Flying Blade is specifically for if you want to use thrown weapons regularly. It lets you use finishers with them. If you are wanting a backup ranged weapon, grab a ranged weapon like a bow.
I personally don't like After You. Sure it lets you gain panache without rolling anything. But it also puts you last in initiative. I prefer Finishing Follow-through for keeping panache.
It is a free action with a trigger, so you can choose to use it or not. But you do need to decide to use it or not before anyone starts rolling initiative.
As for reactions, I like having several available - but it is best if they have different triggers so that you don't have to pick which one to use.
A classic example is the Champion that picks up AoO. The Champion walks up next to their ally that is being attacked and raises their shield. The enemy now has three bad options:
1) attack the ally: ↺ Champion Reaction protects the ally and punishes the attacker.
2) attack the champion: ↺ Shield Block
3) run away: ↺ Attack of Opportunity
So with a swashbuckler you will have Opportune Riposte at 3rd level, you can pick up Attack of Opportunity, Nimble Dodge, One For All to use Aid, You're Next, Guardian's Deflection, ... And probably several more that I am not thinking of.
So yes, you will probably want to pick a couple or three to have that you will actually use. But keep in mind that if they have very different triggers that not all of those triggers are likely to come up in one turn. How often does someone:
1) critically fail an attack against you
2) attack your ally
3) die to an attack you made
4) attack you
5) move away from you
all in the same round?
Some of them in the same round, yes. Some of those reactions are more powerful than others too. But they won't all happen at the same time even if they do happen on the same round. So it may end up feeling like a missed opportunity where one reaction triggers and you use it, but then later another reaction triggers but you don't have your reaction available any more.
It is a bit of a tough balancing problem - but it is one that you have to decide on the answer to. I have a character that has up to 5 reactions depending on spell selection and usage. And one more if I set up Aid.
Goading Feint doesn't replace Feint entirely. It allows you to use Feint with one of two different result sets - the standard one, and the one listed in Goading Feint. Either should be able to let you gain panache. And you can choose which result set to use each time you use the Feint action.
Standard Feint, Finisher, Goading Feint seems like a pretty good combat round to me.
1. Being honest. Swashbuckler are horrible with ranged Strikes. Usually is better to fully focus in melee Strike and take a way to fly than try to shoot anything.
2. You're just player to the bottom of the initiative order in exchange for starting with the panashe and that's it. You stay there for the rest of the encounter unless something changes your initiative for the better after combat begins. With for example another player delaying after you.
3. AoO is fantastic because it allows an extra attack without PAM. But for swashbuckler it's not as good as it is on fighter or barbarian because usually the focus of the class is on finishers, but it's still fantastic reaction. As for decision paralysis, don't worry too much, normally it's not worth keeping reactions for a possible situation where another reaction might be better. If for some reason there was a situation that uses AoO just do it, if you hear a reflex test just use Charmed Life. Very rarely will you be thrown into a situation where you have a choice.
4. Yes if you use Goading Feint allows you to change the Feint default effect but you are still feinting so you will gain the panache. The Fencer style says "You gain panache during an encounter whenever you successfully Feint" it don't care abou the Feint effect just if your Feint check was a success or not.
|
Flying Blade is insanely good with Dual Finisher. Two Strikes at full MAP for one action, one of which is at 20ft range, so positioning isn't too big of an issue. Sure, a Starknife doesn't do much damage, but what matters is the Finisher damage anyway. 3d6 when you pick up the feat, and 4d6 at level 9. It essentially doubles the finisher's damage.
Theoretical damage output if both hit (Level 10, 18 STR, Rapier and Starknife):
Target 1: 2d6+6 P + 4d6 Precision, Average 27, Max 42
Target 2: 2d4+6 P + 4d6 Precision, Average 25, Max 38
Average Total: 52 damage
Max Total: 80
On a Crit with both:
Target 1: (2d6+6 P + 4d6 Precision)x2 + 1d8, Average 58.5, Max 92
Target 2: (2d4+6 P + 4d6 Precision)x2 + 1d6, Average 53.5, Max 82
Average Total: 112 damage
Max Total: 174
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flying Blade is insanely good with Dual Finisher.
That can be debated.
Flying Blade says that it works with Confident Finisher specifically, and other finishers that include a strike and can benefit from Precise Strike.
Confident Finisher has no requirements line, and only says that you must make a Strike.
Bleeding Finisher has no requirements line, but does limit the damage type of the weapon to piercing or slashing. It also only say that you must make a strike.
