It will be better than the Duelist and "different" than the base classes, which is the point. Why have prestige classes if they don't enhance the base classes? You are advocating a nonsensical black and white position.
No, I just hated the fact that in 3.5 everything revolved around taking PrC's. It was the alpha and the omega of optimization.If PrC's make the base class strictly BETTER, then there is no reason to EVER continue in that base class.
Of course not! The majority of 3.5 base classes didn't include any incentive to keep playing them instead of branching out into PrCs that actually had beneficial class abilities that could be achieved in less than 12 levels (by which I mean, abilities less than 12 levels apart). Pathfinder rectifies that somewhat.
Hyperbolic Example: PrC X requires a specialist wizard of level 6, 6 ranks in 4 various skills, and the feat Spell Focus (specialized school). Over 10 levels, the PrC gives full casting, the 8th lvl specialist power at level 2, and the 20th level capstone at level 10. Nothing else. PrC X is absurdly broken since it requires almost nothing to enter and gives the capstone ability 4 levels earlier with no penalty whatsoever.
And why would anyone stay in Wizard instead of taking Master Specialist when the Wizard had jack to stay in it for? This is changed entirely in pathfinder where if you branch out, you lose progression on your class abilities.
Hyperbolic Example: PrC X requires a specialist wizard of level 6, 6 ranks in 4 various skills, and the feat Spell Focus (specialized school). Over 10 levels, the PrC gives full casting, the 8th lvl specialist power at level 2, and the 20th level capstone at level 10. Nothing else. PrC X is absurdly broken since it requires almost nothing to enter and gives the capstone ability 4 levels earlier with no penalty whatsoever.And why would anyone stay in Wizard instead of taking Master Specialist when the Wizard had jack to stay in it for? This is changed entirely in pathfinder where if you branch out, you lose progression on your class abilities.Take away the specialist abilities, and give different specialist abilities of approximate power. Voila. Balanced PrC.
Of course you can make bad PrCs, but that doesn't mean you can't make good ones.
Wouldn't those work as feats, then? With BAB requirements or some other non-chain configuration?Possibly. It depends on the things; they could be things which are too strong to coexist with the core of a class, such that they need to supplant, rather than supplement, the class core. Alternately, they could be things which are thematically incompatible with the class core.
How exactly was the Master Specialist unbalanced?
|
Give it up. A lot of people have decided that having flexibility isn't worth losing a smidgeon of power. I for one agree that Duelist is a solid class. Special abilities bartered for some combat damage. Sure it ain't for everyone, especially a numbers cruncher, but I like the flexibility that the PRCs in general allow. It really is a matter of trading a certain degree of power for a certain degree of flexibility. 3.5 ignored that and set a precedence for PRCs being overall better than staying in a base-class.
I think the PRPG PRCs are a good thing. Every adventurer should have a prestige class? That is not Prestigious. In 3.5 you were taking a serious hit in power if you didn't prestige. I like that we now have a real, tough choice to make instead of dumping out of a base class ASAP so you can be truly powerful with Overpowered Prestige Class X (which is usually followed closely by Synergistic Overpowered Prestige Class Y).
Bravo Paizo and Pathfinder for not kowtowing to that line of thought.
Give it up. A lot of people have decided that having flexibility isn't worth losing a smidgeon of power. I for one agree that Duelist is a solid class. Special abilities bartered for some combat damage. Sure it ain't for everyone, especially a numbers cruncher, but I like the flexibility that the PRCs in general allow. It really is a matter of trading a certain degree of power for a certain degree of flexibility. 3.5 ignored that and set a precedence for PRCs being overall better than staying in a base-class.
I think the PRPG PRCs are a good thing. Every adventurer should have a prestige class? That is not Prestigious. In 3.5 you were taking a serious hit in power if you didn't prestige. I like that we now have a real, tough choice to make instead of dumping out of a base class ASAP so you can be truly powerful with Overpowered Prestige Class X (which is usually followed closely by Synergistic Overpowered Prestige Class Y).
Bravo Paizo and Pathfinder for not kowtowing to that line of thought.
