Duelist class (LONG, Mech in 2nd post) - Seek Critique

[Knight_Errant]

Duelist part 2--The Mech--LONG reply

Greetings again,
I apologize for the length of this post ahead of time and for the fact it took me so long to reply. I hope this helps some.

DUELIST

GAME RULE INFORMATION
Duelists have the following game statistics.
Abilities: Dexterity, Wisdom, Charisma and Intelligence are the most important ability scores for the duelist. Duelists rely on speed, accuracy, precision, perception and sharp whit over brawn to master their style of fighting. A common maxim among duelist masters is: “Defeating an opponent through knowledge of that opponent is more effective even than your skill with a blade.”
Alignment: Any Non-Chaotic
Hit Die: d10
Starting Gold: 5d4X10gp

This all looks good to me. The only question I would have raised was the hit die, however, when I read the armor restrictions it makes sense to beef up their hit points.

CLASS SKILLS
The class skills of the duelist are: Balance, Bluff, Craft, Diplomacy, Dueling*, Gather Information, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (Local), Perform, Profession, Sense Motive, Spot, Tumble and Use Rope.
Skill Points for 1st Level: (4+INT modifier) x4
Skill Points at Each Additional Level: 4+INT modifier

No problems with the skill points or starting skill points; I do however wonder about Gather Information and Perform. While I can see both as being useful to the Duelist, I don’t think they quite fit the concept of the class—insofar as I understand it. If I had to choose one of these to keep, I could see the argument for Perform; though it is shaky IMO. Gather Info on the other hand, seems out of place as a class skill—useful, but not necessary to the class.

Diplomacy vs. Intimidate: This is another sticky area IMO. Most classes grant one or the other and not both. The rationale for which is pretty clear; either you convince people (i.e. diplomacy) that your way of thinking is correct, or you bully them into doing your bidding (i.e. intimidate). I can see your thinking here (at least I think I can)—the duelist can choose which way he would like to travel the road of personal interaction; however, many of the abilities you have listed for the class seem more in line with Intimidate than Diplomacy.
Overall, I’d say drop diplomacy and keep intimidate.

NEW CLASS SKILL
DUELING (Charisma): The duelist uses this skill to gather their focus and concentration in combat, and especially in a Formal Duel.
Check: If the duelist attacks a flat-footed opponent immediately after drawing any weapon for which they may use the Duelist’s Grace ability, they may deal extra damage based on the result of their Dueling skill check (as follows).
Code:
Check Result Extra Damage Check Result Extra Damage
11-15 +1d6 36-40 +6d6
16-20 +2d6 41-45 +7d6
21-25 +3d6 46-50 +8d6
26-30 +4d6 51+ +9d6 (max)
31-35 +5d6

This seems to be very similar to the OA rules for Iaijutsu. I don’t see any inherent problems with using this system for the Duelist. No changes recommended here.

CLASS FEATURES
All of the following are class features for the Duelist.

Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Duelists gains proficiency with the following Weapon Groups (as per Unearthed Arcana weapon group feats) and are proficient in light armor but not with shield.
Weapon Group (Light Blades): Dagger, Punching Dagger, Rapier, and Short Sword.
Weapon Group (Duelist Blades): Cutlass, Khopesh, Main Gauche, Long Sword, Saber, Scimitar (including Daphan Scimitar), Singing Sword, Smallsword, Soldano Blade, Sword Cane, Torres Blade, and the specialized rapiers: Aldana Blade, Dietrich Sword, Gallegos Blade and Zepeda Blade.
(See “3E Weapons & Armor.doc” for descriptions of new items. Note – many of these are from Forgotten Realms or Swashbuckling Adventures.)

The only suggestions I would make here is to ditch the weapon groups from UA. While I don’t necessarily think they are a bad thing—it is difficult to make this class fit with other generic settings which may want to use these rules. The bottom line is you are better off writing it as generic as possible and keeping additional rules like this for your own games.

I would simply assign them weapons they are proficient in, much like the other core classes, and list their armor and shield proficiency here. The special weapons you have listed can remain in parenthesis for your own notes if you like, but I’d take them out of the list as “class” proficiencies.

Finally, I don’t see any real issues with the weapons listed as being inappropriate; though I do wonder why you chose to list them this way. I would also point out (to those who are dense like myself) that there are no ranged weapons listed here. I like that.

Duelist’s Grace (Ex): With any weapon from the Light Blade or Duelist Blade weapon groups or any other weapon normally allowed to be finessed, the duelist gains the benefit of the Weapon Finesse feat, even if they or their weapon would normally not qualify for the feat.

And this maybe why you did it that way afterall. However, the same end can be accomplished by stating that the duelist may apply the weapon finesse feat to any weapon on his class list—even if that weapon is not normally allowed by the feat.
For simplicity sake, I understand what you are doing here, I just think that as a core class, you should stick to the format of the core rules.

Denigrating Banter (Ex): Duelists become experts at sizing up their opponents and assaulting the opponent’s self-confidence and pride with taunts and jibes. At 6th level their skill with this tactic reaches a fine-tuning that allows them to truly demoralize their opponents with naught but words. The duelist gains a +4 bonus to Intimidate checks and can demoralize an opponent (as a standard action as described in the Intimidate skill description in the Player’s Handbook).

This is where our concepts of what a Duelist should be able to do mech-wise start to differ. From a roleplaying standpoint, I can see where this would be useful for a duelist. However, I’m not sure that I like this as an ability of the class per se; the reason being that I don’t see this as a function of someone who fights single opponents in a structured setting (for the most part). While it is an interesting ability to grant them, I don’t think it truly fits with the remaining abilities.

That said, I have noted that your “archetype” for this class was Archibald Cunningham from Rob Roy; therefore I can see where the concept for this ability came from. The only comment I can offer to this is that perhaps that is too narrow a focus for a core class concept. Futhermore, it is a difference of opinion, but one that I think merits some thought.

Does this really need to be a class ability?

Finally, this leads back into my comment about class skills. This ability (and those similar to it) would seem to indicate that Intimidate is the only necessary persuasion skill the duelist requires; thereby negating diplomacy as an option.

Now for some comments on the other abilities similar to this one above:

Jibing Insult (Ex): Once per day, a duelist of 7th level may use these skills of taunting their enemies in such a way that their banter and jibbing insults can be as effective as a weapon. When the duelist uses this extra-special jibing insult (a free action), their next attack gains a bonus on the attack and damage rolls equal to their Charisma bonus (minimum +1). As the duelist gains levels, they may make a jibing insult twice per day at 12th level, and thrice per day at 17th level.

