Perhaps a list of bonus feats like the monk, (at first and second level) with options for damage, and mobility. Or a fighting style option set like the ranger.
Just give the Swashbuckler the Mobile Fighter's Rapid Attack ability.
"At 11th level, a mobile fighter can combine a full-attack action with a single move. He must forgo the attack at his highest bonus but may take the remaining attacks at any point during his movement. This movement provokes attacks of opportunity as normal."
For even more mobility (and to help his teammates' effective mobility), give him a deed like this:
Master Ruseman: At Nth level, when the Swashbuckler successfully uses Intimidate to demoralize an opponent, he pay spend a Panache point to enrage the target as a free action. This deed causes the target to lose one Attack of Opportunity, as the target lashes out blindly and the Swashbuckler easily evades.
The Swashbuckler and his target do not have to share a common language, as the Swashbuckler can achieve this affect with either a cutting remark or an insulting gesture.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think a Swashbuckler should match a Fighter in DPR. In my opinion a SB should do about 25% less damage, because a SB gets more skills and skillpoints, plus a lot more mobility.
In a stand up fight on an open field the SB should lose to the Fighter. The SB should get hacked to pieces.
On a boat, on rough terrain, or in a banquet hall with chandeliers, stairs, and long drapes, the Fighter should lose to the SB. The Fighter would sink, stumble, or say make a terminal faux pas.
Since a swashbuckler is a fighter/gunslinger hybrid, both d10 classes the damage should equal the fighter. If you want a fighter with more skill points play a lore warden :)
If you want to play a Fighter with less damage and more skill points, you could play a Fighter with less Strength and more Intelligence. Get class skills with Additional Traits (or get more specialized bonuses with Skill Focus or the two-skill feats) and use your Fighter Bonus Feats for combat feats.
|
Ok, so a little more mobility, but it should be a lot more mobility. I like Athaleon's suggestion to increase this.
Sir Frog, if you apply that logic to hybrid classes (or any class with the same Hit Dice and Base Attack Progression) then the Paladin and Ranger fail to match up, since neither can match the DPR of a fighter, except when fighting certain enemies. For a Swashbuckler, his favored enemy should the environment, whether physical or social.
Yes, mobility is key. Some of the ninja movement abilities would be perfect, or the movement abilities from dragon style.
Yeah, but that won't keep up later, when the Dervish Dance Swashbuckler gets the feats he missed out on early to get Dervish Dance.At level 8:
** spoiler omitted **
Melee: rapier +1, Agile: + 18 ( 1d6+10 / 15-20) + 8 precise strike.
Melee: scimitar + 2: + 18 (1d6+ 9 / 15-20) + 8 precise strike.Winner: Rapier!
I think if a DM allows Dervish Dance, they will allow Agile Weapons.
Slashing is better at penetrating DR, but as Westley is a pirate, his rapier is better as he may have to fight underwater.
Also, this comparison highlights the importance of Swashbuckler Weapon Finesse not counting as a prerequisite for Dervish Dance. If you remove the Weapon Finesse feat tax on Dervish Dance, the Scimitar will be better.
I have several problems with this comparison. First off, you went with a 20 point buy. The biggest problem this class faces is the effective minimum it needs in basically every stat. I don't think (without going for a str build) there's much of any wiggle room from how I threw together Debbie Debug's stats here with a 15 point buy. If you have the breathing room for all your stats to be great then yeah, you avoid a lot of problems, but if you're playing at the point everything Paizo puts out is balanced for, you need to make some real nasty choices.
The far bigger problem is that you're only looking at this directly after the upgrade to an agile rapier. As mentioned in my playtest reports, yeah, the difference between the two becomes fairly minimal. The rapier build is slightly ahead on feats (which becomes less and less important each level as you run of of good ones to take), but the scimitar is ahead a +1 bonus on a weapon, which becomes a bigger deal the higher you get from that level. If you're aiming for a +3 enhancement bonus to cut through some of the more common DR, that rapier build needs an extra 10,000 gold, for instance. And if a +1 weapon isn't your priority, there's all kinds of other things that money can be going to, like a dex belt which gives the same bonus to hit and damage, as well as AC reflex and skills.
The much more important bit though is all that time the rapier build has to spend doing basically no damage at all while saving up that 8000 gold. It's just devastating, as best exemplified in Debbie level 5.
I don't think a Swashbuckler should match a Fighter in DPR. In my opinion a SB should do about 25% less damage, because a SB gets more skills and skillpoints, plus a lot more mobility.
In a stand up fight on an open field the SB should lose to the Fighter. The SB should get hacked to pieces.
On a boat, on rough terrain, or in a banquet hall with chandeliers, stairs, and long drapes, the Fighter should lose to the SB. The Fighter would sink, stumble, or say make a terminal faux pas.
