Valor bard: the Swiss Army knife?

[Klorox]

Convince me to play a valor bard.

Are they really the class that can do it all?

[TheUser]

Convince me to play a valor bard.

Are they really the class that can do it all?

Yep.

Full caster? Check

Two attacks per round? Check

Skill Expertise? Check

My gf plays a level 11 Valor Bard and despite being really new to D&D we built the character based on her telling me what type of character she wanted to play and what abilities she wanted...

When I noticed she wanted to be able to do everything I felt like her unrealistic needs wouldn't be able to be met by any one class....turns out I was wrong.

She currently has Medium Armor Mastery which allows her to skulk around with 20AC using Half-plate and a shield with no penalty to her +11 stealth checks. She has control and healing spells and took fly and wall of force with her two "learn any 2 spells" feature @ 10.

She casts, fights, sneaks, is the party face (omg skill mastery with persuasion and deception is insane) and is very content with her do anything and everything character.

Bear in mind that many of these features don't come online until mid levels so if you are running a low level campaign you won't see these benefits.

[EvilAnagram]

They are true Jacks of all trades, but masters of none, and often are better than masters of one.

They're the perfect fifth character.

[DireSickFish]

A lot of people get hung up on Valor Bards. They see that it adds a second attack and start thinking about being full gishes. And they get dissapointed when they have to cast spells instead of stabbing things.

But really a Paladin does that much better. They have smite and spells designed to augment auto attacks. With a few other utility spells to help out in a pinch.

Bards are much more fluid. Auto attacking is for mooks, and also helps take advantage of magical weapons. Spellcasting is to drop major threats, control the battlefield, or as utility to get past non combat encounters. Your much more fluid. Embrace the versatility and do whatever is best for the situation. If that means stabbing things takes a break for a few sessions then so be it.

[Dudu]

Never played a valor bard, but I played with valor bards in my party. Overall, they were pretty good support class.
The emphasis on fighting over support they have, when comparing with lore bard, doesn't shine in a group with a true melee class. They barely make a secondary or even tertiary melee.

Paladins rock that melee role much better. Although I would put the bard as a stronger class in terms of versatily. Bard's spell list tend to be concentration heavy as well, and they do not have innate con saves.

Due to the bard itself being much more of a caster than a fighter, I see the Lore bard as the more solid choice in most cases. Attacking twice is neat, if your attacks hurt, but you get to wonder if that's the case of the valor bard, with no Fighting Skills and having to manage Cha on top of his physical stats.

Overall, I would say bard is a skillmonkey/caster, competent on both roles. He can dwell in fighting, but barely master it. The most recent UA about College of Blades, the blade bard, has a good melee option for bard.

[JAL_1138]

A level or two of Fighter for an archery-focused VB makes for a powerful character, and 2 levels of Paladin on a VB make for a quite effective Str-based melee-oriented gish. I personally find that they work better as actual gishes with a multiclass dip (though since I don'y want to spark another argument, I'll concede that they can do adequately in that department single-classed, with the right feats and/or Magical Secrets picks), as a dip gives them a fair bit more capability to deal at-will or burst damage, and in the case of a melee VB, better AC as well (heavy armor), without massively reducing their spellcasting ability.

With the right Secrets picks and/or feats, they can hold their own in a fight well enough. Without those, they'll be rather lacking, especially after 10th level or so. But take something like Sharpshooter and Swift Quiver, or Elemental Weapon, and they can be surprisingly competent damage-dealers from the time they get Magical Secrets onward (and with Sharpshooter they're quite decent even before Magical Secrets kick in).

EDIT: Of course, the big advantage they have is spellcasting, and the bard list is a great mix of arcane and divine support and utility spells on its own, before even considering Magical Secrets. And as DireSickFish pointed out, they're full casters--the weapon-combat ability is there for versatility when needed (although they can be quite good at it with the right build), and weapon damage can and should take a back seat to spellcasting when necessary. Casting Hypnotic Pattern, or reviving a KO'd party member, or removing status effects, or Polymorphing the Fighter into a T-Rex, or (at higher levels) bringing someone back from the dead or dropping a Forcecage can be far more useful than dealing damage yourself. And there are some great utility spells on the bard list, like Leomund's Tiny Hut and others, that are also good to pick up.

They really are a Swiss Army knife, either way. Healing, debuffing/controlling, buffing, crowd-control, damage (eventually), can take a few hits, Expertise...what's not to like?

[EvilAnagram]

Never played a valor bard, but I played with valor bards in my party. Overall, they were pretty good support class.
The emphasis on fighting over support they have, when comparing with lore bard, doesn't shine in a group with a true melee class. They barely make a secondary or even tertiary melee.

