PDA

View Full Version : A question about bards being underpowered.



Juron Pilo
2009-04-29, 02:14 AM
Don't the spells hideous laughter, sound burst, and greater shout suggest that a bard would be awefully effective at neutralizing spellcasters in party situations? Unless I'm missing something most magic users would be pretty poor at fortitude saves, and the sonic dependant attacks all use a fortitude save. sure theres a big part of the game where none of these spells are gained but at low and high levels I don't see why a bard can't be effective.

sonofzeal
2009-04-29, 02:20 AM
Don't the spells hideous laughter, sound burst, and greater shout suggest that a bard would be awefully effective at neutralizing spellcasters in party situations? Unless I'm missing something most magic users would be pretty poor at fortitude saves, and the sonic dependant attacks all use a fortitude save. sure theres a big part of the game where none of these spells are gained but at low and high levels I don't see why a bard can't be effective.
Well.... yes and no. Yes, they can function that way, and could work. But most spellcasters have Con as their highest secondary stat (and using pump their primary and Con to the exclusion of everything else). Also, Bard spellcasting lags significantly behind the curve in spell level, which means a major hit to your DC compared to what a Sor/Wiz could be throwing out there. And then there's the rather horrid spells-per-day.

Bluebeard
2009-04-29, 02:22 AM
Bards are underpowered?

Juron Pilo
2009-04-29, 02:24 AM
Meh, I've always thought the DC thing was completely unfair to partial spellcasters. Why does spell level have to effect the DC instead of just caster level, makes no sense.

Saph
2009-04-29, 02:44 AM
Bards are generally considered balanced, rather than underpowered. Like most arcane casters they're weak at very low levels, but by levels 4-6 they've hit their stride and make quite decent all-round characters.

They can be underpowered if built poorly, and overpowered if tweaked out. Like most classes, really. But on average, they tend towards the middle of the balance scales.

- Saph

Dixieboy
2009-04-29, 02:56 AM
Those who complain about bards are those who wants something to dish out a gazillion d6 damage

The bard does not do that at all. Being fairly weak in the damage aspect of things.

However he can do pretty much everything, fill every niche and still have skill points left for perform.

JellyPooga
2009-04-29, 02:59 AM
Well.... yes and no. Yes, they can function that way, and could work. But most spellcasters have Con as their highest secondary stat (and using pump their primary and Con to the exclusion of everything else).

Only for optimised spellcasters and Fighter/Casters is this the case. For a more stereotyped wizard or cleric, Con should be low...if they had high Con they'd be in a more active profession. At least that's how I play. Even with a high Con score (say 20 with buffs), a Wizard still only has a +10 to his Fortitude save at level 16. Base DC for Greater Shout is 16+Cha mod, so assuming a Charisma of...lets say 26 (a low estimate for a Bards Charisma at level 16), that's a Save DC of 24. If you've been playing a "Caster Bard" you can safely add 1 from Spell Focus and at least another 1 from Greater Spell Focus or some other DC boosting ability for a Save DC of 26. So said Wizard would need to roll 16 or more to make his save against that, so it's not that shabby a tactic (that's what? a 75% success rate for the Bard?)


Also, Bard spellcasting lags significantly behind the curve in spell level, which means a major hit to your DC compared to what a Sor/Wiz could be throwing out there. And then there's the rather horrid spells-per-day.

True enough, capping at Level 6 spells isn't good, but the point is not that Bards are better casters than Wizards or Sorcerers, but that they're not all that horribly underpowered as many people seem to think (comparing anything to Wizards is just an exercise in head-wall-beatery anyway).

Tsotha-lanti
2009-04-29, 03:37 AM
Why on Oerth would a wizard not get inherent bonuses, an amulet of health, and a cloak of protection? There's no reason not to. That's more like Fort +15 or more at level 16.

grautry
2009-04-29, 04:06 AM
Bards are not underpowered at all.

