| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not wanting to start an argument here, but Robinhood isn't a swashbuckler, he is an archer. Errol Flynn is a swashbuckler, so when he made a Robinhood movie it wasn't really a Robinhood movie, it was an Errol Flynn movie.
While Pathfinder doesn't have the concept of "Mooks," if you look at the "Mook" fights, such as the Musketeers vs. the Guards. The Musketeers are out numbered by 30 or 40 to one. What GM wants to run with 150 "monsters" on the table? But if you look to make that a CR "fair" fight, 128 1st level warriors is a CR 13 encounter. And each one of those is likely to be one-shotted.
I've used SmiloDan's Swashbuckler from these boards with a few small alterations and it's been balanced and enjoyable to both play and GM people playing one.
Which version? I've made a few. :-)
I'd personally be inclined to see what you could do by simply basing it off the fighter.
Take away from the fighter the following feats:
Heavy Armor Proficiency
Medium Armor Proficiency
Tower Shield Proficiency
Shield Proficiency (except buckler shields)
And give him four feats available at level 1 to see if it is possible to simulate this.
If you had a fighter with 4 extra feats at 1st level but were missing the ones above do you think you could do it?
You might need to invent some new feats to do it. Also modify armor mastery into "non-armor mastery"... weapon mastery kinda works as is. I wouldn't mind some feats or abilities that worked based on a swashbuckler's charisma bonus. Like applying it to combat maneuvers or initiative or crit damage.
I think a swashbuckler ought to be someone who does great crit damage and crits frequently, instead of someone who does a lot of straight damage. But maybe when he doesn't crit he can turn his attack into a disarm or reposition.
Someone mentioned the parry ability from the Duelist PRC. Of course, this ability is yet another ability that it seems like anyone ought to be able to do already without a class ability. You sacrifice an attach to do something else. This should simply be a type of combat option.
Peet
I'd personally be inclined to see what you could do by simply basing it off the fighter.
Take away from the fighter the following feats:
Heavy Armor Proficiency
Medium Armor Proficiency
Tower Shield Proficiency
Shield Proficiency (except buckler shields)And give him four feats available at level 1 to see if it is possible to simulate this.
If you had a fighter with 4 extra feats at 1st level but were missing the ones above do you think you could do it?
You might need to invent some new feats to do it. Also modify armor mastery into "non-armor mastery"... weapon mastery kinda works as is. I wouldn't mind some feats or abilities that worked based on a swashbuckler's charisma bonus. Like applying it to combat maneuvers or initiative or crit damage.
I think a swashbuckler ought to be someone who does great crit damage and crits frequently, instead of someone who does a lot of straight damage. But maybe when he doesn't crit he can turn his attack into a disarm or reposition.
Someone mentioned the parry ability from the Duelist PRC. Of course, this ability is yet another ability that it seems like anyone ought to be able to do already without a class ability. You sacrifice an attach to do something else. This should simply be a type of combat option.
Peet
I'd also reduce the Weapon Proficiencies, because you don't swashbuckle with a great axe.
Here's five.
Combat Reflexes.
Weapon Finesse.
Combat Expertise.
Dodge.
Quickdraw.
When designing my Swashbuckler class, the first thing I decided was to which class I wanted it to compare. I regard the Fighter as being on the low spectrum of desirability, since the only thing the class is built to do well is to deal damage effectively and to give ultimate flexibility in choosing your feats. Otherwise it lacks in every regard. It is bland, it has few skill points, it only has one good save, it simply lacks a "direction".
In the end, I settled on the Ranger as the class to compare my Swashbuckler to. The Ranger has not very high flexibility in its class abilities and the fixed ones he has give him a lot of his direction as a woodsperson. Although the class is comparable to the Fighter in many regards, it still is allowed to have six skillpoints per level and two good saves.
Further design approaches by me were to allow for different finessable weapons to be used (up to including two-handed weapons). Also to make the class desirable at every level and avoid too much level-dipping potential. Additionally to keep damage for most of its career below the level the Fighter can put out, the latter of which was achieved only at later passes and with help of people here on the board (thanks to Dabbler for that again, btw). A high focus in acrobatics and athletics was a prime goal for the design of the class, since impossible maneuvering and the ability to get to where you want to be have always been something I've expected from swashbuckling. I did not try to break the paradigm of using full attacks to maximise your damage, since that option is simply not supported well in Pathfinder outside of mythic rules.
