5e Swashbuckler

I suspect you're not misunderstanding it, but it is not horrendously overpowered either.

Initiative + Charisma

Sneak Attack even when not flanking

Yeah seems OP. Are there other conditions for making a sneak attack?

>>49277686
Has to be made with a Finesse weapon or a ranged weapon (in other words, has to be dex-based).

>>49277715
In other words, exactly what a swashbuckler will be using

>>49277669
It looks like you're still using the UA version. The full version is in the Sword Coast book.

It's not quite as overpowered when it's used by a player character (since rogues are a bit fragile and having a flanking buddy is a good idea for more reasons than just sneak attack), but if you give it to a boss (who's going to have more HP and likely be fighting by himself or herself anyway), it might be. If the mini-boss fight is with just the swashbuckler, I'd say do something else; but if it's with, say, a less-powerful swashbuckler and his two flunkies, then it should be fine.

>>49277762
thanks for the advice, i think i'll throw in a couple goons and weaken the boss a bit

File: 1471638868028.png (271KB, 507x507px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 507x507px

Character concepts more and more specific are becoming their own classes
5e is jumping the shark already

RIP in Peace

>>49277857
>their own classes
It is an archetype, dumbass.

PC Classes are for PCs. Don't give them to NPCs.

>>49277744
...Yes, typically? A question was asked and a question was answered.

>>49277669
I strongly caution against using player character creation rules for NPCs. It's unnecessary and typically will make them too strong and versatile, or at the very least cause the fight to drag on.

Just pick what seems appropriate yourself. You can just give features, it doesn't need prerequisite stuff.

>>49277878
Of what?

>>49277916
I was just adding on, explaining why that requirement isn't even a drawback at all

>>49277923
Rogue. Along with assassin, thief, inquisitive, and arcane trickster.

>>49277857
>Character concepts more and more specific are becoming their own classes
I don't think we've even got a single class other than Psion for 5E. And Psion isn't even complete as far as I recall.
Way to talk out your ass.

>>49277941 (me)
The "outside the PHB" was implicit and I shouldn't have to say it, right?

File: 1472777827743.jpg (53KB, 660x629px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 660x629px

>Morons speaking out of their ass wildly ITT

I do not even think half of /tg/ plays rpg's at this point.

>>49277968
So what's your opinion, weeb?

>>49277686
How often does sneak attack damage decide one of your encounters, and how frequently does the rogue in your party NOT get to sneak attack?

File: 1471657942586.jpg (96KB, 292x408px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 292x408px

>>49277975
That people who can't even google basic shit are idiots.

Related to the OP, no, that ability isn't overpowered. Considering Sneak attack is once a round and most rogues only get one attack a turn or maybe two if they multiclassed enough levels to get an extra attack.

Swashbucklers are an archetype, not a separate class. In short, there are a lot of retards here who don't use google or basic sense. If you're one of those retards i'm sorry but you should probably educate yourself.

>>49278028
Being able to apply sneak attack bonuses to every attack isn't strong?

File: 1471656733415.jpg (111KB, 392x446px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 392x446px

>>49278153
Sneak attacks are once a turn. realistically a rogue won't be getting them more than once a round in general. So at most they're gonna get one really loaded attack - but it'll just be loaded with dice. I'm a lot less scared of the dude who rolls random dice compared to the guy who does a shit load of static damage per hit.

The fighter with an action surge is a lot more terrifying to go up against.

>>49278176
You have to stop avatarfagging

Swashbucklers aren't any deadlier than other rogues, they're just less reliant on their party members.
Any other rogue gets their regularly scheduled sneak attack fiesta so long as they're attacking the same guy the fighter/barbarian/paladin/melee cleric/wild shaped druid/shillelagh druid/valor bard/really fucking desperate wizard is.

>>49278153
He's still capped to 1/round. The Assassin's 3rd level ability seems better than this to be honest.

File: 1471656694409.jpg (90KB, 392x365px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 392x365px

>>49278206
Call the cops they can't un image you.

>>49278282
They're about equal. The Swashbuckler will get more use out of constant bonuses to init, but, get the drop on the enemy and you can do a nice chunk of damage to it. Not as much as a fighter, but a good amount.

>>49277669
OP, if you're making bosses don't make PCs. Make more capable NPCs with legendary actions. Focus on negative conditions and not HP damage. Try giving lair actions.

If you do make a class as an NPC pick and choose abilities.

>>49277937
The valid weapons cap out at d8; Strength's a way more valuable damage stat, especially for NPCs who can trigger not-Sneak Attacks and other features while still doing 2d6+ damage.

To add to that, the version OP posted is from a test version of the archetype--the final one can only get the solo sneak attack when within 5 feet of the target, which means it's a major double-edged sword when compared to 'normal' Rogue SOP.

>>49278028
>>49278176
>>49278304
You seem like a less autistic Touhoufag, I support this.

File: 1471657286916.jpg (38KB, 385x434px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 385x434px

>>49278600
I could not possibly pull out out the autismo math he does.

But, just compare the damage numbers a rogue could pull out to a great sword fighter with the appropriate feat, or a polearm fighter with appropriate feats. One's clearly ahead in numbers, and its not by a small margin either.

>>49278650
It's not so much about the math as the shitposting anime avatarfag style and the 'think about this a bit' rules-focused content.

>>49278153
For balance purposes, the game assumes you get Sneak Attack every round. And most rogues do find a way. This ability just makes life a little easier and opens up different tactical options when playing with a rogue which is exactly the point.

>>49279539
It's more to be able to get Sneak Attack during Errol Flynn-style one-on-ones where you'll trade one-liners as well as attacks, perhaps after you call them out with Panache.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MqmpL6X_8w

Not to say that it's wrong to use it for anything, just that it's aimed at that--other applications is gravy.

Since you can't get extra sneak attacks even if you use the Swashbuckler's abilities, which are meant to work well with two-weapon fighting, it'll make their attacks sting like a bitch but I don't think it's a deal breaker compared to the kind of damage fighters or paladins or barbarians can pump out.

That said, you can be an absolute motherfucker with their Fancy Footwork ability meaning they don't draw attacks of opportunity from people they've attacked that turn. High Elf Swashbuckler, Cunning Action to dash every turn for a 60 foot movement, and use your racial cantrip to hit-and-run constantly with Sneak Attack Booming Blades. Tag them for a goodly amount of damage, run well outside their melee reach since they can't make a reaction attack against you, and then damage them again for free if they move at all.

>>49277669
1. The official Swashbuckler is in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.

2. It's not overpowered, it's to let a melee rogue go solo.

3. Don't make an NPC like a PC. It's a waste of time. Give it the stats and abilities you want it to have and calculate CR accordingly. Formulas for CR are in the DMG, pg. 275 or thereabout.

>>49277669
Wait, so that lets a Rogue sneak attack if there are no allies next to the target, as well as the default that lets them sneak attack when there are? So, sneak attack on every melee attack then.

>>49281618
In the final one they also have to be within 5 feet of the target; the one pictured is a test version.