Why does everyone hate bards?

[noahpocalypse]

Is that just in tabletop games because the player will actually sing, or are they truly regarded as useless? They seem kind of cool to me- they have rogue-ish skills, a few spells based on the sorcerer system (so no spell book required), and they... well, they aren't as bad at melee as wizards are. So they're kind of jack-of-all-trades, a handy class to have in case your group's whatever dies. What's the big deal?

[Yora]

Not everyone hates bards. Some love them.

[Kalirren]

I've heard it argued that bard is the best class because you naturally get the greatest share of productive play time in session.

I guess against full casters they pale. And they don't get any bonus feats, and half their songs are sad and useless. But those are all relatively easy things to houserule/work around/homebrew for.

[tribble]

I like bards thematically, I just don't like the crunch.

[DonutBoy12321]

I love bards. They are my third favorite class (Factotums and Duskblades in first and second, respectively.) And everyone says bards are weak, but with the Sublime Chord prestige class, they can at least get close to sorcerers in power, while still having all of the Bardy goodness. I also like how many prestige classes they have, so they can become uber-specialized in one area of bardness.
People hate bard for two reasons:
1. It comes after Barbarian and before Cleric in the Player's Handbook, so it's after a pure melee, and before a full caster who can do a lot, so it seems weak and unspecialized.
2. You might accidentally miss s letter on a keyboard and call them Barf, which subconsciously amuses people and makes Bards look weak.

[Lateral]

Nobody here really thinks bards are weak. That's something you see in groups that see bards as a fifth wheel and therefore useless, or else see them as silly. They aren't.

Well, okay, maybe they're a little silly, but they still have a very well-defined role as skillmonkeys, combat buffers, and supplementary casters.

[killem2]

I think it depends on the DM and how much they build around what a bard can do. If all it is,is a bunch of hack n slash... I wouldn't expect 100% awesome from the bard.

[Greenish]

If all it is,is a bunch of hack n slash... I wouldn't expect 100% awesome from the bard.You'd be surprised.

[Lateral]

I think it depends on the DM and how much they build around what a bard can do. If all it is,is a bunch of hack n slash... I wouldn't expect 100% awesome from the bard.

On the contrary, if it's all hack-and-slash you invest in Inspire Courage and turn all your party's beatsticks into howitzers.

[RaggedAngel]

A Harmonizing Crystal Echoblade, Slippers of Battledance, Snowflake Wardance, and a tiny ToB dip for Song of the White Raven makes one hell of a combat machine. You have to put ranks in both Perform: Sing and Dance to make it work, but then you just look twice as cool.

[FMArthur]

There are a bunch of reasons bards get a bad rep, and some of those reasons make the others seem more severe.

They're supposed to be the Jack of All Trades and a lot of people play it that way, but... they're not that good at doing everything. If played that way when unoptimized, they fall well short of it in every category and become useless at everything. In general they get beat at Doing Everything by clerics, druids, factotums, arcane gish multiclassers, ACF-aware rangers and an unfortunately expansive repertoire of prestige classes. None of these things were balanced based on what a Do Everything bard can do, unlike many other classes that got balanced against core classes when competing for their roles.
[br] Thematically, Bardic Music in combat is utterly silly unless you go out of your way to fluff yourself as the drums of war or an orator or a deadly dancer. The generic bard fluff is some jackass with a lute and that's what people assume any new bard is until they see it in action or are told OoC that the character is otherwise.
[br] Extraordinary social prowess is undervalued by some, and resented by some others. The campaign will go whereever it needs to, and you and your heroes are more than capable of communicating with others in character because their poor skills or Cha haven't made them mutes. Having a big number in "talking to people" is super vague and implies confusing or uncomfortable things about roleplaying dialogue, like whether or not the bard should always be the one speaking. The presence of a character on social steroids in a party of normals makes it difficult to demonstrate the difference without it seeming arbitrary.
[br] Most of the best Bard options that make them awesome in 3.5 come from a huge variety of books. This is daunting for some players, irksome to 'simple' groups, and can be more work than constructing a dang wizard.

[Fax Celestis]

Thematically, Bardic Music in combat is utterly silly unless you go out of your way to fluff yourself as the drums of war or an orator or a deadly dancer. The generic bard fluff is some jackass with a lute and that's what people assume any new bard is until they see it in action or are told OoC that the character is otherwise.

Dear lord, I lol'd so hard.

[NNescio]

Thematically, Bardic Music in combat is utterly silly unless you go out of your way to fluff yourself as the drums of war or an orator or a deadly dancer. The generic bard fluff is some jackass with a lute and that's what people assume any new bard is until they see it in action or are told OoC that the character is otherwise.

Dear lord, I lol'd so hard.

♪ Bravely bold Sir Robin, rode forth from Camelot.
He was not afraid to die, O brave Sir Robin! ... ♪

[Elric VIII]

Thematically, Bardic Music in combat is utterly silly unless you go out of your way to fluff yourself as the drums of war or an orator or a deadly dancer. The generic bard fluff is some jackass with a lute and that's what people assume any new bard is until they see it in action or are told OoC that the character is otherwise.

I take issue with this. It's damn fun to play as a jackass with a lute. Quite literally, that's what one of my character was, a noncombatant bard that mocked the enemies while strumming his lute. :smallbiggrin:

[Big Fau]

If all it is,is a bunch of hack n slash... I wouldn't expect 100% awesome from the bard.

Two words: Dragonfire Inspiration.

[Anarion]

Pretty much selected a bard in my current campaign entirely so I would have an excuse to play this as my inspire courage music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrPte1uijDw :smallbiggrin:

That said, I think you can make a bard perfectly competent in a variety of ways. I'm playing pathfinder with my character, so it's even easier to optimize without at on of books. I ended up going pretty heavily skillmonkey using versatile performance and bardic knowledge to have a ton of very high skill checks all over the place since that's what the party was most lacking. Plus I took acute senses in combo with a druid we have to push his animal companion eagle's perception checks above 70, so that was fun.

[killem2]

You'd be surprised.

I don't think I really would. Unless the difference of hack n slash is different than what I think it is.

(I think diablo 1)

Straight walk fight, walk fight some more, gets some treasure, fight some more.

Straight on, no shenanigans, just fighting.

Answer me this then, bard lovers :smalltongue:, why be a bard if all you want is the fighting aspect? Why not make a fighting class? This is assuming the dungeons your DM gives you, require no real skill checks, or lore, or knowledge?

Why bother taking a class with rich RP flavor if you won't get to use it?

[Coidzor]

Only real problem I have with bards is the bit where they don't have trapfinding. Which is really more of a problem I have with trapfinding being a class feature that forces one player to take at least one level in a range of classes that are not necessarily desirable to take otherwise.


Straight walk fight, walk fight some more, gets some treasure, fight some more.

Straight on, no shenanigans, just fighting.

Bard doesn't even have to stop singing between fights in that case. :smallamused:

[Curious]

I don't think I really would. Unless the difference of hack n slash is different than what I think it is.

(I think diablo 1)

Straight walk fight, walk fight some more, gets some treasure, fight some more.

Straight on, no shenanigans, just fighting.

Oh, ohohoho. Ahahahaha!

Savage Bard 20
Silverbrow Human

1st lvl feat - Dragonfire Inspiration
Human feat - Two Weapon Fighting
3rd lvl feat - Snowflake Wardance
6th lvl feat - Words of Creation

Trade out Suggestion for Song of the Heart feat.

By level 7, you are dealing 6d6 on every attack you and your teammates make, and getting Cha to hit. It only gets better from there. If allowed to include Pathinder material, I can also move + full attack at level 5.

[Geigan]

I don't think I really would. Unless the difference of hack n slash is different than what I think it is.

(I think diablo 1)

Straight walk fight, walk fight some more, gets some treasure, fight some more.

Straight on, no shenanigans, just fighting.

Well there's bardzilla (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8595585) for starters. Other than that, dragonfire inspiration and just plain old inspire courage can contribute a lot to combat, especially if optimized. Not to mention stuff like snowflake wardance and the other numerous (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125732) ways to get charisma on to to-hit, damage, AC, etc that can help a bard contribute just as much as the rest of the group.

[Orzel]

The problem is not the bard but how they are played.

As FMArthur said, some people try to play bards as Jacks of All Trades. Doing this without optimization tends to tend to put them at NPC class level uselessness.

Again as FMArthur said already, some people play (or are throwaway NPC RPed by the DM) as some idiot with a stringed instrument. The quick default fluff of a bard is silly. You almost HAVE to make up a long background to be serious.

If someone play the bard as the face in a conversation heavy game, the bard is great. Too great if the player actually tries.

And bards are jinxes. Nothing good happens around bards. Or they wouldn't have anything to sings about. "There once was a-" "I met a-"

[Greenish]

Answer me this then, bard lovers :smalltongue:, why be a bard if all you want is the fighting aspect? Why not make a fighting class?Because bard is better at fighting than most "fighting classes". You really have no idea.

[Geigan]

Answer me this then, bard lovers :smalltongue:, why be a bard if all you want is the fighting aspect? Why not make a fighting class? This is assuming the dungeons your DM gives you, require no real skill checks, or lore, or knowledge?

Why bother taking a class with rich RP flavor if you won't get to use it?

How are we supposed to respond to your questions when you try to sneak your responses into old posts like that?

On top of all the good combat investment you still get all the normal RP and out of combat usefulness you always had. It is a class that has multiple uses on and off the battlefield like a proper jack-of-all-trades should. There's no reason to dislike bards if you've seen it done right. Unless it's the Best (http://guildedage.net/webcomic/chapter-10/chapter-10-page-14/) you've ever seen.

[Coidzor]

Oh, ohohoho. Ahahahaha!

Savage Bard 20
Silverbrow Human

1st lvl feat - Dragonfire Inspiration
Human feat - Two Weapon Fighting
3rd lvl feat - Snowflake Wardance
6th lvl feat - Words of Creation

Trade out Suggestion for Song of the Heart feat.

By level 7, you are dealing 6d6 on every attack you and your teammates make, and getting Cha to hit. It only gets better from there. If allowed to include Pathinder material, I can also move + full attack at level 5.

Conservatively or liberally?

Conservatively you might just get 1(bard 1)x2(words of creation)+1(song of the heart) +1 badge of valor + 1 inspirational boost for 5d6.

Otherwise that's 7d6 or 8d6 depending upon how an effect like inspirational boost that is put on the inspire courage after activating it is adjudicated.

Add in a masterwork cow's horn instrument which does not require hands once it is in, provided some kind of harness, and you can do that and give a flat +1 to hit and damage as well. Which may or may not get converted to d6s again.

Twisting the songs though, one can have both inspire courage and dragonfire inspiration up, for a +X to hit and damage and +Xd6 of Y energy type damage. There's another spell that can be used to make opponents take 1.5x the damage from sonic energy than they would otherwise which can also be brought to bear.

And every +X to hit and damage is one more point of BAB that can be put into power attack or one more point of to-hit that makes the lesser iterative attacks more likely to hit and be meaningful in the combat.

Bards' contributions to combat are to go for MVP, really, as they prefer to have others that they act as a force multiplier upon, even if they're just summons. Which a bard can transform from speedbumps into glass cannons or even real challenges depending upon the summon and the feats involved.

