Why Bards are Awesome.

[Iwasforger03]

I ran across a post on another forum where someone was asking what people did with Bards, and a number of comments involved the idea that bards are useless and should be relegated to the sidelines or used only as NPCs. This ignorance disturbed me greatly, and I endeavored to defend the great and mighty bard.

Sadly, I have lost one of my greatest weapons. It was a written piece on, i believe, live journal, posted either as a post or in a signature of one of our esteemed playgrounders, explaining all the myriad ways Bards are simply the best. I would like to find it again, if anyone can guide me to it. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

In addition, if you have any excellent points regarding how incredible the Bard is, feel free to share them. If you have any questions you'd like clarified about the bard, ask those too.

Thank you all ^_^

[thecrimsondawn]

I ran across a post on another forum where someone was asking what people did with Bards, and a number of comments involved the idea that bards are useless and should be relegated to the sidelines or used only as NPCs. This ignorance disturbed me greatly, and I endeavored to defend the great and mighty bard.

Sadly, I have lost one of my greatest weapons. It was a written piece on, i believe, live journal, posted either as a post or in a signature of one of our esteemed playgrounders, explaining all the myriad ways Bards are simply the best. I would like to find it again, if anyone can guide me to it. Your assistance is greatly appreciated.

In addition, if you have any excellent points regarding how incredible the Bard is, feel free to share them. If you have any questions you'd like clarified about the bard, ask those too.

Thank you all ^_^

Bards are one of the most OP classes if used right. From an RP point alone, they can stop roughly every fight without combat. With every social skill and knowledge skill, not only will you know about every creature, find blackmail material, know the way of the streets, and never die in fey infested forests, but you have spells that are so controlling in nature that there is little excuse for loosing a fight.

From a combat perspective, Unless you are going dragon fire inspiration, bards are of course the ultimate support class. As a spontaneous arcane caster, you can get things like knowstones to give you a few extra spells that you need, and still qualify for Spell Dancer or Incantrix depending on your build - giving your crazy repertoire of buffs, a 24 hour duration.
They also have access to a vast selection of prestige classes, so if bard is not your thing, you are still getting so much out of just a few levels in it.

[Flickerdart]

People think Bards suck because they were kind of lame in Core - their only signature ability provided a negligible bonus, and the jack of all trades thing was more of a hindrance than anything. Players who just wanted to make full attacks couldn't play the bard that way. Players who recognized the power of the wizard and cleric's spells couldn't play the bard that way. Players who wanted to sneak up on people and gank them in one hit couldn't play the bard that way. Players who did figure out how to get the most of a guy that's always prepared to fill a missing role never stood out, because D&D is a game of specialization and dealing 50 damage all day long isn't as memorable as 100 damage, once. Plus, the idea of a guy with a lute meshed with a bunch of knights and wizards spelunking in an ancient ruin about as well as the anime-flavored monk.

Splats changed all that in short order - almost every supplement has something for the Bard, and combining two or three of these things can make him truly formidable. The singing thing got fixed with options for lots of alternate music types supported by feats like Snowflake Wardance or Subsonics. Bards who don't want to sing for their allies can also be very effective fear machines. Bards who want to cast have an amazing selection of spells as well as things like Metamagic Song and Sublime Chord that let them break into the big leagues.

[Geddy2112]

Warning-Salty Rant ahead.

Bards are my favorite class, but unfortunately the game and general D&D setting has made them a sterotypical laughingstock of crap. This whole idea of a lute playing halfling who "lives to be a great performer" needs to die. HARD. I have a policy to attack and kill ON SIGHT any lute playing bard I encounter in any game. Absolutely no exceptions; I don't care if I am a paladin of peace, I will strangle that stupid lute player with their own entrails and cackle with glee. I warn players and DM's ahead of time that I don't stand for such nonsense and I will not see bards be made as a joke. Other classes can play lutes no problem, but no bard should be some derpy idiot playing a lute who sings and flutters around.

Bards are people who inspire, who lead, and who go down in history as some of the baddest effing people around. Look at "The Bard" William Shakespear. Did he play a lute and be a laughing stock?! Absolutely not. He wrote stories of regicide, witchcraft, political asssassinations, XXX level pornagraphy, and finding loopholes in the rules that end with people losing their head. A good bard will tell the story of Macbeth and scare children. A great bard will have seen it first hand, but the best bards....the best bards were pulling the strings and have just as much blood on their hands as the fighter and the wizard. They waltzed into the castle like they owned the place, and by word, magic or weapon they eventually did. Sure, other classes can, but they won't tell the story of how it happened as well as the bard will. The bard turns it up to 11 in whatever medium they work in, and you will never forget it.

Mechanically, sure there are more powerful classes, but the unique abilities of the bard do things others cannot. Namely, the bardic performance being extraordinary(no spell resistance, no antimagic field to stop it) and glibness(I just told the queen that I am her, and she is a commenter. I am a man, but she believed me and just handed me the crown. GG campaign). At high levels, bards don't end combats, they prevent them from ever happening. God forbid somebody tries to fight a high level bard, cause you are not just fighting the bard, you are fighting throngs of allies(compelled, charmed, earned or otherwise) willing to give their lives and abilities to the silver tongued devil.

For further inspiration on how a bard is awesome, Watch "Once upon a time in Mexico" and read up on commander Jack Churchill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Churchill

This image also pretty well sums it up.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TFPuGmgTHy8/UNTu2k3LPaI/AAAAAAAAB8s/Jqza9F64_MU/s1600/BardBoast.jpg

[Dysart]

I'll agree, in Core the bard basically seemed like the 5th wheel, yeah he could sneak, and melee and cast offensive spells with a few healing spells to back up... but that's it. He was backup for every other class.

With all the other core books it became less about 'performance' and more about "what can we swap performance out for?" which I think is a shame.

Though I will be honest, never played one, never had the desire to play one. Hopefully some of the comments here will be able to convince me the mentality I currently have of "yeah but X can do that better" is not correct.

[Hiro Quester]

I played a bard sublime chord in our precious game. It was lots of fun. Your main role is helping everyone else be awesome. (Or making them suck if they are on the other team).

You get lots of love from other players for that. "Hey, can you sing the song that does X" requests abound.

But the other important part is that you can be pretty darn awesome at everything else. Maybe not quite as much as the melee type who has devoted everything into dealing damage, or the blaster sorcerer with metamagic feats out the wazoo, or the God wizard who controls everything. Or the cleric commanding hordes of undead and keeping the party alive.

But if any of those roles are missing (player can't play today, or PC is taken out of action, the bard can step in and do pretty awesome.

So awesomely that you have to avoid stepping on other players' toes when they are active.

My bard/sublime chord could shape change with the wizard, and stop time to buff or BC. He killed a cloud giant in one melee round dealing 550 points damage. He had heal spells and wands when needed, and limited wish, greater shadow evocation, greater greater shadow conjugation for any useful spells he didn't know. He won a spell battle by counterspells get or counter casting eveything a high level sircerer threw at him.

He had devoted many resources to being very hard to kill, charm, or otherwise take out. (Here's the conversation (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?358399-How-can-they-nerf-me-Let-me-count-the-ways) posted to the playground asking for help critiquing his defensive preparations.) In melee he had an AC in the 60s, was greater blinking and flying at 60ft.

About the only role he couldn't step in to cover was the rogue finding traps. But he could summon creatures to find them for us.

That was an an awesomely fun character to play.

[emeraldstreak]

IMO part of the problem is the bard fluff often attacts the Elan-players.

[Fuzzy McCoy]

At the OP: is this the quote you were talking about?


Those who are jealous of a bard's awesome quotient frequently dismiss them as "signing". Bards need not sing.

Bards can dance... and with Tumble and Improved Unarmed Strike, they are practicing Capoeria.

Bards can use the drums... and light maces + percussion skill + two-weapon fighting is a nasty-fun combination.

Bards can orate. Don't believe that's effective? Listen to the St. Crispin's Day speech (especially with a Ghost-sound provided orchestra rising the background) and don't get stirred.

Bards can do comedy. A bard who tells puns, inspiring his allies to hit people harder.

Bards can chant, and that's a freaky one. A bunch of dwarves, lead by their bard, each chanting in unison. "I wanna be a dwarven fighter/smashing orcs and other blighters."

Bards can use stringed instruments. Bards with high enough ranks in Fiddle automatically have a golden fiddle.1

More importantly, though, bards tell stories. Bards tell the stories of our adventures, they tell stories about their unending fidelity, and they tell stories about your fighters hygeine that have to be smelled to believe. What do beguilers do? It's right in the name: they lie. Beguilers lie like dogs, and cannot be trusted. They use the fact that Wizards, bereft of any remaining awesome (having spent it ALL on bards), were forced to give beguilers mechanical crutches to get around the fact that they lie and they smell funny. And carry diseases.

It is well known that bards are all fantastically endowed paragons of their gender, while beguilers are lying, disease-ridden deviates... and not even the fun kind of deviates. The kind of deviates that even make Blackguards go "That dude has something seriously wrong with him." And I'm not talking pansy blackguards. I'm talking the kind of blackguards who were paladins until they tasted their first baby and said "Yum. I think I'll eat more of these."

So play a bard. Because bards are awesome. And beguilers cheat at cards. ALL THE TIME.



1Golden fiddle not included. Offer void in certain Crystal Spheres. Consult your local overdeity for details.

It was pulled from this thread: Bard or Beguiler (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?122326-Bard-or-Beguiler)

[eggynack]

I disagree with the assertion that bards aren't sweet in core. Granted, their casting obviously isn't on par with that of tier one or two casters, but honestly, what is on par with tier one casters? Compared to anything else, the bard's very reasonable casting off of a strong list gives them a big edge, and that's before you consider all of the other assets they bring to the table, like a solid chassis and good skill use, along with some nifty music abilities. There is much in core that makes bards look bad. In any role they attempt, they are outclassed, and there is little there in terms of build elements. However, being vastly outclassed by a wizard at arcane magic still leaves plenty of room for a very powerful class, and a core bard is a very powerful class.

[kaffalidjmah]

Bards ARE awesome. i prefer more powerful spell caster, so usually i don't play it but i remember one game....

i was preparing the char sheet (level 9 or 10, i don't remember) and figuring out what kind of spell for 1st level i should pick. "...mmm this one no. no. no. why not remove fear? is andrew doing the cleric or not i don't remember. screw that, i'll pick heal light wound...nah, let's pick remove fear"

the day of the game (i was a new player, the master want to insert me in som point of the evening quest).

DM "ok guys you find this stony thing (runic guardian, i believe) that cast fear, roll your will"
*roll* *roll* *roll* *roll* "4 fail? wow, you start running around and screaming. a bard outside of the building hear you and enter, willingly to help. your turn, what do you do?" "i cast remove fear" "...you have remove fear in your spell known? seriously?"

the table exploded. people just throwing dice and bunch of damage to the thing. later that quest, when assegning award for the player, i have won the "gold statue for the better entrance in a quest". i still have it XD

[Troacctid]

I disagree with the assertion that bards aren't sweet in core. Granted, their casting obviously isn't on par with that of tier one or two casters, but honestly, what is on par with tier one casters? Compared to anything else, the bard's very reasonable casting off of a strong list gives them a big edge, and that's before you consider all of the other assets they bring to the table, like a solid chassis and good skill use, along with some nifty music abilities. There is much in core that makes bards look bad. In any role they attempt, they are outclassed, and there is little there in terms of build elements. However, being vastly outclassed by a wizard at arcane magic still leaves plenty of room for a very powerful class, and a core bard is a very powerful class.

I agree with you except on one point: nothing in Core is a better party face than the Bard. They are easily the best class at using Diplomacy and Bluff, the two most broken skills in the game.

I would also argue that they're the best skill monkey class in Core too. They're like Rogues with casting.

But of course neither of those roles matter in combat, and all anyone ever cares about is combat. Pff. Philistines.

[mvpmack]

If all you care about is combat, be a wizard! As a Bard, I mean.

