Why would you ever take fighter over swashbuckler? Their damage is harder to get. You seem to be pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons to keep up with a swashbuckler in damage. Your main stat is less useful than a swash's main stat.
General arguments for comparing both classes, GO!
Fighters are better for people wanting simpler characters, or new players. Past that, I got nothin'.
|
They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.
That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.
Fighter are also good archers. I think an archer could do comparable damage to a swashbuckler without having to worry about the precision damage that might stop a swashbuckler.
two quick combat featsfor a two level dip, weapon training for a third.
|
for me its the versitalty, you can make most melee orianted characters from fighters, lol once had a fighter who took down 9 fish guys by himself at lv3 with a simple dagger, i thought that was epicly awsome :D not to mention the fighter was also a professinal gambler with a good charisma woo yay for not making charisma a dump stat!! :D
They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.
That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.
And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.
All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.
I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.
two quick combat featsfor a two level dip, weapon training for a third.
What do you mean? Need a bit more context to understand.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People often seem to forget that what a fighter does he can do all the time every round every day. He doesn't require grit or panache to occasionally nova. That is the main strength of the fighter.
I know most of us play a pretty basic 4-5 encounters per day because that seems to be how everything is written. But when that goes out the door it is nice to be a fighter.
Feat every level?
Doesn't seem like much but you can pull off some neat things. I especially like the ability to run a Dervish Dance Fighter and Armor Training to get my AC through the roof. Sure you end up using half your non-combat feats on things like Iron Will and whatever else you can to shore up your weaknesses but there is something to being an unhittable Critacular power attacking buffable frontline tank.
Fighters are simple, but that does not stop them from being effective. Perhaps not for something in which people are meta-gaming, know the module already, and you've got munchkins rolling insane characters tailored specifically for the encounters, but in a more laid-back campaign nothing beats hitting things till they are dead every now and then.
it occurs to me weirdly enough that you can a passable archer with a swash, picking up point blank master at level 6. you would have to ignore quite a few class features though, or go the switch hitter route though.
People often seem to forget that what a fighter does he can do all the time every round every day. He doesn't require grit or panache to occasionally nova. That is the main strength of the fighter.
I know most of us play a pretty basic 4-5 encounters per day because that seems to be how everything is written. But when that goes out the door it is nice to be a fighter.
So can a Swashbuckler. You only need 1 panache to add you level to damage every strike. That's like getting a +1 weapon every level... forever.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not everybody wants to play people dancing around with swords...some just like swinging their big swords and be done with it. I have a friend who enjoys playing dex fighter and enjoyed it when Swashbuckler was released.
Swashbuckler is pretty cool...but frankly I will never ever play a dex based class for personal preference really. I prefer brute strength or spellcasting but that's just me.
Feat every level?
Doesn't seem like much but you can pull off some neat things. I especially like the ability to run a Dervish Dance Fighter and Armor Training to get my AC through the roof. Sure you end up using half your non-combat feats on things like Iron Will and whatever else you can to shore up your weaknesses but there is something to being an unhittable Critacular power attacking buffable frontline tank.
Fighters are simple, but that does not stop them from being effective. Perhaps not for something in which people are meta-gaming, know the module already, and you've got munchkins rolling insane characters tailored specifically for the encounters, but in a more laid-back campaign nothing beats hitting things till they are dead every now and then.
Swashbucklers only get 4 less feats by level 20.
it occurs to me weirdly enough that you can a passable archer with a swash, picking up point blank master at level 6. you would have to ignore quite a few class features though, or go the switch hitter route though.
I think you meant "make a passable". Swashbucklers can't add precise strike damage to bows.
Because fighters can specialize ranged combat and ranged combat is superior in just about every way to melee combat?
Other than that I would say because a martial master, mutation fighter, Druman Blackjack is fun.
two quick combat featsfor a two level dip, weapon training for a third.What do you mean? Need a bit more context to understand.
why ever take fighter?
Not everybody wants to play people dancing around with swords...some just like swinging their big swords and be done with it. I have a friend who enjoys playing dex fighter and enjoyed it when Swashbuckler was released.
Swashbuckler is pretty cool...but frankly I will never ever play a dex based class for personal preference really. I prefer brute strength or spellcasting but that's just me.
I can totally agree with you. I play this game about 75% for the flavor so I buy that. This is an exerciser in mechanical debate though.
why ever take fighter?two quick combat featsfor a two level dip, weapon training for a third.What do you mean? Need a bit more context to understand.
