Player Core 2 Preview: The Swashbuckler, Remastered

Btw, how are you doing 2 or 3 attacks per round? 3 attacks means that you either don't generate panache or that you aren't using finishers, which means that a rogue (which is more accurate) in the same situation would certainly be dealing more damage as well. At 10th level it would be dealing an average of 54 points of damage (4d6+4 thrice), while a swashbuckler would be dealing an average of 45 (2d6+8 thrice) or 55 (2d6+8 twice + 6d6+4) in the miraculous situation you somehow manage to land an attack at -8 MAP, which again, a rogue is more likely to do even if still highly unlikely. At least unless you are targeting a lower level enemy.

They said they used Dual Finisher. Which would have their Finisher possibly hit twice at a MAP -4/-5 (or, if the 2nd hit is done with a non-Agile weapon for some reason, a -7) for a single Action. Which would allow a total of 3 Strikes (1 from the initial Strike, and 2 from Dual Finisher).

shroudb wrote:

Nope.

As you said, your problem is the early game of the Swash which indeed is weak.

The Swash in my campaign, now level 10, has been doind 2-3 attacks almost every single round.

It's very easy to "tumble, Strike, Finisher/Dual Finisher" every round.

The damage he does with his Swash is noticeably higher than the damage of Scoundrel Rogue we used to have.

The issue is mostly one of perception:
People feeling that they have to do the Finisher as their 1st attack "because it's my hardest hitting" (as you yourself have stated that you've fallen to this mental trap) instead of using it as a Finisher, which is both mathematically very superior but also thematically superior (using the Finishers as finishers).

I do think the problems with the swashbuckler aren't only just on early game, the class is flawed as a whole. Just the very concept of the class of relying on single high damage attacks is weird conceptually for a class that flavor-wise doesn't have anything to do with that, but also because there's a class that can do that already and does it better (rogues). I can't say your experiences are wrong because I wasn't there, but I honestly can't see a swashbuckler outdamaging a rogue tbh.

Assuming both start with +4 Dex and +3 Str at 1st level, that they manage to land two attacks, and that they both use a shortsword (a good weapon for both classes because its finesse and agile which makes those second attacks more accurate), a 5th level rogue would be dealing 4d6+4 per attack (avg. 36) while a swashbuckler would be dealing 2d6+7 in the first attack and 5d6+4 in the second attack (avg. 35.5). I already discussed this in earlier comments, so I'll make the same process but at 10th level. A rogue would still be dealing the same damage (avg. 36) while a swashbuckler would be dealing 2d6+8 in the first attack and 6d6+4 in the second attack (avg. 40). Yes, now the damage for the swashbuckler is higher, but as I discussed earlier, the rogue would still be more accurate...

a) the rogue isn't targeting off-guard targets "more easily". It's as easy for the swash to tumble through to a position that grants him off-guard as it is for the rogue to Stride there.

b) the reason your math is so off is because you don't include the actual effects of the finishers in them.
Dealing damage on a miss, dealing 2 attacks in 1 strike, dealing equal amounts of bleed, and etc boost your damage by a lot, which rogue does not have it on his sneak attacks.

Basically, only counting the average damage of a Hit, and not anything else, will never give you the correct numbers, and will actually skewer them by quite a lot.

c)again, the rogue is not "more accurate" by any stretch. rogue has no bonuses to hit any more than Swash has. If anything, Swash is the more accurate class because it has ways to either decrease his MAP or debuff enemy defences if he's an Intimidation Swash.

d)for the math I didn't even used a fully 18 str Swash, I used a Swash who has 16 Str by level 10, and he still outdamaged the rogue on average.

exequiel759 wrote:

Btw, how are you doing 2 or 3 attacks per round? 3 attacks means that you either don't generate panache or that you aren't using finishers, which means that a rogue (which is more accurate) in the same situation would certainly be dealing more damage as well. At 10th level it would be dealing an average of 54 points of damage (4d6+4 thrice), while a swashbuckler would be dealing an average of 45 (2d6+8 thrice) or 55 (2d6+8 twice + 6d6+4) in the miraculous situation you somehow manage to land an attack at -8 MAP, which again, a rogue is more likely to do even if still highly unlikely. At least unless you are targeting a lower level enemy.

They said they used Dual Finisher. Which would have their Finisher possibly hit twice at a MAP -4/-5 (or, if the 2nd hit is done with a non-Agile weapon for some reason, a -7) for a single Action. Which would allow a total of 3 Strikes (1 from the initial Strike, and 2 from Dual Finisher).