Obtain Familiar, the 2nd level spell Magic Savant (from Complete Mage), and maxed UMD. Fill it out with the Melodic Casting feat, so you can read scrolls and cast spells while singing. Now anything a wizard can do, you can do better and twice a round, as long as you have the scrolls, wands or staves to back it up. It's a bit more expensive than having a wizard do it, but WBL ensures that you'll replace the costs and the game impact is huge. Get eternal wands (MIC) for the lower level spells that you absolutely need all the time (heroics? mirror move?)

Not only are Bards the best faces and skill monkeys, they also provide as much arcane power as a wizard if played right. Screw the Snowflake Wardance stuff, you can play the role of the best class in the game, as well as copy cleric and druid spellcasting.

[eggynack]

I agree with you except on one point: nothing in Core is a better party face than the Bard. They are easily the best class at using Diplomacy and Bluff, the two most broken skills in the game.

True enough. My assessment was definitely underselling the extent of their abilities at least somewhat, and even without DFI and crazy boosting, inspire courage is a pretty good buffing ability, as are the other bardic musics to a lesser extent. I don't know if the class necessarily hits its top of tier three status that it gets out of core, but it definitely deserves its position in the general tier.

[Iwasforger03]

At the OP: is this the quote you were talking about?



It was pulled from this thread: Bard or Beguiler (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?122326-Bard-or-Beguiler)


Sadly not, but it is lovely.

[atemu1234]

Warning-Salty Rant ahead.

Bards are my favorite class, but unfortunately the game and general D&D setting has made them a sterotypical laughingstock of crap. This whole idea of a lute playing halfling who "lives to be a great performer" needs to die. HARD. I have a policy to attack and kill ON SIGHT any lute playing bard I encounter in any game. Absolutely no exceptions; I don't care if I am a paladin of peace, I will strangle that stupid lute player with their own entrails and cackle with glee. I warn players and DM's ahead of time that I don't stand for such nonsense and I will not see bards be made as a joke. Other classes can play lutes no problem, but no bard should be some derpy idiot playing a lute who sings and flutters around.

Bards are people who inspire, who lead, and who go down in history as some of the baddest effing people around. Look at "The Bard" William Shakespear. Did he play a lute and be a laughing stock?! Absolutely not. He wrote stories of regicide, witchcraft, political asssassinations, XXX level pornagraphy, and finding loopholes in the rules that end with people losing their head. A good bard will tell the story of Macbeth and scare children. A great bard will have seen it first hand, but the best bards....the best bards were pulling the strings and have just as much blood on their hands as the fighter and the wizard. They waltzed into the castle like they owned the place, and by word, magic or weapon they eventually did. Sure, other classes can, but they won't tell the story of how it happened as well as the bard will. The bard turns it up to 11 in whatever medium they work in, and you will never forget it.

Mechanically, sure there are more powerful classes, but the unique abilities of the bard do things others cannot. Namely, the bardic performance being extraordinary(no spell resistance, no antimagic field to stop it) and glibness(I just told the queen that I am her, and she is a commenter. I am a man, but she believed me and just handed me the crown. GG campaign). At high levels, bards don't end combats, they prevent them from ever happening. God forbid somebody tries to fight a high level bard, cause you are not just fighting the bard, you are fighting throngs of allies(compelled, charmed, earned or otherwise) willing to give their lives and abilities to the silver tongued devil.

For further inspiration on how a bard is awesome, Watch "Once upon a time in Mexico" and read up on commander Jack Churchill http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Churchill

This image also pretty well sums it up.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-TFPuGmgTHy8/UNTu2k3LPaI/AAAAAAAAB8s/Jqza9F64_MU/s1600/BardBoast.jpg

Hey, both are well-established. It's not a good idea to break RP for meta reasons.

I once made a Vampire Bard NPC. He specialized into seducing people and turning them into slaves in something referred to as a "Blood Brothel". Yes, I know what it means.

[Arbane]

Another good reason to play a Bard, at least in pathfinder: You can insult people so hard that they burst into flame. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/b/blistering) :smallbiggrin:

[Othniel]

Bard-types are my favorite class in, well...pretty much anything to be honest. I love playing the character that just knows stuff. Probably because I'm a bit like that in real life. Not that I'm anywhere close to an expert in anything, but I'm a trivia junkie (especially with history). The other fun thing about Bards is making everyone else just a little bit more awesome. Fighter just missed that attack roll? Nope: Inspire Courage. Rogue just missed disarming that trap? Nope: Inspire Competence.

Bards were my favorite class in Pathfinder...until Skalds came out. What's better than a Bard? Viking Bards. This Guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snorri_Sturluson) is someone who deserves to be better known.

Edit: And Jack Churchill really needs to have a biography written about him.

[Dunsparce]

I myself am going to play a bard in an upcoming campaign. Though I'm not going to be like most bards. Dragon Magazine #311 has an interesting PrC for neutral good dwarven bards or moradin called Memory Smith. Five levels of full BAB, d8 hitdie, and a bunch of spells added for free to your spells known(the most important one being Divine Power), and proficiency in all martial axes, hammers, and picks, medium and heavy armor, and all shields. And the best part is all five levels advance bardic music and casting(and only bard casting).

I plan to play a Divine Bard, I got some nifty stat Rolls (17/14/16/14/16/17 before dwarven racial adjustments) so I can still cast in fullplate. I plan to pick mostly healing a buff spells, no enchantments or illusions, so I'm some sort of weird pseudo paladin/cleric but with bardic music.

The fact that is even possible shows that with the right PrCs and ACFs, Bards can take all sorts of party roles not traditionally meant for them.

[Flickerdart]

Bard-types are my favorite class in, well...pretty much anything to be honest. I love playing the character that just knows stuff.
Unfortunately, Bardic Knowledge is not a great way to "just know stuff" - it only gives you information about important people, items, and places so you can't use it to know anything about a monster or a spell or a village, etc. It's also much harder to boost than the Knowledge skills (since it is not itself a skill) so an equal-level wizard is actually more likely to get a better result through the relevant Knowledge skill than the bard with his Bardic Knowledge, since he has skill points aplenty.

[Darrin]

Unfortunately, Bardic Knowledge is not a great way to "just know stuff" - it only gives you information about important people, items, and places so you can't use it to know anything about a monster or a spell or a village, etc.

Then you're not using it right. If you need info about a monster, spell, or village, then you start with, "Well, there's this old legend about the Great Hero Earwaxian the Unbathed who visited the Ancient Village of Podpeople in his search for the Angle Bracket of Ruleswankery, and once he got there he found out that {fill in the blank}". Yes, it's bending the rules on Bardic Knowledge a bit, but it's also a HUGE NEON SIGN to the DM to feed the bard Clue-By-Fours, all that meaningless background text that the other players were not smart enough to ask about, and basically any info the DM thinks the players should have but wasn't able to find an easy way to get into the narrative.

[Flickerdart]

Then you're not using it right. If you need info about a monster, spell, or village, then you start with, "Well, there's this old legend about the Great Hero Earwaxian the Unbathed who visited the Ancient Village of Podpeople in his search for the Angle Bracket of Ruleswankery, and once he got there he found out that {fill in the blank}". Yes, it's bending the rules on Bardic Knowledge a bit, but it's also a HUGE NEON SIGN to the DM to feed the bard Clue-By-Fours, all that meaningless background text that the other players were not smart enough to ask about, and basically any info the DM thinks the players should have but wasn't able to find an easy way to get into the narrative.
That has nothing to do with how you use Bardic Knowledge. When you use Bardic Knowledge, you pick a topic and roll. You don't decide what you get back.

In your example, the bard will already have to know who Earwaxian is, and that Earwaxian passed through this random village, and even then the DM is not obligated to say "oh yeah, you totally know what happened to Earwaxian in this village" because the ability doesn't let you ask for specific things, only request "some relevant information."

The DM can easily info-dump without PCs using an ability.

[Blackhawk748]

My favorite bard had to be Tapion (yes that Tapion) He had a Bastard Sword (yes i blew a feat on it) grabbed two levels of Warblade and happily ran off into Warchanter (my DM let me substitute Oratory for Wind Instrument, Ocarina for the win!!) So one point shy of Full BaB, nearly full Bardic Music, and all the nifty Warchanter toys. Needless to say my party loved me. Especially when a village was attacked by an ogre horde and i started playing Inspire Legion and Inspire Awe (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f8V1QSf7yg), suddenly every commoner in the village got my BaB and the Ogres where Panicked. Oh and i had led with Singing Shout. It was glorious!!

So ya, bards are epic and if you disagree bring it up with a party made up of nothing but bards. Go on, ill just sit here. With popcorn.

[Othniel]

Then you're not using it right. If you need info about a monster, spell, or village, then you start with, "Well, there's this old legend about the Great Hero Earwaxian the Unbathed who visited the Ancient Village of Podpeople in his search for the Angle Bracket of Ruleswankery, and once he got there he found out that {fill in the blank}". Yes, it's bending the rules on Bardic Knowledge a bit, but it's also a HUGE NEON SIGN to the DM to feed the bard Clue-By-Fours, all that meaningless background text that the other players were not smart enough to ask about, and basically any info the DM thinks the players should have but wasn't able to find an easy way to get into the narrative.

I'm going to agree here. According to the online Pathfinder srd, there's nothing on the Bard page about not being able to know about a monster, spell, or village. That's what each specific knowledge skill (reflective of knowledge of a particular field of study, just going off the srd) is for, and the bard gets a 1/2 level bonus to each knowledge skill to reflect his in-depth knowledge of things. They get an even better ability (Lore Master) at level 5. Bards can be just as knowledgeable about a topic as wizards, depending on how they assign their skill points. So yeah, they can just know stuff. :smallbiggrin:


Blackhawk748, this feat is for you: Ensemble. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/ensemble-teamwork)

[Chronos]

Even in core-only, bards are great. The only reason that some people think that they suck is that they happen to not like doing the two things that bards do very well. But the core-only bard is a very good support class, and they're the best face class in the entire game. If you hate playing support or face, well then, of course you're going to think that bards are lackluster, because they really are lackluster outside of those two roles (in core, at least). But that says as much about your preferences as it does about the bard's abilities.

[omnitricks]

You don't mess with bards because they are the guys that can completely defame you until you are wrecked whether it is true or not. At best you can still repair your reputation but at worst you will become a legend for the wrong reasons. Ditto for why you want a bard to be your best friend especially if he is a good bard for making you famously immortalized.

[Vrock_Summoner]

Full caster level progression allows them to becomes liches.

You don't need a heart or lung to sing both out.

[LoyalPaladin]

You don't mess with bards because they are the guys that can completely defame you until you are wrecked whether it is true or not.
We have a bard who was relatively set on defaming my paladin with insults. It was great. Until I accidentally one shot him. One cleric spell later he was back on his feet with a whole new outlook on mocking the front liner. It sounds like I mean "accidentally" one shot him. But it was 100% accidental, I was trying to smash an evil item and he was trying to grab it off the ground. After I'd already rolled to attack I might add. Poor choice.

On topic, I actually really like bards as a class. They are versatile and generally well accepted anywhere. They're great performers and usually have a something up their sleeve for every occasion.

[Rijan_Sai]

Warning-Salty Rant ahead.

Bards are my favorite class, but unfortunately the game and general D&D setting has made them a sterotypical laughingstock of crap. This whole idea of a lute playing halfling who "lives to be a great performer" needs to die. HARD. I have a policy to attack and kill ON SIGHT any lute playing bard I encounter in any game. Absolutely no exceptions; I don't care if I am a paladin of peace, I will strangle that stupid lute player with their own entrails and cackle with glee. I warn players and DM's ahead of time that I don't stand for such nonsense and I will not see bards be made as a joke. Other classes can play lutes no problem, but no bard should be some derpy idiot playing a lute who sings and flutters around.

Bards are people who inspire, who lead, and who go down in history as some of the baddest effing people around. Look at "The Bard" William Shakespear. Did he play a lute and be a laughing stock?! Absolutely not. He wrote stories of regicide, witchcraft, political asssassinations, XXX level pornagraphy, and finding loopholes in the rules that end with people losing their head. A good bard will tell the story of Macbeth and scare children. A great bard will have seen it first hand, but the best bards....the best bards were pulling the strings and have just as much blood on their hands as the fighter and the wizard. They waltzed into the castle like they owned the place, and by word, magic or weapon they eventually did. Sure, other classes can, but they won't tell the story of how it happened as well as the bard will. The bard turns it up to 11 in whatever medium they work in, and you will never forget it.

