Why is Swashbuckler considered so weak?

[ThiagoMartell]

I've seen people say Swashbuckler is weaker than a Fighter. But aren't Swashbuckler's sub levels a lot better? Arcane Stunt is very good, you get blur as a swift action at level 2. Insightful Strike, the Swasbuckler's main class feature, is pretty good itself. Shield of Blades is not stellar or anything, but it is quite good for non-gish low-level TWFers. Daring Outlaw is an amazing feat (a lot better than the Ninja/Fighter one, for example), making the other class features (crippling strike, acrobatic charge) icing in the cake.
If there is a problem with Swashbuckler, I think it's being so front loaded. Even Swashbuckler chassis is quite good (a single die size away from the Warblade/Barbarian, usually considered the best chassis around).

So... what is it against the Swashbuckler, really?

[Saph]

The basic problem with Swashbuckler is that it's a martial class that's mediocre at doing damage. Which, as a martial class, is supposed to be their job. It's like having a wizard who's bad at casting spells.

Daring Outlaw is pretty much the only way to make Swashbuckler good, and the only reason it works is because you're stealing the main class feature of the rogue.

[ThiagoMartell]

The basic problem with Swashbuckler is that it's a martial class that's mediocre at doing damage. Which, as a martial class, is supposed to be their job. It's like having a wizard who's bad at casting spells.

Daring Outlaw is pretty much the only way to make Swashbuckler good, and the only reason it works is because you're stealing the main class feature of the rogue.

But Daring Outlaw is there. It's a must have feat, such as Natural Spell is a must have feat for the Druid and Power Attack for a Barbarian. It does fix the damage problem. Considering damage is not a problem... what is there against Swashbucklers?

[Gavinfoxx]

With Daring Outlaw, what you have isn't the swashbuckler class... but a particular swashbuckler/rogue build.

[Eldest]

But Daring Outlaw is there. It's a must have feat, such as Natural Spell is a must have feat for the Druid and Power Attack for a Barbarian. It does fix the damage problem. Considering damage is not a problem... what is there against Swashbucklers?

Well, that's not a Swashbuckler. That's a Swashbuckler/Rogue. The combination is quite good. Swashbuckler on it's own isn't.

[Saph]

But Daring Outlaw is there. It's a must have feat, such as Natural Spell is a must have feat for the Druid and Power Attack for a Barbarian. It does fix the damage problem. Considering damage is not a problem... what is there against Swashbucklers?

Because all your damage is coming from Rogue. The only reason Daring Outlaw is good is because Sneak Attack is good. Swashbuckler's contributing very little.

On top of that, most good martial classes are dippable, while Daring Outlaw locks you into a Rogue/Swash build. And finally, what if Complete Scoundrel isn't on the allowed-books list? It's a bad sign if a class needs a specific feat and a specific build to be any good.

[eggs]

Daring Outlaw makes Swashbuckler playable in certain builds. That's very different from making the class good.

Even in Daring Outlaw builds, a character will typically benefit from the absolute minimum number of swashbuckler levels that give the appealing benefits (3-4, depending on goals). The class's features are just a long series of things that don't matter. The only features that might be worth caring about are the Int to damage, which has enough limitations to be fairly dubiously useful, the versatile charges, which can be mostly replicated with a skill trick or two, and the 1 reroll per day, which is very useful, but not exactly worth building a character around.

Swashbuckler is a bad class because it doesn't have any class features more powerful than its chassis, its only proactive abilities and bonuses relate to dealing damage (which it still fails to do well), and it encourages a finesse-based fighting style that works very poorly in D&D.

Basically, it's the same "Fighter, but with crappy preselected feats" problem the Samurai has, just less glaring because instead of feats, it gets crappy abilities that probably aren't worth feats.

[ThiagoMartell]

On top of that, most good martial classes are dippable, while Daring Outlaw locks you into a Rogue/Swash build.

But that's my other point, Swashbuckler is a very dippable class.
1st level- bonus feat. 2nd level- blur as a swift action. 3rd level- insightful strike.
All with excellent chassis (full BAB, d10 hit dice, 4 skill points per level).
If you're going to be a melee finesse fighter with positive int, I find it hard to justify not dipping Swashbuckler.



Daring Outlaw makes Swashbuckler playable in certain builds. That's very different from making the class good.
I never said the class was good, I said it was not as bad as the fighter...


Even in Daring Outlaw builds, a character will typically benefit from the absolute minimum number of swashbuckler levels that give the appealing benefits (3-4, depending on goals).
What? Now that is something I never heard. Isn't the typical Daring Outlaw build Rogue 4/Swashbuckler 16? :smallconfused:

The class's features are just a long series of things that don't matter.
What?! You really think 20% miss chance at level 2 as a swift action does not matter? Crippling Strike does not matter? :smallconfused:

The only features that might be worth caring about are the Int to damage, which has enough limitations to be fairly dubiously useful, the versatile charges, which can be mostly replicated with a skill trick or two, and the 1 reroll per day, which is very useful, but not exactly worth building a character around.
You missed Arcane Stunt and Crippling Strike, at the very least.
It's more than you get from Rogue, which is basically dead levels from 5 to 9.


Swashbuckler is a bad class because it doesn't have any class features more powerful than its chassis, its only proactive abilities and bonuses relate to dealing damage (which it still fails to do well), and it encourages a finesse-based fighting style that works very poorly in D&D.
I don't think you're correct. Finesse does not work "very poorly" in D&D. You just don't use Power Attack, you use some sort of bonus damage instead.


Basically, it's the same "Fighter, but with crappy preselected feats" problem the Samurai has, just less glaring because instead of feats, it gets crappy abilities that probably aren't worth feats.
I disagree again. Swashbuckler gets extra skill points and some really good class features (Arcane Stunt, Lucky, Crippling Strike) over Fighter. He needs Daring Outlaw to deal good damage, yeah.
I mean, Mystic Ranger needs a crapload of stuff to be good, and it's still good, isn't it?

[Kazyan]

But that's my other point, Swashbuckler is a very dippable class.
1st level- bonus feat. 2nd level- blur as a swift action. 3rd level- insightful strike.
All with excellent chassis (full BAB, d10 hit dice, 4 skill points per level).
If you're going to be a melee finesse fighter with positive int, I find it hard to justify not dipping Swashbuckler.

Monk is very dippable, too. But when you judge the class as a whole, you have to look beyond level 3.

[White_Drake]

As a 3 level dip, Swashbuckler is superb, but as a 2 level dip fighter is decent; neither of them are great as a 20 level progression. I can't see any reason to progress beyond Swashbuckler 3 in any build.

[ThiagoMartell]

As a 3 level dip, Swashbuckler is superb, but as a 2 level dip fighter is decent; neither of them are great as a 20 level progression. I can't see any reason to progress beyond Swashbuckler 3 in any build.

Daring Outlaw :smallsmile:

[White_Drake]

Why would you keep going in Swashbuckler when you could gain more levels in Rogue?

[Kazyan]

Why would you keep going in Swashbuckler when you could gain more levels in Rogue?

The ability to actually hit your opponent and not die when they hit you back.

[Fineous Orlon]

Why would you keep going in Swashbuckler when you could gain more levels in Rogue?

Short: BAB and HP

Long: read the thread already!

[Aeryr]

Why would you keep going in Swashbuckler when you could gain more levels in Rogue?

More BAB and bigger HD, if you are going to be at close combat.

Swashbuckler also has decent ACF for two weapon fighting that can use better than a rogue due to a higher BAB.

Edit: Swashbuckled? :smallconfused:

[Hiro Protagonest]

The ability to actually hit your opponent and not die when they hit you back.