Paladins rock that melee role much better. Although I would put the bard as a stronger class in terms of versatily. Bard's spell list tend to be concentration heavy as well, and they do not have innate con saves.

Due to the bard itself being much more of a caster than a fighter, I see the Lore bard as the more solid choice in most cases. Attacking twice is neat, if your attacks hurt, but you get to wonder if that's the case of the valor bard, with no Fighting Skills and having to manage Cha on top of his physical stats.

Overall, I would say bard is a skillmonkey/caster, competent on both roles. He can dwell in fighting, but barely master it. The most recent UA about College of Blades, the blade bard, has a good melee option for bard.

This raises a good point. Yes, Valor Bards are competent in just about anything, but while they may be Swiss army knives, you shouldn't bring a Swiss army knife to a sword fight.

[DivisibleByZero]

Honestly?
I think the true Swiss Army Knife of 5e is a Dex/Cha based Half-elf Criminal (or Urchin, or Urban Bounty Hunter) Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 18.
But yeah, Valor Bard is definitely a close second.

[DireSickFish]

Honestly?
I think the true Swiss Army Knife of 5e is a Dex/Cha based Half-elf Criminal (or Urchin, or Urban Bounty Hunter) Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 18.
But yeah, Valor Bard is definitely a close second.

Sorcerer spell selection really cuts into the "swiss army knife" style. Sorcerers do 1 or 2 things very very well with meta-magic. They get poor when they spread out to much.

[DivisibleByZero]

Sorcerer spell selection really cuts into the "swiss army knife" style. Sorcerers do 1 or 2 things very very well with meta-magic. They get poor when they spread out to much.

1 single target CC (from Pally to start)
1 AoE CC
1 single target damage
1 AoE damage
1 single target debuff (from Pally to start)
1 AoE debuff
Swap these as you level up
Paladin covers healing and solo/group buffing

You always have a good spell for pretty much any situation, and you have a ton of open slots for utility or doubling up to cover more elements, etc.
Smart spell selection, and intelligent use of swapping spells on level-up makes the Sorcs' limited spells known a problem only in your mind. And the 4-6 spells from Pally make it even easier.

[DireSickFish]

That's just a bunch of combat stuff. What about social interaction? What about stealth? What about all the other skills? Group buffs are also lacking for the sorcerer. And they don't have access to some of the best ones. I guess the new Favored Soul opens that up a little bit. Teleport and re-positioning spells are also -really- useful.

[DivisibleByZero]

That's just a bunch of combat stuff. What about social interaction? What about stealth? What about all the other skills? Group buffs are also lacking for the sorcerer. And they don't have access to some of the best ones. I guess the new Favored Soul opens that up a little bit. Teleport and re-positioning spells are also -really- useful.

Social interaction? Cha is your primary.
Stealth? That and thieves' tools are the reason for the BG choice.
All the other skills? You have 2 from Race, 2 from BG, 2 from class. With Cha and Dex both decent-to-good, if you choose them wisely, you'll want for nothing.
Group buffs? Paladin and later some Sorc stuff (incidentally, Bards are actually worse buffers than Sorcs via casting, it's Bardic Inspiration that makes them decent buffers. Decent, not good).

[JAL_1138]

This raises a good point. Yes, Valor Bards are competent in just about anything, but while they may be Swiss army knives, you shouldn't bring a Swiss army knife to a sword fight.

Average damage vs AC 18, accounting for accuracy and crit chance, when using Elemental Weapon as a 7th-level spell, Crossbow Expert, and Sharpshooter is 48.45 (40.5 if using EW at 5th level). With a level of Fighter for Archery Style it goes up to 56.25 (and 47.1 if using EW at 5th level).

By contrast, a 20th-level Thief's average damage vs AC 18, accounting for accuracy and crit chance--but not factoring in Thief's Reflexes, wherein this average is doubled on Round 1, is 33.125 for single rapier, 40 flat if using two rapiers with Dual Wielder feat.

Doing Rogue damage every round with a 5th-level spell slot ain't bad weapon damage for a fullcaster.

[krunchyfrogg]

Honestly?
I think the true Swiss Army Knife of 5e is a Dex/Cha based Half-elf Criminal (or Urchin, or Urban Bounty Hunter) Paladin 2 / Sorcerer 18.
But yeah, Valor Bard is definitely a close second.

Please esplain.

[Corran]

Doing Rogue damage every round with a 5th-level spell slot ain't bad weapon damage for a fullcaster.
.... for a fullcaster who uses his concentration to augment his dpr. This is important, as it presents a very important opportunity cost. Meaning, that when you are using your concentration with elemental weapon (or some other self buff), you are not using it with any of the other concentration options... and the bard's spell list is full of very good concentration options.

Not to be negative about it, just wanted to paint the full picture as I see it.

