Swashbucklers being good doesn't fix Swords bards being bad, but Warlock... Warlock + Rogue is a lot of fun. Shadow of Moil is every Rogue's wet dream.
Swords bards are, if nothing else then for the fact that they are bards, not bad.
I mean pure rogue Swashbuckler. I want to love this class, I really do! But I honestly don’t think it’s any good.
You absolutely need to dual wield, it’s supposed to be the Fighter-Rogue, but it’s AC is garbage and have little defensive options.
From what I see, you sneak attack and run away, forcing enemies to follow you into an ambush.
Just feels really.....[redacted]. Not the daring, Zorro/Three Musketeer build I was expecting.
Am I wrong?
I absolutly agree. All my friends who have ben playing for longer than me say it is the best subclass, so I looked it up and was like oooookay... whats all the fuss?
I absolutly agree. All my friends who have ben playing for longer than me say it is the best subclass, so I looked it up and was like oooookay... whats all the fuss?
Have you played under more than one DM? The 5E rules for hiding and visibility are scattered around, at times self-contradictory, and often just plain lacking in offering real guidance in how to adjudicate them. In general, no two DMs will adjudicate them the same way. It is common and typical to build a rogue expecting to be able to credibly hide in combat, and then you discover you can't. This means the best rogue subclasses are the ones where you can get around this problem, and Swashbuckler is one of them. It's also absolutely critical to emphasize that much of the Swashbuckler love you'll find online is pre-Tasha's; Tasha's gives all Rogues of level 3+ a way to Sneak Attack despite being unable to hide.
So here's a list of pre-Tasha's Rogue subclasses with independent solutions to being allowed to Sneak Attack without relying on being allowed to hide:
Arcane Trickster (you get a familiar without spending a feat on ritual caster, and access to spells like Greater Invisibility - pre-Tasha's, easily the second-best Rogue subclass)
Inquisitive (has serious problems - for example, doesn't work on a target that's been stunned by a monk)
Scout (allowed in on a technicality; you have to be L17+, not surprised, using two-weapon fighting, and it only works on your first turn - radically worse than Swashbuckler)
Swashbuckler
As a corollary, you won't generally see anyone pre-Tasha's using Thief or Mastermind for anything, and Assassin is used for multiclassing, since its L3 ability is radically better on a non-Rogue than a Rogue. That's what makes Swashbucklers so very, very great.
Post-Tasha's, it's now possible to build a probably-ranged Rogue around the core concept of aiming your shot instead of hiding, so other subclasses are stronger now relative to Swashbuckler, but Swashbuckler is still excellent for what it does.
Help me out here, but why does any of that matter? Sneak Attack isn't hard to get. For crying out loud, how can you, with a straight face, say Inquisitive has a problem with using their feature if they don't have to use their feature because someone else gave them Sneak Attack? And I think you have Scout all wrong. It starts 13th-level, you don't need to be using Two-Weapon Fighting, and the benefit of granting Advantage extends to everyone who attacks that target before the start of the Scout's next turn.
So much of the time, playing a rogue, I get sneak attack from an ally engaging the target in melee. Advantage is mostly a sweetener. Hiding really isn't that hard, given appropriate terrain (and expertise in Stealth...), and has other benefits. The new Aim action is mostly useful for when you're stuck in a bare space. The inquisitive basically gets to mark targets. Etc.
Help me out here, but why does any of that matter? Sneak Attack isn't hard to get. For crying out loud, how can you, with a straight face, say Inquisitive has a problem with using their feature if they don't have to use their feature because someone else gave them Sneak Attack? And I think you have Scout all wrong. It starts 13th-level, you don't need to be using Two-Weapon Fighting, and the benefit of granting Advantage extends to everyone who attacks that target before the start of the Scout's next turn.
Inquisitive has many problems, but for the one you're choosing to focus on, the stun only lasts a turn, but the Inquisitive's ability lasts the whole fight. The monk granting the sneak attack right now is great, but what if you want it up later? There are many practical hoops to an Inquisitive other subclasses can ignore.
You're right about Scouts, I forgot to account for twf - you can absolutely hit the target first to give yourself the buff and then your bonus action attack can be a Sneak.