I'd still rather take rogue levels. If you wanted a class with sneak attack dice that could stand up in melee, you'd play sneak attack thug fighter. That way, you don't lose any BAB or HP.

And with fighter, you can also stack on Zhentarim Soldier.

[NeoSeraphi]

Here's the thing. A swashbuckler has d10 HD and full BAB. That should classify it as a martial class, which means that when you ask "why is it considered weak", you have to compare it to other martial classes.

When that happens, the answer is as clear as day. What does the barbarian, the duskblade, the warblade have that the swashbuckler does not? Independent power.

The Daring Outlaw gives you Sneak Attack progression. Awesome. What exactly is Sneak Attack? It's a fistful of d6 that get added to your attack roll when you flank a target or catch it unawares.

What does a barbarian get? Ungodly Strength and Power Attack, Leap Attack, etc. The barbarian can charge, cut, Cleave if he wants, and repeat.

The swashbuckler is not necessarily a bad class when you consider Daring Outlaw, but it's not a good warrior. You have to flank, and guess what? Most warriors are alone in a typical four-person party. That's because warriors are repetitive, so having two or more melee DPS high-hit-dice characters isn't that helpful, it's better to have someone else there to fill a different role.

So what happens if the party's composition is Warrior, Healer, Arcane Caster, and Face? Then the swashbuckler doesn't have anyone to flank with.

Creatures who are immune to Sneak Attack are also immune to Insightful Strike. And since you're a half-rogue with Weapon Finesse, chances are you're going to be Dex-based, which means no damage from Strength against those enemies.

Warriors are supposed to be good at killing everything in melee, by themselves. Maybe not all of them live up to that requirement, but the strong ones do. The Daring Outlaw does not. Therefore, the Daring Outlaw is weak.

In the right party, say, Barbarian, Daring Outlaw, Bard and Wizard, the Daring Outlaw would do just fine (Though she'll have less skill points than the bard and less damage than the barbarian, probably end up feeling a bit overshadowed at times, but she won't be useless). The ability to accomplish your role on your own with no outside help though, and against almost every enemy you will face, that's what makes a character strong.

[Ceaon]

If you're going to be a melee finesse fighter with positive int, I find it hard to justify not dipping Swashbuckler.


Swashbuckler is considered weak because it is a) only useful for a dip, (b) in combination with another class that provides bonus damage, (c) to execute a weak fighting style, (d) that can not be combined with other fighting styles or techniques like Power Attack and Trip.

[NeoSeraphi]

Swashbuckler is considered weak because it is a) only useful for a dip, (b) in combination with another class that provides bonus damage, (c) to execute a weak fighting style, (d) that can not be combined with other fighting styles or techniques like Power Attack and Trip.

Actually, Spiked Chains are finessable. They are also two-handed, which means Power Attack works well (if you can spare the 13 to put into Strength for it) and a Spiked Chain is a Trip weapon with reach. (Though your Trip bonus might not be that high with a low Strength score. Can be fixed if you dip factotum though).

[Larkas]

Quick question: If you go Sneak Attack Thug Fighter 3/Swashbuckler 17 (Or Rogue 1/Swashbuckler 4/Assassin 1/Swashbuckler 14, for that matter) with Daring Outlaw, will you get Sneak Attack +11d6 at level 20?

Regardless, if you could at least feint as a swift action, and/or have your opponent lose its Dex to AC by feinting until the END of your next turn (something Pathfinder ALMOST did right (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/feats.html#_greater-feint)), then at least the Swashbuckler would have a chance to stand on its own (just a chance, though, sneak attack is remarkably unreliable). Alas, that doesn't work out of the box.

[ThiagoMartell]

Here's the thing. A swashbuckler has d10 HD and full BAB. That should classify it as a martial class, which means that when you ask "why is it considered weak", you have to compare it to other martial classes.
You raise very interesting points. I tend to agree. I don't agree completely abount flanking, because it's not the only way to setup sneak attack (bluffing, marbles, hiding, blurstrike weapons and winning initiative all spring to mind), but I can see how that makes the class beind perceived as weak.
I might play as an Azurin Rogue 3/Swashbuckler 3 in my next game and was wondering if I was just crazy to think it was good (I'll even be able to eventually flank with myself due to Dimensional Dervish, so there is that)



Regardless, if you could at least feint as a swift action, and/or have your opponent lose its Dex to AC by feinting until the END of your next turn (something Pathfinder ALMOST did right (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/feats.html#_greater-feint)), then at least the Swashbuckler would have a chance to stand on its own (just a chance, though, sneak attack is remarkably unreliable). Alas, that doesn't work out of the box.
I could be wrong, but I think Surprising Riposte does something similar to that.

[Hiro Protagonest]

And another thing. Saying swashbucklers are good because of Daring Outlaw is like saying monks are good because of Tashalatora. Except Tashalatora is better.

[Saph]

Thinking about it, a Daring Outlaw doesn't really play like a "warrior" at all. It's a rogue with better BAB/HP and worse skills/talents.

[SowZ]

Swashbuckler/Rogue is also a great way to get the required levels to go into Assassin, if you want to. Shoot, drop on a level of Monk with the feat so your abilities key off of Int and you may even have decent AC! (If your DM doesn't do alignment restrictions.) But if you are playing Swashuckler, you have a few levels of usefulness. Your first two levels, before insightful strike, you suck. Then you get it and feel competent for a bit. Then the total dead levels make you lag behind pretty soon after. Even with 18 int, insightful strike will add half the damage of a raging barbarians 2H weapon str. bonus.

[NeoSeraphi]

You raise very interesting points. I tend to agree. I don't agree completely abount flanking, because it's not the only way to setup sneak attack (bluffing, marbles, hiding, blurstrike weapons and winning initiative all spring to mind), but I can see how that makes the class beind perceived as weak.
I might play as an Azurin Rogue 3/Swashbuckler 3 in my next game and was wondering if I was just crazy to think it was good (I'll even be able to eventually flank with myself due to Dimensional Dervish, so there is that)

You're playing a melee DPS character, except you trade power for power with a condition. You get the ability to deal around as much damage (especially at that level) as a warrior, but only when you're attacking a creature who is unaware, and only if the creature in question is subject to Sneak Attacks.

The problem with this is that you're essentially trying to fill a role that is not intended for your class, so you're going to have to work for it.

For example, I'm playing a knife master rogue in a PF game at the moment. When I flank or win initiative or surprise or whatever, I deal 1d3+2d8 points of damage. If I manage to set up a full round flank and hit with both weapons, I deal 2d3+4d8. That's impressive-looking, right? But I'm fighting a bunch of mooks, and in a party with an archer and two warriors, I'm not really dishing out extraordinary damage. Even if I do flank, the creatures each go down in one hit from either the warriors or from me, so they get to just move to each new creature every round while I have to dance and Tumble and stab, then keep going. Perhaps if we were fighting a creature stronger than a mook, but we did fight one of those, and that just made me feel even more useless, because he backed up against a wall so I couldn't flank him, and I was dealing 1d3 points of damage to him uselessly while the other guys pounded down for 1d10+7 every round.

Reliable average damage is much better to me than conditional powerful damage.

They get to move their speed and hit, and the mook goes down. I get to move my speed, pray that I can flank, and if I do, I can hit for about the same damage. If I can't, though, I hit for...1d3. See the issue here?

If you want to play a sneaky or finesse-like character for the style, that's fine. But you're going to be weaker than the warriors in your group. And even if you're dealing as much or more damage than them, it's going to take more work on your part, as well as cooperation with the DM.