A Bard and a summoning-focused/necromancer character working together can lead to a lot of beautiful music. Same goes for rogues and totemists which like to turn into blenders of attacks anyway.

And when the bard fights, he's force multiplying one more person. So a good bard probably makes 3 fighting types more like 5 or 6 of them. Definitely doubles the d6s a rogue would be throwing down easily. 20th level rogue with a bard is going to throw 10d6 sneak attack if he can get into position for it, which he probably can fairly consistently do against most foes, and the bard slaps down another 8d6 to 13d6 to 18d6 energy damage that can be used on every attack.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

I don't think I really would. Unless the difference of hack n slash is different than what I think it is.

(I think diablo 1)

Straight walk fight, walk fight some more, gets some treasure, fight some more.

Straight on, no shenanigans, just fighting.

Answer me this then, bard lovers :smalltongue:, why be a bard if all you want is the fighting aspect? Why not make a fighting class? This is assuming the dungeons your DM gives you, require no real skill checks, or lore, or knowledge?

Why bother taking a class with rich RP flavor if you won't get to use it?

Inspire Courage/DFI with War Chanter and Inspire Legion. COngratulations, now everyone in the group has a full BAB progression (even rogues and monks) INCLUDING iteratives, have something like a +14 to attack and damage and +14d6 Sonic damage per swing.

Now go beat things down. Hard.

[Big Fau]

This is assuming the dungeons your DM gives you, require no real skill checks, or lore, or knowledge?

Why bother taking a class with rich RP flavor if you won't get to use it?

Let me rephrase your question: "Why play a Wizard when the DM bans Evocation?" Answer: "Because Evocation is irrelevant to the Wizard in general".

Every class will feel some kind of pain when major class features are removed. However, every single ability you listed has little impact on a Bard's combat ability (the Knowledges and Skill Checks are it, and only under specific circumstances). Inspire Courage, Inspire Greatness, and Fascinate are all very useful abilities (the latter being an out-of-combat option), and should not be discounted because you don't know how to use them properly.

[Helldog]

Bads are awesome. That's a fact. Evidence: Elan.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Ah, good old Dragonfire Inspiration. Every time I hear those two words, I think of the "Maiden of Flame" whose shouting voices resonates so well her very form ignites.

That being said, if you can swing it, simply because of how silly it is, Monk with a dash of monk (or, preferable), and Unarmed Swordsage dip with the usual White Raven bard set up can transform you and your party into walking fireballs.

Because Performing so awesomely that every one of you and your allies spontaneously combusts is always worth it.:smallbiggrin:

[Telonius]

My view of why Bards are awesome:

With a high enough Perform check, you can charm the Devil himself (http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llw6b3PyEs1qipfy5o1_500.jpg).

[jiriku]

Is that just in tabletop games because the player will actually sing, or are they truly regarded as useless? They seem kind of cool to me- they have rogue-ish skills, a few spells based on the sorcerer system (so no spell book required), and they... well, they aren't as bad at melee as wizards are. So they're kind of jack-of-all-trades, a handy class to have in case your group's whatever dies. What's the big deal?

Bards are great. Dunno who you're hanging with who doesn't agree, but I've seen a bard turn a solid PC group into an absolutely awesome group that could handle "difficult" encounters without breaking a sweat. Inspire Courage optimization produces awe-inspiring results when done properly.

[GoatBoy]

You can blame Fansy the Famous Bard (http://www.notacult.com/fansythefamous.htm) for most of their bad reps.

Players new to D&D focus on the "master of none" part of the bard's "jack of all trades, master of none" tagline. This is, of course, the same level of experience which thinks fighters match up to wizards because they never run out of sword swings, or that mystic theurges break the game because they have TWO caster levels! Wow!

Other people, regardless of experience with D&D, just don't want to be the nancy with the lute. They'll probably change their minds when you play some Klingon opera (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNTVzwjEyb4) for them.

[Hiro Protagonest]

My view of why Bards are awesome:

With a high enough Perform check, you can charm the Devil himself (http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llw6b3PyEs1qipfy5o1_500.jpg).

Charm the devil? That's for wimps. Bards beat the devil at his own game (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6RUg-NkjY4).

[Weezer]

To echo what everyone else is saying, Bards are actually really good, especially if you focus on Inspire Courage, grab Dragonfire Inspiration, Snowflake Wardance, Slippers of Battledancing and a Crystal Echoblade. They definitely outshine any core melee and are solid tier 3.

[Helldog]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u43-bh9jrxc

[Wyntonian]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u43-bh9jrxc

I was thinking about that, too.


Honestly, I feel like the question has been answered. Well done, Playgrounders. One of these days I'll find a slam-dunk thread like this to contribute to before you all nail it down.

[Ancano]

Nobody makes fun of bards. Fighters, on the other hand.....

[Thrice Dead Cat]

Bards are great. Dunno who you're hanging with who doesn't agree, but I've seen a bard turn a solid PC group into an absolutely awesome group that could handle "difficult" encounters without breaking a sweat. Inspire Courage optimization produces awe-inspiring results when done properly.

Bards are great for the DM, too. A bard with any summoner is like having your cake and eating it, too. A good conjurer drops somewhere between 1-5 monsters a round. A bard sings, giving bonuses to-hit and damage (or just damage, with Dragonfire Inspiration). Together, they smack armies around like the biggest bully on the playground.

[Weezer]

Bards are great for the DM, too. A bard with any summoner is like having your cake and eating it, too. A good conjurer drops somewhere between 1-5 monsters a round. A bard sings, giving bonuses to-hit and damage (or just damage, with Dragonfire Inspiration). Together, they smack armies around like the biggest bully on the playground.

Now I want to make a Druid with a DFI Bard cohort, spontaneous SNA+many natural attacks+Greenbound Summoning+IC+DFI is simply sexy.

[Godskook]

Everybody hates bards, wizards are underpowered, monks are the anit-caster, and fighters are king of the hill.

[Greenish]

Everybody hates bards, wizards are underpowered, monks are the anit-caster, and fighters are king of the hill.Clerics are only good for heal-botting and nobody wants to play a sissy tree-hugging druid.

[Helldog]

Commoners are the real kings. 99% of the entire worlds population consists of them so there must be something special about that NPC class and we don't even know it! 99% of the population can't be wrong, right?

[Geigan]

Clerics are only good for heal-botting and nobody wants to play a sissy tree-hugging druid.

Rangers are borderline OP because they get TWF, barbarians are generally hard to play, sorcerers are better than wizards because they're more flexible, the paladin's code is good because it helps balance out how OP they would otherwise be, psionics are straight up broken, and anything outside of core is obviously imbalanced beyond belief. /sarcasm in case you didn't get it by now

[TheCountAlucard]

I'm not going to say that it's necessarily true, but I will note that as I quote Chainmail Bikini, perceptions are everything...


Imagine Indiana Jones, Jackie Chan, and Conan the Barbarian teamed up to fight evil. They would surely leave no ass un-kicked. Now imagine if they let Ricky Martin join the party and started giving him an equal cut of the loot and XP. You’d have no respect for them. They might as well put an dresses and be his back-up dancers, because nobody is going to think of them as brave warriors and adventurers. Everyone will think of them as the three guys that hang around Ricky Martin and keep him from getting beat up.

Take a good look at your character sheet and ask yourself if that’s what you wanted when you rolled him up.

[Greenish]

If Indy wasn't a factotum, he'd be a bard.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

For a full education on the baddassery of a Bard, here is the Syllabus:

Week 1: Introduction. 10min + Bluff check = alignment change so fast you leave skid marks on the chart (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRG1tWQN6e8) [see sig for description of the Joker Bard and just how nasty he can be to an entire campaign]

Week 2: Queen. Crank the base, this is Inspire Courage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGaOlfmX8rQ)

Week 3: Manowar. Inspire Legion done right (www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLCp5U7wotQ)

Week 4: Metallica. Smack Talk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAGP24eq_0o)

Week 5: TROGDOR! Dragonfire Inspiration (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsiap4x66vo)

Week 6: Midterm exam

Week 7: Charlie Daniels Band Beating them at their own game (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6RUg-NkjY4)

Week 8: Blind Guardian. Even if you are Blind, you are still badass (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_tORtmKIjE)

Week 9: Beatles. One bard can cause a revolution (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqC_Gma221M)

Week 10: Monkees. Why Bards always get the girl (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaKDOYTZbJg)

Week 11: Hell Week. Also, Stringed instruments are not necessarily 'pansy' (www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JjQGt7WjK0)

Week 12: Finals. Also: Music that moves generations (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcL---4xQYA)

Your professor will be on hand to answer any questions you might have.

[Drelua]

Nobody makes fun of bards. Fighters, on the other hand.....

Oh, lots of people that don't know the system very well make fun of bards, such as my DM and myself 6 months ago, before I joined these forums. They seemed like losers that just help other people be awesome. And my favourite class was monk. And I thought druids sucked. Yeah, I had no idea what the hell I was talking about. Also, see Order of the Stick. Before taking Dashing Swordsman, which seems to me like Rich Burlew saying he knows that bards don't have to suck if the player knows what they're doing, Elan was a useless idiot. He pranced around with his lute without any optimization, so he was useless. I still don't think my DM agrees with me about bards being good. I really want to play a Dervish Dancer bard, since we recently switched to Pathfinder.

[TheOOB]

They can never decide what exactly a bard is, each edition they seem to change(even 3.0 to 3.5 they changed dramatically). There is also the problem that the bard song, their most iconic ability ranges from a curiosity to outright useless(with a few exceptions, suggestion is amazing), there are few points where I'm willing to give up my ability to spellcast to give my team a small to-hit bonus. That's what heroism potions are for.

[Tenno Seremel]

Thematically, Bardic Music in combat is utterly silly unless you go out of your way to fluff yourself as the drums of war or an orator or a deadly dancer. The generic bard fluff is some jackass with a lute and that's what people assume any new bard is until they see it in action or are told OoC that the character is otherwise.
I'd apply Ar tonelico fluff = instant awesome.

[Zaq]

The thing about Bards is that they're one of the least user-friendly classes in the PHB. You can't really accidentally optimize a Bard. You have to know what you're doing. You have to know exactly what you're going for, exactly what to look for, and exactly how to use it. They have really tricky action economy management (sing or cast? How many songs should I try to have going at once?), unintuitive resource management (it is really, really easy for a newb to run out of songs, spells, or both), and often subtle effects that a neophyte won't know to look for or appreciate.

That, and most of their best stuff comes from splatbooks. It's a total myth that core-only Bards suck . . . Grease, Glitterdust, and Glibness alone give them plenty of room to shine, and that's ignoring skills and Suggestion. That said, a lot of the really cool stuff isn't in core, so new players won't know to look for it. (Also, it's not exactly clustered together, either. A "standard" DFI Bard is pulling from Dragon Magic, Eberron Campaign Setting, DMG2, Book of Exalted Deeds, the MIC, and possibly Complete Adventurer. That's intimidating for a newbie.)

Basically, it takes system mastery to make Bards good. They're fantastic if you know what you're doing, but optimizing them takes work.