Mechanically, sure there are more powerful classes, but the unique abilities of the bard do things others cannot. Namely, the bardic performance being extraordinary(no spell resistance, no antimagic field to stop it) and glibness(I just told the queen that I am her, and she is a commenter. I am a man, but she believed me and just handed me the crown. GG campaign). At high levels, bards don't end combats, they prevent them from ever happening. God forbid somebody tries to fight a high level bard, cause you are not just fighting the bard, you are fighting throngs of allies(compelled, charmed, earned or otherwise) willing to give their lives and abilities to the silver tongued devil.

{Redacted}

You know, I've been thinking about playing a bard. Reading this makes me want to play one in a game with you, playing the deity you describe in the S-Block, and at some point after I have obtained such power, just for you, pull out a lute and start playing!*

Also makes me want to learn more about the bard to become this diety!

*Yes...this made me a bit vindictive. In the "real world" I probably would not do this...

[Sonoflarry]

Joined to reply to this,
As a DM, I have a love/hate relationship with bards, on one hand, they make up some of the funniest dialogues in role playing you can get, depending on the player. But on the other hand, they do have the potential to seriously mess with the campaign you've spent days preparing.
I have this long time player of mine who always takes it upon himself to make the most vile and wretched bards in existence. In a long 1-20 level campaign I'm still running, he plays a self proclaimed "priest of priapus", whose sole goal in life is to have as much fun as possible and screw over people in the most hilarious way possible... In one particular instance, instead of finding out who was trying to assassinate the king, he simply hijacks the meeting of elders, convinces them all that the king is unfit to rule and that the high priest is a child molester, in turn promoting their 12 foot tall damage soaking half/Orc half/troll behemoth to take his place, as they reasoned. "He can take the damage"...

But yeah, I feel that a charasmatic class should be played by a charasmatic player, it just makes it all the more fun. Bards have their place, but should be used with a bundle of creativity.

[Milo v3]

I think a major issues with bards is taking them seriously and getting them to work in the setting. Mechanically they can be pretty nice.

[Sith_Happens]

I have a policy to attack and kill ON SIGHT any lute playing bard I encounter in any game. Absolutely no exceptions; I don't care if I am a paladin of peace, I will strangle that stupid lute player with their own entrails and cackle with glee.

Even the ones using masterwork lutes for the +1 effective bard level to almost every song?:smallfrown:

More on-topic, I've actually had the opposite experience in that I've yet to come across a group that didn't think bards were super cool, either due to people knowing their potential or for the same sorts of reasons that trick newbies into thinking monks are good. "Wait, you mean I can buff the party, cast spells, and be good at talking to people? Sweet!"

[Marlowe]

Plus, the idea of a guy with a lute meshed with a bunch of knights and wizards spelunking in an ancient ruin about as well as the anime-flavored monk.


We're blaming anime for the Monk now? Seriously? Lot of anime being watched in Minnesota in 1975.:smallconfused:

[Extra Anchovies]

We're blaming anime for the Monk now? Seriously? Lot of anime being watched in Minnesota in 1975.:smallconfused:

Indeed. The Monk is a wuxia class (a bad wuxia class, but a wuxia class nonetheless). If any class is anime-style, it's the swordsage, especially if you announce the names of your maneuvers as you use them. "FIVE-SHADOW CREEPING ICE ENERVATION STRIKE!!"

[Marlowe]

As is right and proper.

I'm still looking for a good RP opportunity to use "EXTREME PACIFIST CRUSH" or 'FATHER AND DAUGHTER PEACE AND LOVE DOUBLE IMPACT". Though.

[goto124]

So if there's one person who's the party face and is a jack of all trades, she does all the talking/diplomancy rolls during social situations... And in combat, does some buffing and otherwise leaves much of the fighting to her more specialised friends?

Bard sounds like it works well in a solo game, but other than that...

We do have Cha-based spellcasting for other classes right? So it's not like other party members of other classes are unable to be 'party faces'.

[Terazul]

Even the ones using masterwork lutes for the +1 effective bard level to almost every song?:smallfrown:

More on-topic, I've actually had the opposite experience in that I've yet to come across a group that didn't think bards were super cool, either due to people knowing their potential or for the same sorts of reasons that trick newbies into thinking monks are good. "Wait, you mean I can buff the party, cast spells, and be good at talking to people? Sweet!"

Personally I used a Masterwork Horn as a megaphone with Perform (Oratory). Those were some good inspirational speeches.

And yeah, I've never come across a group I've played in that had the problem with bards. One of my fraternal brothers played them religiously, and is most well known for distracting a boss with witty banter, then managing to succeed on a bull rush to send them both flying out of the tower, and casting featherfall on the way down. He put what resources he had to work.

In the last campaign I was in I played a battlebard/bardblade and served as the party face, leader, and combat specialist all at once, with a bit of backup healing on the side (Song of the Heart, Song of the White Raven, Healing Hymn, Dragonfire Inspiration, general IC optimization). Mostly cast lots of Shock and Awe use to keep the party going first, double up on Inspire Courage and Dragonfire Inspiration, then Whirling Blade to mow down enemies. With the right spells and ACFs, bards go from "neat" to downright incredible.

[Marlowe]

Whoever said Bards can't fight? d6 hit dice, medium bab, and decent weapons and armour proficiencies aren't tank material, but its not as though they fall over in a bleeding mess at the first sharp word.

As for other CHR-based casting classes, none of them gets anything like the array of social skills, with all the synergy bonus that implies, that the Bard does. The Sorceror can lie, but he'll also be hoodwinked by the first bridge sailsman. The Shugenja can be diplomatic, but can neither Sense Motive nor Bluff. The Dread Necro is your girl for when you want something frightened, but not placated. The Beguiler probably has poor charisma. The Warlock has most of the tools for the job but none of the skill points to do them.

[Der_DWSage]

As is right and proper.

I'm still looking for a good RP opportunity to use "EXTREME PACIFIST CRUSH" or 'FATHER AND DAUGHTER PEACE AND LOVE DOUBLE IMPACT". Though.

Yeah, but you need to have a family member with several levels in Cleric for that second maneuver. On top of having Vow of Peace...

[Marlowe]

Nah, all you need is a snarky Spirit Shaman with the mineral Warrior template standing on the sidelines complaining that all your attacks are oxymoronic.

[Yuki Akuma]

Warning-Salty Rant ahead.

Bards are my favorite class, but unfortunately the game and general D&D setting has made them a sterotypical laughingstock of crap. This whole idea of a lute playing halfling who "lives to be a great performer" needs to die. HARD. I have a policy to attack and kill ON SIGHT any lute playing bard I encounter in any game. Absolutely no exceptions; I don't care if I am a paladin of peace, I will strangle that stupid lute player with their own entrails and cackle with glee. I warn players and DM's ahead of time that I don't stand for such nonsense and I will not see bards be made as a joke. Other classes can play lutes no problem, but no bard should be some derpy idiot playing a lute who sings and flutters around.

Well don't you seem like an awesome person to play games with.

On topic: Bards are fantastic and are probably my favourite class. What other class can give an entire army +12d6 Fire (or whatever) damage per attack?

[Flickerdart]

We're blaming anime for the Monk now? Seriously? Lot of anime being watched in Minnesota in 1975.:smallconfused:
The original monk wasn't Eastern-inspired, he was just a punchy guy. All of the magic juju came later.


Indeed. The Monk is a wuxia class (a bad wuxia class, but a wuxia class nonetheless). If any class is anime-style, it's the swordsage, especially if you announce the names of your maneuvers as you use them. "FIVE-SHADOW CREEPING ICE ENERVATION STRIKE!!"
Take a look at Hennet the iconic Sorcerer and then tell me how non-anime he is.

[Segev]

The original monk was absolutely eastern-inspired. 1e AD&D had Quivering Palm and a number of other "secret techniques of martial artists"-inspired features. And the "unarmed fighter" monk is not exactly a Western stereotype; Western monks inspire images of scholars and traveling friars more than anything else. The most militant example DID wield a quarter-staff, but was by far not the best-known for that skill even in the band of merry men which he joined.

[Flickerdart]

The original monk was absolutely eastern-inspired.
E. Gary Gygax, "Preface", Oriental Adventures (1st edition, 1986): "In its early development, the D&D game was supplemented by various booklets, and in one of these the monk, inspired by Brian Blume and the book series called The Destroyer, was appended to the characters playable. So too was this cobbled-together martial arts specialist placed into the AD&D game system, even as it was being removed from the D&D game."

Blackmoor (the booklet in question) was published in 1975 - at which point the monk was just a punchy guy based on books about a secret agent. The monk only gained "a form of psionic power" in 1981, and became the eastern monk we know and hate today only with the release of Oriental Adventures, which describes its origins with the quote above.

[Segev]

The very fact it's called a "monk" implies that it's still pulling from eastern flavor. "A punchy guy" would have no reason to be called one without the eastern association. He'd be a "boxer" or, if pulled too directly, a "secret agent." (Which would make even less sense without spelling out that it's directly mimicking a PARTICULAR secret agent who likes to punch things a lot.)

[Flickerdart]

I'm not saying it makes sense, I'm saying it's what happened. You can feel free to pretend otherwise.

[Deadline]

E. Gary Gygax, "Preface", Oriental Adventures (1st edition, 1986): "In its early development, the D&D game was supplemented by various booklets, and in one of these the monk, inspired by Brian Blume and the book series called The Destroyer, was appended to the characters playable. So too was this cobbled-together martial arts specialist placed into the AD&D game system, even as it was being removed from the D&D game."

Blackmoor (the booklet in question) was published in 1975 - at which point the monk was just a punchy guy based on books about a secret agent. The monk only gained "a form of psionic power" in 1981, and became the eastern monk we know and hate today only with the release of Oriental Adventures, which describes its origins with the quote above.

Umm, perhaps you haven't read The Destroyer or it's bajillion subsequent novels? Yes, they guy is a secret agent martial artist. He's trained in a made-up mystical martial art from korea. They even made a movie based on it. It was a ridiculous comedy train-wreck starring Wilford Brimley, Joel Grey, and Kate Mulgrew.

[Segev]

Umm, perhaps you haven't read The Destroyer or it's bajillion subsequent novels? Yes, they guy is a secret agent martial artist. He's trained in a made-up mystical martial art from korea. They even made a movie based on it. It was a ridiculous comedy train-wreck starring Wilford Brimley, Joel Grey, and Kate Mulgrew.

Oh man, I saw a review of that movie as part of watching a Let's Play of Deadly Premonition. It looked hillariously atrocious.


That said, this would seem to support that the "monk" was always based on eastern monks, which is why the "punchy guy" is called a "monk."

[Deadline]

Oh man, I saw a review of that movie as part of watching a Let's Play of Deadly Premonition. It looked hillariously atrocious.

Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins

I love that movie almost as much as I love Hudson Hawk. :smallbiggrin:


That said, this would seem to support that the "monk" was always based on eastern monks, which is why the "punchy guy" is called a "monk."

Yep.

Edit - Although, to be fair to Flickerdart, Remo isn't asian. It doesn't matter to the argument, I think, but it can be an easy mistake to make if you don't delve into the source too far.

[Doctor Awkward]

Bards are awesome only because of splat book support. Full stop.


In core, they suck.

The only feat that is of any real use to them in core is Skill Focus. Maaaaybe the Spring Attack chain. Bad HD, medium BAB (with no solid way to boost it), and lack of weapon proficiencies means they can't really stand on their own in melee, rogues/rangers/druids (even MONKS if they are build right) are all better at scouting (lack of Spot as a class skill is just bizarre), rogues absolutely have them beat in the skill-monkey department, and on those rare instances you need a party face, they are really only slightly better than paladins or sorcerers, Glibness notwithstanding.

