|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right on, like Wis mod as standard perception, you just made it sound like Dex is never used for Initiative, was just confirming.Just noting that it wasn't standard.
So, ha, how do we get Str mod for Initiative?This might be possible, though I'm not sure what activity would use Athletics for initiative.
"From your position atop the roof, you have no trouble seeing Lady Dangereuse and her bodyguards approaching the alchemist's shop. They don't even stop to look around as they hurry toward the front door."
"Well then, it seems like it's time for the Sable Crusader to, ah, drop in!"
"Okay, so that's initiative... Athletics check for you and Perception for them."
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lets say my character's name is Karen the murderer, and I am wanting to be a good assassin. I am not very strong by nature so I study ways to fight people and hurt people that don't require a lot of strength to be effective, but, if assassinating people is what I am dedicating my life to do, then I probably also start strengthening my frame as much as I can as well.
Realistically? Sure. Realism is not exactly Pathfinder's priority, though, and playing the quick but weak character who is nevertheless deadly is a genre option that should be available, IMO.
1st level Dex to Damage completely obliterates the idea that damage with melee weapons is tied to strength. In fact, for a rogue that is Dex focused with Dex to damage, getting stronger never makes me do more damage.
This is true, and indeed necessary for many concepts. I don't consider it a problem any more than a character in Full Plate never getting any better AC for raising Dex (which is just as unrealistic, by the way, Full Plate is actually pretty mobile and you can easily dodge in it), which is also necessary to enable many concepts.
The issue comes up if going Dex-based is just flatly better than going Str-based, not with people being able to focus on one to the exclusion of the other.
Wouldn't it make a lot more sense for the damage bonus to be static (to make up for the lower damage dice, and let me decide if increasing my damage output is worth spending some resources on strength, instead of focusing on some other aspect of my character?
It would be more realistic. That doesn't make it more fun or better game design, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Introduction
Through this post, I'll talk about a phenomenon that is observable in 5E. I'll posit this phenomenon is a detriment to the game, both in terms of thematics and mechanics; and I'll foray into how PF2E is tackling it and where there may be danger.
The STR/DEX Dichotomy is a character development property of 5E.
Due to the game mechanics, there is little to no incentive to pick up STR if your character is DEX-based; simultaneously, STR-based characters receive minimal returns from investments in DEX.
This leads to STR-based characters who keep minimal, sometimes negative, DEX, and viceversa.
The one exception is found where characters are mandated through class features to avoid doing so – the Barbarian forces the player to use medium armor and make STR-based attacks if they want to fully enjoy its class features.
There are two facets of the game which I consider to be negatively impacted by it:
- Thematically: Having light, nimble characters with no sinew is a whiff; street rats, acrobats, brawlers – all of them require muscle to climb, run, jump, dodge, deflect, pry open, and so forth. Encouraging them to keep 8 STR makes them more of a game construct than an individual in a fantasy setting. The opposite case is also true – while hulking STR-balls with no speed are as conceivable as DEX-amassing mousers, most real warriors of all stripes should have picked up some motor coordination with their training.
- Mechanically: When STR or DEX are more valuable than the other, the baseline for characters created with the less optimal attribute should be lower, and it should make anyone who is being relatively pragmatic on character creation disregard one of the main core attributes as a viable option.
5E did not attempt to splinter the Dichotomy with its...
I like most of these points, and have to agree with others that the ACP adjustment is probably the favorite out of the bunch. Providing and offering different flavors and benefits for the two stats is a great way to go. "Dex to damage" just makes one feel like the other, and is a lazy approach. With the customization focus of PF2, it makes sense that we'd apply the same mindset to DEX and STR and say hey, 'let's let you be different people, and that's okay. Oh, and let's give you cool options you can pick from'.
So, +1 for the ACP option, and let's keep discussing the others, as well.
Thank you for making the post.