Dual Finisher does have a requirements line that you must be using Melee weapons. It also specifies making a Melee Strikes.
So the difference in wording can be interpreted as being deliberate wording to prevent use with Flying Blade. And nothing in Flying Blade says that you can ignore the Requirements line or make a different type of Strike than the finisher initially requires.
|
|
This also allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike for Confident Finisher and any other finisher that includes a Strike that can benefit from your precise strike.
Make two melee Strikes, one with each required weapon, each against a different foe.
Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Flying Blade lets you replace Melee Strikes with Thrown Strikes, as long as the Finisher's strike can benefit from your Precise Strike, which all can do as far as I can tell.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A while ago there was some debate over whether or not Flying Blade allowed you to use melee-specific finishers with it that never really reached a satisfying conclusion outside people mostly agreeing it wasn't a big deal.
There was some back and forth though over whether "allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike[...]" meant flying blade could override the melee Strike component of dual finisher or if specifying melee Strike was actually some obtuse way of trying to disqualify Flying Blade.
|
|
Finishers that specify "Melee Strike"
Unbalancing Finisher
Impaling Finisher
Dual Finisher
Finishers that specify "with a weapon or unarmed attack that allows you to add your precise strike damage"
Bleeding Finisher
Confident Finisher
Lethal Finisher
Finishers that only say to Strike
Stunning Finisher
Targeting Finisher
Mobile Finisher
Perfect Finisher
So if you're saying Flying Blade only applies to 3 of the 10 available Finishers, that's honestly a pretty bad take.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, half of Flying Blade would only work on those three.
You still need Flying Blade to add precise strike damage, even for the finishers that aren't weapon restricted.
I'm not entirely convinced of the argument, but it's still worth discussing since there's some controversy about it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, taking up the opposing side of the debate because why not.
I don't see Flying Blade only applying to 3 of the 10 finishers.
Finishers that specify "Melee Strike"
Unbalancing Finisher
Impaling Finisher
Dual Finisher
These ones would not qualify since they specify Melee only.
Finishers that specify "with a weapon or unarmed attack that allows you to add your precise strike damage"
Bleeding Finisher
Confident Finisher
Lethal Finisher
These would qualify since Flying Blade lists that same language - you can use them because you can use your Precise Strike damage with Thrown weapons with the feat.
Finishers that only say to Strike
Stunning Finisher
Targeting Finisher
Mobile Finisher
Perfect Finisher
These qualify as well. The explicit mention of allowing Precise Strike damage is not necessary - that is the default for Finishers. And these lack the Melee exclusive wording.
So I am seeing 7 of 10 Finishers that work with Flying Blade.
These ones would not qualify since they specify Melee only.
Which is specifically overridden by Flying Blade. It is the only point of the feat.
|
|
First off, I realize I severely messed up the order of my list, but I can't fix it now, so oh well.
Lets go over the wording of all the finishers to determine why they're so inconsistent.
First, the two finishers that require you to make a strike that adds precise strike damage, Bleeding Finisher and Confident Finisher
It makes sense that these require you to make a precise strike specific Strike, as the effects rely on the precise strike damage. If you were to make a strike without Precise Strike, the finishers would essentially be non-functional.
The rest of them can technically be done with any strike, but what makes the ones that require a Melee strike so special? There's actually four Finishers that require a Melee Strike, Unbalancing Finisher, Impaling Finisher, Dual Finisher, and Stunning Finisher.
Why do these specifically require a Melee strike, while Targeting Finisher, Mobile Finisher, Perfect Finisher, and Lethal Finisher allow for any strike? There's nothing mechanically about those four finisher that make them require a melee Strike. Using a Thrown weapon won't break these finishers in any way.
Since by default, precise strike requires a melee strike, it would make sense that the writers might omit it from some finishers, while including it in others. Its not like one person wrote every feat, and it's likely the editors preferred to simply make sure the rules aren't broken rather than making sure everything has the exact same wording.
Final thought, since Lethal Finisher allows for any Strike, what happens if you make a Strike that wouldn't have Precise Strike, like with a Bow or Great Axe? Would it do nothing, since there's nothing to "forgo", or would it still do precision damage? If it does nothing, then why does it even allow any strike instead of only strike with precise strike on them? If it still works, what is the point of precise strike then?
It's obvious the intent of Finishers is to use them with precise strike. Using them without precise strike is not just inefficient, and in some cases completely useless. Being able to use them with non-precise strikes seems like an oversight in my opinion. The wording is extremely inconsistent and arbitrary, so it makes no sense to gatekeep certain finishers after someone spends a feat to use them with a ranged weapon.
