Random Thoughts and Speculation
Standard attacks seem to be OUT for player characters. With abilities like Deft Strike as an at will attack, there doesn't seem to be much reason to do a regular, normal attack. I'm cool with this.
[W] probably includes strength. I think this because 1) if it does not, then strength stops giving a damage bonus to the brawny rogue, since he'll mostly be using at will attacks, and 2) if it does not, then paladin smites are completely unaffected by your strength score, which I think is implausible. So I'm assuming its included.
Daggers - big stabby knives, and shuriken - little throwy knives. This is probably for the best. I never liked that all daggers came perfectly balanced for throwing. In real life, not all knives are throwing knives. They're small, so you CAN throw them, but that's probably best represented by rules for throwing random objects like daggers, warhammers, chairs, etc.
The rogue-with-a-rapier was a 3eism. Now, someone needs to be fighting with a rapier, and it might be the rogue- but one way to handle this, I'm thinking possibly the best way, is to make the rapier genuinely better than the shortsword, and then charge the rogue a feat to access it. This would suck in 3e because the damage difference is so small, but if in 4e this is not the case, it would be worthwhile.
I know people are going to miss sneak attacking with greatswords, but honestly, its not just about the sneak attack. Its also about Deft Strike and other attacks that don't make as much sense when you do them with a giant cleaver.
I'm one of the biggest pro-swashbuckler backers around here. I'm not sure if the rogue will satisfy my swashbuckler needs. Guess we'll find out. It does satisfy my lunatic-with-a-knife-who-stabs-you-in-the-face needs.
In my opinion, the proper ranged weapon for a rogue is a hand crossbow. I am so glad this is back. 3e screwed over weapons like that on a structural level. It was generally a bad idea to use a ranged weapon that denied you iterative attacks AND the ability to move, and being charged a feat for the right to suck that way was not cool. Especially when the dagger was right there, begging you to take it instead. If I can play a rogue with a rapier who has a rules viable reason to draw a concealed handbow and shoot someone while dueling someone else, I will be a happy player. Even if the only swashbuckler available to me is not a defender.
Crimson Edge scared the crap out of me until I realized that saves happen pretty fast these days.
I'm glad for the inclusion of shuriken, and I'm cool with the name. I think its a waste of time to heavily divide eastern and western fantasy. It forces you to do double duty, trying to create two separate versions of things that are functionally identical. Like small, throwable blades.
The names on the abilities seem fine. Crimson Edge is about as flashy as it gets. Its inevitable that we get SOME flashiness, because there's a limited number of descriptive names for things like "a strike themed after leaving an ongoing wound," but quite a lot of different ways one might want to do such a thing. When possible abilities outnumber possible realistic names, you have to get a little flashy to make everything work.
It DOES look like miniatures are more required. I simply don't think it will be as easy to handwave positioning as it was before. This will require an adjustment for me, because I typically ran my fights by drawing, in pen, on a sheet of notebook paper. I know that's awfully low budget, but it got the job done. Now I'll want to actually use a grid. This is more work for the DM, but at least it looks like work that produces value. If using a grid and miniatures lets my players do things like trick an ogre into stumbling off a dock into the water, I'll be happy to do the labor involved in getting the materials and setting up.
My overall verdict is that I could be happy playing this character, and so could my friends. And that's all I really care about.