Sgt Arpin's page

Sgt Arpin wrote:

Saigo Takamori wrote:

Lyra Amary wrote:

Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would be be flat footed? He has evasion ant uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge. Have you tried it?

There are many reason why a character may not be able to move (easily), it has happened regularly during the last few play session.

What levels are you talking about, you're trying to macguffin in any and all abilities of the class at any one time.

This is starting to turn into a "my wizard can cast this spell" discussion

Were not talking about "at what level". Were talking about what the classes can and can't do.

For instance, there is no debate here whether a level 1 2 handed fighter would out damage a level 1 swasbuckler. Of course he would.

Eltacolibre wrote:

Not everybody wants to play people dancing around with swords...some just like swinging their big swords and be done with it. I have a friend who enjoys playing dex fighter and enjoyed it when Swashbuckler was released.

Swashbuckler is pretty cool...but frankly I will never ever play a dex based class for personal preference really. I prefer brute strength or spellcasting but that's just me.

Using a bastard sword or katana might be big enough for some people. And the dancing around part is not necessary. You can easily play a guy wielding a bastard sword who's standing still most of the time until he strikes or someone attacks him. That's when he dodges just far enough to not get hit.

But to OP: I'd play a slayer over a fighter or swashbuckler most of the time. Except maybe for a dip.

I love my swashbuckler characters. I haven't been able to wait for the class to come out. I'm usually a more finesse type player, rogues, ranged rangers, mostly elves, but I've never had a martial class quite fit the bill. Now I do. One thing to take away from this debate (trying to keep it friendly, looking at you Seranov) is that the more classes and archetypes we come out with, the more danger we are in our pushing or legacy iconic classes out of their roles. I think fighter is the class in most jeopardy of this.

Lyra Amary wrote:

Also, attempting to explain the Fighter as versatile is not the best ideas. The Fighter is good at only one thing: doing damage. There is a reason why they are considered weak, because this is the only thing they can be good at.

True, but not my point. Sure, outside of combat the fighter is like a moose on broadway, but in combat the fighter is a class that can master many style. It's quite easy for a 2-handed figther to get some archery feat for these pesky flying thing, and shine more thant the barbarian who just rage on the ground because the monster are not in reach.... or in the actual case, the swatch butler who don't really have good mechanics to go ''outside of his box in combat''.

Why would be be flat footed? He has evasion ant uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge. Have you tried it?

It's not an ad hominem. I'm not attacking your stance. I am expressing disbelief that you could actually even say something like that.

An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.

Your right. You didn't attack my stance. That would in fact make it not and add hominem statement. Your statement attacked my character. Read above.

Fighters are better at mass combat.

Arm chairing you are looking at one on one fighting.

They also last a lot longer and deal better with low rolls… a swashbuckler poops out early when nothing amazing happens (meaning no crits etc)

A fighter can hold a doorway against multiple enemies while the party prepares/escapes/heals.

The swashbuckler is so busy jumping around anything and everything can just run by him.

A fighter is more party cohesive.

If given the opportunity, and ALL skills are covered, I don't need to worry about casting, or disabling device etc.

Ill pick fighter almost every time.
(although I do like barbarian and occasionally paladin… holy guide looks particularly attractive)

Why can't a swash do this too?

Sgt Arpin wrote:

You keep using this "feats well" statement. What feats can a fighter take a swash can't?

Spellbreaker, weapon specialization, greater weapon focus, greater weapon specialization, disruptive, teleport tactician, shield specialization, greater shield focus, ray shield

Off the top of my head.

Of course then there is:

Two weapon fighting,
Point blank shot, rapid shot, precise shot, manyshot, deadly aim, and any other combat feat that doesn't involve stabbing things with a single one handed weapon.

Swashbucklers count their levels as fighter levels and get combat feats ever 4 levels.

Sgt Arpin wrote:

TarkXT wrote:

Sgt Arpin wrote:

What would "anything else melee" be?

Reach fighting.

Two handed fighting.

Two Weapon Fighting.

Natural Weapon fighting.

This question has been answered before.

Why do that things? The swash does better damage without that.

You cannot actually be this obtuse.

Ad hominem.

Let's be clear here. I don't think the swash is better. I think they both have their merits. I'm trying to find someone to make a compelling argument to my group as to (other than sheet flavor) why they should take a fighter over a swashbuckler when I'm standing toe to toe with a bad guy.