The majority of their songs also suck. Inspire courage and inspire greatness are the only two you need. The rest of the time you are trading away the others for better alternatives. Countersong is probably the worst class feature in, like, all of D&D.

Bards are spread way too thin, and while they can adequately fill almost any archetype (occasionally, two at once), they just aren't an ideal replacement for any dedicated class, and are thus relegated to secondary whatever.

[Troacctid]

In core, they suck.

The only feat that is of any real use to them in core is Skill Focus. Maaaaybe the Spring Attack chain. Bad HD, medium BAB (with no solid way to boost it), and lack of weapon proficiencies means they can't really stand on their own in melee, rogues/rangers/druids (even MONKS if they are build right) are all better at scouting (lack of Spot as a class skill is just bizarre), rogues absolutely have them beat in the skill-monkey department, and on those rare instances you need a party face, they are really only slightly better than paladins or sorcerers, Glibness notwithstanding.

Excuse me? No feats in Core? Bards have the #1 best feat in Core, and they're also the best at abusing it. And they're also the best skillmonkey class in Core by far--they have all the important class skills, and the amazing utility of the Bard spell list to back it up, plus they're Cha-based, which is a great stat for skills. And what are these feats that Rogues are taking that are better than the ones Bards are taking? Do Rogues have better BAB, hit dice, and weapon proficiencies than Bards now? Because I must have missed that errata. Does your Rogue have invisibility, teleportation, and divination spells to help them scout, too? Did your Sorcerer somehow gain Diplomacy and Sense Motive--AKA two of the three crucial social skills that a party face needs--as class skills?

I mean, if you completely ignore the fact that they have spells, then sure, they suck, but...I mean...I don't know if you missed the memo, but magic is good. :smallwink:

[Petrocorus]

I agree with you except on one point: nothing in Core is a better party face than the Bard. They are easily the best class at using Diplomacy and Bluff, the two most broken skills in the game.

According to me, they are the best party face even out of core. It's the only class with both a big emphasis on Charisma and the appropriate skill list and skill points. Not to mention their spell list.



I would also argue that they're the best skill monkey class in Core too. They're like Rogues with casting.

But of course neither of those roles matter in combat, and all anyone ever cares about is combat. Pff. Philistines.
They are actually lacking of use in the combat department and i think that's their main flaw and the reason why people don't like them very much.
In Core only, the Bard can easily be useless in fight. They lack the mean to be a proper glass cannon and their Inspire Courage is not good enough at high level.


.... Great Hero Earwaxian the Unbathed who visited the Ancient Village of Podpeople in his search for the Angle Bracket of Ruleswankery, ...

I really need to play that campaign now. And that hero, we need to flesh him out.

[goto124]

Why do I take along a Bard instead of a device that can make Diplomancy/Bluff/etc checks?

[Sith_Happens]

Why do I take along a Bard instead of a device that can make Diplomancy/Bluff/etc checks?

Who's going to use that device? Last I checked bards are the best at UMD.:smalltongue:

[Story]

Whoever said Bards can't fight? d6 hit dice, medium bab, and decent weapons and armour proficiencies aren't tank material, but its not as though they fall over in a bleeding mess at the first sharp word.

As for other CHR-based casting classes, none of them gets anything like the array of social skills, with all the synergy bonus that implies, that the Bard does. The Sorceror can lie, but he'll also be hoodwinked by the first bridge sailsman. The Shugenja can be diplomatic, but can neither Sense Motive nor Bluff. The Dread Necro is your girl for when you want something frightened, but not placated. The Beguiler probably has poor charisma. The Warlock has most of the tools for the job but none of the skill points to do them.

What about Binders?

They're a CHA based class with Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information, Intimidate, and Sense Motive as class skills. Admittedly, they get a lot less skill points, but then again, they get Naberius, which just makes things silly.

Of course if you really want to go pure face, no build would be complete without a 1 level dip in Marshal, but that does mean sacrificing combat prowess or utility.

[Marlowe]

Are Binders a Casting class? Okay...

A Binder is like the Incarnate in that he can get up in the morning and decide he's going to have whatever class abilities he wants for the day. That's nice. Still rather have it all there all the time though.

I'm rather flummoxed that people persist in thinking of the Bard as an odd extra to the adventure and somehow out of place. The oldest piece of English literature surviving (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widsith) is almost nothing but a Bard yarning about all the places he's been and the people he's met. I don't mean to suggest that English literature is that old, in the general scheme of things, but most cultures have the archetype. Bards, out of all the core classes, have the best excuse to go wandering around getting into adventures. Wizard? Why aren't you studying? Fighter? Where's your unit, son? Rogue? What are you doing so far from Stabback Alley? Cleric? Aren't there better things you could be doing than tomb-robbing?

[Troacctid]

Who's going to use that device? Last I checked bards are the best at UMD.:smalltongue:

Third best, tops. Warlocks and Artificers are better. Warlocks can take 10, and Artificers get a +2 bonus and can craft whatever devices they need, and both can do it from very low levels.


Cleric? Aren't there better things you could be doing than tomb-robbing?

You kidding? Clerics of Olidammara live for tomb-robbing! :smalltongue:

[Marlowe]

You kidding? Clerics of Olidammara live for tomb-robbing! :smalltongue: You can find a god for pretty much any human and inhuman activity. That doesn't mean that Cleric as a class automatically screams "Tomb robber" any more than it screams "Animal Trainer" or "Gymnast".

And there's easy-to-find gods for those as well.

Also; Olidammara? Pffft. Guy should be selling used wagons. Go Xan Yae or Vecna or maybe even Wee Jas and be the divine tomb-robber that can look at his god without the sinking feeling that he could have done better.

[Story]

Isn't there a PRC specifically for tomb robbing clerics of Ollidarma?

[Marlowe]

Yes and No.

Yes, there's a Prestige class called "Temple Raider of Olidammara."

No, it's not good for Clerics. The prereqs are very Roguey and rather than advance Clerical casting, it gets its own casting progression instead. Starting from the bottom. It's for skillmonkeys who want some casting rather than Clerics who want to get more skillful.

Apparently, Olidammara even cheats his own Clerics.

[Sith_Happens]

Third best, tops. Warlocks and Artificers are better. Warlocks can take 10, and Artificers get a +2 bonus and can craft whatever devices they need, and both can do it from very low levels.

I meant in Core, which... I don't think goto was restricting to in the first place, not sure how that happened.:smallconfused:


Isn't there a PRC specifically for tomb robbing clerics of Ollidarma?

Yup, it's even called Temple Raider of Olidammara.

EDIT: Slowpoke swordsage'd.

[Doctor Awkward]

Excuse me? No feats in Core? Bards have the #1 best feat in Core, and they're also the best at abusing it. And they're also the best skillmonkey class in Core by far--they have all the important class skills, and the amazing utility of the Bard spell list to back it up, plus they're Cha-based, which is a great stat for skills. And what are these feats that Rogues are taking that are better than the ones Bards are taking? Do Rogues have better BAB, hit dice, and weapon proficiencies than Bards now? Because I must have missed that errata. Does your Rogue have invisibility, teleportation, and divination spells to help them scout, too? Did your Sorcerer somehow gain Diplomacy and Sense Motive--AKA two of the three crucial social skills that a party face needs--as class skills?

I mean, if you completely ignore the fact that they have spells, then sure, they suck, but...I mean...I don't know if you missed the memo, but magic is good. :smallwink:

Oh.

You play in games that actually allow Leadership?

Weird. I kind of forget that feat even exists.


-Sorcerer's don't need those skills to be the party face. It's called Charm Person. And party face is a niche role anyway. It's not something you are going to need every game, and almost never something you are going to need at all. I couldn't tell you the number of campaign journals I've read that have something along the lines of, "Well this guy wanted to be a party face, so I had to add in some social encounters..."


-A bard with Intelligence higher than 12 is doing it wrong, so in core bard get's 7 skill points per level (8 if human), and needs Concentration, Perform, Spellcraft, UMD, and Tumble maxed at all times. That leaves you with one or two leftover to fill whatever other role you think you need to fill.
Please illustrate for me how they are better than a rogue at being a skillmonkey, who have room to get Hide, Move Silently, Search, Disable, Listen, Spot, Diplomacy if it's that kind of game, Bluff, Sense Motive, Sleight of Hand, Decipher Script...


-And uh... Weapon Finesse? The Two-Weapon Fighting chain? Do you really take those on a bard? And shouting a dimension door spell is not what you do when you scout. It's what you do when you get caught. Rogue's don't get caught in the first place. And what divination spells are we talking about that help you scout? And oh wait, invisibility? Yes, it's called a potion. Or a wand. And proficiencies aside, rogue's do have better choices for weapons (Sword of Subtlety), and are far less MAD than bard's are.

[Marlowe]

*Snip*

So what you are saying is that a Bard can do two peoples jobs; and do so without bleeding money on potions or getting the party lynched after the enchantment spells wear off, and that's not taking into account most of their class features.

Thank you for proving the point.

Bards are awesome.

[Talya]

Plus, the idea of a guy with a lute meshed with a bunch of knights and wizards spelunking in an ancient ruin about as well as the anime-flavored monk.


Only for people who knew nothing about the high fantasy the game was emulating.

From Tolkien's pages upon pages of songs (which I skipped), Blondel, The Piper of Hamelin, Fflewddur Fflam, Amergin Glúingel (the possibly-historical origin of the bard), the Harpers in Dragonriders of Pern (tell me any fans of that series didn't think of Robinton as a badass). Heck, Mercedes Lackey did an entire series based on the concept. I could probably come up with dozens more.

[Doctor Awkward]

So what you are saying is that a Bard can do two peoples jobs; and do so without bleeding money on potions or getting the party lynched after the enchantment spells wear off, and that's not taking into account most of their class features.

Thank you for proving the point.

Bards are awesome.

Yes bards can adequately fill almost any role, and are always inferior than a dedicated class at doing it.

Thank you for agreeing.

Stop pretending like a bard has some kind of undeserved reputation as a useless tag-along and that people just don't want to give them a chance. Their reputation is well-earned. It persists because people are largely unaware of all the splat support they have to make them better.

[Talya]

Yes bards can adequately fill almost any role, and are always inferior than a dedicated class at doing it.

Thank you for agreeing.

Stop pretending like a bard has some kind of undeserved reputation as a useless tag-along and that people just don't want to give them a chance. Their reputation is well-earned. It persists because people are largely unaware of all the splat support they have to make them better.

In core this is true except for party face. However, even in this case, the party is always better off with a bard than with a Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, or Monk. They're probably better off than they'd be with a Rogue or a Ranger.

But the game has been "completed" for 7 years. Nobody uses "core." Everyone has instant access to all material that was ever written for them. The default is with splatbook support.

With splatbook support, the bard is:
(1) The best melee damage dealer in the game. They can choose to make others even better than themselves, but nobody's better than they are without having a bard around.
(2) Can turn other melee fighters into even better damage dealers than themselves.
(3) The best skill monkey in the game, bar none.
(4) Tier 2 spellcasters the better of any sorcerer. (This is a choice that is at the expense of a bit of points 1-3).

What's more, if you take away the Sublime Chord PrC, the bard is the pinnacle of game balance/good class design. They're the perfect tier 3: capable of being useful in EVERY situation, and outright winning several common situations without help. Add in Sublime Chord, and they're a great tier 2 that flirts with tier 1 due to sheer versatility. (This isn't really a positive thing, though, as anything beyond tier 3 starts to mess up game balance.)

[Marlowe]

I've played quite a few Bards by now. Never have I felt like a "Useless tag-along kid", or that I didn't have something worthwhile to do in almost any situation.

If there's a single core class I find does nothing worthwhile--well obviously it's the Monk--but Rogues are a close second.

I actually have to change my dungeon designs when there's a Rogue present. Just so they'll have something worthwhile to do.

[goto124]

Marlowe, could you kindly elaborate on why you felt great when playing bards? Was it the style of melee fighting, spell casting, diplomancing (what kind? Did you just throw dice, or used RP? Were you the only one who did all the talking for the party?), whatever a bard does?

Did you use splatbooks, or pure Core?

[Marlowe]

Multiple questions there.