They get a very nice skill list - especially for social situations and the skill points to use them. And really - most Diplomancer builds use some levels of bard(AFAIR), so that should tell you something. Not too mention the UMD. Inspire Courage/Inspire Greatness are great. Generally, the uses of Fascinate are incredibly nice. If you can get Bardic Knack(alternative class feature) it's incredible for skill-monkey uses. As far as alternative features go, bards also get excellent racial substitution levels.

Spells are also good. Alter self, glitterdust, dispel magic, haste, heroism, very nice illusion spells, some very nice buffs, cure spells, irresistible dance, invisibility, dimension door. Yes, DCs are going to be weak against some of the offensive ones, but bards are usually buffing anyway.

Overall, there's absolutely nothing wrong with bards at all. If you trust the Tier System thread on Brilliant Gameologists, then there's a reason as to why bards are Tier 3.

sonofzeal
2009-04-29, 04:38 AM
Bards are flexible, and get some good stuff, but here's what I see as the problems with the class, at least inside core...

- Complete lack of core options. Seriously, the closest you come to a "bard" feat in core is "weapon finesse".

- Seriously gimped spellcasting. Early in 3.x, WotC severely overrated the ability to cast spells in armor, and it shows. Even forgetting about the slower advancement mauls DCs and ability to metamagic, the spells per day are atrocious.

- Inability in combat. In theory, Bards are the group-supporting, spell-slinging, sword-wielding generalists of the core classes. In practice, Inspire Courage is pretty irrelevant (at least without heavy splat mining), the combat spells are seriously sub-par, and a core bard in melee is just going to get hurt.


...yeah, pretty dire. In exchange:

- Some out-of-combat "utility" in the form of Inspire Competence and Bardic Knowledge. Not a major factor, but worth mentioning.

- Excellent Diplomancing. In a social game, Bards can dominate due to Cha focus and Glibness. Really, I'd rate than single spell as the #1 reason to play a Bard... assuming you couldn't otherwise get it from the Beguiler, Assassin, or Commerce Domain. The Fascination/Suggestion ability is also insanely powerful in a social setting.

- Outside of core, Inspire Courage can be pumped out the wazzoo, to the point of being game-breaking, and there's a few ways to leverage it into crazy damage for you and the whole team.


Summary: it is my firm belief that bards have a strong tendancy to either suck horribly or dominate unfairly, depending on the setting or optimization skill in question. They're not "weak" so much as poorly balanced and erratically powered. The weakest character I ever played was part-bard, and so was the strongest. Every bard I've seen in play has either been seriously ineffectual or totally game-breaking. I'm sure there's a happy middle zone in there somewhere, and I'm sure that the occasional player is able to hit it, but I'd still rate the class as the worst-balanced in the entire game. Not the weakest, not the strongest, but the worst-balanced.

JellyPooga
2009-04-29, 07:36 AM
Why on Oerth would a wizard not get inherent bonuses, an amulet of health, and a cloak of protection? There's no reason not to. That's more like Fort +15 or more at level 16.

My ball-park figures were based on the assumption that a Wizard buffing his Con is going to pay less attention to that than a Bard buffing his Cha. After all, the Wizard is going to spend more on buffing his Int than his Con, right?

Let's, for the sake of argument, say the Wizard and Bard have equal base stats for Con and Cha...the actual figure is irrelevant because they're directly opposing one another, so only the difference matters. The Bard is going to put all of his stat-ups from levels divisible by 4 into Charisma. The Wizard is not (if you say he is, you're lying :smallwink:). That alone gives a 2 point differential. From a base DC of 16, that's gone up to 18. Take away the 5 from the Wizards base Fort that means the Wizard has to beat a DC 13 on a straight roll. Now, assuming the Wizard hasn't got great Fortitude (why would he?), the Bard (being a "Caster-Bard") will almost certainly have Spell Focus, putting that DC up to 14 after Feats are accounted for (lets disregard Greater Spell Focus or any other feats that improve DC for now). Here's where it gets a little more complicated.