Have you seen the Swashbuckler? How would incorporating the better parts of it with the better parts of the Duelist make it some UBERCLASS?
|
|
You keep saying that, but then you don't offer any suggestions on what "flexibility" means, what value it has, or what builds are supposedly more flexible. A duelist isn't more flexible than a fighter; it's considerably less flexible, since it's behind the AC curve for most of its career, even given an infinite point buy, and does less damage over the whole of its career, in return for a nearly-nonfunctional defensive ability. Beyond that, it doesn't get any special abilities.PrCs are by design less flexible than base classes. They specialize in doing a particular thing. It's a problem that most of them are worse at that one thing than a base class. Prestige classes are now an easy decision; they're almost always 100% worse at everything compared to base classes. I find it difficult to describe that as a good state of balance. There are balance points between "completely overpowered" and "trap option."
Here is something Ice Titan wrote earlier in the thread--
"10th level fighter vs. 6fight/4duel. +2 weapons both. 22s in str or dex. 14s in str or dex secondary.10th level greatsword fighter has something akin to +24/+19 to hit, and the duelist has +23/+18 to hit. Both should have power attack, and so PAing they attack at +21/+16 and +20/+15 respectively.
The fighter does 2d6+14 or 2d6+26. 18-20 critical, x2.
The duelist does 1d6+10 or 1d6+18. 15-20 critical, x2.
When you factor in critical focus, the duelist suddenly becomes a little more potent in that most of his crits start becoming confirmed. If he can hit on a 15, he can confirm on an 11, so he gains a lot of lee-way in that manner.
Then their ACs... the fighter would have 10+9+2 for a 21, while the duelist would have 10+4+6+4+1 for a 25. Or 27, if we're counting tankards here.
The fighter needs to upkeep both STR, DEX and CON items to stay competitive (which can get super expensive-- fast!) while a duelist can upkeep INT and DEX, which stays relatively cheap.
Overall I think the fighter has the most stable damage output while being the least mobile, and the duelist has sometimes shakey damage output while being the most mobile."
On top of all this you guys are acting like all the Parry ability is all that the Class has. He has stacking initiative bonuses, int to AC, acrobatic charge, enhanced AoO abilities, and a host of bonus feats geared around being mobile.
But you are right beyond that it doesn't get an special abilities.
If all you want to do is look at a certain set of numbers and ignore a bunch of other abilities you are gonna see deficiencies in any class besides a full caster/full bab+special bells PRC.
And actually Parry is pretty cool for protecting someone standing next to you when needed. Situational? Yes. So? That isn't all the class has going for it and it is a nice little bonus.
|
|
Have you seen the Swashbuckler? How would incorporating the better parts of it with the better parts of the Duelist make it some UBERCLASS?Give it up. A lot of people have decided that having flexibility isn't worth losing a smidgeon of power. I for one agree that Duelist is a solid class. Special abilities bartered for some combat damage. Sure it ain't for everyone, especially a numbers cruncher, but I like the flexibility that the PRCs in general allow. It really is a matter of trading a certain degree of power for a certain degree of flexibility. 3.5 ignored that and set a precedence for PRCs being overall better than staying in a base-class.
I think the PRPG PRCs are a good thing. Every adventurer should have a prestige class? That is not Prestigious. In 3.5 you were taking a serious hit in power if you didn't prestige. I like that we now have a real, tough choice to make instead of dumping out of a base class ASAP so you can be truly powerful with Overpowered Prestige Class X (which is usually followed closely by Synergistic Overpowered Prestige Class Y).
Bravo Paizo and Pathfinder for not kowtowing to that line of thought.
There is no need to. Duelist is fine as is. See above.
The Duelist undeniably lags behind a straight fighter in terms of damage per round largely because the duelist is frozen out of the two high damage build: twf (regular and sword and board) and thf. Precise strike simple can't equal two-hander base damage + strength bonus x 1.5 or the added base damage of additional twf iterative attacks. Precise strike is also hampered by being limited against certain foes unlike twf and thf builds.
Further AC in general lags behind the armored fighter so that the duelist can't withstand a CR appropriate Melee brute for any significant length of time.
Parry can help but in general unless the duelist is facing a 3/4 BAB foe, the duelist has to trade off a pretty significant iterative attack to fuel the ability. Tertiary attacks or below simple have too low of a + to hit to be able to erect a decent defense.
The duelist can do a moderately decent mobility fighter using acrobatics, light armor and spring attacks to engage and withdraw but even with the vital strike the duelist struggles in many ways.
It's not utterly worthless and obviously some people like the class as is but here are some ideas that could help buff the duelist.
Possible Fixes:
1)Introduce a feat ala the dervish dance feat that allows dexterity bonus to be used for bonus to damage. This allows the swashbuckler fighter to be relative low strength but still be able to do significant damage. Being able to focus on Dex + Int as primary makes this a good skill fighter.