[ThiagoMartell]

And another thing. Saying swashbucklers are good because of Daring Outlaw is like saying monks are good because of Tashalatora. Except Tashalatora is better.

Then it's a good thing no one said that, right? :smallamused:

Also, Daring Outlaw is the opposite of Tashalatora in this context, isn't it? I mean, Psion/Ardent/Psychic warrior gets unarmed strike from Monk due to Tahaslatora. Swashbuckler gets sneak attack from Rogue with Daring Outlaw. I'm afraid you're creating a duality that simply isn't there.

[Vladislav]

Actually you did. In post 3 and again in post 11.

[ThiagoMartell]

Actually you did. In post 3 and again in post 11.

I never did. Please reread my posts.

[Talya]

You don't need rogue levels for daring outlaw. Martial Stance alone can qualify you.

(It's still not a great build.)

[MeeposFire]

Actually a major unsaid issue is that like almost all martial characters you are boned if you don't get to make a full attack. Swashbucklers don't have enough firepower to be effective if they want to move and their class is supposed to be mobile. This is very similar to what monks have to deal with. It is also why the "best" martial classes are the ones with access to powerful abilities that can combine with mobility. Pounce helps a lot and maneuvers are even better. Swashbucklers will always have to deal with the fact that if they have to move 10 or more (or get slowed etc) they will lose at least 50% or more of their offensive firepower automatically. A warblade in the same situation loses much less (in some cases it really does not lose any at all).

[Draz74]

What?! You really think 20% miss chance at level 2 as a swift action does not matter?

I could be remembering wrong, but ... doesn't this ACF involve swapping out your Grace ability? And doesn't that disqualify you from Daring Outlaw?

[eggs]

Why are we discussing Arcane Stunt as a complement to Daring Outlaw? They're incompatible. Either the Swashbuckler chooses to get a fairly nice defense bonus for a few rounds a day, or it gets to multiclass as a more damage-focused Rogue. Not both.

I don't know why you would laud Crippling Strike as a reason Swashbuckler is better than the Rogue. It is one of the clearest illustrations of why Rogue levels are more valuable than Swashbuckler levels in those builds - Crippling Strike means Rogue gets to deal Strength damage to anything from mid-levels; Swashbuckler's ability damage analogs limit it to crits, and those only start at very high levels when crit immunity is commonplace.

I say Weapon Finesse works very poorly because it imposes frequent and often stifling limitations on abilities. By level 5, it's trivial to negate Sneak Attack (even with the Penetrating Strike ACF), there are common immunities to other finesse-based damage increases like Insightful Strike (Undead/Construct/Plant/Ooze types, and from mid-levels, most casters or friends of casters). So reliable damage increases typically follow the same paths as Strength-based fighters, but with stat allocations that don't use the techniques as efficiently.

[ThiagoMartell]

For those wondering, I started this discussion mainly because I might be playing a Daring Outlaw (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=243442) in the very near future and wanted to know if more Swashbuckler levels would be preferable over Incandescent Champion.


I could be remembering wrong, but ... doesn't this ACF involve swapping out your Grace ability? And doesn't that disqualify you from Daring Outlaw?
You're indeed correct. It's such a common houserule in my area that I end up forgetting it. Sorry.



Why are we discussing Arcane Stunt as a complement to Daring Outlaw? They're incompatible. Either the Swashbuckler chooses to get a fairly nice defense bonus for a few rounds a day, or it gets to multiclass as a more damage-focused Rogue. Not both.
See my answer above.


I don't know why you would laud Crippling Strike as a reason Swashbuckler is better than the Rogue.
I'm not. I'm just saying it's a good class feature.


I say Weapon Finesse works very poorly because it imposes frequent and often stifling limitations on abilities. By level 5, it's trivial to negate Sneak Attack (even with the Penetrating Strike ACF), there are common immunities to other finesse-based damage increases like Insightful Strike (Undead/Construct/Plant/Ooze types, and from mid-levels, most casters or friends of casters). So reliable damage increases typically follow the same paths as Strength-based fighters, but with stat allocations that don't use the techniques as efficiently.
Swordsages, Champion of Corellon Larethian and Magus Dervish Dancers are all finesse builds that work really fine.
The Dancing With Shadows (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9894993&postcount=2) kalashtar is another efficient finesse build.
Strenght based and Power Attack are the easier path to follow, but there are many other paths to melee damage and I don't see them working poorly, it just takes more effort.

[eggs]

Strenght based and Power Attack are the easier path to follow, but there are many other paths to melee damage and I don't see them working poorly, it just takes more effort.
You can make an Expert build that works. It just takes more effort than other classes. That's what it means for an option to be weak.

With the exception of the Magus (whose unrelated class features forbid some of Strength builds' strengths), your examples are more efficient as Strength-focused builds. They work with Finesse, but it requires more feat investments, forbids certain common tools like reach weaponry, and generally yields lower effectiveness in damage output, combat maneuver success rates and control abilities. Due to the extra effort/resources needed for finesse to reach comparable levels to strength-based fighting, it's weaker.

[ThiagoMartell]

You can make an Expert build that works. It just takes more effort than other classes. That's what it means for an option to be weak.
Fair enough.


With the exception of the Magus (whose unrelated class features forbid some of Strength builds' strengths), your examples are more efficient as Strength-focused builds. They work with Finesse, but it requires more feat investments, forbids certain common tools like reach weaponry, and generally yields lower effectiveness in damage output, combat maneuver success rates and control abilities. Due to the extra effort/resources needed for finesse to reach comparable levels to strength-based fighting, it's weaker.
Well, if you make a Strenght focused Swordsage, all your many Dex skill will be lacking. You'll also have a worse armor class, since you're restricted to light armor. So that Swordsage is better as a non-finesse build is at least debatable, specially considering most of a Swordsage's damage has nothing to do with ability scores.
Regarding the Champion of Corellon Larethian and the Dancing With Shadows example, though, you're just plain wrong, no way around that. Champion of Corellon is all about having high Dex and using heavy armor and adds Dex to damage as a class feature. If you build a low Dex Champion of Corellon, there's something very very wrong.
In a Dancing With Shadows build, you need Str 13 for Power Attack and that's it, your damage comes from the interaction between Dancing With Shadows and Power Attack. Putting more points into Str is unnecessary, since Dex improves lots of other stats (AC, Reflex, initiative) while Str only increases damage and you already have enough damage.

[Gwendol]

It has some good bits, but in general suffers from being MAD. To make a good build you need high dex, high int, high con, and can't dump strength or charisma (at least not too low to foregoe the fluff).

The ACF's are not bad, with arcane stunt being outstandingly good, but perhaps not good enough to build an entire career on. Compare with the Knight for example, which in my opinion comes across as vastly superior mechanically. Had the swashbuckler been able to throw out challenges and taunts it could have been more interesting.

[Lonely Tylenol]

If I had to go with a Rogue-like Swashbuckler with just base classes, I'd go with something along the lines SA Zhentarim Fighter 3/Swashbuckler 3/Feat Rogue 14. Ends with +11d6 Sneak Attack (+9d6 as a 17th-level Rogue from Swash 3/Rog 14, +2d6 from SA Fighter), INT to damage, Finesse if I need it, 8 Fighter bonus feats (at Rog 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14), two special Rogue talents (this can include Crippling Strike if you're that in love with it, and get a better version to boot, but mine would be two of Defensive Roll, Improved Evasion and Skill Mastery, all of which I think are better), enough BAB for four iterative attacks by 20, and enough skill points to actually be a useful Rogue (probably complemented by having high INT). At 20th level, your capstone is a bonus feat and another d6 of Sneak Attack dice, which is less impressive than some classes, but still better than any of these classes normally.

