I'd consider unchained phantom thief into swashbuckler. Phantom thief keeps the unchained dex to damage ability, loses sneak attack, but gains skill unlocks super fast and at a lower level, plus can take combat feats, skill focus, or major/minor magic unlimited times with rogue talent
Anyway, I was planning to have an Unchained Rogue who dipped 3 levels into Swashbuckler for the panache and deeds. Then I found the Dashing Thief archetype, and was like, "Hey! Face dex-based melee with some cool jazz! Great!" I then read through Ultimate Intrigue, and found the Sharper rogue archetype, and was done. After doing some more research, I wasn't so sure.
What exactly is it that you want to get from your three levels of Dashing Thief that isn't given at level 1?
At level 3 you get the following deeds:
Kip-Up, Dazing Charm, Precise Strike, and Swashbuckler Initiative.
Kip-Up is outclassed by the Stand Up rogue talent. Dazing Charm is dependent on your class level, not total level, which means the DC is too low. Precise Strike can't be used while TWF-ing. That's one deed left, and not worth an additional two levels.
So, I was wondering, would an Unchained Knife Master/17 Dashing Thief/3 be better than an Unchained Sharper/17 Dashing Thief/3?
Yes. Sharper gives away far too many rogue talents.
Skulking Slayer or Cutpurse are better archetypes if you want to steal stuff during combat. Skulking Slayer because you can attempt Dirty Trick/Steal maneuvers for every sneak attack, and Cutpurse because it requires the absolute minimum investment. It's a DC 20 Sleight of Hand check to succeed, which you can do in combat with some stipulations.
Well, I have one word for you- Flavor.
What is the flavor? I see the two Rogue archetypes you mention at pretty much opposite sites of the Rogue spectrum, so what is the flavor you're after?
Sorry, I should have been more clear about that. I was thinking of a face-y rogue, but with enough damage output to make it worth it.
That... sounds purely mechanical. Damage output is mechanics by definition, and "face" is generally skill checks, a pure mechanic as well. Unless you mean rogue as in a personality (in which case there'd be no actual reason to pick the class), what you've given instead of flavor is two mechanical aspects and a class name. That is the opposite of flavor!
So I have to wonder, is it actually flavor that drives you towards these classes/archetypes, or just the names?
I just liked the flavor of the Dashing Thief combined with the Sharper, cause they seemed like they fit.
Sharper has abilities about stealing, scamming, overconfidence, and luck. Dashing Thief has abilities about stealing, confidence, and er, momentary distraction. The two seem to mix well flavor wise, but I don't see anything that either improves combat prowess, or influencing others (for more than a few seconds), so I honestly don't understand in what way they 'fit' the description of "face-y (...) but with enough damage output to make it worth it".
|
So, I know what you're probably saying- The two least powerful classes in the game combined? Well, I have one word for you- Flavor.
Huh? The Swashbuckler we had in our Hell's Rebels campaign was an untouchable, unstoppable killing machine. And while I haven't seen an Unchained Rogue in play yet, I really like what they did there. It's high up on my to-play list.
Then again, the whole «tier» view on class power is comically at odds with my personal play experience. I've never felt useless with a frontliner character — there's always something in need of bashing —, whereas it did happen every so often with my casters (including the Conjurer Wizard).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then again, the whole «tier» view on class power is comically at odds with my personal play experience.
That's not surprising, since in actual play individual optimization level, campaign style and current level can totally change balance. I assume the swashbuckler profited from an optimizing player and humanoid enemies. And maybe you ended the campaign before level 17?
My players have a samurai ("tier 5") as the dominant PC. The player makes good use of demoralize, crit fishing and resolve - that's a rather restricted toolbox, but it works most of the time. In theory, the other players have more options, but they forget to use them or fail to pick the strongest in a given situation. Accessibility of power matters, and it's not reflected by the tier system.
So a player can have a lot of fun with a rogue and / or swashbucker, even without 100% optimization. It depends on the table though.
|
|
That's not surprising, since in actual play individual optimization level, campaign style and current level can totally change balance. I assume the swashbuckler profited from an optimizing player and humanoid enemies. And maybe you ended the campaign before level 17?
«Yes», no, and yes.
From our GM's point of view, we are all filthy optimizers, whereas from the point of view of actual optimizers here on the boards, we are bloody amateurs. ;o)
And the enemies we quite a mixed bag, with particularly devils taking the lead toward the end.
The Swashbuckler has high defenses, high damage output, can boost their saves a bunch of times per day to make up for the weak progressions, and can absolutely cheat the action economy with Parry & Riposte. Lots of skills and flavor too. Really neat package overall.
In theory, the other players have more options, but they forget to use them or fail to pick the strongest in a given situation.