This doesn’t seem broken or unbalanced but I do wonder about its usefulness. Using it as a free action might be a bit questionable since most of the bards abilities require a standard action and don’t accomplish nearly as much as this does.

Improved Denigrating Banter (Ex): A duelist’s practice at this technique improves to the point that they can size-up their opponents and assault them with denigrating banter, taunts and jibes with just a quick inspection. At 11th level their skill with this tactic reaches its pinnacle allowing the duelist to demoralize an opponent as a move action rather than as a standard action.

Again, my hesitation here is based on the fact that the core class who is supposed to have abilities like this, i.e. the Bard, does not. Therefore, I don’t see this as balanced in the grand scheme of things.

Intimidating Presence (Ex): At 18th level, the duelist’s reputation for death, their prowess, and their swift tongue have become legend. When the duelist draws any weapon with which they can use the Weapon Finesse feat, opponents within 30’ must succeed a Will save (DC 20 + duelist’s Charisma modifier) or become panicked for 4d6 rounds (if they have 4 or fewer Hit Dice) or shaken for 4d6 rounds (if they have between 5 and 19 Hit Dice). Creatures with 20 or more Hit Dice are unaffected. Any foe that succeeds the Will save cannot be affected again by the same duelist’s intimidating presence for 24 hours.

This ability I like to a certain extent, though as I mentioned before, I’m not sure I like any of these “intimidation line” abilities. If I had to choose one to keep, this would more than likely be it; however, it does again trump the Bard class (not that its hard to do that accidentally).

To sum up what I’ve been rambling on about for a while: I don’t think that the duelist necessarily needs abilities that build off of the intimidate skill in this fashion. I would think that they would receive abilities based on single combat and showmanship rather than improved bard-like abilities.

Afterall, they are a combat oriented class; not an armed insult thrower. I think their abilities should reflect their training instead of focusing on a role-playing dependent line of abilities.

My solution: remove the “banter” based abilities and replace them with more combat oriented skills and abilities. That said, let me make one final comment regarding a few of the combat abilities the duelist does have at this time.

Weakening Strike (Ex): At 14th level, a duelist that scores a critical hit against an opponent that is not immune to critical hits, also deals an additional 2 points of Strength damage to that creature.

Wounding Strike (Ex): At 19th level, a duelist that scores a critical hit against an opponent that is not immune to critical hits, also deals an additional 2 points of Constitution damage to that creature. This is in addition to the Strength damage dealt by the Weakening Strike ability.

I would avoid abilities that deal ability point damage were I you. This class (if it attacks someone flat-footed or in a formal duel) has a lot of dice to keep track of initially; adding ability point damage to that equation only complicates things.
The only rational I can offer for my dislike of this type of ability rule-wise is that no other base class gains abilities like this (with perhaps the exception of the Rogue).

Here are some suggestions for abilities that would make sense for the duelist to have (Name of the book is listed at the top, page numbers in parenthesis):

Sword & Fist
Improved Feint (21)
Exhaust Opponent (22)
Roar of the Crowd (22)
Make them Bleed (22)
Elaborate Parry (18)

Swashbuckling Adventures
Counterattack (131)
Disarm Master (132)
Extra Finesse (133)
Parry (139)
Riposte (141)
Slip (143)
Stay on their Tail (143)

This list is by no means complete, just a rough outline of some sources you might want to look at for ideas. Remember that granting the duelist bonus feats with a set list to choose from could also accomplish the same end.

Hope that helps some, looking forward to comments.

 

[Tywyll]

Thanks for the reply and comments.

In the core classes, the armor restriction can be a hinderance but it is offset by their offensive capabilities which are more specialized than the fighter. Fighters are bland because they are more well rounded between offense and defense. Also keep in mind that the swashbuckler (and duelist) really arent meant to be front line fighters. They excell in one-on-one combat, duels. They can also wear magical armor and protective devices such as bracers of armor, amulates of natural armor etc. They "Can" strap on heavier armor in dire need, just as can rangers, it just isnt in their normal repetoir.

However, with that said, the duelist does get the Defense Bonus against their designated opponent. It isnt much but it is something. Do you really think this should be increased? What are the specifics on the Unfettered's defenses again?

I also use as an House Optional Rule: "Duelists may choose to forgo proficiency in light armor to instead train in the Unarmored Defense Proficiency (Beginner)* feat."
* Swashbuckling Adventures

no problem. I'm always interested in unarmored varients, simply because those types of fighters have always appealed to me over the more heavy tank style character.

That being said... I realize that in a general campaign with both Fighters and Duelists side by side, the Duelists' role would not be as much a front line meat bag. However, in many campaigns they might be. Since DnD allows the Martial Artist (monk) to benefit from two attributes in a fight, and gain an all the time dodge bonus, why can't an unarmored 'finesse' warrior expect to gain the same benefits? Maybe its just because the majority of my players would rather be tumbling off chandeliers rather than tanking toe to toe, but since DnD allows for some archtypes, I don't see why others shouldn't be feasible.

It depends on the campaign style, of course, but I have far more stealthy, gritty fighters than up in your face style guys.

That being said, my specific suggestion goes like this:
Allow them to benefit from another stat when unarmored. Perhaps as a higher level ability (say 8th or 10th) allow them to benefit from said stat while wearing light armor (like the Unfettered and the Bladesinger). Treat it like Canny Defense and use either Intelligence (canny, tricky fighting) or Charisma (flashy, showy, distractions). They would lose this bonus when flat footed or restrained.

Allow the Dodge bonus to work versus all attackers, like the Monk bonus.

The unfettered has an all the time dodge bonus they can get while wearing light armor, it begins at +1 I think and caps out at +7. They also get a Parry that they can apply, like Dodge, to one attack a round, and numerically functions like the new Canny Defense, but only against one attacker. It starts working only on melee but eventually can be applied to single target spells.

Hope that helps.

 

[Khaalis]

That being said... I realize that in a general campaign with both Fighters and Duelists side by side, the Duelists' role would not be as much a front line meat bag. However, in many campaigns they might be. Since DnD allows the Martial Artist (monk) to benefit from two attributes in a fight, and gain an all the time dodge bonus, why can't an unarmored 'finesse' warrior expect to gain the same benefits? Maybe its just because the majority of my players would rather be tumbling off chandeliers rather than tanking toe to toe, but since DnD allows for some archtypes, I don't see why others shouldn't be feasible.

