If you are referring to the Arcanist, somebody else mentioned it in another thread, but we are all still waiting for further details. Do you have any?
James Jacobs wants a Swashbuckler. This might be his chance to get one.
I hope not. I love James Jacobs but he once said he wanted something like the Duelist. I think the Duelist is a really bad class.
Again. I really respect and like JJ, but I hope someone else will do the class and that without the 3.5 legacy/baggage this time he/she will get a chance to do it right, because the Duelist is not what I want.
James Jacobs wants a Swashbuckler. This might be his chance to get one.I hope not. I love James Jacobs but he once said he wanted something like the Duelist. I think the Duelist is a really bad class.
Again. I really respect and like JJ, but I hope someone else will do the class and that without the 3.5 legacy/baggage this time he/she will get a chance to do it right, because the Duelist is not what I want.
What did you not like about the Duelist? I happened to love that PrC...but just wandered what you dislike about it?
@John Kretzer.
Hi John. Right, here comes a wall of text.
English isn’t my first language and being dyslectic doesn’t help so pardon my crappy English. Any snarky remarks are unintentional.
Famous Swashbucklers such as Zorro, Errol Flynn’s characters, The Three Musketeer, etc. could all fight one-on-one against a single foe. One of the reasons I don’t like rogue as a Swashbucklers is that sneak attack makes that hard.
Edit:
Another bad example of a swashbuckler class is the Duelist. The stuff the Duelist gets looks cool but most of it is week, circumstantial and some of it is even bad. I played one in 3.5 and the Pathfinder version isn’t that much better.
I could write more, but these are just a few thoughts.
I’m not going to comment on skills etc., but I would like to point out that only getting reflex as a good saves is possibly the weakest option since reflex saves is the least important save in the game. Reflex + fort or reflex + will would have been more fitting and obviously better.
It’s rather unclear what the role of this class is and who is going to play it. Is it a fighter that wants a more rogue feeling without losing BAB or a rogue that want more battle power? I don’t think any fighter will picking 10 levels in this, so it seems more like a class where rogues might want to multi-class into. It’s not even good as a dip class if you are a fighter and wants some more class skills like acrobatics and perception and don’t want to lose BAB. You are better of picking a level barbarian. At level 2 you get uncanny dodge which is nice if you play a dex fighter.
Even rogues are better of picking levels of another class than Duelist, such as a few levels of fighter, ranger or samurai.
• Canny Defense: Weak and I would even call this bad design. First, the bonus itself isn’t that big unless you have the Int score of a wizard. Second, no AC bonus if you are disarmed or using a bow. I would have preferred something like The Free hands fighter's “Elusive”. “Elusive” is a far more useful, fitting and elegant design.
• Precise Strike: Weak. I really dislike this ability. You force the class to use a 'weak' weapon and make sure she can’t use of her off hand, and the only pay off is a boost to damage that can’t be applied to incorporeals, oozes, elementals, undeads, Swarms, warms, Aeons, constructs and objects. I have never played an AP without undeads. In fact in Pathfinders AP they are very common. This isn’t a fair trade. What I really dislike about this ability (and the class) is that it prevents the character from using her off hand, but she doesn’t gain anything by doing so except for some minor stuff. She actually has no use of her off hand and that is bad design. She could actually cut off her off hand and it would not affect her fighting abilities in anyway. That isn’t cool, that is bad.
If a class is prohibited from using THW, shields or carrying things in her off hand, the class should be able to do stuff with that hand similar to what the free hand fighter archetype can do.
• Improved reaction +2: Nice, but is this really what she needs? It stacks with improved Initiative so it’s not bad.
• Parry: Parry is bad, really really bad (and consequently riposte is bad). Parry shouldn’t cost the duelist an attack and I don’t like that she takes a –4 penalty on her attack roll for each size category that the attacking creature is larger than the duelist.
“The game favors offense over defense. Attack bonuses increase faster than AC bonuses, and that's intentional “, as SKR put it. Among other things this means that is better to attack than elect not to in hope of stopping a possible attack later on. It also means it is easier to beat AC than it is to beat an attack bonus. Finally there is also the issue that the attacker may not even attack you or may use an attack that you can’t Parry (cast spell or whatever). Or one of your allies may already have killed it.
I like the idea of being able to Parry and I know how I would have done it. Not like this. FASA EarthDawn got it right, but sadly this doesn’t cut it.
• Enhanced Mobility: Nice, but circumstantial if you are a Swashbuckler. Most of the time you don’t want to move. You want to full attack and you therefore want a bonus to AC even when you don’t move. The exceptions would be if you as a rogue need to get into flanking position or if you could move and full attack.