[Specter]

You've certainly got the tools to be good at the combat, exploration and social pillars of the game. But there has to be no confusion in the player's mind: a pure Valor Bard can't match a dedicated martial character, he can at most fill their shoes for a while.

[JAL_1138]

.... for a fullcaster who uses his concentration to augment his dpr. This is important, as it presents a very important opportunity cost. Meaning, that when you are using your concentration with elemental weapon (or some other self buff), you are not using it with any of the other concentration options... and the bard's spell list is full of very good concentration options.

Not to be negative about it, just wanted to paint the full picture as I see it.

Absolutely true, which is why I think DireSickFish had a point about spellcasting being primary--as a Bard you're a full caster and will need to forego doing direct damage sometimes, whenever another Concentration spell would be more effective. You'll need to use it for other things, like Hypnotic Pattern, or Dominate Monster, Hold Monster, or Polymorph, or other useful buffs/debuffs, quite often. You can't always just spam attacks—you'll have other places to spend your Concentration quite often, and there will be times it's way more effective to do that than to deal damage yourself. Well, you can just spam attacks, but if you're doing that, why play a full caster?

You do have some good non-Concentration options, though, when you're using your Concentration to help buff your damage, with several healing spells, Mass Suggestion (surprisingly non-Concentration, unless that was errata'd later), Forcecage, and suchlike, and you can pick up some Magical Secrets that don't use it.

And for an added bonus, Valor Bards can make an attack as a bonus action after casting a Bard spell.

EDIT:

You've certainly got the tools to be good at the combat, exploration and social pillars of the game. But there has to be no confusion in the player's mind: a pure Valor Bard can't match a dedicated martial character, he can at most fill their shoes for a while.

Agreed on pure VB, but multiclassing opens some extra possibilities. With a Paladin 2 dip they can get pretty close, since they can Smite more often and have a few ways to buff themselves for solid damage and/or defensive abilities. They don't get those awesome Paladin auras, Channel Divinities, or Improved Divine Smite, but I've played one as the frontliner before and it worked fairly well. Doesn't match the Sorcadin in pure gish effectiveness, granted (so long as the Sorcadin has access to SCAG cantrips; without them, Palabard compares more favorably via Extra Attack, Magical Secrets for Elemental Weapon or Spirit Guardians, and possibly PAM+GWM), but is a bit more versatile thanks to having more spells known (and thus more room for utility), better healing by leaps and bounds, Magical Secrets, and Expertise (put Expertise in Athletics if you want to be a fantastic grappler, for example).

[Maxilian]

Social interaction? Cha is your primary.
Stealth? That and thieves' tools are the reason for the BG choice.
All the other skills? You have 2 from Race, 2 from BG, 2 from class. With Cha and Dex both decent-to-good, if you choose them wisely, you'll want for nothing.
Group buffs? Paladin and later some Sorc stuff (incidentally, Bards are actually worse buffers than Sorcs via casting, it's Bardic Inspiration that makes them decent buffers. Decent, not good).

But aren't you kind of wanting in the pala spell department (buffs in general and single target debuff), Sorcerer does give you some options in the long run, but i agree that they are quite good (if you had expertise though or the Bard ability to add half-prof to everything at least).

[DivisibleByZero]

But aren't you kind of wanting in the pala spell department <snip>

Bless, Command, Cure Wounds, Divine Favor, Heroism, Protection from Evil, Shield of Faith, and three Smite spells. You can prepare 4-6 of them as you level. I'd hardly call that lacking. That's an HUGE boost to a Sorc.

[JAL_1138]

But aren't you kind of wanting in the pala spell department (buffs in general and single target debuff), Sorcerer does give you some options in the long run, but i agree that they are quite good (if you had expertise though or the Bard ability to add half-prof to everything at least).

Sorcerers can Twin Spell on the really good buffs they already have on their lists, such as Haste, making them better buffers than Bards, even if Bards can yoink a few that Sorcs can't. And the Bard spell list is actually missing a few of the better buff spells like Haste. They have most of the good single-target debuffs, like Dominate Monster, on their list already, if they have room to squeeze them into their spells known, and can Twin those too. Sorcs are better combatants than Bards, even I have to admit. Bard's advantage is in skills (Expertise and JoaT), healing, more spells known, Magical Secrets, and utility.

[Corran]

Bless, Command, Cure Wounds, Divine Favor, Heroism, Protection from Evil, Shield of Faith, and three Smite spells. You can prepare 4-6 of them as you level. I'd hardly call that lacking. That's an HUGE boost to a Sorc.
If concentration was not the restrictive thing it is in 5e, then yes, it would be a major boost. But it's not as good as you present it to be. I'll not go as far as to call it dead weight (because there is some very situational value in some of the spells you mentioned), but it is far from a huge boost in actual play.