Initially, I thought Bards were extremely underpowered and good only for filling in cracks here and there. Then, when DMing a campaign for a small group (basically a Fighter and a Cleric), I built a multiclass Rogue/Bard NPC to fill in certain missing skill sets. I fully expected the Rogue part of it to do the heavy lifting and the Bard side would just be useful for a song here in there.

I was very much wrong, the Bardic levels (whether it was the skill list, or the spells, or the music) turned out to be useful in an obscene number of situations, while the Rogue levels just sat there and sulked. I was a very inexperienced DM, who was only in the position because the regular guy was sleeping off a drunk most of the time, and I'd often put the party in situations they were ill-equipped to handle without meaning to.

Very often it was the Bard who turned out to have a mechanical answer that at least gave them some leverage on the problem, and he would have done even more if the player who was "managing" him (I didn't DMPC him) had been showing him more attention. Not that I can really blame him.

That was with a Core-only Bard. I don't want to think what it would have been like if I'd built him with more splats, or if he'd had an, undistracted player to run him.

When I actually started playing Bards I'd often specialize them into one combat role, say archery or Finesse fighting. But this generally seemed to undersell the class. Focusing a class that can be useful all the time on a role that's only useful some of the time. I never knew what role I'd be called upon to play, or which member of the party I'd wind up backing up. And yes, if I was backing up someone else, that's still better than having nothing to contribute.

After a while I grasped the obvious that the strength of the class lay in its wild-card ability to be ready for the unexpected as much as anything you plan for. While others were playing more focused, objectively stronger classes, they often seemed to just give up and stand around if the situation didn't play to their strengths. Even a wizard can be without a useful spell for the current situation on occasion. With a Bard you have fallback. Skills not offering a solution? What spells have you got? Spells not doing anything? Maybe the music does something. Is there someone around we can talk to? That might help.

A Bard has multiple layers of options available in a given situation, whereas many other classes, and even some much stronger ones, only have the one. And the variety is refreshing. You might say that the individual layers are comparatively weak. Well, they're strong enough enough times to do the job in style. What I see in most posts from people who dislike them is to focus on only one aspect of their abilities, and then trivialize that. As we saw above. It's never sound logic, even if said trivialization is remotely fair.

And this notion that a character, or a class, should be built or specialised to be the best at one thing, an only one thing? I don't believe that's a terribly sensible attitude in a profession (adventuring) that deals with the unknown on a regular basis, but that's irrelevant. What's not irrelevant is that I'm not interested in standing around in a dungeon waiting for my specialty to come up, or watch myself become increasing pointless as the campaign goes on (hello Rogue). I like Bards because they always give me something useful to do. And sometimes, quite often, they can shine.

EDIT: And to answer things a little more literally.
1, Initiate song first, the throw javelins, then melee.
2, We usually talk, then roll dice to see how it goes down.
3, "Whatever it is a Bard does?" You mean, close to everything? Is that a question?
4, Much prefer using splats. I'd ban most core classes if I felt I could get away with it.

[goto124]

What could you do that no one else would do? A wizard can cast spells. A wizard can't sneak, but we have a rogue. Neither are good at melee fighting, but we have a fighter.

That's why the idea of an all-rounder sounds wierd. We have multiple people to cover all our bases. It is a team game after all!

Why was the rogue 'sulking around' when the bard was in play? What did you guys do?

[Segev]

What could you do that no one else would do? A wizard can cast spells. A wizard can't sneak, but we have a rogue. Neither are good at melee fighting, but we have a fighter.

That's why the idea of an all-rounder sounds wierd. We have multiple people to cover all our bases. It is a team game after all!

Why was the rogue 'sulking around' when the bard was in play? What did you guys do?There's something to be said for having a second person who can back up the primary expert in a field. Sometimes, you need two people who can do the same thing, perhaps in different places or just working in parallel. The bard can be that second person almost all the time.

[Petrocorus]

With splatbook support, the bard is:
(1) The best melee damage dealer in the game. They can choose to make others even better than themselves, but nobody's better than they are without having a bard around.
(2) Can turn other melee fighters into even better damage dealers than themselves.

I would like you to elaborate if you don't mind. I agree with you point (2), but precisely because of this i don't see how point (1) can be true. How the Bard can deal more damage than the über-charger buffed with the Bard's DFI?



(3) The best skill monkey in the game, bar none.
(4) Tier 2 spellcasters the better of any sorcerer. (This is a choice that is at the expense of a bit of points 1-3).

Once again, i don't see how the bard can be a better skill monkey than the Rogue, the Factotum, or the Beguiler who have for main focus to be a skill-monkey and focus on Int.
I agree that the Bard is surely the best party face, because he doesn't focus on Int but on Cha, while still having the skills. But in other skills department? The Bard is not even supposed to be a trapfinder.



What's more, if you take away the Sublime Chord PrC, the bard is the pinnacle of game balance/good class design. They're the perfect tier 3: capable of being useful in EVERY situation, and outright winning several common situations without help. Add in Sublime Chord, and they're a great tier 2 that flirts with tier 1 due to sheer versatility. (This isn't really a positive thing, though, as anything beyond tier 3 starts to mess up game balance.)
There too, i agree the Sublime Chord put the Bard in tier 2, and maybe better than the Sorcerer. According to me, however, the lack of spells known and spells per day won't allow him to be in tier 1.



I actually have to change my dungeon designs when there's a Rogue present. Just so they'll have something worthwhile to do.
But you still need a trapfinder, don't you? Or do you deal with traps only with spells? Or do you mean the Beguiler or the Arty are doing this as well as the Rogue while having other strengths?


Did you use splatbooks, or pure Core?

Out of curiosity, are there a lot of people who play Core only games?

[atemu1234]

Out of curiosity, are there a lot of people who play Core only games?

There are a few, but most games I run or have been in have a multitude of books. There are usually a few banned books, however.

[Deadline]

Once again, i don't see how the bard can be a better skill monkey than the Rogue, the Factotum, or the Beguiler who have for main focus to be a skill-monkey and focus on Int.

Given that the quote was in the context of "With splatbook support", this one's pretty straightforward: Bardic Knack and Jack of All Trades. Now you have all of the skills.

The Beguiler is still a better trapfinder, and the Factotum is better at getting big numbers.


There too, i agree the Sublime Chord put the Bard in tier 2, and maybe better than the Sorcerer. According to me, however, the lack of spells known and spells per day won't allow him to be in tier 1.

Runestaves and Knowstones are the common fix to this. Wands and the like help as well. Oh, and Bards get UMD.


But you still need a trapfinder, don't you?

Almost never, actually. Either summon creatures to spring the traps, or have your resident damage sponge face-tank them.

I admit to being biased and loving bards. They are versatile and useful in nearly every situation. And they just get better in a party, where they can make all the specialists even better at what they do. They're the ultimate team player, IMO.

[Marlowe]

What could you do that no one else would do? A wizard can cast spells. A wizard can't sneak, but we have a rogue. Neither are good at melee fighting, but we have a fighter.

That's why the idea of an all-rounder sounds wierd. We have multiple people to cover all our bases. It is a team game after all!

Why was the rogue 'sulking around' when the bard was in play? What did you guys do?

What does a Fighter do that no one else can do? Nothing. Everyone fights. A Sorceror? Nothing. Other classes cast spells. Some much better. A Paladin? Nothing. Clerics do everything better. Multiple redundancy doesn't invalidate a class by itself.

And of course a wizard can sneak.

Please read what I actually wrote again. There was no Rogue. The Rogue LEVELS did nothing of significance.




But you still need a trapfinder, don't you? Or do you deal with traps only with spells? Or do you mean the Beguiler or the Arty are doing this as well as the Rogue while having other strengths?

No. You only need a Trapfinder when you HAVE a Trapfinder. Trapfinding is a contrived and frankly, tedious mechanic to give the Rogue a reason to exist. Except there's better classes with trapfinding now, so even that doesn't work.

Rest of the time the "traps" take the form of puzzles, which are solvable by the player. Not by class features and dice rolls.

[Petrocorus]

Given that the quote was in the context of "With splatbook support", this one's pretty straightforward: Bardic Knack and Jack of All Trades. Now you have all of the skills.

Oh my gosh.. completely forgot about that one. My bad.



Almost never, actually. Either summon creatures to spring the traps, or have your resident damage sponge face-tank them.

Never been a fan of that second solution, a magical trap targeting the Will save and your BSF can be gone for good, or requires a mid to high level spell. Can be a waste of resources. OTOH, The Summon Elemental reserve feat is a good solution as you said.



I admit to being biased and loving bards. They are versatile and useful in nearly every situation. And they just get better in a party, where they can make all the specialists even better at what they do. They're the ultimate team player, IMO.
I love Bard too. And they really are the team player.

[Troacctid]

Yes bards can adequately fill almost any role, and are always inferior than a dedicated class at doing it.

Thank you for agreeing.

Unless the job is skill-monkeying, in which case they're just as good or better.

[Deadline]

Never been a fan of that second solution, a magical trap targeting the Will save and your BSF can be gone for good, or requires a mid to high level spell. Can be a waste of resources. OTOH, The Summon Elemental reserve feat is a good solution as you said.

If I remember correctly, the OD&D method of trapfinding our groups liked to use involved the purchase of several goats (they were super cheap) from the nearest town before dungeon delving. Worried there might be a trap in that corridor? Send a goat to go spring it. Sure, goats are noisy and give away the element of surprise, but so does Sir Clanks-A-Lot over there, so you might as well make the noise do some work for you. :smalltongue:

Another method was the classic 10' pole. About the only time you needed a trap expert was when you ran into a resetting trap that had to be disabled to proceed. And even then, there were oodles of creative solutions to that sort of problem.

Also, finding a well-hidden equivalent CR trap is ridiculously hard, even for a Rogue. And traps cease to be much of an issue once you hit higher levels. The Rogue seems to find more use as a skill monkey and situational glass cannon.

Of course, that could depend quite a bit on campaign styles.

[Doctor Awkward]

holy hell.

It's really going to be one of those threads, isn't it...


But the game has been "completed" for 7 years. Nobody uses "core." Everyone has instant access to all material that was ever written for them. The default is with splatbook support.

Maybe not in your local gaming community, but there are plenty of others who would disagree. Core is the one thing everyone is guaranteed to have access to. Core + PHBII is also a very common restriction. Some games around here (EDIT: meaning locally for me) allow only Unearthed Arcana.


With splatbook support, the bard is:
(1) The best melee damage dealer in the game. They can choose to make others even better than themselves, but nobody's better than they are without having a bard around.
No.

Seriously, is there a step beyond "no"? Because that's where we are right now.

The best damage you can expect from a bard pales in comparison to an optimized ubercharger, a 16 BAB sneak attack build, and even an optimized mailman sorcerer.


(2) Can turn other melee fighters into even better damage dealers than themselves.
Yes, but this is a bard's default setting. Literally everything does better average damage than a core bard (except maybe a TWF Ranger).


(3) The best skill monkey in the game, bar none.
And we're right back to "beyond no".

First of all, outside of core, the best skill monkey in the game, bar none, is the Factotum. He gets all skills as class skills, adds his primary ability score plus the normal ability score to over half of them, and gets a class level bonus once per day per skill. If you have an arcane spell that helps your skills, he has it too.
The bard has nothing that even approaches that. If you are really going to try to claim otherwise, we're pretty much done here.

Second of all, inside core, I've demonstrated how a rogue has a bard beat when it comes to all-purpose skill monkeying, and no one has done anything to demonstrate otherwise. Except, of course, to repeat "bards are the best skill monkeys because I said so" over and over again.


(4) Tier 2 spellcasters the better of any sorcerer. (This is a choice that is at the expense of a bit of points 1-3).

Sublime Chords cannot effectively compete with an optimized sorcerer with it's own exclusive spells (Wings of Cover, Arcane Fusion, et al.)


What's more, if you take away the Sublime Chord PrC, the bard is the pinnacle of game balance/good class design. They're the perfect tier 3: capable of being useful in EVERY situation, and outright winning several common situations without help. Add in Sublime Chord, and they're a great tier 2 that flirts with tier 1 due to sheer versatility. (This isn't really a positive thing, though, as anything beyond tier 3 starts to mess up game balance.)