I think that is shied away from this style so as not to step on the toes of the Monk. Also, many feel the monk is close to or is outright broken being one of the most powerful of the classes. There is also the theoretical response. Monks train arduously (thus the Lawfulness) to gain the benefits they do. They are masters of martial arts which in most cases are supposed to be a self-defense combat styles. Weapon fighters are, in general, not so dedicated to self-defense. Weapons in general lend to a more offensive tactic. These, I think are the basic reasons why the melee weapon classes are stripped of most inherent defensive abilities. This is why I shied away from it, as much as I agree. I was afraid it would overbalance the class to give them an inherent AC bonus.

That being said, my specific suggestion goes like this:
Allow them to benefit from another stat when unarmored. Perhaps as a higher level ability (say 8th or 10th) allow them to benefit from said stat while wearing light armor (like the Unfettered and the Bladesinger). Treat it like Canny Defense and use either Intelligence (canny, tricky fighting) or Charisma (flashy, showy, distractions). They would lose this bonus when flat footed or restrained.

Allow the Dodge bonus to work versus all attackers, like the Monk bonus.

The unfettered has an all the time dodge bonus they can get while wearing light armor, it begins at +1 I think and caps out at +7. They also get a Parry that they can apply, like Dodge, to one attack a round, and numerically functions like the new Canny Defense, but only against one attacker. It starts working only on melee but eventually can be applied to single target spells.

* Stat when unarmored: I had though of this but was afraid it would be unbalancing. My preference for the style of the class would be to use cold intellect and calculation (Intelligence). I do like the idea of the AC bonus being useable with light armor (but no heavier).

Choices would be…

From Duelist SRD
Canny Defense (Ex): When not wearing armor or using a shield, a duelist adds 1 point of their Intelligence bonus (if any) per duelist class level to their Dexterity bonus to modify Armor Class while wielding a melee weapon. If a duelist is caught flat-footed or otherwise denied their Dexterity bonus, they also lose this bonus.

Or from Monk SRD
AC Bonus (Ex): When unarmored and unencumbered, the duelist adds their Intelligence bonus (if any) to their AC. This bonus to AC applies even against touch attacks or when the duelist is flat-footed. They lose this bonus when thy are immobilized or helpless, when they wear any armor, when they carry a shield, or when they carry a medium or heavy load.

* Dodge Bonus: Actually a monk’s level bonus isn’t a Dodge bonus, it is just a flat unnamed bonus to AC. From the SRD ” In addition, a monk gains a +1 bonus to AC at 5th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every five monk levels thereafter (+2 at 10th, +3 at 15th, and +4 at 20th level).”. I definitely don’t know if I want to steal the monk’s thunder on this ability, especially in combination with the INT bonus to AC. However, the Monk’s +4 is still more balanced I think than +7 that you think the unfettered get, especially in light of the duelist’s offensive capability.

* Unfettered Bonus: The problem I think with using that, is that the duelist surpasses the unfettered in class abilities. I will have to check a copy of AU when I get the chance, but if I remember correctly the unfettered’s AC bonuses are one of its primary class features, am I correct?

In either regard if I add the AC effects, I will reduce the HD from d10 to d8 to compensate, otherwise the duelist will exceed the Fighter as the melee of choice and it shouldn’t. It should be an equal but different choice.

Another question is when to give the bonuses? Currently the Dodge bonus is 5/10/15/20. This actually coincides with the Monk’s flat AC bonus. Would you condone Canny Defense at 1st or 2nd and then the Dodge bonus at 5-20?

Thoughts?

Greetings again, I apologize for the length of this post ahead of time and for the fact it took me so long to reply. I hope this helps some.

Anything is a help, either for better ideas or to help concrete the logic behind choices.

Hit Die: d10
This all looks good to me. The only question I would have raised was the hit die, however, when I read the armor restrictions it makes sense to beef up their hit points.

This was the determining factor, especially when compared with the Swashbuckler. However, if I follow the AC ideas put forward by Tywyll, I will reduce this back to d8 to balance the two aspects.

No problems with the skill points or starting skill points; I do however wonder about Gather Information and Perform. While I can see both as being useful to the Duelist, I don’t think they quite fit the concept of the class—insofar as I understand it. If I had to choose one of these to keep, I could see the argument for Perform; though it is shaky IMO. Gather Info on the other hand, seems out of place as a class skill—useful, but not necessary to the class.

Perform is an obvious choice, though not all Duelists will bother with it. Many duelists are showman. They make a show of their skills and know how to work a crowd just as well as they know how to toy with an opponent. Take the example duelist of Archibald. He knows very well how to work a crowd to his advantage, and earns their favor regardless of the fact that he is a worm.

Gather Information fits the D&D implications of the class. First, the duelist is a social profession. Also, keep in mind that in many places duels are illegal. It falls within the bounds of GI to learn of an area’s local news, laws, rumors, etc. This is a very important skill for the accomplished duelist. Not only to become aware of local custom for duels, where to have them, when, what places to avoid – but more importantly to dig up the information, rumors and news on people they will need to spur their “insults”.

Also remember that some duelists act as "public assassin" either outright killing someone for pay in an "honorable" duel or assassinating someones honor by public humiliation.

Diplomacy vs. Intimidate: This is another sticky area IMO. Most classes grant one or the other and not both. The rationale for which is pretty clear; either you convince people (i.e. diplomacy) that your way of thinking is correct, or you bully them into doing your bidding (i.e. intimidate). I can see your thinking here (at least I think I can)—the duelist can choose which way he would like to travel the road of personal interaction; however, many of the abilities you have listed for the class seem more in line with Intimidate than Diplomacy.
Overall, I’d say drop diplomacy and keep intimidate.

This is again, one that I think falls to individual taste. Like Perform, not every duelist will be skilled in both, though they Should be, but don’t have to be. The fictional blurb in the beginning is a perfect example. Diego is skilled in both Intimidation and Diplomacy. Keep in mind that Diplomacy also involves knowing the correct customs/etiquette for the situation. He knows when to be polite and gentlemanly as well as to act respectfully to the magistrate, yet is doesn’t prevent him from intimidating his foes. On the flip side, Mirt, also an accomplished duelist shows no hint of diplomacy. He is gruff, crude and to the point. It’s a matter of style, background and personal influences. I don’t think it hurts to keep both skills as viable to the class.