If I wanted to be an underhanded thug, Sneak Attack Zhentarim Thug Fighter 9+/XX 11- with Imperious Command causes foes to cower as a swift action, which means a full round of Sneak Attack damage for free against anything not immune to fear-based effects, without relying on other players or conditional bonuses, and has the same chassis as Swash of equivalent level, with a set of smaller, but more cohesive, class features.

Notice how both of these builds use as few Swashbuckler levels as possible: the first build uses three, while the second needs none (although a case can be made for an INT-based subset of the build, since a three-level dip in Swash advances damage by +2d6+INT, and gives Finesse for free if needed). That's because any combination of class levels arranged intelligently is better than Swashbuckler, except where that three-level dip is concerned. And that's the problem; Grace isn't better than Lightning Reflexes until level 20 (and both are bad), Dodge +X isn't much better than the Dodge feat from 10 on (and both are bad), and past the third level, most of Swashbuckler's not-dead levels are incremental bonuses to these, or some weak ability that came way too late to be relevant. The thing is, even Fighter to 20 is better than Swash to 20, because a Thug fighter can drop 1 of his 11 fears to have the same skill ranks/similar skill set, and then spend the remaining 10 doing the Swashbuckler's thing better (minus niche bonuses like the INT to damage and Crippling Strike, but that is, again, niche). Or, doing something that is better than the Swashbuckler's thing, better. Like the Übercharger. Or Jack B. Quick. Or the Chain-Tripper lock. Or... You get the point.

[MeeposFire]

I find magus dervish dancers to be very mediocre. You end up spending resources to end up essentially where you started except you have better AC at the start of the game and you are down a few feats at the end of the game but otherwise are no better off from before. Granted you see that because PF seems to not like characters to fully use their schtick at level 1 but that is a whole another issue.

[Soranar]

Swashbuckler really isn't that weak, as long as you allow Tome of Battle.

1rst decent option

Swashbuckler 20

take martial study + martial stance+ shadow blade+ daring outlaw

effect: not immediate (takes a few levels to get the combo out) but you get , essentially, DEX to damage, DEX to hit, full sneak attack progression and a full BAB build. Not great but not terrible. Also works well with TWF assuming you get a form of pounce.

2nd decent option

go for exotic weapon proficiency (spiked chain) with a lockdown build

effect: You get 1.5 STR to damage + INT to damage against non crit immune creatures. All in all you can make a normal full BAB power attack build that benefits from a high INT. You can also go DEX based if you allow shadow blade, all in all a decent fighting build that requires a few feats to work.

Other than those, you'll be using swashbuckler as a 3 level dip.

Personally I think those builds are fine (at least having 3 decent options is better than none) and a 3 level dip isn't that much of a dip (3 levels being a significant investment).

[Flickerdart]

2nd decent option
How is that any better than a Warrior at chain tripping? All it gives you to help with that is additional INT to damage which is going to be a tiny number because INT does nothing else for you.

[SowZ]

If I had to go with a Rogue-like Swashbuckler with just base classes, I'd go with something along the lines SA Zhentarim Fighter 3/Swashbuckler 3/Feat Rogue 14. Ends with +11d6 Sneak Attack (+9d6 as a 17th-level Rogue from Swash 3/Rog 14, +2d6 from SA Fighter), INT to damage, Finesse if I need it, 8 Fighter bonus feats (at Rog 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 14), two special Rogue talents (this can include Crippling Strike if you're that in love with it, and get a better version to boot, but mine would be two of Defensive Roll, Improved Evasion and Skill Mastery, all of which I think are better), enough BAB for four iterative attacks by 20, and enough skill points to actually be a useful Rogue (probably complemented by having high INT). At 20th level, your capstone is a bonus feat and another d6 of Sneak Attack dice, which is less impressive than some classes, but still better than any of these classes normally.

If I wanted to be an underhanded thug, Sneak Attack Zhentarim Thug Fighter 9+/XX 11- with Imperious Command causes foes to cower as a swift action, which means a full round of Sneak Attack damage for free against anything not immune to fear-based effects, without relying on other players or conditional bonuses, and has the same chassis as Swash of equivalent level, with a set of smaller, but more cohesive, class features.

Notice how both of these builds use as few Swashbuckler levels as possible: the first build uses three, while the second needs none (although a case can be made for an INT-based subset of the build, since a three-level dip in Swash advances damage by +2d6+INT, and gives Finesse for free if needed). That's because any combination of class levels arranged intelligently is better than Swashbuckler, except where that three-level dip is concerned. And that's the problem; Grace isn't better than Lightning Reflexes until level 20 (and both are bad), Dodge +X isn't much better than the Dodge feat from 10 on (and both are bad), and past the third level, most of Swashbuckler's not-dead levels are incremental bonuses to these, or some weak ability that came way too late to be relevant. The thing is, even Fighter to 20 is better than Swash to 20, because a Thug fighter can drop 1 of his 11 fears to have the same skill ranks/similar skill set, and then spend the remaining 10 doing the Swashbuckler's thing better (minus niche bonuses like the INT to damage and Crippling Strike, but that is, again, niche). Or, doing something that is better than the Swashbuckler's thing, better. Like the Übercharger. Or Jack B. Quick. Or the Chain-Tripper lock. Or... You get the point.

While a really good build mechanically, I know a lot of DMs would nix feat rogue Daring Outlaw. If it is allowed, there is really no reason not to do it.

[Elfinor]

While a really good build mechanically, I know a lot of DMs would nix feat rogue Daring Outlaw. If it is allowed, there is really no reason not to do it. *waves hand* Would nix!

@ThiagoMartell: Much as I love Swashbuckler to bits, it is a weak class on its own. Daring Outlaw does make it viable but one feat does not make a class. The comparison to Natural Spell and Druid isn't really a valid one: if you take Daring Outlaw away from a Swashbuckler then you have an enormous drop in combat viability - there isn't a niche past Level 3 (except maybe Seduction (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x) herp derp) that another class can't fill better. Contrast the Druid: it still retains a lot of combat ability without Natural Spell - especially if you're using one the non-Wildshape variants (madness!).

I agree that Daring Outlaw is great, and is one of the better class bases for the popular nonmagical smart, agile, suave fighter archetype. Outside of ToB anyway:smalltongue:

The concept in general doesn't see a lot of love though, it loses out to the Factotum on the +magic side and to AoO fighters on the +combat -suave side.

Swashbuckler really isn't that weak, as long as you allow Tome of Battle. -snip- Since ToB has entered the discussion, the most effective option for the 'Swashbuckler' concept is (usually) Warblade. Grab Bluff as a class skill, and they do a better job of swashbuckling than a Swashbuckler.

Also, the second build's effectiveness is almost completely independent of the Swashbuckler class. Even not accounting for Warblade, you could tack that on to a Thug Fighter, keep the same concept, and be far more effective. Even if you pump INT to fit the character concept, the extra feats>INT to damage.

[Amphetryon]

Swashbuckler really isn't that weak, as long as you allow Tome of Battle.

1rst decent option

Swashbuckler 20

take martial study + martial stance+ shadow blade+ daring outlaw

effect: not immediate (takes a few levels to get the combo out) but you get , essentially, DEX to damage, DEX to hit, full sneak attack progression and a full BAB build. Not great but not terrible. Also works well with TWF assuming you get a form of pounce.