Sgt Arpin wrote:

What would "anything else melee" be?

Reach fighting.

Two handed fighting.

Two Weapon Fighting.

Natural Weapon fighting.

This question has been answered before.

Why do that things? The swash does better damage without that.

What would "anything else melee" be?

And the ONLY 2 thinks prcise strike doesnt work against are oozes and elementals. Well and ghosts.

You keep using this "feats well" statement. What feats can a fighter take a swash can't?

The only 2 options are presented because the IRL conversation pit only those 2 classes against each other.

Why be a fighter instead of a swashbuckler? If you want to use two-handed weapons. If you want to use heavy armor. If you want to use a shield other than a buckler. If you want to use two-weapon fighting. If you want to have a good fortitude save. If you don't want to keep track of resources like panache.

I think you missed the point. "Want" isn't a factor here. If I wanted a class that casts spells I wouldn't choose swashbuckler either. What you use to do it is irrelevant in this conversation as pointed many many many times above. The point is that swashbuckler does melee fighting better than fighter. Stop being a klingon and start thinking like a vulcan. Thats the point of this conversation. There are plenty of classes that I would play just because I liked the flavor better, even if it was gimped and the same thing could be done much better by another class. I'm sure we all agree on that and pointing that out derails the intent of the conversation and should not be contributed.

Sgt Arpin wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Sgt Arpin wrote:

Evilgm wrote:

They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.

That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.

And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.

All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.

I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.

What do you mean by "it"?

Ah you're right. By it, I mean one vs one sustained melee combat, taking into account damage as well as the ability to avoid damage, and manipulate that same combat using abilities, whether they be from feats or class abilities.

I think a barbarian can do quiet well, and a paladin also if fighting something evil.

I've got pali butt hurt. They do everything better. If you said that's the most OP class, I'd agree all day. Especially if they made them correctly with their highest stat as CHA.

Right, you then ignored the whole Armor Training point I brought up. So let me mention it again, Armor Training. Fighters, compared to Swashbucklers, can wear Heavy armor and move at normal speed. Additionally, Armor Training allows you to play even a Dex Fighter in heavy armor without losing any AC. Even with the Swashbuckler's extra AC in light armor it cannot match up.

So, with similar Saves, the difference between them is that one hits harder and the other is harder to hit.

Plus, more feats, options, and archetypes instead of deeds.

As swashbuckler with the signature deed feat for opp parry and rip with combat reflexes, AC hardly matters.

Sgt Arpin wrote:

Mike Franke wrote:

People often seem to forget that what a fighter does he can do all the time every round every day. He doesn't require grit or panache to occasionally nova. That is the main strength of the fighter.

I know most of us play a pretty basic 4-5 encounters per day because that seems to be how everything is written. But when that goes out the door it is nice to be a fighter.

So can a Swashbuckler. You only need 1 panache to add you level to damage every strike. That's like getting a +1 weapon every level... forever.

It is not all day because it is precision damage so some are immune to it. That is what the other poster was getting at. Yes, it is true that it won't be common, but the other poster is correct.

No, I am not saying the fighter is better.

Good point. Oozes and Elementals.

Sgt Arpin wrote:

Evilgm wrote:

They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.

That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.

And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.

All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.

I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.

What do you mean by "it"?

Ah you're right. By it, I mean one vs one sustained melee combat, taking into account damage as well as the ability to avoid damage, and manipulate that same combat using abilities, whether they be from feats or class abilities.

Sgt Arpin wrote:

Diminuendo wrote:

two quick combat featsfor a two level dip, weapon training for a third.

What do you mean? Need a bit more context to understand.

why ever take fighter?

Ah I head to reread what you typed.

"They may want to take a two level dip in fighter for 2 quick combat feats, and weapon training for a third."

That's a good point.

Let me rephrase my question:

"why ever play 20 levels of fighter instead of 20 levels in swashbuckler?"

Not everybody wants to play people dancing around with swords...some just like swinging their big swords and be done with it. I have a friend who enjoys playing dex fighter and enjoyed it when Swashbuckler was released.

Swashbuckler is pretty cool...but frankly I will never ever play a dex based class for personal preference really. I prefer brute strength or spellcasting but that's just me.

I can totally agree with you. I play this game about 75% for the flavor so I buy that. This is an exerciser in mechanical debate though.

it occurs to me weirdly enough that you can a passable archer with a swash, picking up point blank master at level 6. you would have to ignore quite a few class features though, or go the switch hitter route though.