-3/-3 due to Combination Finisher. MAP for Dual finisher progresses only after you do both attacks. So it's usually Strike at +0/Finsher at -3/-3

Debilitating Strike (and associated feats) does let the Rogue do many or similar things that Finishers can do. No, they don’t have an equivalent to Confident Finisher or Dual Finisher, but they can just add extra dice to every attack with Precise Finisher or cause a significant amount of bleed damage or debuff the target in multiple ways.

After your earlier postings, I do see how the specific combination of Combination Finisher and Dual Finisher can be good. But if you’re going to consider a specific build of Swashbuckler, you need to do the same for Rogue. I think that’s what other posters are doing. Give rogue Gang Up, and it is much easier for the Rogue to get off-guard AND to make an enemy Off-Guard to the rest of the melee characters in the party. Give a Rogue Opportune Backstab, which is a much more consistent reaction than Opportune Riposte as things stand, and they are getting that extra attack that Dualing Finisher grants most turns. Give them one more feat in Precise Debilitations, and I think a Rogue can stay competitive or exceed in damage just fine. And they are never making a skill check that could just flat out remove their key abilities for a round if they fail (that problem being fixed mostly for Swashbuckler with the remaster).

And as many people have pointed out, the Rogue staying competitive with Swashbuckler in damage makes Rogue a far better class than Swashbuckler, because Rogue has so many skills and things going for it outside of combat.

I do agree that you’ve found a combination of feats that can make for a good Swashbuckler build a couple of levels earlier than I previously thought, and can make using a finisher on a second attack less painful. But rogue has things that make it better at those levels, too.

As an example, I did run into a PFS scenario yesterday that created issues for the Gang Up and Opportune Backstab build. Lots of enemies starting at 100 feet away or more. There were some obstacles that made closing more difficult, and there was a late night encounter that meant I didn’t have Tailwind, so I only had a 30 speed instead of 40 (on a dwarf, mind). Swashbuckler would have had a slight edge there. But Rogue is versatile enough that I still got 1 sneak attack off in the first round of each fight thanks to Surprise Attack and swapping to a short bow. My Swashbuckler, even projecting him out to the same level, would have been much more hampered in each of those fights. Essentially having to spend time closing the distance (admittedly with more speed), and not being able to generate panache or attack in any meaningful way on round 1, even if I did pick up Flying Blade at some point. Round two would have been fine, and I could have played the Rogue similar and just moved up three times to close the distance, but the rest of the party had trouble closing as well, so Gang Up and Opportune Backstab still wouldn’t have been that helpful. One thing the Swashbuckler has going for it is that it can fair a little better solo against one or more enemies, but only because of the stances for defense and the higher hit points (which being a dwarf, my rogue only has slightly fewer hps than most d10 classes at the same level. 150 at level 10 vs the level 11 fighter that had 173, but that’s a niche build with an 18 con, mountain stoutness, and toughness).

Anyway, it was just an interesting situation that came up that reminded me of some of the flexibility that Rogue has compared to Swashbuckler that hadn’t been discussed yet. I could have spent the whole fight sniping and would have still been effective, if not putting out the normal large damage numbers.

Debilitating Strike (and associated feats) does let the Rogue do many or similar things that Finishers can do. No, they don’t have an equivalent to Confident Finisher or Dual Finisher, but they can just add extra dice to every attack with Precise Finisher or cause a significant amount of bleed damage or debuff the target in multiple ways.

After your earlier postings, I do see how the specific combination of Combination Finisher and Dual Finisher can be good. But if you’re going to consider a specific build of Swashbuckler, you need to do the same for Rogue. I think that’s what other posters are doing. Give rogue Gang Up, and it is much easier for the Rogue to get off-guard AND to make an enemy Off-Guard to the rest of the melee characters in the party. Give a Rogue Opportune Backstab, which is a much more consistent reaction than Opportune Riposte as things stand, and they are getting that extra attack that Dualing Finisher grants most turns. Give them one more feat in Precise Debilitations, and I think a Rogue can stay competitive or exceed in damage just fine. And they are never making a skill check that could just flat out remove their key abilities for a round if they fail (that problem being fixed mostly for Swashbuckler with the remaster).

And as many people have pointed out, the Rogue staying competitive with Swashbuckler in damage makes Rogue a far better class than Swashbuckler, because Rogue has so many skills and things going for it outside of combat.

I do agree that you’ve found a combination of feats that can make for a good Swashbuckler build a couple of levels earlier than I previously thought, and can make using a finisher on a second attack less painful. But rogue has things that make it better at those levels, too.