One problem which I tried to mitigate is the usual high-level AC inflation for dexterity-based classes. As such, while I allowed bucklers to be used (it's the Swashbuckler after all), I made it incompatible to use any shield bonus with the dodge bonus the class gets for free every six levels.
I avoided adding a parrying mechanic, since dodging blows and the like already is included with the armor class core mechanic. For people who like to parry attacks, the Crane Style line of feats already is up your alley (and an excellent feat choice for my Swashbuckler).
Dotting
Doesn't the magus make more sense as a class to compare it to? It fits all the criteria that have been brought up in the thread so far and makes for quite an effective swords and sorcery style swashbuckler.When designing my Swashbuckler class, the first thing I decided was to which class I wanted it to compare. I regard the Fighter as being on the low spectrum of desirability, since the only thing the class is built to do well is to deal damage effectively and to give ultimate flexibility in choosing your feats. Otherwise it lacks in every regard. It is bland, it has few skill points, it only has one good save, it simply lacks a "direction".
In the end, I settled on the Ranger as the class to compare my Swashbuckler to. The Ranger has not very high flexibility in its class abilities and the fixed ones he has give him a lot of his direction as a woodsperson. Although the class is comparable to the Fighter in many regards, it still is allowed to have six skillpoints per level and two good saves.
Not really. The magus is a 3/4 BAB class, due to its combination of ability to cast lots of offense spells and its martial prowess. The Swashbuckler would clearly fall, IMO, under the "pure martial" rule, which includes all the full BAB classes. Yes, some of them have spellcasting, but mostly support spellcasting and only to 4 levels of spells. As envisioned (by me at least), the Swashbuckler has only his martial skills, acrobatics and extraordinary luck to fall back on.
Not to mention that I don't see much "swashbuckling" in the core Magus. I can't really envision Errol Flynn with a scimitar in one hand and throwing a fireball with the other. Also, no acrobatics support for the Magus, either.
If I was designing a Swashbuckler class, one thing I would definitely do is give the class a +1/level bonus to Acrobatics checks to avoid AoO.
I'm not sure if you've noticed, but the ranger that you chose doesn't have acrobatics either.
In either case though, it's easily remedied by a trait.
All you'd need is to cut the obviously unrealistic spells from the list while retaining the ones that can be reflavoured as martial maneuvers mirror image becomes a series of confusing movements that makes it hard to predict where they will be, bladed dash is well...a dash with an attack, which combined with spell combat makes them the only class that can move and full attack without resorting to blink shirts. Hasted assault just becomes a burst of speed, gust of wind gets a shorter range and just becomes a single sweep that knocks down weaker foes, etc. The loss of versatility from removing encounter trivialising spells like fly and wind wall from their list should more than balance out the fact that their remaining personal buffs aren't subject to dispel magic anymore.
Their 3/4 BAB is made up for by their ability to increase their attack rolls with arcane accuracy, their arcane pool, and in the case of the myrmidarch, weapon training, while getting an extra attack by combining spell combat with spellstrike or bladed dash.
Due to having a high value for intelligence, the measured words trait can let them function well as a face person, and they do have the skill points to support it.
The "decide what you want to do in addition to attacking" spell effects (i.e. Full Attack + Hydrolic Push = Flurry of blows that drives back the opponent), combined with their ability to move while fighting (Bladed dash + full attack) and designate whether to focus on protecting themselves or all out attacking (Full attack + Shocking Grasp vs Full attack + mirror image) seems much more swashbucklery than the fighter or ranger's stand in place full attacking with little thought beyond who the most important target is, and whether or not you can stand in between your enemies and party members and lose more than half your damage if you move more than 5 feet.
Well, if that works for you, more power to you. You may design your own take on the class with what you got there.
I took the Ranger for the reasons I enunciated already. That the class doesn't have Acrobatics isn't really relevant, since it has a terrain focus. Only that the Ranger works with the terrain he has and I see the Swashbuckler working more around the terrain he finds himself in. What I wanted to say with the lack of focus on Acrobatics with the Magus is that the class is movement/terrain neutral and has no natural inclination towards interacting with its environment.
If I was designing a Swashbuckler class, one thing I would definitely do is give the class a +1/level bonus to Acrobatics checks to avoid AoO.
I gave mine a +1 per every two levels, which seemed plentyful enough.
If I was designing a Swashbuckler class, one thing I would definitely do is give the class a +1/level bonus to Acrobatics checks to avoid AoO.
