Player Core 2 Preview: The Swashbuckler, Remastered

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.

And it stacks with Off-Guard or being Prone, which is still pretty great. Plopping down debuffs that I get a +1 bonus to, that activates my panache, and doesn't require any extra Cha or Str investment is pretty nice.

Thief rogues are going to love it.

Yeah, Clumsy is a major debuff that helps your whole party, I don't mind the Attack Trait either.

I don't mind the Attack trait at all; it's just a very important note that defines what the skill feat is for. Maneuvers are pretty great! They just require a different strategy from "third actions".

Demoralize is definitely better in theory, of course. No action tax to remove it early, no crit fail consequence, no MAP. That's very good. But it's unlikely to use your KAS, and it targets the enemy's Wil DC instead of Reflex DC. If your wizard just Recalled Knowledge and told you this thing's weakest save is Reflex, Dirty Trick is a no-brainer.

Good news saw on reddit that +1 circumstance bonus to Bravado checks increases to +2 at 9th level. On top of that they do get auto scaling to Acrobat or their style skill.

This pretty much means that when it comes to their style they are best in game in using those skills in combat.

they do get auto scaling to Acrobat or their style skill.

It's not quite auto-scaling. They get an additional skill increase at 3rd, 7th and 15th level and can use those only on acrobatics or their style skill. You don't need to spend all those increases on the same skill.

(You will likely end up doing it regardless, but you don't have to.)

TheWayofPie wrote:

they do get auto scaling to Acrobat or their style skill.

It's not quite auto-scaling. They get an additional skill increase at 3rd, 7th and 15th level and can use those only on acrobatics or their style skill. You don't need to spend all those increases on the same skill.

(You will likely end up doing it regardless, but you don't have to.)

You’re right. It’s even better.

And funny enough it’s pretty much exactly like the homebrew I made for the game I’m running.

You can even double down with acrobat and basically get autoscaling on both Acrobatics and your Subclass skill.

At least I got one thing from my hopeful list. Looks like I can ditch Acrobat whenever I rebuild. Between this and precise strike damage without Panache, Swashbuckler should be able to be a little more flexible in general (builds and combat cycles).

Yeah, I saw those buffs on the subreddit too. I think the swashbuckler is a fairly good class now.

TheWayofPie wrote:

they do get auto scaling to Acrobat or their style skill.

It's not quite auto-scaling. They get an additional skill increase at 3rd, 7th and 15th level and can use those only on acrobatics or their style skill. You don't need to spend all those increases on the same skill.

(You will likely end up doing it regardless, but you don't have to.)

Nice!

It was always a good class. Really didn't need like 6 separate buffs.

Here's an incomplete list of known buffs to swashbucklers in PC2 so far:

* the huge buff to gaining panache even on a failure for actions with the bravado trait
* de-facto auto scaling acrobatics or style skill
* +1 circ bonus to any skill action with bravado trait when done in combat (+2 from level 9)
* Precise Strike is now a passive +2 damage buff (with same scaling as before)
* The buckler expertise feat gives you panache on a crit miss
* Swaggering Initiative now grants panache if you act first in combat
* Lots of feats open to any style (eg. Vexing Tumble, The Bigger They Fall, etc) now have the bravado trait, enabling you to gain panache with them, as well as the +1/+2 circ bonus to pull them off.
* A cool new 12th level feat (which also has the bravado trait) called "Get Used to Disappointment" with a free action Demoralise on a creature who failed an attack roll or skill check against you on its last turn - a Hero Point to whoever at Paizo wrote that one, for the fabulous Princess Bride reference!

Swashbuckler sounds pretty damn dope right now, i wonder if it has some new snazzy finisher

It was always a good class. Really didn't need like 6 separate buffs.

It was always an ok class, with lots of little and not so little problems. These buff look like they really make it shine, so I'm happy.

Guntermench wrote:

It was always a good class. Really didn't need like 6 separate buffs.

It was always an ok class, with lots of little and not so little problems. These buff look like they really make it shine, so I'm happy.

I dunno, I played the class for three years in multiple games and still don't think it really needed any of this. Let alone all of it.

Karmagator wrote:

Guntermench wrote:

It was always a good class. Really didn't need like 6 separate buffs.

It was always an ok class, with lots of little and not so little problems. These buff look like they really make it shine, so I'm happy.

I dunno, I played the class for three years in multiple games and still don't think it really needed any of this. Let alone all of it.