The class you are comparing this fighter to is not what the swashbuckler is. The class that exists does less than a fighter does. It does not have any abilities it needs to "pay for" with a lower damage output, with the possible exception of certain deeds (which the fighter can replicate easily with their extra feats), and any time they use those, they do pay for them with reduced damage, because they are spending panache on something other than the damage boost that almost brings them to a fighter's level. The extra skill points aren't even an edge, because they have more demands on their stats. The fighter could easily dump dex, cha, or even con relative to the swashbuckler and make up for the gap with more int.
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32
|
Two minor (very minor) questions that I don't think have been addressed so far:
1) Does the gnome hooked hammer's hook end count as a one-handed piercing weapon if you only use the weapon one-handed? Essentially this makes it a heavy pick with the trip property, and the ability to take on some skeletons if you need to by flipping to the hammer side. Although, you know what, every time I think about using a weird weapon that technically counts for swashbuckler finesse, I remember that tridents and picks aren't "bladed weapons" and therefore don't count for the fencer trait, which I feel is pretty necessary for the parry/riposte combo.
2) Two minor things about weapon finesse versus swashbuckler finesse. Weapon finesse comes with an ACP penalty to attack if you use a finesse weapon and a shield at the same time, so although it would be nice to have at first level, perhaps it would actually be best to leave this until one could get a masterwork buckler? I'm surprised I didn't remember this part of weapon finesse until now. That said, does the same apply to swashbuckler finesse? Strictly speaking, swashbuckler finesse grants "the benefits" of the weapon finesse feat, so does it leave out the ACP penalty from a shield?
|
|
The class you are comparing this fighter to is not what the swashbuckler is. The class that exists does less than a fighter does. It does not have any abilities it needs to "pay for" with a lower damage output, with the possible exception of certain deeds (which the fighter can replicate easily with their extra feats), and any time they use those, they do pay for them with reduced damage, because they are spending panache on something other than the damage boost that almost brings them to a fighter's level. The extra skill points aren't even an edge, because they have more demands on their stats. The fighter could easily dump dex, cha, or even con relative to the swashbuckler and make up for the gap with more int.
Your opinion of what makes a swashbuckler is apparently different then mine. However, instead of defining your swashbuckler you have broken down the class into stats, abilities, and DPR, without one note of what really makes a swashbuckler and how the class rules should promote that. So what do you think a swashbuckler should be?
For me a swashbuckler is the Dread Pirate Roberts.
A fighter is Inigo Montoya.
|
|
The class you are comparing this fighter to is not what the swashbuckler is. The class that exists does less than a fighter does. It does not have any abilities it needs to "pay for" with a lower damage output, with the possible exception of certain deeds (which the fighter can replicate easily with their extra feats), and any time they use those, they do pay for them with reduced damage, because they are spending panache on something other than the damage boost that almost brings them to a fighter's level. The extra skill points aren't even an edge, because they have more demands on their stats. The fighter could easily dump dex, cha, or even con relative to the swashbuckler and make up for the gap with more int.Your opinion of what makes a swashbuckler is apparently different then mine. However, instead of defining your swashbuckler you have broken down the class into stats, abilities, and DPR, without one note of what really makes a swashbuckler and how the class rules should promote that. So what do you think a swashbuckler should be?
For me a swashbuckler is the Dread Pirate Roberts.
A fighter is Inigo Montoya.
A swashbuckler is both the Dread Pirate and Inigo, along with Athos, Porthos, Aramis, the Scarlet Pimpernel, Robin Hood, Zorro, Jack Sparrow, Cyrano de Bergerac, John Carter, etc...
All of them similar but different, but that is the spirit of the class :)
The class you are comparing this fighter to is not what the swashbuckler is. The class that exists does less than a fighter does. It does not have any abilities it needs to "pay for" with a lower damage output, with the possible exception of certain deeds (which the fighter can replicate easily with their extra feats), and any time they use those, they do pay for them with reduced damage, because they are spending panache on something other than the damage boost that almost brings them to a fighter's level. The extra skill points aren't even an edge, because they have more demands on their stats. The fighter could easily dump dex, cha, or even con relative to the swashbuckler and make up for the gap with more int.Your opinion of what makes a swashbuckler is apparently different then mine. However, instead of defining your swashbuckler you have broken down the class into stats, abilities, and DPR, without one note of what really makes a swashbuckler and how the class rules should promote that. So what do you think a swashbuckler should be?
For me a swashbuckler is the Dread Pirate Roberts.
A fighter is Inigo Montoya.
To me they are both swashbucklers.
As a comparison using 3 fairly well known movies, lets use Robin Hood.
The Adventures of Robin Hood starring Errol Flyn (1938): Swashbuckler
Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves starring Kevin Costner (also Morgan Freeman) (1991): Ranger
Robin Hood starring Russle Crowe: Fighter
The version as portrayed by Errol Flynn is classic swashbuckling (and also one of the rolls that lead to the prominence of swashbucklers in media). This guy is sharp witted, dashing, and skilled with his sword.
The version as portrayed by Kevin Costner focuses more on the Men of Sherwood and involves a lot more archery and traps. While skilled with a sword, Kevin Costner is no Errol Flynn when it comes to playing a dashing persona, or in the war of wits.