You seem to be under the mistaken belief that, since Sublime Chord let's a bard play like he's one of the big boys, they must be pretty decent without it.

No. Not at all.

Bard's are Tier 3 because of the options they gain with splat support. Without it, they suck.



Multiple questions there.

Initially, I thought Bards were extremely underpowered and good only for filling in cracks here and there. Then, when DMing a campaign for a small group (basically a Fighter and a Cleric), I built a multiclass Rogue/Bard NPC to fill in certain missing skill sets. I fully expected the Rogue part of it to do the heavy lifting and the Bard side would just be useful for a song here in there.

I pretty much skimmed the rest of your post after this point.

Pretty much what you are saying is that you built an NPC tailored specifically to the strengths of your campaign that no one else in the party was capable of even attempting, and you were surprised at how much better it performed its role better than the rest of the party could have?

... /sigh

That must have been one hell of a low-op game.



When I actually started playing Bards I'd often specialize them into one combat role, say archery or Finesse fighting. But this generally seemed to undersell the class.

In other words, when you tried to make him exceptional at one aspect of the game, you couldn't.

Welcome to core bards.


A Bard has multiple layers of options available in a given situation, whereas many other classes, and even some much stronger ones, only have the one. And the variety is refreshing. You might say that the individual layers are comparatively weak. Well, they're strong enough enough times to do the job in style. What I see in most posts from people who dislike them is to focus on only one aspect of their abilities, and then trivialize that. As we saw above. It's never sound logic, even if said trivialization is remotely fair.

People don't dislike bards because they are a master of none. They dislike bards because you have to spend your resources on "not sucking" instead of "being awesome".


And this notion that a character, or a class, should be built or specialised to be the best at one thing, an only one thing? I don't believe that's a terribly sensible attitude in a profession (adventuring) that deals with the unknown on a regular basis, but that's irrelevant.

Yes, because god forbid we encourage player characters to pool their talents and work together to solve a problem.


What's not irrelevant is that I'm not interested in standing around in a dungeon waiting for my specialty to come up, or watch myself become increasing pointless as the campaign goes on (hello Rogue bard without splats).

FTFY



[What does] A Sorceror? [do that no one else can do?]
Hi there. (http://community.wizards.com/forum/previous-editions-character-optimization/threads/1765181)


A Paladin?
Better than anyone else? Mounted combat.


Multiple redundancy doesn't invalidate a class by itself.
Not it's the fact that there is next to nothing a bard can do better than anyone else that invalidates the class, and is the reason why they are always relegated to secondary whatever.


No. You only need a Trapfinder when you HAVE a Trapfinder. Trapfinding is a contrived and frankly, tedious mechanic to give the Rogue a reason to exist. Except there's better classes with trapfinding now, so even that doesn't work.

I'm pretty sure I made this exact same point in regards to having a party face.

Requiring a party to have someone that specializes in talking to people, when that kind of thing should be handled through roleplaying, is exactly as sloppy a DMing job as putting in traps that require a party to have Trapfinding in order to progress the game.

[Troacctid]

Second of all, inside core, I've demonstrated how a rogue has a bard beat when it comes to all-purpose skill monkeying, and no one has done anything to demonstrate otherwise. Except, of course, to repeat "bards are the best skill monkeys because I said so" over and over again.

It's not because I said so. It's because they only lose 2 skill points per level compared to Rogues, in exchange for arcane spells up to 6th level. I think it's pretty well-established who's getting the better end of that particular exchange.

[Doctor Awkward]

It's not because I said so. It's because they only lose 2 skill points per level compared to Rogues, in exchange for arcane spells up to 6th level. I think it's pretty well-established who's getting the better end of that particular exchange.

Replace "arcane spells" with "Bard spells", and yes. Yes it is.

...Wait, no it's not.

What do spells have anything to do with who is the better skill monkey?

If they are available in potions and wands, then everyone can have them, and they help determine nothing. The person with the better base modifier will still be better.

[Troacctid]

Spells are the most powerful thing you can do in D&D. Bards can do everything Rogues can, except they also have spells on top of that. Hence, they are better.

I mean, I don't know if you've seen some of the stuff that spells can do, but they're, like, really sweet. :smalltongue:

[Doctor Awkward]

Spells are the most powerful thing you can do in D&D. Bards can do everything Rogues can, except they also have spells on top of that. Hence, they are better.

I mean, I don't know if you've seen some of the stuff that spells can do, but they're, like, really sweet. :smalltongue:


...I see.

So what you are saying then, is because the word "skill" ends in two "L"s, just like the word "spell" does, that makes you correct.

...Because that makes about as much sense as what you just posted.


Bards cannot find traps, nor can bard sneak attack, nor do they have evasion and uncanny dodge, so there's that.

Nor can a bard compete with a rogue in overall skills because, a) the rogue has more, and b) the bard has taxes that the rogue does not, in the form of Perform, Spellcraft, and Concentration.

But perhaps there is some other way that a bard can do "everything" that a rogue does, in addition to have these, like, really sweet spells?

[Marlowe]

Tonymitsu, you're arguments are circular. You say Bards are nothing without splat support, then use splat support to to claim other classes are superior. Frankly, that alone blows everything you say out of the water. If not for the "Core-only" stipulation then the simple answer to you from the first would have been "Bardic Knack: Game over Rogue".

Might I ask why you're shrill about this? Frankly, we know that Bards are a competent and worthy adventurer class. And that Rogues have consistently proved themselves to be a poor one. You telling us we're "doing it wrong" or that our opinions are invalid because you say so isn't going to help with anything.

[Doctor Awkward]

Tonymitsu, you're arguments are circular. You say Bards are nothing without splat support, then use splat support to to claim other classes are superior.

Wrong.

I said that bards suck without splat support.

Then I said that core rogues are better skill monkeys and scouts than core bards. And that core rangers, druids, and monks can be made better scouts too. In fact, I'll go on to say that, other than diplomancing, there is nothing a core bard can do better than a core rogue.

If you want to throw in Bardic Knack, then we are going outside core. And if you need a skill monkey outside core, you play a Factotum. Shoot, they are nothing but variety. Even with Bardic Knack, a rogue can still probably do the job better because of the cross-class ranks you will have to dump into things like Disable Device, and Open Lock just to be allowed to make the check.

Just because your players don't know how to play a rogue doesn't mean they "consistently prove themselves to be a poor adventuring class". Rogues are the second best skill monkeys in the game behind factotum. Unlike bards, they are also a credible threat in melee combat, with far more survivability. With the right tools, and proper application of UMD, there is actually very little a skillfully played rogue cannot handle. Outside of core the only area bards clearly pull ahead is in their spellcasting.

[Milo v3]

...I see.

So what you are saying then, is because the word "skill" ends in two "L"s, just like the word "spell" does, that makes you correct.

...Because that makes about as much sense as what you just posted.


Bards cannot find traps, nor can bard sneak attack, nor do they have evasion and uncanny dodge, so there's that.

Nor can a bard compete with a rogue in overall skills because, a) the rogue has more, and b) the bard has taxes that the rogue does not, in the form of Perform, Spellcraft, and Concentration.

But perhaps there is some other way that a bard can do "everything" that a rogue does, in addition to have these, like, really sweet spells?

You do realise that spells can copy what skills can do... but better right? :smallconfused:

[Doctor Awkward]

You do realise that spells can copy what skills can do... but better right? :smallconfused:

You do realize that if spells are below 4th level, anyone with UMD as a class skill can have them... right?

[Milo v3]

You do realize that if spells are below 4th level, anyone with UMD as a class skill can have them... right?

How is "Can spend WBL" equal or better to "Doesn't need to spend WBL"?

[Doctor Awkward]

How is "Can spend WBL" equal or better to "Doesn't need to spend WBL"?

Because equipment and character wealth is part of your character and is functionally identical to feats, skill points, and class features?

[Marlowe]

Tonymitsu, I'll spell this out for you. When you post links to things that use non-core materials, such as the mailman as part of your argument; you are going beyond core. When you change the rules of the debate, others get to play by those new rules as well.

As for Core-only Bards vs using splats? Obviously I'd prefer to use splats, but in a Core-only game I'd be more likely to play a bard.

Why? Because the Core classes are a horrifically broken bunch, and the Bard is the closest thing to a balanced class among them.

[Troacctid]

And effectively doubling, tripling, or quadrupling your WBL is an extremely powerful ability. Not to mention that spells cast from spell slots are more powerful than spells cast from wands.

[Milo v3]

Because equipment and character wealth is part of your character and is functionally identical to feats, skill points, and class features?

But every class gets the WBL, the bard gets that benefit just as much as the rogue would, but with better "potential" benefit since bards can even take crafting feats.

[Doctor Awkward]

Tonymitsu, I'll spell this out for you. When you post links to things that use non-core materials, such as the mailman as part of your argument; you are going beyond core. When you change the rules of the debate, others get to play by those new rules as well.

And they don't get to pick and choose either. If you want to discuss how much more awesome a bard is because of splat books, you don't compare it to a core class. You compare it to what that other class is capable of with splat support.

If you want to talk about how a Bard 9/Sublime Chord 2/Virtuoso 9 is the most bardiest caster ever, then I'll point out that a Rogue 3/Fighter 2/Chameleon 7/Nightsong Enforcer 8, with a bought off Dark template, has 17 BAB, 5d6 naked Sneak Attack, Opportunist, Chameleon variety and versatility, and is still a better skill monkey to boot.

[Sith_Happens]

-A bard with Intelligence higher than 12 is doing it wrong

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/4a/36/e9/4a36e9d253fc10ea7d4ccd95011ab6b6.jpg

This is news to me. Please, I'd quite like to hear why a bard that's "doing it right" is putting any points into Strength or Wisdom that they can't afford 14 Intelligence.


needs Concentration, Perform, Spellcraft, UMD, and Tumble maxed at all times

Concentration and Spellcraft DCs are pitifully easy past low levels, the only good reason to have more than +14 Tumble is if you're worried about terrain or being ganged up on in which case +19 is still the most you'll ever need, and UMD is Charisma-based and whether you need more than +19 is mostly a matter of taste (specifically, whether you care about scrolls). Which leaves Perform as the only skill that actually needs to be "maxed at all times."

And that's assuming Core-only, with splatbooks you have Melodic Casting and tons of easy ways to get out of threatened areas, which means you don't need any ranks in Concentration or Tumble.


So what you are saying is that a Bard can do two peoples jobs; and do so without bleeding money on potions or getting the party lynched after the enchantment spells wear off, and that's not taking into account most of their class features.

Don't forget that Charm and Dominate are both V, S so without a really good Bluff check you're boned if there's anyone else in the room when you cast them in the first place.


Yes, but this is a bard's default setting. Literally everything does better average damage than a core bard (except maybe a TWF Ranger).

But which class in Core is better than the bard at making the entire party deal more damage? Didn't think so.

(And before you say "Polymorph," that's single-target.)


Sublime Chords cannot effectively compete with an optimized sorcerer with it's own exclusive spells (Wings of Cover, Arcane Fusion, et al.)

Sublime Chord casts "as a sorcerer" and so gets all those same spells.


What do spells have anything to do with who is the better skill monkey?

https://i.imgur.com/4A9OKVO.gif

...Oh wait, you're serious. The answer depends, do we really need to say anything more than "Knock?"


If they are available in potions and wands, then everyone can have them, and they help determine nothing.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a55/WildeRebellion/Gifs/BreakandBreathe.gif

Is this the argument I think it is? After all these years?


You do realize that if spells are below 4th level, anyone with UMD as a class skill can have them... right?