[Greyfeld85]

To echo what everyone else is saying, Bards are actually really good, especially if you focus on Inspire Courage, grab Dragonfire Inspiration, Snowflake Wardance, Slippers of Battledancing and a Crystal Echoblade. They definitely outshine any core melee and are solid tier 3.

This is the problem, really. If you only work within Core, Bards are half worthless since they get outshined by most of the core classes. On the other hand, if you allow splat books, you essentially get 2 builds to work with.

Either you go DFI, Snowflake Wardance, and pick yourself up an echoblade... or you completely ignore your melee capability and dive into Sublime Chord to turn yourself into a sucky sorcerer.

The wide majority of Bard splat is just horrible for PCs, and that makes it incredibly easy to accidentally make a worthless character.

Don't get me wrong, I love the flavor of the Bard and all that, but the Factotum and Beguiler ended up being better bards than the core Bard ever was.

[Morph Bark]

I [censored] love Bards.


Not everyone hates bards. Some love them.

Words of Creation.

[FMArthur]

I thought this thread was about IRL groups not "in the know" enough to be aware of the Bard's strengths, and why that might be. I didn't know there were actually people on GitP who disliked them. :smalleek:

[Novawurmson]

If Indy wasn't a factotum, he'd be a bard.

Definitely a bard, at least in Pathfinder (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/archetypes/paizo---bard-archetypes/archaeologist) :D

[Skaven]

Bards excel in social campaigns.

They are also fairly decent in the magical department if you focus on a specific area and are creative, they are probably second to the monster trio (wiz/cleric/druid when played by a smart and creative player.

[Lateral]

This is the problem, really. If you only work within Core, Bards are half worthless since they get outshined by most of the core classes.
With decent spell selection, a Core bard will crush any Core monk or fighter. Easily.

On the other hand, if you allow splat books, you essentially get 2 builds to work with.

Either you go DFI, Snowflake Wardance, and pick yourself up an echoblade... or you completely ignore your melee capability and dive into Sublime Chord to turn yourself into a sucky sorcerer.
There are several different ways to build IC-focused bards, and many different ways to build Sublime Chords.


Don't get me wrong, I love the flavor of the Bard and all that, but the Factotum and Beguiler ended up being better bards than the core Bard ever was.
They're both similar to bards, but neither one fills quite the same rolls. Bards buff and skillmonkey, beguilers debuff (with illusions or enchantments) and skillmonkey, and Factotums do pretty much anything they want.

[Eldan]

Ah, bard Magic. Oh, all the Sculpt Sound shenanigans.

[Tyndmyr]

Is that just in tabletop games because the player will actually sing, or are they truly regarded as useless? They seem kind of cool to me- they have rogue-ish skills, a few spells based on the sorcerer system (so no spell book required), and they... well, they aren't as bad at melee as wizards are. So they're kind of jack-of-all-trades, a handy class to have in case your group's whatever dies. What's the big deal?

Ive seen this opinion lots. Here's why...the bard has a few options available, but none of them are as immediately imposing as that of a more specialized char. It's fairly obvious, for instance, that a rogue will tend to outclass them as a skillmonkey, and a full caster on spells. So people tend to look at this as "not as good".

And people rarely tend to consider the full effect of things like buffing via songs.

TLDR: Bards are not actually bad, their abilities are just structured in a way that makes them appear so at a casual glance.

[Elric VIII]

Ive seen this opinion lots. Here's why...the bard has a few options available, but none of them are as immediately imposing as that of a more specialized char. It's fairly obvious, for instance, that a rogue will tend to outclass them as a skillmonkey, and a full caster on spells. So people tend to look at this as "not as good".

And people rarely tend to consider the full effect of things like buffing via songs.

TLDR: Bards are not actually bad, their abilities are just structured in a way that makes them appear so at a casual glance.

This is true enough, but I'll never understand it. The same players that see the Bard's abilities as useless look at all of the Monk's abilities and start drooling.

[Anarion]

Also worth noting that, if your campaign does have a strong focus on actually talking to people, it's pretty easy to be too dominant with a bard.

I mean, imagine you went back to OoTS and Elan took glibness as one of his spells and had Haley's level of skill at bluffs. They could probably have taken over all battle planning in Azure City (not to mention walk easily in the trial and probably skip the jail session), and Elan would have convinced one of the Azure city allies to let them land in a kingdom, meaning that he, Durkon, and V would have taken a totally different route to reuniting the party.

[FMArthur]

This is my assessment of the class's strengths and role:

Bards are pretty much the best party-boosters in the game and outclass a number of other classes that focus on doing so to the exclusion of all else. Being competent in melee in addition to that is good synergy (and usually pretty stylish!), but it's not required to fulfill your party role unless you're really short on frontliners.

The skills, Knowledge and tricksy spellcasting are all sideshows to that and don't seem to have much impact on their primary role, but those features can remain powerful without needing to divert any particular build attention to them, so they are welcome additions that improve versatility. But they will never be the best at those other things, and if you try to focus on them by neglecting your buffing power, then you start treading dangerously close to the 'outclassed' zone under beguilers and factotums.

Sublime chords are another matter entirely. I know I'll get a lot of flak for this from SC-lovers, but I can never take them seriously as bards. Sublime chords are bards who stopped caring about their class halfway through and decided to be sorcerers instead. I mean come on.

[Big Fau]

I'd apply Ar tonelico fluff = instant awesome.

Because nude people are funny.

[Doug Lampert]

They can never decide what exactly a bard is, each edition they seem to change(even 3.0 to 3.5 they changed dramatically). There is also the problem that the bard song, their most iconic ability ranges from a curiosity to outright useless(with a few exceptions, suggestion is amazing), there are few points where I'm willing to give up my ability to spellcast to give my team a small to-hit bonus. That's what heroism potions are for.

So? Sing PRIOR to the fight and then stop when the fight starts, the bonus lasts 5 more rounds. It's basically a standard action to cast spell that gives a very good moral bonus to your entire party and all associates for 6 rounds (5 if you are already singing so you don't need to waste an action in combat at all) and which doesn't cost you a slot.

[Dr.Epic]

Yeah, I love bards and most people I know love them too.

[jackattack]

I hate bards because I don't like medieval music, and I don't want to listen to "Medieval Open Mike Night" every session.

[Axinian]

I hate bards because I don't like medieval music, and I don't want to listen to "Medieval Open Mike Night" every session.
That's why no bard I've ever seen actually uses medieval music.

Real men use Blind Guardian for inspire courage.

[Weezer]

That's why no bard I've ever seen actually uses medieval music.

Real men use Blind Guardian for inspire courage.

Because lutes and flutes are so very metal :smalltongue:

[Hiro Protagonest]

I hate bards because I don't like medieval music, and I don't want to listen to "Medieval Open Mike Night" every session.

There are bards who play medieval music?

And there are people who play medieval music because they're playing bards? :smallconfused:

Oh, and in PF, bards get new class features, and they use this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6MYLtqL9T8) for Dirge of Doom. :smallamused:

[Emmerask]

I don´t know who could really hate bards... well maybe the dm ^^

They are either very competent fighters or pretty good casters and on top of that they make everyone else in the group a lot better, whats not to love?

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Because lutes and flutes are so very metal :smalltongue:

Apocalyptica uses only acoustical stringed instruments... I dare you to deny their metal status. Metal is more than amperage. It's a way of music...

[Big Fau]

Oh, and in PF, bards get new class features, and they use this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6MYLtqL9T8) for Dirge of Doom. :smallamused:

Do note that if you plan on using Bardic Music out of combat, you won't have the rounds/day to use it during combat.

That's what I hate about PF Bards: Their bardic music is not capable of being used both in combat and out of it because of the changes they made to it. And god help you if you take bardic music feats.

[Tenno Seremel]

Because nude people are funny.

First two games where fine with changing clothes though :}

[Weezer]

Apocalyptica uses only acoustical stringed instruments... I dare you to deny their metal status. Metal is more than amperage. It's a way of music...

I know, thus the tongue-smily. In fact listening to a cappella metal right now (well not pure a cappella, they do use some drums), and it certainly is metal despite being purely vocals driven.

[Sith_Happens]

there are few points where I'm willing to give up my ability to spellcast to give my team a small to-hit bonus. That's what heroism potions are for.

Melodic Casting feat. Complete Mage, pg. 44-45. Lets you cast spells and use bardic music at the same time, and use Perform instead of Concentration. "What's that, you're trying to interrupt my spell? It'll take a lot more than a sword to throw off my groove!"

[Greyfeld85]

With decent spell selection, a Core bard will crush any Core monk or fighter. Easily.

As I said, most core classes.


There are several different ways to build IC-focused bards, and many different ways to build Sublime Chords.

Even if you have a little wiggle room of a couple feats, that doesn't change the fact that you're still working with a grand total of two builds.



They're both similar to bards, but neither one fills quite the same rolls. Bards buff and skillmonkey, beguilers debuff (with illusions or enchantments) and skillmonkey, and Factotums do pretty much anything they want.

The whole "jack of all trades" thing is more or less what the Beguiler and Factotum do, which was the original intended role of the Bard. The fact is, to become relevant in any campaign of tier 3 or higher, the Bard has to actually specialize, which runs contrary to the original intentions of the developers.

[Fax Celestis]

Real men use Blind Guardian for inspire courage.

Imaaaaginations from the other siiiiiiiiiiiiide~~

[Elric VIII]

Even if you have a little wiggle room of a couple feats, that doesn't change the fact that you're still working with a grand total of two builds.

This is only true to the extent that any class has limited builds based on class feature strengths. You can make many different Bards, it seems every other book has a bard-geared PrC in it. This is especially true when you use Theurge and music-granting PrCs to splash some Bard onto another class.

[Dr.Epic]

Yeah, it's almost like the hatred of bards makes them almost banned. I guess you could call it an em-bard-go? Get it?:smallbiggrin:

[FMArthur]

That was the biggest stretch since the goatse man. You should be just as ashamed.

[Elric VIII]

Yeah, it's almost like the hatred of bards makes them almost banned. I guess you could call it an em-bard-go? Get it?:smallbiggrin:

I hope that you don't RP it when your Bards take Perform (comedy). :smallamused:

[Greyfeld85]

This is only true to the extent that any class has limited builds based on class feature strengths. You can make many different Bards, it seems every other book has a bard-geared PrC in it. This is especially true when you use Theurge and music-granting PrCs to splash some Bard onto another class.

I'm not saying that there aren't plenty of Bard-intended options out there. I'm just saying that most of them suck, and aren't worth playing if you're playing in a campaign of tier 3 or higher.

Recently, I wanted to create a Bard//DN gestalt to make use out of the Dirgesinger PrC from Libris Mortis. After doing a lot of research, and piecing together build after build, I finally came to the realization that the best "dirgesinger" I could build would require exact zero levels in the Dirgesinger PrC. Taking the actual prestige class would force me to lose spellcasting levels, shaft my Reflex save, and ruin my IC progression, all so I could pick up a handful of undead-themed songs that were situational at best and useless at worst.

And this is really the problem with most Bard PrCs. The wide majority of them force you to give up too much for some extra situational abilities. The exceptions have already been stated.

And dipping bard for Bardic Knowledge and IC +1 doesn't count as "playing a bard." No more than dipping two levels into Fighter for bonus feats count as "playing a fighter."