One way of possible addressing it, cap Dex to damage at your next highest ability mod of (Str or Int (or Wis)) -- ie you're ability to capitalize on your agility is limited by either your raw strength behind the pin-point blow, or the ability to find (int or wis) the chink in the armor/etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No I want to choose between the two and not have dex be significantly worse because ... reasons?...So you want to be able to dump Str with no conciquences and are strongly opposed to any game design that makes choosing between Dex and Str a meaningful choices. Probably just removing Str from the system will be your best bet. Just make atheltics and carrying capacity based on Con.
Right there is where I disagree I don't see a dex focused meleee build being worse at all even without dex to damage. Less damage sure but you get the other benefits of focusing on dex.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This might be possible, though I'm not sure what activity would use Athletics for initiative.
Charging into battle as fast as possible of course!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFufoOgCMW8
One way of possible addressing it, cap Dex to damage at your next highest ability mod of (Str or Int (or Wis)) -- ie you're ability to capitalize on your agility is limited by either your raw strength behind the pin-point blow, or the ability to find (int or wis) the chink in the armor/etc.
FWIW, I think this is one of the cooler ideas for balancing DEX to damage that I've seen. It makes it worse than STR (because presumably your Rogue isn't maxing out INT or WIS), but still lets you dump STR if you want, as long as you're willing to put some resources somewhere specific.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That doesn't make it more fun or better game design, though.
Challenge accepted:
Finesse Strike: When you attack with an agile or finesse one-handed melee weapon, you can add a +2 to your damage. At level 5, this bonus is increased to +3, and you gain an additional +1 at every five levels.
This is a more fun design for a first level rogue class feature. It scales at the exact same rate as attributes so it keeps up, but it doesn't undercut strength for a rogue. A rogue that wants to be on par with a +4 attribute bonus attacker needs a 14 in STR (which is pretty easy to do with the new system) and is rewarded for increasing strength as they level up as well. A rogue that keeps a 10 in STR is a massive -2 damage behind total from level 1 to level 20, an amount probably easily made up for with feats, spells, magic items or other features.
In my opinion, this also more closely emulates the fact that even Paladins and Fighters usually want at least a 12 or 14 dex for AC, because heavy armor dedicated classes almost always have ways to benefit a point or two from Dex to AC, whether from using "lighter" heavy armors, special materials, or a feat or class feature at higher levels that lets them get that extra +1 or 2.
This change is simple, elegant and does not radically change the face of the game, nor is it particularly susceptible to future exploitation, and decreases the likelihood of the STR based monk becoming a trap option within the first or second splat book that comes out. What is not more fun about this option?
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is it important to dump Str?
That's part of the problem, dumping Dex is never, ever a good idea, so I don't see why Str should be singled out.
Depends on what you mean by dumping. In PF2 you can't dump stuff below 10 unless your Ancestry gives a penalty to it. We know that there's armor with a +0 Dex Mod, so going with Dex 10-12 is entirely viable for the whole game.
Why should Str 10 not be equally viable?
From a balance perspective, letting any class basically be as close to pure SAD as the rogue can be is dangerous. My thought upthread, was that the common trope of "agile but weak -- often is still effective due to cunning/strategic" hence its not dex to damage but allowing the rogue with a finesse weapon to use int/wis instead of str. Its not still dex to damage, but it is letting them choose from a thematically appropriate non-DEX stat. Wis is probably stronger than int (helps a save and rogues have enough skill points at level 1 as it is), but still hits a character concept.
The "only agile" --weak & stupid -- tends to work in stories when "lucky" but that's harder to make work in a multiplayer game without becoming broken or pure comedic (which might work for some campaigns, but typically requires GM fiat.)
(FWIW, unicore's version is simpler :) )
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That doesn't make it more fun or better game design, though.Challenge accepted:
Finesse Strike: When you attack with an agile or finesse one-handed melee weapon, you can add a +2 to your damage. At level 5, this bonus is increased to +3, and you gain an additional +1 at every five levels.