That's two bad design choices for the price of one:
*Split skill value*A tiny bonus when you need it the most, a huge bonus after you've stopped caring.
If I was designing a Swashbuckler class, one thing I would definitely do is give the class a +1/level bonus to Acrobatics checks to avoid AoO.That's two bad design choices for the price of one:
*Split skill value
*A tiny bonus when you need it the most, a huge bonus after you've stopped caring.
Rather than simply dismissing it, you could suggest alternatives, you negative Nancy you :P Such as, based on your feedback, it applies to every Acrobatics check, it's like Toughness where you gain a +3 straight up, and it could max at +10.
Edit: So at level 1 with a Dex of 16, that'll make a +10, which means the swashbuckler needs a 3 against a single troglodyte (CR 1), a 4 against an orc (CR 1/3), and an 8 against an ogre (CR 3). I assume Dodge and Mobility will be class granted feats - not sure when you would be granting them, but I assume the swashbuckler would have them by 5th or 6th level (yes, no?).
Maybe give the swashbuckler an ability similar to the 3.5 scout's skirmish ability. It gave +1d6 damage if you moved 10+ feet per round, increasing by 1d6 at levels 5, 9, 13, 17. It also gave a dodge bonus to AC at levels 3, 7, 11, 15, 19 when moving 10+ feet per round.
I played a 3.5 scout back in the day, and it was very swashbuckley, at least in combat. Lots of tactical movement, and the class feature encouraged not just standing there and trading blows.
Maybe give it an Improved Mobility ability: +4 to AC vs. AoOs for moving, +1 or +2 every few levels (maybe 4, 8, 12, 16, 20?). A front-ended bonus that scales with level. Or even give it Mobility at 4th level, but boost it to add your level to AC vs AoOs.
Or maybe give it an Avoid Attack of Opportunity ability, where the swashbuckler could make an AoO of her own to automatically block an opponent's AoO against her? And maybe even use it to block AoOs against her allies? That would definitely encourage some dynamic combats: lots of movement, combat maneuver attempts, picking up items off the ground and throwing them at the bad guys, etc. etc., especially if the swashbuckler has Combat Reflexes.
This could almost re-skin the purpose of the swashbuckler from primary damage dealer to pre-emptive "healer"--she would be able to protect her allies from needing healing in the future.
I'm a big believer in using and referring to tools (ie class abilities) that already exist, where they make sense.
While some may think that boring, unimaginative, or cheating, I think it helps a class stay relevant and be used more often. And it helps to prove how a class measures up against its closest niche competitors.
If you look at the non-core classes that WotC brought out, very few were ever referred to outside of the book they were introduced. Same with the feats in those same books.
An ability may sound great, but if it is never built on in succeeding books, it means your PC took a dead-end feat or feat chain, whereas the PCs who took feats and class abilities from the core rule book find more and more feats and prestige classes that reference those as prerequisites.As such, if a swashbuckler can be emulated, using abilities that already exist in the core 11 classes, that would be great; if they can use a mechanic from the APG, that's still good; Ultimate Combat or Ultimate Magic, is getting more obscure, and if all else fails, inventing a new mechanic ought to be a last resort. Mechanics from Golarion-specific sources ought to be avoided, as this will be difficult to port over to a home game, or be picked up to support by a third party publisher.
So, if the class can be powered by grit, that would be better than having it be powered by some new source ('swash'?), since there will likely be a stream of feats giving extra grit, or new uses for grit, while you'd never hear of an 'Extra Swash' feat again.
I get your point, although it does sound like we are getting new mechanics for at least some classes. Which sort of makes sense, because if every hybrid class was just "old classes" with different spell lists or built in feats, it would probably get pretty boring.
That said, I am sure the book will have a ton of feats for the new classes. Also Paizo has done a great job of introducing new classes and supporting them in later rule/player books. I am sure future hardcover rulebooks will continue to support the new classes. I am also sure that many of the feats from prior books will be useful in building the new classes.
I was playing around, and I came up with this. I just threw it together kind of quick, so I didn't pay attention to the order in which I selected feats/abilities (other than sticking to the minimum level reqs). So obviously there's some tweaking that would need to be done.