[Big Fau]

And this is really the problem with most Bard PrCs. The wide majority of them force you to give up too much for some extra situational abilities. The exceptions have already been stated.

Actually this a problem with hundreds of PrCs, not just Bard-focused ones. There are 500+ PrCs out there, and of those only about 70 of those are any good.

[Anarion]

Actually this a problem with hundreds of PrCs, not just Bard-focused ones. There are 500+ PrCs out there, and of those only about 70 of those are any good.

These boards also create the perception that full spellcasters get the best PRCs and have the most options, but I think that mostly comes from the fact that any PRC with full casting progression is an improvement over the base wizard/sorcerer class.

[Godskook]

Sublime chords are another matter entirely. I know I'll get a lot of flak for this from SC-lovers, but I can never take them seriously as bards. Sublime chords are bards who stopped caring about their class halfway through and decided to be sorcerers instead. I mean come on.

What exactly do they lose about their core-competencies, especially since SC can easily jump right back into other bardic prestige classes.


As I said, most core classes.

Considering the most powerful and least powerful are almost all in core, you're going to have to be more specific, or I can, I guess: \

Wizard/Druid/Cleric>Sorcerer>Bard>Barbarian/Ranger/Rogue>Fighter/Monk/Paladin

Note how there's only full-casters above the Bard on that core list.

[Big Fau]

Considering the most powerful and least powerful are almost all in core, you're going to have to be more specific, or I can, I guess:

If you ignore the DMG's NPC classes, your statement is patently untrue. The weakest classes in the game are agreed to be the CW Samurai and the Truenamer.


However, including the NPC classes into your equation makes the statement true again, because the Commoner loses to the Truenamer in a swordfight.

[Elric VIII]

I'm not saying that there aren't plenty of Bard-intended options out there. I'm just saying that most of them suck, and aren't worth playing if you're playing in a campaign of tier 3 or higher.

Recently, I wanted to create a Bard//DN gestalt to make use out of the Dirgesinger PrC from Libris Mortis. After doing a lot of research, and piecing together build after build, I finally came to the realization that the best "dirgesinger" I could build would require exact zero levels in the Dirgesinger PrC. Taking the actual prestige class would force me to lose spellcasting levels, shaft my Reflex save, and ruin my IC progression, all so I could pick up a handful of undead-themed songs that were situational at best and useless at worst.


This line of thinking only leads to the logical conclusion of "just play Pun Pun."

I mean, how many builds exist for DN? I'm pretty sure there's only one: a Necromancer. Just because you thought the option of Dirgesinger was not powerful/useful enough to consider does not invalidate it. I'm sure there are plenty of people (myself included) that feel DN is too limited vs a Wizard/Cleric, the same as you feel toward the Bard.


And dipping bard for Bardic Knowledge and IC +1 doesn't count as "playing a bard." No more than dipping two levels into Fighter for bonus feats count as "playing a fighter."

In the same was Fighter 2/Warblade 18 is a "fighter," Bard 2/Something 8/Bardic+Something Theurge 10 is a "bard." But this gets into the topic of classes as metagame constructs.

[Greyfeld85]

Actually this a problem with hundreds of PrCs, not just Bard-focused ones. There are 500+ PrCs out there, and of those only about 70 of those are any good.

I'm sorry, but this doesn't disprove my point in the slightest.


What exactly do they lose about their core-competencies, especially since SC can easily jump right back into other bardic prestige classes.

It's not so much what they "lose" (although by PrCing out of the Bard class, you do gimp your IC progression, but that isn't limited to SC), it's that you're basically taking the Bard and turning it into a Sorcerer. This wouldn't be an issue in and of itself, except the Sorcerer is already known for benefiting massively from any full-progression spellcasting PrC, which gives them far more flexibility or specialization (as they deem fit for their character)

Ultimately, it's not really a huge deal, objectively, but to some people it can ultimately feel like you're wasting 7 levels just to catch up with the Sorcerer, and still being locked out of getting to cherry pick your class features, like the Sorcerer gets to.



Considering the most powerful and least powerful are almost all in core, you're going to have to be more specific, or I can, I guess: \

Wizard/Druid/Cleric>Sorcerer>Bard>Barbarian/Ranger/Rogue>Fighter/Monk/Paladin

Note how there's only full-casters above the Bard on that core list.

Personally, my list would be more like:

Wizard/Druid/Cleric > Sorcerer > Bard/Ranger/Paladin > Rogue > Fighter/Barbarian > Monk

My assertions regarding strength against core classes is based on playing a core-only game. Bards get quite a bit stronger with splat books, but they have jack-all for customization in core.

[Greyfeld85]

This line of thinking only leads to the logical conclusion of "just play Pun Pun."

I mean, how many builds exist for DN? I'm pretty sure there's only one: a Necromancer. Just because you thought the option of Dirgesinger was not powerful/useful enough to consider does not invalidate it. I'm sure there are plenty of people (myself included) that feel DN is too limited vs a Wizard/Cleric, the same as you feel toward the Bard.

I may not have properly explained myself.

It's not that the PrC "wasn't strong enough." It's that it literally detracted from my character, rather than adding to it. The Bard core class is already on the low end of tier 3 on its best day. There were other options to give my character the same concept, without actively gimping her, which is pretty much where most Bard PrCs tend to fall.

"Sure, this is a cool concept, but I can use another prestige class with similar fluff that doesn't suck, instead."

And don't get me wrong; this is, as always, my opinion. But the OP asked why people dislike the Bard class, so I'm giving my view on why some people dislike it.


In the same was Fighter 2/Warblade 18 is a "fighter," Bard 2/Something 8/Bardic+Something Theurge 10 is a "bard." But this gets into the topic of classes as metagame constructs.

This thread is about the class itself, not the archetype construct. Such as the discussion is about actual classes, dipping a level or two for a specific class feature is not akin to "playing that class." That's why "fighters suck," but so many builds still require a 2 level dip.

[Weezer]

I may not have properly explained myself.

It's not that the PrC "wasn't strong enough." It's that it literally detracted from my character, rather than adding to it. The Bard core class is already on the low end of tier 3 on its best day. There were other options to give my character the same concept, without actively gimping her, which is pretty much where most Bard PrCs tend to fall.

"Sure, this is a cool concept, but I can use another prestige class with similar fluff that doesn't suck, instead."

And don't get me wrong; this is, as always, my opinion. But the OP asked why people dislike the Bard class, so I'm giving my view on why some people dislike it.

Except that's how it is for 90+% of PRCs. True Necromancer is a far ****ter necromancer than a straight wizard or cleric, Arcane Archer fails completely at doing anything of use, Greenstar Adept makes wizards almost useless, the list of PRCs that hurt you goes on and on. There is a reason that if you look at the optimized builds for any particular class they tend to use a small list of PRCs. The only real exception for this is psion/wizard/sorcerer/cleric, where any full casting PRC without horrific prerequisites is better than the base class.

What you're describing is true for just about every class, not just the Bard class.

[Skelengar]

Someday, I'm going to run an all bard campaign. The characters will get groupies and everything.

[Lateral]

Someday, I'm going to run an all bard campaign. The characters will get groupies and everything.
Yeah, I've often thought about trying to start an all-Bard rock band D&D group. Only problem is that Words of Creation sort of clashes with being a rock musician, what with being an Exalted feat and all.

[enderlord99]

Proof that bards are awesome:

Best Greek Myth Ever = Jason and the Golden Fleece

Jason and the Golden Fleece = Large Group of the Greatest People of their Career type

Large Group of the Greatest People of their Career type = We are the World

We are the World = music

music = bards

thus, Best Greek Myth Ever (which is by definition awesome) = bards.

:smallbiggrin:

[Greyfeld85]

Except that's how it is for 90+% of PRCs. True Necromancer is a far ****ter necromancer than a straight wizard or cleric, Arcane Archer fails completely at doing anything of use, Greenstar Adept makes wizards almost useless, the list of PRCs that hurt you goes on and on. There is a reason that if you look at the optimized builds for any particular class they tend to use a small list of PRCs. The only real exception for this is psion/wizard/sorcerer/cleric, where any full casting PRC without horrific prerequisites is better than the base class.

What you're describing is true for just about every class, not just the Bard class.

Most base classes have at least double the amount of PrC options that the Bard does. This is especially true of core classes.

Despite the sheer number of worthless/horrible PrCs, this doesn't change the fact that after dozens of splat books, the Bard is basically the only core class that's limited to two builds.

As a Wizard,Sorcerer, Druid or Cleric, you can go into literally any PrC with full spell progression and still remain tier 1. And there is an incredible number of full-progression PrCs out there.

As a Fighter, anything with full BAB and actual class features is a step up.

Barbarians have their choice of a number of decent Rage PrCs.

Paladins and Rangers are both interesting springboards into a handful of odd PrCs that usually have very specific requirements, in addition to the fact that they have multiclass options that mean they don't necessarily have to PrC to begin with.

Rogues have access to a pretty wide variety of PrCs, which can drastically change their entire playstyle.

Monks... well hell, even monks can choose between straight combat, or turning into a gish (in your preferred flavor of divine, arcane or psionic). Granted, Swordsages are better Monks than Monks are, but if you actually decide to play a Monk, you have a number of PrC options that actually make you better at what you do.

Bards... not so much. Most Bard PrCs force you to give up your spellcasting progression. The ones that don't still force you to gimp your Inspire Courage progression. If you're serious about actually optimizing your Bard, you're limited to maybe 3 PrCs out of all the splat books (War Chanter, Virtuoso, Sublime Chord), with the rest taking a back seat and being relegated to NPCs or sub-op campaigns.

[onemorelurker]

Someday, I'm going to run an all bard campaign. The characters will get groupies and everything.

I'm doing this on Monday! Our band name is the Truly Horrid Umber Hulks. :smallcool:

[Zaq]

Someday, I'm going to run an all bard campaign. The characters will get groupies and everything.

I've been in an all-Bard campaign. I actually kind of orchestrated it (yuk yuk) partially to show the GM that Bards kick total ass. (In my defense, he said something like "Bard casting is OK, but they don't really get any good spells, like Fireball." I took that as a challenge.) It was amazing. We took great care to complement (and compliment!) each other's strengths and not double up too much, which was totally possible even at level 3. The sheer amount of creative problem-solving we got out of that group (which included 2 veterans and 2 newbies, plus a first-time GM) was hilarious. We all took Buommi as a language known so we could talk to each other without being understood. Whenever anyone got suspicious, we just said that we were practicing our harmony. Beautiful.

Also, a group of Bards can succeed on any skill check they really care to. We got something like a 30-odd on a Gather Info check—and none of us were trained in Gather Info. At level 3. That was fun.

I'd totally be part of another all-Bard group.

[Curious]

I've been in an all-Bard campaign. I actually kind of orchestrated it (yuk yuk) partially to show the GM that Bards kick total ass. (In my defense, he said something like "Bard casting is OK, but they don't really get any good spells, like Fireball." I took that as a challenge.) It was amazing. We took great care to complement (and compliment!) each other's strengths and not double up too much, which was totally possible even at level 3. The sheer amount of creative problem-solving we got out of that group (which included 2 veterans and 2 newbies, plus a first-time GM) was hilarious. We all took Buommi as a language known so we could talk to each other without being understood. Whenever anyone got suspicious, we just said that we were practicing our harmony. Beautiful.