2nd decent option

go for exotic weapon proficiency (spiked chain) with a lockdown build

effect: You get 1.5 STR to damage + INT to damage against non crit immune creatures. All in all you can make a normal full BAB power attack build that benefits from a high INT. You can also go DEX based if you allow shadow blade, all in all a decent fighting build that requires a few feats to work.

Other than those, you'll be using swashbuckler as a 3 level dip.

Personally I think those builds are fine (at least having 3 decent options is better than none) and a 3 level dip isn't that much of a dip (3 levels being a significant investment).
Now compare those options to straight ToB builds. I believe they'll come up short.

Fighter as a whole is considered weak for reasons that include the fact that there are maybe 3 good build concepts with more than 2 levels of Fighter. Swashbuckler, by comparison, has one good build concept - Daring Outlaw - and it doesn't need more than 3 levels of Swashbuckler to tick. Couple that with Swashbuckler's difficulty dealing effectively with a variety of threats (things that can't be SA'd, flying creatures, incorporeal, etc) and you're hard-pressed to legitimately call Swashbuckler *good* except in very restrictive environments.

[Din Riddek]

Op, if you like the swashbuckler and its class features, then play the swashbuckler. The only reason why one shouldn't play a class is if you wouldn't have fun playing it. It doesn't sound like your playgroup is full of optimizers who will bury you in terms of power, so you really shouldn't worry about power.

The perceived power level of a class is largely determined by the playgroup you are used to. Like you, I find a build with mostly fast BAB and full sneak dice with a good hit die is good, but in my playgroup we typically have 5 players, often with 3 doing melee builds. In the dynamic of my playgroup, Daring outlaw swashbuckler is really good. Then again, I don't typically play in a party with a cleric, a wizard, and a druid at the same time.

[ThiagoMartell]

While a really good build mechanically, I know a lot of DMs would nix feat rogue Daring Outlaw. If it is allowed, there is really no reason not to do it.

I doubt anyone would allow that. It's obviously completely against RAI.

[Answerer]

I doubt anyone would allow that. It's obviously completely against RAI.
There is no such thing as "obviously completely against RAI." You are wrong. No author has ever commented on that potential interaction. You have no evidence and have made no case for this, you have merely asserted that you are right. This is insulting and adds nothing to the conversation. Please justify your statements when you make them.

[Lycar]

Regardless, if you could at least feint as a swift action, and/or have your opponent lose its Dex to AC by feinting until the END of your next turn (something Pathfinder ALMOST did right (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/feats.html#_greater-feint)),

You may want to check out the Two-Weapon-Feint (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/two-weapon-feint-combat) line (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/improved-two-weapon-feint-combat) of feats.

[Midnight_v]

I've seen people say Swashbuckler is weaker than a Fighter. But aren't Swashbuckler's sub levels a lot better?
No. Not really. . . and it depends.
I mean:
1st the fighter has Waaaayy more support spread out over many books, so in a bubble it has more to draw on. Therefore the answer to that question is pretty conditional.
However, fighters' are better (in this case), because they have no fixed form, so you can platform them into all kinds of things.

Options make them better, and while SOME of those options are poor, there are enough good ones to make up for it.

Dragonborn/Raptoran Zhentarim Dungeoncrashers w/imperious command, and/or overpowering assult,blah blah blah...
Or just archers with weapon mastery, people consider them better because its not just: "This 1 build MAKES this class good!"
That particular build may be decent but that doesn't make a "CLASS" strong.

[Amphetryon]

FWIW, I've hit upon another possible use for Swashbuckler: Use the Swashbuckler as the leader for HoB's Concentrated Volley rules. Because Swashbucklers have incentive to have a high INT, and because the Concentrated Volley rules want the leader in that circumstance to have a high INT AND a high BAB, it works out decently. That said, nothing in Swashbuckler is especially geared toward Ranged combat except high DEX, so you'll be playing away from the Class' presumed strengths, you'll need to be using Heroes of Battle for this to work, and you'll need Leadership or some other justification for having 10 or so lackey archers tagging along with you. Most folks can come up with things they'd rather use Leadership for than a gaggle of archers.

[Suddo]

The main reason Swashbuckler is considered weak is that it is either:
A bad rogue
or a bad barbarian.

Luckily it does have the option but like many hybrids you often find you're unable to do either. Plus auto-losing to undead, constructs, ooze and things with fortification kind of sucks.

[Draz74]

two special Rogue talents (this can include Crippling Strike if you're that in love with it, and get a better version to boot, but mine would be two of Defensive Roll, Improved Evasion and Skill Mastery, all of which I think are better),
The rest of your points are valid, but ... Defensive Roll is 1/day, and only activated if you are hurt worse in combat than (ideally) you ever should be. And Improved Evasion ... you shouldn't be failing Reflex saves often enough to make it worthwhile. I'd rather have Crippling Strike over either of those.


Plus auto-losing to undead, constructs, ooze and things with fortification kind of sucks.

FTFY. (IIRC, "things with Fortification" is the only category that trumps the Penetrating Strike ACF. And there are other ways, too, of dealing with undead and constructs.)

[Talya]

Swashbuckler, like fighter, is often more useful as a component of an idea that isn't fully mimicked by other classes than it is on its own. As a three level dip in any dex/int heavy melee build, they're quite good. As a heavy rogue, they're decent. (I like the idea of using Martial Stance and Daring Outlaw to make a Swashbuckler 20 with 12d6 sneak attack. Is it perfect? No, but it's neat.) They're often perfect martial components in Gish-type builds with INT based casters.

But what a swashbuckler isn't, is a base class that is viable on its class features alone.

[ThiagoMartell]

Swashbuckler, like fighter, is often more useful as a component of an idea that isn't fully mimicked by other classes than it is on its own. As a three level dip in any dex/int heavy melee build, they're quite good. As a heavy rogue, they're decent. (I like the idea of using Martial Stance and Daring Outlaw to make a Swashbuckler 20 with 12d6 sneak attack. Is it perfect? No, but it's neat.) They're often perfect martial components in Gish-type builds with INT based casters.

But what a swashbuckler isn't, is a base class that is viable on its class features alone.

Agreed completely. Then again, that's an issue of all noncasters in 3.5.

[Talya]

Agreed completely. Then again, that's an issue of all noncasters in 3.5.

With quite a few notable exceptions, perhaps. Barbarian can be good melee build. Ranger can do alright with archery, too. Rogue has its niche. TOB classes area all quite viable. ACFs can make a lot of base classes better still.

[ThiagoMartell]

With quite a few notable exceptions, perhaps. Barbarian can be good melee build. Ranger can do alright with archery, too. Rogue has its niche. TOB classes area all quite viable. ACFs can make a lot of base classes better still.

But they are all better as dips, isn't it? Barbarian 1 is a very good dip, so is Figher 2, Ranger 3, stuff like that. I can see a point being made for Rogue with Savvy Rogue, but even then you should dip at least one level somewhere because Rogue 20 gives you nothing. I agree on the ToB classes, though.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Agreed completely. Then again, that's an issue of all noncasters in 3.5.

...

Anything from Tome of Battle. Well-built barbarian. Well built fighter/barbarian. Well-built rogue. Raptoran or winged dragonborn as race for a well-built fighter/barbarian, barbarian, or rogue.

[NeoSeraphi]

But they are all better as dips, isn't it? Barbarian 1 is a very good dip, so is Figher 2, Ranger 3, stuff like that. I can see a point being made for Rogue with Savvy Rogue, but even then you should dip at least one level somewhere because Rogue 20 gives you nothing. I agree on the ToB classes, though.

