... but has a much higher chance of whiffing. Which feels exactly like the risk/reward.

Things like agile finisher, dual finisher, precise finisher, certain finisher, and etc make this tactic more and more appealing as well.

The Swash in my campaign doesn't really have issues tearing things up and his main routine (except against the rare single boss encounters) is Strike followed by Dual finisher while also having agile finishers.

The problem is that this whole "high risk / high reward situation" only means that you deal a couple of extra d6s on your second attack, a thing a rogue could have done in both attacks and thus deal more damage without having to risk anything.

I been comparing swashs to rogues multiple times already, but let's compare it to a thaumaturge for example: a thaum is limited to one-handed weapons like a swashbuckler to agile or finesse weapons, which deal comparable amounts of damage, though unlike a swashbuckler, a thaumaturge has a bonus equal to double their damage die to damage passively (literally the same damage as precise strike in the early levels, but always active) and on top of that they also have exploit weakness, which does activate on failures too, though not like you were going to fail that much anyways when you have auto-scaling in the skill that feature needs which also uses your KAS. At 5th level a swashbuckler in its best day would deal something like (assuming he's using a rapier which is kinda thematic for a swash) 2d6+7 in the first attack and then 5d6+4 on the second (avg. 35,5), while a thaumaturge almost every turn is going to be dealing (with the same weapon) 2d6+12 in both attacks (avg. 38) assuming the creature doesn't have a weakness on its own.

The issue I have with just comparing swash damage with rogue damage is that finishers occupy a different niche than sneak attack that isn't just dealing damage. Your finishers have other jobs. Only the basic finisher can be compared neatly but even damage on a miss is unique at first level.

Looking forward to any more new finishers that might make it.

The issue I have with just comparing swash damage with rogue damage is that finishers occupy a different niche than sneak attack that isn't just dealing damage. Your finishers have other jobs.

Confident, Bleeding, Impaling, Dual, Lethal, and Perfect finisher are all about dealing damage.

Only mobile, stunning, targeting, and unbalancing "have other jobs".

So it's less "finishers are for other things" and more that there are a couple finisher feats that can let you apply debuffs instead.

... That also feels like a weird point in a comparison with Rogues, because Rogues get debilitations natively. So the "not just damage" argument seems to favor them too.

Powers128 wrote:

The issue I have with just comparing swash damage with rogue damage is that finishers occupy a different niche than sneak attack that isn't just dealing damage. Your finishers have other jobs.

Confident, Bleeding, Impaling, Dual, Lethal, and Perfect finisher are all about dealing damage.

Only mobile, stunning, targeting, and unbalancing "have other jobs".

So it's less "finishers are for other things" and more that there are a couple finisher feats that can let you apply debuffs instead.

... That also feels like a weird point in a comparison with Rogues, because Rogues get debilitations natively. So the "not just damage" argument seems to favor them too.

Dealing damage in other ways is different enough for me. Impaling has multi target utility and bleeding is really good persistent damage. Debilitations are a 9th level feature which swash also has some similar buffs to their finishers. Braggart is particularly good.

The point was that finishers have additional effects from the get go. Whether or not those effects are in a good place or not is another question. That's where I'd like to see improvements instead of just pointing to damage. Finisher effects are a little unbalanced rn imo. Bleeding reigns supreme until perfect finisher. There's definitely room to make them more interesting.

The one thing I'd like to see simply do more damage is the basic finisher on the archetype. It aught to mirror archetype sneak attack with 2d4 at first and then 2d6 at 6th level. 1d6 forever on a finisher is really sad for multi class PCs

I'm not well-versed in the class but glancing through the online guides it looks like swashbucklers get dramatically fewer effective control mechanisms than I would expect. A huge part of swashbuckling is being actively confusing like a proper trickster so that opponents partly defeat themselves.

I'm not well-versed in the class but glancing through the online guides it looks like swashbucklers get dramatically fewer effective control mechanisms than I would expect. A huge part of swashbuckling is being actively confusing like a proper trickster so that opponents partly defeat themselves.

Yeah I hope either the new bravado actions or new finisher options can deliver on more unique and useful effects.