The version as portrayed by Russle Crowe is more or less a straight up fighter. He doesn't exactly exhibit many skills (other than some leadership), but he is pretty good in combat.
Notable Mention: Robin Hood: Men in Tights starring Cary Elwes (also known as Westley from Princess Bride). Much more reminiscent of Errol Flynn's portrayal, Cary Elwes is a perfect example, along with Errol Flyn as a quintessential Swashbuckler and Dashing Swordsman.
[Edit] Fixed a name mix-up.
Opinion has nothing to do with it. Right now, we have this here Swashbuckler class to deal with. It doesn't have a bunch of crazy powers for fighting better on boats or swinging from chandeliers. It actually swims and climbs worse than a fighter (assuming a dex based build), and it doesn't win fights against fighters.
If you want to get into opinion and Princess Bride talk, Inigo is absolutely a swashbuckler, and becomes the next Dread Pirate Roberts. Westley's just higher level is what it comes down to. And come to think of it, since Westly wins that fight, how would it work as an example of a fighter beating a swashbuckler anyway?
Both of them are nifty charismatic types who aren't super strong (that's Fezzik), but they're fairly nimble, and they are matchless when fighting with a rapier.
Game balance wise though, when I next get time to talk through some of what I'm doing in playtest land, there's going to be a real good example of the sort of situation where a fighter will always outshine a swashbuckler even if it gets every tweak anyone could want. Here's a hint- It starts with a D, has a breath weapon and never comes into melee range.
Also oozes, CR 1/3 skeletons, etc. etc.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I GMed for a Swashbuckler earlier today at levels 1, 3 and 6 (2 short adventures for each level). Here are a few things I noticed:
1- At 1st level Dex-based Swashbucklers are terrible. The player was very frustrated when he realized he didn't get to use Dex to attack rolls yet, so he was forced to use ranged weapons all the time. He was even more frustrated when he realized he had to grab the Weapon Finesse feat anyway because the class doesn't get the feat, just its benefits. So he had to grab a feat for absolutely zero benefit just so he could play the character archetype the class is supposed to be based on.
Solution: Give them Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat at 1st level: It's simple, easy, balanced and it works, besides, that's what the class is supposed to be about anyway.
2- Precise Strike doesn't help much before 5th~6th level or so. Especially since it doesn't benefit from high critical threat range such as those from rapiers and scimitars.
Solution: Just let them add Dex to damage already: It deals less damage than precise strike at higher levels, and the character is likely to focus Dex anyway, so it won't give them any advantage on AC, Initiative or anything else that they wouldn't get anyway.
It'd be a much simpler rule and open many options to the player, adding a lot of variety and versatility to the class. Make it a variant of Weapon Training, just like Panache is a variant of Grit, instead of getting a flat bonus to attack and damage rolls, let the Swashbuckler add Dex to damage when using the chosen Weapon group.
3- Charisma is a dump stat. Panache is not very useful because many deeds are really weak and/or too situational, and the attribute doesn't do anything else for the class.
Solution: Make Charisma more useful and improve those deeds: Let Swashbucklers add their Cha modifier to Initiative, Acrobatics and Escape Artist skill checks, attack rolls made to confirm critical and AC/CMD against AoO provoked by moving through a threatened area.
4-There not any extra mobility worth a note: Swashbucklers are barely more mobile than any other martial class. They don't nearly as nimble as you'd expect from a class trying to reflect the likes of Zorro and Robin Hood.
Solution: Give them more mobility! Why not give Swashbucklers the abilities of Mobile Fighter/Dervish of Dawn Fighter archetypes or a simple speed bonus. Let them use Panache to ignore difficult terrain, move as a swift action or move without provoking AoO.
5-Those saves are a death sentence: By 6th level or so, Fort and Will saves become far more important than Reflex save. Having both of them as bad saves made the player tremble in fear whenever the party fought a caster or any creature with supernatural abilities. If they are not given a 2nd good save, I fear Swashbucklers will rarely last more than 7~8 levels unless the GM is really holding back.
Solution: Give them a 2nd good save: Obviously.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He was even more frustrated when he realized he had to grab the Weapon Finesse feat anyway because the class doesn't get the feat, just its benefits. So he had to grab a feat for absolutely zero benefit just so he could play the character archetype the class is supposed to be based on.
This here points to what really is my single biggest issue with the class. The only feats which require weapon finesse are the two in the inner sea world guide that patch a fatal flaw in the class (and/or break it wide open, depending how you look at it). Being able to access these shouldn't be such a huge issue, because they should not have such a ridiculous effect on how it plays. Which is a roundabout way of saying just add dex to damage and maybe allow slashing weapons. Everyone seems to be on the same page with that.
Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.
Riddle me this: why do Swashbucklers gain Improved Critical with their weapons, and eventually autoconfirms on crits at 20th level, but Precise Strike doesn't multiply on crits? Balance or no, it seems like the class is going in two directions at once. It's a pushmi-pullyu.
Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.
Not the goblins!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.
REALLY?!?!?!
How many levels do I get?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.REALLY?!?!?!
** spoiler omitted **...
Considering James killed all of those goblins, none Tels.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Considering James killed all of those goblins, none Tels.Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.REALLY?!?!?!
** spoiler omitted **...
My actions prompted James to kill those Goblins. I'm like a party member, I share the experience points!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.
It's the elephant in the room, not because it's some obscure option that benefits the class more than it should, but because it adds in a feature the class really, really, really needs to have by default, unfortunately.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would still like a Developer response to what "1d6+11" would do on a crit for swashbucklers. As Malachi Silverclaw has already pointed out twice, there is no quick way to figure out critical damage for a swashbuckler using precise strike by reading his stat-block. A DM would have to reverse engineer it by subtracting the NPC's swashbuckler level from the "+11", then take the remainder and multiply that, then add back the swashbuckler level. This is a hassle.
If Smite Evil multiplies on crits, as a 1-for-1 scaling damage bonus from another class, then so should Precise Strike. Just remove the ability to double damage for a panache entirely, and let it multiply on crits already.
If the ONLY reason it's not being multiplied on critical hits is because the ability is flavored as being precision damage, then change the flavor. Or change it to bonus damage dice. Not letting a flat-damage bonus multiply is unheard of and it makes DMing npcs that do it a headache because of the "how much damage does this do on a crit" problem.
Considering James killed all of those goblins, none Tels.Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.REALLY?!?!?!
** spoiler omitted **...
James Jacobs may well be the cause of the deaths of more goblins than anyone in history.
How does he sleep at night?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sadly, I think Swashbucklers would be better off being a Gunslinger/Monk hybrid than a Gunslinger/Fighter one. Even being just a Gunslinger archetype would be more fitting.
Fighters don't really add anything Swashbuckler-ish to the class. They have very few skill points, weak skill list, no synergy with Cha, bad reflex saves, no mobility option... In fact, all Fighters have to offer is extra damage, which really shouldn't be the main focus of Swashbucklers.
That said, a few Fighter archetypes do fit the Swashbuckler theme very well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Every time Dervish Dance is mentioned, James Jacobs kills a goblin. Think about the goblins.It's the elephant in the room, not because it's some obscure option that benefits the class more than it should, but because it adds in a feature the class really, really, really needs to have by default, unfortunately.
If Dex to damage were to be added to the class, considerations would have to be made so that the Swashbuckler is not JUST the most obvious DIP for nearly every dexterity based melee fighter. Even though I personally feel that dex to damage is a bad idea, if it were to be done, I'd suggest two options:
1) Have the Dexterity to damage scale with level (either one point per level or one point per two levels (min 1).
2) Grant it at a late enough level that it is a heavy enough investment (into a full BAB class) that the loss of class features from the character's original class equals (or exceeds) the benefits gained - say 5th level.
Again, I'm not advocating that Dexterity to damage is a good idea. I am not a fan of completely marginalizing stats, which is what Dervish Dance and the Agile weapon enchantment both do to Strength. (That Charisma is marginalized in 80+% of character builds is an entirely separate issue meant for it's own thread.) But of the two options, I prefer the first option and think that having it scale at 1 point per 2 levels (min 1) is the better of the two options.
That option would also allow the damage to be multiplied on a critical hit without getting out of hand. This could, in theory, be a whole scale replacement for the Swashbuckler's scaling precision damage, though it would be weaker in total. (That may be ironically fitting though, Paizo giving posters what they demanded in a package that is entirely substandard to what they had.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Lemmy: I support everything except this little bit:
a simple speed bonus
That won't help the Swashbuckler for the same reason it doesn't help the Monk. If your job is to move up to the target, stop, and full attack, then your movement speed is almost irrelevant.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If Dex to damage were to be added to the class, considerations would have to be made so that the Swashbuckler is not JUST the most obvious DIP for nearly every dexterity based melee fighter. Even though I personally feel that dex to damage is a bad idea, if it were to be done, I'd suggest two options:1) Have the Dexterity to damage scale with level (either one point per level or one point per two levels (min 1).
2) Grant it at a late enough level that it is a heavy enough investment (into a full BAB class) that the loss of class features from the character's original class equals (or exceeds) the benefits gained - say 5th level.
When I brought this up, people (rightly) pointed out the ongoing problem of the Swashbuckler sucking at low levels. I'd push for +2 Dex per Swashbuckler level, to replace Strength right off the bat.
I don't think that dipping will be a problem, provided the class is built properly. After all, the whole reason people dip is because the incentives to stick with a class are not good enough. As long as the Swashbuckler is firmly better than some multiclassed Paladin-Monk-Swashbuckler-Duelist pileup — In other words, as long the Swashbuckler is the premiere Dex Fighter, and an effective class in its own right, at all levels — There will be no reason to dip.
Again, I'm not advocating that Dexterity to damage is a good idea. I am not a fan of completely marginalizing stats, which is what Dervish Dance and the Agile weapon enchantment both do to Strength.