I'm not against such an option existing for those who want to go Str/Dex. I am against needing Str to make Dex builds viable when the reverse is not true.
This is a more fun design for a first level rogue class feature. It scales at the exact same rate as attributes so it keeps up, but it doesn't undercut strength for a rogue. A rogue that wants to be on par with a +4 attribute bonus attacker needs a 14 in STR (which is pretty easy to do with the new system) and is rewarded for increasing strength as they level up as well. A rogue that keeps a 10 in STR is a massive -2 damage behind total from level 1 to level 20, an amount probably easily made up for with feats, spells, magic items or other features.
The idea that it can be compensated for is a huge assumption. Flat bonuses of the sort you're talking about are almost nonexistent in PF2 by all indications, with the only one we know of being Barbarian Rage.
In my opinion, this also more closely emulates the fact that even Paladins and Fighters usually want at least a 12 or 14 dex for AC, because heavy armor dedicated classes almost always have ways to benefit a point or two from Dex to AC, whether from using "lighter" heavy armors, special materials, or a feat or class feature at higher levels that lets them get that extra +1 or 2.
This is another huge assumption. It's very possible that this is very much not true in PF2. Personally, I suspect it will be, but only via Mithral or other special materials.
For parity, then, there should be a weapon option to add Str as well as Dex to weapon damage rather than needing Str being a non-gear dependent assumption.
This change is simple, elegant and does not radically change the face of the game, nor is it particularly susceptible to future exploitation, and decreases the likelihood of the STR based monk becoming a trap option within the first or second splat book that comes out. What is not more fun about this option?
Dex to damage can avoid exploitation pretty easily just by powering up Strength, which is my definite preference.
I'd be much more inclined to make an ability available to add Str to AC instead of Dex when unarmored or in light armor than get rid of Dex-to-damage.
I'd be much more inclined to make an ability available to add Str to AC instead of Dex when unarmored or in light armor
That's an interesting idea. What's the ingame rationale?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From a balance perspective, letting any class basically be as close to pure SAD as the rogue can be is dangerous. My thought upthread, was that the common trope of "agile but weak -- often is still effective due to cunning/strategic" hence its not dex to damage but allowing the rogue with a finesse weapon to use int/wis instead of str. Its not still dex to damage, but it is letting them choose from a thematically appropriate non-DEX stat. Wis is probably stronger than int (helps a save and rogues have enough skill points at level 1 as it is), but still hits a character concept.
I actually prefer this version quite a bit to most of the other restrictions on Dex-to-damage for thematic reasons, for the record.
Well, Dex is not just about AC, by sticking with 10 Dex, you lose out on other aspects, like Ref saves, ranged weapon attacks, stealth, acrobatics.
As long as a 10 Str is equally viable to a 10 Dex, fine, but that is not the current situation in 3rd Ed/PF1 and 5th Ed.
Sure. I agree there's a lack of parity, and it needs to be fixed. I'd just rather that be done by making Strength more valuable rather than Dexterity less so.
|
|
I'd be much more inclined to make an ability available to add Str to AC instead of Dex when unarmored or in light armorThat's an interesting idea. What's the ingame rationale?
I have no idea, which is probably the biggest problem with the idea.
Maybe something involving parrying/blocking attacks via binding weapons or grappling?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not against such an option existing for those who want to go Str/Dex. I am against needing Str to make Dex builds viable when the reverse is not true.That doesn't make it more fun or better game design, though.Challenge accepted:
Finesse Strike: When you attack with an agile or finesse one-handed melee weapon, you can add a +2 to your damage. At level 5, this bonus is increased to +3, and you gain an additional +1 at every five levels.
But you wouldn't NEED Strength; or at least, you'd need it as much as a Full Plate user who's already capped their Max DEX.
Getting more gives you a benefit, but doesn't make or break your build.