2)Allow duelists to use a light weapon (main gauche) or buckler in the off hand. Traditional dueling styles often used secondary weapons or bucklers why doesn't the duelist?
3) Introduce a feat that allows fighters to simulate twf with a one-handed or light slashing/piercing weapon. Does not stack with secondary weapon. All strikes have light secondary weapon penalty. Some sort of other penalty such a -2 to AC so that single weapon longsword isn't better than twf longsword + short sword.
4) +10 to base speed. The Duelist is a speed fighter, I don't see any reason why you can't have a duelist moving 40 ft giving him additional range with his spring attacks.
5) Some sort of ability to demoralize opponents while still being able to attack and defend. Even if it's conditional. Dazzling display is nice but a full-round action is very limited. The ability to sacrifice an iterative attack to impose a swift intimidate shaken effect on a single foe might be useful in debuffing a BBEG.
There is no need to. Duelist is fine as is. See above.Have you seen the Swashbuckler? How would incorporating the better parts of it with the better parts of the Duelist make it some UBERCLASS?Give it up. A lot of people have decided that having flexibility isn't worth losing a smidgeon of power. I for one agree that Duelist is a solid class. Special abilities bartered for some combat damage. Sure it ain't for everyone, especially a numbers cruncher, but I like the flexibility that the PRCs in general allow. It really is a matter of trading a certain degree of power for a certain degree of flexibility. 3.5 ignored that and set a precedence for PRCs being overall better than staying in a base-class.
I think the PRPG PRCs are a good thing. Every adventurer should have a prestige class? That is not Prestigious. In 3.5 you were taking a serious hit in power if you didn't prestige. I like that we now have a real, tough choice to make instead of dumping out of a base class ASAP so you can be truly powerful with Overpowered Prestige Class X (which is usually followed closely by Synergistic Overpowered Prestige Class Y).
Bravo Paizo and Pathfinder for not kowtowing to that line of thought.
I argue it isn't. If you look at the Swashbuckler compared to the Duelist, you see the Duelist is needlessly hobbled in places that it shouldn't be.
Main points:
- Swashbuckler adds Int as precision damage to melee attacks with a light weapon
- Swashbuckler doesn't have a level cap on Int to AC.
There are other things but those are the only ones I recall off the top of my head.
|
I like the +10 to speed.
I might also let them use acrobatics for tumbling at full speed with no penalty.
A rapid strike ability (instead of two weapon fighting) might be the way to go as well if you're looking for a general power up. This doesn't seem like a class feature so much as a feat, IMO though.
I don't understand why they cannot use bucklers either. The word swashbuckling comes from the common use of bucklers with dueling swords, so why they cannot use them escapes me.
Edit: Overall, I don't hate the class as is. Just giving some feedback.
See Swashbuckler. The Int-to-AC is needlessly handicapped.
The AC of a duelist is often better than that of a greatsword/falchion build but those builds are optimized for pure damage dealing.
TWF (Sword + Board) is probably going to have a comparable or higher AC though.
At 10th level the Sword + Board will likely have
Mithral Full Plate +2
Light Shield +2
Amulet of Natural Armor +2
Dex Bonus +1 possible +2 due to armor training
Shield Focus +1
For an AC of 28 or 29
10th level Duelist
Mithral Chain Shirt +2
Amulet of Natural Armor +2
Dex Bonus +4
Duelist Bonus +4
Dodge Bonus +1
For an AC of 27.
The duelist is totally built for maximum dex bonus though (15+2 Race+1 4th level increase). Even with his precise strength he's likely falling behind the DPR of the power attacking bastard sword + shield bash.
And if he's ever denied dex bonuses the duelist is screwed.
I'm not saying that the duelist is a crap class, it's just that single-weapon style means you don't drop your foes as fast which means a higher chance of getting hit in return. I think the duelist build could definitely use some enhancements that make it's mobile fighter role more potent while still keeping a role for the Big Stupid Tank.
link above is a thread that goes over the mechanics of using a feat to add dexterity bonus to damage instead of str.
for a duelist, the Dervish dance feat works perfectly well, but it means using a scimitar instead of a rapier (the feat allows the scimitar's damage type to be piercing). at least one poster didn't like the fluff of trading in their duelist's rapier, but mechanically it is actually a better deal.
other finesse classes aren't so lucky.
there was a lot of back and forth about whether a feat that straight up traded dex for str with regards to melee weapon damage would be overpowered. the general conclusion was that it might be a bit overpowered if allowed with twf and power attack. but, a lot of the fears about the benefits of high dex didn't really hold up because of other balancers like armor dex caps, the point buy system for stats and str requirement for power attack.