I'm advocating it. We need to marginalize at least one stat because this class suffers from MAD, plain and simple. And nobody's going to dump Strength down to 7 unless they're ignoring encumbrance rules.
James Jacobs may well be the cause of the deaths of more goblins than anyone in history.
How does he sleep at night?
Like a baby, thanks to the softest baby goblin skin sheets the goblin "interns" can make...
I would still like a Developer response to what "1d6+11" would do on a crit for swashbucklers. As Malachi Silverclaw has already pointed out twice, there is no quick way to figure out critical damage for a swashbuckler using precise strike by reading his stat-block. A DM would have to reverse engineer it by subtracting the NPC's swashbuckler level from the "+11", then take the remainder and multiply that, then add back the swashbuckler level. This is a hassle.
If Smite Evil multiplies on crits, as a 1-for-1 scaling damage bonus from another class, then so should Precise Strike. Just remove the ability to double damage for a panache entirely, and let it multiply on crits already.
If the ONLY reason it's not being multiplied on critical hits is because the ability is flavored as being precision damage, then change the flavor. Or change it to bonus damage dice. Not letting a flat-damage bonus multiply is unheard of and it makes DMing npcs that do it a headache because of the "how much damage does this do on a crit" problem.
I agree that not multiplying a flat damage bonus is bizarre. It invalidates the most straightforward way to identify if damage is multiplied or not. There's an actual rule:
Multiplying DamageSometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results.
Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. So if you are asked to double the damage twice, the end result is three times the normal damage.
Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon's normal damage are never multiplied.
Whereas, "precision damage is not multiplied" has never been an actual rule that I know of.
I'm advocating it. We need to marginalize at least one stat because this class suffers from MAD, plain and simple. And nobody's going to dump Strength down to 7 unless they're ignoring encumbrance rules.
There's a trait to raise your carrying capacity by 2 (muscle of the society)
Mithral chain shirt and a pony or pack dog will get you through.
Whereas, "precision damage is not multiplied" has never been an actual rule that I know of.
It is and has been quoted previously.
It's in the Combat section of the Core Rule Book under Critical Hits:
Exception: Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit.
At that point in time, Sneak Attack was the best source of precision damage. A Duelist's Precise Strike is also intended to be precision damage, while not being explicitly called that (although only a total cheese whiz would try and argue Precise Strike isn't precision damage). As time has passed, more sources of precision damage has been released, but the Infiltrator's Sneak Attack dice has always been the most consistent source of precision damage.
I'm advocating it. We need to marginalize at least one stat because this class suffers from MAD, plain and simple. And nobody's going to dump Strength down to 7 unless they're ignoring encumbrance rules.There's a trait to raise your carrying capacity by 2 (muscle of the society)
Mithral chain shirt and a pony or pack dog will get you through.
Muleback Cords raise your strength score for encumbrance purposes by 8.
Whereas, "precision damage is not multiplied" has never been an actual rule that I know of.It is and has been quoted previously.
It's in the Combat section of the Core Rule Book under Critical Hits:
Exception: Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit.At that point in time, Sneak Attack was the best source of precision damage. A Duelist's Precise Strike is also intended to be precision damage, while not being explicitly called that (although only a total cheese whiz would try and argue Precise Strike isn't precision damage). As time has passed, more sources of precision damage has been released, but the Infiltrator's Sneak Attack dice has always been the most consistent source of precision damage.
Huh, missed that one. It's strange that a version of this rule appears under both Critical Hits and damage, and they don't state exactly the same thing.
So they dump Strength to 7. All that does is put them in line with everyone else, who's dumping either Strength or Charisma (or both) to 7.
Almost a necessity for a class that needs Dexterity and Charisma, needs Constitution even more than usual, cannot possibly compromise on Wisdom, and needs 13 Int for Combat Expertise & skill ranks.
|
|
Huh, missed that one. It's strange that a version of this rule appears under both Critical Hits and damage, and they don't state exactly the same thing.Whereas, "precision damage is not multiplied" has never been an actual rule that I know of.It is and has been quoted previously.
It's in the Combat section of the Core Rule Book under Critical Hits:
Exception: Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit.At that point in time, Sneak Attack was the best source of precision damage. A Duelist's Precise Strike is also intended to be precision damage, while not being explicitly called that (although only a total cheese whiz would try and argue Precise Strike isn't precision damage). As time has passed, more sources of precision damage has been released, but the Infiltrator's Sneak Attack dice has always been the most consistent source of precision damage.
That's because the 'flat bonus multiplies, extra dice don't.' has been the rule since the beginning of the d20 engine, while the 'precision damage' (as anything other than sneak attack) not multiplying is new, poorly thought out (what is the crit roll of 1d6+11?) and arbitrary (why does specialisation, weapon training and favoured enemy damage bonus get multiplied when they are just as much about skill as Precise Strike?).