If that feature existed, and you kept STR at 10, you could spend your resources obtaining more lethality through different means, and then laugh at the fact some people increase their Strength to deal damage.
And that way, you'd feel like you've achieved something great and unique – your character, in spite of its natural weakness, is a deadly combatant because you've built them that way...
...and not because at 1st level someone said you'd be just by giving you DEX-to-damage.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The better way to make dexterity more (or the same as before) appealing to all classes is to make sure that there is a reasonable option for keeping a point or two of Dex to heavy Armor. Yes it is important not to let ACs scale up too high, but a defensive minded fighter with a Dex of 14 should be able to have one of the highest AC's in the game and having Best AC, but retaining mobility, by pulling it off with slightly less heavy armor should be a big boost to a character as well, and if it is not, that seems like a relatively easy change that is less likely to game break.
As far as whether or not feats will be able to make up 2 points of damage over the course of 20 levels (for a character that decides never to put an attribute bonus towards strength over those 20 levels), maybe you are right, and there will never be feat options for increasing damage with a specific weapon or weapon group, that character will always be -2 damage behind (a premise I am skeptical of, but willing to concede), because they have put 2 attribute increases somewhere else at first level and then continued to increase those other attributes over STR. I am ok with that character , which has clearly decided to focus on things other than increasing damage, being -2 points of damage behind. I am sure that the character is getting plenty of adequate compensation, from 6 total stat increases(2 at first level and 4 over 20 levels), for a -2 reduction to damage.
2 points of damage could be a significant trade off for a Dex only, no strength character, but only makes the STR 10 DEX 18 rogue "less good" than a STR 14 DEX 18 rogue if doing damage is the only thing that a rogue has to contribute to the party, and there is nothing that could be gained by having those 4 attribute points in a different area. If that is the case, then the class seems like it has much bigger problems than Dex to Damage would be able to solve (i.e. why rogues are such a terrible PF1 class, because they had massive accuracy issues, skills were wildly inferior to magic, and rogue talents never could make up the difference).
I'm writing my own system and, currently, this is the plan for STR and DEX.
STR: Affects damage dealt, types of weapons and armor you can use effectively, Athletics (which encompasses grappling and half of all "combat maneuvers).
DEX: Affects accuracy, evasion, and various DEX based skills.
Armor and weapons have a STR requirement. If you don't meet the requirement, you take a penalty on Attack rolls (for weapons) and evasion/DEX based skill checks (for armor).
A low STR, high DEX character is limited to lighter/weaker weapons and lighter armor unless they are willing to take penalties.
A high STR low DEX character can use the biggest weapons and the best armor at no penalty, but they are going to get hit more often (and take much less damage) and they are going to have trouble hitting enemies (but they are going to hit REALLY hard).
Having good stats in both is ideal, but I'm trying to do my best to design the system such that nobody wants to dump any stat.
I have seen system tweaks such as this work out really well at some tables, and bomb at others. Another interesting fix I have seen put into play is the use of two stat modifiers for everything, depending on circumstances. STR+DEX to hit and/or damage, or DEX+INT, etc.
|
My observations have been that folks will employ encumbrance under circumstances where it matters to the story, or when using automation (Hero Lab) where tracking encumbrance is an easy side effect of managing your inventory.I don't think its a valid assertion that most people don't use encumbrance systems.
I've been playing some version of this and other RPG's since 1984, and I have always used encumbrance systems.
That's fair. But I think everyone needs to understand, that even with my "vast" experience (34+ years, coast to coast, 5 states for home games, Canada, Croatia, multiple systems, 3 major organized play campaigns, etc.) that we only personally know a very small percentage (less than 1%) of the way people play. My experience is different than yours in regards to Encumbrance. It doesn't mean I'm right and you are wrong.