Squiggit wrote:

Powers128 wrote:

The issue I have with just comparing swash damage with rogue damage is that finishers occupy a different niche than sneak attack that isn't just dealing damage. Your finishers have other jobs.

Confident, Bleeding, Impaling, Dual, Lethal, and Perfect finisher are all about dealing damage.

Only mobile, stunning, targeting, and unbalancing "have other jobs".

So it's less "finishers are for other things" and more that there are a couple finisher feats that can let you apply debuffs instead.

... That also feels like a weird point in a comparison with Rogues, because Rogues get debilitations natively. So the "not just damage" argument seems to favor them too.

Dealing damage in other ways is different enough for me. Impaling has multi target utility and bleeding is really good persistent damage. Debilitations are a 9th level feature which swash also has some similar buffs to their finishers. Braggart is particularly good.

The point was that finishers have additional effects from the get go. Whether or not those effects are in a good place or not is another question. That's where I'd like to see improvements instead of just pointing to damage. Finisher effects are a little unbalanced rn imo. Bleeding reigns supreme until perfect finisher. There's definitely room to make them more interesting.

Most of the improvements swashbucklers get at 9th level from their style are things rogues have at 1st level. The battledancer's benefit is the same as the scoundrel's after using a feint; the fencer's is the same as the scoundrel's and mastermind's; and wit's is the same as the Overextending Feint feat. Only the braggart and gymnast have unique benefits, which in my opinion function more like patches to how they need to gain panache in the first place. Braggarts don't have ways to generate panache more than once against the same target unless they switch to using Tumble Through, and for the gymnast, the subclass hampers the class's damage due to how the action required to generate panache imposes a MAP penalty, which often forces you to delay your finisher to the next turn.

Rogues also have the Twist the Knife feat two levels earlier than the swashbuckler's Bleeding Finisher, though I admit Twist the Knife is certainly weaker than Bleeding Finisher, though isn't Impaling Finisher really situational as a feat? How many times an enemy is going to stand behind one of their allies in a straight line from you? But besides that, are really swashbuckler's finishers that fantastic? We already went over Bleeding Finisher and Imapling Finisher, but what about the other ones? Dual Finisher is not that different from what a regular rogue can do with Gang Up if they want to attack two targets (with a MAP penalty though), Lethal Finisher is similar to what a rogue can achieve with the Analyze Weakness and Precise Debilitations feats (less damage, but without having to make a saving throw mind you), Unbalancing Finisher being nearly what every rogue can do from the get go with their subclass, and Stunning Finisher has the problem of having the incapacitation trait, which effectively means it only works against mooks. Pretty much only Mobile Finisher, Perfect Finisher, and Targeting Finisher have unique effects that can't exactly be replicated by a rogue. Also, if the only real advantage that swashbucklers have over rogues are a couple of feats, what's stopping those feats from instead being rogue feats? If a class only stands because a couple of (fairly high level) feats make it stand on its own from other similar classes then its obvious the class has problems.

shroudb wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the basic problem I have with finishers is that obviously this is the attack you want to make without MAP, since you want to land it, so you want it to be the first attack (and hence only) in a round, but then you're left with two more actions where there isn't an obvious use for them.

My hope is that the Swashbuckler will have a bunch of good ways to spend actions on things that aren't attacks.

But isn't this the risk/reward people have been saying about just a few posts above?

A single finisher at full MAP is the safest option, yes, but it's also the less rewarding.

A finisher after a normal attack can bring your damage way up... but has a much higher chance of whiffing. Which feels exactly like the risk/reward.

Things like agile finisher, dual finisher, precise finisher, certain finisher, and etc make this tactic more and more appealing as well.

The Swash in my campaign doesn't really have issues tearing things up and his main routine (except against the rare single boss encounters) is Strike followed by Dual finisher while also having agile finishers.

The problem is that this whole "high risk / high reward situation" only means that you deal a couple of extra d6s on your second attack, a thing a rogue could have done in both attacks and thus deal more damage without having to risk anything.

I been comparing swashs to rogues multiple times already, but let's compare it to a thaumaturge for example: a thaum is limited to one-handed weapons like a swashbuckler to agile or finesse weapons, which deal comparable amounts of damage, though unlike a swashbuckler, a thaumaturge has a bonus equal to double their damage die to damage passively (literally the same damage as precise strike in the early levels, but always active) and on top of that they also have exploit weakness, which does activate on failures too, though not like you were going to fail that much anyways when you have auto-scaling in the skill that feature...