Possible Fixes:1)Introduce a feat ala the dervish dance feat that allows dexterity bonus to be used for bonus to damage. This allows the swashbuckler fighter to be relative low strength but still be able to do significant damage. Being able to focus on Dex + Int as primary makes this a good skill fighter.
And let's not forget that the parry ability makes the duellist the perfect bodyguard for arcane Casters.
I have a player in my tabletop group who has come fresh to PF after years of playing 1st ed..he likes the duellist concept and his half elf fighter aims to go in that direction.
The other fighter in the group is a Dwarf with Urgosh and TWF
It will be interesting to compare them in field conditions
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
link above is a thread that goes over the mechanics of using a feat to add dexterity bonus to damage instead of str.
for a duelist, the Dervish dance feat works perfectly well, but it means using a scimitar instead of a rapier (the feat allows the scimitar's damage type to be piercing). at least one poster didn't like the fluff of trading in their duelist's rapier, but mechanically it is actually a better deal.
other finesse classes aren't so lucky.
there was a lot of back and forth about whether a feat that straight up traded dex for str with regards to melee weapon damage would be overpowered. the general conclusion was that it might be a bit overpowered if allowed with twf and power attack. but, a lot of the fears about the benefits of high dex didn't really hold up because of other balancers like armor dex caps, the point buy system for stats and str requirement for power attack.
Possible Fixes:1)Introduce a feat ala the dervish dance feat that allows dexterity bonus to be used for bonus to damage. This allows the swashbuckler fighter to be relative low strength but still be able to do significant damage. Being able to focus on Dex + Int as primary makes this a good skill fighter.
I am positive of two things: EVERYONE is ignoring me and no one has read Complete Warrior.
Hmm not ignoring you..but I never liked the CW swashbuckler...
Adamant had a stab(excuse the pun ) at doing the PF version of the base class in Tome of Secrets
I am positive of two things: EVERYONE is ignoring me and no one has read Complete Warrior.
I have a bit of a soft spot for the CW swashbuckler, myself.
they were pretty gimped up with MAD, especially if levels 1 and 2 had to be played. I wouldn't call them overpowered, certainly nothing to make PF fighters sweat.so I agree that there is no need to fear removing a cap on Int to AC for duelists, if that is what you were proposing, nor should we fear Int to damage.
is that what you meant?
In 3.5, the duelist was one of those trap PrCs, where it looked pretty and sounded cool, and then you looked at the mechanics and it was utter garbage.
Unfortunately, it's biggest problems weren't really patched over.
The first issue duelist has is damage. Namely: it has none. Even with duelist level to damage, it's still taking a damage HIT rather then a damage BOOST, and this is due to it's need to, basically, use a rapier, and not duel wield.
Secondly, the duelist is MAD. The class seems to aim at high dex and high intelligence...except it still needs strength and constitution. In fact, wisdom and charisma are the only two stats that it doesn't require. Binding the monk to a billion stats didn't make it strong, it made it weak. Doing the same to the duelist doesn't do it any favors.
Thirdly, no seriously, it's damage is lowered, but the "why" of it is due to numbers one and two.
1) Rapier only, no duel wield
2) Dex and int are pointed as being good, neither adds damage
Rogues work because they have sneak attack. High dex? Perfect, grab two weapons and flank away! The sneak attack is what kicks their damage up several notches. Bowman fighters do awesome because they shoot twelve quivers worth of arrows all in a single round. Two handed warriors and fighters might as well be single stat characters and pump everything into strength and swing a weapon bigger then they are. The duelist, on the other hand, has no duel wield, no giant amount of attacks, and no hueg strength modifier. They're compared most to bowfighters and rogues because both use damage modifiers rather then pure stats to hash out their damage, much like duelists get precise strike, but rogues and bowman fighters get way more attacks. It's a perfect storm of "Stop doing this."