What it does mean, is that you can't say, "most," just because your personal anecdotal evidence may indicate so.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want a character with low strength and high dex to be viable, I don't want them to not be, but I want the character with 10 strength and 20 dex to deal less damage than an otherwise identical character with 16 strength and 20 dex, and have that lower strength actually mean something. I think the strength and ACP direction is a good option, but I don't think it alone is enough for differentiation.
Do we know the full stats of any armor yet? I feel this Str/Dex conversation is limited because we don't know how the different attributes will affect AC in the end.
This is what I managed to back out from the Blogs and Character sheets, if anyone else knows more info please let me know:
LIGHT ARMOR
Leather +1 AC; +0 TAC; ? Max Dex; ? ACP
Studded Leather +2 AC: +0 TAC; ? Max Dex; -1 ACP
Chain shirt +2 AC: +1 TAC: ? Max Dex; ? ACP; Noisy
MEDIUM ARMOR
Chainmail +4 AC: +1 TAC; ? Max Dex; ? ACP; (probably also noisy)
Breastplate +4 AC; +2 TAC; ? Max Dex; ? ACP;
HEAVY ARMOR
Gray Maiden Plate +7 AC; +3 TAC; +0 Max Dex; ? ACP
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, ha, how do we get Str mod for Initiative?This might be possible, though I'm not sure what activity would use Athletics for initiative.
Barbarian McPunchyclaws kicking the damn door in.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except you do need it. Why would I waste a class feature/feat so I can deal less damage than if I went full str rather than needing to split my stats across str/dex?I'm not against such an option existing for those who want to go Str/Dex. I am against needing Str to make Dex builds viable when the reverse is not true.That doesn't make it more fun or better game design, though.Challenge accepted:
Finesse Strike: When you attack with an agile or finesse one-handed melee weapon, you can add a +2 to your damage. At level 5, this bonus is increased to +3, and you gain an additional +1 at every five levels.
But you wouldn't NEED Strength; or at least, you'd need it as much as a Full Plate user who's already capped their Max DEX.
Getting more gives you a benefit, but doesn't make or break your build.
Finesse strike is a builtin class feature of the rogue. Every rogue has it. This mentality, that "rogue is only a viable class with Dex to damage" is problematic exactly because the assumption is that the rogue has to be a high damage dealing character to have any utility.
The purpose of the Rogue is not to be the character that deals the most damage all the time. I feel like 4e decided to call the rogue a striker and create this illusion of the class as ultimate damage dealer, but in PF1 it definitely wasn't that (not nearly good enough accuracy), and the much better rogue build should be a rogue that utilizes mobility, stealth, skill feats, proficiencies, and status effect abilities to control a battlefield and seize tactical advantages.
A low STR Rogue should be able excel at these aspects of the game and slip off a little bit (-2) on the damage front. Whereas, a rogue who decides that damage dealing is their shtick, should be able to pull it off by investing in STR, but probably be behind other rogues either in defense or in utility.
The flat damage bonus Finesse Strike allows for this. A STR and DEX Rogue can be the damage dealer (and a better one too if they really invest in it). A low STR Rogue will either have better defenses all around (if they boost CON and WIS) or access to some other special ability that should be worth 2 points of damage. If not, then we can ask for some more class specific feats that allow rogues to utilize having those points in INT or CHA.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except a flat damage finesse strike encourages you to go full str rogue ignoring the class feature, because youll have more damage and free up resources for investing in utility aspects. And they'll be able to be ahead or as good in defence by investing into armor prof.
This is the issue with flat damage bonuses for this, yeah. I mean, look at Swashbuckler in PF1. Your best mechanical choice is actually to grab Full Plate, and ditch Dex going straight Strength. Which is not the way Swashbucklers are intended to function.
You can theoretically get around that by making the bonus damage only kick in if attacking with Dex, but that's fairly inelegant as a core class feature...and remains a completely useless class feature for non-Dex characters (which I though were what we were doing this for).
