Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Shaftiel 03-11-05, 12:46 PM	Hi! IMO lightly armored and/or low-Str Fighters are somewhere between "suboptimal" and "useless" (except for a couple of VERY specific builds, like spiked cahin mage slayers) and the easiest way to fix this is with a 3 level dip into Swashbuckler for Insightful Strike. But I dislike adding new basic classes that aren't radically different from the old classes... and it seems to me that it would be cleaner to get rid of Swashbuckler entirely and just add a new feat - Insightful Strike. Insightful Strike [General] You can place your finesse attacks where they deal extra damage. Prereqs: Weapon Finesse, Fighter Level 3 Benefit: Identical to the Swashbuckler ability of the same name. (See CW, p. 12 - it's not open source so I'm not going to reprint it here...) So I have a couple of questions for people... first, does this seem balanced? Should it have Ftr 2, Ftr 3 or Ftr 4 as a prereq? And finally, am I missing something with the Swashbuckler class? Does anyone *really* take it to, say, 14th level? Thanks, -Shaftiel
Nyferto 03-11-05, 12:49 PM	So you're dumping 3 levels of Swash for 3 levels of Fighter, which is 1-2 more than they'd usually bother with. I'd say Swash has a lot more going for it as a base class than just those levels - it's just that not everyone wants those abilities. P.S. if you're relying on finnesse alone and expecting to be good, then you've just made a crud character.
eRaz0r 03-11-05, 01:09 PM	So instead of one attribute for +attack and +damage, you've got +Dex to attack and +Int to damage... So aside from the obvious (you want to trade the Swashbuckler for a more customizable class - Fighter feats > Dodge+1, more skills for your character build), you also missed the caveat on the Insightful Strike ability (which limits the bonus to your SwashB level if it's less than your Int bonus). So unless you say "no greater than your level in fighter" your feat is more powerful than 3 levels of swashB. It makes it a very useful feat for Skill monkeys (Rogues and Bards) who usually have a high Dex and Int, but not alwasy STR. Hard to say whether it's really unbalancing or not. I still don't get why you'd rather have 3 fighter levels than 3 swashbuckler levels for such a character, except for the Armor Proficiencies to qualify for a prestige class, or some other feat prereq that is a fighter feat. Hmm.
Creeg 03-11-05, 01:14 PM	as eRazOr just hinted at (I think) Make Weapon Spec a Prereq and have it apply only to speced weapons
wonlee76 03-11-05, 01:22 PM	In CW, Insightful Strike is listed as an Epic Feat. Since its an epic feat, my guess is WoTC never intended Insightful Strike to be a regular feat. As such, any pre-epic feat that gives you insightful strike is overpowered (at least by WoTC).
Lexarius 03-11-05, 01:44 PM	Can you imagine a dragon with Insightful Strike? So, I propose the following version: "When making a melee attack using the Weapon Finesse feat, you may apply your Intelligence modifier to damage instead of Strength." I once played a half dragon bard/swashbuckler. He didn't use Weapon Finesse because he had great Strength. He also had great Intelligence. This worked out quite well for him. This version narrows down the target audience to creatures that have good Dex and Int but poor Strength. It's just too good for creatures with good Str and Int but poor Dex.
Shaftiel 03-11-05, 01:47 PM	...you also missed the caveat on the Insightful Strike ability (which limits the bonus to your SwashB level if it's less than your Int bonus).Nope, Swashbuckler's don't have this limit, which is why it makes a good 3-level dip for combat Rogues and similar semi-Fighters. (As opposed to all the "add Int to Dex" PrC classes, which is probably what you're thinking of.) Hard to say whether it's really unbalancing or not. I still don't get why you'd rather have 3 fighter levels than 3 swashbuckler levels for such a character, except for the Armor Proficiencies to qualify for a prestige class, or some other feat prereq that is a fighter feat. It's a tidiness issue. As I mentioned, I feel that the fighter class has a problem in that lightly armored and/or low-Str Fighters are somewhere between "suboptimal" and "useless" - and because the folks a WoTC have introduced both Swashbucklers and Skirmishers as alternate base classes, I suspect that at least someone there agrees. But unlike the Skirmisher, it seems to me that 85% of the appeal of the Swashbuckler comes from a non-scaling ability that's gained at a low level: Insightful Strike. And rather than introduce an entirely new base class for one class ability it seems like it would be simpler, tidier, and just as effective to simply add a new feat. as eRazOr just hinted at (I think) Make Weapon Spec a Prereq and have it apply only to speced weapons Hmmm. On the one hand, I agree that this would be almost guarenteed not to present any balance problems. But on the other hand, this would mean that the earliest a character could get it would be 6th level... which means that a Dex/Int based fighter would still be left swinging in the wind until 6th level and as far as dipping or quick fixes, the Swashbuckler would still be vastly superior. Hmmm. -Shaftiel
Creeg 03-11-05, 01:58 PM	as far as dipping or quick fixes, the Swashbuckler would still be vastly superior. Hmmm. Since I hate dipping, sounds good to me
Shaftiel 03-11-05, 02:03 PM	Can you imagine a dragon with Insightful Strike? So, I propose the following version: "When making a melee attack using the Weapon Finesse feat, you may apply your Intelligence modifier to damage instead of Strength." I once played a half dragon bard/swashbuckler. He didn't use Weapon Finesse because he had great Strength. He also had great Intelligence. This worked out quite well for him. This version narrows down the target audience to creatures that have good Dex and Int but poor Strength. It's just too good for creatures with good Str and Int but poor Dex.Hah. Actually, I use Draconomicon (which has some obscene dragon feats) and, when I level dragons, usually put them straight into PrCs - Blackguard is good. 3 or 4 levels of Fighter and 2 feats to get (about) +4 damage/attack certainly isn't game breaking, IMO. But I really like your version of the feat! Assuming I kept the prereqs as WF and Ftr 3 (or Ftr 2, or Ftr 4), does this seem like it could work? Is the other version better? Do people hate both versions? -Shaftiel
Grepp the Mighty 03-11-05, 03:21 PM	Interestingly enough, our party just fought a Drow swashbuckler two sessions ago. He carved us up pretty good, wielding two +2 keen rapiers. Not one of our tanks could stand toe-to-toe with him. It wasn't until we finished off his companions and concentrated all our attacks on him that he fell. (As a note, our party is 10th level and he was 11th.)
Ra-Tiel 03-11-05, 04:09 PM	Hello. Why not just make the prerequisites for the feat something along the lines of "Dex 13+, Int13+, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus with weapon, Ftr2+" and let the feat work only with the focused weapon? Greetings, _Ra-Tiel.