You are giving an extra action to the Thaumaturge in this comparison.

As an example, you cannot exploit, move strike, strike, as the Thaumaturge.
You CAN tumble through, gain panache, strike, finisher as the Swash.

Even in the best case scenario for the Thaum, that somehow he doesn't has to move, and somehow others have set up the flank for him, and the only thing he has to do is exploit, strike, strike, the Swash STILL gets an extra full action to do a ton of things with it.

And swash still does half of 3d6 on a miss while thaum deals 0.

Powers128 wrote:

Squiggit wrote:

Powers128 wrote:

The issue I have with just comparing swash damage with rogue damage is that finishers occupy a different niche than sneak attack that isn't just dealing damage. Your finishers have other jobs.

Confident, Bleeding, Impaling, Dual, Lethal, and Perfect finisher are all about dealing damage.

Only mobile, stunning, targeting, and unbalancing "have other jobs".

So it's less "finishers are for other things" and more that there are a couple finisher feats that can let you apply debuffs instead.

... That also feels like a weird point in a comparison with Rogues, because Rogues get debilitations natively. So the "not just damage" argument seems to favor them too.

Dealing damage in other ways is different enough for me. Impaling has multi target utility and bleeding is really good persistent damage. Debilitations are a 9th level feature which swash also has some similar buffs to their finishers. Braggart is particularly good.

The point was that finishers have additional effects from the get go. Whether or not those effects are in a good place or not is another question. That's where I'd like to see improvements instead of just pointing to damage. Finisher effects are a little unbalanced rn imo. Bleeding reigns supreme until perfect finisher. There's definitely room to make them more interesting.

Most of the improvements swashbucklers get at 9th level from their style are things rogues have at 1st level. The battledancer's benefit is the same as the scoundrel's after using a feint; the fencer's is the same as the scoundrel's and mastermind's; and wit's is the same as the Overextending Feint feat. Only the braggart and gymnast have unique benefits, which in my opinion function more like patches to how they need to gain panache in the first place. Braggarts don't have ways to generate panache more than once against the same target unless they switch to using Tumble Through, and for the gymnast, the subclass hampers the...

difference with Exemplar finishers is that those effects are in addition to the base effect, while feats like overextending feint are "instead" of the main effect.

plus, battledancer's effect was given to the rogue only after the remaster, so let's wait to see what swash gets in the reamaster, before comparing the direct buffs that Rogue got from the remaster, no?

apart from that, dual finisher is 1 action for 2 attacks with no map that each does more damage than a sneak, so no, it's certainly NOT comprable to a rogue attacking 2 targets with gang up.

furthermore, comparing twist the knife with bleeding is laughable at best. you're comparing 4d6 bleed without an extra action vs 2d6 bleed as an action?

You are giving an extra action to the Thaumaturge in this comparison.

Not quite. A thaumaturge has to exploit weakness only once per target, while the swashbuckler needs to recharge panache every single time. Action economy-wise, a thaumaturge is still ahead, even in encounters against multiple targets since the most common AP design for encounters against mooks is that they usually are of the same kind, which allows a thaumaturge with the Sympathethic Vulnerabilities to not need to exploit weakness again

And swash still does half of 3d6 on a miss while thaum deals 0

So would a fighter or barbarian, and I don't think nobody is going to argue the swashbuckler is better than those classes because it can deal damage on a miss.

difference with Exemplar finishers is that those effects are in addition to the base effect, while feats like overextending feint are "instead" of the main effect.

Fair, but only Overextending Feint replaces the main effect. Most of the effects I mentioned happen in addition to whatever you are doing to trigger that effect.

apart from that, dual finisher is 1 action for 2 attacks with no map that each does more damage than a sneak, so no, it's certainly NOT comprable to a rogue attacking 2 targets with gang up.

furthermore, comparing twist the knife with bleeding is laughable at best. you're comparing 4d6 bleed without an extra action vs 2d6 bleed as an action?