Rules as Written is a thing of the past. 2e encourages GMs to make decisions when things don't make sense, and it just doesn't make sense that melee "only" finishers don't work with a feat that is intended to make finishers work with thrown weapons.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is still a lot of interpretation going on here. My point is that there are other completely valid interpretations.
Since by default, precise strike requires a melee strike, it would make sense that the writers might omit it from some finishers, while including it in others. Its not like one person wrote every feat, and it's likely the editors preferred to simply make sure the rules aren't broken rather than making sure everything has the exact same wording.
It is just as valid to say:
Since by default, precise strike requires a melee strike, it would make sense that when the writers explicitly state that a finisher must use a melee strike, that Flying Blade doesn't override that.
Flying Blade only says that it overrides the melee-only rule in Precise Strike - not any of the finishers. Being able to use a thrown weapon in a finisher is a side effect of being able to use a thrown weapon with Precise Strike.
That is just as clearly RAI.
Final thought, since Lethal Finisher allows for any Strike, what happens if you make a Strike that wouldn't have Precise Strike, like with a Bow or Great Axe? Would it do nothing, since there's nothing to "forgo", or would it still do precision damage? If it does nothing, then why does it even allow any strike instead of only strike with precise strike on them? If it still works, what is the point of precise strike then?
That is a bit odd. I would agree that Lethal Finisher should have the same restriction wording that Bleeding Finisher has - that it can only be used if your Strike would qualify to use Precise Strike.
I also agree with those who is interpreting that you cannot use Finishers that explicitly says melee Strikes. IMO they are more specific than Flying Blade exception and falls into the guide line of Ambiguous Rules "Sometimes a rule could be interpreted multiple ways. If one version is too good to be true, it probably is. If a rule seems to have wording with problematic repercussions or doesn’t work as intended, work with your group to find a good solution, rather than just playing with the rule as printed".
It's a thing that I noticed after many erratas of PF2, in case of doubt, if you aren't missing some other rule, so is the worse one!
|
|
How is using any of the four "melee" finishers with a thrown weapon "too good"? Thrown Weapons typically only have a range of up to 20ft (with the exception of the Bladed Diabolo, which is Advanced so you wouldn't be trained with it anyway), and Swashbucklers get massive speed boosts, so that 20ft of reach isn't going to be that big of an issue since you could likely Stride there anyway. Thrown melee weapons are also low base damage, only being a d6 max for finesse thrown weapons. "Too good to be true" doesn't mean always pick the worse interpretation of things. There are trade offs to using a Ranged strike over a Melee one.
The main benefit of Flying Blade is for the opening of options. You get range, but can't benefit from flanking in return. I have a swashbuckler who has it, and I still enter melee a lot for that flank bonus, but if I'm low HP I will back off and deal with the lower chance to hit.
Let Swashbucklers be flashy. Arbitrarily limiting their abilities like this goes against what the class is all about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How is using any of the four "melee" finishers with a thrown weapon "too good"?
Flying Blade is insanely good with Dual Finisher. Two Strikes at full MAP for one action, one of which is at 20ft range, so positioning isn't too big of an issue. Sure, a Starknife doesn't do much damage, but what matters is the Finisher damage anyway. 3d6 when you pick up the feat, and 4d6 at level 9. It essentially doubles the finisher's damage.
Theoretical damage output if both hit (Level 10, 18 STR, Rapier and Starknife):
Target 1: 2d6+6 P + 4d6 Precision, Average 27, Max 42
Target 2: 2d4+6 P + 4d6 Precision, Average 25, Max 38
Average Total: 52 damage
Max Total: 80On a Crit with both:
Target 1: (2d6+6 P + 4d6 Precision)x2 + 1d8, Average 58.5, Max 92
Target 2: (2d4+6 P + 4d6 Precision)x2 + 1d6, Average 53.5, Max 82
Average Total: 112 damage
Max Total: 174
I'm not entirely sure what you think the difference between 'too good' and 'insanely good' is.
|
|
Dual Finisher is insanely good period. All those numbers work with two melee strikes, and probably can be higher since you can use two d6 weapons like shortsword+rapier.