I'd much rather you could pick from several options as a 1st level Rogue ala Barbarian Totems or the like, with Dex-to-damage being one option, things for a straight Str build (like my aforementioned Str-to-AC in light armor, or perhaps better armor proficiency) being another, and other options for other things (very possibly including something for the Dex/Str combo specifically) being available as well.
So far I've liked the ideas of giving str to ac when in light or no armor, and increased acp with str reducing it. Those are the best routes to go.Except a flat damage finesse strike encourages you to go full str rogue ignoring the class feature, because youll have more damage and free up resources for investing in utility aspects. And they'll be able to be ahead or as good in defence by investing into armor prof.This is the issue with flat damage bonuses for this, yeah. I mean, look at Swashbuckler in PF1. Your best mechanical choice is actually to grab Full Plate, and ditch Dex going straight Strength. Which is not the way Swashbucklers are intended to function.
You can theoretically get around that by making the bonus damage only kick in if attacking with Dex, but that's fairly inelegant as a core class feature...and remains a completely useless class feature for non-Dex characters (which I though were what we were doing this for).
I'd much rather you could pick from several options as a 1st level Rogue ala Barbarian Totems or the like, with Dex-to-damage being one option, things for a straight Str build (like my aforementioned Str-to-AC in light armor, or perhaps better armor proficiency) being another, and other options for other things (very possibly including something for the Dex/Str combo specifically) being available as well.
This just doesn't sound like good features for a rogue imo. I think STR rogue should have its place, but should definitely not just gain random stuff just for being a str rogue. Those ideas would be better served on an entirely new class.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This just doesn't sound like good features for a rogue imo. I think STR rogue should have its place, but should definitely not just gain random stuff just for being a str rogue. Those ideas would be better served on an entirely new class.
This is quite possibly fair (though I could see just giving that one to Barbarian). I really think we need to know how multiclassing works before we know how this sort of thing will work, though.
The ACP reduction thing isn't a Str-Rogue suggestion, though, that's a suggestion for a blanket rule change. And a good one.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Except a flat damage finesse strike encourages you to go full str rogue ignoring the class feature, because youll have more damage and free up resources for investing in utility aspects. And they'll be able to be ahead or as good in defence by investing into armor prof.This is the issue with flat damage bonuses for this, yeah. I mean, look at Swashbuckler in PF1. Your best mechanical choice is actually to grab Full Plate, and ditch Dex going straight Strength. Which is not the way Swashbucklers are intended to function.
wat
1. Give up Nimble?
2. Miss out the class budget on free Weapon Finesse, and lack of better profs?
3. Give up Dodging Panache?
4. Give up Bleeding Wound?
I mean, you can probably dumpster dive for archetypes to make a Full Plate Swash work, but that's hardly "NOT WORKING AS INTENDED", as much as explicitly attempting to exploit the chassis through option bloat.
Flat damage can work without any other things attached to it – just add Sneak Attack riders with DEX for DC, just create class features that trigger off Thievery, Stealth and so forth, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
wat1. Give up Nimble?
2. Miss out the class budget on free Weapon Finesse, and lack of better profs?
3. Give up Dodging Panache?
4. Give up Bleeding Wound?
I mean, you can probably dumpster dive for archetypes to make a Full Plate Swash work, but that's hardly "NOT WORKING AS INTENDED", as much as explicitly attempting to exploit the chassis through option bloat.
Flat damage can work without any other things attached to it – just add Sneak Attack riders with DEX for DC, just create class features that trigger off Thievery, Stealth and so forth, etc.
Not to mention the Rogue gets a bonus to Dex, a Max STR rogue is looking at a 16, with a 14 or 16 DEX, possibly an interesting option, but inherently less accurate than a 18 Dex Rogue. I don't think a +2 damage bonus to a weaker set of weapon options is going to be the death knell of the Dex based rogue. The point of all of this is that Single attribute classes are not as much fun as ones that have fun options.
The ACP reduction thing isn't a Str-Rogue suggestion, though, that's a suggestion for a blanket rule change. And a good one.My mind has gone blank, what is ACP?