Your in the minority. Swashbuckler being my first class I must say it is quite mediocre in performance until high levels when Skills start outscaling DCs and they start getting good outlier feats like Bleeding Finisher.

* Swaggering Initiative now grants panache if you act first in combat

I hadn’t seen this one yet, either. That’s two things off my hopeful list. This just feels so much better than After You, which has you sitting around an entire turn doing nothing. That felt so bad in practice. I’m good with not *always* starting with Panache. But on those rounds where you act first, you get to be cool. Leaping in first feels more Swashbucklery than hanging in the back and watching everyone else have fun.

It’s sounding more and more like I’ll enjoy playing Swashbuckler now, even if I still may have some quibbles with the way Finishers work.

Karmagator wrote:

Guntermench wrote:

It was always a good class. Really didn't need like 6 separate buffs.

It was always an ok class, with lots of little and not so little problems. These buff look like they really make it shine, so I'm happy.

I dunno, I played the class for three years in multiple games and still don't think it really needed any of this. Let alone all of it.

I have played a couple of swashbuckler characters through low levels up to about level 4. One was PFS and the other is a game that was discontinued at about that point.

When fighting against lower level enemies, the class does pretty well. But when the class doesn't do well, it does really bad.

Against higher level single-enemy encounters in the AP, my Gymnast character could end up doing nothing effective for multiple rounds - pretty much the entire fight. Attempting a grab and missing applies MAP. So then what do I do? Strike with MAP (hit-fishing, not even crit-fishing) and maybe do some minor chip damage since I don't have panache?

My PFS fencer several times ended up fighting mindless undead enemies. With the GM ruling that since feint doesn't affect the enemy, I don't get panache from that either even if I could roll high enough to succeed. The action simply isn't available. Tumble Through only. And yes, Tumble Through does need to be 'through' - you can't end up back on the same side of the enemy unless you use another Tumble Through action to get back there.

So these buffs very much feel like they are raising the floor of the class rather than improving the ceiling. If your experience with Swashbuckler has been consistently near the ceiling of the class's power band, then it makes sense that you find these buffs unnecessary.

My experience hasn't been that. I find these buffs very needed and quite good.

Yeah, the only real problem I have with swashs is that they still have to play around the 1 attack per round if I want to make a finisher. Otherwise, the class seems to be in a really good spot and it certainly went over a few tiers in my personal tier list of martial classes.

I'm a gunslinger fan, so the one big attack per round appeals to me, but I can see the disconnect if you're imagining your swashbuckler, say, making their sword flash around them in a whirlwind of steal and striking loads of times rather than bouncing around, throwing out quips, and striking every couple seconds.

As for the buffs, I'm not sure if I'd have implemented all of them myself, nobody ever played a swashy in a game I've run, let alone expressed disatisfaction with one, so I've never needed to really consider it, but I like that they're there. Bravado is by far my favorite. It feels like such a clean mechanic to me. If it'd just been Bravado and an additional skill pick, or Bravado and the additional +1/+2, I'd have been eager to play the class.

Edit: Just realized my last sentence there made it sound like I wasn't eager. Just want to clarify that the extra stuff swashies got makes more interested, not less.

Yeah, the only real problem I have with swashs is that they still have to play around the 1 attack per round if I want to make a finisher. Otherwise, the class seems to be in a really good spot and it certainly went over a few tiers in my personal tier list of martial classes.

it's always superior to first do a normal strike and THEN a finisher.

even now.

That has been proven by math.

People keep falling to the mental trap of "oh no! i must do my big attack as my only strike" instead of sitting down and thinking how much stuff Finishers have going on for them to mitigate failing with them.

I mean, now that generating panaches is effectively +10 to the roll (triggers on one success tier lower), I'll be using Confident Finisher with, um... Confidence!

exequiel759 wrote:

Yeah, the only real problem I have with swashs is that they still have to play around the 1 attack per round if I want to make a finisher. Otherwise, the class seems to be in a really good spot and it certainly went over a few tiers in my personal tier list of martial classes.

it's always superior to first do a normal strike and THEN a finisher.

even now.

That has been proven by math.

People keep falling to the mental trap of "oh no! i must do my big attack as my only strike" instead of sitting down and thinking how much stuff Finishers have going on for them to mitigate failing with them.