Help me out here, but why does any of that matter? Sneak Attack isn't hard to get. For crying out loud, how can you, with a straight face, say Inquisitive has a problem with using their feature if they don't have to use their feature because someone else gave them Sneak Attack? And I think you have Scout all wrong. It starts 13th-level, you don't need to be using Two-Weapon Fighting, and the benefit of granting Advantage extends to everyone who attacks that target before the start of the Scout's next turn.
Inquisitive has many problems, but for the one you're choosing to focus on, the stun only lasts a turn, but the Inquisitive's ability lasts the whole fight. The monk granting the sneak attack right now is great, but what if you want it up later? There are many practical hoops to an Inquisitive other subclasses can ignore.
Why wouldn't the Inq be able to use their ability later?
Help me out here, but why does any of that matter? Sneak Attack isn't hard to get. For crying out loud, how can you, with a straight face, say Inquisitive has a problem with using their feature if they don't have to use their feature because someone else gave them Sneak Attack? And I think you have Scout all wrong. It starts 13th-level, you don't need to be using Two-Weapon Fighting, and the benefit of granting Advantage extends to everyone who attacks that target before the start of the Scout's next turn.
Inquisitive has many problems, but for the one you're choosing to focus on, the stun only lasts a turn, but the Inquisitive's ability lasts the whole fight. The monk granting the sneak attack right now is great, but what if you want it up later? There are many practical hoops to an Inquisitive other subclasses can ignore.
You're right about Scouts, I forgot to account for twf - you can absolutely hit the target first to give yourself the buff and then your bonus action attack can be a Sneak.
I feel like you're not paying attention.
There is nothing about Insightful Fighting that prevents an Inquisitive rogue from using it on a stunned target. But even if you want to say it can't apply that turn, it can always be used later on. And there is no limit to the number of times it can be used. It doesn't require concentration, and you can attempt to use it as many times as you want if fail. I'm just not seeing the "practical hoops" other classes can ignore. Even with your monk example, they need to successfully land a melee attack and expend a limited resource.. The rogue doesn't.
No, you did account for Two-Weapon Fighting. I'm saying it isn't the only way. Ambush Master can be used with any additional attack the rogue might make. This could be done via a bonus action, such as one granted by Crossbow Expert. Or a reaction, like an Opportunity Attack. Or even a spell, like haste. And it's not a big deal if the rogue doesn't benefit because it's a buff you spread to everyone else. To focus only on the rogue in this instance is to willfully shortchange the feature.
Help me out here, but why does any of that matter? Sneak Attack isn't hard to get. For crying out loud, how can you, with a straight face, say Inquisitive has a problem with using their feature if they don't have to use their feature because someone else gave them Sneak Attack? And I think you have Scout all wrong. It starts 13th-level, you don't need to be using Two-Weapon Fighting, and the benefit of granting Advantage extends to everyone who attacks that target before the start of the Scout's next turn.
Inquisitive has many problems, but for the one you're choosing to focus on, the stun only lasts a turn, but the Inquisitive's ability lasts the whole fight. The monk granting the sneak attack right now is great, but what if you want it up later? There are many practical hoops to an Inquisitive other subclasses can ignore.
You're right about Scouts, I forgot to account for twf - you can absolutely hit the target first to give yourself the buff and then your bonus action attack can be a Sneak.
I feel like you're not paying attention.
There is nothing about Insightful Fighting that prevents an Inquisitive rogue from using it on a [condition]stunned[condition] target. But even if you want to say it can't apply that turn, it can always be used later on. And there is no limit to the number of times it can be used. It doesn't require concentration, and you can attempt to use it as many times as you want if fail. I'm just not seeing the "practical hoops" other classes can ignore. Even with your monk example, they need to successfully land a melee attack and expend a limited resource.. The rogue doesn't.
No, you did account for Two-Weapon Fighting. I'm saying it isn't the only way. Ambush Master can be used with any additional attack the rogue might make. This could be done via a bonus action, such as one granted by Crossbow Expert. Or a reaction, like an Opportunity Attack. Or even a spell, like haste. And it's not a big deal if the rogue doesn't benefit because it's a buff you spread to everyone else. To focus only on the rogue in this instance is to willfully shortchange the feature.