I didn't discuss chance to hit at all because I was just trying to point out the utility of being able to hit one target 20ft away while meleeing the other. Flank gives you a +10% chance to hit your target, which is something ranged attacks cant benefit from. If you want me to calculate average damage from flanking vs not flanking I can, since a +10% chance to hit doesn't necessarily equal a 10% damage increase.
|
|
You know what, I'll run the numbers anyway.
Lets assume a 50/50 hit chance, so at level 10 you would likely have +21 to hit (10 level, 4 training, 5 dex, 2 item), so the target AC is 32. That's a 50% chance to hit at all since you need an 11 to hit, and 5% chance to crit. That will bring the average damage down to 15.425 on target 1, and 13.925 for target 2, totaling 29.35 average damage for both strikes.
If we add flanking only for target one in the mix, that brings us up to a 60% chance to hit at all, and a 10% chance to crit.That average comes to:
Target 1: 19.35
Target 2: 13.925
Total Average: 33.275
Already +4 average damage just from one flank, which is a 13.6% increase in damage.
With two flanks, we get:
Target 1: 19.35
Target 2: 17.85
Total Average: 37.2
So by only having a Flank on one target, we lose almost 4 average damage, a 10.55% loss in average damage. Essentially, we take a 10% damage loss to gain 20ft reach on one strike.
But, it's unlikely we will be fighting two level 12 creatures at once, so lets pick something at level 10, which has a moderate AC of 29.
Running the numbers again with +21 to hit, we have a 65% hit rate and 15% crit rate, so here's what we get:
Target 1: 22.275
Target 2: 20.525
Total Average: 42.8
With one flank:
Target 1: 28.125
Target 2: 20.525
Total Average: 48.65
And with both flanks:
Target 1: 28.125
Target 2: 25.875
Total Average: 54
This time the damage loss is 9.9%, which is close enough to 10%. So it does look like it's about a 10% damage loss in this case to not have a flank on one target, but I'm sure as the AC drops the damage loss will get lower, while it will increase as the AC will get higher. This also isn't taking into account using a higher damage agile weapon for the second target, which will boost average damage even more.
In conclusion, Flying Blade results in about a 10% damage loss with Dual Finisher. That's a good trade off in my opinion, but not "too good". And before you say "You aren't guaranteed a flank!", you should be getting guaranteed flanks. If your party can't provide adequate flanks for their allies that's a skill issue, not a numbers issue.
It is just as valid to say:Since by default, precise strike requires a melee strike, it would make sense that when the writers explicitly state that a finisher must use a melee strike, that Flying Blade doesn't override that.
I don't really understand how A necessitates B here.
Flying Blade only says that it overrides the melee-only rule in Precise Strike - not any of the finishers
I mean the last sentence says it allows you to use a ranged strike on any finisher that includes a qualifying strike. Dual Finisher definitely allows you to benefit from precise strike too.
I don't really understand how A necessitates B here.
It is just as valid to say:Since by default, precise strike requires a melee strike, it would make sense that when the writers explicitly state that a finisher must use a melee strike, that Flying Blade doesn't override that.
I'm not sure what you are assigning to A and B.
Flying Blade only says that it overrides the melee-only rule in Precise Strike - not any of the finishersI mean the last sentence says it allows you to use a ranged strike on any finisher that includes a qualifying strike. Dual Finisher definitely allows you to benefit from precise strike too.
If the intent was that Flying Blade lets you use all finishers with thrown weapons - why didn't it just say that instead? Since it lists a qualification, there should be some finishers that are excluded. What finishers don't allow you to benefit from precise strike?
I'm not sure what you are assigning to A and B.
I mean you mention precise strike requiring a melee attack, I just don't see how that has anything to do with finishers that also require melee attacks. Two separate mechanics so I don't think trying to suggest some kind of carryover rules applies.
What finishers don't allow you to benefit from precise strike?
There aren't any right now.
Setting aside the question of damage and feat interactions... Have you considered the range of thrown weapons? They are pretty short, and Swashbuckles are very mobile. If you want something to use as a back up for enemies too far for you to close on, I'd suggest a bow. If you want to fully integrate dual wielding/thrown weapons into your regular combat routine, go thrown weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure what you are assigning to A and B.I mean you mention precise strike requiring a melee attack, I just don't see how that has anything to do with finishers that also require melee attacks. Two separate mechanics so I don't think trying to suggest some kind of carryover rules applies.
Right.
Precise Strike requires a melee attack.
Some Finishers specify a melee attack.
Flying Blade overrides the melee-only requirement in Precise Strike, and mentions that this allows Finishers with thrown attacks in some Finishers (apparently all finishers because they could potentially all qualify for precise strike).