You know I said that myself, right? The point wasn't that the rogue was better at doing those things, but the fact that a rogue can do the same stuff a swashbuckler can (even if sligthly weaker). The point of the discussion was that finishers were unique effects, which really aren't. I even said below that I don't think a couple of high level feats make a class worth it, because in other circumstances those feats could have been either archetype feats or rogue feats directly if the class didn't exist

shroudb wrote:

You are giving an extra action to the Thaumaturge in this comparison.

Not quite. A thaumaturge has to exploit weakness only once per target, while the swashbuckler needs to recharge panache every single time. Action economy-wise, a thaumaturge is still ahead, even in encounters against multiple targets since the most common AP design for encounters against mooks is that they usually are of the same kind, which allows a thaumaturge with the Sympathethic Vulnerabilities to not need to exploit weakness again

shroudb wrote:

And swash still does half of 3d6 on a miss while thaum deals 0

So would a fighter or barbarian, and I don't think nobody is going to argue the swashbuckler is better than those classes because it can deal damage on a miss.

shroudb wrote:

difference with Exemplar finishers is that those effects are in addition to the base effect, while feats like overextending feint are "instead" of the main effect.

Fair, but only Overextending Feint replaces the main effect. Most of the effects I mentioned happen in addition to whatever you are doing to trigger that effect.

shroudb wrote:

apart from that, dual finisher is 1 action for 2 attacks with no map that each does more damage than a sneak, so no, it's certainly NOT comprable to a rogue attacking 2 targets with gang up.

furthermore, comparing twist the knife with bleeding is laughable at best. you're comparing 4d6 bleed without an extra action vs 2d6 bleed as an action?

You know I said that myself, right? The point wasn't that the rogue was better at doing those things, but the fact that a rogue can do the same stuff a swashbuckler can (even if sligthly weaker). The point of the discussion was that finishers were unique effects, which really aren't. I even said below that I don't think a couple of high level feats make a class worth it, because in other circumstances those feats could have been either archetype feats or rogue feats directly if the class didn't exist

thaum being one of my favorite classes, and one that i've played quite a few games with, i can guarantee you, as good as syumpathetic vulnerabilities is:

a)fighting Humanoids without weaknesses (against which you have to manually exploit each and every one of them) is extremely common.
and b) you still want to exploit almost every round because 99% of your implements only work against the single target you have exploited and NOT one affected merely by sympathetic.

So yeah, the times i get to Strike twice is actually about once every three, or once every forth rounds. All other rounds, between movement and Exploiting, I only get to Strike once. And that's from actual play experience.

(which is one of the main reasons why ranged/thrown or unarmed Thaum is so good at later levels, because you get to strike twice more often, but that's after level 10-12 for unarmed or lower damage for ranged, by which time Swash also has stuff like Fortune on his Finisher every time)

---

furthermore, the most common action for melee apart from Strike is Stride. And Swash get's basically to do so for free if he chooses when he builds Panache (tumble has a Stride in it).

Again, actual play experience, the swash in my campaign will Strike twice in every single round that he does't fail the Acrobatics to build up said panache (which is suppossedly being fixed in the remaster with Bravado giving panache on failure).
Which is a lot more than any melee Thaum will ever hope to do.

---

now, don't get me wrong, Swash does need some help, and Thaum brings other stuff in the table (notably Recall checks), but a Swash will almost always outdamage a Thaum.

I'm trying to figure out how the rascal style will work. Thievery? That would put it in a really good place since you can focus on just dex.

The new bravado actions are good news for stats in general too. Starting with a 14 charisma isn't so bad when you can gain panache on a failed check.

Ooh yes, Thievery!

I worry if it's thievery, your panache action will be to steal which is really niche in combat and has a massive -5 penalty at the start. Maybe the new bravado actions will have a better option

Definitely love panache on a failed check, though I have to agree with an earlier poster that having both normal panache and temporary panache creates a little bit of unnecessary bookkeeping, not sure how much it helps.

Could be that keeping panache will become more attractive so the brief panache duration won't be too redundant with how the class is currently played. That's my guess.

“Until end of next turn” is not that fiddly.
Failing the check means you have to blow it next turn or it’s wasted.
Succeeding or better means you can save it for when you want it most.
There’s like, no numbers you have to even remember!