Ah I head to reread what you typed.
"They may want to take a two level dip in fighter for 2 quick combat feats, and weapon training for a third."
That's a good point.
Let me rephrase my question:
"why ever play 20 levels of fighter instead of 20 levels in swashbuckler?"
They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.
That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.
And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.
All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.
I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.
What do you mean by "it"?
So can a Swashbuckler. You only need 1 panache to add you level to damage every strike. That's like getting a +1 weapon every level... forever.People often seem to forget that what a fighter does he can do all the time every round every day. He doesn't require grit or panache to occasionally nova. That is the main strength of the fighter.
I know most of us play a pretty basic 4-5 encounters per day because that seems to be how everything is written. But when that goes out the door it is nice to be a fighter.
It is not all day because it is precision damage so some are immune to it. That is what the other poster was getting at. Yes, it is true that it won't be common, but the other poster is correct.
No, I am not saying the fighter is better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right, you then ignored the whole Armor Training point I brought up. So let me mention it again, Armor Training. Fighters, compared to Swashbucklers, can wear Heavy armor and move at normal speed. Additionally, Armor Training allows you to play even a Dex Fighter in heavy armor without losing any AC. Even with the Swashbuckler's extra AC in light armor it cannot match up.
So, with similar Saves, the difference between them is that one hits harder and the other is harder to hit.
Plus, more feats, options, and archetypes instead of deeds.
Two reasons to take fighter -
If you are multiclassing and take only one or two levels of fighter for the feats and martial capabilities.
If the GM has said Core rulebook only, eliminating the choices of Swashbucklers, Gunslingers, or Slayers.
The Advanced Class Guide has made some of the core classes potentially obsolete, and has arguably added classes that could be done better by simply multiclassing. I'm looking at you Warpriest. A cleric with a one or two level dip into any martial class might be a better option if it wasn't for your archetypes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Better question is... Why play a Swashbuckler when you can play a Daring Champion Cavalier?
What do you mean by "it"?They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.
That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.
And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.
All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.
I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.
Ah you're right. By it, I mean one vs one sustained melee combat, taking into account damage as well as the ability to avoid damage, and manipulate that same combat using abilities, whether they be from feats or class abilities.
|
|
Going to assume, we are talking about base fighter and base swashbuckler because if we add archetypes into the mix...it's just going to be a game of rock paper scissor and right now fighters have much better archetypes than swashbuckler:
On a mechanical exercise point of view, frankly fighters offer a lot of flexibility compared to a Swashbuckler. The sheer amount of bonus feats often means a fighter will have at least mastered 2 or 3 different fighting styles (Which often is melee + ranged, since archers are frankly the best fighting style out there).
Swashbucklers do work on their area of expertise, which isn't a bad thing but at the same time, the lack of flexibility could start hurting in the higher levels with the different monsters tactics and abilities. But to be fair skill wise, a swashbucklers is more likely to bring some utility outside of combat, including possibly being a face with his charisma and dex most likely high.
So can a Swashbuckler. You only need 1 panache to add you level to damage every strike. That's like getting a +1 weapon every level... forever.People often seem to forget that what a fighter does he can do all the time every round every day. He doesn't require grit or panache to occasionally nova. That is the main strength of the fighter.
I know most of us play a pretty basic 4-5 encounters per day because that seems to be how everything is written. But when that goes out the door it is nice to be a fighter.
It is not all day because it is precision damage so some are immune to it. That is what the other poster was getting at. Yes, it is true that it won't be common, but the other poster is correct.
No, I am not saying the fighter is better.
Good point. Oozes and Elementals.
Ah you're right. By it, I mean one vs one sustained melee combat, taking into account damage as well as the ability to avoid damage, and manipulate that same combat using abilities, whether they be from feats or class abilities.What do you mean by "it"?They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.
That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.
And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.
All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.
I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.
I think a barbarian can do quiet well, and a paladin also if fighting something evil.
Right, you then ignored the whole Armor Training point I brought up. So let me mention it again, Armor Training. Fighters, compared to Swashbucklers, can wear Heavy armor and move at normal speed. Additionally, Armor Training allows you to play even a Dex Fighter in heavy armor without losing any AC. Even with the Swashbuckler's extra AC in light armor it cannot match up.