This, even more so than it being superior for the old Barbarian to rage on their second turn so as to get two attacks turn 1 and turn 2, feel like design fails to me. They're both non-intuitive, and the need to rely on confident finisher to ensure damage instead of the more fun finishers until you hit level 19 is just frustrating.

shroudb wrote:

exequiel759 wrote:

Yeah, the only real problem I have with swashs is that they still have to play around the 1 attack per round if I want to make a finisher. Otherwise, the class seems to be in a really good spot and it certainly went over a few tiers in my personal tier list of martial classes.

it's always superior to first do a normal strike and THEN a finisher.

even now.

That has been proven by math.

People keep falling to the mental trap of "oh no! i must do my big attack as my only strike" instead of sitting down and thinking how much stuff Finishers have going on for them to mitigate failing with them.

This, even more so than it being superior for the old Barbarian to rage on their second turn so as to get two attacks turn 1 and turn 2, feel like design fails to me. They're both non-intuitive, and the need to rely on confident finisher to ensure damage instead of the more fun finishers until you hit level 19 is just frustrating.

nah, you don't need to rely on confident finisher till 19.

Confident is just ONE of the mitigating factors.

Other stuff like:
reduced MAP on finishers
2 attacks on 1 finisher
fortune effect on finisher attack roll

all help with mitigating the fail on said finisher.

shroudb wrote:

exequiel759 wrote:

Yeah, the only real problem I have with swashs is that they still have to play around the 1 attack per round if I want to make a finisher. Otherwise, the class seems to be in a really good spot and it certainly went over a few tiers in my personal tier list of martial classes.

it's always superior to first do a normal strike and THEN a finisher.

even now.

That has been proven by math.

People keep falling to the mental trap of "oh no! i must do my big attack as my only strike" instead of sitting down and thinking how much stuff Finishers have going on for them to mitigate failing with them.

This, even more so than it being superior for the old Barbarian to rage on their second turn so as to get two attacks turn 1 and turn 2, feel like design fails to me. They're both non-intuitive, and the need to rely on confident finisher to ensure damage instead of the more fun finishers until you hit level 19 is just frustrating.

You're using an agile weapon -- you shouldn't be anticipating a 2nd attack Finisher will miss. If you're setting up your conditions appropriately, that 2nd attack should have bonuses similar to a vanilla 1st attack.

nah, you don't need to rely on confident finisher till 19.

Confident is just ONE of the mitigating factors.

Other stuff like:
reduced MAP on finishers
2 attacks on 1 finisher
fortune effect on finisher attack roll

all help with mitigating the fail on said finisher.

-Rapiers, the most iconic swashbuckler weapon (the one included in the swashbuckler class kit, no less!) are not agile. Combination Finisher is a 6th level feat that faces stiff competion.

Look, I'm not disputing the things you bring up. But a lot of swashbucklers won't have any of them. I'd even be inclined to say the majority of them don't.

Perfect Finisher is indeed late in the game at 14, but for a full 1/4 of a 1-20 AP it's rather hilariously effective.

I mean, I don't want to get at it again now that the swashbuckler has received some buffs that I think most of us here like, so going over DPR discussions again would kinda feel bad IMO, but if those DPR discussions we had earlier proved something was that even in the best case scenarios swashbucklers didn't even had that much of a difference in damage when compared to rogues (and we didn't compare swash to the best rogue builds available). Also, like Squark said, even if the swashbuckler would be better in some situations, the fact that you have to do something as unnatural as make your strongest attack with a penalty is just weird. At least you don't have to jump so many hoops as you used to, which technically makes this a more possible tactic than before, but I just will never like it. At least losing panache now isn't as bad as it used to.

I mean, I don't want to get at it again now that the swashbuckler has received some buffs that I think most of us here like, so going over DPR discussions again would kinda feel bad IMO, but if those DPR discussions we had earlier proved something was that even in the best case scenarios swashbucklers didn't even had that much of a difference in damage when compared to rogues (and we didn't compare swash to the best rogue builds available). Also, like Squark said, even if the swashbuckler would be better in some situations, the fact that you have to do something as unnatural as make your strongest attack with a penalty is just weird. At least you don't have to jump so many hoops as you used to, which technically makes this a more possible tactic than before, but I just will never like it. At least losing panache now isn't as bad as it used to.

there's a great difference in:

basically, the only way swash could reach rogue levels of damage was by doing 2 attacks.

you claiming that "they still are doing only 1 attack" is purely spreading misinformation at this point, when it has been clearly shown to you that 2 attacks are factually better over and over again.

Assuming 2 strikes/round for DPR is the ultimate in problematic white room math IMHO.