Rogue 20 is the most disappointing level in the entire game. Still, you don't have to dip anymore. We have prestige classes for that now. You can just be a more rogue-ish rogue, whether that's as an assassin, or a ronin, or a shadow sun ninja, or an arcane trickster, whatever type of rogue you'd like to be.

[Venger]

Swashbuckler/Rogue is also a great way to get the required levels to go into Assassin, if you want to. Shoot, drop on a level of Monk with the feat so your abilities key off of Int and you may even have decent AC! (If your DM doesn't do alignment restrictions.)

carmendine monk is the feat you're talking about. it's a pretty great way to cut down on MADness

you actually don't need your DM to waive alignment stuf. just take your monk lvl before swashbuckler lvls, then go nonlawful. you don't lose class features, you just can't take more levels in monk later (not like you'd want to anyway) it also lets you take one of the evasion ACFs for rogue/monk since you don't need it twice, I'd suggest dropping monk's for invisible fist since you're going to be SAing all day, erryday.



Then it's a good thing no one said that, right? :smallamused:

Also, Daring Outlaw is the opposite of Tashalatora in this context, isn't it? I mean, Psion/Ardent/Psychic warrior gets unarmed strike from Monk due to Tahaslatora. Swashbuckler gets sneak attack from Rogue with Daring Outlaw. I'm afraid you're creating a duality that simply isn't there.

by that, do you mean that with tashalatora, you go monk2/psion18, and are taking only a little monk, whereas with normal daring outlaw, you do rog3/swash17 so are taking mostly swashbuckler.



Quick question: If you go Sneak Attack Thug Fighter 3/Swashbuckler 17 (Or Rogue 1/Swashbuckler 4/Assassin 1/Swashbuckler 14, for that matter) with Daring Outlaw, will you get Sneak Attack +11d6 at level 20?

Regardless, if you could at least feint as a swift action, and/or have your opponent lose its Dex to AC by feinting until the END of your next turn (something Pathfinder ALMOST did right (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/feats.html#_greater-feint)), then at least the Swashbuckler would have a chance to stand on its own (just a chance, though, sneak attack is remarkably unreliable). Alas, that doesn't work out of the box.
the answer is no, since daring outlaw specifies it only lets rogue levels and swashbuckler levels stack, not SA thug/ninja/etc levels.

that lvl breakdown will indeed get you 11d6 at lvl 20. you'd have a hard time getting into assassin on time though since Swashbuckler lacks disguise, hide, and MS as class skills. disguise you could get from your rog lvl, but the other two would eat up a lot of skill poings. able learner seems like kind of a waste.

[Drelua]

Swashbuckler/Rogue is also a great way to get the required levels to go into Assassin, if you want to. Shoot, drop on a level of Monk with the feat so your abilities key off of Int and you may even have decent AC! (If your DM doesn't do alignment restrictions.)

I'm confused, what alignment restrictions? Rogue and Swashbuckler don't have any, just play a Lawful character. Unless you mean the Evil requirement for Assassin, then you can just use Avenger (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/prc/20070401a&dcmp=ILC-RSSDND). There's no Alignment conflict at all for a Monk/Rogue/Swashbuckler/Assassin(or Avenger).

[Talya]

carmendine monk is the feat you're talking about. it's a pretty great way to cut down on MADness

you actually don't need your DM to waive alignment stuf. just take your monk lvl before swashbuckler lvls, then go nonlawful. you don't lose class features, you just can't take more levels in monk later (not like you'd want to anyway) it also lets you take one of the evasion ACFs for rogue/monk since you don't need it twice, I'd suggest dropping monk's for invisible fist since you're going to be SAing all day, erryday.




by that, do you mean that with tashalatora, you go monk2/psion18, and are taking only a little monk, whereas with normal daring outlaw, you do rog3/swash17 so are taking mostly swashbuckler.



the answer is no, since daring outlaw specifies it only lets rogue levels and swashbuckler levels stack, not SA thug/ninja/etc levels.

that lvl breakdown will indeed get you 11d6 at lvl 20. you'd have a hard time getting into assassin on time though since Swashbuckler lacks disguise, hide, and MS as class skills. disguise you could get from your rog lvl, but the other two would eat up a lot of skill poings. able learner seems like kind of a waste.

Meh. Just go swashbuckler 20!

With Martial Stance (Assassin's Stance) and Daring Outlaw, as well as all the TWFing line and a few feats to help your sneak attack apply to immune creatures, you're actually going to do alright. Full BAB means more attacks (and more that hit), plus you get bigger flanking bonuses than rogue.

It's not nearly as versatile as rogue, but it's a frontline combatant with lots of hit points, piles of sneak attack, and all the swashbuckler's ...uh... "class features." (Better use a pair of rapiers to take advantage of those crit-based features.)

[eggs]

the answer is no, since daring outlaw specifies it only lets rogue levels and swashbuckler levels stack, not SA thug/ninja/etc levels.
17+0=17
9d6 SA from stacked Rogue/Swash levels, 2d6 from Fighter.

EDIT:
On the CoCL and Dancing With Shadows builds, they again illustrate my point - look at how many resources they invest for around +15 damage, look at the limitations and terrible tactical decisions they have to make to maintain that damage, and then look at how easily a cookie-cutter strength-based charge build outperforms them.

Bringing that in to the Swashbuckler, we could call the default Swashbuckler something like Swash 17/Rogue 3 with Daring Outlaw. That seems reasonable.

Outside combat, it doesn't bring much beside the skills accessed from the Rogue levels (hardly creditable to the Swashbuckler) and bought with cross-classed skill points (most of the Swashbuckler's skills are made redundant with an inexpensive wand of Alter Self, anyway).

In combat, without maxing Strength, it's not going to bring much to the table in terms of control. Staggering Strike and Confound the Bigfolk are the most finesse-friendly options I can think of, and both add even more necessary conditions for a Swashbuckler's usefulness.

In terms of damage output, the Swashbuckler is unreliable - any concealment negates the bulk of its damage completely, any common source of crit immunity will cut out most of its damage even with Penetrating Strike, and tactically setting up the sneak attack is problematic on its own. So offensively, it's occasionally decent (when it can line up a full attack, qualify for sneak attack and choose a viable target), but frequently mediocre or lacking. And the only attack it gets from class levels targets (weapon attack rolls) one of the most easily boosted defenses (the combined HP/AC/DR/miss chance).

In terms of durability, it doesn't derive any relevant immunities from class levels, doesn't get any way to duck around common low-level spell effects like Web, Sleet Storm, or conjured walls or grapplers. Its only two defenses are its chassis and evasion - so it brings nothing defensively to the high-level game of immunity roulette.

And as to the argument that classes like the non-Mystic/Wild Ranger, Barbarian and Fighter are also best used as dips, that line of reasoning doesn't follow because they're also weak classes. Monk is one of the richest dip classes in the game. It's still considered a bad class because after that second level, it stops. Same with the Swashbuckler, except its dip isn't as useful, and its subsequent decline is even more steep.

[Lonely Tylenol]

I doubt anyone would allow that. It's obviously completely against RAI.


There is no such thing as "obviously completely against RAI." You are wrong. No author has ever commented on that potential interaction. You have no evidence and have made no case for this, you have merely asserted that you are right. This is insulting and adds nothing to the conversation. Please justify your statements when you make them.