Also, a group of Bards can succeed on any skill check they really care to. We got something like a 30-odd on a Gather Info check—and none of us were trained in Gather Info. At level 3. That was fun.

I'd totally be part of another all-Bard group.

I would totally join that game, if someone else were willing to DM.

[Greyfeld85]

I've been in an all-Bard campaign. I actually kind of orchestrated it (yuk yuk) partially to show the GM that Bards kick total ass. (In my defense, he said something like "Bard casting is OK, but they don't really get any good spells, like Fireball." I took that as a challenge.) It was amazing. We took great care to complement (and compliment!) each other's strengths and not double up too much, which was totally possible even at level 3. The sheer amount of creative problem-solving we got out of that group (which included 2 veterans and 2 newbies, plus a first-time GM) was hilarious. We all took Buommi as a language known so we could talk to each other without being understood. Whenever anyone got suspicious, we just said that we were practicing our harmony. Beautiful.

Also, a group of Bards can succeed on any skill check they really care to. We got something like a 30-odd on a Gather Info check—and none of us were trained in Gather Info. At level 3. That was fun.

I'd totally be part of another all-Bard group.

The bolded and underlined part made me lol :P

[Zaq]

Me too, Greyfeld. That's what really cemented my decision. (And hey, I thought it was classier to show him what "good spells" were from a Bard perspective, rather than from a full caster's perspective.)

[Elric VIII]

Most base classes have at least double the amount of PrC options that the Bard does. This is especially true of core classes.

Despite the sheer number of worthless/horrible PrCs, this doesn't change the fact that after dozens of splat books, the Bard is basically the only core class that's limited to two builds.

Bards... not so much. Most Bard PrCs force you to give up your spellcasting progression. The ones that don't still force you to gimp your Inspire Courage progression. If you're serious about actually optimizing your Bard, you're limited to maybe 3 PrCs out of all the splat books (War Chanter, Virtuoso, Sublime Chord), with the rest taking a back seat and being relegated to NPCs or sub-op campaigns.

This is false, Bards can qualify for nearly every PrC that a Sorcerer can get, plus Bard ones. From what I can see, your problem is that there are few Bard PrCs that are just Bard, but better. The whole idea of PrCs is specialization. WotC dropped the ball a bit with all the full casting PrCs, but the idea is still there.

Seriously, there are many Bard builds. Just to list some good PrCs to dip or finish:


Dawncaller - RoS
Fochlucan Lyrist - CAd
Lyric Thaumaturge - CM
Spellsinger - RoF
Seeker of the Song - CAr
Sublime Chord - CAr
Virtuoso - CAd
War Chanter - CW
Warrior Skald - RoF


Honorable Mnetion:

Song of the White Raven allows for Bard and Crusader/Warblade multiclassing.
Devoted Performer/Harmonious Knight allow for Bard/Paladin multiclassing.
Initiate of Milil allows for Cleric/Bard multiclassing.


Those are just the good ones. Surely this is enough for diversity.

[Godskook]

If you ignore the DMG's NPC classes, your statement is patently untrue. The weakest classes in the game are agreed to be the CW Samurai and the Truenamer.


However, including the NPC classes into your equation makes the statement true again, because the Commoner loses to the Truenamer in a swordfight.

1.I said 'almost', as in, not all, but most. The fact that you're only naming two does not negate anything of what I said.

2.Truenamer is quite a bit stronger than tier 6, but its dependance on optimization is what gathers it such harsh criticisms.


It's not so much what they "lose" (although by PrCing out of the Bard class, you do gimp your IC progression, but that isn't limited to SC), it's that you're basically taking the Bard and turning it into a Sorcerer. This wouldn't be an issue in and of itself, except the Sorcerer is already known for benefiting massively from any full-progression spellcasting PrC, which gives them far more flexibility or specialization (as they deem fit for their character)

Ultimately, it's not really a huge deal, objectively, but to some people it can ultimately feel like you're wasting 7 levels just to catch up with the Sorcerer, and still being locked out of getting to cherry pick your class features, like the Sorcerer gets to.

None of that really gives a counter-point to mine.


Personally, my list would be more like:

Wizard/Druid/Cleric > Sorcerer > Bard/Ranger/Paladin > Rogue > Fighter/Barbarian > Monk

My assertions regarding strength against core classes is based on playing a core-only game. Bards get quite a bit stronger with splat books, but they have jack-all for customization in core.

Everybody agress that Bard is not as strong as full-casters, so stating that its not is a no-brainer, and the fact that you list Bard as being at least as strong as anyone else basically disqualifies the statement:


This is the problem, really. If you only work within Core, Bards are half worthless since they get outshined by most of the core classes.

Cause really, 4/11 is *NOT* 'most'. Hell, its not even half.

[Coidzor]

This is the problem, really. If you only work within Core, Bards are half worthless since they get outshined by most of the core classes.

Cleric, Druid, and Wizard are part of the big 3, comparing anything other than the members of the expanded big 6 to them is going to be unfair, so that's not really a valid point of comparison. Adding in the sorcerer, that makes 4 fullcasters. 4/11 is not most, and it's not fair to say that something is "half worthless" because it's not not one of the classes that break the game. Paladins, Monks, Rangers, Fighters, Barbarians, and Rogues are the actual competition anyway, because these 7 classes are not game-breaking.

Monks and Fighters, as amusing as it might be, don't outshine the Bard. Paladins are kind of meh even compared to Fighters in core. Rangers are either TWF or Ranged in core, neither of which they really get anything to help out with. Barbarians have enough good stuff for melee to be able to be better in that realm if the bard doesn't have intelligent spell selection and play and Rogues get trapfinding and more skillpoints which allow them to be better in that realm in many ways although it's debatable about the others, like, combat and certain things like glibness give the bards clear advantages.


Either you go DFI, Snowflake Wardance, and pick yourself up an echoblade... or you completely ignore your melee capability and dive into Sublime Chord to turn yourself into a sucky sorcerer.

Only slightly worse in terms of casting and much better in terms of everything else, so it doesn't need spells to cover certain areas.


I thought this thread was about IRL groups not "in the know" enough to be aware of the Bard's strengths, and why that might be. I didn't know there were actually people on GitP who disliked them. :smalleek:

Indeed, kind of shocking.


These boards also create the perception that full spellcasters get the best PRCs and have the most options, but I think that mostly comes from the fact that any PRC with full casting progression is an improvement over the base wizard/sorcerer class.

Spells automatically mean more options, so, yeah. :smallconfused: Each spell is one option, it might not be any good, but it's still better to have 4 good, 5 average, 6 mediocre, and 200 crap options than it is to have 1 average, 3 mediocre, and 4 crap options.


We all took Buommi as a language known so we could talk to each other without being understood. Whenever anyone got suspicious, we just said that we were practicing our harmony. Beautiful.

Oo, nice idea.


Also, a group of Bards can succeed on any skill check they really care to. We got something like a 30-odd on a Gather Info check—and none of us were trained in Gather Info. At level 3. That was fun.

I'm curious, how'd you pull that off?


I'd totally be part of another all-Bard group.

I want to try out out. Not necessarily a dragonforce, but definitely bards everywhere.

[Leon]

There are bards who play medieval music?


use Corvus Corax as your inspiration and go off

[Optimator]

Who hates Bards? They're the best.

[Greyfeld85]

None of that really gives a counter-point to mine.



Everybody agress that Bard is not as strong as full-casters, so stating that its not is a no-brainer, and the fact that you list Bard as being at least as strong as anyone else basically disqualifies the statement:



Cause really, 4/11 is *NOT* 'most'. Hell, its not even half.

Ok, since you want to get technical, let's get technical.

Bards are built to be the 5th man. They can pick up the slack when necessary, but don't actually fill any specific role when considering core-only.

You can look at tiers all day, but the fact is that every base class in core, except the Bard and the Monk fill at least 1 role satisfactorily. There is no feat support for the Bard in core. There is no Prestige support for the Bard in core. The best you can hope for is to dump your skill points into Diplomacy/Bluff and UMD, play as the party face, and buff the characters that can actually do anything useful in combat.

Once you open the game up to splat books, Bards become vastly more useful, between substitution levels, ACFs, feat support, and real PrCs. But at the end of the day, even that's extremely limited, and you're essentially going to end up playing one of two different Bard builds: Snowflake Wardance echoblade melee gish, or a second-rate sorcerer.

You can debate the technicalities of which classes are what tier and what PrCs are viable until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't change the fact that if you're actually building a Bard (not a 1-level-dip-for-skills-and-features Bard, an actual Bard), your build choices are extremely limited, and you have very little in the way of choices, unless you're playing in a sub-op campaign.

And you can agree with me or not, this is my opinion, based on personal experience and time spent on various char-op boards.

[Godskook]

These boards also create the perception that full spellcasters get the best PRCs and have the most options, but I think that mostly comes from the fact that any PRC with full casting progression is an improvement over the base wizard/sorcerer class.

Full-casters generally *DO* get the best prestige classes, unless you count hybrids like unseen seer as non-caster prestige classes. This is cause their strongest feature is their progression of the full-caster's casting. Similarly, Druids don't tend to have very many good prestige classes: they have actual class features past level 1.

[Coidzor]

unless you're playing in a sub-op campaign.

What does sub-op mean, exactly? I've never run into that term at all before, so I figure it'll help clarify your point to clarify that term.

[Greenish]

What does sub-op mean, exactly? I've never run into that term at all before, so I figure it'll help clarify your point to clarify that term.It means "a game where the optimization level is lower than the person using the term is used to".

Compare to "uber optomized", which is "a game where the optimization level is higher than the person using the term is used to".

[Greyfeld85]

What does sub-op mean, exactly? I've never run into that term at all before, so I figure it'll help clarify your point to clarify that term.

Sub-optimized. Games with low levels of optimization. Generally, anything under tier 3 (in my mind).

[Coidzor]

It means "a game where the optimization level is lower than the person using the term is used to".

Compare to "uber optomized", which is "a game where the optimization level is higher than the person using the term is used to".

Sounds like an unhelpful set of terms, that. :/

[Endarire]

Sunic beat you to it with Hi Welcome (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=9724.0).

[Duncan_Ruadrik]

I agree with many here, I think the "bards suck" syndrome is just leftover from how people expect the class to be played. It is why I much appreciate the Pathfinder archetypes: It gives the flavor and abilities to make a character that does not have the luggage of how people expect Bards to be played.

[Fax Celestis]

Also, a group of Bards can succeed on any skill check they really care to. We got something like a 30-odd on a Gather Info check—and none of us were trained in Gather Info. At level 3. That was fun.

GASP A TRUENAMER SOLUTION


There is no Prestige support for the Bard in core.

Lies (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/arcaneTrickster.htm) and slander (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/prestigeClasses/loremaster.htm).

[Talya]

As FMArthur said, some people try to play bards as Jacks of All Trades. Doing this without optimization tends to tend to put them at NPC class level uselessness.


I would hardly call adding Jack of All Trades (feat) and Bardic Knack (Alternate Class Feature), Song of the Heart (can replace Fascinate as a bonus feat), and Dragonfire Inspiration "heavily optimized." But they sure as hell can do everything.