I too hope the incentive to “keep” panache raises marginally somehow…

I worry if it's thievery, your panache action will be to steal which is really niche in combat and has a massive -5 penalty at the start. Maybe the new bravado actions will have a better option

agreed, thievery sounds pretty fun (And s.a.d.) but yeah, lets hope you can do something else than stealing, i want to kick people in the nads and pull down pants while stringing shoelaces together

A swashbuckler that sneaks firecrackers between a dragon's scales sounds hilarious.

Putting together my thoughts after this discussion. It will depend on how things turn out, but here is where I think I stand:

Improvements that seem evident from the blog:

Bravado will make Swashbucklers more effective and more fun to play at low levels. Gaining Panache on a fail is a significant power improvement, even if I don’t like it conceptually.

Twirling Throw points to an attempt to give the Swashbuckler more interesting feats, even if I think it has some issues.

Given that the blog mentions a desire to move away from “less satisfying uses of Tumble Through instead of an exciting way to move dynamically around the battlefield,” I will try to remain optimistic that there will be enough useful options to gain Panache.

Things I am afraid of given the contents of the blog

As positive of a thing as Bravado could be, if it requires using feats to gain more actions, and you can just get panache by doing and failing at one thing, I’m afraid that will lead to less interesting things instead of more. The biggest example I can think of is if someone can demoralize an enemy they have already demoralized and still gain panache despite that enemy being immune, that just doesn’t sit right with me, even though it solves the panache problem.

That most of the new feats will miss the mark like Twirling Throw does.

That Bravado will be seen as the fix for all things wrong with the Swashbuckler.

Things I am still hopeful might make it in:

A scaling skill. Whether that’s Acrobatics or your Style skill. Either would help realize more concepts that fall under the class name.

Beginning an encounter with panache (possibly with limitations). There’s a range here from always starting with Panache, to being dependent of what skill you roll for initiative, to being only if you roll a 20. I’m doubtful about this, but I’m hoping maybe the conversation around the Barbarian and Rage might spill over here.

Edit: Small addition… Disarm getting the Bravado trait, at least for Fencers.

Things it’s clear we aren’t getting that I wanted:

A conceptual reworking of the class to move away from its best tactic being to set up one big hit. Bravado seems to have leaned in to making it easier to get panache so that you can set up your one big hit. Swashbuckler as the one big hit class will never feel right to me.

Adding one more item to the Things I’m Still Hopeful Might Make It:

Opportune Riposte triggering on a miss instead of a crit miss. Or advancing automatically at some point to occur on a miss without having to take an extra feat to enable that.

Adding one more item to the Things I’m Still Hopeful Might Make It:

Opportune Riposte triggering on a miss instead of a crit miss. Or advancing automatically at some point to occur on a miss without having to take an extra feat to enable that.

I recommend this homebrew. I’ve had my player’s Swash using this for months. The only condition is that to work on a miss you need to have Panache giving reason to hold on to it.

Considering Opportune Backstab exists it’s not even OP. Especially since you can’t finisher off it innately.

That makes a lot of sense, normally only on Crit miss, but while you have panache, on regular miss. that makes sense.

That would be a really great incentive to keep panache at the end of your turn that plays into your core mechanics.

Yeah, that sounds like a good solution.

Personally expecting opportune riposte to remain exactly the same.

I'm also not a fan of that houserule since it basically encourages swashbucklers to stop using finishers and buffs what's already probably one of their best builds (derring do gymnasts).

It encourages them to not use finisher, while also replacing some of the damage lost by not using finishers. A finisher should have been a once or twice a combat thing in the first place. It’s a “finisher,” to finish an opponent after you’ve done most of their hit points. Instead of that, it’s necessary in order to maintain a damage output close to other martials to use a finisher as often as you can. Extra no-MAP attacks that mock your opponent when they miss you is exactly the type of ability the class should have. Limiting it to crit misses makes it kinda terrible. Particularly against bosses. The frequency of finishers vs opportune riposte is backwards currently from where it should be.

There's nothing keeping you from gaining panache, spending panache, then regaining panache is there?

Like you could use "panache gain, finisher, panache gain (to set up riposte)."