The Bard, will invest as much as possible into Charisma. So that's a +5 Inherant and +6 Enhancement. That improves the DC by another 5 to 19 (remember this is what the Wizard has to roll on the dice, without modifiers). Assuming the Wizard is investing more into Int than Con, he probably only has a +2, maybe +3 Inherant to Con (the difference being moot for the sake of this argument), but will likely have the same +6 Enhancement, bringing that DC back down to 15. Add a Cloak of Resistance (as you say) and that comes down again to 10...still a 50/50 chance of failure.

However, do bear in mind that this particular Wizard has invested approximately half of his starting wealth by level just to boost his Con and Saving Throws. If he wants an Inherant bonus to Intelligence, that's not going to leave an awful lot of money for anything else, so I doubt that he'll have spent that much, rather spending it on boosting his Int, Scrolls, Staves, Wands and other gewgaws that will probably come in more useful. Also bear in mind that this Wizard also started with an equal con to the Bards Charisma; also unlikely. The Bard will almost certainly have at least a 2 higher Charisma than the Wizards Constitution as a base. Now consider that the Bard could have taken Greater Spell Focus (much more likely than the Wizard taking Great Fortitude) or a number of other feats that further improve his spell DC's (also likely if he's "caster-bard"). All told, that DC is creeping back up to the 14-15 mark when all is accounted for.

Yes, a Wizard could potentially have a much easier time of making that save (by boosting Con over Int, taking Great Fortitude, etc.), but the likelihood of it is low in practice. This is also assuming that the Wizard hasn't cast some kind of spell-immunity or other abjuration to protect himself from enemy spell-casters, but that's a different argument.

Gorbash
2009-04-29, 08:00 AM
For a more stereotyped wizard or cleric, Con should be low..

Should be low? Where does it says so?


assuming the Wizard hasn't got great Fortitude (why would he?)

Because things that can hurt him require Fort save?


Assuming the Wizard is investing more into Int than Con, he probably only has a +2, maybe +3 Inherant to Con (the difference being moot for the sake of this argument), but will likely have the same +6 Enhancement, bringing that DC back down to 15. Add a Cloak of Resistance (as you say) and that comes down again to 10...still a 50/50 chance of failure.

Assume also that Wizard will have a Rat familiar, making that another +2. Assume that he'll have Con at least 16. Also assume that wizard won't buy Cloak of Resistance, he'll cast Superior Resistance, making his Fort save +15 at lvl 11.

And that's without any feats or expensive items or major spell investment. 1 Spell, 1 Class Ability.

JellyPooga
2009-04-29, 08:16 AM
Should be low? Where does it says so?

It doesn't. I'm thinking only of the stereotyped Wizard (not the optimised one) that is mighty in arcane power but weak physically.


Because things that can hurt him require Fort save?

how many Wizard builds do you see with Great Fortitude?


Assume also that Wizard will have a Rat familiar, making that another +2. Assume that he'll have Con at least 16. Also assume that wizard won't buy Cloak of Resistance, he'll cast Superior Resistance, making his Fort save +15 at lvl 11.

O.k. read my post before replying...That he has Con 16 is irrelevant because the Bard probbly has Cha 18. Superior Resistance gives an almighty +1 bonus over the Cloak of Resistance. Sure the Rat familiar will give a +2 to his Fort, but 1)it's fairly useless apart from that so it's appeal is limited 2)not all Wizards choose to have a familiar. I am looking at generalisations as much as possible in these example and on the whole a small percent of Wizards will have a Rat Familiar...not the 'average' Wizard. Still, assuming he does have the Rat familiar, he's still only countering the other bonuses that a Bard might have to the DC so your still not looking at a dice roll of anything below 10 to make that save. The point is that a Wizard making a Fortitude save against a Bard Spell has a fairly good chance of failure, on the whole.