I think you meant "make a passable". Swashbucklers can't add precise strike damage to bows.

Feat every level?

Doesn't seem like much but you can pull off some neat things. I especially like the ability to run a Dervish Dance Fighter and Armor Training to get my AC through the roof. Sure you end up using half your non-combat feats on things like Iron Will and whatever else you can to shore up your weaknesses but there is something to being an unhittable Critacular power attacking buffable frontline tank.

Fighters are simple, but that does not stop them from being effective. Perhaps not for something in which people are meta-gaming, know the module already, and you've got munchkins rolling insane characters tailored specifically for the encounters, but in a more laid-back campaign nothing beats hitting things till they are dead every now and then.

Swashbucklers only get 4 less feats by level 20.

People often seem to forget that what a fighter does he can do all the time every round every day. He doesn't require grit or panache to occasionally nova. That is the main strength of the fighter.

I know most of us play a pretty basic 4-5 encounters per day because that seems to be how everything is written. But when that goes out the door it is nice to be a fighter.

So can a Swashbuckler. You only need 1 panache to add you level to damage every strike. That's like getting a +1 weapon every level... forever.

two quick combat featsfor a two level dip, weapon training for a third.

What do you mean? Need a bit more context to understand.

They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.

That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.

And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.

All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.

I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.

Why would you ever take fighter over swashbuckler? Their damage is harder to get. You seem to be pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons to keep up with a swashbuckler in damage. Your main stat is less useful than a swash's main stat.

General arguments for comparing both classes, GO!

So I have recently made a Tetori Monk and saw the Grabbing Style.

It would seem at first that the Tetori Monk and Grabbing style go hand and hand but it seems that only Brawler's furry and Monks with Furry of Blows can take this style.

Does anyone know if the Tetori archetype replacement ability " Graceful grappler" would count as Furry of Blows for the prerequisite for taking the Grabbing style feat?

If not has anyone heard if this will be part of an errata?

No it doesn't. Take Snapping turtle style. It's better.

Is there a written statement somewhere about what specific rules should be used for character creation for the adventure paths in order to keep them challenging? My group likes to make uber characters using their own rules. Most of the time I find that fun, but it rarely turns out fun for the DM (whoever it is from our group for that AP). They invariably get butt hurt between level 7-12 when we start trivializing everything and ends up knee jerk reacting and modifying the adventure to have us face something that we can't escape and kills 1 or all of the party.

Keep in mind, my question is if there is a written statement about character creation, not how to keep the APs challenging.

Swashbuckler levels are considered fighter levels for feat prerequisites, so a Human Swashbuckler 4 can take Martial Versatility. Sorry if this has been said already or if the conversation has moved past this point.

This guy's done a good job with Eberron already:

https://sites.google.com/site/eberronpathfinder/

The hero lab developers are claiming that swashbuckler class levels don't satisfy the prerequisites for the signature deed feat. Does pg 56 of the ACG say otherwise?

It's useful for the Swashbuckler that has a rogue type in the party and was already going for spring attack.

It's in their role:
These fast and agile combatants serve as protectors for spellcasters and flank mates for rogues and slayers, while waiting for the opportunity to show panache and score the killing blow on some lumbering hulk.

You could look at piranaha strike. Isn't that sorta dex version of power attack?

I might snag some dex and mobility feat later, possibly spring attack.. Jin fought very fluiditically and moving.

Piranha Strike only applies to light weapons.

Spring attack was a very strong contender though

So far I've though this far:

Exotic Wpn Prof: Katana (GM Bonus, for free)
Weapon Focus: Katana (Human)
Slashing Grace: Katana (Lvl 1)
Quickdraw (Lvl 3)
Wpn Spec: Katana (4 bonus)
Dodge (lvl 5)
Mobility (lvl 7)
Spring Attack (8 bonus)
Critical Focus (lvl 9)
Signature Deed: Opportune Parry and Riposte (lvl 11)
Combat Reflexes (12 bonus)

The rest I'm still wondering about. Possibly Combat Expertise and Whirlwind attack? Any fighter exclusive feats I should consider?

While there is nothing stopping you flavoring him/her as a Samurai, you are missing certain class abilities to actually be the Samurai alternate class.

You certainly are closer to the non-heavily armored Ronin samurai of the Chanbara films with this archetype than the samurai class though.

prototype00

Very true. I'll have to keep him in mind for the next character.