[Insert Race Here] Barbarian (Urban Barbarian/Invulnerable Rager)
Stats (before racial adjustments):
Str 15 Dex 14 Con 11 Int 8 Wis 14 Cha 12
Archetype Abilities:
Controlled Rage
Crowd Control
Invulnerability
Extreme Endurance
Progression:
1 - Combat Reflexes
2 - Raging Leaper
3 - Improved Unarmed Strike
4 - Strength Surge
5 - Panther Style
6 - No Escape
7 - Panther Claw
8 - Bestial Leaper
9 - Panther Parry
10 - Knockdown
11 - Vital Strike
12 - Knockback
13 - Improved Vital Strike
14 - Boasting Taunt
15 - Greater Vital Strike
16 - Quick Reflexes
17 - Power Attack
18 - Mighty Swing
19 - Improved Critical
20 - Whatever
Invulnerable Rager isn't strictly necessary to achieve the concept (and may not be desirable if you're wedded to uncanny dodge) but I think the DR achieves two things:
1) Helps offset the lower HP
2) Simulates the "dodginess" of a swashbuckler - he's twisting, ducking, diving, and rolling so that he's only glanced or nicked by blows that would normally have struck him squarely.
I initially thought about using Crane Wing, but Panther Claw attracted me because it gives D'artagnan a chance to compensate for his smaller number of attacks by weaving in and out of the enemy position. Once he gets Knockback/Knockdown, he can use those retaliatory strikes to push/trip enemies as he passes by, nicely simulating the "crowd control" elements of a Swashbuckler who discombobulates his foes with his deft movements. This works well in conjunction with Crowd Control, which gives D'artagnan a nice bonus against those big groups of mooks.
Strength Surge is there to help ensure that key maneuvers are successfully pulled off, and Bestial Leaper helps mitigate the loss of damage from not getting full attacks, since it can be used with the Vital Strike line to jump up in someone's face and then fall back. And since this doesn't require Crane Style, you can actually wield your main weapon two-handed if you want/need to.
In terms of skills, he can easily sink his favored class bonus into more skill points, giving him 5 per level. Urban Barbarian adds Diplomacy and Knowledge: Local/Nobility (among others) to his list, giving him some more social grace.
If you're not going all the way to level 20, a first-level dip into monk might be worth it to pick up a bonus feat and improved unarmed strike for free (plus better unarmed damage and some nice save bonuses).
Like I said, it needs some fine-tuning, but I'm rather pleased with how this turned out. He won't have the same punching power as a fighter, but he should still be able to hold his own while jumping all over the battlefield and doing cool tricks. I think I might play a character like this myself the next time I get a chance.
I fear that Crane Style will be to the swashbuckler as the scimitar is to the magus.
Maybe give the swashbuckler an ability similar to the 3.5 scout's skirmish ability. It gave +1d6 damage if you moved 10+ feet per round, increasing by 1d6 at levels 5, 9, 13, 17. It also gave a dodge bonus to AC at levels 3, 7, 11, 15, 19 when moving 10+ feet per round.
I played a 3.5 scout back in the day, and it was very swashbuckley, at least in combat. Lots of tactical movement, and the class feature encouraged not just standing there and trading blows.
How did that actually work? From all I've heard about scouts, it was almost always either:
- Ranger/scouts with swift hunter using greater manyshot
- Dips into martial adept for their mobility manuvers or the stance that granted 10ft steps
- People going to the spring attack -> bounding assault -> rapid blitz tree.Because a single attack against a single target with less bonus damage than sneak attack, with 3/4 BAB and no inherent ways to boost their accuracy was extremely lackluster beyond early levels.
My group was my scout, an aristocrat/bard, his gnome cleric/rogue cohort, a ranger/wizard/truenamer, and eventually, an uber-paladin.
My guy was a switch-hitter: longbow, longspear, or handaxe. I eventually got a magical handaxe that gave a +4 bonus when flanking--that stacked with regular flanking bonuses!!! So that was REALLY helpful in keeping my attack rolls on par with the uber-paladin (super awesome rolls for stats (like 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17!!!) + super lucky roller (usually 15+ on d20s!!!).
The party was unusual.
But my scout was pretty standard: PBS, Dodge, Mobility, Shot on the Run, Spring Attack, Power Attack, Track (from a flaw). I think I played him into the low double-digits. The bonus feats of the scout really helped, too. I think I had Bounding Assault eventually which is really fun when you have a speed of 60+.
I fear that Crane Style will be to the swashbuckler as the scimitar is to the magus.