I DID use Debilitating effect from teh thief racket in my comparisson. The 2nd sneak attack benefitting from it.

Still doesn't even come close to the effects of the finishers.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Swash doesn't need buffs, but since this is a comparisson with one of the most competitive classes in the game rn (rogue) I think it's safe to point out that things aren't that bad for Swash once you level up after a certain point.

Main issue for Swash underperforming was, and is, failing to get panache in a round, something that I do hope that gets fixed with Remaster and Bravado.

2nd issue is early level until you do get all those nice feats and different finishers.

What isn't an issue is Finishers though. Those do play out in the sense of building up to a big finale on a round (and are not suppossed to be the only attack in a round if you're trying to maximize your effectiveness, your style, and ultimately your swashbuckling).

---

That said, the Rogue in a specific party vs specific enemies will have the upper hand if he goes with opportune+perparation, but that setup does require 2 extra Strikers that hit with Strikes, a specific Initiative order, and the enemy not stepping away and ignoring most of the rogue damage. Hence why I thought it would be too specific for the occasion.

On the other hand, higher HP, fortune on saving throws, and (since we're talking about level 10) +2 on his AC, would favor the Swashbuckler making him much more defensive and sturdy compared to the rogue.

I totally missed Dual Finisher so my bad on that one, and while I wasn't taking certain feats into consideration like Bleeding Finisher, I did say a couple of comments ago that Bleeding Finisher was indeed very good. With that said, if we have to compare a specific swashbuckler build with its best feats available then we have to compare it with the best rogue build available too, in which case as, as Ferious Thune said, the rogue would still come up ahead. If Bleeding Finisher is a good feat that doesn't necesarily make swashbucklers a strong class either, it makes Bleeding Finisher a strong feat. Much like Gadget Specialist is a strong inventor feat but nobody is saying the inventor is a strong class because of that.

By the way, this wasn't discussed in this thread in depth though I believe some people mentioned it before, but what do you guys think about swashbucklers receiving a +1 circumstance bonus to checks to Tumble Through or to take any actions that give panache while you have panache? I feel this should work in the other way around, giving you this bonus while you don't have panache, because except you are playing a gymanst its not like you have much incentive to keep doing those actions once you already have panache. Continous Flair could increase this to a +2 circumstance bonus instead. I don't think it would be that strong really.

I totally missed Dual Finisher so my bad on that one, and while I wasn't taking certain feats into consideration like Bleeding Finisher, I did say a couple of comments ago that Bleeding Finisher was indeed very good. With that said, if we have to compare a specific swashbuckler build with its best feats available then we have to compare it with the best rogue build available too, in which case as, as Ferious Thune said, the rogue would still come up ahead. If Bleeding Finisher is a good feat that doesn't necesarily make swashbucklers a strong class either, it makes Bleeding Finisher a strong feat. Much like Gadget Specialist is a strong inventor feat but nobody is saying the inventor is a strong class because of that.

By the way, this wasn't discussed in this thread in depth though I believe some people mentioned it before, but what do you guys think about swashbucklers receiving a +1 circumstance bonus to checks to Tumble Through or to take any actions that give panache while you have panache? I feel this should work in the other way around, giving you this bonus while you don't have panache, because except you are playing a gymanst its not like you have much incentive to keep doing those actions once you already have panache. Continous Flair could increase this to a +2 circumstance bonus instead. I don't think it would be that strong really.

I didn't use a combination of feats though.

My comparisson was kept straight as feat light and option like as possible:

Just vanilla Confident finisher, without any addons, that you start at level 1 with for free. A single level 6 feat (combination finishers) that while it did help it wasn't that vital since I only used it with Confident finisher (basically just a +1 on the second attack, wouldn't change the math a lot even without) and not dual finisher or anything like that.

And for the Rogue side of things I gave the rogue a level 10 feat, in precise debilitations, because that's what usually all thief rogues pick at that level and it is a math enhancer for the rogue.

So, Feat wise, I actually favored the rogue over favoring the Swashbuckler.

If the comparisson was with Dual finisher, or Bleeding finisher, or even Precise finisher, it would be even worse for the rogue.

Well, I already proved your math was wrong above, so I don't know then.

Well, I already proved your math was wrong above, so I don't know then.

Only you didn't.

You just took the average of the damage, without taking into account the fact that one does damage on a miss.

which actually blows your math completely out of the water and makes them wrong.