NEW CLASS SKILL
DUELING (Charisma): The duelist uses this skill to gather their focus and concentration in combat, and especially in a Formal Duel.

This seems to be very similar to the OA rules for Iaijutsu. I don’t see any inherent problems with using this system for the Duelist. No changes recommended here.

Correct. It is from OA Iajutsu, chosen as such to be an already written rule rather than inventing a new one, though if I remember correctly, I tweaked the skill results to make them a bit harder to achieve… need to recheck that.

CLASS FEATURES
Weapon and Armor Proficiency:
The only suggestions I would make here is to ditch the weapon groups from UA. While I don’t necessarily think they are a bad thing—it is difficult to make this class fit with other generic settings which may want to use these rules. The bottom line is you are better off writing it as generic as possible and keeping additional rules like this for your own games.

I would simply assign them weapons they are proficient in, much like the other core classes, and list their armor and shield proficiency here. The special weapons you have listed can remain in parenthesis for your own notes if you like, but I’d take them out of the list as “class” proficiencies.

Finally, I don’t see any real issues with the weapons listed as being inappropriate; though I do wonder why you chose to list them this way. I would also point out (to those who are dense like myself) that there are no ranged weapons listed here. I like that.

Duelist’s Grace (Ex): With any weapon from the Light Blade or Duelist Blade weapon groups or any other weapon normally allowed to be finessed, the duelist gains the benefit of the Weapon Finesse feat, even if they or their weapon would normally not qualify for the feat.

And this maybe why you did it that way afterall. However, the same end can be accomplished by stating that the duelist may apply the weapon finesse feat to any weapon on his class list—even if that weapon is not normally allowed by the feat.
For simplicity sake, I understand what you are doing here, I just think that as a core class, you should stick to the format of the core rules.

Good points that have merit on “core format. However, as you pointed out, it is because it makes it more difficult to assign the class abilities later on that are dependant on weapon proficiency: Duelist’s Grace, Swift Reflexes and Precision Strike. I would rather it be:

Duelist’s Grace (Ex): With any weapon from the Light Blade or Duelist Blade weapon groups or any other weapon normally allowed to be finessed, the duelist gains the benefit of the Weapon Finesse feat, even if they or their weapon would normally not qualify for the feat.

Rather than…

Duelist’s Grace (Ex): With any of the following weapons: Dagger, Punching Dagger, Rapier, Short Sword, Cutlass, Khopesh, Main Gauche, Long Sword, Saber, Scimitar (including Daphan Scimitar), Singing Sword, Smallsword, Soldano Blade, Sword Cane, Torres Blade, Aldana Blade, Dietrich Sword, Gallegos Blade and Zepeda Blade; or any other weapon normally allowed to be finessed, the duelist gains the benefit of the Weapon Finesse feat, even if they or their weapon would normally not qualify for the feat.

And I definitely do NOT want it to state “with any weapon the Duelist is proficient with” due to the potential mess that would be caused by multiclassing and the Fighter/Duelist using Duelist’s Grace on the Great Sword…

Being worded as a “group” really doesn’t change anything mechanic’s wise. It is still similar to a Wizard’s weapon list – stating only specific weapons rather than the core handbook “Simple” or “Martial” groups which are totally inappropriate for the class. As you note, no ranged weapon other than the dagger.

Denigrating Banter
This is where our concepts of what a Duelist should be able to do mech-wise start to differ. From a roleplaying standpoint, I can see where this would be useful for a duelist. However, I’m not sure that I like this as an ability of the class per se; the reason being that I don’t see this as a function of someone who fights single opponents in a structured setting (for the most part). While it is an interesting ability to grant them, I don’t think it truly fits with the remaining abilities.

That said, I have noted that your “archetype” for this class was Archibald Cunningham from Rob Roy; therefore I can see where the concept for this ability came from. The only comment I can offer to this is that perhaps that is too narrow a focus for a core class concept. Futhermore, it is a difference of opinion, but one that I think merits some thought.

Does this really need to be a class ability?

Does it “Need” to be a class ability? No, there is no such thing as “Need” in a class design. Yes the archetype was based on characters from Rob Roy as well as some other typical characters of fiction such as:
Inigo Montoya and Count Rugen…
“Hell. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die!”
”STOP SAYING THAT!”
Or (not as appropriate but a comical example)
Connor McLeod and Mr. Basset “I apologize, Mr. Bassett, for calling your wife a bloated wart-hog. I trust honor has been satisfied, and bid you good day.””
Or the Three Musketeers, etc.

I was going for a feel to the duelist that differentiates them from just any other generic sword swinger like the Swashbuckler or the DMG’s bland Duelist. Something more to the flavor of the original Duelist (which I realize few people have access to anymore) or along the more interesting niche of the Hexblade. I wanted abilities with flavor and flair as much as just combat mech. The mech itself was just adapted from existing classes.

Finally, this leads back into my comment about class skills. This ability (and those similar to it) would seem to indicate that Intimidate is the only necessary persuasion skill the duelist requires; thereby negating diplomacy as an option.

See the statements on this above.

Now for some comments on the other abilities similar to this one above:
Jibing Insult
This doesn’t seem broken or unbalanced but I do wonder about its usefulness. Using it as a free action might be a bit questionable since most of the bards abilities require a standard action and don’t accomplish nearly as much as this does.

I will have to dig, as its been a while since I completed the build, but I am almost positive that this is an ability directly from an existing class, possibly the Samurai’s Great Kia? (Don’t have books handy.) It would be rather odd to make the ability anything more than a free action considering speaking is considered a free action. A Bard’s abilities require more than simply speaking, it involves performing, not just making a statement. At most it wouldn’t be more than a move-equivalent but that just seems silly.

Improved Denigrating Banter
Again, my hesitation here is based on the fact that the core class who is supposed to have abilities like this, i.e. the Bard, does not. Therefore, I don’t see this as balanced in the grand scheme of things.

Again, I will need to dig up the source but I am almost positive this is as written in another core class (if I remember correctly either the CW Samurai or Swashbuckler which were used as the templates for this build).

Intimidating Presence
This ability I like to a certain extent, though as I mentioned before, I’m not sure I like any of these “intimidation line” abilities. If I had to choose one to keep, this would more than likely be it; however, it does again trump the Bard class (not that its hard to do that accidentally).