It's a very probable combination. Nothing to fear, to be honest.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I fear that Crane Style will be to the swashbuckler as the scimitar is to the magus.It's a very probable combination. Nothing to fear, to be honest.
More cookie cutter builds, especially with the strongest feat in the game...A class who is thematically about duels with the ability to more or less negate such encounters...Yea, this is going to be problematic.
That does sound good. We need bounding assault/rapid blitz back, as well as more situational magic...Maybe give the swashbuckler an ability similar to the 3.5 scout's skirmish ability. It gave +1d6 damage if you moved 10+ feet per round, increasing by 1d6 at levels 5, 9, 13, 17. It also gave a dodge bonus to AC at levels 3, 7, 11, 15, 19 when moving 10+ feet per round.
I played a 3.5 scout back in the day, and it was very swashbuckley, at least in combat. Lots of tactical movement, and the class feature encouraged not just standing there and trading blows.
How did that actually work? From all I've heard about scouts, it was almost always either:
- Ranger/scouts with swift hunter using greater manyshot
- Dips into martial adept for their mobility manuvers or the stance that granted 10ft steps
- People going to the spring attack -> bounding assault -> rapid blitz tree.Because a single attack against a single target with less bonus damage than sneak attack, with 3/4 BAB and no inherent ways to boost their accuracy was extremely lackluster beyond early levels.
My group was my scout, an aristocrat/bard, his gnome cleric/rogue cohort, a ranger/wizard/truenamer, and eventually, an uber-paladin.
My guy was a switch-hitter: longbow, longspear, or handaxe. I eventually got a magical handaxe that gave a +4 bonus when flanking--that stacked with regular flanking bonuses!!! So that was REALLY helpful in keeping my attack rolls on par with the uber-paladin (super awesome rolls for stats (like 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17!!!) + super lucky roller (usually 15+ on d20s!!!).
The party was unusual.
But my scout was pretty standard: PBS, Dodge, Mobility, Shot on the Run, Spring Attack, Power Attack, Track (from a flaw). I think I played him into the low double-digits. The bonus feats of the scout really helped, too. I think I had Bounding Assault eventually which is really fun when you have a speed of 60+.
Yeah, especially since teleporters can do it with the Dimensional Assault feat chain.
An additional +4 was kind of powerful, but my PC only used it once per round. A hasted two-weapon rogue with a pair of those axes (or shortswords, kukri, etc.) could get up to 7 attacks a round at nearly full BAB with those. If it was a swift action to activate it for 1 attack, then that +4 bonus would be more balanced. Or just a constant +2 additional flanking bonus. Well, I guess it depends on how many "plusses" it costs....
|
Wouldn't a class that is built to make better use of feints be an good way to make a swashbuckler class? Maybe with their own version of sneak attack that is triggered by feints, and a class ability that at a certain level lets them feint as a swift/free action? Maybe a class ability that makes better use of combat expertise also.
A rapier is not ever going to be better at parrying attacks than a shield. Heck, a rapier isn't good for parrying attacks from anything much heavier than a rapier either, so no, 'swashbucklers' shouldn't be about attack negation.
This is a primary problem with Pathfinder where AC is not tied to level/combat prowess. This was fixed in the Star Wars Saga version of D20, where the Reflex 'save' (not really a save, more like Reflex AC, there was also a Will and Fortitude AC) was what people had to beat to hit you. And like saves, they went up with character level.
Star Wars Saga Edition had a lot of mechanics that were very good for swashbuckling style play. I don't know if it's OGL; if it were I'd recommend Pathfinder 2nd edition (if/when it happens) steal heavily from it.
I like the idea of Reflex saves being used as a class-based defense bonus to AC. And maybe combine it with an Armor as DR system?
It's not the weapon, it's the fighting style.
Players want to be d’Artagnan at level one and Zorro by level 8. It is movies and TV, people want to do what they see characters on the screen doing. But most such screen action heroes are Epic Level mythic, not firsties.
Zorro and d'Artagnan are at best, 5th level characters. Cap.America and Batman are 6th level. 8th~10th level is Hercules.
Saying they're Mythical Epic character is completely out of touch with the game mechanics and assumptions. Just take a look at what skills truly do and what you're expected to fight at each level.
I like the idea of Reflex saves being used as a class-based defense bonus to AC. And maybe combine it with an Armor as DR system?
Goodness, then you'd have armor that made sense and people becoming harder to hit as they became more skilled at combat - with little to no added complexity to the game!