But Precise Strike and each Finisher are indeed separate mechanics without carryover. So when Flying Blade allows thrown attacks on Precise Strike, that doesn't override the 'make a melee strike' rule in a particular Finisher.
In conclusion, Flying Blade results in about a 10% damage loss with Dual Finisher. That's a good trade off in my opinion, but not "too good". And before you say "You aren't guaranteed a flank!", you should be getting guaranteed flanks. If your party can't provide adequate flanks for their allies that's a skill issue, not a numbers issue.
I have to question the concept of trying to forbid opponents to your argument from using valid criticisms.
How about if I instead point out that Flanking isn't what increases your attack bonus and increases your expected damage - it is flat-footed.
So if you have someone using grapple or trip in your party, then that would put your Flying Dual Finisher damage back up to what you would get in melee - from the safety of range.
But Precise Strike and each Finisher are indeed separate mechanics without carryover. So when Flying Blade allows thrown attacks on Precise Strike, that doesn't override the 'make a melee strike' rule in a particular Finisher.
That is an interpretation I choose to not entertain simply on the basis that it is circular and negates the power Flying Blade. Natural language and TBTBT win over that sort of logic.
So when Flying Blade allows thrown attacks on Precise Strike, that doesn't override the 'make a melee strike' rule in a particular Finisher.
Correct.
But that's only one of the four sentences in the feat's description.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That is an interpretation I choose to not entertain simply on the basis that it is circular and negates the power Flying Blade. Natural language and TBTBT win over that sort of logic.
It doesn't make the feat unusable if it is prevented from working with a small subset of Finishers.
But that's only one of the four sentences in the feat's description.
But it is enough to make the ruling up for debate.
Which is really all I am going for here - that the recommendation of taking Flying Blade because of how good it is when combined with Dual Finisher is a ruling that you will want to run past your GM first.
Some rulings you can rely on - like being allowed to take Adopted Ancestry(Gnome) and Gnome Weapon Familiarity in order to run around with a Gnome Flickmace. Some GMs may not like that and want to houserule that it isn't allowed, but that isn't something that we can plan for.
Other rulings, like this one about Flying Dual Finisher, or how useful a familiar actually is, or what triggers Needle of Vengeance - you should check first before building a character around what you expect the ruling to be.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A while ago there was some debate over whether or not Flying Blade allowed you to use melee-specific finishers with it that never really reached a satisfying conclusion outside people mostly agreeing it wasn't a big deal.
There was some back and forth though over whether "allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike[...]" meant flying blade could override the melee Strike component of dual finisher or if specifying melee Strike was actually some obtuse way of trying to disqualify Flying Blade.
And it looks like that is the same conclusion we came to this time around too.
Amazing how that works - if the rules text does not change, then the conclusions that we come to do not change either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is an interpretation I choose to not entertain simply on the basis that it is circular and negates the power Flying Blade. Natural language and TBTBT win over that sort of logic.It doesn't make the feat unusable if it is prevented from working with a small subset of Finishers.
But that's only one of the four sentences in the feat's description.But it is enough to make the ruling up for debate.
Which is really all I am going for here - that the recommendation of taking Flying Blade because of how good it is when combined with Dual Finisher is a ruling that you will want to run past your GM first.
There is only one sentence in Flying Blade that counts for this
This also allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike for Confident Finisher and any other finisher that includes a Strike that can benefit from your precise strike.
This rule clearly calls out that it is modifying finishers. So it is the most specific rule and you can't correctly claim that any text in a finisher overrides this.
All finishers written so far includes Strikes and also all finishers benefit from Precise Strike the class feature.
A ranged strike is still a Strike. A melee Strike is still a Strike.
Flying Blade calls out that it is enabling thrown weapons for Finishers that benefit from Precise Strike, not just that it enables thrown weapons for Precise Strike
There is no gap here. Your interpretation is not legal.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A ranged strike is still a Strike. A melee Strike is still a Strike.
But a ranged Strike is not a melee Strike.
This rule clearly calls out that it is modifying finishers. So it is the most specific rule and you can't correctly claim that any text in a finisher overrides this.
I don't see any rule listing a priority order for two specific overrides.
The general rule is that Precise Strike requires a melee Strike.
Some finishers specify that their attacks must use a melee Strike as a specific rule.
Flying Blade changes Precise Strike to allow ranged Strike as a specific rule.