Eldariel
2009-04-29, 08:31 AM
It doesn't. I'm thinking only of the stereotyped Wizard (not the optimised one) that is mighty in arcane power but weak physically.

I always found that was already factored into the Hit Die; that you average Wizard still has a decent constitution (simply because the more durable ones are better at Concentrating, which happens to be fairly important for Wizards; also for the Fort-saves), but appears to be fragile regardless due to having that d4.


how many Wizard builds do you see with Great Fortitude?

As far as Great Fortitude goes, unfortunately the feat sucks (like all the save-feats), simply because it comes into play so rarely (exception being something like Frenzied Berserker where you'll do those Will-saves constantly and they'll always be disastrous to fail). You'd rather take some feats you get constant use out of, like metamagic, spell focus, item creation or prerequisites to PrCs.

JellyPooga
2009-04-29, 08:37 AM
I always found that was already factored into the Hit Die; that you average Wizard still has a decent constitution (simply because the more durable ones are better at Concentrating, which happens to be fairly important for Wizards; also for the Fort-saves), but appears to be fragile regardless due to having that d4.

The low HD does factor it in part, but with a high Con score, a Wizard not only gets a better Fort for spell resistance and Concentration, but also becomes better at holding his breath, forced marches and shrugging off the effects of virulent poisons (read: can take more Con damage before keeling over). To my mind, a stereotypical Wizard should simply not have that kind of fortitude without the application of powerful magic (i.e. enhancement bonuses, etc.).


As far as Great Fortitude goes, unfortunately the feat sucks (like all the save-feats), simply because it comes into play so rarely (exception being something like Frenzied Berserker where you'll do those Will-saves constantly and they'll always be disastrous to fail). You'd rather take some feats you get constant use out of, like metamagic, spell focus, item creation or prerequisites to PrCs.

Precisely my point!

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-29, 08:43 AM
Jelly, you choose level 16 so let's look at that.

You have a Bard, he has an 18 starting Cha, a +6 enhancement bonus, +4 stats, he can't afford an inherent bonus.

A Wizard has a Con of 16 and a +6 enhancement item. So the Bard has a +3 stat advantage. Add that to the 10 and the 6 from the spell level.

You now have a DC 19, -5 from Fort progression, -6 from Superior Resistance. Now we are looking at an 8 on a d20. Now, if you add any kind of Moral bonus, like from Heroism, or a Spellstrike Weapon providing a +4, or a Rat Familiar for +2, ect.

It's actually really easy to make it an auto success, and the only money being spent is a +6 Con item, which you want anyway.

Gorbash
2009-04-29, 08:50 AM
To my mind

There, you said it. To *your* mind. That's not generalizing.


1)it's fairly useless apart from that so it's appeal is limited

Err, no it's not. If you read any Wizard optimizing guide, you'll note that Rat is a pretty solid choice out of core familiars, since it's quite a skill monkey and has different modes of movement.


how many Wizard builds do you see with Great Fortitude?

None, but where did I say anything about taking Great Fortitude? Any smart Wizard (the stereotypical one, since they do have high Int, after all) will invest in his defenses, ie. Fort saves.


Superior Resistance gives an almighty +1 bonus over the Cloak of Resistance

And it also saves up 25 000 gold which you can use to buy Amulet of Health +4.


2)not all Wizards choose to have a familiar.

Not all, but in general, they do. And we're talking in general here.

Eldariel
2009-04-29, 09:03 AM
Those who complain about bards are those who wants something to dish out a gazillion d6 damage

Actually...
Dragonfire Inspiration, Song of the Heart, Inspirational Boost, Vest of Legends, Mw. Drums, Lvl 10 Bard = 9d6 damage of the energy type of your choice for you and all your pals minimum; could get as much as 12d6 if applying static bonuses first and multiplier then.

JellyPooga
2009-04-29, 09:35 AM
Jelly, you choose level 16 so let's look at that.