Make it a savage bard, using flaws to throw in snowflake wardance and two weapon fighting, take Melodic Casting, and suddenly, yes, you're getting optimized.

And you can do everything. Oh, maybe not as well as a wizard or a druid (although you can do several things they cannot), but you really can do everything.

[Mantarni]

I agree with many here, I think the "bards suck" syndrome is just leftover from how people expect the class to be played.

I agree, and would say it especially extends to noncombat situations. I played a bard once, and despite me making and presenting him as a paranoid schemer who does everything for a specific reason but acts jovial as a front, everything he did was handwaved as being the idiot chaotic stupid fool.

This actually irked me since the DM apparently subscribed to this topic and took it personally; no matter what the rest of the party did or how they behaved, when it was the bard's turn to act I swore he rolled a check on some dramatic murphy's law disaster chart. Rest of party murders, extorts and blackmails? 'So you do that. Continue!' Bard (in what I was planning to use as a scene to show some of his philosophy on the world and society) breaks a frigging teacup? 'GUARDS MURDER THEFT ARSON HANG HIM HE IS A DANGEROUS MONSTER AND MUST BE STOPPED!' The hell? Seriously, all of a sudden there were (disproportionate) consequences? Where were these when the other people were killing, threatening and extorting? ...hrg. :smallmad:

[MukkTB]

Priceless Flaming Bane (VS bad taste) Ming Teacup +3 (to drinking )

[Zaq]

I'm curious, how'd you pull that off?

Man, I don't even remember. It was the result of three or four Bards rummaging through their respective bags of tricks, seeing what could stack with what else, throwing everything together, and getting a pretty decent die roll on top. That's the thing, though . . . a party of Bards (or as we called it, a band) can do that.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

And of course, you have things like Irresistable Dance (www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJej6kCgxVM) (along with Facinate and Mass Suggestion) to make Ghost Sound into an encounter win!

[Skelengar]

I'm doing this on Monday! Our band name is the Truly Horrid Umber Hulks. :smallcool:

snip

I'd totally be part of another all-Bard group.

I would totally join that game, if someone else were willing to DM.

I want to try out out. Not necessarily a dragonforce, but definitely bards everywhere.

Glad to see that I'm not some kind of insane madman. Maybe I should create a recruitment thread. Not too sure if how well an all-bard game would work as a PbP, though.

[Mantarni]

Glad to see that I'm not some kind of insane madman. Maybe I should create a recruitment thread. Not too sure if how well an all-bard game would work as a PbP, though.

Badly if you value quickness and efficiency would be my guess, given that social interaction is the bard's main strength. Unless half the party are mimes, we're at page 20 and they still haven't left the first town or talked to the mayor. And apparently one of them is already "engaged." :smalltongue:

[Skelengar]

Badly if you value quickness and efficiency would be my guess, given that social interaction is the bard's main strength. Unless half the party are mimes, we're at page 20 and they still haven't left the first town or talked to the mayor. And apparently one of them is already "engaged." :smalltongue:

That's pretty much what I figured. On the other hand, that could be hilarious. :smallamused:

[dgnslyr]

Well, if you're going to run a party of all bards, it's nice to diversify. Maybe they're not all suave, silver tongued socialites. Perhaps one is a skald, a proud warrior from the far north, whose skill with his blade is matched only by his skill with words. Maybe one is a merchant of goods of questionable legality, whose skill with subterfuge keeps him safe from the law. One might have a greater affinity for magic, with plans on becoming a Lyric Thaumaturgist. That's the PrC that practically turns you into a sorcerer, right? Because of all the neat things bards can do, it shouldn't be too hard for everybody to find a niche and specialize. That's what PrCs are for, right?

[Mantarni]

That's pretty much what I figured. On the other hand, that could be hilarious. :smallamused:

The Adventurers Who Don't Do Anything: The Campaign

[Calanon]

During my first D&D group my DM forced me to play a bard... I soon discovered Glibness then the DM quickly kicked me out of the group :smallfrown:
This story is completely fictitious

Needless to say I discovered how worthless Bards are... LIES! LIES EVERYWHERE!

[Daftendirekt]

Yeah, could easily have a Snowflake Wardancer, a Lyric Thaumaturge, a Fochlucan Lyrist, a Sublime Chord... all with their own things they do. Plenty of variance possible.

[Infernalbargain]

It's because they're bards. If you look at all the portrayals of bards in various D&D humor, they're... bardlike.

[Taelas]

I don't hate Bards.

I hate their fluff.

See this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0128.html).

[Greenish]

One might have a greater affinity for magic, with plans on becoming a Lyric Thaumaturgist. That's the PrC that practically turns you into a sorcerer, right?Sublime Chord is what you're thinking of.


The Adventurers Who Don't Do Anything: The CampaignThere's much you can accomplish without picking up the dice. Besides, bards or no, sometimes you just want to roll those attack rolls.

[Morph Bark]

Besides, bards or no, sometimes you just want to roll those attack rolls.

Indeed. Though last encounter, that is what got my Bard killed. He had the best stats of the whole party and I had rolled extremely well on his hp rolls, so that combined with him being a fierce fighter for Good and having boosted himself with Inspire Courage and Dragonfire Inspiration (acid) and using Iaijutsu Focus, he figured he'd take down a dangerous devil.

He didn't (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12363645#post12363645). At least, not while alive. :smallamused:

[The Random NPC]

This thread reminds me of a game where I played a bard. We were 6 level 1s exploring some cave and while the rest of my party was recovering from a fight (they were practically bedding down for the night over like 3 HP), the Rogue and I went scouting ahead. We were found by a couple of kobold fighters, a kobold necromancer, and his two pet skellingtons. As the party hears our commotion the meat shields run forward to assist us. When they reach us I pushed them back through the door stating it was too dangerous for them. The Rogue and I soundly trounce the kobolds with nary a scratch on us, and I believe I said something to the effect of stop camping after every fight. It must have been galling to watch us support classes mop up a fight balanced for 6 just because we were willing to go balls to the wall and take a gamble, rather than engage in a 15 min work day.

[Corolinth]

I remember winning a battle for my party by singing inspire courage while tied up and stuffed in a burlap sack.

[Skelengar]

I remember winning a battle for my party by singing inspire courage while tied up and stuffed in a burlap sack.

That doesn't sound very inspiring.

[The Random NPC]

It seems to inspire though shame. "We have to fight harder, the bard is tied up in a sack and still singing our greatness! We can't let him down!"

[Dimers]

If the "everyone hates bards" hypothesis has not been sufficiently disproven yet, please check out this newer thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225559).

[Socratov]

To be honest, I think bards are actually one of the strongest classes in the game... Using options as a definition for a class beïng good. Out of all the classes, the bard can actually do the most: he can buff, he can cast, he can sociomance, skillmonkey, cast various CC, he can heal, he can do melee, as well as ranged combat, etc.

Granted, he can't do is as well as the classes focused on those aspects (and even then he has a few talents not really many other classes get). But then again, even the classes focused on said role need to be pimped out to actually fulfill their use. Wizard and sorc: cant heal or do martial combat well... clerics and druids are not the best sociomancers out there, the martial characters (say, barbarian and fighter), have so few otions they can really only do one thing well. Abard can do all these things. Should someone happen to play a bard in a party where one of teh PC's get kidnapped, or when the player actually doesn't turn up (because of his girlfriend maybe, or whatever reason out there 8wink* *wink*), the bard can actually take his role and carry at least some of the duties. The only problem is the fact that a bard is feat starved, and to be actually really good, he needs to specialize. that doesn't mean he can't do other things, but really at a basic level... with more feats this could be remedied to make the bard shine as it actually should...

[Axinian]

To be honest, I think bards are actually one of the strongest classes in the game... Using options as a definition for a class beïng good. Out of all the classes, the bard can actually do the most: he can buff, he can cast, he can sociomance, skillmonkey, cast various CC, he can heal, he can do melee, as well as ranged combat, etc.

Well, without too much optimization anyway. I mean, most full casters can do all that too, but it takes in a tiny bit more work.

I think bard are Tier 3 right now? If you build them right they're very easily Tier 2.

[MukkTB]

Bards are silly. I spent one combat singing La Cucuracha at the table. Every time people went to calculate their to hit or damage I'd start singing it. Everyone enjoyed their combat bonuses. Everyone thought it was amusing. Nobody took the character seriously. Not even me. 18 strength two handing a greatsword. "La Cucuracha..."

[Coidzor]

Bards are silly. I spent one combat singing La Cucuracha at the table. Every time people went to calculate their to hit or damage I'd start singing it. Everyone enjoyed their combat bonuses. Everyone thought it was amusing. Nobody took the character seriously. Not even me. 18 strength two handing a greatsword. "La Cucuracha..."

That's more of a reflection on what you think of your chosen course of action there than the class. :smallconfused:

[Skelengar]

Bards are silly. I spent one combat singing La Cucuracha at the table. Every time people went to calculate their to hit or damage I'd start singing it. Everyone enjoyed their combat bonuses. Everyone thought it was amusing. Nobody took the character seriously. Not even me. 18 strength two handing a greatsword. "La Cucuracha..."

Next time try a war chant.

[MukkTB]

Cuando uno quiere a una
Y esta una no lo quiere,
Es lo mismo que si un calvo
En la calle encuentr' un peine.

La cucaracha, la cucaracha,
Ya no quieres caminar,
Porque no tienes,
Porque le falta,
Marihuana que fumar.

[enderlord99]

Cuando uno quiere a una
Y esta una no lo quiere,
Es lo mismo que si un calvo
En la calle encuentr' un peine.

La cucaracha, la cucaracha,
Ya no quieres caminar,
Porque no tienes,
Porque le falta,
Marihuana que fumar.

Seriousry... you need to rearn Engrish...

:smalltongue:

[Hiro Protagonest]

Bards are silly. I spent one combat singing La Cucuracha at the table. Every time people went to calculate their to hit or damage I'd start singing it. Everyone enjoyed their combat bonuses. Everyone thought it was amusing. Nobody took the character seriously. Not even me. 18 strength two handing a greatsword. "La Cucuracha..."

That's because you played a silly character, not because you played a bard. I can make a silly fighter, or rogue, or wizard, or cleric, or monk, or warblade, or anything.

[NNescio]

Cuando uno quiere a una
Y esta una no lo quiere,
Es lo mismo que si un calvo
En la calle encuentr' un peine.

La cucaracha, la cucaracha,
Ya no quieres caminar,
Porque no tienes,
Porque le falta,
Marihuana que fumar.

O Fortuna!
Velut luna!
Statu variabilis!
Semper crescis,
aut decrescis;
vita detestabilis
Nunc obdurat
et tunc curat
ludo mentis aciem,
egestatem,
potestatem
dissolvit ut glaciem.

-from a certain collection of medieval frat songs. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmina_Burana)


There are bards who play medieval music?

And there are people who play medieval music because they're playing bards? :smallconfused:

[Nerd-o-rama]

I started running a game where everyone was (multiclassed) bards at the request of a player on the PbP forums here. They were also meant to be a Power Rangers-style team. One player insisted on referring to this as the Five Man Band (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FiveManBand) Band.

Ironically enough, this ended as soon as the first combat started and I got DMing stage fright. The point is, a bard game can work.

