Which makes a better Bardic Cohort?

[Fenris-Wolf]

Just as the title says, my non-caster melee character is looking to pick up a bard cohort (specializing in ranged attacks and utility/buffing spells) to cover his weaknesses. The cohort would start at lv13 and progress to 18'th by the end of the campaign.

I'm looking at two possible builds Lillend (HD7/Bard 3/Sublime Chord 2; LA+6) or Human (Bard 10/Chord 8); which would be a better choice?

Human would get 8th lv spells (cl 18), 6 extra HD, BAB +11 and 3 more feats, short bow (1d6+str); but the Lillend (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Lillend) would get 5th lv spells (cl 11), BAB +10, flight, spell-like abilities, str+10, dex+6, con+4, int+4, wis+6, cha+8, +5 natural armor, fire resistance 10, large size, reach, 1 tail attack (2d6+str), imp. grab, constrict, drakvision, immunity to poison, all weapons/attacks gain chaotic and good descriptors, and a great bow (2d8+str).

So the Lillend would be the better physical attacker and probably tougher despite less HD, but the human would be the superior caster.

P.S. I know casters walk on water in these forums but the campaign we are playing is very demon heavy, so lots of guys with SR and annoying resistances, and we have a full sorc, druid, cleric/sacred exorcist but no really competent archer in the party.

Cheers :smallbiggrin:

[Rebel7284]

Gloura is a high HD monster with great stats that is also a bard.

Dmitriy

[Yorrin]

Of the two options you presented the deciding factor is how much use you'd put those extra spells levels too. If you're good with casters, take the caster. If you're not, Lillend is a fun and flavorful choice. I'd probably pick the Lillend myself just because it would be more memorable for the party. But I also play my Bards as melee buffers rather than archer casters, so that might affect things.

[Anxe]

Which one sounds more fun to you?