In my actual play experience, swashbucklers only have the *opportunity* to make 2 strikes in a round 50% of the time or less. Even fighters only do it maybe 67%-75% of the time.

exequiel759 wrote:

I mean, I don't want to get at it again now that the swashbuckler has received some buffs that I think most of us here like, so going over DPR discussions again would kinda feel bad IMO, but if those DPR discussions we had earlier proved something was that even in the best case scenarios swashbucklers didn't even had that much of a difference in damage when compared to rogues (and we didn't compare swash to the best rogue builds available). Also, like Squark said, even if the swashbuckler would be better in some situations, the fact that you have to do something as unnatural as make your strongest attack with a penalty is just weird. At least you don't have to jump so many hoops as you used to, which technically makes this a more possible tactic than before, but I just will never like it. At least losing panache now isn't as bad as it used to.

there's a great difference in:

"dpr comparissons had swashbucklers slightly ahead of rogue"
and
"dpr comparissons had 2 attacks very much clearly ahead of 1 attack"

basically, the only way swash could reach rogue levels of damage was by doing 2 attacks.

you claiming that "they still are doing only 1 attack" is purely spreading misinformation at this point, when it has been clearly shown to you that 2 attacks are factually better over and over again.

For the sake of those of us unfamiliar with previous discussions, providing a link to such evidence would be greatly appreciated (my search engine skills were not great before techbros rammed a glorfied chatbot down the throat of the major search engines).

I'm never quite sure why people get hung up on such small amounts of difference in the amount of damage dealing potential. Unless the DPR calculations show a difference somewhere close to an entire character's worth of damage for a round, it isn't going to very noticeably change the number of rounds that an enemy stays alive.

I mean, I don't have a link but I wouldn't have played four of them over three years in four different games if it was noticeably worse in play...

Except I didn't make my math with a single attack and made it assuming they hit two attacks. Even hitting three attacks later on.

The discussion starts here for those interested..

But again, I wont go over that again, and its not like we aren't going to say anything that wasn't said before because I maintain my stance. If anything, the only thing that changed is that shroudb's supposed "very common scenario" is actually very common now with bravado, so that's a point in his favor.

I might have missed the text in the book but having read through the swashbuckler, none of the Finishers have the attack trait.

The general text for them includes the rule that you cannot take any actions with the attack trait after you use an action with the finisher trait but there is nothing to say that finishers themselves have the attack trait.

I'm pretty sure from reading the other text that they are meant to as it talks about finishers being an attack but the trait itself is missing and there is no text about finisher's being a strike either.

I might have missed the text in the book but having read through the swashbuckler, none of the Finishers have the attack trait.

The general text for them includes the rule that you cannot take any actions with the attack trait after you use an action with the finisher trait but there is nothing to say that finishers themselves have the attack trait.

I'm pretty sure from reading the other text that they are meant to as it talks about finishers being an attack but the trait itself is missing and there is no text about finisher's being a strike either.

That's completely normal. Stuff like finishers includes Strikes and such, which are attack actions. As you can't do part of the action, you can't do the finisher.

For a second I got really excited lol. I guess it would have been too much if finishers didn't have a MAP penalty.

I might have missed the text in the book but having read through the swashbuckler, none of the Finishers have the attack trait.

The general text for them includes the rule that you cannot take any actions with the attack trait after you use an action with the finisher trait but there is nothing to say that finishers themselves have the attack trait.

I'm pretty sure from reading the other text that they are meant to as it talks about finishers being an attack but the trait itself is missing and there is no text about finisher's being a strike either.

This is covered by Subordinate Actions, which is on page 415 of Player core. The relevant part being:

"An action might allow you to use a simpler action— usually one of the Basic Actions on page 416—in a different circumstance or with different effects. This subordinate action still has its normal traits and effects, but it’s modified in any ways listed in the larger action"

Finishers all call for one or more Strikes. Strike has the Attack trait and as such is affected by MAP.

Helvellyn wrote:

I might have missed the text in the book but having read through the swashbuckler, none of the Finishers have the attack trait.

The general text for them includes the rule that you cannot take any actions with the attack trait after you use an action with the finisher trait but there is nothing to say that finishers themselves have the attack trait.

I'm pretty sure from reading the other text that they are meant to as it talks about finishers being an attack but the trait itself is missing and there is no text about finisher's being a strike either.