You also didn't take into account that rogues are more accurate, which is something you aren't acknowleding here (a swashbuckler doesn't leave targets off-guard with tumble through, only if they have the Tumble Behind feat they can do it, which mind you, is a feat rogues also have and one level lower. Besides that, battledancers, braggarts, and wits don't have a way to proc off-guard, with only fencers and gymanst being able to do that through their panache-generating actions. Ruffians and thieves are the rogues that can't proc off-guard from their subclass, but if we accept Tumble Behind as a viable option for swashbucklers then rogues have that plus Twin Feint, Dread Striker, Head Stomp, Scoundrel's Surprise, Sly Disarm, and Precise Debilitations.)

Besides, as if half precision damage on a miss would change much of anything. The difference in damage between both classes is already close even in the assumption they all succed their attacks. You also haven't brought up once how rogues still have more than twice trained skills, skill feats, and skill increases than swashbucklers and how that impacts the class. Even in the few spots in which swashbucklers indeed do more damage than rogues, a rogue still has a ton of other things it can do and its not like fighters or barbarians in which that difference in damage is meaningful enough to kinda compensate for the loss of that versatility.

I DID use Debilitating effect from teh thief racket in my comparisson. The 2nd sneak attack benefitting from it.

Your math is off, then. You didn’t show the breakdown of how you got the Rogue numbers.

(EDIT: My math is off now. Shouldn’t ever be more than a 45% chance of a normal hit. I’m fixing it now
EDIT EDIT: Should be fixed now).

2d6 from striking shortsword
2d6 from sneak
2d6 from runes
+5 Dex
+2 specialization

Avg 28 damage

Once you land one attack, that will go up to 35 for essentially the rest of that enemy’s life, provided you hit at least once per round.

Rogue will have off-guard, which you do seem to give, but you don’t seem to give the rogue crit at all.

.45 x 28 + .15 x 56 = 21 First attack

.35 x 35 + .05 x 70 = 15.75 Second attack

36.75 avg damage (42 potentially on subsequent rounds). And level 10 happens to be a level before Rogue sneak goes to 3d6 and a level after Finishers go to 4d6.

If you add in Opportune Backstab on even half of the rounds, you add an additional 10.5 (13.125 if Precise debilitations is active) damage (half of a full MAP attack)

This is compared to 29 from Swashbuckler per your calculations. If we give Swashbuckler off-guard that will probably even out or maybe even pull ahead a little.

If you take away Precise Debilitations, you’re at 33.6 (.45x28+.15x28 + .35x28+.05x56) Before Opportune Backstab and with no feats contributing.

EDIT again. Say it’s not a Thief Rogue and only has a +3 STR at 10th level. That makes average damage 26 on an attack, for:

.45 x 26 + .15 x 52 = 19.5

.35 x 26 + .05 x 52 = 11.7

Total: 31.2 Still higher than what you calculated for Swashbuckler.

By the way, this wasn't discussed in this thread in depth though I believe some people mentioned it before, but what do you guys think about swashbucklers receiving a +1 circumstance bonus to checks to Tumble Through or to take any actions that give panache while you have panache? I feel this should work in the other way around, giving you this bonus while you don't have panache, because except you are playing a gymanst its not like you have much incentive to keep doing those actions once you already have panache. Continous Flair could increase this to a +2 circumstance bonus instead. I don't think it would be that strong really.

While I agree that it would be nice to get bonuses while out of panache, I disagree that you won't want to use your panache skill while you have panache. Just taking a Battledancer, you would be interested in using Perform to:

Fascinate additional people/for additional rounds
Reposition with Leading Dance
(and as a Shadadowdancer, cast Dance of Darkness (success level determines duration))

Part of building a Swashbuckler well is making sure that you have multiple useful things to do in combat with your panache skill, since it is such a major investment.

Battle Dancer has been a bit of an outlier, in that it had up until now been the easiest build to get panache on, and it has an interesting use of its skill.

Which kind of points to the issue with the other styles. They aren’t generally any better at doing the thing they need to do to gain panache than other classes, and often worse. And, they don’t do anything unique with it. Anyone can demoralize, bon mot, feint, etc. Leading Dance is something unique to Battle Dancer, and the other Styles could use something unique as well.

shroudb wrote:

I DID use Debilitating effect from teh thief racket in my comparisson. The 2nd sneak attack benefitting from it.

Your math is off, then. You didn’t show the breakdown of how you got the Rogue numbers.

(EDIT: My math is off now. Shouldn’t ever be more than a 45% chance of a normal hit. I’m fixing it now
EDIT EDIT: Should be fixed now).

2d6 from striking shortsword
2d6 from sneak
2d6 from runes
+5 Dex
+2 specialization

Avg 28 damage

Once you land one attack, that will go up to 35 for essentially the rest of that enemy’s life, provided you hit at least once per round.