You have a Bard, he has an 18 starting Cha, a +6 enhancement bonus, +4 stats, he can't afford an inherent bonus.

Stop right there. Why can't he afford an Inherent Bonus? By Starting WBL a +5 Inherent is easily affordable. True it's about half his funds, but this is a Casting-Bard so he's going to invest as much as possible into boosting his Cha through the roof. I see no reason why he won't have at least a +3, if not +4 or 5.


A Wizard has a Con of 16 and a +6 enhancement item. So the Bard has a +3 stat advantage. Add that to the 10 and the 6 from the spell level.

With Inherent bonuses included (of which the Wizard has a lower one, if he has one at all), that +3 stat advantage increases to +4 or +5.


You now have a DC 19, -5 from Fort progression, -6 from Superior Resistance. Now we are looking at an 8 on a d20. Now, if you add any kind of Moral bonus, like from Heroism, or a Spellstrike Weapon providing a +4, or a Rat Familiar for +2, ect.

As mentioned, (Greater) Spell Focus will increase that DC from 20/21 to 22/23. Using Snow Casting+Cold Focus (a viable build for a Caster Bard) increases that up to 24ish. Now take out your 5 from Fort and 6 from S.Resistance and we're talking 11 on a d20. Taking out a few for moral bonuses and the potential Rat still only takes that down to 7...quite easy, but a definite risk of failure there and far from an auto-success. If you build a Wizard to be able to make Fort saves, yes, I'll admit that an Auto-success is easily doable, but the average Wizard I think will be looking at somewhere around the 50/50.


There, you said it. To *your* mind. That's not generalizing.

I don't like to start sounding offensive, but please learn to differentiate between one point and another. My comments about stereotypical Wizards were just my opinion and not related to the example I gave below that. Perhaps I could have made it clearer, but I didn't think it needed clarifying.


None, but where did I say anything about taking Great Fortitude? Any smart Wizard (the stereotypical one, since they do have high Int, after all) will invest in his defenses, ie. Fort saves.

O.k. my bad for a mis-type leaving off the Capitalisation of the G when I first mentioned it here:
Now, assuming the Wizard hasn't got great Fortitude (why would he?), the Bard (being a "Caster-Bard") will almost certainly have Spell Focus, putting that DC up to 14 after Feats are accounted for (lets disregard Greater Spell Focus or any other feats that improve DC for now).
(underlined for emphasis) I was referring to the Feat here, so apologies.


And it also saves up 25 000 gold which you can use to buy Amulet of Health +4.

Whilst true, I'd already factored an Amulet of Health +6. While you could argue that it frees up a little more cash for a higher Inherent bonus, I think more Wizards would use the cash for other parephenalia rather than increasing their Con by one point.


Err, no it's not. If you read any Wizard optimizing guide, you'll note that Rat is a pretty solid choice out of core familiars, since it's quite a skill monkey and has different modes of movement.

O.k. I'll give you that one, but as I mention above, we're still not talking about auto-successes here.

I'm not trying to argue that the Wizard is going to fail every time or even more often than he doesn't. I'm just saying that a Bard will, given that he's a "Caster-Bard" fighting against a "Generic-Wizard", have a fairly good chance of casting a high level spell that the Wizard will fail his Fortitude save against. I am quite aware that a Wizard can buff his Fortitude save into the stratosphere and I know many of the methods to do so. Likewise, there are also options that will blast the Bards Save DC into the same stratosphere. Both however, are very specialised builds and as far as I'm concerned only have a place in a theoretical discussion. I'm trying to lay out a typical, average scenario that might actually happen in a game. And, as it should be, all things being equal, the Wizard should fail the Fort. save around about half the time, maybe a bit less, maybe a bit more.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-29, 10:18 AM
Jelly, if the Bard spends money on inherent bonuses, then he has approximately 1/4th of his wealth left to be spent on AC/saves/attacks/useful items/ect. and 3/4ths on Charisma.