Lastly, it doesn't get any abilities. 3.5 duelist was obscene about this, giving players almost nothing for all their sacrifices. Pathfinder duelist is a little better, but just doesn't go far enough. Ok, they seem to be a mobile fighter, but that only makes their lack of attacks even more odious. They get acrobatic charge, but without a nice big two hander, they can't do too much with that charge. He gets a bunch of increases to his AC, and then parry, which ignores his AC. The cap is nice, don't get me wrong, but just doesn't do enough.
So what would I change?
First off, give something similar to flurry. The duelist gains, let's say just eyeballing it here, an extra attack when attacking with the whole one handed thing at level X. Maybe a second extra attack at level Y. Second, he gets to use a buckler. Seriously. He gets to use a damn buckler. Alternate idea: I forget which, but either one Dragon or one of the books had a "duelist's cape" which worked as an offhand shield. Reintroduce that and count it as being usable for a duelist.. Third, change Parry to give, at every X level, a free parry. Not free as in automatically works, but you don't have to give up an attack. Let's say, at level X, the duelist can parry once at his full attack bonus for free, and can give up attacks to gain more then that one. At level Y, he parries once at full attack bonus, and again at full attack bonus -6.
This could easily be way too powerful, I openly admit. I'm no game designer ;p. But, hopefully, it'll help roll the way towards making the PrC not crappy.
Oh, and as for the CWar swashbuckler, it was a three level class :/
Secondly, the duelist is MAD. The class seems to aim at high dex and high intelligence...except it still needs strength and constitution. In fact, wisdom and charisma are the only two stats that it doesn't require.
sadly, the fluff of the character and its appeal to some (being the closest to a swashbuckler), make CHA hard to drop too. so it is even worse! I've seen people propose a feat/class feature that allows cha to damage (other than OOTS!), but never seen anyone try this or seriously consider it.
I like the idea of another base class that fills this role rather than a PrC. Better yet, make options for fighters to have this style of character. Dervish dance helps (but could go even farther), and maybe some new fighter feats that help with mobility and skills.
Well there are ways of making dangerous duelist all the same ...
I'm going for it with a fighter/rogue/duelist build. Three levels of rogue doesn't drop hit points that much, or extra fighter feats, and for losing one point of BAB you get two dice of sneak attack.
I'm then using Combat Expertise, and also I've imported Deadly Defence from one of the 3.5 supplements. at 4th level, I have Fighter 2/Rogue 2, I can use Improved Feint to get a sneak attack in and is I'm fighting defensively I can still crank out 3d6 base damage with my rapier.
I'm awaiting a DM decision on a Fencing feat that can apply to finesseable weapon to give power-attack style damage to your attacks but increase the bonus to +3 per point of attack sacrificed if you have no off-hand weapon. This then equals the damage output of using a two-handed weapon and power attack, but even if the DM says no, I can take Power Attack.
Once I have the levels, though, I plan to use Vital Strike combined with Improved Feint to make single damaging strikes: Applying everything at higher level, I can strike for 5d6 base at, say, 7th level (Ftr 4/Rog 3), plus strength and weapon bonuses, which is not too shabby. I have lost two points of attack bonus but gained two points of AC and +1d6 damage.
For my next three levels of Duelist I am gaining +1 BAB, +1 AC and +1 Precision damage, and I can still add Power Attack (or if allowed Fencing) into the equation. I'm sure there are better builds of course, but this one works OK. If I go for an exitic weapon, I could up that damage further, or add to them from an enhanced weapon. Improved Critical will help further.
I am positive of two things: EVERYONE is ignoring me and no one has read Complete Warrior.I have a bit of a soft spot for the CW swashbuckler, myself.
they were pretty gimped up with MAD, especially if levels 1 and 2 had to be played. I wouldn't call them overpowered, certainly nothing to make PF fighters sweat.so I agree that there is no need to fear removing a cap on Int to AC for duelists, if that is what you were proposing, nor should we fear Int to damage.
is that what you meant?
Originally yes, but in relation to your post, I don't see the point of adding some new feat of Dex to melee damage just to benefit the Duelist when you could look at the Swashbuckler and just modify Duelist class abilities to add Int as a flat boost to Duelist damage like the Swashbuckler has. That knocks it down to at worst only needing a 10 for Str so Dex and Int can be pumped instead of Dex and Str and Int.
Ummm... lag in AC? Duelist? Really?? I don't think so.