[The Reverend]

Love playing the party face as a bard. Im a trained orator and actor so usually DMs just end up skipping my half of the roll and saying "no bards for you next campaign. Its not fair."

[deuxhero]

Today's strip has a relevant line.

:nale: Sure. You're the one who taught me that bards are underpowered.
:tarquin: They are! With their mastery of narrative structure they should be ruling the cosmos by now, instead of wasting time singing in taverns.

[MeeposFire]

Today's strip has a relevant line.

:nale: Sure. You're the one who taught me that bards are underpowered.
:tarquin: They are! With their mastery of narrative structure they should be ruling the cosmos by now, instead of wasting time singing in taverns.

Yes bards are awesome but too many do not take their power seriously.

[Velaryon]

Regardless of the actual power of the class (which is easy to miss if you're not too familiar with the system), I think one reason bards have a certain negative image is that they've never quite recovered from the perception of bards created by Edward from Final Fantasy 4; that is, useless fops who sing at the enemies instead of doing something helpful like fighting with a weapon or casting an attack spell.

It's not true of bards in 3.X at all, at least not if you know what you're dong with them, but it's pretty easy for an inexperienced player to end up with a useless Bard character if they're not careful. You look at your sheet and see that your attack bonus is lower than the Fighter's and Barbarian's, your weapon damage is piddly in comparison, you don't have as many skills as the Rogue, you don't get the cool damage spells that Wizards and Sorcerers get, and you don't heal as well as a Cleric. Sure you can do a little bit of all those things, but if you don't know to specialize, and more importantly don't know how to specialize, you end up as the guy who makes Bluff and Diplomacy rolls for the group and otherwise sits in the corner hoping the enemies don't notice you.

In short, bards have a bad reputation among some people due to a stereotype that's only inaccurate if you know how to avoid it, as well as a few examples in media and video games that reinforce the stereotype.

[Elric VIII]

Regardless of the actual power of the class (which is easy to miss if you're not too familiar with the system), I think one reason bards have a certain negative image is that they've never quite recovered from the perception of bards created by Edward from Final Fantasy 4; that is, useless fops who sing at the enemies instead of doing something helpful like fighting with a weapon or casting an attack spell.

It's not true of bards in 3.X at all, at least not if you know what you're dong with them, but it's pretty easy for an inexperienced player to end up with a useless Bard character if they're not careful. You look at your sheet and see that your attack bonus is lower than the Fighter's and Barbarian's, your weapon damage is piddly in comparison, you don't have as many skills as the Rogue, you don't get the cool damage spells that Wizards and Sorcerers get, and you don't heal as well as a Cleric. Sure you can do a little bit of all those things, but if you don't know to specialize, and more importantly don't know how to specialize, you end up as the guy who makes Bluff and Diplomacy rolls for the group and otherwise sits in the corner hoping the enemies don't notice you.

In short, bards have a bad reputation among some people due to a stereotype that's only inaccurate if you know how to avoid it, as well as a few examples in media and video games that reinforce the stereotype.

It's funny that you should mention this. Last summer I introduced a friend to D&D and he kept wanting to play Final Fantasy characters (I am rather unfamiliar with the franchise, having never played the games). He eventually ended up playing a Bard named Edward. He spend every combat hiding and singing, but not using Bardic Music. I eventually kicked him out because he kept complaining to me that the combat was boring and would just play his PSP during the non-combat scenes.

I think this really demonstrates that the Bard's perceived lack of power stems from the playstyles of those that try to match then to stereotypes in the media.

[NNescio]

It's funny that you should mention this. Last summer I introduced a friend to D&D and he kept wanting to play Final Fantasy characters (I am rather unfamiliar with the franchise, having never played the games). He eventually ended up playing a Bard named Edward. He spend every combat hiding and singing, but not using Bardic Music. I eventually kicked him out because he kept complaining to me that the combat was boring and would just play his PSP during the non-combat scenes.

I think this really demonstrates that the Bard's perceived lack of power stems from the playstyles of those that try to match then to stereotypes in the media.

Considering that Edward is the infamous spoony bard (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SpoonyBard) who launched a thousand memes... I think your player was trolling around.

[kulosle]

This thread reminds me of a game where I played a bard. We were 6 level 1s exploring some cave and while the rest of my party was recovering from a fight (they were practically bedding down for the night over like 3 HP), the Rogue and I went scouting ahead. We were found by a couple of kobold fighters, a kobold necromancer, and his two pet skellingtons. As the party hears our commotion the meat shields run forward to assist us. When they reach us I pushed them back through the door stating it was too dangerous for them. The Rogue and I soundly trounce the kobolds with nary a scratch on us, and I believe I said something to the effect of stop camping after every fight. It must have been galling to watch us support classes mop up a fight balanced for 6 just because we were willing to go balls to the wall and take a gamble, rather than engage in a 15 min work day.

So i ctrl + F for the words support and i got very few results. one page mentioned how the game doesn't support bards well and then you mentioned that they are a support class. Thank you. SUPPORT!!! No one likes to play support characters. Play any MMO and you'll see that about 1-5% of the entire game is played by support characters. But everyone has that one friend who plays a support character and loves playing with them. In all honest: SUPPORT WINS GAMES! Supports aren't bad classes they just doesn't get as much of the glory as the other classes. Especially the bard who is fluffed in such a way to sing the glory of others. But bards are the best non tier 1 support in the game. Maybe even the best. Especially at early levels. I may just be behind in my tier ones because i haven't played them in a while, but i don't think that they can give as big of a buff to as many people as a bard can with using as little resources as the bard needs to.

Now i'll go back through this and actually read it. I was simply miffed at the very title of this thread and needed this to be said ASAP.

[Big Fau]

In all honest: SUPPORT WINS GAMES!

A party of two Clerics, an Incarnate, and a DFI Bard would be nigh unstoppable. You'd have every base covered with numbers somewhere in the stratosphere.

[MukkTB]

That's because you played a silly character, not because you played a bard. I can make a silly fighter, or rogue, or wizard, or cleric, or monk, or warblade, or anything.

Fair enough. But lets try this thought experiment. Imagine a lineup of core characters with no personality or fluff. They just have the game mechanics backing them up. What would they be like?

Well the fighter would be this big tough dude. Visibly strong and he'd spend his time whacking things. That I can take seriously.

The wizard would be this guy carrying around and reading weird books. Now and then he'd wave his arms and say a few words and magic would happen. That I can take seriously.

The Druid would be this guy with a really liberal green philosophy. At least one animal around at all times. Probably one that's somewhat intimidating. So kind of silly but enough there to take seriously.

The Bard sings at monsters and bad guys. If he has an instrument and hes using a weapon its likely going to be a smallish weapon. The music completely robs any chance of being a swashbuckling figure. Its pretty silly.

It takes active effort to fluff a bard so he isn't silly. Either you try to make it more 'realistic' and stress that hes a war chanter, maybe instead banging war drums, or you got out beyond the ridiculous into the land of cool and make him some kind of rock dude in the middle of combat Metalocalypse style.

I'm not saying anything against the class or its players. But I think its possible to prove that the class starts with a higher quotient of silly before you start adding in fluff.

[Coidzor]

The Bard sings at monsters and bad guys. If he has an instrument and hes using a weapon its likely going to be a smallish weapon. The music completely robs any chance of being a swashbuckling figure. Its pretty silly.

You've never seen any musicals then? :smallconfused: Plenty of singing swashbucklers. Heck, I think there's even an opera about them. I think someone had an avatar of Thog dressed up as some character or another from it.


It takes active effort to fluff a bard so he isn't silly. Either you try to make it more 'realistic' and stress that hes a war chanter, maybe instead banging war drums, or you got out beyond the ridiculous into the land of cool and make him some kind of rock dude in the middle of combat Metalocalypse style.

That's... not really a whole lot of effort. That's so little effort it seems almost not worth mentioning or making such a big deal out of.

Especially in light of your previous comment about what you decided to do instead.

[MukkTB]

Try this. Build a level 1 bard. Then come back and introduce yourself as that bard. Describe who you are and what you do WITHOUT ADDING ANY FLUFF. No back story, not history. No description of what kind of music you play beyond the mechanics in the game. I sing./I play the fiddle./whatever. Maybe even explain what you will do in combat.

Its going to be hard to avoid the silly.

[MukkTB]

That's... not really a whole lot of effort. That's so little effort it seems almost not worth mentioning or making such a big deal out of.

Especially in light of your previous comment about what you decided to do instead.

Yes but my point is that if the bard is silly in its natural unfluffed state, and there is no pressure to make it more serious, you could legitimately take the unfluffed state as the average. Some people will make sillier bards than the unfluffed state. Some people will make more serious sounding bards.

If you don't think there's more of a tendency for a bard to be silly then do you disagree with the portrayal of Elan?

[jpreem]

{Scrubbed}

[MukkTB]

They see me rollin they hatin.

[olentu]

Try this. Build a level 1 bard. Then come back and introduce yourself as that bard. Describe who you are and what you do WITHOUT ADDING ANY FLUFF. No back story, not history. No description of what kind of music you play beyond the mechanics in the game. I sing./I play the fiddle./whatever. Maybe even explain what you will do in combat.

Its going to be hard to avoid the silly.

I buff my allies, use skills, counter sonic based magic, hit people with weapons, know things, and/or cast spells in combat. I use skills, counter sonic based magic, use spell like abilities, know things, and/or cast spells out of combat.

[MukkTB]

I buff my allies, use skills, counter sonic based magic, hit people with weapons, know things, and/or cast spells in combat. I use skills, counter sonic based magic, use spell like abilities, know things, and/or cast spells out of combat.

Ok now explain it to me like I was an wasn't familiar with game mechanics. Because you just shrouded the silly in mechanical names. In the world of the D&D they don't perceive you 'buffing your allies' they perceive you singing. MAybe you singing and your allies getting more vigorous.

[MukkTB]

How about this bard just to demonstrate I'm not setting some impossible goalpost.

"I play the drums. I also know how to craft armor and do field repairs on equipment. I have a quicker eye than most people and see dangerous situations sooner. In combat I start by banging my drums which invigorates my allies and then I continue to bang my drums while I also hit people with a hammer. "

Of course there's still some silly in there. I left out the part where my drum beat causes weapons to catch on fire or how I stop magic users by drumming so hard that their voices can't be heard over it. But that quote there is can be taken seriously. You want to take a go at it with the instrument being an oboe?

EDIT - I'M NOT CRAZY. POST I'M RESPONDING TO ARE DISAPPEARING. REALLY I MEAN IT.

[Elric VIII]

Ok now explain it to me like I was an wasn't familiar with game mechanics. Because you just shrouded the silly in mechanical names. In the world of the D&D they don't perceive you 'buffing your allies' they perceive you singing. MAybe you singing and your allies getting more vigorous.

If you're trying to prove that removing fluff does nothing to make the Bard less silly, shouldn't you remove the fluff of Bardic music as singing and simply state it as a sonic-based power boost? After all, without the singing fluff, oratory Bardic Music could be as simple as giving orders/tactical advice to allies.