That's because the 'flat bonus multiplies, extra dice don't.' has been the rule since the beginning of the d20 engine, while the 'precision damage' (as anything other than sneak attack) not multiplying is new, poorly thought out (what is the crit roll of 1d6+11?) and arbitrary (why does specialisation, weapon training and favoured enemy damage bonus get multiplied when they are just as much about skill as Precise Strike?).Huh, missed that one. It's strange that a version of this rule appears under both Critical Hits and damage, and they don't state exactly the same thing.Whereas, "precision damage is not multiplied" has never been an actual rule that I know of.It is and has been quoted previously.
It's in the Combat section of the Core Rule Book under Critical Hits:
Exception: Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit.At that point in time, Sneak Attack was the best source of precision damage. A Duelist's Precise Strike is also intended to be precision damage, while not being explicitly called that (although only a total cheese whiz would try and argue Precise Strike isn't precision damage). As time has passed, more sources of precision damage has been released, but the Infiltrator's Sneak Attack dice has always been the most consistent source of precision damage.
Really? I don't even know why the whole 'reverse-engineering headache' thing is even brought up. As if it's hard to look at a stat block that says, "1d6+11/15-20/x2" and then quickly glance up at the character sheet to see 'Human Swashbuckler 5" and realize, "Oh, 5 of that damage is from Precise Strike, so a Crit is 2d6+8 +5 from Precise Strike".
If people are complaining about how hard it is to reverse engineer Precise Strike on crit damage, I don't think it's Precise Strike that's the problem. It's their ability to use logic, and math, and their schooling that is the issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm guessing that someone has already mentioned this one, but I want to point it out just in case.
I'm currently building a Kitsune Swashbuckler, and I've found one issue that kind of bothers me: technically you need a the Combat Reflexes feat in order to use the Riposte Deed. This is because you would have already used one for Parry.
It seems very odd that a class ability would not be able to even function without feat investment. That AoO requirement should either be removed or the Swashbuckler should get Combat Reflexes for free.
|
|
I don't even know why the whole 'reverse-engineering headache' thing is even brought up. As if it's hard to look at a stat block that says, "1d6+11/15-20/x2" and then quickly glance up at the character sheet to see 'Human Swashbuckler 5" and realize, "Oh, 5 of that damage is from Precise Strike, so a Crit is 2d6+8 +5 from Precise Strike".
If people are complaining about how hard it is to reverse engineer Precise Strike on crit damage, I don't think it's Precise Strike that's the problem. It's their ability to use logic, and math, and their schooling that is the issue.
I'm curious about your take on the other objection: it's arbitrary.
What is the reasoning behind saying the Precise Strike doesn't get multiplied but weapon specialisation, weapon training and favoured enemy do? All of these are conceptually more damaging because of the ability of the warrior to use his weapon more skilfully, or know his target so well he knows precisely where to aim.
What is different about this kind of precision damage to the other kinds? Just the game term? Is there any difference in the game world?
|
|
Panache: it really doesn't feel like you get your Cha bonus as Panache points. It feels like you get one less than your Cha bonus!
No-one in their right mind would give up the extra damage just for a very low chance to parry or affect the success or failure of a skill roll. It feels like one point is almost totally unusable.
I'd prefer it if the deeds which work 'as long as you have one point of Panache' were just permanent abilities.
I don't even know why the whole 'reverse-engineering headache' thing is even brought up. As if it's hard to look at a stat block that says, "1d6+11/15-20/x2" and then quickly glance up at the character sheet to see 'Human Swashbuckler 5" and realize, "Oh, 5 of that damage is from Precise Strike, so a Crit is 2d6+8 +5 from Precise Strike".
If people are complaining about how hard it is to reverse engineer Precise Strike on crit damage, I don't think it's Precise Strike that's the problem. It's their ability to use logic, and math, and their schooling that is the issue.
I'm curious about your take on the other objection: it's arbitrary.
What is the reasoning behind saying the Precise Strike doesn't get multiplied but weapon specialisation, weapon training and favoured enemy do? All of these are conceptually more damaging because of the ability of the warrior to use his weapon more skilfully, or know his target so well he knows precisely where to aim.
What is different about this kind of precision damage to the other kinds? Just the game term? Is there any difference in the game world?
I don't feel it's arbitrary. Precision damage isn't multiplied on a crit, it's as simple as that. The Investigators Sneak Attack is precision damage, and isn't multiplied. The Duelist's Precise Strike is (supposed to be) precision damage and isn't multiplied on a critical hit. The trait Open Palm of Irori from Humans of Golarion gives a flat +2 precision damage, and it isn't multipled on a crit. The Precise Strike teamwork feat gives precision damage and isn't multiplied on a crit. A stalking weapon deals precision damage that isn't multiplied on a crit.
Precision damage simply isn't multiplied. Simple as that. I have no problem with that because I know what type of damage it deals. If they were to have called it something other than Precision Damage, but still kept the 'not multiplied' aspect, I would have been annoyed because all other damage types are multiplied.