So, with similar Saves, the difference between them is that one hits harder and the other is harder to hit.
Plus, more feats, options, and archetypes instead of deeds.
As swashbuckler with the signature deed feat for opp parry and rip with combat reflexes, AC hardly matters.
I think a barbarian can do quiet well, and a paladin also if fighting something evil.Ah you're right. By it, I mean one vs one sustained melee combat, taking into account damage as well as the ability to avoid damage, and manipulate that same combat using abilities, whether they be from feats or class abilities.What do you mean by "it"?They are dramatically more versatile than the Swashbuckler. Neither class is a particularly optimum choice most of the time, because all they do is hit things and fail saves.
That you would use the phrase "pigeon holed" when comparing anything to a Swashbuckler amuses me no end though. They represent the very definition of the term.
And now a tangent to explain something that doesn't matter about semantics. When I say the words "pigeon holed", I'm referring to the fighter, since it does in fact have other options. Being pigeon holed implies you have many other options but only 1 decision ever is the optimal choice. The Swashbuckler doesn't. It has only one, and if the fighter wants to perform its role as a striker as well as a swashbuckler, he's pigeon holed into 2 handed weapons.
All they do is hit things and fails saves? Yes, that's precisely what striker classes do. I contend that swashbucklers do it better and with MORE versatility since they have more abilities and only 4 feat less than a fighter at lvl 20, and roughly the same feat taxes. And have more skills. And don't need to take feats to do what a lot of fighters can. And are IMMUNE to being disarmed, sundered, and steal. And get evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge.
I challenge you to find a melee fighting class that does it better than either, then I challenge you to stay on topic and tell me how a fighter compares to a swashbuckler.
I've got pali butt hurt. They do everything better. If you said that's the most OP class, I'd agree all day. Especially if they made them correctly with their highest stat as CHA.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, for one Swashbucklers have the worst possible saves in the game. Fighter defenses are pretty awful but Swash defenses are even worse. Actually, a lot of the issues with the Fighter are compounded with the Swashbuckler (extremely fragile, need to full attack to do anything productive, etc). Also Fighters get many more feats for those play styles that are horrendously riddled with taxes, and some people want to use a 2-handed weapon.
A better question would be "why ever take fighter when you could take slayer". Alternatively, "why ever take swashbuckler when you could take daring champion cavalier".
Some other points:
MAD -- Swashbucklers are inherently more MAD than fighters due to wanting a good charisma score. They need strength a little less, but if they want power attack then they are going to want a good strength score. A fighter can get away with simply a good strength, Con and Wisdom score.
Front Loaded -- The fighter is a bit more front loaded damage-wise. The swashbuckler needs that precise strike. If the swashbuckler goes dex heavy with a light weapon to use piranha strike the damage is going to be sketchy for a bit. If they go slashing grace they still need a 13 strength if they want power attack (since piranha strike doesn't work with 1 handed weapons). The fighter can two hand a weapon with power attack and lay down the hurt from day one. The fighter (especially a human fighter) could also complete a basic fighting style at level 1 (say point blank shot, precise shot and rapid shot), where as the swashbuckler is building into his stuff much longer.
Base saves -- Fortitude is a more important save throw than reflex. The swashbuckler does get to add charisma to saves a few times a day (likely enough) but even so that just makes the swashbuckler MAD again.
As swashbuckler with the signature deed feat for opp parry and rip with combat reflexes, AC hardly matters.Right, you then ignored the whole Armor Training point I brought up. So let me mention it again, Armor Training. Fighters, compared to Swashbucklers, can wear Heavy armor and move at normal speed. Additionally, Armor Training allows you to play even a Dex Fighter in heavy armor without losing any AC. Even with the Swashbuckler's extra AC in light armor it cannot match up.
So, with similar Saves, the difference between them is that one hits harder and the other is harder to hit.
Plus, more feats, options, and archetypes instead of deeds.
Yup up until people shoot at them. Parry/rip is melee only.
Fighters also gain more bonuses to hit with their chosen styles -- yes the swash has weapon training (limited) but the fighter still has the weapon focus/greater weapon focus line to help too.
|
The correct answer is you probably shouldn't play either if you want to be an effective contributor to your group. Daring Champion Cavalier and Magus that grabs a handful of Deed stuff from feats are both far stronger chassis that still have the Dextrous Fighter feel, and aren't completely and totally hamstringed by lack of skill points or Swift Action economy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see fighter as basically Build-A-Class, and thats why I play them. I'm not really a min maxer or a munchkin or anything. If I have something in specific in mind for a martial character, and I want a lot of room to do it, I'll pick fighter.