At the very least a level 16 Bard is going to want a +6 Con item, a +5 cloak, and various AC boosters.

As for a "caster bard" they don't exist. If your primary contribution is casting, you should be a Sumblime Chord or Sorcerer.

Now, let's assume for the sake of argument that this bard has spell focus and greater, and that he's an "average caster bard" and that he's bought a +4 inherent bonus to Cha. An Average Caster Bard doesn't have snowcasting, because if you get into that, I'm going to have to actually optimize for saves.

He now has a total Cha of 32 at level 16. That means the DC on the level 6 spell is DC 29 if it's his focus school.

An average Wizard is not going to have any inherent bonuses at level 16, because he's going to spread his wealth around instead of investing 3/4ths of it in his stats by way of bad stat to cash ratios.

So he has a +6 Con item, unlike the Bard.

His Con score is +6. His Base Fort is +5. His Resistance Bonus is +6. He has a morale bonus of +2. He has a Spellstrike Parrying Dagger with GMW on it.

That comes out to a +24 Fort saves. He makes the save on a 5, on a 3 if he has a Rat or any other bonus like a luck bonus or insight bonus.

He has spent 36,000gp on HP and fort save, and 16,000gp on a +5 to all saves (and +1 AC). That's less then a +2 Inherent bonus, and yet it negated the entire stick of the Bard.

The Bard on the other hand is looking at similar DC spells, but with no money to actually buff his saves, and no way to give himself a resistance bonus except by money.

This "anti caster bard" who uses Greater Shout needs to fire off 3-4 to stun a Wizard for one round. The Wizard on the other hand need only 1, maybe 2, spells to beat the Bard. He can even use something like EBT to render the Bard incapable of casting and deal with other enemies.

Tengu_temp
2009-04-29, 10:25 AM
Those who complain about bards are those who wants something to dish out a gazillion d6 damage

The bard does not do that at all. Being fairly weak in the damage aspect of things.

However he can do pretty much everything, fill every niche and still have skill points left for perform.

Being a jack of all trades and a master of none works poorly in a game that puts heavy accent on specialization. However, bards do have a niche, and that's usually social interaction and buffing - Eldariel posted just one of the many bard builds that excel at this area.

Jack_Simth
2009-04-29, 10:29 AM
Meh, I've always thought the DC thing was completely unfair to partial spellcasters. Why does spell level have to effect the DC instead of just caster level, makes no sense.
Because then the Wizard's 2nd level save-or-lose spells (Glitterdust, Web, and Cloud of Bewilderment) are just as disabling (percentage wise vs. CR appropriate opponents) at level 20 as they are at level 3. Which means rather than the low-level slots migrating over to defense, buffs, and utility, the low-level spells stay with the offensive stuff, making a mid level Wizard mostly inexhaustible. The spells even get better as the Wizard boosts his primary casting attribute. It's a game-balance issue.

JellyPooga
2009-04-29, 11:23 AM
Jelly, if the Bard spends money on inherent bonuses, then he has approximately 1/4th of his wealth left to be spent on AC/saves/attacks/useful items/ect. and 3/4ths on Charisma.

Check your DMG. A +4 Inherent Bonus costs 110,000, which is less than half his WBL at level 16. I did admit that this was the case and it leaves enough for other bits and pieces (including a +6 Enhancement to Cha, most importantly).


As for a "caster bard" they don't exist. If your primary contribution is casting, you should be a Sumblime Chord or Sorcerer.

A "Caster Bard" is simply a Bard that focuses his talents on his Spellcasting rather than his other abilities. With the limited number of feats, a Bard is often forced into specialising in one of his abilities, whether that be spellcasting (as sub-par as it is in comparison to a Sorcerer), his music or his skills. There are even Prestige Classes that exemplify this specialiation (namely Sublime Chord, Seeker of the Song and Exemplar, respectively, to name but three), one of which you mention yourself, so yes, there is such a thing as a "Caster Bard".


stuff...