Armor Check Penalty
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except a flat damage finesse strike encourages you to go full str rogue ignoring the class feature, because youll have more damage and free up resources for investing in utility aspects. And they'll be able to be ahead or as good in defence by investing into armor prof.This is the issue with flat damage bonuses for this, yeah. I mean, look at Swashbuckler in PF1. Your best mechanical choice is actually to grab Full Plate, and ditch Dex going straight Strength. Which is not the way Swashbucklers are intended to function.
You can theoretically get around that by making the bonus damage only kick in if attacking with Dex, but that's fairly inelegant as a core class feature...and remains a completely useless class feature for non-Dex characters (which I though were what we were doing this for).
I'd much rather you could pick from several options as a 1st level Rogue ala Barbarian Totems or the like, with Dex-to-damage being one option, things for a straight Str build (like my aforementioned Str-to-AC in light armor, or perhaps better armor proficiency) being another, and other options for other things (very possibly including something for the Dex/Str combo specifically) being available as well.
I don't think that there is anything wrong with a Strength build doing more damage in melee than a dex build and--as such--a flat bonus to finesse weapons will probably do the job nicely. Then you can have this big muscly thug who can shank you to death with a knife real good but that big thug is just easier to hit than the nimble guy with a knife and he also can't throw his knife as well.
I am also not sure about your swashbuckler analysis but other peeps are already talking about that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
wat
1. Give up Nimble?
Sure. You can get better AC with Full Plate at low levels, and at least as good at higher ones. Or use an Archetype to trade it out if you want.
Alternatively, you can do the hilarious Oracle 1/Swashbuckler X and use Cha for AC, ditch Dex to 7 and do a straight Str/Cha build in light armor.
2. Miss out the class budget on free Weapon Finesse, and lack of better profs?
The free Weapon Finesse is wasted, but you can two-hand a trident (or whatever one-handed piercing weapon you like) for Str x 1.5 and x3 Power Attack, plus your Swashbuckler level.
By 8th, that can easily be 1d8+28 damage with a +1 weapon, Power Attack, and no other bonuses.
For reference, a Dex-based Swashbuckler with Fencing Grace (which, Feat-wise, balances out the Feat cost of Heavy Armor) at that level does 1d6+22 if she also has Power Attack.
This difference only gets bigger as levels go up.
3. Give up Dodging Panache?
Dodging Panache is usually inferior to Opportune Parry and Riposte (or, in emergencies, maybe Charmed Life). Its loss is not a huge blow to the Swashbuckler.
4. Give up Bleeding Wound?
Nah, you just use it for Con Bleed. That's much better anyway.
I mean, you can probably dumpster dive for archetypes to make a Full Plate Swash work, but that's hardly "NOT WORKING AS INTENDED", as much as explicitly attempting to exploit the chassis through option bloat.
You can do it sans Archetype.
For the record, I'd never do this and despise the fact that it works this way, but the fact is that it does and that incentivizes some weird and unfortunate stuff.
Flat damage can work without any other things attached to it – just add Sneak Attack riders with DEX for DC, just create class features that trigger off Thievery, Stealth and so forth, etc.
More damage tends to win out over less damage, regardless of ancillary stuff.
Ah, of course, thanks, how does ACP work in PF2, which skills?Armor Check PenaltyThe ACP reduction thing isn't a Str-Rogue suggestion, though, that's a suggestion for a blanket rule change. And a good one.My mind has gone blank, what is ACP?
Straight Penalty to Acrobatics, Athletics, Stealth, and Thievery (Though not to Athletics checks made to perform combat maneuvers)
I never really understood why the ACP applied to things like "picking locks". Sure if you have heavy metal gloves it will be hard to manipulate the picks but you can take your gloves and helmet off and it shouldn't be any harder than picking the lock while naked- all the action is with your hands and head.