Yup up until people shoot at them. Parry/rip is melee only.As swashbuckler with the signature deed feat for opp parry and rip with combat reflexes, AC hardly matters.Right, you then ignored the whole Armor Training point I brought up. So let me mention it again, Armor Training. Fighters, compared to Swashbucklers, can wear Heavy armor and move at normal speed. Additionally, Armor Training allows you to play even a Dex Fighter in heavy armor without losing any AC. Even with the Swashbuckler's extra AC in light armor it cannot match up.
So, with similar Saves, the difference between them is that one hits harder and the other is harder to hit.
Plus, more feats, options, and archetypes instead of deeds.
Another issue is that things like giants which hit above their CR may be able to beat your attack roll, but might not be able to hit a fighter focused on AC as easily.
Better question is... Why play a Swashbuckler when you can play a Daring Champion Cavalier?
This is the winner right here. Swashbucklers are just not that great.
For me the question is, if I want a charismatic warrior, why would I ever play a Swashbuckler when I can play a Warlord instead?
Kindly note: A fighter who doesn't invest in Dex loses all benefit of his Armor Training Dex to AC ability.
Also note that a true Dex fighter will not be able to keep his full Dex bonus to AC in heavy armor...he tops out at 24 Dex in Mithral Full plate, unless you allow Celestial Plate into play.
The Swashbuckler doesn't need Armor Training. He always has full movement, and with mithral chain or celestial Chain he can easily get use out of a post-30 Dex without a problem. Armor Training is a completely unnecessary ability on ALL LEVELS for a swash, so why waste class level abilities on it?
==Aelryinth
Well this thing called role playing. Believe it or not some of us dont try to make the biggest baddest killing machine, we Instead we come up with a concept that we think is going to be fun to role play and then build on that concept. And maybe a fighter fits that concept better, and maybe some might even see his or her fighter as a handsome champion of good and even (gasp) spend a few points on charisma.
i don't play that many fighters but sometimes its nice to roleplay a guy who is just a straight ahead fighter- no parrying, no studying targets, just muscle and steel. their huge number of (choose-able) feats is nice too if you want to build an unusual character... interesting feats that you're often unwilling to spend your feats don't seem so costly when you get so many of them! i made a kitsune fighter who was taking the whole magic tail tree (and kitsune pounce). i made another one (a lore warden) who took dangerously curious, skill focus: knowledge[arcana], and eldritch heritage[arcane] and surprised a lot of people. also, i haven't tried it yet but the new mutation fighter looks like it has a lot of potential for cool/effective builds. and i think a lore warden/martial master would probably be pretty awesome (probably the best combat maneuver build you'll find, since you can use martial flexibility to pick up whole maneuver chains)
Fighters are better for people wanting simpler characters, or new players. Past that, I got nothin'.
This sometime you just want to pick feats and swing a sword.
Fighters will always be better at using your weapon as a weapon than you'll ever be, regardless of class.
The one time this isn't really true is the Monk.
That being said, the Fighter is worse at being anything beyond Brock Samson In Fullplate.
Fighter is the single best Class to dip into for combat; but you shouldn't require more than a few levels just to get all the combat Feats in a short period of time.
A straight Fighter can be played one of two ways: Specialist or Generalist. You either specialize at 1 weapon, via the Weapon Focus tree, or you take general Combat Feats and make use of your Weapon Training to become a threat with any weapon you find lying around.
If you try to do both, it ends up kinda gnarly, and if you want to do things other than Combat Maneuvers or "HIT IT WITH A STIIIIIIICK!" you'll want to multiclass.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why be a fighter instead of a swashbuckler? If you want to use two-handed weapons. If you want to use heavy armor. If you want to use a shield other than a buckler. If you want to use two-weapon fighting. If you want to have a good fortitude save. If you don't want to keep track of resources like panache.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well this thing called role playing. Believe it or not some of us dont try to make the biggest baddest killing machine, we Instead we come up with a concept that we think is going to be fun to role play and then build on that concept. And maybe a fighter fits that concept better, and maybe some might even see his or her fighter as a handsome champion of good and even (gasp) spend a few points on charisma.
Stormwind Fallacy.