• Combat Reflexes: You can’t use reach weapons since the class prohibits you from using them or any THW, and then you get Combat Reflexes? Yes I know it is good to have if you are going to use Ripost a lot, but I doubt you use it more than once per round so I don’t see why you’d need it. True Combat Reflexes lets you perform an attack of opportunity even if you haven’t acted but so does uncanny dodge. And also, you are at least level 10 when you get this. I rather have a bonus feat or uncanny dodge instead?
• Grace: a +2 bonus to the least important save in the game and a save that is already your best save. I rather have a +2 will saves or charisma bonus to all saves or something else.
• Ripost: See Parry.
• Acrobatic charge – Now we are talking. This is great and really the sort of stuff that a Swashbuckler should be able to do. The Swashbuckler should get Nimble Moves as well.
• Elaborate Defense: This is a really weak ability. You are at least level 13 when you get this. Again: The game favors offense over defense[/b]. Attack bonuses increase faster than AC bonuses. It is better to kill than to try to avoid getting killed.
• Improved reaction +4: It’s a bonus, but noting great. This isn’t really what you need right now. You still have crappy AC and you still have a problem killing stuff.
• Deflect Arrows – It’s a feat and not a great one. Something a monk can pick at level 1 and you’ll be at least level 15 when you get this. The perk is that you don’t not need a free hand to use this feat. Remember what I said about cutting of your hand.
• no retreat: Very weak and very circumstantial. You get this as high level ability, and withdraw actions from foes are even more uncommon at higher levels.
• Crippling critical: This is a good ability, but you wasted 9 levels to get this. Also, at this level fortification and other crit immunities are more common than when you started as out as a Duelist. Rogues can pick crippeling strike at level 10 and Pressure Points at level 2. You are at least level 16 when you get this.
A class that gets a lot of stuff doesn’t equal a good class. Take parry and Ripost. Why not just let the Duelist parry an attack as immediate action a number of times per day equal to her (class) level. At level 2, she can parry twice per day. At level 5 she can do it 5 times per day, etc. Perhaps at level 10 she can do it unlimited times per day. And remove the silly penalties vs. larger attackers or use normal size penalties: –1, –2, –4, –8.
Verdict: Almost every ability is weak and/or circumstantial. The two exceptions are Acrobatic charge and Crippling critical.
I did play a fighter, rogue, Dervish (from Complete Warrior) once. That was great.
I had to swap between Dervish and rogue to be able to max out some of my roue skills but that wasn't much of a problem.
With the exception of class skills Dervish was great as a Swashbuckler.
Hey, Zark, take a look at my homebrewn Swashbuckler class, maybe it can tide you over until the official one comes out next year. Of course only if you and your GM are even interested in homebrewn stuff.
@John Kretzer.
Hi John. Right, here comes a wall of text.
English isn’t my first language and being dyslectic doesn’t help so pardon my crappy English. Any snarky remarks are unintentional.Famous Swashbucklers such as Zorro, Errol Flynn’s characters, The Three Musketeer, etc. could all fight one-on-one against a single foe. One of the reasons I don’t like rogue as a Swashbucklers is that sneak attack makes that hard.
Edit:
Another bad example of a swashbuckler class is the Duelist. The stuff the Duelist gets looks cool but most of it is week, circumstantial and some of it is even bad. I played one in 3.5 and the Pathfinder version isn’t that much better.** spoiler omitted **...
Ok I see the reasons...but my 3.5 converted over to Pathfinder was probably the most powerful character in the game I played( As a matter of fact I had reduce that character's power level). So I am going have to disagree. But I chalk that up to different experiences.
I do agree with you rogue make poor swashbucklers though for the reasons I stated.
@John Kretzer.
Hi John. Right, here comes a wall of text.
English isn’t my first language and being dyslectic doesn’t help so pardon my crappy English. Any snarky remarks are unintentional.Famous Swashbucklers such as Zorro, Errol Flynn’s characters, The Three Musketeer, etc. could all fight one-on-one against a single foe. One of the reasons I don’t like rogue as a Swashbucklers is that sneak attack makes that hard.
Edit:
Another bad example of a swashbuckler class is the Duelist. The stuff the Duelist gets looks cool but most of it is week, circumstantial and some of it is even bad. I played one in 3.5 and the Pathfinder version isn’t that much better.** spoiler omitted **...
Ok I see the reasons...but my 3.5 converted over to Pathfinder was probably the most powerful character in the game I played( As a matter of fact I had reduce that character's power level). So I am going have to disagree. But I chalk that up to different experiences.