From insightful fighting:
"As a bonus action, make a Wisdom (insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated"
From the stunned condition:
"A stunned creature is incapacitated (see the condition), can't move, and can speak only falteringly"
also if we are not ignoring party members, why is being able to pull off a sneak attack even a problem? just have one of your more melee- focused companions stand within 5 feet of the target and badabing badaboom you can sneak attack that bugger
Swashbuckler is a great rogue subclass. Dual Wielding is very useful for swashbucklers, our party's halfling swashbuckler dual wields a sun blade and flame tongue shortsword.
They are very good at melee combat, especially because they can run away from combat without needing to take a bonus action to do so. Very useful in combat.
They are honestly one of my favorite subclasses in the game for melee characters.
last time i checked you can not duel wield those 2 weapons
Not without the Dual Wielder Feat, you can't, which is exactly what I meant when I said "Dual Wielding is very useful for swashbucklers".
(However, I could see there being a reasonable houserule for making Sunblades count as light, given that the only part of the weapon that weighs anything is the hilt, although that's not RAW.)
Fun fact that isn't really on topic, if you're mounted and have the Dual Wielder feat, you can actually dual wield lances. That's even more outrageous than dual wielding a shortsword and a sunblade, IMO, and it is RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Mainly because it's the only martial that comes anywhere near the depth of choice available to casters, and uses a system that could (and probably should) be expanded into a general-case martial maneuver system (with Battle Masters specialising in it, but others having more access than they currently do). There are early hints of this in the Martial Adept feat, and a bit more accessibility with the Superior Technique fighting style, but there's still significant room for expansion.
(Or in short, because Battle Master feels most like what martials in general should be.)
Everyone’s answer to everything is to build a Battle Master, why is the Battle Master the measuring stick when nothing else compares to it?
It's the one with the shiniest toys that people want to be using and feel like the extra damage dice and occasional extra effect are somehow overly superior. Partly because many measure most things based primarily upon combat... and even more than that generally by the damage they can do in a single round.
Its the general problem with Fighter to be honest....Battlemaster is a top pick for fighter due to power/versatility especially with the new Tasha's maneuvers.
If you make a new subclass that is more powerful than Battlemaster its power creep to many...so a lot of fighter subclasses end up nerfed into the ground (Arcane Archer)
It doesn't help that its original competitors were moderate (EK) to just bad (Champion). So it carries a stigma that persists to this day.
Rune Knight came along and did a lot to help with the issue but it has to rely on some pretty arguably borderline too-powerful abilities to match up with BM. But it at least holds a different design space.
Core fighter is decent with its Multiple ASI's, Action Surge, etc....but it does drop off later on by a fair amount without a strong subclass to back it up.
Swashbuckler is great IMO but I think its mostly becasue core Rogue is so good. Its one of the better designed classes and even those that pick highly situational and likely ultimately less effective options (Assassin) are generally still doing good things due to this.
It is the same with Cleric....the base cleric package is so good that it allows the domains to be more flavor driven and have different play styles. It is the same for rogue....you do the same basic things (Sneak Attack, good at skills) but you have slight variations on how you do these things and what your skill focus is.
Overall it plays just as well as other rogues most of the time as its base package is strong enough to carry it along.
Its the general problem with Fighter to be honest....Battlemaster is a top pick for fighter due to power/versatility especially with the new Tasha's maneuvers.
If you make a new subclass that is more powerful than Battlemaster its power creep to many...so a lot of fighter subclasses end up nerfed into the ground (Arcane Archer)
It doesn't help that its original competitors were moderate (EK) to just bad (Champion). So it carries a stigma that persists to this day.
Rune Knight came along and did a lot to help with the issue but it has to rely on some pretty arguably borderline too-powerful abilities to match up with BM. But it at least holds a different design space.
Core fighter is decent with its Multiple ASI's, Action Surge, etc....but it does drop off later on by a fair amount without a strong subclass to back it up.
Swashbuckler is great IMO but I think its mostly becasue core Rogue is so good. Its one of the better designed classes and even those that pick highly situational and likely ultimately less effective options (Assassin) are generally still doing good things due to this.
It is the same with Cleric....the base cleric package is so good that it allows the domains to be more flavor driven and have different play styles. It is the same for rogue....you do the same basic things (Sneak Attack, good at skills) but you have slight variations on how you do these things and what your skill focus is.
Overall it plays just as well as other rogues most of the time as its base package is strong enough to carry it along.
