GURPS Dungeon Fantasy Denizens: Swashbucklers

[PK]

Originally Posted by Anders

This is not part of the "I Want It All" level, is it?

No; that only included PDFs up through the Kickstarter.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by Ternas

Thieves, however, have been greatly ignored as far as my ground has been able to find. Not even given a spot among the other martial classes in Way of the Warrior.

Not sure I'd consider Thief to be a Martial class. I'd lump them in as "Support".

[simply Nathan]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Not sure I'd consider Thief to be a Martial class. I'd lump them in as "Support".

Same here. A D&D 4th Edition rogue is "martial", but they're more a DF swashbuckler who knows Climbing, Lockpicking, Pickpocket, and Stealth.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Not sure I'd consider Thief to be a Martial class. I'd lump them in as "Support".

They're definitely not a fighty template. Perhaps by "martial" Ternas means "doesn't have a power source" - "martial" was a power source[1] in D&D 4e and rogues were martial sourced there, IIRC (Like fighters and warlords).

Barbarians are a hybrid support-fighty template, although Denizens provides templates, lenses, and options that produce a more D&D style fighty-support hybrid or even a pure fighty type. Scouts are another hybrid template, although they're usually fighty-first, support second, and don't need any special options to really neglect that support angle.

Thieves are not a fighty template, and I'm pretty sure that was the original intent. They have some things to do in combat, but everyone does because this is DF and you'd better have something to do in combat. They stick out for being such a solidly support oriented template - out of the original batch, the other ambiguous ones are things like Druid and Martial Artist, who have wandered outside the lines, so to speak.

[1] Most like like GURPS power origins than power modifiers. Other sources were things like divine, arcane, elemental. "Martial" was just the word for "doesn't have a funky source" - I guess "Mundane" was too mundane.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by simply Nathan

A D&D 4th Edition rogue is "martial", but they're more a DF swashbuckler

For 5e, WotC released a not-quite-official Swashbucker that's a rogue archetype, rather than a kind of fighter. Perhaps that's the modern trend for them. Rather than DF taking inspiration from D&D, now it's the other way around :)

(One interesting change is that they reverse the usual rogue pattern. Rather than wanting a friend to fight a target to grant the rogue Advantage so they can use their sneak attack, the Swashbuckler can use their sneak attack, but only when none of your allies are adjacent to the target. They're very much about dueling one enemy up and down the castle stairs, not stabbing them in the back in a crowded market.)

[GWJ]

I'm so much waiting for "Denizens" series for other non-spellcasters (thieves, knights, scouts, martial artists, and maybe holy warriors).

And I wondering why swashbucklers, as someone who have usually better than average Appearance, and often fights without armor (or with some sexy skimpy armor and mini-dress) DOESN'T have any perk turning on Bullet Proof nudity for them. Barbarian have...

[Ternas]

Originally Posted by Bruno

They're definitely not a fighty template. Perhaps by "martial" Ternas means "doesn't have a power source" - "martial" was a power source[1] in D&D 4e and rogues were martial sourced there, IIRC (Like fighters and warlords).

That's close to what I mean. Basically it would be any of the ones without the ability to use magic of some kind like Bards, Clerics, Druids, or Wizards as even Holy Warriors got some Pyramid loving in Way of the Warrior. Clerics already have something close in Dungeon Fantasy 7, not that I'd say nay to having a Denizens focused on them. Druids have various templates from the Natural Magic Pyramid. And wizards? Well we've got Dungeon Styles and a whole book of magic for them to choose from.

But the poor thief doesn't have much of anything to its name.


That being said, now that I've had more than a quick skim, definitely upgrading my review to this being a great book and well worth the cost for the extra advantages and fluff bits.

[Colarmel]

Originally Posted by GWJ

I'm so much waiting for "Denizens" series for other non-spellcasters (thieves, knights, scouts, martial artists, and maybe holy warriors).

And I wondering why swashbucklers, as someone who have usually better than average Appearance, and often fights without armor (or with some sexy skimpy armor and mini-dress) DOESN'T have any perk turning on Bullet Proof nudity for them. Barbarian have...

Genre conventions. The most unclothed swashbucklers get is low necklines. Plus, swashbucklers don't need DB help.

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Colarmel

Genre conventions. The most unclothed swashbucklers get is low necklines. Plus, swashbucklers don't need DB help.

And the plunging necklines of female swashbucklers 'cause Sexy Feints are a Thing(TM). :-)

(I've had a female nymph swashbuckler in a DF campaign - she was nasty then and this is gonna make her even scarier.)

[Colarmel]

So, having spent entirely too much time on this today, I'm really thrilled with the love that crazy risk-taking gets. I adore broadening weapon specializations so that I can finally build my longsword swashbuckler.

I wish there was a decent way to make staff-swinging swashbucklers as viable as regular ones, but, hey, at least it's a thing, nothing was ever going to beat the ability to stab someone in the eye.

Everyone's A Critical is awesome.