This is covered by Subordinate Actions, which is on page 415 of Player core. The relevant part being:

"An action might allow you to use a simpler action— usually one of the Basic Actions on page 416—in a different circumstance or with different effects. This subordinate action still has its normal traits and effects, but it’s modified in any ways listed in the larger action"

Finishers all call for one or more Strikes. Strike has the Attack trait and as such is affected by MAP.

Yeah, I'd missed the description of each finisher; so although the general text on finishers doesn't mention making a strike it's in the description of each individual finisher.

I haven't read this entire thread.

I am guessing that Finisher still has the bug where you can't cast Ignition afterwards (since the spell has the attack trait), but casting Spout works just fine.

They squished dueling parry and twin parry together into a 1st lvl Extravagant Parry feat, which is really great because before there wasn't a good reason to play with two weapons at first. (Ranger and Fighter get the twin defensive feats 2 lvls later because they start with Double slice or Twin Takedown but Dual Finisher is lvl 8)
But now there isn't a lvl 10 dueling dance or twinned defense style feat anymore, but there is Buckler Dance, which still doesn't work with Parry and Riposte.
I dunno. It still just feels like the Swashbuckler is a jigsaw puzzle where the pieces don't quite fit.

seems like dueling dance has been removed? I guess thats incentive to use a buckler but still, feels pretty weird

seems like dueling dance has been removed? I guess thats incentive to use a buckler but still, feels pretty weird

The free-hand riposte feat now gives you panache when the enemy misses you in addition to the normal benefits, so Dueling Dance would be a meaningful increase in power if it applied to that as well. It seems like they're trying to encourage bucklers being more defensive, with free-hand being more offensive.

RaptorJesues wrote:

seems like dueling dance has been removed? I guess thats incentive to use a buckler but still, feels pretty weird

The free-hand riposte feat now gives you panache when the enemy misses you in addition to the normal benefits, so Dueling Dance would be a meaningful increase in power if it applied to that as well. It seems like they're trying to encourage bucklers being more defensive, with free-hand being more offensive.

Uh. Thats actually pretty cool

RaptorJesues wrote:

seems like dueling dance has been removed? I guess thats incentive to use a buckler but still, feels pretty weird

The free-hand riposte feat now gives you panache when the enemy misses you in addition to the normal benefits, so Dueling Dance would be a meaningful increase in power if it applied to that as well. It seems like they're trying to encourage bucklers being more defensive, with free-hand being more offensive.

Elegant buckler also gives panache when someone critically misses you.

Arcaian wrote:

RaptorJesues wrote:

seems like dueling dance has been removed? I guess thats incentive to use a buckler but still, feels pretty weird

The free-hand riposte feat now gives you panache when the enemy misses you in addition to the normal benefits, so Dueling Dance would be a meaningful increase in power if it applied to that as well. It seems like they're trying to encourage bucklers being more defensive, with free-hand being more offensive.

Elegant buckler also gives panache when someone critically misses you.

Which is odd, because the other level 1 feats that enable similar styles, like Extravagant Parry and Flashy Dodge, enable panache on a regular miss and don't require a crit fail.

BadLuckGamer just dropped the giga sized Swashbuckler video.

This is the most buffed class in the system. Swashbucklers are now way less one trick pony thanks to the huge variety of bravado traits. A very noticeable feat is one that lets you draw a weapon and perform a finisher in one action. And it can be any finisher you qualify for.

I saw the BadLuckGamer video and now Swashbuckler looks like way more fun than before due how much easier and how much funnier is to get the panache.

Yet the changes basically focus into get the panache way more easier but didn't solve the damage point where swashbucklers lags behind the thief rogues.

The problem is that finishers aren't powerful enough to compete with rogues, barbarians and fighters that get their benefits in every strike that they deal including their reactions.

What the designers made to panache was fantastic yet due they keep the finishers limited to be the last attack action that swashbucklers can made in their turns and unable to be used in reactions other than Opportune Riposte they will still are subpar vs other martial classes including the rogues that have theirs characters concepts too close to the swashbucklers' characters with far more skills.

Illimitable Finisher allows it to become competitive because allows 2 finishers in a single action but is a level 20 feat so you still stays behind along the levels from 10-19 what's pretty meh!

It almost feels that it's so easy to gain Panache now that the Swashbuckler needs an additional thing they can spend it on, since you could easily gain it twice on your own turn and once between turns but you can only spend it once per turn.

not sure about time limit on panache

it make sense but also add another thing to track

style still doesn't give bonus feat

parry at level 1 and buckler buff are nice