Actually it doesn’t trump the Bard. The bard is not designed to be an intimidating fighter. Granted, in my opinion I’m still not really sure what it IS designed to be, but its definitely not anything close to the role of the duelist. Their performance abilities are based around either Inspiring allies or controlling the minds of others. Its not a fair comparison.

To sum up what I’ve been rambling on about for a while: I don’t think that the duelist necessarily needs abilities that build off of the intimidate skill in this fashion. I would think that they would receive abilities based on single combat and showmanship rather than improved bard-like abilities.

Afterall, they are a combat oriented class; not an armed insult thrower. I think their abilities should reflect their training instead of focusing on a role-playing dependent line of abilities.

My solution: remove the “banter” based abilities and replace them with more combat oriented skills and abilities. That said, let me make one final comment regarding a few of the combat abilities the duelist does have at this time.

As you have stated its not your personal taste to use the “Intimidation” line tactics, which would also mean you don’t like many of the existing CW classes?

I am not yet convinced to agree. I think the class uses the abilities as flavor and a bit of forced role-play as well as useful tactics to the style of fighter they are supposed to be. All of their abilities shouldn’t be geared toward mass combat – its not what they do. And reducing them to only 1 “intimidation” line ability removes the logic of them. They are designed to be a part of the class, not the oddball ability that seems to make no sense among the others, which is why they take up 6 ability slots. I might be convinced to drop this down to 3, and open it up to 3 more “pure fighter” oriented abilities, but overall I thin the concept should remain or they lose their flavor. It would be like having the Hexblade but taking away its Hex ability.

Weakening Strike & Wounding Strike
I would avoid abilities that deal ability point damage were I you. This class (if it attacks someone flat-footed or in a formal duel) has a lot of dice to keep track of initially; adding ability point damage to that equation only complicates things.
The only rational I can offer for my dislike of this type of ability rule-wise is that no other base class gains abilities like this (with perhaps the exception of the Rogue).

Again, I will have to verify the reference, but these are also direct from existing class(es). Weakening Strike and Wounding Strike are from the Swashbuckler though Weakening is also the same as the Rogue’s.

As I stated in the beginning of the 1st post the Swashbuckler and Samurai were used heavily as base templates for abilities to create this class to be balanced with the CW core classes as an addition to those classes.

Here are some suggestions for abilities that would make sense for the duelist to have (Name of the book is listed at the top, page numbers in parenthesis):
Sword & Fist: Improved Feint (21), Exhaust Opponent (22), Roar of the Crowd (22), Make them Bleed (22), Elaborate Parry (18)

Swashbuckling Adventures: Counterattack (131), Disarm Master (132), Extra Finesse (133), Parry (139), Riposte (141), Slip (143), Stay on their Tail (143)

This list is by no means complete, just a rough outline of some sources you might want to look at for ideas. Remember that granting the duelist bonus feats with a set list to choose from could also accomplish the same end.

Are Swashbuckling Adventures feats OGL? Need to check that as well. Also not sure I like the whole “Parry” feat line. I will have to re-look at them.

Hope that helps some, looking forward to comments.

All of the comments help. Not sure I am swayed on the loss of 8 of the 16 abilities I gave them however. The duelist is not just a swashbuckler aka light armored sword swinger, nor are they a main-line tank. They are meant to be a flavor oriented niche fighter. I look forward to more comments, and I will post more once I re-look at some of the abilities to denote sources and look at other mentioned.

Thanks!

 

[Khaalis]

Ok... ability sources:

Duelist’s Grace: Slightly modified from Swashbuckler (minor expansion to weapons allowed by Finesse).
Swift Reflexes: Samurai (Iajutsu Master, still restricted weapons)
Precision Strike: Swashbuckler (Insightful Strike)
Defense Bonus: Swashbuckler (Grace) - Looking at replacing this with Monk’s defense bonus or Duelist PrC’s Canny Defense
Denigrating Banter: Samurai (Staredown)
Jibing Insult: Samurai (Ki Smite)
Swift Strike (Ex): Samurai and Duelist PrC
Improved Denigrating Banter: Samurai (Improved Staredown but only single target)
Weakening Strike: Swashbuckler (Weakening Critical), Rogue (Crippling Strike)
Intimidating Presence: Samurai (Frightful Presence)
Wounding Strike: Swashbuckler (Wounding Critical)

Proposed abilities (WotC):
Improved Feint (Now 3.5 PHB) - You can make a Bluff check to feint in combat as a move action.

This makes sense for the fighting style, though I don’t know if it should also require the pre-requisite Combat Expertise. Granted CE is a defensive skill, but that takes up 2 class ability slots to one desired effect. The other issue is this is a specific type of duelist fencing. I don’t think all duelists would necessarily fight this way.
Just as I don’t see them all wanting a feat such as “Defensive Strike” from CW (+4 bonus to attack after successful total defense).
This is also similar to Denigrating Banter except it is for Bluff (Feint) instead of Intimidate (Demoralize). They would both fit but are two different styles.


Exhaust Opponent (Sword & Fist Gladiator) – Deals 1d6 non-lethal damage on failed Fort save (DC 15 + 1/round of combat past the 3rd).

While this has an interesting flair to it, I am not so keen on the mechanic. I am not a fan of Non-lethal damage attacks unless the class is specifically oriented to it. This would be even more limiting than the Banter/Intimidate skills as almost anything with a humanoid intelligence (3+) and a common language can be affected, but not a lot of things are subject to non-lethal damage.


Roar of the Crowd (Sword & Fist Gladiator) – When watched by 6+ non-combatants, make a Perform check (DC15) to get +1 attack and damage for the fight.

This is very similar to Jibing Insult but is EXTREMELY more limiting, much more-so than the Jibing in my opinion as it requires an audience.

Make them Bleed (Sword & Fist Gladiator) – Basically a limited version of the magical wounding weapon property, bleeding +1hp/round for up to 10 minus Con bonus rounds, and is cumulative.

Personally I don’t like the mechanic very much. It creates a lot of extra book keeping just to do excess damage. Each hit creates another wound that needs to be tracked independent of the others. It is also limited only to slashing weapons. For this kind of rule I would rather just see an added +1d6 damage. I also don’t see this as too different from the ability score damage abilities from the Swashbuckler except the swashbuckler’s ability is to debilitate rather than just kill faster.