Rogue will have off-guard, which you do seem to give, but you don’t seem to give the rogue crit at all.

.45 x 28 + .15 x 56 = 21 First attack

.35 x 35 + .05 x 70 = 15.75 Second attack

36.75 avg damage (42 potentially on subsequent rounds). And level 10 happens to be a level before Rogue sneak goes to 3d6 and a level after Finishers go to 4d6.

If you add in Opportune Backstab on even half of the rounds, you add an additional 10.5 (13.125 if Precise debilitations is active) damage (half of a full MAP attack)

This is compared to 29 from Swashbuckler per your calculations. If we give Swashbuckler off-guard that will probably even out or maybe even pull ahead a little.

If you take away Precise Debilitations, you’re at 33.6 (.45x28+.15x28 + .35x28+.05x56) Before Opportune Backstab and with no feats contributing.

I used 11 to hit an off-guard target to have uniform numbers.

But i'll go ahead with your 8 to hit an off-guard target that you used.

4d6+2+4+4 average 24 on a Strike
8d6+6 on a finisher hit average 34, 7 on a finisher miss.

0.45x24+ 0.15x48 first hit that's a 18 damage.
0.4x34 + 0.05x68 +0.5x7 second hit that's 20.5 damage

Total of 38.5 vs your 36.75

So, with your example of needing a 8 to hit an off-guard target, Swashbuckler is still ahead of the Rogue.

I don't think it's useful to get into a deep dive about the math of the Swashbuckler without actually having the text of the remastered swashbuckler.

Barely, which I acknowledged would probably be the case. But the Swashbuckler is by no means guaranteed off guard. It’s possible, if you’re mainly tumbling through and using the feat to include off guard, but as has been pointed out, many of the things that Swashbucklers do to gain Panache don’t give Off Guard.

Even granting the Swashbuckler off guard as often as the Rogue, claiming that 1.4 average damage a round when everything goes right for the Swashbuckler makes them significantly better in combat than a Rogue is stretching things.

And, again, Rogue has Gang Up and Opportune Backstab available to counter Opportune Riposte (on the rare occasions it happens) or an increase in damage from a different finisher.

That the classes are even close in combat is a major strike against the Swashbuckler given all of the things that a Rogue can do out of combat.

I don't think it's useful to get into a deep dive about the math of the Swashbuckler without actually having the text of the remastered swashbuckler.

I partially agree. I’m mainly countering the narrative that the Swashbuckler as is is somehow significantly better than the Rogue. But even given the one thing we know about Remastered Swashbuckler, which makes it more likely they can generate panache, that is already assumed in these numbers. Which is why I feel like Swashbuckler still needs other boosts, if it isn’t going to get some out of combat additions. So I’m hopeful for things like Opportune Riposte on a miss (when you have panache was a good suggestion for that) or Panache on initiative (possibly depending on what skill you roll). Those line up with things that the Rogue already has on top of basically being equal in generating damage on a normal round (when everything goes right for the Swashbuckler).

Barely, which I acknowledged would probably be the case. But the Swashbuckler is by no means guaranteed off guard. It’s possible, if you’re mainly tumbling through and using the feat to include off guard, but as has been pointed out, many of the things that Swashbucklers do to gain Panache don’t give Off Guard.

Even granting the Swashbuckler off guard as often as the Rogue, claiming that 1.4 average damage a round when everything goes right for the Swashbuckler makes them significantly better in combat than a Rogue is stretching things.

And, again, Rogue has Gang Up and Opportune Backstab available to counter Opportune Riposte (on the rare occasions it happens) or an increase in damage from a different finisher.

That the classes are even close in combat is a major strike against the Swashbuckler given all of the things that a Rogue can do out of combat.

I already said that in optimal conditions, a Rogue with Prep and Opportune will indeed outdamage. That said, gang up, opportune, prep, and debilitations is something that you'd have at 12 I think and it would take almost all of your feats for. (and although that comes with some restrictions and party compositions and initiative orders and all that hassle that makes it kinda impossible to accurately codify in raw numbers. similar to how i'm not using bleeding finisher since that comes with its own problems like "how many rounds has the bleed lasted till the monster died")

I was pointing out that the "if both rogue attacks and swash attacks, the rogue outdamages the swash" was simply a fallacy.

A fallacy born from the mental trap of "you should only use the finisher as 1st attack and ignore the rest".

As far as off-guard goes, I think given that Tumble through incorporates a move action in it and as a swash you have like 40+ speed, it's almost guaranteed for you to be able to tumble to a possition to have an enemy off-guard, maybe not as guaranteed as gang-up, but i haven't used a feat for that.