Let's adjust these to a more equal gold value:
At 10th level the Sword + Board will likely have
Mithral Full Plate +2
Light Shield +2
Amulet of Natural Armor +2
Dex Bonus +1 possible +2 due to armor training
Shield Focus +1For an AC of 28 or 29
10th level Duelist
Mithral Chain Shirt +2 -> Mithral Breastplate +3
Amulet of Natural Armor +2
___ -> Dusty Rose Prism Ioun Stone (+1)
Dex Bonus +4
Duelist Bonus +4
Dodge Bonus +1For an AC of 31.
That's better. Duelist ahead +2, power attacking with near the same attack bonus. And/or using combat expertise for even more AC (hittable on a 19 instead of a 16 is a 60% reduction in damage taken).
No level cap on Int to AC? Every 12th level wizard in the game will go for the qualifications to take this class.
As for "free parry" - over my dead body. :)
I must point out you are assuming a duelist with 18 dex and 18 int. The 'sword and board' fighter will likely have his bonuses elsewhere, so while he may get a slightly lower AC, he will have better hit points, damage, etc. if the point base or dice rolls are lower for both, the duelist loses out more.
I just had a thought for a potent but not broken ability for a conversion of the swashbuckler to PF, or to the duelist to keep it relevant for this thread. Instead of parry adding to AC, why not have it be a scaling miss chance. I haven't worked out the details, but it seems more useful than a straight AC bonus, especially at higher levels, and it seems in keeping with the character.
as far as limits on the ability, I am thinking that it would cap at around 50% miss chance and scale at something like 5% per level, and wouldn't apply when dex is denied to AC. if that is too much, it could be limited to humanoids only, weapon attacks only and so on. The only real problem I see is that it would strongly encourage a rogue (or monk or worst of all barbarian) build for the uncanny dodge.
@Cartigan, Dervish dance is already on the books and works for a duelist as is. I'm not saying that it fixes them completely, but it could help with the MAD. I am also interested in a swashbuckler conversion, although IMHO, swashbucklers look better on paper than they play (again a MAD issue) and as P.C. pointed out, they were mostly a dip class in 3.5, so a conversion should (again IMHO) do something to help them out. If you are interested, something like this has been tried : proposed PF swashbuckler conversion.
I must point out you are assuming a duelist with 18 dex and 18 int. The 'sword and board' fighter will likely have his bonuses elsewhere, so while he may get a slightly lower AC, he will have better hit points, damage, etc. if the point base or dice rolls are lower for both, the duelist loses out more.
True but at 10th level I think you can safely assume that a duelist build can probably invest in a headband of vast intelligence +2 and belt of physical perfection +2. 18 Dex 18 Int is probably not going to be seen but I think 20 Dex 16 Int is definitely a definite possibility at that level especially if you do a dervish dance duelist build.
But yes in general the single weapon rapier build is going to suffer in terms of damage output.
That's why I think you either need to allow bucklers or twf in order to keep the swashbuckler somewhat competitive.
However I would like to figure out a way to make single weapon no shield somewhat competitive with twf + thf.
Some way of giving bonus attacks like the twf chain would be desirable but you have to balance out the damage production of what is likely a d6/18-20 x2 or d8/19-20 x2 one handed weapon with the twf's d8/19-20 x2 primary strike d6/19-20 x2 secondary strike. Bearing in mind that a single weapon means less investment in a magic secondary weapon and also the problem of secondary weapon only recieving x1/2 strength bonus.
I'm not sure it's worth the effort tbh.
So I've been wondering about this. Could a Duelist work with a spiked shield? I don't want to thread jack or anything but think about it. It's not necessarily a shield because you're fighting with it but, it also is.
Also a Duelist with the Vital Strike and Spring Attack feats makes an interesting character. On top of that if you take the Spring Attack feats, Lunge, Combat Expertise, and Whirlwind Attack you can now Precise Strike everyone within a 10ft. radius at a -2 on your attack.
Much like Cartigan said, I think the PrC's in Pathfinder are supposed to be more of a class that has an ability that another class doesn't or a combination of a few classes.
The Duelist undeniably lags behind a straight fighter in terms of damage per round largely because the duelist is frozen out of the two high damage build: twf (regular and sword and board) and thf. Precise strike simple can't equal two-hander base damage + strength bonus x 1.5 or the added base damage of additional twf iterative attacks.
1) Rapier only, no duel wield
As determined during the discussion on the first page, which I'm sure you carefully read but then simply forgot about, I will remind you---
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING STOPPING A DUELIST FROM DUAL-WIELDING.