As for why it's different? Most other kinds of Precision Damage add extrs d6's, and I figure they didn't want to give the Swashbuckler the ability to add a bunch of d6 as precision damage, because everyone would just call it sneak attack.
Wouldn't want to take anything away from Vivisectionists, Slayers or Investigators right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't feel it's arbitrary. Precision damage isn't multiplied on a crit, it's as simple as that.
You do know what arbitrary means, right?
Considering that this literally affects only the Duelist and a handful of obscure feats, and only for the better, I'd rather just see that line scrubbed as errata, now that there are non-dice sources of precision damage. If you want to just take the terms as they are, then the core Duelist actually does not deal precision damage, as it is not called out as such.
Yeah, but that won't keep up later, when the Dervish Dance Swashbuckler gets the feats he missed out on early to get Dervish Dance.At level 8:
** spoiler omitted **
Melee: rapier +1, Agile: + 18 ( 1d6+10 / 15-20) + 8 precise strike.
Melee: scimitar + 2: + 18 (1d6+ 9 / 15-20) + 8 precise strike.Winner: Rapier!
I think if a DM allows Dervish Dance, they will allow Agile Weapons.
Slashing is better at penetrating DR, but as Westley is a pirate, his rapier is better as he may have to fight underwater.
Also, this comparison highlights the importance of Swashbuckler Weapon Finesse not counting as a prerequisite for Dervish Dance. If you remove the Weapon Finesse feat tax on Dervish Dance, the Scimitar will be better.
That is stacking the deck in your favor by giving the Scimitar build the same suck feats that the Rapier Swashbuckler has taken because he ran out of damage feats to get. Give the Scimitar guy the useful feats first.
There are 3 Precise Strike abilities in the game. Duelist, a Feat, and the Swashbuckler. Two of the three are strictly called out as Precision damage, the third isn't, RAW, called out as being precision damage.
I'm sorry, but only a min-max, munchkin is going to actually try and argue that the duelist's PRECISE Strike isn't PRECISION damage.
The fact you even brought it up demeans both your, and my, intelligence, and I refuse to say another word on this subject.
Statements like that belong in the rules forums, not here in the playtest where the stuff we're talking about could be completely abandoned at a moments notice. RAI should be the order of the day here, nothing more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are 3 Precise Strike abilities in the game. Duelist, a Feat, and the Swashbuckler. Two of the three are strictly called out as Precision damage, the third isn't, RAW, called out as being precision damage.
I'm sorry, but only a min-max, munchkin is going to actually try and argue that the duelist's PRECISE Strike isn't PRECISION damage.
The fact you even brought it up demeans both your, and my, intelligence, and I refuse to say another word on this subject.
Statements like that belong in the rules forums, not here in the playtest where the stuff we're talking about could be completely abandoned at a moments notice. RAI should be the order of the day here, nothing more.
I'm not trying to munchkin anything. I called it out, because you said,
Precision damage isn't multiplied on a crit, it's as simple as that.
If it's as simple as that, you just identify everything that's labeled as precision damage, and you're done. Only, it's not as simple as that. There isn't any grand rationale given why some things are precision damage and others aren't. There isn't a really good reason why Weapon Spec multiplies on a crit, agile weapon damage bonuses multiply on a crit, but the Swashbuckler's damage bonus does not. You're acting as if the effects should follow from the name, but I would say the point is to come up with a design that works, then describe it in the right way.
If "precision damage" means damage isn't multiplied, why make a Swashbuckler's flat damage bonus precision damage? Just call it Puissant Strike instead.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are 3 Precise Strike abilities in the game. Duelist, a Feat, and the Swashbuckler. Two of the three are strictly called out as Precision damage, the third isn't, RAW, called out as being precision damage.
I'm sorry, but only a min-max, munchkin is going to actually try and argue that the duelist's PRECISE Strike isn't PRECISION damage.
The fact you even brought it up demeans both your, and my, intelligence, and I refuse to say another word on this subject.
Statements like that belong in the rules forums, not here in the playtest where the stuff we're talking about could be completely abandoned at a moments notice. RAI should be the order of the day here, nothing more.
This is gonna be another one of those 'Knives is forcing himself to remain calm for the sake of communication' kind of posts.
What, precisely, does 'munchkin' mean to you? How about 'min-max'? Because these aren't words with standardized definitions and what they mean to you might not be what they mean to me, or to another group, or to the developers.
The question that needs to be addressed is, "Are the Swashbuckler's bonuses powerful enough that they need to not be multiplied on a crit?" As far as I can tell the answer is, "No, they're not, we should retype the damage." This question, by extension, is applied to Duelist and that feat - and the answer is still, "No, we could probably just let this one go without any problems."
Sadly, I think Swashbucklers would be better off being a Gunslinger/Monk hybrid than a Gunslinger/Fighter one. Even being just a Gunslinger archetype would be more fitting.
Fighters don't really add anything Swashbuckler-ish to the class. They have very few skill points, weak skill list, no synergy with Cha, bad reflex saves, no mobility option... In fact, all Fighters have to offer is extra damage, which really shouldn't be the main focus of Swashbucklers.