...He has spent 36,000gp on HP and fort save, and 16,000gp on a +5 to all saves (and +1 AC). That's less then a +2 Inherent bonus, and yet it negated the entire stick of the Bard.

Strictly speaking that Spellstrike Parrying Dagger with GMW cost twice the price you list there (unless you crafted it yourself, but then strictly the cost is 16,000gp + some XP), but yes, point taken that it costs a lot less to buff your Saves than to buff your Spell DC.

On the subject of Snowcasting, I think it a legitimate aragument that the example Bard might have it or a similar ability to increase the save DC of his spells, given that his focus is on his spellcasting...if he's not taking feats to improve his spellcasting, what is he using those feats for? This example is for a spellcasting specialised Bard vs. a generic Wizard. Note that I don't say the Bard is optimised (if he were that he'd be some combination of Sublime Chord, Virtuoso and something else most likely and also involve Greater Shadow Evocation and horrendous boosts to the Illusion school, but that's by-the-by). A Wizard twinked for Fortitude is obviously going to beat the Bards DCs 9/10, but the point is that you don't often see a lot of Fortitude-Twinked Wizards.

Anyway, I'm mostly posting to concede the point, though I still don't think it's so clear cut (but then, what argument really is?) as some are choosing to believe ::bows and leaves::

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-04-29, 11:30 AM
I think the real issue here is that people are using bard spells offensively. It's 6th level spellcasting, yes, you can invest in it until your opponent needs a 15 to make the save. Of course, at that point he's failing on a 19 from a primary caster, so why bother? You've got better things to do, like Inspire X, Irresistable Dance, Heroism, or just melee combat. Leave SoD to the glass cannons, you've got better things to spend feats/actions on.

Gorbash
2009-04-29, 11:39 AM
I'm just saying that a Bard will, given that he's a "Caster-Bard" fighting against a "Generic-Wizard", have a fairly good chance of casting a high level spell that the Wizard will fail his Fortitude save against.

And I'm saying that "Generic-Wizard" who has low HP and low Fort saves, flies around the battlefield and casts Fireball is a thing of past, before LogicNinja and CharOp and the popularity of optimization forums. If you look around the forum, you'll notice that most people are looking for advice to optimize their Wizards and every discussion about wizards is usually about how awesome they are and how "Generic-Wizards" are terribly bad, and as such, small number of people actually plays that type of Wizard, becuase it's terribly easy to make your Wizard as tough as a Barbarian (Heart of Earth, False Life, Greater Heroism, Channeled Lifetheft...) or to have almost auto success on saves with little to no investment. I myself play a Gnome Wizard with those spells/items/rat familiar, and I took it a step further and took a spellcasting prestige class that has a good fort save (Earth Dreamer), so now at lvl 12 I have +15 fortitude saves and base HP of 83 (122 with HoE and False Life). And that's without Superior Resistance (since I don't actually need it now).

Point is, a wizard with lots of HP and great saves is much more common than a Bard with Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus, since they usually take feats, such as Melodic Casting, Lingering Song, Dragonfire Inspiration, Song of the Heart etc.

Dr_Horrible
2009-04-29, 12:39 PM
Check your DMG. A +4 Inherent Bonus costs 110,000, which is less than half his WBL at level 16. I did admit that this was the case and it leaves enough for other bits and pieces (including a +6 Enhancement to Cha, most importantly).

Yes, and you are spending 146,000gp on your Charisma alone, which is more then half of your 260,000gp. I am not questioning the possibility of it occurring, I am saying that doing so is a very poor idea, because you also want +6 Con, +6 Dex, +5 Resistance, +2CL, and various odds an ends that provide other neat abilities.

Taking just the example of +4 Inherent to Cha, that's 110,000gp, 117,000gp can also buy him both +6 items, a +5 to saves, and +1 CL. Which would you rather have, +4 to Cha or +12 in Stats, +15 in saves, and +1 CL?


