D&D 5E What would be better build for a Swordsman?

[The Wonderful Rogue]

Sounds good. I'd just question if you want BM 16 or 17. Is another Action Surge and Indomitable worth the ASI you could get from Swashbuckler 4? It's a toss up, IMO, depending on what you do with the ASI...

Samurai/Zealot could also work, but for me the BM maneuvers are too important to a "master swordsman" build.

agreed on that last part, and yes, Swashbuckler 4 sounds solid actually, and action surge sounds tempting but indomitable... not so much actually

 

[DND_Reborn]

If you do go just BM/Swash route, the ability scores work a bit better since you don't need WIS 13. Using the half-elf still you might want:

STR 10 or 12
DEX 16 (15+1)
CON 14 (13+1)
INT 8
WIS 12 or 10
CHA 16 (14+2)

So, you'd have a great DEX and CHA for +6 initiative, pretty good HP with CON 14, and without Barbarian you don't need a high STR. It gives you the option for 12 for STR or WIS, depending on what you want to focus on.

EDIT: If you want you could also swap CON and WIS. You'd have less HP but better WIS save bonus and WIS skills.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Bladesinger with fighter or rogue is very fun and effective.

Battlesmith/Bladesinger is great if the pet doesn’t bother you.

Obv Hexblade and Hexblade multiclassed.

Blade Bard/Vengeance Dexadin is very fun and good.

 

[The Wonderful Rogue]

If you do go just BM/Swash route, the ability scores work a bit better since you don't need WIS 13. Using the half-elf still you might want:

STR 10 or 12
DEX 16 (15+1)
CON 14 (13+1)
INT 8
WIS 12 or 10
CHA 16 (14+2)

So, you'd have a great DEX and CHA for +6 initiative, pretty good HP with CON 14, and without Barbarian you don't need a high STR. It gives you the option for 12 for STR or WIS, depending on what you want to focus on.

Just for the sake of roleplay i'd go with
STR: 8
DEX: 17 (15+2)
CON: 14 (13+1)
INT: 10
WIS: 12
CHA: 15 (14+1)

And then get feats like Elven Accuracy and Actor to raise DEX and CHA, also would get Resilient CON and Tough maybe

 

[Bill Zebub]

I really wish rogue was written such that it combined with kensai in a way that let you sneak attack with any weapon.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I really wish rogue was written such that it combined with kensai in a way that let you sneak attack with any weapon.

I flat-out houseruled away the Finesse requirement of Sneak Attack. Not seen any issues caused by that yet.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I really wish rogue was written such that it combined with kensai in a way that let you sneak attack with any weapon.

I flat-out houseruled away the Finesse requirement of Sneak Attack. Not seen any issues caused by that yet.

Yeah, my group has as well. You can sneak attack with any weapon you have proficiency with.

No issues at all. It works perfectly fine, and allow STR-based rogue builds more easily, such as a making a thug with a club.

 

[jgsugden]

Interesting combination. Ranger also allows you to gain some spell casting, and Hunter's Mark would grant additional damage on a lot of attacks!

I'm not sure if I would include the level of Monk. I would go Barbarian instead for Unarmored Defense that way, and RAGE!!! Even more damage plus resistance to some damage.

Also a good option. The monk seems more 'control and finesse' while the barbarian gives us more wild fury as an angle.

The ranger spellcasting can be reskinned pretty easily. Disguise Self, Speak with Animals, Hunter's Mark, Zephyr Strike, Longstrider, Jump, Animal Friendship, Beast Bond, Absorb Elements ... these do not need to feel like spellcasting.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I flat-out houseruled away the Finesse requirement of Sneak Attack. Not seen any issues caused by that yet.

Yeah, my group has as well. You can sneak attack with any weapon you have proficiency with.

No issues at all. It works perfectly fine, and allow STR-based rogue builds more easily, such as a making a thug with a club.

Agreed. I can't tell if this requirement was protection against an abusive combination which never materialized, or just reinforcement of iconic character types/appealing to the TSR-era crowd (who were used to the limitations of the Thief class backstab). Regardless, it doesn't seem to be necessary. Taking the effort to MC into a class which grants the (non-longsword) non-SA-able weapons grants you extra damage to your SA... right on par with the opportunity cost of the dip. PAM or other massively-multiple attacks don't overly synergize with SA (other than an extra chance to get at least one hit, making sure you get the SA damage, which rogues already can do with 2wf). Neither does GWM and the -5/+10, as SA wants an assured hit more than it wants even more extra damage.

Perhaps that clause was written before SA was limited to once per turn, and the fear was that you would get the spam-attack builds of 3e (minus that SA didn't work on ~half the monsters in the MM).

Regardless, a fighter-rogue bandit with a club or dirty-fighting sentry with a polearm are wonderful themes that should be allowed, and if that works for the OPs swordsman as well, all the better.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Wandering off-topic, but what if the concept of finesse weapons was dispensed with entirely, and instead you could choose Str or Dex with any weapon? What additional tweak would be needed to keep Str builds viable?