Seriously though, see if you can find a copy of Star Wars Saga Edition.
More cookie cutter builds, especially with the strongest feat in the game...A class who is thematically about duels with the ability to more or less negate such encounters...Yea, this is going to be problematic.I fear that Crane Style will be to the swashbuckler as the scimitar is to the magus.It's a very probable combination. Nothing to fear, to be honest.
You consider Crane Style to be the strongest feat in the game?! Really???
Since the whole dueling thought seems prevalent in this brainstorm, would it work if the swashbuckler was given something along the lines of
"Once per enemy per round, if an opponent attempts to attack the swashbuckler and misses, the swashbuckler immediately rolls to attack with one weapon at her highest BAB"
or something. This would boost the damage output to a more reasonable level. If that sounds like too often, maybe # of times per encounter equal to their X modifier. This would give more of a back/forth feel to their individual fight, and make enemies think twice about attacking them. They'd need a decent AC to back this up, of course.
There was a feat in 3.X, not sure from where, that had that, but used AoOs.
Yeah, that seems to jive pretty well with the idea of the swashbuckler being a martial battlefield controller.
Maybe add some features from the 3.5 knight, like increasing the DC to tumble through his threatened area, maybe making AoOs that halt an opponent's movement, and I really like the idea of disarming/tripping/dirty tricking/bull rushing/repositioning as AoOs.
Possibly using (Charisma-based) Grit to enhance combat maneuvers and/or AoOs in someway.
Riposte
Great feat. Just too bad it didn't work with a Longsword. :(
A rapier is not ever going to be better at parrying attacks than a shield. Heck, a rapier isn't good for parrying attacks from anything much heavier than a rapier either, so no, 'swashbucklers' shouldn't be about attack negation.
This is a primary problem with Pathfinder where AC is not tied to level/combat prowess. This was fixed in the Star Wars Saga version of D20, where the Reflex 'save' (not really a save, more like Reflex AC, there was also a Will and Fortitude AC) was what people had to beat to hit you. And like saves, they went up with character level.
Star Wars Saga Edition had a lot of mechanics that were very good for swashbuckling style play. I don't know if it's OGL; if it were I'd recommend Pathfinder 2nd edition (if/when it happens) steal heavily from it.
Saga had a number of great ideas that would work well for a Swashbuckler. You got your character level as a bonus to AC (in PF, it might be more balanced to be 1/2 your character level instead).
Additionally, there was a Talent for the Jedi base class called Block. I don't think it's OGL, so I won't quote it directly, but a basic summary would be roughly:
As an immediate action, you can negate a melee attack by making a successful Use The Force check (DC = incoming attack, DC + 5 for each additional attack you try to block since the beginning of your last turn). You must have a weapon drawn, be aware of the attack, and not be flat-footed.
A PF version of that would probably substitute an attack roll instead of a UTF check, or perhaps a Reflex save.
Some food for thought.
I like the idea of Reflex saves being used as a class-based defense bonus to AC. And maybe combine it with an Armor as DR system?
Goodness, then you'd have armor that made sense and people becoming harder to hit as they became more skilled at combat - with little to no added complexity to the game!
Seriously though, see if you can find a copy of Star Wars Saga Edition.
Along those lines, I think the option of being able to base AC on the highest of either 10+Reflex or 10+BAB+Dex (remove Armor and Natural Armor bonuses completely from AC in favor of the DR idea, but let everything else, including Shield bonuses, still apply to AC) would be the way to go. That would let you reflect both "slippery" folks like Rogues and skilled combatants like Fighters as both being tough to hit.
If you went that route, you'd likely have to ditch Flat-footed AC entirely and use something like 4E's +2 bonus to hit foes who are flat-footed. (While I understand the concept of flat-footed and think it makes sense, I don't think someone who is naturally quick should be worse off when caught off-guard than someone who is slower.)
You'd likely also ditch touch AC under this system. Since you're already modeling successful contact (rather than successful contact that pierces/avoids the armor) with the to-hit roll anyway.
Of course, armor as DR also introduces other quirks to the system. You may have to allow weapon finesse to automatically grant Dex bonus to damage instead of Strength, or you may end up with the Dex-based types unable to actually cause any damage outside of a crit or sneak attack against armored foes. (Then again, this might be considered a feature rather than a bug, depending on the type of game you want to run.)