Champion is not nearly as bad as everybody seems to find the need to call it. Then again Battlemaster isn't as supremely powered as everybody wants to make it either. it's actually not hard to make subclasses stronger than it. Arguably certain other subclasses are stronger than it.
The fact that people feel like Rune Knight Challenges Battlemaster so much so it must be power creep is kind of evidence that Battlemaster isn't everything that it's made out to be. With many of it's abilities being 1 per short/long rest (until you get to 15th level and then it's 2). And most others being on reaction so they are once a turn at best. And most of the always on abilities are pretty much non-combat.
But that's kind of the thing with subclasses and classes in general. The things that people say about them aren't always right. But at the same time. There is also the issue about how we use them and the kinds of playstyles we use when we play them. Swashbuckler is a bit more flashy, a bit more showy, and a bit more upfront. Which means it plays differently than how a lot of people think about rogues. It's not that it's any less valid or any less Rogue Really. But it can take a bit broader thinking to see everything it does.
For Example Plenty of Rogues find themselves going very early in combat rounds if not first. That can be a problem on the first round of combat because Rogue's in general aren't as built for spearheading that initial engagement. They are more suited towards taking advantage of situations created by others spearheading it. But the Swashbuckler is different. It has tools built in even from an early level to actually help them engage targets on a few different terms before the party does and still take advantage of that. Fancy Footwork and cunning Action to Dash let's you get in and out without as much threat of reprisal when you pick the right targets. Fancy Footwork and Panache can completely shut down an opponents ability to make AoO's. This can shut down the threats of hard hitters or make it much more possible for team-mates move away from threats that might pin them down otherwise. And it gives yet another way to get Sneak Attack Damage that is supported by it's other abilities to mitigate some of the risks while subtly upping the chance for the rewards (the reward being sneak attack damage with little setup that is easily repeatable).
Champion is actually pretty bad...its supposed to be a damage dealing subclass and simple. It is simple but it falls behind in damage tremendously. I won't expand further as this a rouge thread but Champion is not good at what it is supposed to be good at.
Rogue tends to have less issues across the board due to the strong core but you are right you can play a subclass a bit off from its design intent.
Swashbuckler encourages you to isolate an enemy away from your friends and lock them down there. If you play them next to everyone all the time you will not see the benefit as much but you will still be effective as you will still proc your sneak attack...but be missing the pieces that make the subclass what it is.
You will still enjoy the CHA to initiative though!
Champion is actually pretty bad...its supposed to be a damage dealing subclass and simple. It is simple but it falls behind in damage tremendously. I won't expand further as this a rouge thread but Champion is not good at what it is supposed to be good at.
Rogue tends to have less issues across the board due to the strong core but you are right you can play a subclass a bit off from its design intent.
Swashbuckler encourages you to isolate an enemy away from your friends and lock them down there. If you play them next to everyone all the time you will not see the benefit as much but you will still be effective as you will still proc your sneak attack...but be missing the pieces that make the subclass what it is.
You will still enjoy the CHA to initiative though!
Champion isn't a pure damage dealer. It's actually incredibly versatile. Improved Critical and Superior Critical do aid in dealing damage, and they lend themselves better to more Strength and a [Tooltip Not Found] weapon, and they're especially potent with Great Weapon Fighter, but you don't have to go that route. Remarkable Athlete adds half your proficiency bonus (rounded up) to up to four skills and your Initiative modifier. A second Fighting Style lets them double-down on a single mode of play or be more of a switch-hitter, and with the advent of Tasha's is basically a free feat unto itself. And Survivor is just free just hit points to help keep you up in a fight. That's straight survivability, and it doesn't compete with any actions.
But enough of that. Y'all need to stop hating on stuff. Because you clearly don't understand as much as you think you do, and nobody needs that much negativity in their life.
Champion is actually pretty bad...its supposed to be a damage dealing subclass and simple. It is simple but it falls behind in damage tremendously. I won't expand further as this a rouge thread but Champion is not good at what it is supposed to be good at.
Rogue tends to have less issues across the board due to the strong core but you are right you can play a subclass a bit off from its design intent.
Swashbuckler encourages you to isolate an enemy away from your friends and lock them down there. If you play them next to everyone all the time you will not see the benefit as much but you will still be effective as you will still proc your sneak attack...but be missing the pieces that make the subclass what it is.