IT IS.

http://pa1.narvii.com/5671/90c763e48c2c69e9ba7fedb1c96b6d8e9da73cb5_hq.gif


If you want to talk about how a Bard 9/Sublime Chord 2/Virtuoso 9 is the most bardiest caster ever, then I'll point out that a Rogue 3/Fighter 2/Chameleon 7/Nightsong Enforcer 8, with a bought off Dark template, has 17 BAB, 5d6 naked Sneak Attack, Opportunist, Chameleon variety and versatility, and is still a better skill monkey to boot.

http://www.badcontroller.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/joker_notsureifserious.jpg

You realize you're comparing "Gets 9th spells" to "Doesn't get 9th level spells," right?:smallconfused:

[Doctor Awkward]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/4a/36/e9/4a36e9d253fc10ea7d4ccd95011ab6b6.jpg

This is news to me. Please, I'd quite like to hear why a bard that's "doing it right" is putting any points into Strength or Wisdom that they can't afford 14 Intelligence.

YARLY!!!


16 CHA, minimum cuz, y'know, spells are awesome. So save DC's and spells per day and whatnot... also Snowflake Wardance if you want to be effective at melee.
10 Wis, minimum, you don't give yourself a penalty on Will saves, Spot and Listen checks (y'know, the not-dying skills).
10 Str, 14 Dex, for ranged, or swap if you want to pretend you can melee. So you might have a shot at hitting stuff.
14 Con, minimum, cuz, y'know, your contributions when you are dead are zero.
That leaves you with a 14 in Int.

And that's at 32 PB.

What do your stats look like at 28 PB?

Isn't math fun?





Concentration and Spellcraft DCs are pitifully easy past low levels, the only good reason to have more than +14 Tumble is if you're worried about terrain or being ganged up on in which case +19 is still the most you'll ever need, and UMD is Charisma-based and whether you need more than +19 is mostly a matter of taste (specifically, whether you care about scrolls). Which leaves Perform as the only skill that actually needs to be "maxed at all times."

If you are casting spells you max concentration. Why do I even have to explain that?
Knowing what spells the enemies are casting is a good thing! Do I have to explain why that is too?

So even if you only care about auto-succeeding on wands, you can stop worrying about it after what, level 13? Or level 15 with Tumble?

I guess it's a good thing no one ever starts games at lower levels than that, amirite lolz?


And that's assuming Core-only, with splatbooks you have Melodic Casting and tons of easy ways to get out of threatened areas, which means you don't need any ranks in Concentration or Tumble.

Hooray. Bards are awesome with splat support.

And they suck in core.

Thank you for pointing out the same **** I've been saying the entire thread.






Don't forget that Charm and Dominate are both V, S so without a really good Bluff check you're boned if there's anyone else in the room when you cast them in the first place.

Because if it works on the highest level character in the room, there's no chance at all it will work on the lower level ones, amirite lolz?

Sorcerers live to spam spells. Why do I have to point this out too?




But which class in Core is better than the bard at making the entire party deal more damage?

Cleric





Sublime Chord casts "as a sorcerer" and so gets all those same spells.

Sublime chord gets spells that appear on sorc/wiz combined list.

He does not get Sorcerer unique spells any more than a Factotum doesn't get to prepare bard spells.




https://i.imgur.com/4A9OKVO.gif

...Oh wait, you're serious. The answer depends, do we really need to say anything more than "Knock?"

Oh look, ANOTHER spell Bard doesn't get??

Wait, you mean bards are awesome with splat support?!?

If ONLY someone had been pointing that out before now!




http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a55/WildeRebellion/Gifs/BreakandBreathe.gif

Is this the argument I think it is? After all these years?



IT IS.

http://pa1.narvii.com/5671/90c763e48c2c69e9ba7fedb1c96b6d8e9da73cb5_hq.gif



http://www.badcontroller.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/joker_notsureifserious.jpg

You realize you're comparing "Gets 9th spells" to "Doesn't get 9th level spells," right?:smallconfused:

Like everyone else who thinks this is an argument, you've still failed to establish how being good at spells also makes you good at being a skill monkey.

We all know that spells make skills irrelevant at higher levels. So I guess it's a good thing we also know that no one ever plays games at lower levels hahahaha... o wait no...


I'm sorry that I didn't have any cute gifs to post and that I had to make you do all that reading, but I tried to dumb it down a bit.


Seriously though, until you have something meaningful to contribute, go sit down.

[Milo v3]

I think Sith Happens might have been infected by Snowbluff....


Like everyone else who thinks this is an argument, you've still failed to establish how being good at spells also makes you good at being a skill monkey.

We all know that spells make skills irrelevant at higher levels. So I guess it's a good thing we also know that no one ever plays games at lower levels hahahaha... o wait no...

Spells makes skills irrelevant at low levels as well... Knock, Invisibility, Spider Climb, etc.

[Extra Anchovies]

Bards are force-multipliers. Much of their power scales directly with the number of companions they have.

They're also one of the best non-duplicate fifth members in a standard arcane caster/divine caster/physical-damage-dealer/skillmonkey arrangement. They have enough utility magic that the other two casters can use their slots more efficiently, have enough skills to cover the stuff the skillmonkey hasn't already picked up, and can stand next to the physical-damage-dealer in combat if the need arises.

[Doctor Awkward]

Bards are force-multipliers. Much of their power scales directly with the number of companions they have.

They're also one of the best non-duplicate fifth members in a standard arcane caster/divine caster/physical-damage-dealer/skillmonkey arrangement. They have enough utility magic that the other two casters can use their slots more efficiently, have enough skills to cover the stuff the skillmonkey hasn't already picked up, and can stand next to the physical-damage-dealer in combat if the need arises.

This.

But no one ever disputed this.

The problems here is the mistaken belief that there is ever a moment where the bard is the best choice to fill a missing role in a party.

There is an enormous gulf between being capable at a role and being good in a role.

[atemu1234]

I like bards. Bards are fun.

But they're not good.

D&D operates on a simple enough logic- pick a field, excel at that field, as fast as possible. You focus on one thing and rely on party members to do the other stuff.

Ignoring the problem of stuff that Wizards and Sorcerers have access to - a lot of spells give substantial bonuses to skill checks at first level, not to mention Divination spells obsolete-ing a lot of a Rogue's shine- then we still have to deal with the most crunchy tidbit.

Bards are a jack of all trades, master of none class in a game where mastering one is the modus operandi. If you don't do that, and are instead mediocre at a bunch of stuff, you don't do as well simply because you aren't prepared for it.

I'm not saying Bards are never going to have a time to shine- all classes do. I'm simply saying that they are poorly designed for the rules that exist.

Bards are skillmonkeys. That's great. Rogues skillmonkey better.
Bards are party buffmasters. That's wonderful. The wizard does it better.

It's an unfortunate effect of the rules that being better at one thing is substantially better than being alright at most.

[Segev]

D&D operates on a simple enough logic- pick a field, excel at that field, as fast as possible. You focus on one thing and rely on party members to do the other stuff.


It's an unfortunate effect of the rules that being better at one thing is substantially better than being alright at most.

While these are true statements, one thing I've noticed in parties that follow them too rigidly is the tendency to have only one character who can handle a particular problem type. If there's ever two instances of that problem that need handling simultaneously, the party has a great deal of trouble.

The Bard is the "second guy" who's always in demand in every situation. He may never be the point man on a given operation, but he's able to back up any of the other archetypes without flubbing the job. And heaven forbid the party needs one of some talent set in two different places at once; the Bard will, again, be the go-to "second guy" to go cover that other instance.

Not every game will run into this problem; in my personal experience, it happens in about 70% of games, and those where it does, it happens all the time.


(Obviously, a high-end optimized wizard, druid, or cleric will pull the "I can do anything!" Tier 1 card and be better still, but that's never been in dispute.)

[goto124]

I'm curious about why you would need two people doing the job at the same time. Don't split the party and all that? I've yet to see examples...

[Milo v3]

I'm curious about why you would need two people doing the job at the same time. Don't split the party and all that? I've yet to see examples...

... I'd love to GM a session where the party didn't split and try the same thing in two places at once... :smallsigh:

[goto124]

Try a solo campaign!

Incidentally, Bards would be great in solo campaigns :smalltongue:

[Segev]

I'm curious about why you would need two people doing the job at the same time. Don't split the party and all that? I've yet to see examples...

The example at the top of my mind is not D&D, but Rifts, unfortunately. We do wind up with the party split a lot of the time, and often need one or more of our specialists in more than one place at a time. A backup specialist would be very nice, but we have a chronic fear of not protecting our niches, so we also see a lot of potential "backup X" concepts nixed because they step on the toes of the guy already filling it.

Bards are rarely going to step on anybody's toes, but will back up X very nicely. Rifts has no such class for all the roles Rifts requires, however.

[Talya]

holy hell.

It's really going to be one of those threads, isn't it...



Maybe not in your local gaming community, but there are plenty of others who would disagree. Core is the one thing everyone is guaranteed to have access to. Core + PHBII is also a very common restriction. Some games around here (EDIT: meaning locally for me) allow only Unearthed Arcana.

All official material is available to everyone with the click of a button. It requires arbitrary rules to limit it. Core only is a houserule. It may be a somewhat common houserule (I don't know anyone willing to play core only), but it IS a houserule.


No.

Seriously, is there a step beyond "no"? Because that's where we are right now.

The best damage you can expect from a bard pales in comparison to an optimized ubercharger, a 16 BAB sneak attack build, and even an optimized mailman sorcerer.

Uberchargers are useless. They either destroy everything in one shot, or they can't do anything. And any decent DM takes obvious steps to prevent them from trivializing the game. Without the ability to charge due to obstructions or terrain, or against lots of weaker opponents, uberchargers are completely useless. You can't render a melee bard useless.



Yes, but this is a bard's default setting. Literally everything does better average damage than a core bard (except maybe a TWF Ranger).
Note we're not discussing core bard. I've said core bard only dominates as party face.



And we're right back to "beyond no".

First of all, outside of core, the best skill monkey in the game, bar none, is the Factotum. He gets all skills as class skills, adds his primary ability score plus the normal ability score to over half of them, and gets a class level bonus once per day per skill. If you have an arcane spell that helps your skills, he has it too.
The bard has nothing that even approaches that. If you are really going to try to claim otherwise, we're pretty much done here.

THe factotum is a decent skill monkey, but they can't compare to the 200-300 defacto free skill ranks all bards with splatbook support will get by level 20. The factotum will have 2-3 more skills capped, but the bard has 10 ranks in every single skill that they don't have capped, with no regard for class or cross class. The Factotum caps more skills than the bard due to INT focus. However, CHA-skills tend to be the most useful ones, so it's really a wash in that regard.


Second of all, inside core....

is again irrelevant to what I said.


Sublime Chords cannot effectively compete with an optimized sorcerer with it's own exclusive spells (Wings of Cover, Arcane Fusion, et al.)
Sublime Chords explicitly get access to all sorcerer spells.




You seem to be under the mistaken belief that, since Sublime Chord let's a bard play like he's one of the big boys, they must be pretty decent without it.

No. Not at all.

Actually, I prefer the bard without sublime chord. It sacrifices some power in exchange for ultimate versatility. The tricked out splatbook single classed bard 20 will be extremely useful to, but not more powerful than, anyone in a party of Wizard/Cleric/Druid.


Bard's are Tier 3 because of the options they gain with splat support. Without it, they suck.


Your "Suck" threshold is low. The core-bard "sucks" compared to wizard/cleric/druid/sorcerer. Everything in core does. They can still play batman-sorcerer (and with UMD in class, just as effectively as an actual sorcerer, but with a lower tier of power), which puts them far beyond core fighter/barbarian/monk/paladin, and they are generally more useful than core-only rogue/ranger as well, but not universally so.

[Troacctid]

But which class in Core is better than the bard at making the entire party deal more damage?
Cleric

Well Clerics are already better than Bards (and basically everyone else), so that works out, then. Still leaves Bards as the 5th most powerful class in Core.

[LoyalPaladin]

I think Sith Happens might have been infected by Snowbluff....
Actually, it might be my fault this time.


I like bards. Bards are fun.

But they're not good.
This is basically where I have been at this whole thread.


Better than anyone else? Mounted combat.
Flattery will only get you so far.
https://38.media.tumblr.com/e2c53e0d273e2dba4b12cecf34968bbc/tumblr_ni0jiaJ5Wo1tkcbojo1_500.gif

[Sith_Happens]

YARLY!!!