Wow. I didn't think of all of that. It sounds using Reflex as AC would actually streamline combat: everyone would only have 1 AC!!! No more touch AC, flat-footed AC, touch AC while flat-footed, etc. etc.
Players want to be d’Artagnan at level one and Zorro by level 8. It is movies and TV, people want to do what they see characters on the screen doing. But most such screen action heroes are Epic Level mythic, not firsties.Zorro and d'Artagnan are at best, 5th level characters. Cap.America and Batman are 6th level. 8th~10th level is Hercules.
Saying they're Mythical Epic character is completely out of touch with the game mechanics and assumptions. Just take a look at what skills truly do and what you're expected to fight at each level.
Take a 5th level swashbuckling fighter-type. Match him against a dozen 1st level warriors. See if he comes out without a scratch. That handles the Alcade’s militia. Now, the Cardinal’s guards were reckoned as highly skilled experienced veterans.
Take a 5th level swashbuckling fighter-type. Match him against a dozen 1st level warriors. See if he comes out without a scratch. That handles the Alcade’s militia. Now, the Cardinal’s guards were reckoned as highly skilled experienced veterans.
The Cardinal's guards were "skilled experienced veterans" compared to the common folk. i.e.: they were 2nd level warriors instead of 2nd level commoners/experts. Which means each one of them is CR 1/2, IIRC.
Do you think Zorro or d'Artangnan (who you claim are Mythichal level 20+ Characters) could easily defeat a Dire Lion (CR 5), a Dire Bear (Cr 7) T-Rex (CR 9), a Ancient Red Dragon (CR 19) or a freaking Balor (CR 20)?
Because those are easy fights for Epic Mythical characters. According to you, Zorro could defeat half a dozen T-Rex at the same time.
I suggest you read this article. It's very well written and it explains what low-level numbers actually mean.
Take a 5th level swashbuckling fighter-type. Match him against a dozen 1st level warriors. See if he comes out without a scratch. That handles the Alcade’s militia. Now, the Cardinal’s guards were reckoned as highly skilled experienced veterans.The Cardinal's guards were "skilled experienced veterans" compared to the common folk. i.e.: they were 2nd level warriors instead of 2nd level commoners/experts. Which means each one of them is CR 1/2, IIRC.
Do you think Zorro or d'Artangnan (who you claim are Mythichal level 20+ Characters) could easily defeat a Dire Lion (CR 5), a Dire Bear (Cr 7) T-Rex (CR 9), a Ancient Red Dragon (CR 19) or a freaking Balor (CR 20)?
Because those are easy fights for Epic Mythical characters. According to you, Zorro could defeat half a dozen T-Rex at the same time.
Yeah that article is bullpucky. But in any case, a 5th level fighter would not be able to defeat a dozen level 1 warriors without even taking a hit.
Zorro, being in a non-magic universe, would never encounter a Balor.
Alley-oop routinely defeated dinos. As did Tor, and others. Batman even fought a few.
Zorro may well fall short of Epic, but he's Mythic and high level.
Yeah that article is bullpucky. But in any case, a 5th level fighter would not be able to defeat a dozen level 1 warriors without even taking a hit.
Why not? That's what being 4 levels beyond the other guys means. A creature with CR = APL -4 is a pathetic challenge and can barely touch the PCs. The rules reflect that.
Zorro, being in a non-magic universe, would never encounter a Balor.
That makes no difference. The power scale is still the same. Even if this argument made sense, I could simply say "Zorro being in a non-magical universe would never go beyond 5th level". If my 18th level Fighter is plane-shifted into Zorro's universe, does he suddenly grow weaker despite having the exact same attributes, gear and abilities?
And what about lions, they're CR 3. Is Zorro capable of easily defeating half a dozen Lions? I don't think so. He might be capable of defeating 1, maybe 2 of them... But a whole pack? That doesn't seem to fit the power scale of his stories.
Alley-oop routinely defeated dinos. As did Tor, and others. Batman even fought a few.
But did they defeat them as easily a Mythical high-level character would? Batman wouldn't beat a T-Rex by fighting it in melee combat, he'd probably use his really advanced technology and all-but-infinite WBL to throw a bomb or something, which is basically the same as casting a high level spell. And Batman was really lucky when he rolled his attributes.
Zorro may well fall short of Epic, but he's Mythic and high level.
Nah, still think he's 4th... Maybe 5th level. It coincides with what the rules say. The article's analysis of what attribute and skill checks can do is very done and makes perfect sense.