You will still enjoy the CHA to initiative though!
First I wasn't talking about playing a subclass different from it's design intent. I was actually talking about playing the subclass with it's intent in mind.
Also if you pay close attention to the Swashbuckler it is not meant to lock down an enemy away from others. It's not really built for that. it's not heavily sustainable. It's still as opportunistic as the core Rogue Class. It's just not as subtle about it. Much of it's abilities, particularly in combination still rely on a hit and run style. Specialy when combined with what rogue can already do. What it actually does is open up the range of what is considered and Opportunistic target and disrupt Enemies in the process of doing so because it can now go after solo targets which actually tend to take a great deal of prep to take on well for a Rogue.
As for Champion. I'll basically point to what Jounichi said. Simple yes. Entirely a damage dealing subclass. Not a chance. It does so much more than that. If you need any indication that Champion wasn't meant the way your portraying I'll just point you to the number technique's added in Tasha's that not only don't do damage. But the ones that are also non-combat in nature. For what they added to the battle master 5 of the 7 new ones Don't deal damage. And 3 of those 5 are either partly or entirely non-combat in nature. Though a couple of them you could shoehorn into combat if you tried.
Champion is actually pretty bad...its supposed to be a damage dealing subclass and simple. It is simple but it falls behind in damage tremendously. I won't expand further as this a rouge thread but Champion is not good at what it is supposed to be good at.
Rogue tends to have less issues across the board due to the strong core but you are right you can play a subclass a bit off from its design intent.
Swashbuckler encourages you to isolate an enemy away from your friends and lock them down there. If you play them next to everyone all the time you will not see the benefit as much but you will still be effective as you will still proc your sneak attack...but be missing the pieces that make the subclass what it is.
You will still enjoy the CHA to initiative though!
Champion isn't a pure damage dealer. It's actually incredibly versatile. Improved Critical and Superior Critical do aid in dealing damage, and they lend themselves better to more Strength and a [Tooltip Not Found] weapon, and they're especially potent with Great Weapon Fighter, but you don't have to go that route. Remarkable Athlete adds half your proficiency bonus (rounded up) to up to four skills and your Initiative modifier. A second Fighting Style lets them double-down on a single mode of play or be more of a switch-hitter, and with the advent of Tasha's is basically a free feat unto itself. And Survivor is just free just hit points to help keep you up in a fight. That's straight survivability, and it doesn't compete with any actions.
But enough of that. Y'all need to stop hating on stuff. Because you clearly don't understand as much as you think you do, and nobody needs that much negativity in their life.
Champion is less versatile then battlemaster and it does less damage.
So all in all it's only grace is that it's simple which it does in spades... But again that's off topic and likely should be in the fighter forum.
As for swashbuckler it is for pulling single enemies from groups and then dashing away to pull them again.
It's less about locking them in one area and more drawing them into another.
So I agree with that correction on my part.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Swords bards are, if nothing else then for the fact that they are bards, not bad.
I absolutly agree. All my friends who have ben playing for longer than me say it is the best subclass, so I looked it up and was like oooookay... whats all the fuss?
Have you played under more than one DM? The 5E rules for hiding and visibility are scattered around, at times self-contradictory, and often just plain lacking in offering real guidance in how to adjudicate them. In general, no two DMs will adjudicate them the same way. It is common and typical to build a rogue expecting to be able to credibly hide in combat, and then you discover you can't. This means the best rogue subclasses are the ones where you can get around this problem, and Swashbuckler is one of them. It's also absolutely critical to emphasize that much of the Swashbuckler love you'll find online is pre-Tasha's; Tasha's gives all Rogues of level 3+ a way to Sneak Attack despite being unable to hide.
So here's a list of pre-Tasha's Rogue subclasses with independent solutions to being allowed to Sneak Attack without relying on being allowed to hide:
As a corollary, you won't generally see anyone pre-Tasha's using Thief or Mastermind for anything, and Assassin is used for multiclassing, since its L3 ability is radically better on a non-Rogue than a Rogue. That's what makes Swashbucklers so very, very great.
Post-Tasha's, it's now possible to build a probably-ranged Rogue around the core concept of aiming your shot instead of hiding, so other subclasses are stronger now relative to Swashbuckler, but Swashbuckler is still excellent for what it does.
