FAQ Request - Can a Swashbuckler parry a natural 20?

[kaisc006]

To present both cases how I understand them:

The Yes argument:

Spoiler:

Natural 20 and Natural 1: On attack rolls and saving throws, a natural 20 is an automatic success and a natural 1 is an automatic failure. But should I treat them differently than other results when deciding if a roll succeeded or failed by 5 or more, when comparing two opposed attack rolls to see which is a higher result, or other similar situations?
No, unless a specific rule tells you otherwise, treat a natural 20 or natural 1 result on an attack roll or saving throw the same as any other result when comparing the total result to other numbers. For example, if a fighter rolls a natural 1 for a total of 31 against the wizard’s AC of 33, the attack misses by 5 or less and destroys one of the wizard’s mirror images.

So since the Swashbuckler is comparing their result to the Opponent's, both results follow the rules for opposing attack rolls, and can therefore treat the natural 20 as "any other result", not an automatic success. Swashbuckler Parries the attack.

The No argument:

Spoiler:

Opponent is making an attack roll, the swashbuckler is making an opposed attack roll.

Attack Roll: ... A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit...

Since the Opponent is making an attack roll, subject to all rules of the attack roll, then if the opponent rolls a natural 20 it must hit. The swashbuckler cannot parry.
The swashbuckler is making an opposed attack roll, or at least a variation of a normal attack roll. Therefore his natural 20s are treated as "any other number" and don't auto parry.

I'm firmly in the yes camp, but in PFS play there seems to be a split among GMs.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

Well, that's PFS' problem for not keeping their GMs up-to-date on their FAQs, as they're required to be.

No FAQ is needed. All that's needed is to throw the book at them.

[Lemartes]

Yes camp.

[Wei Ji the Learner]

I see the logic behind both options, though my 'internal math-ing' leans towards the 'Yes'.

[BigNorseWolf]

I was no before the FAQ but am a pretty strong yes after.

[BigNorseWolf]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Well, that's PFS' problem for not keeping their GMs up-to-date on their FAQs, as they're required to be.

No FAQ is needed. All that's needed is to throw the book at them.

The requirement to DM a game of PFS is downloading a PFS number.

Downloading the core rules, the other rules, the FAQ to the core rules, the FAQ scattered about in 27 different places, and the campaign clarifications keeps burning out the jumper cable to USB port connection.

[vhok]

yes it can parry a nat 20 they already made an faq about the general rule of nat 1 and nat 20. swashbucklers fall under the "compare 2 attack rolls" section of this faq

Natural 20 and Natural 1: On attack rolls and saving throws, a natural 20 is an automatic success and a natural 1 is an automatic failure. But should I treat them differently than other results when deciding if a roll succeeded or failed by 5 or more, when comparing two opposed attack rolls to see which is a higher result, or other similar situations?

No, unless a specific rule tells you otherwise, treat a natural 20 or natural 1 result on an attack roll or saving throw the same as any other result when comparing the total result to other numbers. For example, if a fighter rolls a natural 1 for a total of 31 against the wizard’s AC of 33, the attack misses by 5 or less and destroys one of the wizard’s mirror images.

FAQ..