Finesse Vs. Strength

[Fenes 2]

It all depends on your campaign. If all your battles start with the party prepared and armored, then the platemail guy will not have much of a problem. If you have your share of fighting in social situations, where wearing plate mail and shield is frowned upon, or at times and locations where no one is wearing armor (at night in a soft bed, or in the bath, f.e.) then the swashbuckler will really shine.

Our duelist has just hit elaborate parry, and now her AC has skyrocketed, especially compared to the barbarian in our magic-poor campaign.

 

[Synicism]

In terms of inflicting large amounts of pain, a fast, high-dexterity character will pretty much never match one who relies on strength. But that isn't the point. This is one reason I have a huge problem with the Duelist. He does too much damage with that Precise Strike ability.

In the "standard" D&D encounter (a pitched battle), a fast-moving character that relies on dexterity and high-critical range weapons like the rapier really shines when mobility is important. For example, a 10th level human brick fighter in full plate with large shield and battle axe will probably have a better AC and dish out more damage than his swashbuckling friend, but that swashbuckler, even if he doesn't go the duelist route, will still have some advantages, primarily in the mobility route.

This kind of fighter is a flanker, in the tacitcal sense. His job is often to get behind the enemy's hard defense (tank fighters) and wipe out important targets (clerics, arcane spellcasters, that irritating bard-archer who is providing bonuses like crazy while dishing out tons of damage with his GMW bow and arrows, and haste).

 

[Sanackranib]

teamwork

the flanker coment was dead on these guys are excelent when used in tandom with the partys rogue