The Pathfinder Duelist is NOT the 3.5 Duelist. There is no clause ANYWHERE stating that the Duelist cannot have an off-hand weapon.
The ONLY restriction is that if a Duelist applies Precise Strike damage to her attack with her main weapon, she cannot attack with an off-hand weapon during that turn. Nowhere does it say she cannot have an off-hand weapon. This is the exact wording: "When making a precise strike, a duelist cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield." This seems pretty clear to me.
We determined that this means the following:
1. The TWF Duelist will sacrifice his Precise Strike damage if she does a full attack with both on- and off-hand weapons (and if well built, probably do more damage than with Precise Strike alone).
2. But when she makes a standard action single attack (and she will at some point, since she's a Duelist and quite possibly running all over the battlefield), or makes a full attack action where she chooses NOT to attack with her off-hand weapon, she still gets Precise Strike damage to her on-hand attacks.
3. In case #2, she can then use the reserved off-hand attacks for Parries--actually quite nicely simulating fighting with a main-gauche, where fencers use their off-hand weapons primarily for defense.
4. Mirror, Mirror also points out that means she can still get the AC bonus from Two-Weapon-Defense when Precise Striking, as long as the Duelist is wielding (just not attacking with) an off-hand weapon.
The above makes a Rogue-Duelist especially effective damage wise, because the Rogue-Duelist will be able to use the Duelist's incredible mobility to be able to stay in a flanking position whenever possible and adding Sneak Attack Damage with Two Weapons (or added to Precise Strike when attacking with the off-hand weapon is not feasible).
If I've missed something in the Duelist description, please let me know, but as far as I can tell in RAW, all of the above is legal.
So I've been wondering about this. Could a Duelist work with a spiked shield? I don't want to thread jack or anything but think about it. It's not necessarily a shield because you're fighting with it but, it also is.
I think that counts as "using" a shield. Canny Defense, Precise Strike, Enhanced Mobility, and Grace all say "cannot use a shield." The way it's worded I don't think it would allow that.
Also a Duelist with the Vital Strike and Spring Attack feats makes an interesting character. On top of that if you take the Spring Attack feats, Lunge, Combat Expertise, and Whirlwind Attack you can now Precise Strike everyone within a 10ft. radius at a -2 on your attack.
That would indeed be one of the best ways to make a single-weapon using Duelist. You'd probably want the Duelist to be Fighter-based so the Duelist could also have bonuses to damage from Weapon Training and Weapon Specialization.
We determined that this means the following:1. The TWF Duelist will sacrifice his Precise Strike damage if she does a full attack with both on- and off-hand weapons (and if well built, probably do more damage than with Precise Strike alone).
2. But when she makes a standard action single attack (and she will at some point, since she's a Duelist and quite possibly running all over the battlefield), or makes a full attack action where she chooses NOT to attack with her off-hand weapon, she still gets Precise Strike damage to her on-hand attacks.
3. In case #2, she can then use the reserved off-hand attacks for Parries--actually quite nicely simulating fighting with a main-gauche, where fencers use their off-hand weapons primarily for defense.
4. Mirror, Mirror also points out that means she can still get the AC bonus from Two-Weapon-Defense when Precise Striking, as long as the Duelist is wielding (just not attacking with) an off-hand weapon.
I agree with points 1 and 2.
Point 3 I think requires a pretty dubious interpretation of twf and the precise strike ability. TWF gives you a bonus attack with a full attack action but it's with that weapon. It's not just a static +1 attack that you can allocate as needed. Precise strike only factors in when you don't attack with a secondary weapon or shield. If twf requires an attack action I don't think you can re-allocate the action for a parry action without violating the terms of the precise strike ability.
So if you are willing to sacrifice precise strike damage you can power parry with your main-gauche but many people would view sacrificing precise strike damage outside of spring attack actions as pretty meh.
Point 3 I think requires a pretty dubious interpretation of twf and the precise strike ability. TWF gives you a bonus attack with a full attack action but it's with that weapon. It's not just a static +1 attack that you can allocate as needed. Precise strike only factors in when you don't attack with a secondary weapon or shield. If twf requires an attack action I don't think you can re-allocate the action for a parry action without violating the terms of the precise strike ability.Depends how you look at things:
A TWF can elect to use all their primary-hand attacks to target one adjacent opponent, and all their off-hand attacks to target another adjacent opponent, correct? Like for DR purposes or something?