Elaborate Parry: (SRD Duelist) - At 7th level and higher, if a duelist chooses to fight defensively or use total defense in melee combat, she gains an additional +1 dodge bonus to AC for each level of duelist she has.
This would follow the same ideals as presented earlier by Tywyll for AC. It also follows into the line of Combat Expertise and other “pure defense” styles. This would also have to be changed to per 2 levels.


Proposed abilities (Swashbuckling Adventures): These Are OGL
Counterattack – When attack may use an attack AoO to attack back, but must declare before they attack and you both suffer –2 AC. Req: Combat Reflexes which is sub-optimal choice for a primarily one-on-one fighter.

Don’t really like the mechanic since it warps the use of the AoO. I would prefer Defensive Strike (CW, mentioned above). Same relative idea without stretching the rules.

Disarm Master – On successful disarm take an immediate AoO on that opponent.

This could work with Improved Disarm in a chain, but is very specific to one type of melee and is limited to armed opponents only.

Extra Finesse – Add Dex to damage instead of Strength.

This is a good one. Maybe use this instead of a “Wounding” or “Ability score” damage?

Parry & Riposte – I wont even bother trying to list this mechanic. Its very cumbersome. Basically attack rolls to defeat attack rolls and if the attack roll is defeated by the counter make a new attack of your own. A bit messy for my taste – especially if both opponents have the abilities.

Slip – If an opponent misses you on an attack they provoke an AoO.

Not sure how I feel about this. With a mixture of rogue this could be really ugly.

Stay on their Tail – Ref save when opponent moves out of threatened area to move 5’ to keep them in threatened area.

This only works if they only took a 5’ step, which is rather limiting, especially since you can make a 5’ step yourself anyway, unless you already have done so.


Bonus Feats
As for the core idea of the class I would prefer to avoid using the “Bonus Feat” option. I would rather add a string of related combat feats similar to the Monk and Ranger “Combat Styles”. It would still grant choice of styles but it wouldn’t be so blandly generic. The other problem would be restricting the feats of choice as there really are, technically, Many feats that “could” be associated to a duelist’s style depending on the personal taste of the duelist (normally covered by the standard bonus feats).

We could do three (or more) combat styles: Skill or Intimidation or Defense. As an example off the cuff, something like…
Level X: Improved Feint or Denigrating Banter or Combat Expertise
Level Y: Improved Disarm or Jibing Insult or Elaborate Parry
Level Z: Disarm Master or Intimidating Presence or Defensive Strike

Thoughts?

Edit: Unfettered AC bonus = +1 at 1,3,6,9,12,15,18 (+7 max)

 

[Turanil]

Here are my short comments on the class. I didn't read the other posts for they waere way too long (plus text in deep blue on a black background is really painful to read!).

- Fluff Text: it's excellent. A new class should have more justifications than just say "Hey look at my set of cool special features!".

- Skills: original skills were Balance, Bluff, Craft, Diplomacy, Dueling*, Gather Information, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (Local), Perform, Profession, Sense Motive, Spot, Tumble and Use Rope.. I disagree with many of them which are IMO not justified by the class concept. So I would rather have: Balance, Bluff, Craft, Diplomacy, Jump, Knowledge (Local), Profession, Sense Motive, Spot, and Tumble. Also, I think that 2 skill points per level would probably be better, but I would need to see a table for the special features progression, bab, and saving throws.

- Basics: obviously bab of fighter, but what about saves. I envision at least a good Reflex saves, but what about good Fortitude saves?

- Class Features: It would help to see a table. For one thing, I would have given them an AC bonus similar to that afforded to monks. I think it only makes sense for that class. the Defense bonus seems to do that but not as effectively (it's on the poor side of things), and I think the two could stack. For the other abilities, I think they need be refined (too much for me to review here).

 

[Khaalis]

It would help to see a table.

Just a quick response. The table is there, but I am assuming your browser cant see it? Here is a pure text version.

.............Base
Class......Attack...............SAVES
Level......Bonus....Fort.........Ref.......Will.........Special
1...........+1.........+0..........+2.........+0.........Duelist’s Grace
2...........+2.........+0..........+3.........+0.........Swift Reflexes
3...........+3.........+1..........+3.........+1.........Precision Strike
4...........+4.........+1..........+4.........+1.........-----
5...........+5.........+1..........+4.........+1.........Defense Bonus +1
6...........+6.........+2..........+5.........+2.........Denigrating Banter
7...........+7.........+2..........+5.........+2.........Jibing Insult 1/day
8...........+8.........+2..........+6.........+2.........Swift Strike
9...........+9.........+3..........+6.........+3.........-----
10.........+10........+3..........+7.........+3.........Defense Bonus +2
11.........+11........+3..........+7.........+3.........Improved Denigrating Banter
12.........+12........+4..........+8.........+4.........Jibing Insult 2/day
13.........+13........+4..........+8.........+4.........-----
14.........+14........+4..........+9.........+4.........Weakening Strike
15.........+15........+5..........+9.........+5.........Defense Bonus +3
16.........+16........+5..........+10........+5.........-----
17.........+17........+5..........+10........+5.........Jibing Insult 3/day
18.........+18........+6..........+11........+6.........Intimidating Presence
19.........+19........+6..........+11........+6.........Wounding Strike
20.........+20........+6..........+12........+6.........Defense Bonus +4

 

[Khaalis]

Defensive Options

Here are the proposed options for an AC bonus.

1) D10 HD and
Unarmored Defense (Ex): When not wearing armor or using a shield, the duelist may add 1 point of their Intelligence bonus (if any) per duelist class level to their Dexterity bonus to modify Armor Class while wielding a melee weapon. In addition, the duelist gains a +1 bonus to AC at 5th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every five duelist levels thereafter (+2 at 10th, +3 at 15th, and +4 at 20th level). If the duelist is caught flat-footed or is otherwise denied their Dexterity bonus (such as when immobilized or helpless) they lose these bonuses. They also lose these bonuses when they wear any armor, when they carry a shield, or when they carry a medium or heavy load.

2) D10 HD and
Defensive Parry (Ex): The duelist learns to more effectively parry incoming attacks and gains a +1 bonus to AC at 5th level when wearing light or no armor. This bonus increases by 1 for every five duelist levels thereafter (+2 at 10th, +3 at 15th, and +4 at 20th level). If the duelist is caught flat-footed or is otherwise denied their Dexterity bonus (such as when immobilized or helpless) they lose this bonus. They also lose this bonus when they wear medium or heavy armor, when they carry a shield, or when they carry a medium or heavy load.