Help me out here, but why does any of that matter? Sneak Attack isn't hard to get. For crying out loud, how can you, with a straight face, say Inquisitive has a problem with using their feature if they don't have to use their feature because someone else gave them Sneak Attack? And I think you have Scout all wrong. It starts 13th-level, you don't need to be using Two-Weapon Fighting, and the benefit of granting Advantage extends to everyone who attacks that target before the start of the Scout's next turn.
So much of the time, playing a rogue, I get sneak attack from an ally engaging the target in melee. Advantage is mostly a sweetener. Hiding really isn't that hard, given appropriate terrain (and expertise in Stealth...), and has other benefits. The new Aim action is mostly useful for when you're stuck in a bare space. The inquisitive basically gets to mark targets. Etc.
Why wouldn't the Inq be able to use their ability later?
I feel like you're not paying attention.
From insightful fighting:
"As a bonus action, make a Wisdom (insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated"
From the stunned condition:
"A stunned creature is incapacitated (see the condition), can't move, and can speak only falteringly"
also if we are not ignoring party members, why is being able to pull off a sneak attack even a problem? just have one of your more melee- focused companions stand within 5 feet of the target and badabing badaboom you can sneak attack that bugger
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Yep, okay, my bad on that one. Still, the overarching point stands.
If the monk has Stunned a target, then why is not being able to give yourself advantage an issue when you already have advantage?
Just how many ways are there to render a target incapacitated without something else giving advantage?
Not without the Dual Wielder Feat, you can't, which is exactly what I meant when I said "Dual Wielding is very useful for swashbucklers".
(However, I could see there being a reasonable houserule for making Sunblades count as light, given that the only part of the weapon that weighs anything is the hilt, although that's not RAW.)
Fun fact that isn't really on topic, if you're mounted and have the Dual Wielder feat, you can actually dual wield lances. That's even more outrageous than dual wielding a shortsword and a sunblade, IMO, and it is RAW.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Everyone’s answer to everything is to build a Battle Master, why is the Battle Master the measuring stick when nothing else compares to it?
Mainly because it's the only martial that comes anywhere near the depth of choice available to casters, and uses a system that could (and probably should) be expanded into a general-case martial maneuver system (with Battle Masters specialising in it, but others having more access than they currently do). There are early hints of this in the Martial Adept feat, and a bit more accessibility with the Superior Technique fighting style, but there's still significant room for expansion.
(Or in short, because Battle Master feels most like what martials in general should be.)
It's the one with the shiniest toys that people want to be using and feel like the extra damage dice and occasional extra effect are somehow overly superior. Partly because many measure most things based primarily upon combat... and even more than that generally by the damage they can do in a single round.
Its the general problem with Fighter to be honest....Battlemaster is a top pick for fighter due to power/versatility especially with the new Tasha's maneuvers.
If you make a new subclass that is more powerful than Battlemaster its power creep to many...so a lot of fighter subclasses end up nerfed into the ground (Arcane Archer)
It doesn't help that its original competitors were moderate (EK) to just bad (Champion). So it carries a stigma that persists to this day.
Rune Knight came along and did a lot to help with the issue but it has to rely on some pretty arguably borderline too-powerful abilities to match up with BM. But it at least holds a different design space.
Core fighter is decent with its Multiple ASI's, Action Surge, etc....but it does drop off later on by a fair amount without a strong subclass to back it up.
Swashbuckler is great IMO but I think its mostly becasue core Rogue is so good. Its one of the better designed classes and even those that pick highly situational and likely ultimately less effective options (Assassin) are generally still doing good things due to this.
It is the same with Cleric....the base cleric package is so good that it allows the domains to be more flavor driven and have different play styles. It is the same for rogue....you do the same basic things (Sneak Attack, good at skills) but you have slight variations on how you do these things and what your skill focus is.
Overall it plays just as well as other rogues most of the time as its base package is strong enough to carry it along.
Champion is not nearly as bad as everybody seems to find the need to call it. Then again Battlemaster isn't as supremely powered as everybody wants to make it either. it's actually not hard to make subclasses stronger than it. Arguably certain other subclasses are stronger than it.