16 CHA, minimum cuz, y'know, spells are awesome. So save DC's and spells per day and whatnot... also Snowflake Wardance if you want to be effective at melee.
10 Wis, minimum, you don't give yourself a penalty on Will saves, Spot and Listen checks (y'know, the not-dying skills).
10 Str, 14 Dex, for ranged, or swap if you want to pretend you can melee. So you might have a shot at hitting stuff.
14 Con, minimum, cuz, y'know, your contributions when you are dead are zero.
That leaves you with a 14 in Int.

And that's at 32 PB.

Um, yes? This is literally the exact spread I was implying... in response to your claiming that no bard should have more than 12 INT, in case you forgot you wrote that.


What do your stats look like at 28 PB?

8/14/14/14/8/16, because a -1 Wisdom penalty isn't going to kill you when you have a good will save and points to spare for Spot and Listen (and if you aren't putting points in Spot and Listen then you're going to fail nearly as often with a +0 as with a -1).


If you are casting spells you max concentration. Why do I even have to explain that?
Knowing what spells the enemies are casting is a good thing! Do I have to explain why that is too?

Did you miss the part about the DCs being easy? And what are you doing in melee as a Core bard in the first place? And identifying spells as they're cast is a lot less important than you think.


So even if you only care about auto-succeeding on wands, you can stop worrying about it after what, level 13?

Level 8, assuming you have 20 Charisma and a Circlet of Persuasion by then. In which case you only need 9 ranks which you can have by level 6.


Or level 15 with Tumble?

Level 7, give or take armor check penalties.


Because if it works on the highest level character in the room, there's no chance at all it will work on the lower level ones, amirite lolz?

Sorcerers live to spam spells. Why do I have to point this out too?

Because casting lots of spells all of a sudden isn't fishy at all and everyone is totally just going to stand there and let you do it, am I right?


Cleric

With which cleric spells? Last I checked most of the damage-increasing ones are personal range and the rest are single-target.


Oh look, ANOTHER spell Bard doesn't get??

Weird, I could have sworn that Knock was a bard spell.:smallconfused:

On the other hand, here's a bunch of spells that definitely are on the bard list:
Detect Magic: Almost all of the most legitimately dangerous traps are magical.
Ghost Sound: Distract the guards.
Lullaby: Give all the guards -5 Spot and Listen for as long as it takes for the whole party to sneak past them or up on them, from far enough away that components are a non-issue.
Mage Hand: 'Nuff said.
Charm Person: Since you seem to think it's all one needs to be a good face.
Detect Secret Doors: Self-explanatory.
Disguise Self: Self-explanatory.
Grease: Can give +10 to Escape Artist.
Silent Image: "Distract the guards" is just the beginning, as is giving yourself something to hide behind.
Summon Monster I: Safely trigger most traps from a distance, whether you know it's there or merely suspect.
Alter Self: Swim speeds, climb speeds, burrow speeds, and racial skill bonuses galore are all a standard action away. Not to mention that it complements (and arguably stacks with) Disguise Self.
Detect Thoughts: Eat your heart out, Sense Motive.
Glitterdust: Make enemies functionally unable to hide.
Invisibility: +Yes to Hide.
Shatter: All the fun of Knock plus property damage.:smallwink:
Silence: The entire party now has +Yes to Move Silently.
Suggestion: If Charm Person makes you a good face, having this too makes you an even better one.
And that's just spells through 2nd level.


Seriously though, until you have something meaningful to contribute, go sit down.

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--gRG2YWja--/efg4piwisx1tcco4byit.png


I think Sith Happens might have been infected by Snowbluff....


Actually, it might be my fault this time.

Don't worry, all you did was awaken something that was in me from the start.

http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/Snapshot_2012-10-23_19-19-39_4668.jpg

[The Vagabond]

I have no idea how react to this thread. I'm split between two reactions to the complete chaos that bleeds through this thread. I'm debating either laughter or shock. Either way, pick one of the first two spoilers, click on the image, and then watch what's going on.


http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/895/845/2f9.jpg (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l6vqPUM_FE&autoplay=1)

http://gifrific.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Shocked-Troy-Walks-Into-Fire-With-Pizza-Community.gif (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6FUBTIqWUA)
http://media.giphy.com/media/y2fQ6EhJeIuTm/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/sClB7NlA5AkKs/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/F8yJPRcxCA4lW/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/JowMlW4ylKpFe/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/tS8wJ5Uk9EONa/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/6duCe109KVlhm/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/12DpSQw8Pqy1IA/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/Q4ryYnkPOhqRa/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/Ri0xSUQTeWE0M/giphy.gifhttp://media1.giphy.com/media/12KiGLydHEdak8/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/QnYCwZ8jAEue4/giphy.gifhttp://giphy.com/gifs/history-war-wwii-eRKWITqHY4fmM/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/yjGUHUVsNCqgo/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/UFcBDeIC1lPva/giphy.gifhttp://giphy.com/gifs/history-war-wwii-14fqnWQyxxd3wI/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/rcspze4LhGJmo/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/hDB09cILvnHwY/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/3F3uhwYuawGmA/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/5Tf3WsaZWyf5u/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/Lv0Rem2bimZmE/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/HhTXt43pk1I1W/giphy.gifhttp://media.giphy.com/media/rhYsUMhhd6yA0/giphy.gif

So, I call upon all of you, as Friedrich Schiller wrote and Ludwig composed:
O Freunde, nicht diese Töne!
Sondern lasst uns angenehmere anstimmen,
und freudenvollere. (https://youtu.be/sJQ32q2k8Uo?t=55m5s)

[Talya]

I would like you to elaborate if you don't mind. I agree with you point (2), but precisely because of this i don't see how point (1) can be true. How the Bard can deal more damage than the über-charger buffed with the Bard's DFI?


I didn't claim it can do more damage than a pure melee class buffed with the bard's on DFI. I said it was better melee than any other class without the bard's buffs.

I didn't say more damage. I said better melee. I can see how that might be confusing, but being good at melee is more than the sheer numbers.

An über-charger doesn't really do damage. They basically kill one target per round. They trivialize encounters unless you do something to keep them from doing so. Therefore, all DMs keep them from doing so. An über-charger in your party results in all fights having some combination of terrain/obstructions that prevent charging, or no big-bad single enemy worth charging, instead many glass cannons that do heavy damage but can be one-shot by just about everyone in the party, putting the über-charger on the same footing as everyone else.

DFI is very close to the same thing, actually. I'm not a huge fan of it... 14d6 bonus energy damage per attack just screams for immunity on your enemies, because ultimately 100ishD6+150ish(+a big extra amount that isn't related to bardic music) in a round is just as much of an all-or-nothing as the über-charger. However, the non-DFI part of that damage can't really be stopped, and is still one-shotting most targets and taking a huge chunk out of the big bosses.



Once again, i don't see how the bard can be a better skill monkey than the Rogue, the Factotum, or the Beguiler who have for main focus to be a skill-monkey and focus on Int.
I agree that the Bard is surely the best party face, because he doesn't focus on Int but on Cha, while still having the skills. But in other skills department? The Bard is not even supposed to be a trapfinder.

Bardic Knack + Jack of All Trades gives them 10 free ranks (1/2 hit dice) in every skill they don't choose to cap, including cross-class skills. That's the equivalent of getting a +30ish bonus to intelligence when it comes to skill ranks. Think about that... the bard will cap between 7 and 10 skills, and have EVERY OTHER SKILL at 1/2 their hit dice in ranks. They can do EVERYTHING competently. Oh, there might be 1 or 2 skills that the factotum or rogue have capped that the bard does not, but there will be 20 skills that the bard has half their hit dice in ranks in that the others have nothing in.



There too, i agree the Sublime Chord put the Bard in tier 2, and maybe better than the Sorcerer. According to me, however, the lack of spells known and spells per day won't allow him to be in tier 1.

I didn't say they're tier 1. I said they "flirt with tier 1." They have casting pretty much equal to a sorcerer, but freakishly great class features to go with it.



But you still need a trapfinder, don't you? Or do you deal with traps only with spells? Or do you mean the Beguiler or the Arty are doing this as well as the Rogue while having other strengths?

I never really have needed a trapfinder... trapfinding is kindof a fake class feature. Like Tracking. The need for trapfinding seems to correlate ever-so-closely with the availability of a trapfinder in the party. (Likewise, tracking is simply a tool by which a DM can get a party to be where he needs them to be without resorting to railroading.) If we're talking sheer power, the best parties don't have a trapfinder. They have 4 tier 1 or 2 spellcasters, right?






Out of curiosity, are there a lot of people who play Core only games? Not that I've ever seen.

[Petrocorus]

I didn't claim it can do more damage than a pure melee class buffed with the bard's on DFI. I said it was better melee than any other class without the bard's buffs.

I didn't say more damage. I said better melee. I can see how that might be confusing, but being good at melee is more than the sheer numbers.

OK, sorry for the confusion, and point taken concerning the damage. But i still don't see how the Bard can be a better melee class than the others. I'm really asking out of curiosity. Can you spell it out? Are you speaking of Snowflake Wardance + Slippers of Battledancing? Because this alone don't seem so good.

[Talya]

OK, sorry for the confusion, and point taken concerning the damage. But i still don't see how the Bard can be a better melee class than the others. I'm really asking out of curiosity. Can you spell it out? Are you speaking of Snowflake Wardance + Slippers of Battledancing? Because this alone don't seem so good.

They help (although optimizing to full attack with slippers of battledancing is sometimes a pain). They aren't everything. It's a combination of things. You can get up to 15 points of inspire courage bonus. 10 points from the crystal echoblades you're wielding. 15 more from power attack (because inspire courage and snowflake wardance are making your attack bonus stupidly high so you can't miss anyway). Take every possible advantage available to you (the template "magic-blooded" (spark) for instance.) Oh, feel free to tack on DFI if you want it, being aware that it's not always going to work... when combined with the weapon damage and such, though, even without DFI a level 20 bard might be reliably doing 350-400 damage in a round with no special circumstances required to make it work and no good way to stop it. At that point, you're one-shotting a typical CR 20 enemy. That's without any major melee optimizing...that's just with basic stuff. DFI bumps that up to 800ish, if you get it working.

The uber-charger ain't doin' much more than 150 if he can't charge.

[Marlowe]

Well. That made the chimps choke on their bananas. Thank you and well done Talya.

[GreatDane]

Bards are awesome because they make for amazing stories. Between the class' abilities and the type of people who usually opt to play one, the bard almost always brings humor, drama, or some other good roleplaying element to the table.

Speaking of bards and good stories, this is one I enjoyed:

http://funnydndstories.com/apps/blog/show/18023945-banjolele-bard/

[Petrocorus]

They help (although optimizing to full attack with slippers of battledancing is sometimes a pain). They aren't everything. It's a combination of things. You can get up to 15 points of inspire courage bonus. 10 points from the crystal echoblades you're wielding. 15 more from power attack (because inspire courage and snowflake wardance are making your attack bonus stupidly high so you can't miss anyway). Take every possible advantage available to you (the template "magic-blooded" (spark) for instance.) Oh, feel free to tack on DFI if you want it, being aware that it's not always going to work... when combined with the weapon damage and such, though, even without DFI a level 20 bard might be reliably doing 350-400 damage in a round with no special circumstances required to make it work and no good way to stop it. At that point, you're one-shotting a typical CR 20 enemy. That's without any major melee optimizing...that's just with basic stuff. DFI bumps that up to 800ish, if you get it working.


Sorry, but i still have some problems with your maths here.

I count at lvl 20 IC = +4 +1 (Song of the Heart) + 1 (Inspirational boost) + 1 (Badge of Valor) x2 (Words of Creation) = +14
Assuming you multiply all IC bonus with WoCreation.

For the damages, i count 1D8 (longsword) + 5 (magic) + 12 (Charisma through Slippers) + 15 (IC you calculated) + 10 (Echoblade) + 16 (PA max, i assume a BAB of 16) = 1D8 + 58
x 4 attacks (assuming some dipping) = 4D8 +232 = 250 on average.
That's huge, but that still far from 400 and that assuming you can PA for +16 on all your 4 attacks and you can full attack with Slippers (how, btw?).

So, what am i missing?