[gkathellar]

Try this. Build a level 1 bard. Then come back and introduce yourself as that bard. Describe who you are and what you do WITHOUT ADDING ANY FLUFF. No back story, not history. No description of what kind of music you play beyond the mechanics in the game. I sing./I play the fiddle./whatever. Maybe even explain what you will do in combat.

Its going to be hard to avoid the silly.

I'm not even clear what a character without fluff is, or why considering one is useful to anyone in any way. But here:

"I'm a silver-tongued jack-of-all-trades, skilled at talking my way out of a situation and with a small variety of simple but unusual magics — and as a competent fighter I can cast these spells even while armored. As a skilled singer and poet, I tend to shout out rhymes or verses as challenges at the beginning of a fight, and my confidence and energy in doing so drives my allies to fight all the harder."

There. Standard party face bard, who tends to use Inspire Courage at the start of a fight before getting into the thick of things. Since most encounters last 5 rounds or fewer, that's usually enough. Not especially silly.


The Druid would be this guy with a really liberal green philosophy.

That sounds like an awfully fluff-based argument. Going just by their mechanics, a druid is a dude who's comfortable out in the wilderness, has a terrifyingly strong animal pet, doesn't like people who do harm to his comfort zone, and will a) light you on fire, b) hit you with lightning c) dehydrate you into a mummy, d) sic dinosaurs on you, e) turn into a dinosaur and eat you, f) all of the above if you piss him off.

[Ossian]

Bards are really cool. Core strong classes: Cleric, Druid, Wizard = I-Mac. Ready out of the box, connected, powerful, no need to optimize unless you really want to (hence "play a wizard" as an answer to all and every "a fox for class xyz").

Bards = Windows? You can have a lot of fun with them, but you have to work on a lot of fluff.

Take middle earth, first age. Practically every Noldo character is to some extent a bard. Songs of power, countersong, chainsongs, world shaping music etc...

Bards can be a number of characters in game. If you are stuck with the Zombie-Orpheus useless man in thighs with jaunty feather hat, who brings and...guitar lute! to a dungeon crawl, and burst into songs in the middle of a knife fight in a dark alley, well, yeah, that is really silly.

Some of the Fianna warriors from the Irish myth were bards, versed in lore, able to inspire great deeds with their sheer supernatural charisma.

A bard can be an actor, a poet, a man of arts and humanities, well-read, able to soothe spirits with just the right words, with a powerful voice, and a magnetic look! Gatsby (the great gatsby) was not a bard, but there is a quote from that wonderful book that totally sums-up the bardness:

“He smiled understandingly-much more than understandingly. It was one of those rare smiles with a quality of eternal reassurance in it, that you may come across four or five times in life. It faced--or seemed to face--the whole external world for an instant, and then concentrated on you with an irresistible prejudice in your favor. It understood you just as far as you wanted to be understood, believed in you as you would like to believe in yourself.”

[olentu]

Ok now explain it to me like I was an wasn't familiar with game mechanics. Because you just shrouded the silly in mechanical names. In the world of the D&D they don't perceive you 'buffing your allies' they perceive you singing. MAybe you singing and your allies getting more vigorous.

" in combat." Combat is an abstract conflict resolution mechanic. The goal of which varies but generally involves incapacitating the opposing side of the conflict through various methods.

"I buff my allies," A buff is a beneficial effect. Your allies are other in game constructs representing various entities that are on your side.

"use skills," Skills are a method of allowing the constructs in the game to perform certain actions without relying on the ability of the person running said construct to perform the same action. For example one does not need to be proficient at not opening ones self to attack while maneuvering through a melee, instead one rolls a twenty sided die or D20 and then adds their characters applicable modifiers for the skill (which would be the tumble skill in this case). If the sum of the rolled number plus all modifiers is greater than some target number the action succeeds (moving through a melee without opening ones self to attack in this example) if not then it fails.

"counter sonic based magic," Abilities and effects can be given several classifications. Those classified as relying on sound can be protected against. In this case the character is able to allow surrounding creatures to substitute the result of the character's skill roll in place of their saving throw (that is their own roll to avoid the ability).

"hit people with weapons," I am going to assume that you understand something of combat in the real world, namely that it generally involves hitting things with other things. "Hitting people with weapons" is one abstraction that represents the act of hitting people with weapons in the game world. This can kill opponents and is one method of resolving conflicts.

"know things," The character has an ability to have an additional chance to know some particular pieces of information, in applicable areas, outside of the normal channels that are used to gather said information. Presumably this only matters when wanting to know said information.

"cast spells" Spells are a category of effect that can be generated through the use of certain in game constructs including but not limited to abilities given to some classes. This class gets one of those abilities. While the full possible effects of all spells is too diverse to go into here there are many of them that can cause unique and desirable things to happen thus benefiting the character and allies.


"out of combat." refers to a period of the game when mechanics categorized under the umbrella of the combat conflict resolution mechanic are not being used either at all or to any great degree.

"spell like abilities," Being the one thing that is new to the "out of combat" realm is the one I will discuss. The other categories maintain basically the same function in and out of combat but are generally applied towards slightly different things. That being said spell like abilities are abilities that are quite similar to spells. They have some minor differences (and are not all necessarily restricted to out side of combat only, the ability in question is however) and generally have different limits one the number of times they can be used. However like spells they provide various desirable effects when implemented.


Well I think that covers the abilities of the character as a primer for a player who is not familiar with the mechanics. Of course if said player were to be playing the character or be affected by one of these abilities more detail on just how they work could be provided as necessary. And of course being only a cursory build the exact numbers are not set in stone and so I have not provided them.

[Gwendol]

There are plenty of bard-types in litterature and myth; none of them silly.

Cyrano de Bergerac has a famous duel in which he taunts and jests his opponent while out-fencing him.
The vikings were known to acheive great fame through poetry and songs, if carried out in a battle it was all the more impressive (read: warrior-skald).
At the battle of Pelennor fields, the Rohirrim charges the orcs while singing, thoroughly demoralizing them (and skewering them like shish kebab on their spears).

The bard is the king of cool.

[The Random NPC]

So i ctrl + F for the words support and i got very few results. one page mentioned how the game doesn't support bards well and then you mentioned that they are a support class. Thank you. SUPPORT!!! No one likes to play support characters. Play any MMO and you'll see that about 1-5% of the entire game is played by support characters. But everyone has that one friend who plays a support character and loves playing with them. In all honest: SUPPORT WINS GAMES! Supports aren't bad classes they just doesn't get as much of the glory as the other classes. Especially the bard who is fluffed in such a way to sing the glory of others. But bards are the best non tier 1 support in the game. Maybe even the best. Especially at early levels. I may just be behind in my tier ones because i haven't played them in a while, but i don't think that they can give as big of a buff to as many people as a bard can with using as little resources as the bard needs to.

Now i'll go back through this and actually read it. I was simply miffed at the very title of this thread and needed this to be said ASAP.

Firstly:
Thank you, it's always nice to be appreciated.


Fair enough. But lets try this thought experiment. Imagine a lineup of core characters with no personality or fluff. They just have the game mechanics backing them up. What would they be like?

The wizard would be this guy carrying around and reading weird books. Now and then he'd wave his arms and say a few words and magic would happen. That I can take seriously.

The Bard sings at monsters and bad guys. If he has an instrument and hes using a weapon its likely going to be a smallish weapon. The music completely robs any chance of being a swashbuckling figure. Its pretty silly.


Ok now explain it to me like I was an wasn't familiar with game mechanics. Because you just shrouded the silly in mechanical names. In the world of the D&D they don't perceive you 'buffing your allies' they perceive you singing. MAybe you singing and your allies getting more vigorous.

Secondly:
It seems that the only reason the wizard isn't silly is because of the magic, otherwise you have a guy that speaks gibberish at people. Without establishing the same cause and effect for the bard, it looks like you're letting the game mechanics back up the wizard's silly, but not the bard's.

[MeeposFire]

In Dune you had Gurney who was a warrior/poet/musician and nobody would find him silly in a fight. That is right you heard me a science fiction bard.

Seriously the bard can be just fine doing oratory and there is nothing silly about that. Certainly nothing more silly than the gibberish that spell casters say while casting a spell.

[Nerd-o-rama]

In Dune you had Gurney who was a warrior/poet/musician and nobody would find him silly in a fight. That is right you heard me a science fiction bard.

Dune is very pointedly Heroic Fantasy IN SPACE (like Star Wars), but otherwise you have a point.

[Gnaeus]

To the above list of non silly bards I would like to add:
Väinämöinen
Lugh
Orpheus
and, for a less mythological note, El Mariachi.

[MeeposFire]

Dune is very pointedly Heroic Fantasy IN SPACE (like Star Wars), but otherwise you have a point.

Well considering that the book itself makes light of the fact that it is the highest selling science fiction book of all time I would think somebody considers it science fiction. About the only series I recalled that was pointedly one and not the other is Dragon Riders of Pern since it was written as Science Fiction but everybody thought it was fantasy since it lacked any normal science fiction conventions in the first few books.

Contrary to that I am not seeing anybody saying the same about Dune and in fact everything I am seeing is saying science fiction (or should I say that nothing says it is not science fiction but explicitly fantasy, what I do see is that they call it science fiction and then they will list fantasy elements). But let us not get into an argument over something as lame as whether something is fantasy or science fiction.

[enderlord99]

I've never read Dune, but I already know its genre...

...is...
Speculative Fiction. :smalltongue:

[Skelengar]

I buff my allies, use skills, counter sonic based magic, hit people with weapons, know things, and/or cast spells in combat. I use skills, counter sonic based magic, use spell like abilities, know things, and/or cast spells out of combat.


Ok now explain it to me like I was an wasn't familiar with game mechanics. Because you just shrouded the silly in mechanical names. In the world of the D&D they don't perceive you 'buffing your allies' they perceive you singing. MAybe you singing and your allies getting more vigorous.

Now now, you asked for without fluff. Singing is fluff. Take away the fluff and all you have are mechanics. Unless you're using fluff to mean default fluff, olentu accurately described the bard without fluff.

And besides, I would argue that singing isn't necessarily the default fluff. You can put ranks in perform (comedy) to satirize your enemies or ranks in perform (oratory) to give rousing speeches.

Yes, if you put absolutely no thought into the bard, then they are silly, but that applies to every other class you mentioned.

Warrior: "I hit the monster. I hit it again. I hit it again."

Wizard: "I fire force bullets. No, I can't do it again."

Druid: "I call upon the forces of nature, man!"

[Wyntonian]

Druid: "I call upon the forces of nature, man!"

You forgot the puffing and coughing.

[enderlord99]

Now now, you asked for without fluff. Singing is fluff. Take away the fluff and all you have are mechanics. Unless you're using fluff to mean default fluff, olentu accurately described the bard without fluff.

And besides, I would argue that singing isn't necessarily the default fluff. You can put ranks in perform (comedy) to satirize your enemies or ranks in perform (oratory) to give rousing speeches.

Yes, if you put absolutely no thought into the bard, then they are silly, but that applies to every other class you mentioned.

Warrior: "I hit the monster. I hit it again. I hit it again."

Wizard: "I fire force bullets. No, I can't do it again."

Druid: "I call upon the forces of nature, man!"

That's correct. However, MuckTB is probably going to continue to disagree, or at least pretend he does. I don't know which. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PoesLaw)