(p.s. it's not 1.4 damage "when everything goes right", it's 1.8 damage, or about 5% damage "on average")

Sorry, thought it said 38.15. 38.5-36.75 is 1.75. I just want to make sure we’re using accurate numbers. Giving the rogue off-guard, but then assuming they are fighting an opponent with 2 more AC is not a fair comparison.

You’ve made some good arguments for using a regular attack then finisher.

A 10th level Swashbuckler would have a 35 move assuming Fleet or some other speed boost. They don’t get their full bonus unless they have Panache, and since we are talking about the action with which they gain Panache, they don’t have it. 25 base, half of 15 rounds down to 5, fleet or elf or something similar. Certain builds could have 40 or 45. But essentially you have to be able to both tumble through and either have the feat to make that cause off guard or be able to get to a flank with 15 or 20 feet. This is why many have been arguing that you can’t assume a Swashbuckler will be able to make two attacks in a round.

These are good numbers to have. I’ll still contend that in play, a Rogue will generally out damage (the current) Swashbuckler and feel much better to play, given that there are far fewer rounds of “Try and fail to gain panache, Try an fail to gain panache, Attack for low damage.” Remaster will at least fix that, so that these numbers will be more accurate.

Finishers are more powerful than Debilitations, but Finishers aren’t more powerful than Sneak Attack plus Debilitations. They’re just different. I still don’t think Finishers were the right mechanic for the Swashbuckler and that the class’s damage output shouldn’t be dependent on using one every round just to keep up with other classes. But at least we have some numbers showing that it is possible for them to keep up.

Battle Dancer has been a bit of an outlier, in that it had up until now been the easiest build to get panache on, and it has an interesting use of its skill.

Which kind of points to the issue with the other styles. They aren’t generally any better at doing the thing they need to do to gain panache than other classes, and often worse. And, they don’t do anything unique with it. Anyone can demoralize, bon mot, feint, etc. Leading Dance is something unique to Battle Dancer, and the other Styles could use something unique as well.

Fair enough. Battledancer is the only one I have personally played, and I was actually quite surprised at how effective it was after everything I'd heard about how weak swashbucklers were.

I've played Battledancer, Gymnast and Fencer fairly extensively and a Wit for a short time and the only time I felt useless was entirely unrelated to the class, and I'm fairly certain I wasn't really overshadowed in terms of damage other than the Gymnast. But that was mostly because I made like 1 or 2 strikes every other session.

Braggart only getting once per enemy until level 9 is admittedly some b#~%~&%@.

I was in a group with a battledancer and braggart in low-level campaigns (both which ended up being one-shots for multiple reasons). The battledancer had a really bad time with it because he obviously didn't have Leading Dance so he was restricted to getting panache once per target. It also didn't help that the character died that session lol. The braggart had pretty much the same experience. He at least didn't die, but he didn't come back to keep playing either, so the campaign kinda ended right there. I assume the reason why bravado exists is because of these styles.

Battledancer having a bad time with Panache is odd to me. Were you only fighting single higher level enemies?

so he was restricted to getting panache once per target

This restriction doesn't exist for Battledancer. You don't have to use Fascinating Performance, you can just use the Perform action.

Because it's like the only style that checks against every single enemy and gets Panache if you beat any of them, provided your chosen performance affects the enemies. With no restrictions on how often. I played that from 1-20 and never struggled with Panache at any point really.

Battledancer having a bad time with Panache is odd to me. Were you only fighting single higher level enemies?

Quote:

so he was restricted to getting panache once per target

This restriction doesn't exist for Battledancer. You don't have to use Fascinating Performance, you can just use the Perform action.

Because it's like the only style that checks against every single enemy and gets Panache if you beat any of them, provided your chosen performance affects the enemies. With no restrictions on how often. I played that from 1-20 and never struggled with Panache at any point really.

I always forget for whatever reason that battledancers don't have that restriction despite the fact that the action that enables that panache-generation has it (or at least Fascinating Performance does). I assume it had to be the case for that player as well, though I think we have to agree it is really weird that until now battledancers were the only class that (until bravado) was forced into making checks that don't have a benefit and that they can fail to generate panache.

On top of everything I already said about this class in earlier posts, I think this is also a huge reason why the class feels weird in general. I don't know what happened with Paizo in the APG but the classes from that book feel like they didn't have any playtesting at all. In fact, looking at the APG witch and the PC1 witch it feels like the APG one was made for a playtest and that recently we got the real one. I'm under the assumption oracle is going to be on the same boat since that class is also scheduled for a rework, but until I have the book in my hands and see the full extent of the chages for the swashbuckler and investigator I will be fearing for both of them.