I do agree with you rogue make poor swashbucklers though for the reasons I stated.
Out of curiosity, how did you build it. Would you mind posting it in a spoiler with feats and attributes?
Come to think of it, mine was a 3.0 Duelist. Sad to say I don’t have the sheet, but she was a Bard/Fighter/Duelist that had specialized in perform. She had among other things perform Dance and perform Lovemaking. If I recall correctly an evil outsider (or some sort of evil shifter) fell in love with her.Those were the days, lots of fun. Don’t know why but back then we had a more relaxed attitude towards the game. At least that is what my memories tell me.
Hey, Zark, take a look at my homebrewn Swashbuckler class, maybe it can tide you over until the official one comes out next year. Of course only if you and your GM are even interested in homebrewn stuff.
Thanks Magnuskn. It seems we both have some similar ideas of what we want out of a Swashbuckler class, although if I would build one I would add less focus on damage and more focus on ‘Panache ‘. Panache as in doing cool stuff.
Right now I’m playing Cthulhu. It is fun but it can’t beat Pathfinder. In the fall we will hopefully start a new Pathfinder campaign and I’ll be playing a Sage Sorcerer. I don’t think my GM is interested in homebrewn stuff. I just have to wait until the playtest and hope the Beta Swashbuckler is solid enough to play until the official release.
Do you want feedback on your build?
I could post it in a spoiler or PM it to you?
Over all it looks good, but it could to with some minor changes and cleaning up some of the languages (like main-hand melee weapon).
Do you want feedback on your build?
I could post it in a spoiler or PM it to you?
Over all it looks good, but it could to with some minor changes and cleaning up some of the languages (like main-hand melee weapon).
Nah, it's pretty much done at this point. The "real" Swashbuckler class will turn up soon, this one has gone already through about ten rounds of revisions on this board and with friends at home and the "main-hand" stuff actually has a reason, so that you can use two-handed finesse weapons like the Spiked Chain or Elven Court Sword, without making it possible to say that you can somehow apply the Daring Strike damage to your off-hand weapon. I'm using the class right now as a GM for Ameiko in Jade Regent in two running campaigns and it has turned out to be very balanced, although since I am so occupied with all the other stuff going on, I forget to use the acrobatic tricks I specifically put in the class to be used. ^^
But thanks for the offer!
|
I can't say I have any predictions maybe you could combine the ranger and bard and base it on the legends of the Fianna.
I do hope that the new classes don't just come off as being two classes that were clumsily mashed together. I will be content so long as they feel unique and they don't look like some misbegotten love child of the classes that inspired them.
Pathfinder has never let me down as a player or DM all in all I'm positive that no matter what the product it should be pretty cool.
Also thumbs up for the Artificer concept, love me some arcane steam punk.
Earlier this year I did a Fochlucan Lyrist conversion to a hybrid Bard/Druid for a friend. The Requirements for the PrC are ridiculous. Seeing an official version would make him happy.
As for predictions...
Scoundrel: Rogue with grit mechanic.
Reanimator alla HP Lovecraft: Summoner/Alchemist
Hexblade: Paladin or Ranger/Witch
Really I'd like to see a few more 6 spell level classes.
As for predictions...
Scoundrel: Rogue with grit mechanic.
Reanimator alla HP Lovecraft: Summoner/Alchemist
Hexblade: Paladin or Ranger/WitchReally I'd like to see a few more 6 spell level classes.
Umm, the classes have all been announced - read this POST.
|
What about the scout class from complete adventurer? Only ever played it once but it is very movement oriented and got bonuses from moving. They did have a lot abilities that were very situational but they were cool and felt like they didn't make you stand and hit and that was it.
I like the classes that have some mobility included into their mechanics, active vs passive is fun to play at times. Most of the core classes and the ones that will be released in this book I bet will be all passive in the terms of movement and battle mechanics.
The Gunslinger is really the only active class i have read and I have never played it, want to but haven't found a GM who would let me.
@Raltus: The Rogue has a Scout Archetype.
Raltus: The scout archetype is somewhat close, but at this point all the classes are set in stone.
Archetypes though...they could change the new classes to something you want :)
In hope of any designer reading this:
I would love the swashbuckler to have some more means of regaining panache. As it is, one is bound to use high-crit weapons.
Swashbucklers could be so much more though. Like using shortspears, etc.
There could also be a feat for swashbucklers making it possible for them to use reach weapons. Either both-handed or with a feat like quarterstaff master.