Well, the parry ability allows you to not attack and instead parry. If you elect to use your primary attacks to attack, but your off-hand attacks to parrty, you never fulfilled the condition "attack with a weapon in her other hand". Therefore, you gain precise strike with primary attacks while parrying with off-hand attacks.
This look to be completly valid, and actually an excellent strategy for the duelist. Parry the first attack or two and the rest should miss, due to AC. You don't even need to have a great secondary weapon: since you're only parrying with it, any old dagger will do.
Parry is still effectively an attack action (it's powered via -1 attack) I'm really uncomfortable in saying that just because it's called Parry that it suddenly transforms into a non-attack.
I admit that it's by no means clear on either side of the interpretation but I'd heavily lean against ruling that the duelist can reserve a bonus attack to power parry while still retaining precise strike damage.
However since it's hardly game breaking I think you could probably justify house-ruling it as working that way. I just wouldn't risk relying on it in organized play.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The point of the prestige classes is not about outdoing the base classes. (that was only true in 3.x, Wizards didn't give a rats ass about throwing the base classes out of balance despite the rhetoric) A proper prestige class gives focus to an aspect of the base class, not throw it into obsolescence.
Logically the Duelist should be able to outdo the fighter one on one. The fighter should be able to take on multiple foes, immune to crits, etc better than the duelist.The Eldrich knight should be able to outfight the wizard, outspell the fighter.
This was the issue with the Archmage. The only reason to not take Archmage was to take another prestige class.
Thus the caveat 'logically' :-)
And yes, the Eldrich Knight should be able to outcast the fighter and outfight the wizard. It should not be able to outcast (or keep up with) the wizard or outfight the fighter. Just like the duelist, as a light one weapon build, should be able to beat the fighter at that game, but not as well outside the 3 Musketeers type scenario.
No level cap on Int to AC? Every 12th level wizard in the game will go for the qualifications to take this class.
No, they won't. Losing a caster level and three feats just to gain a small amount of AC - the worst scaling defense in the game - which they can already ignore due to things like stoneskin and mirror image? Not seeing it.
As determined during the discussion on the first page, which I'm sure you carefully read but then simply forgot about, I will remind you---
THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING STOPPING A DUELIST FROM DUAL-WIELDING.
The Pathfinder Duelist is NOT the 3.5 Duelist. There is no clause ANYWHERE stating that the Duelist cannot have an off-hand weapon.
The ONLY restriction is that if a Duelist applies Precise Strike damage to her attack with her main weapon, she cannot attack with an off-hand weapon during that turn. Nowhere does it say she cannot have an off-hand weapon. This is the exact wording: "When making a precise strike, a duelist cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield." This seems pretty clear to me.
But here's the thing - this doesn't solve the issue.
The problem isn't that the duelist isn't allowed to carry two weapons, it's that, with no TWF, the duelist lags behind in damage due to a sharply limited number of attacks.
Parry could be doable with two weapons, yes, but that's still not grabbing the crux of the issue. And in fact, doing this would remove precise attack from his ripostes. Riposte is now dinking the enemy for a completely ignorable amount (Well, slightly more ignorable then usual).
As for the comment on duelist AC, not only is AC the worst scaling armor, due in part to D&D's binary hit or not hit system, but with an 18 in intelligence and dex, where's your con? Where's your strength? Your HP is suffering and, surprise surprise, you're doing little to no damage. What's to stop enemies from just flat out ignoring you?
The duelist seems built around AoO. But without a staple of damage, those AoO are going to be just little pinpricks.
That's why I think you either need to allow bucklers or twf in order to keep the swashbuckler somewhat competitive.
However I would like to figure out a way to make single weapon no shield somewhat competitive with twf + thf.
Some way of giving bonus attacks like the twf chain would be desirable but you have to balance out the damage production of what is likely a d6/18-20 x2 or d8/19-20 x2 one handed weapon with the twf's d8/19-20 x2 primary strike d6/19-20 x2 secondary strike. Bearing in mind that a single weapon means less investment in a magic secondary weapon and also the problem of secondary weapon only recieving x1/2 strength bonus.
I'm not sure it's worth the effort tbh.
The precise strike class feature I read as requiring a one-handed weapon and no shield or TWF.
However, there is a feat in Draconic Compendium, Single Blade Style, that gives you a +2 AC bonus for fighting this way. Alternatively, you could add a Maine Gauche feat to allow a Duelist/Swashbuckler to use all their class abilities fighting TWF with sword and dagger.