In exchange they get to pick the traits on the action so that they can basically always use it, so I've always considered it an even trade.

I don't know what happened with Paizo in the APG but the classes from that book feel like they didn't have any playtesting at all.

To some extent they didn't. The Witch, Investigator, and Oracle all saw substantitive changes to core mechanics before printing. While those changes were based on playtesting, those new versions of the class were never playtested, obviously.

The Swashbuckler kind of had the opposite problem. Lots of people looked at the class, saw it had an interesting new mechanic, and then turned their attention back to the much more obviously broken other classes. People didn't start really deep diving on the Swashbuckler's math, feat, and skill issues until months after the APG came out.

Yup. I recall everyone liking the Swash’s mechanics on a quick glance and the other classes being so obviously poor in their designs.

exequiel759 wrote:

I don't know what happened with Paizo in the APG but the classes from that book feel like they didn't have any playtesting at all.

To some extent they didn't. The Witch, Investigator, and Oracle all saw substantitive changes to core mechanics before printing. While those changes were based on playtesting, those new versions of the class were never playtested, obviously.

The Swashbuckler kind of had the opposite problem. Lots of people looked at the class, saw it had an interesting new mechanic, and then turned their attention back to the much more obviously broken other classes. People didn't start really deep diving on the Swashbuckler's math, feat, and skill issues until months after the APG came out.

The APG was also the first playtest we had since the CRB came out, and the data you get from the playtest is obviously going to be better when the participants are more familiar with the system itself.

Not to mention that expectation power level and design depth were very different way back then.

We only had the Core Classes to go off from and all of those classes, except the Alchemists, had much better base chassis that compensated for the more tame feats. Which was definitely no the case for the APG classes, who mostly relied on passing skill checks for their core mechanic.

In the end, class design was far more conservative way back then and that heavily impacted the APG classes, even though a lot of people asked for more power (as it's usual. Except with Animists).

If we compare the most recent playtests with the APG, the difference is night and day. Even the poorly received Guardian had some powerhouse feats (Tough Cookie and Hampering Sweeps), something that not even the Swashbuckler had during the playtest.

In hindsight, I think I would've focus a lot more on the Finishers themselves. I'm personally not okay with their design, specially at higher levels. I feel like the class has very little of "Superhuman/Demigod" at higher levels and more "math enhancers" that are as mechanically decent as they are awfully boring.

The Curtain Call player's guide references Dirty Trick (one of the backgrounds grants it). It's a thievery skill feat.

The Curtain Call player's guide references Dirty Trick (one of the backgrounds grants it). It's a thievery skill feat.

The player's guide for Curtain Call is written with "you have player core 2" in mind since it name checks the new Champion causes.

Which makes sense since I thing Stage Fright and PC2 ship on the same day.

Sure do! I'm very excited to see what sorts of fun happen in Curtain Call.

Same, even if it's going to be ages before I can run or play in it.

The Curtain Call player's guide references Dirty Trick (one of the backgrounds grants it). It's a thievery skill feat.

Oh my gosh, that's really promising! Thievery desperately needs more love in terms of feat options that aren't some variation of "move an object without other people noticing", a scenario I don't see promoted a lot in the APs I've been in.

Now I really wonder if it's an Attack action. Is it a new rival to Feint/Demoralize/Bon Mot, or an Athletics equivalent for low-Strength characters? And what effect will it have?

I fully expect it to be a Bon Mot-equivalent feat for thievery since Dirty Tricks were a combat maneuver in PF1e like grapple or trip were. I remember it being really strong though, and I don't know what it could do that other similar combat actions don't already do.

Religion actually has two cool skill actions (from Gods and Magic) that would be thematic for a religious Swashbuckler. It's just a shame there's no 1st level Religion skill action to tide you over until you hit 7 (besides Recall Knowledge) or we could have a subclass right there.

I fully expect it to be a Bon Mot-equivalent feat for thievery since Dirty Tricks were a combat maneuver in PF1e like grapple or trip were. I remember it being really strong though, and I don't know what it could do that other similar combat actions don't already do.

It could debuff reflex the way bon mot debuffs will. IF that's the case, then all we'd be missing is a skill action debuffing fortitude and we'd have the trifecta of targeted save debuffs that anyone could do to help set up a spell landing

Dirty Trick

Source: PZO1115.

