Swashbucklers Supplement

[Dimirag]

I think its ok for dwarves not being swashbuclers, they don't have the panache nor charm required

As for the Enthralling bonus I would avoid any race bonus, even mentioning it, as to not open a can of worm or unnecessary debate.

Attaching a pdf version would be a huge plus.

[daryen]

I think its ok for dwarves not being swashbuclers, they don't have the panache nor charm required

See, here's where I am coming from. Sure, the stereotypical Dwarf may be perceived to not have the panache or charm required, but is it really true for all of them?

When playing a character, we are playing the exceptional character, not the run-of-the-mill character. So, while most dwarfs (which I don't buy as "stereotypical" does not mean "most" or "all") may not be suitable, I am sure there are plenty that are. Besides, wouldn't you rather see the dwarf version of Errol Flynn than the 1000th take on Gimli?

[chiisu81]

I think its ok for dwarves not being swashbuclers, they don't have the panache nor charm required

See, here's where I am coming from. Sure, the stereotypical Dwarf may be perceived to not have the panache or charm required, but is it really true for all of them?

When playing a character, we are playing the exceptional character, not the run-of-the-mill character. So, while most dwarfs (which I don't buy as "stereotypical" does not mean "most" or "all") may not be suitable, I am sure there are plenty that are. Besides, wouldn't you rather see the dwarf version of Errol Flynn than the 1000th take on Gimli?

Yeahhh I agree. While we typically haven't seen such a type of Dwarf, there's no reason one couldn't be. I mean, in the Core Rules they can be Thieves...

[SmootRK]

Personally, I don't use racial class blacklists. Any class is available for any race, even seemingly odd variations.

I do play where cultural stereotypes are still there... so a Dwarf Mage would be very abnormal, likely even shunned by normal dwarf settlements, but this is a function of the role-play in the campaign.

I would just put in a phrase that suggests certain restrictions might be put in place by the GM. For instance, here is the paragraph that addresses this for the Hunter (aka Ranger) that is found in the Additional Fighting Sub-Classes Supplement (that I wrote and use):

The Game Master may restrict Hunters to certain races, according to his campaign and his concept of such ranger-esque types. In games that are attempting to nearly duplicate the play style of certain old-school games, Hunters, called Rangers when on the side of goodness, are limited to Humans and Half-Elves (and sometimes normal Elves), but the outdoorsy skills and combat ability of the class are appropriate to virtually all races and cultures. When appropriate, the Hunter subclass may be substituted for standard fighters in some combination class situations. For instance, Elves often progress as Hunter/Magic-Users instead of Fighter/MagicUsers, following the normal combination-class rules.

And here is the section of my personal houserules that addresses this:

Character Races
Importantly, there are no class restrictions for any race. All available classes are open to all races used. Ignore any such references in the core rules or various supplements. While the racial stereotypes remain the cultural norm for most members of a race, individuals from various races, especially those rare individuals that become adventures, are free to become any class even if they might be ill-suited for such endeavors. Within their respective racial communities, such individuals may be treated as peculiar at least, or even ostracized or outlawed in some instances, but this is a factor of role-play, rather than a game-mechanic consideration.

Note that the races listed here have more stringent ability score requirements than as they are found in the Core Rules or various sources. This may effectively limit some class choices for certain races in some situations.

[Syron]

Interesting. I like what you've come up with Smoot, I may go with that instead.

[Dimirag]

See, here's where I am coming from. Sure, the stereotypical Dwarf may be perceived to not have the panache or charm required, but is it really true for all of them?

When playing a character, we are playing the exceptional character, not the run-of-the-mill character. So, while most dwarfs (which I don't buy as "stereotypical" does not mean "most" or "all") may not be suitable, I am sure there are plenty that are. Besides, wouldn't you rather see the dwarf version of Errol Flynn than the 1000th take on Gimli?

Characters in old school style start as one of the bunch, nothing special, they become special by their deeds in game.
Dwarves don't have magic users, but one can say, a very special not run-of-the-mill can be born being able to become one, does this mean the class should be allowed openly to dwarves?

Yes, dwarves can be thieves, but they are in almost opposite sides of the spectrum, thieves uses shadows and steal, swashbucklers search the spotlight.

But, if you allow the class to dwarves, then a swashbuckling dwarf would be mostly a common thing, even if they are exceptional, they are as common as fighters.
I see two options of my liking
A-Leave dwarves out (a GM can add it in if it fits his concept)
B-Make a note that dwarves can be, but its really really rare and uncommon or one similar to what Smoot has presented

[daryen]

Eh, it's up to the GM either way.

I only pointed it out because the "list of allowable races" was almost literally "anything but Dwarf" (the only other one excluded was Half-Ogre). It just seemed kinda odd, that's all. I just trying to point out that dissonance.

[Dimirag]

Lets make a full "review"

Fighting: Do to its XP and fighting skill it goes hand to hand with the cleric, at really high level (14+) a thief will fight a little better. Compared to a fighter, the fighter will be ahead. Giving him a +1 attack bonus with rapiers and similar weapons would give a little advantage against fighters but only until level 9, after that they fight equally right.

Hit Points: Considering that this class is more likely to go into the fray, with little to no armor, either an AC bonus or an increase in hit points could work.
HP increase could come from an d8HD, extra points per level based on Cha (they are really lively) or Dex bonus (they movement increases the chances of serious damage), temporary HP usable on combat or on duels is another interesting idea.

Requirements: Not having Str as one means a swashbuckler could end up with an attack penalty, and combat seems to be a higher focus than for thieves.
This can be changed by either having Str9 as a requirement, or by letting them fight with their Dex bonus while using some weapons (a common rule in different iteration of this class)

Instead of the free hand requirement, it could be allowed to use a dagger as a form of limited shield or extra attack or damage bonus (chose when to apply a +1 once per round after a roll is made)

Special Abilities: The Tumble skill seems a must here.

Along with the loyalty bonus, I think a +1 to reaction rolls could apply like with bards or... lets make them equally hateful or lovable, before such roll, roll a die: odd gives a -1, even a +1, or use a set dice with the chance of a +/-2 bonus

Now, if some of this make the cut it will be time to compare with its XP value and again against the core classes.

[SmootRK]

I think that the focus on Light Weapons should be thought out. I would fold in the Light Weapons rules from the Combat Options (perhaps just repeating it within the class description, making it part of this class even if the GM does not utilize the Combat Options Supplement itself otherwise).

Also, thinking about using light weapons in general. A character is forgoing strength (ie damage bonus), and is generally using weapons with lesser damage dice... so hitting more often with bonuses "to Hit" ought to balance out overall. They deal death by a thousand cuts, rather than the brutish fighter does with his Great Axe in a single blow (which he may miss a few times before he lands such hit).

[Seven]

I like the free hand requirement. It's something a little different.
Two-hand fighting is just meta.
If we're talking about a character like Dartagnan, you might need to add an increase attack rate at higher level to keep up with the fighters. In this case, I don't see it as unbalancing.

Personally, as a GM, I would just complement the high level character with some particular magic items. Like boots of speed, a magic hat and a nice weapon.

I see the character as having an aristocratic background which mean it's going to be pretty uncommon no matter what.

Maybe the dwarf thieves hide in shadow, but making a lot of noise seems pretty natural for a dwarf. Maybe just saying dwarven swashbucklers are unheard of would satisfy everybody?