Answerer said it best, but I can prove that everything works as intended:

A: The Sneak Attack Fighter ACF is intended to replace Fighter bonus feats with Sneak Attack progression of a Rogue, which it does;
B: The feat Daring Outlaw was intended to have a requirement of Sneak Attack +2d6, with no restrictions on the class that bestows it upon the character, which the Sneak Attack Fighter lawfully fulfills at third level;
C: The feat Daring Outlaw was intended to stack Rogue and Swashbuckler levels for the purpose of determining Sneak Attack damage, which this build does (note that the Fighter levels, which grant Sneak Attack, are not counted toward the total level for Sneak Attack progression; it does not "add your Swashbuckler levels to the class that grants Sneak Attack" or anything, nor is it intended to, nor am I asking for it to);
D: The Feat Rogue ACF is intended to trade out Sneak Attack damage for feats, which it does;
E: Therefore, not only is Feat Rogue Daring Outlaw RAW-legal, but every component therein also functions exactly as intended.

You can argue that E doesn't logically follow from A, but if B follows logically from A, C follows logically from B, D follows logically from C, and E follows logically from D, then yes, E follows logically from A, as intended, and you're adding *your* interpretation of the rules as intended, not the rules as they were individually intended to work. As far as the whole package is concerned, you can argue that rules regardig the collective build somehow override the rules for each individual selection from the build, except that there are none.

You could also argue that "Zhentarim Fighter is not intended to get a full-round Sneak Attack for free!". To this, I would argue:

A: Zhentarim Fighter's 9th substitution level is intended to allow you to Intimidate to demoralize as a swift action, which it does;
B: The feat Imperious Command is intended to allow you to Intimidate to demoralize in order to cause the target to cower for 1 round instead of be shaken, which it does;
C: The Sneak Attack Fighter ACF is intended to replace Fighter bonus feats with Sneak Attack progression of a Rogue, which it does;
D: Sneak Attack is intended to function against a cowering opponent, as the cowering condition denies that opponent their DEX bonus to AC, which it does;
E: Therefore, Sneak Attack Zhentarim Fighter can make a full round of Sneak Attacks with an Intimidate check not only by RAW, but by RAI as well, because every piece is working as it is intended to.

Again, you can argue that Zhentarim Fighter wasn't intended to work with Sneak Attack Fighter in such a way--but it does, and every piece is clearly working as intended in the doing.

Your whole argument is based on the premise that "the ACFs are better"--and also, for the entire first page, that a commonly accepted house rule (that you could swap out Grace and still take Daring Outlaw), combined with a feat from an outside splat, make Swashbuckler better, but you are instantly dismissive of a better way to do it involving fewer Swashbuckler levels as "not RIA", and saying that "no DM would allow it"--in response to a DM who can, will, and has allowed every single trick suggested!

[ThiagoMartell]

Answerer said it best, but I can prove that everything works as intended

Sure. Feat Rogue gives up 20 levels of sneak attack and you take it back via a feat. It's completely intended. I can't believe I didn't see that before. It's probably a stealth boost to Rogues. Obviously the designer of the Daring Outlaw feat considered Feat Rogue and said "Hey, not that is something I could do. A feat to give Feat Rogues their sneak attack back." It makes so much sense. Thanks for opening my eyes.

[Red_Dog]

First not to be a prude, BUT=>

=>You can not mix Thug-Fighter and Sneak Attack fighter ACFs.

They both require you to give up feats. You can't trade something twice.

You can however Have Thug Hit-n-Run Dungeon Crusher Fighter that trades 3 feats & heavy armor/Tower Shields for being amazing! [I prefer just Thug Dungeon Crusher]
*Seriously I think my first guide has to be either about Thug Fighter or Hexblade ^^*

=>You can't get Arcane Stunt & Daring Outlaw. feat Daring Outlaw needs Grace, Arcane Stunt needs you to get rid of grace. Mutually exclusive things.

=============================================>

Swash buckler can not be given a credit for Daring Outlaw[no matter the faults of Daring Outlaw] as much as Ranger can't be getting a credit for Swifthunter.

These are separate builds from their original selves[Ranger & Swashbuckler] because if you don't judge them separately, Suddenly! I start with Human Rouge Able learner Penetrating Strike and make a half decent character! Is the character decent because of 16 levels of swashbuckler? No. No it isn't = \

Daring Outlaw isn't ir-redeemable[good bones, absence of class feature. Dumpster dive human/other racial & rouge ACF splat books and suddenly we are not too bad] but certainly not due to the swashbuckler.

=============================================>

I know I have mentioned it quite a few times before, but if you want sword play, go 5 dipping fullBAB base w/ d6 sneak attack => Scarlet Corsair. Its by no means a t3 class, but solid T4 build IMO ^^

[Answerer]

=>You can not mix Thug-Fighter and Sneak Attack fighter ACFs.
Thug only takes away the 1st-level feat. You can trade the rest for Sneak Attack if you want.

[Marlowe]

First not to be a prude, BUT=>

=>You can not mix Thug-Fighter and Sneak Attack fighter ACFs.

They both require you to give up feats. You can't trade something twice.


From the SRD on Sneak Attack Fighter:Some fighters prefer stealth and cunning over martial skill. This variant can also be combined with the thug variant.

[Answerer]

Or that. Missed that. Yeah, then you apparently just get the Sneak Attack.

[Red_Dog]

Answerer & Marlowe=>

I just looked it up... wut?O_0. How are you partially trading an explicitly unequal progression of feats for partial sneak attack progression?O_o

*checks Unearthed Arcana* Yep... checks out. Not sure how 1,2,4,6... checks out with 1,3,5... Are you loosing 2 sneak attack dice or just one?O_0

P.S. By the by, I was wrong, you can't have hit-n-run Thug fighter according to SRD, as you give up armor proficiencies. Sry missed it.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Sure. Feat Rogue gives up 20 levels of sneak attack and you take it back via a feat. It's completely intended. I can't believe I didn't see that before. It's probably a stealth boost to Rogues. Obviously the designer of the Daring Outlaw feat considered Feat Rogue and said "Hey, not that is something I could do. A feat to give Feat Rogues their sneak attack back." It makes so much sense. Thanks for opening my eyes.

...This is the game where Monte Cook wrote an article (before the game was even released, I think. I can't find it) that the game was meant to reward those who found good build choices.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Sure. Feat Rogue gives up 20 levels of sneak attack and you take it back via a feat. It's completely intended. I can't believe I didn't see that before. It's probably a stealth boost to Rogues. Obviously the designer of the Daring Outlaw feat considered Feat Rogue and said "Hey, not that is something I could do. A feat to give Feat Rogues their sneak attack back." It makes so much sense. Thanks for opening my eyes.

Oh, great! I'm glad you've moved beyond being incredibly belittling and dismissive of me and my counterarguments at face value, instead of stopping for a moment to consider the actual truth value of my statement. :smallbiggrin:


Answerer & Marlowe=>

I just looked it up... wut?O_0. How are you partially trading an explicitly unequal progression of feats for partial sneak attack progression?O_o

*checks Unearthed Arcana* Yep... checks out. Not sure how 1,2,4,6... checks out with 1,3,5... Are you loosing 2 sneak attack dice or just one?O_0

P.S. By the by, I was wrong, you can't have hit-n-run Thug fighter according to SRD, as you give up armor proficiencies. Sry missed it.

Not to be a prude, but I *do* know what I was talking about. Sneak Attack and Thug trade the same feature, but are explicitly mentioned as exceptions to the rule. As for trading non-equivalent progressions, Druidic Avenger trades its Wild Shape feature (a non-linear progression) for Rage (a linear progression, if you begin the count at 1), and the Crafty Hunter variant of Barbarian trades Rage (a linear progression) for combat feats as a Hunter (which are non-linear) and Favored Enemy (which is linear, but works on a different progression). This is nothing unique, although it is mostly limited to Unearthed Arcana.