You can attempt to hinder a foe in melee as a standard action. This maneuver covers any sort of situational attack that imposes a penalty on a foe for a short period of time. Examples include kicking sand into an opponent’s face to blind him for 1 round, pulling down an enemy’s pants to halve his speed, or hitting a foe in a sensitive spot to make him sickened for a round. The GM is the arbiter of what can be accomplished with this maneuver, but it cannot be used to impose a permanent penalty, and the results can be undone if the target spends a move action. If you do not have the Improved Dirty Trick feat or a similar ability, attempting a dirty trick provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.

If your attack is successful, the target takes a penalty. The penalty is limited to one of the following conditions:

blinded, dazzled, deafened, entangled, shaken, or sickened.

This condition lasts for 1 round. For every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent’s CMD, the penalty lasts 1 additional round. This penalty can usually be removed if the target spends a move action. If you possess the Greater Dirty Trick feat, the penalty lasts for 1d4 rounds, plus 1 round for every 5 by which your attack exceeds your opponent’s CMD. In addition, removing the condition requires the target to spend a standard action.

If I would need to transalte this into PF2e, it would likely be something like disarm that imposes a penalty on you as long as you don't take an action to remove that penalty somehow. The penalty itself is the hard part though. An action that would allow you to inflict all those actions (more so as an skill feat) is literally impossible in PF2e, though if I had to select a single one of these I would also think the action (feat) would be a little limited too. Probably a skill feat that allows you to select it multiple times to gain different conditions you can impose with it? That of WWHsmackdown's proposal could work.

I fully expect it to be a Bon Mot-equivalent feat for thievery since Dirty Tricks were a combat maneuver in PF1e like grapple or trip were. I remember it being really strong though, and I don't know what it could do that other similar combat actions don't already do.

Yeah, but Grapple and Trip have the Attack trait. That's the big question. It's a question of "is this a Third Action feat or a Strike Alternative feat?"

According to Swing Ripper,

"Dirty Trick is a skill feat for Thievery that can make enemies Clumsy 1 (roll vs reflex DC) for 1 round or until they interact to clean up their distraction with an interact on a critical success... You also fall prone on a crit fail!

Dirty Trick IS an attack trait action so it works very similarly to disarm the more I think of it... Doesn't require the opponent to have a weapon though AND is a status penalty to AC that is repeatable."

Looks like Precise Strike no longer requires Panache to grant you the +2 to +6 precision damage. That's nice for the (hopefully) rare situations in which you can't get Panache.

You also always have the +1 bonuses to the skill actions that grant panache even when you don't have panache.

You also always have the +1 bonuses to the skill actions that grant panache even when you don't have panache.

But only during encounters.

At 33:05 BadLuckGamer showed off Elegant Buckler. On a critical miss with your Buckler up you gain panache. I imagine the free-hand version of the feat will be very similar.

Just like the Rogue it seems that you'll have near-perfect uptime on Panache with all these feats.

Things are looking very interesting. Looks like I'll be able to drop most of the homebrew I cooked up for the campaign I'm running.

It seems most if not all actions that grant panache have the bravado trait, which paired with the other changes the class seems to have, puts the swashbuckler in a much better spot than before. It still presents the problem of doing the same thing a rogue does and not exactly much better, but it at least it is reliable now.

It also sounds like a lot of the benefits panache used to grant are things you just have now, too, including your minimum precision damage. Panache seems to have been changed into a slight buff state you expend for finishers or other feats that require it rather than having so many of your class' buffs tied to having it at all, which is neat.

Base Precision damage not being tied to panache also has the added benefit that it will apply to your opportune ripostes now, which usually wasn't a thing since you usually ended with Finisher and not on a panache builder.

That said, I'm more interested in the feat actions to gain panache through other means, so far we've learned about the raise buckler thing, that gives you panache when they critically fail to hit you (alongside triggering your opportune riposte) I'm assuming the free-hand version of that feat also has that as well, but I heard that there are other feats as well that give you panache outside of the Bravado actions.

Base Precision damage not being tied to panache also has the added benefit that it will apply to your opportune ripostes now, which usually wasn't a thing since you usually ended with Finisher and not on a panache builder.

Oh, I always tried to make sure to end my turn with a panache builder for exactly that reason, but it will be nice to have a little more flexibility in my turn.

Looks like Precise Strike no longer requires Panache to grant you the +2 to +6 precision damage. That's nice for the (hopefully) rare situations in which you can't get Panache.

It does help quite a bit a reposte focused style.

I don't mind dirty trick having the attack trait. Sort of feels like the cost of being the most SAD style. Hopefully there's more to it than just dirty trick though.