The fact that people feel like Rune Knight Challenges Battlemaster so much so it must be power creep is kind of evidence that Battlemaster isn't everything that it's made out to be. With many of it's abilities being 1 per short/long rest (until you get to 15th level and then it's 2). And most others being on reaction so they are once a turn at best. And most of the always on abilities are pretty much non-combat.
But that's kind of the thing with subclasses and classes in general. The things that people say about them aren't always right. But at the same time. There is also the issue about how we use them and the kinds of playstyles we use when we play them. Swashbuckler is a bit more flashy, a bit more showy, and a bit more upfront. Which means it plays differently than how a lot of people think about rogues. It's not that it's any less valid or any less Rogue Really. But it can take a bit broader thinking to see everything it does.
For Example Plenty of Rogues find themselves going very early in combat rounds if not first. That can be a problem on the first round of combat because Rogue's in general aren't as built for spearheading that initial engagement. They are more suited towards taking advantage of situations created by others spearheading it. But the Swashbuckler is different. It has tools built in even from an early level to actually help them engage targets on a few different terms before the party does and still take advantage of that. Fancy Footwork and cunning Action to Dash let's you get in and out without as much threat of reprisal when you pick the right targets. Fancy Footwork and Panache can completely shut down an opponents ability to make AoO's. This can shut down the threats of hard hitters or make it much more possible for team-mates move away from threats that might pin them down otherwise. And it gives yet another way to get Sneak Attack Damage that is supported by it's other abilities to mitigate some of the risks while subtly upping the chance for the rewards (the reward being sneak attack damage with little setup that is easily repeatable).
Champion is actually pretty bad...its supposed to be a damage dealing subclass and simple. It is simple but it falls behind in damage tremendously. I won't expand further as this a rouge thread but Champion is not good at what it is supposed to be good at.
Rogue tends to have less issues across the board due to the strong core but you are right you can play a subclass a bit off from its design intent.
Swashbuckler encourages you to isolate an enemy away from your friends and lock them down there. If you play them next to everyone all the time you will not see the benefit as much but you will still be effective as you will still proc your sneak attack...but be missing the pieces that make the subclass what it is.
You will still enjoy the CHA to initiative though!
Champion isn't a pure damage dealer. It's actually incredibly versatile. Improved Critical and Superior Critical do aid in dealing damage, and they lend themselves better to more Strength and a [Tooltip Not Found] weapon, and they're especially potent with Great Weapon Fighter, but you don't have to go that route. Remarkable Athlete adds half your proficiency bonus (rounded up) to up to four skills and your Initiative modifier. A second Fighting Style lets them double-down on a single mode of play or be more of a switch-hitter, and with the advent of Tasha's is basically a free feat unto itself. And Survivor is just free just hit points to help keep you up in a fight. That's straight survivability, and it doesn't compete with any actions.
But enough of that. Y'all need to stop hating on stuff. Because you clearly don't understand as much as you think you do, and nobody needs that much negativity in their life.
First I wasn't talking about playing a subclass different from it's design intent. I was actually talking about playing the subclass with it's intent in mind.
Also if you pay close attention to the Swashbuckler it is not meant to lock down an enemy away from others. It's not really built for that. it's not heavily sustainable. It's still as opportunistic as the core Rogue Class. It's just not as subtle about it. Much of it's abilities, particularly in combination still rely on a hit and run style. Specialy when combined with what rogue can already do. What it actually does is open up the range of what is considered and Opportunistic target and disrupt Enemies in the process of doing so because it can now go after solo targets which actually tend to take a great deal of prep to take on well for a Rogue.
As for Champion. I'll basically point to what Jounichi said. Simple yes. Entirely a damage dealing subclass. Not a chance. It does so much more than that. If you need any indication that Champion wasn't meant the way your portraying I'll just point you to the number technique's added in Tasha's that not only don't do damage. But the ones that are also non-combat in nature. For what they added to the battle master 5 of the 7 new ones Don't deal damage. And 3 of those 5 are either partly or entirely non-combat in nature. Though a couple of them you could shoehorn into combat if you tried.
Champion is less versatile then battlemaster and it does less damage.
So all in all it's only grace is that it's simple which it does in spades... But again that's off topic and likely should be in the fighter forum.
As for swashbuckler it is for pulling single enemies from groups and then dashing away to pull them again.
It's less about locking them in one area and more drawing them into another.
So I agree with that correction on my part.