GMforPowergamers
Legend
Well, no. The rest of the PHB is full of very disparate concepts as well.
Yes lots to fix but nothing can be done if we don't find some basics
Well, no. The rest of the PHB is full of very disparate concepts as well.
Start here: and they say "Well I'm a swashbuckler that always gets the girl, I'm also really smart, able to fight things smarter not harder"
They roll18, 15,14,14,13,10
If that is the goal I would put the 18 in Int, not Char as smart seems to be really important in your description.
But, nowhere does it say in there that the character must be able to kill a wolf at level 1 or even be a very good fighter. Yet we both know that in your next post you will continue to go on about how a wolf is stronger, how the character is not good enough at combat, etc.
So, again. What do you actually want?
What does an 18 int do? I really don't get that.
I want to show up and do some fun rp and when combat comes out
I want to be cool there TOO (in addition) I want my cool guy to be cool
This sounds like the point where the DM (and the rules) have to inform the player that he is not the guy from those "most interesting man in the world" commercials. On some level, you have to pick which things you want to be good at. Do you want to be clever and daring and smooth with the ladies, or do you want to be able to actually get stuff done? To some extent those are disparate concepts, and to some extent you do have to choose between them.Start here: and they say "Well I'm a swashbuckler that always gets the girl, I'm also really smart, able to fight things smarter not harder"
They roll18, 15,14,14,13,10
The basics are this. Swordplay, subterfuge, channeling divine power, researching arcane secrets, playing music, and so on and so on are completely disparate ideas. Characters defined by doing those things are apples and oranges and all sorts of other different fruits.Yes lots to fix but nothing can be done if we don't find some basics
You want the guy to be smart and fight smart. And as your description focuses much more on his intelligence than his charisma I would put the 18 in Int and not Cha.
Slowly we are getting there. Now define "cool" so that it can be measured (you likely have some measurement in your mind already).
Maybe you didn't read this part of the post to which you replied:Except that you arbitrarily made up your typical duelist
<snip>
Every level 1 character has no chance to defeat that 40 HP guy 1 on 1, so no level 1
You are the one who, upthread, denied that the character concept "swashbuckler" is linked to any particular mechanical expression such as 3d6+7 damage.Because you haven't posted your conception of a typical 3E duelist, I don't have actual numbers to work with - hence my hypotheticals. But whether the numbers are hypothetical or actual, the point remains that a character who has no realistic prospect of winning a duel against a typical duelist is a poor fencer. Hence, you cannot divorce your conception of a character as a swashbuckler from the mechanical expression of that conception via attack statistics.
Why can't I have both? That doesn't strike me as a particularly broken combination!Build what better?
A dashing swordman or a swashbuckler who gets the girl?
I am confident that when most people imagine a swashbuckler they are thinking of Robin Hood, a stereotypical pirate (perhaps Westley), or Zorro, or something similar. I don't think they're thinking of someone who can't fence but brags to the contrary.a swashbuckler is not defined by having prowess, but swagger and daring, and thus there is no mandate that for the swashbuckler concept to be represented mechanically, it must meet a particular threshold of combat effectiveness.
This sounds like the point where the DM (and the rules) have to inform the player that he is not the guy from those "most interesting man in the world" commercials. On some level, you have to pick which things you want to be good at .
Really? I'll challenge you to a duel on that one. When I hear that word, I think of someone who is all suave and cool, but if you dropped him into a cage with a wolf would get torn to pieces. The word has a "pretty boy" connotation to me.I am confident that when most people imagine a swashbuckler they are thinking of Robin Hood, a stereotypical pirate (perhaps Westley), or Zorro, or something similar. I don't think they're thinking of someone who can't fence but brags to the contrary.
You now seem to be conceding that, in fact, competence as a fencer is linked to mechanical capabilities. In which case, we are in agreement!