Maybe *my* first guide should be about Thug Fighter or something. :smallwink:

On an unrelated note: did you know the above Zhetarim Fighter Sneak Attack Thug build is Coup de Grace in a Can in 3.P? Now THAT'S not RAI (it can't be, since we're working cross-system now, albeit in "common houserule" territory), but it's a RAW-legal way to get a bare minimum of a DC 37 Fort save or die with a non-magical scythe and 18 STR. :smallbiggrin:

[Red_Dog]

Not to be a prude, but I *do* know what I was talking about. Sneak Attack and Thug trade the same feature, but are explicitly mentioned as exceptions to the rule. As for trading non-equivalent progressions, Druidic Avenger trades its Wild Shape feature (a non-linear progression) for Rage (a linear progression, if you begin the count at 1), and the Crafty Hunter variant of Barbarian trades Rage (a linear progression) for combat feats as a Hunter (which are non-linear) and Favored Enemy (which is linear, but works on a different progression). This is nothing unique, although it is mostly limited to Unearthed Arcana.

Maybe *my* first guide should be about Thug Fighter or something. :smallwink:

On an unrelated note: did you know the above Zhetarim Fighter Sneak Attack Thug build is Coup de Grace in a Can in 3.P? Now THAT'S not RAI (it can't be, since we're working cross-system now, albeit in "common houserule" territory), but it's a RAW-legal way to get a bare minimum of a DC 37 Fort save or die with a non-magical scythe and 18 STR. :smallbiggrin:

=> I meant that every other ACF explicitly states that you can't trade things that you already traded. Much like hit-n-run fighter can't be combined with thug fighter.

Its fine to have non-linear trades and make the best of them [wildshape ranger gets +10ft move speed at lvl1 and doesn't have to progress further as he/she isn't required to, so technically free +10ft move that stacks with scout barbarian and etc.].Most of the Unearthed Arcane ACFs is about swapping uneven progressions. I just though that once you make the exchange there is no backsies.
So I am not sure how the druid avenger or hunter barbarian example has anything with trading partial features in between progressions.

If Thug fighter can also gain full sneak attack progression by RAW, than Christmas came early for about third of NPCs in my campaign ^^.

I still look iffy at such ruling, but at least this time the exception in the rules finally favors underdogs ^^.
==================================>
By the by, do you refer to coup-de-grace thru Imperious command combo when it comes to Zhetarim fighter?

[Lonely Tylenol]

=> I meant that every other ACF explicitly states that you can't trade things that you already traded. Much like hit-n-run fighter can't be combined with thug fighter.

Its fine to have non-linear trades and make the best of them [wildshape ranger gets +10ft move speed at lvl1 and doesn't have to progress further as he/she isn't required to, so technically free +10ft move that stacks with scout barbarian and etc.].Most of the Unearthed Arcane ACFs is about swapping uneven progressions. I just though that once you make the exchange there is no backsies.
So I am not sure how the druid avenger or hunter barbarian example has anything with trading partial features in between progressions.

If Thug fighter can also gain full sneak attack progression by RAW, than Christmas came early for about third of NPCs in my campaign ^^.

I still look iffy at such ruling, but at least this time the exception in the rules finally favors underdogs ^^.

It does: At first level, you are trading medium and heavy armor proficiencies and your first-level feat for a modified skill list, Urban Tracking, and +1d6 Sneak Attack damage, with +1d6 every odd-numbered level thereafter. When you combine them, you combine the benefits and drawbacks of both, which means you retain both benefits. Merry Christmas, NPCs!


By the by, do you refer to coup-de-grace thru Imperious command combo when it comes to Zhetarim fighter?

Yes. Normally, you can't coup a cowering foe, but in 3.P, the feat Dastardly Finish (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/dastardly-finish-combat) lets you coup de grace a cowering or stunned foe--and Sneak Attack fighter allows you to meet the +5d6 Sneak Attack prerequisite for the feat at level 9, the same level you get Swift Intimidation! All the pieces fall neatly into place for Zhentarim builds, even moreso in 3.P. :smallsmile:

[Red_Dog]

It does: At first level, you are trading medium and heavy armor proficiencies and your first-level feat for a modified skill list, Urban Tracking, and +1d6 Sneak Attack damage, with +1d6 every odd-numbered level thereafter. When you combine them, you combine the benefits and drawbacks of both, which means you retain both benefits. Merry Christmas, NPCs!


No, Thug-fighter sneak attack is a very unique situation.
As an example, -> Wildshape Ranger can't swap parts of his wildshape at any level for Fangshield ACF even though wildshape replaced Combat Styles and Fangshield deals with combat styles. A hunter barbarian can't swap some favorite enemies or Combat styles for Whirling Frenzy Mid way or vise versa. Hence I refer you to => No backsies. = ]

However, since this situation is unique and for once favors Fighters, I am totally fine with such an amazing arrangement ^^.

Also
=>Zhentarim as an organization always strives to provide us with lots of fun = ] Considering they have a Skymage on the list of achievements everything else pales in comparison ^^. Still, cool find, shame I don't play 3.P

[Lonely Tylenol]

No, Thug-fighter sneak attack is a very unique situation.
As an example, -> Wildshape Ranger can't swap parts of his wildshape at any level for Fangshield ACF even though wildshape replaced Combat Styles and Fangshield deals with combat styles. A hunter barbarian can't swap some favorite enemies or Combat styles for Whirling Frenzy Mid way or vise versa. Hence I refer you to => No backsies. = ]

However, since this situation is unique and for once favors Fighters, I am totally fine with such an amazing arrangement ^^.

This is all correct. I am referring specifically to the Thug/SA Fighter stacking (and not any other). I just wanted to be sure to clarify that you are not trading your first level's Sneak Attack--because you aren't. In all other cases, you cannot stack ACFs unless they give up different features (such as a Barbarian trading Fast Movement for Lion Totem and Rage for Whirling Frenzy at level 1).

[Talya]

a case could be made that daring outlaw doesn't even work with feat-rogue by RAW, let alone RAI.

Now, this is not at all clear, or unambiguous, but take a look.


Your rogue and swashbuckler levels also stack for the purpose of determining your sneak attack bonus damage. For example, a 7th-level rogue/4th-level swashbuckler would deal an extra 6d6 points of damage with her sneak attacks, as if she were an 11th-level rogue. Only Swashbuckler levels count as Rogue levels for determining the new sneak dice granted by the feat and these dice stack with other Sneak Dice classes.

For "Rogue and Swashbuckler levels to stack," at least one of these classes already granted sneak attack (obviously, rogue.) What the feat is doing is, as clearly stated in the last sentence, allowing 'Swashbuckler levels to count as rogue levels for determining the new sneak dice granted by the feat.' Okay, there are several possibilities here. A Swashbuckler/Feat-Rogue could end up with no bonus sneak attack at all, because the feat-rogue that the swashbuckler is counting toward doesn't grant sneak attack. I don't like this ruling though, because the feat doesn't specific swashbuckler counts as the same type of rogue as you're already using in the class. No, I'd rather argue that in a Swashbuckler/Feat-Rogue with Daring Outlaw, only the Swashbuckler levels are granting sneak attack, NOT the feat rogue levels. Daring Outlaw does not cause rogue hit dice to grant sneak attack at all. Rogue hit dice already grant sneak attack. IF you take that away, Daring outlaw doesn't restore it. It only gives sneak attack to the Swashbuckler hit dice.

[Answerer]

No, I'd rather argue that in a Swashbuckler/Feat-Rogue with Daring Outlaw, only the Swashbuckler levels are granting sneak attack, NOT the feat rogue levels.
I'm almost certain that's exactly what's being argued.