That said, a few Fighter archetypes do fit the Swashbuckler theme very well.
Right before the book was announced, I was actually working on a homebrew Swashbuckler, as a Gunslinger archetype, and it was honestly surprisingly close to what turned up in the book here. It really does need to be it's own class though, firstly for the same reason Gunslinger doesn't quite work as a fighter archetype. Once you've replaced all the deeds, worked some extra appeal for charisma in, and changed everything weapon related, it's hardly the same thing, and needs a new set of support feats. The other reason is that you have a gunslinger archetype that didn't use guns. That's just going to confuse too many people.
If Dex to damage were to be added to the class, considerations would have to be made so that the Swashbuckler is not JUST the most obvious DIP for nearly every dexterity based melee fighter. Even though I personally feel that dex to damage is a bad idea, if it were to be done, I'd suggest two options:
1) Have the Dexterity to damage scale with level (either one point per level or one point per two levels (min 1).
2) Grant it at a late enough level that it is a heavy enough investment (into a full BAB class) that the loss of class features from the character's original class equals (or exceeds) the benefits gained - say 5th level.
My experience still says give it at 4. 1 or 2 is too early if you're worried about dips, 3 is the first point at which you could have grabbed dervish dance so you're in the clear, but gives you a lot of shiny toys including a raw damage boost, so... let's spread it out a little. 4 is a really depressing level as is because you're really really feeling the lack of damage when a normal fighter would be picking up their next power attack boost, and a bonus feat you aren't getting, and honestly, it's a dead level as is.
Just never getting it seems wrong to me. I get why things are generally set up to punish people who try to use dex to fight in melee in general, but you should not be punishing the dex-based fighter class for trying to make a dex-based fighter. It is seriously wrong how much better it works to just go with strength with this and ignore all the hints it gives to do otherwise.
For that matter, as long as it isn't just a completely front-loaded class, I'm not really concerned with it being "the most obvious DIP for nearly every dexterity based melee fighter." That's like worrying about gunslinger being the most obvious dip for anyone who wants to use guns, or sorcerer for anyone who wants to cast spells spontaneously.
Come to think of it, does anyone have a build of the sort of dipped character they're worried about seeing? To me it still feels like a total boogieman, when you can get all the same benefit just taking 2 feats.
So they dump Strength to 7. All that does is put them in line with everyone else, who's dumping either Strength or Charisma (or both) to 7.
Almost a necessity for a class that needs Dexterity and Charisma, needs Constitution even more than usual, cannot possibly compromise on Wisdom, and needs 13 Int for Combat Expertise & skill ranks.
It's really easy to think of strength as "the melee attack stat" and think that's all it's any good for, but it hurts more than you'd think. It only ties in to two skills true, but have you ever made a melee character that didn't count on being a good enough natural swimmer to wade in and deal? And while it may be missing a proper ability to swing around on ropes (that really needs addressing still) it's a little sad not being able to climb one. CMB and CMD run off str too. The former you can switch with agile maneuvers, but you're dropping CMD for life.
And of course, you'll notice I left Debbie here with a 9, not an 8. There's a reason that spare point didn't go to con, and it's called "light load." Carry too much and you lose your dex bonus to AC, which is a death sentence for this class. Debbie can carry 30 lbs. without a problem, if you look way back through my posts, you'll see how tricky that initial equipment loadout was. Even there I couldn't swing the best armor her dex supported if I wanted a rapier and buckler. Drop to 7 str and it's down to 23 (17.25 if you're small). Lose the buckler or go even lighter than studded and you can still swing it but that's 2 lbs. of wiggle room. Eventually you need a belt and some boots and a cloak and a headband right? Each weighs a pound or two. It adds up.
Ah, you think, but what if I have a strength belt? Sure, that helps, but it also extends the delay on having a belt boost your dex. Eventually sure, you're going to get a +6 belt of physical might, or even perfection, but if dex isn't the stat you're building first with it, you're not really minmaxing this are you.
Plus, this class fills the fighter seat in the typical 4 person party. You know how you always have the fighter carry everything because his light load is in the hundreds or thousands of pounds? A rogue, a bard, maybe a cleric can potentially shoulder some of the burden, but you're abandoning a lot of loot without a bag of holding or something. Type I weighs 15 lbs. That, a buckler, and a rapier leave 1 pound, or 1 magic item, no armor. A Handy Haversack is only 5, which if everyone carries their own share is cool, but it's still only leaves 11 lbs. combined for your armor, backup ranged weapon, ammo for it, magic items, clothing, and anything you happen to need to hold for a moment, like a torch.
You probably could swing a 7 str if you really really worked at it but it's a long road with a lot of tradeoffs. And hey, -2 to all your damage until you find a way to get dex on it, nobody's suggesting that be available at level 1. No power attack (barring a thrown bone) until you have a +6 belt. At a certain point you have to ask how many levels you want to cripple yourself for to have a strong finish in the back half of a campaign.