Combining both, we have a Finisher that requires a melee Strike that uses Precise Strike which now allows a ranged Strike. The specific overrides are in conflict. But no priority order is given for them to determine which specific override takes precedence.
What I dislike about the Flying Blade + Dual Finisher combo is that it's so strong you really have 2 Swashbucklers. Melee Swashbucklers are in a hard spot in terms of efficiency while Flying Blade Swashbucklers are quite fine. It pushes to play with Flying Blade when it's not exactly the basic Swashbuckler build you can imagine.
What I dislike about the Flying Blade + Dual Finisher combo is that it's so strong you really have 2 Swashbucklers. Melee Swashbucklers are in a hard spot in terms of efficiency while Flying Blade Swashbucklers are quite fine. It pushes to play with Flying Blade when it's not exactly the basic Swashbuckler build you can imagine.
Starting to sound a bit like the magus.
I do agree that the wording of flying blade means it will apply to all strikes (melee strike is a strike).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The specific overrides are in conflict.
I think there's an argument to be made about flying blade, but it's not this one.
A feat that changes how finishers work is clearly more specific than a finisher on its own. Otherwise nothing in Flying Blade would do anything.
Flying Blade changes Precise Strike to allow ranged Strike as a specific rule.
It is this summary of Flying Blade that is misleading you because it is incomplete.
Flying Blade does do this, yes. But Flying Blade additionally has a sentence that starts with This also. This is something extra and also part of the rule.
It is this summary of Flying Blade that is misleading you because it is incomplete.
Flying Blade does do this, yes. But Flying Blade additionally has a sentence that starts with This also. This is something extra and also part of the rule.
Does it?
That is certainly one way to read it.
This also allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike for Confident Finisher and any other finisher...
At which point it changes every finisher.
Or it could be read as
This also allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike for Confident Finisher and any other finisher...
At which point it does not override anything in a particular finisher that has its own additional restrictions.
So it seems like a problem with a vague pronoun causing ambiguity.
Also, I would agree that Flying Dual Finisher's big balance problem is not in how much comparable damage you can do between a melee Swashbuckler that can use Dual Finisher and a ranged Swashbuckler that can use Dual Finisher from the safety of range.
The bigger problem is that by allowing Flying Dual Finisher is that it becomes much easier to have two targets to use Dual Finisher on. What would be the damage comparison between a melee Swashbuckler with Dual Finisher that only has one target in their reach and a ranged Swashbuckler with Flying Dual Finisher that has two targets within their first range increment?
What I dislike about the Flying Blade + Dual Finisher combo is that it's so strong you really have 2 Swashbucklers. Melee Swashbucklers are in a hard spot in terms of efficiency while Flying Blade Swashbucklers are quite fine. It pushes to play with Flying Blade when it's not exactly the basic Swashbuckler build you can imagine.Starting to sound a bit like the magus.
I do agree that the wording of flying blade means it will apply to all strikes (melee strike is a strike).
And the Investigator. I heard some players saying that the late classes favor range over melee. I don't always agree, but I can't deny that they are often far easier to play at range than in melee.
Or it could be read asThis ability to use thrown weapons on Precise Strike also allows you to make a thrown weapon ranged Strike for Confident Finisher and any other finisher..
At which point it does not override anything in a particular finisher that has its own additional restrictions.
Rewriting the rule to say what you want is not relevant. It just doesn't say that.
and it is not any other finisher ....it is any other finisher that includes a Strike ...
So it seems like a problem with a vague pronoun causing ambiguity
What? Sorry, I'm not seeing even a whiff of a gap. Your argument here is just empty.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And the Investigator. I heard some players saying that the late classes favor range over melee. I don't always agree, but I can't deny that they are often far easier to play at range than in melee.What I dislike about the Flying Blade + Dual Finisher combo is that it's so strong you really have 2 Swashbucklers. Melee Swashbucklers are in a hard spot in terms of efficiency while Flying Blade Swashbucklers are quite fine. It pushes to play with Flying Blade when it's not exactly the basic Swashbuckler build you can imagine.Starting to sound a bit like the magus.
I do agree that the wording of flying blade means it will apply to all strikes (melee strike is a strike).
The commonality here is static damage bonuses and questionable weapon die.
When you're picking between a shortbow and a greatsword on your fighter, 1d12+4 and 1d6+1 are far enough apart that it makes a difference.
When you're an investigator trying to use strategic strike and you're choosing between 2d6+1 and 2d6+2 but the 2d6+1 has a 60 foot range, it's a lot harder to justify being in melee.