Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercule" data-source="post: 1418595" data-attributes="member: 5100">Ultimately, F4/R3/D1, IIRC.  Oh, and an elf.  Tried to minimize Rogue levels because the emphasis was on fighting.  Weapon Specialization was considered critical because of her 10 strength.  Since it was a female character/player, that would be a 'no'.  In fairness, there were probably three major issues.  1) This was 3.0, no Improved Feint until late in the game.  That means having to sacrifice all attacks one round to gain a sneak attack the next.  2) This was RtToEE.  We knew we were bringing in characters that were better suited to a city adventure, but didn't expect her to be that underpowered.  3) The DM seriously nerfed sneak attack.  Flanking didn't take effect until both combatants had had attacked the target and 'involuntary' movements (bull rush, odd grappling occurances, etc.) negated participation in flanking (yes, this resulted in some squares that literally could not be used to flank from). Since I've still got some bad blood on #3 (I was the Rog/Acr), and part of my qualification for a swashbuckler/duelist is specifically to not need sneak attack, that really isn't relevant.  A ftr/rog can be an effective build, I just don't consider it to fight as a swashbuckler. Oh, here we go... I was the 2E Swashbuckler/Duelist (don't recall) kit for Fighter, not the one for Rogue.  IMO, even that first +0 BAB from the Rogue invalidates the concept.  The Swashbuckler BAB must, absolutely, be a full BAB.  I want something that is on par in combat with the Paladin and Barbarian.  Something that could replace a Fighter completely and solely, but does not require high strength or heavy armor.</blockquote>

Verification