Any other advice for my Swashbuckler?

No interest in the Daring Champion Cavalier version of the exact same build? With order of the flame, you can destroy all your enemies in a flash! (You better hope so at least, as your AC will be crazy low at that point).

prototype00

That's actually looks like a very cool idea! Unfortunately, I'm locked into my class at the moment. I'll keep it in mind for the next time I want to play a samurai. If I'm not mistaken, I could even run him as a samurai with this archetype, right?

Swashbucklers get improved crit at lvl 5, but otherwise that'd be a good idea.

Glad you mentioned weapon Spec. That was the one I had planned for lvl 4.

Also as far as damage, power attack sounds mechanically good, but seems less thematic than I'm looking for. I'm using Dex for damage anyway, and can't 2 hand the katana and get Precise Strike damage. Precise Strike makes up for power attack I think.

Dazzling Display is a cool idea. I was considering that line up to the one that lets be spend a standard action to do double damage and cause 1 con bleed. I forget the name.

So I'm playing in a Jade Regent campaign and have decided to play a romanticized samurai like you may see in many animes or in movies. Not one that is clad in heavy armor on a battlefield, but more like "peacetime" samurai, like Jin from Samurai Champloo. I figured a swashbuckler would do this well, and I've wanted to play one since playtest. I'm looking for feats that would emphasize his fighting style. So far I have this:

Lvl 3 Swashbuckler

Stats are fixed. These can't be changed without leveling up:

Str 10
Dex 17
Con 12
Int 8
Wis 13
Cha 14

I had to dump something and since he's a human, I figured the extra skill from race and favored class would make up for the low Int.

These Feats have already been taken and can't be changed:

Exotic Wpn Prof: Katana (GM Bonus, for free)
Weapon Focus: Katana (Human)
Slashing Grace: Katana (Lvl 1)
Quickdraw (Lvl 3)

I have some ideas but want to hear yours without making you bias with mine.

Thanks. I would assume so too. Again like in my last thread, Hero Lab is doing it wrong.

Thanks. Just making sure I didn't miss something. Hero Lab is doing it wrong.

Does a Swashbuckler using a 1 handed weapon with 2 hands lose out on Precise Strike damage?

If I have slashing grace and am using a 1 handed weapon with 2 hands, does it add 1.5x Dex to damage?

@Aspasia De Malagant - Because there is no clear answer to the question.

Here's the next thing I propose. Would the horizontal wall have a hole formed in it because it is now the surface of the ground, and therefore the top of the pit? The pit spells say it opens on the surface of anything (they use the deck of a ship as an example). Would the pit spell cause a pit to appear in the wall once the wall is now the surface of the ground? That would answer whether they would answer the "shunting" question.

I would still argue that it's not an action at all. It's just a dc you have to hit before you can move.

If you want to move, you have to make a DC 17 strength check, or you can't move. So no, it's just a thing you must do to move if you fail your reflex save to not get hit by the sticky.

As long as there are no conflicts, such as losing the same thing from alchemist, in both archetypes, you can take both archetypes. I don't see any conflicts in your chosen archetypes.

<------- This is my face about this thread...

You're reaching for straws. The goblins can wage war, even if they're not aware of you. The air can't. And the war on terror actually has people you can kill and be killed by in it. That was a bad example.

I would wonder, suppose for some reason I want to attack my friends. Maybe we're all high level and a single strike with a basic weapon isn't going to hurt us much at all and we're betting to see who can hit the most people in a single swing. Also we're probably drunk and have very low base INT scores.

Can I perform a Great Cleave then?

Yes, because you're now opponents.

Are glass bottles your foe? Pretty sure that the answers to your questions will be no. Please look up the definition of the word foe. Sorry if I sound like I'm being a troll, but this question seems to be stretching the troll boundaries itself.

1: one who has personal enmity for another
2:
a: an enemy in war
b: adversary, opponent
3: one who opposes on principle <a foe of needless expenditures>
4: something prejudicial or injurious

I don't this glass bottles really fit any of those, even when looking up the definition of opponent.

1: someone who competes against or fights another in a contest, game, or argument; a rival or adversary.

The closest thing you're going to get here is "an enemy in war" and considering glass bottles, the air, or anything else that can't make an attack roll under normal circumstances can "wage war", I'd say the answer will always be no. This isn't even a rules question anymore....

what is the surface?