I'm sure that's also the reason why my own casters were far from godlike. I certainly prefer Sorcerer- or even Kineticist-style casters with few and reliable options that I'll actually remember to use and that I don't have to plan out like a tax declaration.
So, I know what you're probably saying- The two least powerful classes in the game combined? Well, I have one word for you- Flavor.Huh? The Swashbuckler we had in our Hell's Rebels campaign was an untouchable, unstoppable killing machine.
In theory, Swashbuckler is a very weak class, easily one of the weakest in the game. In practice, the the Swashbuckler is good at what he does, but that's just a small part of the game. If your campaign mostly includes this small portion, it can feel like a strong class. Agains a low number of enemies with few attacks at full BAB that nicely do nothing but attack in melee, he's strong. What happens when the enemy is flying or invisible? The Swashbuckler is useless then. What happens when there are a lot of enemies or the enemies have a lot of attacks per round? The panache won't last long if he uses OP&R multiple times per round. What happens when the enemies are ranged combatants? He needs to walk up to them, make a single attack, and wait a turn while under enemy fire (OP&R only works against melee) before he can full attack. Even worse when there's difficult terrain, pits, etc. in the way. What happens when the enemies enforce multiple saving throws per round? After the first one, Charmed Life is gone and with weak base saves for both Fort and Will, the Swashbuckler is very likely to fail.
When it comes to non-combat challenges, it doesn't look much better - 4+int skills per level (and you can't invest much in int), and the Derring-Do deed is the only non-combat class features (plus Swashbuckler’s Edge at 15th level).I've never felt useless with a frontliner character — there's always something in need of bashing —, whereas it did happen every so often with my casters (including the Conjurer Wizard).
That means you have never fought against flying or otherwise unreachable enemies, invisible or otherwise hidden enemies, or enemies that take you out of the whole combat with some save effect. Quite frankly, if you feel useless as a Wizard, that means you're not playing the class right.
Then again, the whole «tier» view on class power is comically at odds with my personal play experience.
Quite possible, but very likely not in the way you think. It's not that the tier list concept is wrong for the games you play, you just haven't seen why it's true yet. Basically, what you're saying is "Bear Grylls isn't better than me at survival, because I never went hungry a day in my life", when in reality, you simply always had access to a super market and a fridge. APs (and also PFS modules etc.) are designed to be very easy. Just because your party succeeded doesn't mean the party was good.
How many enemies of CR above his level did that Swashbuckler kill in the first round of a combat?
I certainly prefer Sorcerer- or even Kineticist-style casters with few and reliable options that I'll actually remember to use and that I don't have to plan out like a tax declaration.
Well, you are not alone. I know three players (including myself), who prefer a limited amount of options. And they all enjoy rogue-like and sorcerer-like characters.
|
|
Flying is why any frontliner carries a potion of Fly. Invisible enemies are why at least someone in the party has Glitterdust. Crowds of enemies are why he cultivates a high AC. Lots and lots of saves are dangerous for anyone.
The Swashbuckler doesn‘t need to solve all the party‘s problems at once, that‘s what teammates are for.
Quite frankly, if you feel useless as a Wizard, that means you're not playing the class right.
Yes, and I seem to be playing martials right, so as I said, the tier system is comically at odds with my personal playing experience. I don‘t care how good Wizards are in theory when they suck in practice.
APs (and also PFS modules etc.) are designed to be very easy. Just because your party succeeded doesn't mean the party was good.
No, they are designed to be appropriate for a typical party. If they‘re easy, it means your PCs are more powerful than the devs expected, and your GM has to adjust things to keep the game interesting.
«I use a tank instead of a rifle to hunt bears because a bullet will often fail to drop a bear. Also, bear hunting is really easy.»
How many enemies of CR above his level did that Swashbuckler kill in the first round of a combat?
That‘s a silly metric, since CR+ enemies are supposed to be challenging. If the party were to wipe all of them out in one round, the game would be broken and in need of fixing by the GM.
Anyway, the Swashbuckler in question killed the campaign‘s final boss solo in one round, so I think he did alright.
Flying is why any frontliner carries a potion of Fly. Invisible enemies are why at least someone in the party has Glitterdust. Crowds of enemies are why he cultivates a high AC. Lots and lots of saves are dangerous for anyone.
If you think spending 750gp potions all the time, depending on others to do your job, and playing as one of only three classes with weak progression in the two saves that can easily remove you from combat aren't things that make the character worse than others who don't have such weaknesses, then it's not that "the tier system is comically at odds with my personal playing experience", but rather that you refuse to accept the reality because you don't like it. And I have nothing more to say to you.
Thankfully, the OP accepts the reality, so we can get back on topic now.
Yes. God forbid your character depends on others to play as well. There should be no party overlap ever. Remain in your holes.