Strictly speaking that Spellstrike Parrying Dagger with GMW cost twice the price you list there (unless you crafted it yourself, but then strictly the cost is 16,000gp + some XP), but yes, point taken that it costs a lot less to buff your Saves than to buff your Spell DC.

No, it costs 16,000gp if you buy it at a store. A +1 Spellstrike Dagger is a +2 item, it therefore costs 8000gp. Adding Parrying costs 8000gp.

8000+8000 is 16000. A +1 Spellstrike Parrying Dagger costs 16000gp.

JellyPooga
2009-04-29, 01:08 PM
No, it costs 16,000gp if you buy it at a store. A +1 Spellstrike Dagger is a +2 item, it therefore costs 8000gp. Adding Parrying costs 8000gp.

8000+8000 is 16000. A +1 Spellstrike Parrying Dagger costs 16000gp.

Spellstrike is a +1 equivalent, Parrying is a +2 equivalent, add +1 for the enhancement and you're talking about a +4 equivalent weapon for 32,000gp. That's going by the MIC anyway.

tyckspoon
2009-04-29, 01:09 PM
No, it costs 16,000gp if you buy it at a store. A +1 Spellstrike Dagger is a +2 item, it therefore costs 8000gp. Adding Parrying costs 8000gp.

8000+8000 is 16000. A +1 Spellstrike Parrying Dagger costs 16000gp.

Magic Item Compendium updated Parrying to a +2 property. Overpriced, if you ask me, but if you're using MIC it's no longer a nice cheap way to pick up a buff.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2009-04-29, 07:40 PM
Bards don't need to worry about their DCs to neutralize enemy spellcasters. Just ready an action to cast Silence if they cast a spell with a verbal component, as soon as they do cast it on a point in space so they're within the area. They don't get a saving throw and their spell automatically fails. A 2nd level spell can counter some 90% of the spells in the game, regardless of caster level.

A Bard can dish out a gazillion d6 damage, go Silverbrow Human with 2 flaws for Dragonfire Inspiration, Obtain Familiar, Wild Cohort (Badger), Melodic Casting, Song of the Heart, and Improved Familiar (Krenshar). With a Badge of Valor and Inspirational Boost at level 6 your Inspire Courage adds +4d6 fire damage. Your Badger and Krenshar each get three attacks/round, so you're basically dealing 24d6 damage per round at level six not even counting your other party members' or your own attacks. On top of that you can cast spells without interrupting your bardic music, so you can still stick an enemy spellcaster with a Silence.

Keld Denar
2009-04-29, 08:58 PM
Virtuoso, a common bardic PrC, gives you the Jarring Song ability, or the ability to make opposed Perform vs Concentration checks to keep an opponent from casting spells. Assuming equal ranks, you'll probably have enough difference in stats, and skill boosters to have a good shot at shutting up the caster. Thats pretty potent. Given a standard caster bard build of Bard9/Virt1/SC2/Virt+8, you won't get it until about ECL15, IIRC. You could get it earlier, but that would give you a bit less optimized end build, given that after you advance your normal bardic casting with Virt, you can't advance your SC casting with it. Thats why the non-casting level is always taken right before SC, because you haven't advanced casting yet.

Frosty
2009-04-29, 09:00 PM
Those who complain about bards are those who wants something to dish out a gazillion d6 damage

The bard does not do that at all. Being fairly weak in the damage aspect of things.

However he can do pretty much everything, fill every niche and still have skill points left for perform.

Actually, Bards can deal more d6 damages than rogues. Have you heard of Dragonfire Inspiration? You convert Inspir Courage into d6s per 1 bonus of Courage, and you can pump yourself to like +14d6 damage PER HIT...on ALL party members including yourself.

Your Rogue friend will LOVE you. As will anyone who likes landing a lot of hits.