3) D8 HD and
Defensive Training (Ex): When wearing light or no armor, the duelist may add 1 point of their Intelligence bonus (if any) per duelist class level to their Dexterity bonus to modify Armor Class while wielding a melee weapon. In addition, the duelist learns to more effectively parry incoming attacks and gains a +1 bonus to AC at 5th level when wearing light or no armor. This bonus increases by 1 for every five duelist levels thereafter (+2 at 10th, +3 at 15th, and +4 at 20th level). If the duelist is caught flat-footed or is otherwise denied their Dexterity bonus (such as when immobilized or helpless) they lose these bonuses. They also lose these bonuses when they wear medium or heavy armor, when they carry a shield, or when they carry a medium or heavy load.

4) D8 HD and
Defense Bonus (Ex): The duelist learns to more effectively avoid and parry incoming attacks and gains a +1 bonus to AC at 1st level when wearing light or no armor. This bonus increases by 1 at 3rd level and by 1 for every three duelist levels thereafter (+2 at 3rd, +3 at 6th, and +4 at 9th level, etc. to a maximum of +7 at 20th). If the duelist is caught flat-footed or is otherwise denied their Dexterity bonus (such as when immobilized or helpless) they lose this bonus. They also lose this bonus when they wear medium or heavy armor, when they carry a shield, or when they carry a medium or heavy load.


AC/HP Comparison:
Option 1: (Dex18 = +4) + (Int18 = +4) + (20th = +4) = AC +12 / 20d10 HD (110hp)
Option 2: (Dex18 = +4) + (ChainShirt = +4) + (20th = +4) = AC +12 / 20d10 HD (110hp)
Option 3: (Dex18 = +4) + (Int18 = +4) + (ChainShirt = +4) + (20th = +4) = AC +16 / 20d8 HD (90hp)
Option 4: (Dex18 = +4) + (ChainShirt = +4) + (20th = +7) = AC +15 / 20d8 HD (90hp)

Fighter: (Dex12 = +1) + (FullPlate = +8) + (Tower = +4) = +13 / 20d10 (110hp)


A Fighter can begin with a +13 to AC as soon as they have the cash.

Option 1 is very Stat Dependant and will not be easy to reach the AC+12. In fact an average level 10 duelist will be lucky to have a +6 to +8 to AC at best and more likely have a +6 at best. While a secondary stat dependency can be used as a balance point, making a class rely primarily on it for its defensive ability is quite a hit. I don’t think the classes abilities are enough to support the losses in this option (unlike the monk).

Option 2 has the same stat dependency as any other melee class and can buy standard defensive wear. An average level 10 duelist will likely have a +8 to AC.

Option 3 has a high stat dependency but can augment it with standard equipment. An average level 10 duelist will likely have a +10 to AC.

Option 4 has the same stat dependency as any other melee class and can buy standard defensive wear. An average level 10 duelist will likely have a +10 to AC.

Magic: Options 2 & 3 allow the use of magical armor, which increases the effectiveness of the AC of the gear and allows for additional abilities to be added. Option 1 loses the advantage of magical armor unless they wish to give up a part of their class abilities. I feel this is a bit too much of a cost, especially on top of the already steep penalty of most of their AC coming from Stat Dependency. For this reason I would choose to drop #1 first in favor of #2. Option 2 gives the same end result without the outweighed associated negatives. My personal leaning at this point is for Option #3 or 4. Option 3 has a secondary stat dependency which makes it harder to gain the AC but has a slightly higher AC cap than version 4.

Thoughts?

 

[Turanil]

A 1st level fighter with 13 Dex who just found a full plate and tower shield gets the same AC as a 20th level duelist with 18 Dex. IMO something's wrong here. You should be comparing the Duelist to Fighter with same stats at 1st / 5th / 10th / 15th / 20th level. I would suggest (but I haven't thought much about it), that a duelist with same stats and levels as a fighter, gets the same AC as the fighter without armor and shield, BUT only in dueling situation when he concentrates against only one oppoent (against others around, he is as a fighter without armor nor shield). That's the direction I believe it should go.

 

[Khaalis]

More discussion on the topic of AC (and abilities). There are three distinctive stances.
1) Get an AC bonus at ALL times, 2) Get an AC bonus vs. SINGLE opponent, 3) Don’t get an AC bonus at all

Arguments for #1
* The Monk, Duelist PrC, and Unfettered get it as secondary fighter types.
* The class needs it to compete with even a 1st level fighter’s AC.
Arguments against #1:
* Rangers Don’t get it and are d8HD secondary fighters with light armor only.
* Monk’s are probably the most powerful class in the game.
* Swashbucklers Don’t get it and are d10HD secondary fighters with light armor only.

Arguments for #2
* Swashbucklers get AC this way.
Arguments against #2:
* The Monk, Duelist PrC, and Unfettered get it as permanent.
* Rangers Don’t get it and are d8HD secondary fighters with light armor only.

Arguments for #3
* Rangers Don’t get it and are d8HD secondary fighters with light armor only.
* Monk’s are probably the most powerful class in the game.
Arguments against #3:
* The Monk, Duelist PrC, Unfettered and Swashbuckler all get AC Bonus.
* The class needs it to compete with even a 1st level fighter’s AC.

So where does that leave us?
Of the core classes - Rangers, who are Light Armor only d8HD fighter types, DO NOT get an AC bonus - but Monk’s who are a NO Armor d8HD fighter types DO.