Tell us more about how great that wizard is.
Class tiers are solo played white room wastes of time. Game isn't played in a white room. It's not played solo. So they arent useful.
For the OP I've had only one swashbuckler in my games. She broke the game. Every combat was a wipe once she joined. They are very focused but very great at what they do. With a little effort you can make them change the course of how people play.
This is the result of PFS to be honest. Never knowing what classes you're going to be in a group with creates a need for a character that can cover everything.
Its a pity because dwarven scholar bards handing out teamwork and combat feat packages is a blast, that doesn't work if you don't know what party members are in play.
I agree pick up groups make doing more generic creation happen. But honestly if anything that just teaches players to veer out of their zone and cover more than one area than maximize just one.
It's a good point though, I'd likely never play a skald in PFS. I would likely play a character that handed OUT teamwork feats than one that just took them and hoped for the best.
Even that really is at the whim of your table.
One of the fastest online "feat packages" a dwarven scholar can hand out is combat reflexes + paired opportunists + Broken wing Gambit. You can get that online by like level 6. Its absolutely great with two melee, especially if someones playing a character that can take punishment.
its likely to be absolute balls if you're in a group with a wizard rogue and oracle.
|
|
This is the result of PFS to be honest. Never knowing what classes you're going to be in a group with creates a need for a character that can cover everything.
That explains a lot! I only play in AP campaigns, so I‘m used to allies helping each other out. In fact, I see that as one of the most rewarding aspects of cooperative RPGs.
Invisible enemies are why at least someone in the party has Glitterdust.
Glitterdust wouldn't help against any other kind of concealment though, which is one of the biggest weak points of Precise Strike (since concealment prevents precision damage). A simple Blur spell completely counters the Swash, and they had* no in-class options to deal with these common situations.
*The Hilt Hammer deed of renown is a big buff to the Swash as it allows you to halve the dmg from Precise Strike in return for treating it as normal dmg.
Lots and lots of saves are dangerous for anyone.
Yup, but other classes are better equipped to deal with it even compared to when the Swash uses Charmed Life.
At level 10 you'd be expected to have maybe a +4 Cha mod. If you use Charmed Life on a Fortitude save you'd get the equivalent of a Good save progression (+7), which the Fighter, Inquisitor, Paladin, Warpriest, Slayer, Occultist, etc already have. All day long.
You're tricked into believing Charmed Life is a bonus, when all it does it allow you to catch up to equivalent classes**. Not to mention that Charmed Life costs an Immediate action so it competes with other deeds such as OP&R and Dodging Panache.
**Almost catch up. As a Cha-based class your other ability scores should be worse than normal, and result in worse saves. The best Swash build is unironically to dump Cha.
The Swashbuckler doesn‘t need to solve all the party‘s problems at once, that‘s what teammates are for.
Agreed. But a Swashbuckler will have to rely on their party a lot more often that a Warpriest or an Inquisitor. There's a clear correlation between what Tier the class is, and the amount of times you have to ask your party for help.
The best Swash build is unironically to dump Cha.
Might be true, but personally I prefer the more interesting variant: Someone who uses Bluff, Diplomacy and / or Intimidate both in combat and out of combat. There is a reason why the class got all three skills as class skills: It's not intended to be played as yet another straight-forward fighter. I wouldn't throw that unique playstyle away for a measly +1 on a few values.
Might be true, but personally I prefer the more interesting variant: Someone who uses Bluff, Diplomacy and / or Intimidate both in combat and out of combat.
Right, right. But the Swashbuckler's kit doesn't actually help you with any of those skills except "tricked into having high charisma". There's the Menacing Swordplay deed, but being a Swift action it competes with OP&R, Dodging Panache, Charmed Life, and the Swordmaster's Flair.
There is a reason why the class got all three skills as class skills: It's not intended to be played as yet another straight-forward fighter. I wouldn't throw that unique playstyle away for a measly +1 on a few values.
1) The Swash is even flatter than the Fighter after the introduction of AAT/AWT.
2) Unique is a bit of a hyperbole, no? The large majority of classes can easily handle their own in social situations (with a little investment).
3) You don't need to throw it away. There's plenty of ways to be an effective face without charisma, Student of Philosophy being the most common choice.
If I played a Swashbuckler, I'd probably combine it with a few levels of something else (Paladin?) to bolster those saves.
At that point you might as well play a Virtuous Bravo, or as I like to call it, Unchained Swashbuckler.
|
|
If I played a Swashbuckler, I'd probably combine it with a few levels of something else (Paladin?) to bolster those saves.At that point you might as well play a Virtuous Bravo, or as I like to call it, Unchained Swashbuckler.
I‘d love to, but it‘s from a Player Companion, so off the table...