Lets look at some comparison of AC by level among the related/disputed classes.
1) We’ll assume worst-case scenario of 18 in all related stats (from 1st) for equality.
2) Also assume the following for Best Armor: Monk/DuelistPrC = None, Ranger/Swashbuckler/Unfettered = Chain Shirt (+4) / Fighter = Full Plate & Tower (+12)

Level.........Monk.....Ranger.....Fighter..........Unfettered.....Swashbuckler*.....DuelistPrC
1..................18...........18.......…..23....................19...............18 (18)..................N/A
3..................18...........18........….23....................20...............18 (18)..................N/A
5..................19...........18........….23....................20...............18 (19)..................N/A
6..................19...........18........….23....................21...............18 (19)..................N/A
7..................19...........18........….23....................21...............18 (19)..................15
8..................19...........18........….23....................21...............18 (19)..................16
9..................19...........18........….23....................22...............18 (19)..................17
10................20...........18........….23....................22...............18 (20)..................18
12................20...........18........….23....................23...............18 (20)..................18
13................20...........18........….23....................23...............18 (20)..................18 (25)^
15................21...........18........….23....................24...............18 (21)..................18 (27)^
16................21...........18........….23....................24...............18 (21)..................18 (28)^
18................21...........18........….23....................25...............18 (21)..................N/A
20................22...........18........….23....................25...............18 (22)..................N/A

* Swashbuckler (and Duelist) = Base AC (Bonus AC vs. 1 opponent only)
^ Duelist PrC = IF fighting defensively

Also compare… Class Abilities (Does not count iterations of the same ability)

Monk = 24 Abilities; d8; 3 Good Saves; Medium BAB; AC 22
Ranger = 13 Abilities; d8; 2 Good Saves; Good BAB; AC 18
Fighter = 11 Feats; d10; 1 Good Save; Good BAB; AC 23
Unfettered = 11 Abilities (1 is iterated +5d6 sneak); d8; 1 Good Save; Good BAB; AC 25
Swashbuckler = 11 Abilities; d10; 1 Good Save; Good BAB; AC 18 (22)
Duelist PrC = 9 abilities; d10; 1 Good Save; Good BAB; AC 18 (28)^

Duelist (As is) = 10 Abilities; d10; 1 Good Save; Good BAB; AC 18 (22)*

Thus in an analysis we can come to the following conclusions.
1) Monks are one of the most powerful classes (like we didn’t already know this?) – So they are OUT of the picture in respect to balance, especially as their Max base AC falls respectably between Fighter and Ranger (it gets massively abused with magic).
2) Of the Core classes the Fighter has the highest possible base AC
3) The Ranger lags behind the fighter on AC by 5 points, lags on HD by average 1hp/die, but gains 2 good saves and 2 more class abilities then the fighter.
4) The Swashbuckler as written, is equivalently balanced to a Fighter.
5) The Duelist PrC is almost as good as any one of the Core fighting classes but it forces defensive fighting as the preferred style
6) The Duelist class, as written, seems lacking.
Why?
Compared to a Fighter = Lacks in AC (-5) and 1 class ability
Compared to a Ranger = Lacks a good save and 3 class abilities (but has 1hp/die better hp)
Compared to Swashbuckler = Lacks 1 class ability and lacks an AC boost (+4)
Compared to the Unfettered = Lacks 1 class ability and AC Boost (+7), (but has 1hp/die better hp)
Compared to the PrC = Has 1 more class ability over 20 levels vs. 10 PrC, and lacks an AC boost (+10)

However… Does the Dueling skill count as 1 Class Ability?
It adds sneak attack against a flat-footed (No Dex) opponent, but only immediately after drawing their weapon and only then. So it is limited to once per combat and Only IF they go first or can cause the opponent to go flat-footed again.
Is it balanced to the Rogue’s Sneak Attack or the Unefettered’s Sneak Attack enough to count as a Class Ability? I would think yes.

So this would leave the question of AC.

Currently they are restricted as swashbucklers and ranger with an 18 base AC, but have the swashbuckler +4 AC vs. One opponent that rangers DON’T have; and have an average of 1hp/die better Hit Points than rangers; but have worse saves and less class abilities than a ranger.

The unfettered is a good class but is too free form for the concept of the duelist and is designed for a lower-magic setting where it is designed not to have as much access to magic protection. Thus its +7 AC to all opponents I feel is too much for the concept of the Duelist. Like the Swashbuckler the Duelist is trained to focus on a single combatant.

Overall, after looking at the arguments, and the numbers, I think the +4 to AC vs. a single opponent is the best AC bonus for the class. However, with that said, I am also going to divert the class into a “Combat Style” focused class like Rangers and Monks rather than a set ability class like the Swashbuckler.

These Styles could add additional defense abilities, the intensity of the bonus being reliant on the focus of the style. Examples:
Dodge (+1 AC vs. 1 Opp.)
…..Improved Dodge (+3 AC vs. 1 Opp.)
………. Superior Dodge (+5 AC vs. All)
Defensive Parry (+1 AC per 2 levels when fighting defensively)
Offensive Parry (Add INT mod to AC vs. 1 Opp.)
Acrobatic Dodge (Dex Mod times per day = Ref Save (DC20+magic) to avoid damage)

The question is… What styles? Doing styles will give a template that can be followed, and will allow some freedom to those using the class to develop their own styles, just as this thread (http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=90444) is doing for Ranger styles.

Some ideas off the cuff:
Unscrupulous: Improved Feint, Dirty Fighting, Improved Critical, Power Critical
Specialist: Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization
Offensive Dual Wielder: Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Defense, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting
Defensive Dual Wielder: Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Defense, Twin Sword Style, Improved Two-Weapon Defense
Precision: Extra Finesse, Improved Critical, Weakening Strike, Wounding Strike
Defender: Improved Dodge, Defensive Strike, Defensive Parry, Acrobatic Dodge
Intimidation: Denigrating Banter, Jibing Insult, Improved Denigrating Banter, Intimidating Presence

Thoughts?

 

[Knight_Errant]

A 1st level fighter with 13 Dex who just found a full plate and tower shield gets the same AC as a 20th level duelist with 18 Dex. IMO something's wrong here. You should be comparing the Duelist to Fighter with same stats at 1st / 5th / 10th / 15th / 20th level. I would suggest (but I haven't thought much about it), that a duelist with same stats and levels as a fighter, gets the same AC as the fighter without armor and shield, BUT only in dueling situation when he concentrates against only one oppoent (against others around, he is as a fighter without armor nor shield). That's the direction I believe it should go.

I agree completely with this statement.

A duelist should get the same AC as a fighter of equal level--in dueling situations or when he is concentrating on only one opponent at a time.

This would reinforce the idea that the duelist is very dangerous when facing a single opponent but ill-prepared in a melee situation. This, in turn, would be the opposite of many "fighter" templates out there; who are quite prepared for mass combat but sometimes lack real punch against one single opponent.

I do not think that the duelist should have this AC bonus for all situations and at all times. It makes no sense that they have a huge AC bonus for simply being X level. Their bonus should be situational and dependent on their unique style of combat--one on one combat.