[JellyPooga]

Having never actually played a Valour Bard, my opinion may be a little coloured, but I think that about the only thing that Lore Bard does worse is the Attack action and even then their Additional Magical Secrets can give them a significant boost in that department by allowing them to "afford" to take those lower level attack buffs like Entangling Strike and Bless. Given that the Bard is primarily a spellcaster, getting more spellcasting is far and away the better option than trying to tack on some sub-par combat features. If you want more combat ability, take a multiclass; you'll get more than "wasting" it on Valour Bard.

Having said that, if multiclassing isn't an option or all you want is to be a "back-up" melee guy, or even if you just want to be able to wear beefier armour or wield a greatsword without going to the effort of being really all that good with it, then Valour Bard does the job nicely.

[EvilAnagram]

Average damage vs AC 18, accounting for accuracy and crit chance, when using Elemental Weapon as a 7th-level spell, Crossbow Expert, and Sharpshooter is 48.45 (40.5 if using EW at 5th level). With a level of Fighter for Archery Style it goes up to 56.25 (and 47.1 if using EW at 5th level).

By contrast, a 20th-level Thief's average damage vs AC 18, accounting for accuracy and crit chance--but not factoring in Thief's Reflexes, wherein this average is doubled on Round 1, is 33.125 for single rapier, 40 flat if using two rapiers with Dual Wielder feat.

Doing Rogue damage every round with a 5th-level spell slot ain't bad weapon damage for a fullcaster.

I think this does a great job illustrating my point, actually. You can commit a lot of significant resources (spells known, high level slots, concentration) to occasionally deal okay damage that a rogue can do without any resource expenditure whatsoever.

You can do it, and it will be fun, but if you went toe to toe with a fighter, monk, paladin, barbarian, or ranger, then you're going to go down pretty quickly.

Valor bards can fill any niche, but they are never going to master those niches.

[MrStabby]

It kind of depends on the game style as to whether a Valor bard is great.

If the DM likes a lot of smaller encounters or very long adventuring days then the ability to conserve spell slots by using a decent enough attack action is actually very strong. You can save your spells for when you need them and always have something back for the tougher encounters.

An "OK" single target damage option does mean that you can afford to have fewer spell options devoted to this and it can free up more spells for other activities. The same is true of skills - some problems can be solved with skills not spells making your choices go further.

Jack of all trades is worth another mention here for the initiative boost. If You compare an archery valor bard to a great weapon wielding fighter you might be surprised at your ability to match their damage over a fight. You are moderately likely to have another turn over them (initiative boost from JoaT and high dex for archery) and be able to be doing damage from shooting whilst the fighter dashes into range.

It isn't the class for me, but I can see why others like it.

[Specter]

Average damage vs AC 18, accounting for accuracy and crit chance, when using Elemental Weapon as a 7th-level spell, Crossbow Expert, and Sharpshooter is 48.45 (40.5 if using EW at 5th level). With a level of Fighter for Archery Style it goes up to 56.25 (and 47.1 if using EW at 5th level).

By contrast, a 20th-level Thief's average damage vs AC 18, accounting for accuracy and crit chance--but not factoring in Thief's Reflexes, wherein this average is doubled on Round 1, is 33.125 for single rapier, 40 flat if using two rapiers with Dual Wielder feat.

Doing Rogue damage every round with a 5th-level spell slot ain't bad weapon damage for a fullcaster.

This is another Valor Bard problem: when you're not level 20, it flows very slowly. Levels 3-5 are the saddest you'll ever see in terms of melee capability. And you'd better not be hungry for feats, because you want to max CHA, max WIS and probably get either Resilient (CON) or War Caster if you want to concentrate on anything. All of that with 5 ASI's.

[Findulidas]

I still think that if you play with 4-6 people, which I usually have, then having a more specialized character is better. So your buffing, expertise as a party face and full casting is still going to be what your group value.

[JAL_1138]

I still think that if you play with 4-6 people, which I usually have, then having a more specialized character is better. So your buffing, expertise as a party face and full casting is still going to be what your group value.

I dunno, I've had good luck with the versatile jack-of-all-trades approach, particularly in 5-person parties (where you can act as a force-multiplier), but I've had decent luck with it with as few as three in the party (where the ability to cover multiple roles helped fill gaps in party strengths, either by pinch-hitting for a role that's altogether absent, or by working with other versatile characters, like the Cleric, to end up covering that role sort-of-decent between the two of you).

As a "fifth party member," you're anywhere from about 1/2 to 3/4 as good as a specialist at a variety of things a larger group probably already has a specialist for (and you actually are a specialist at a couple of things). Say the party needs more physical damage; you can jump in that role and it's sort of like having a second martial (not as good, but effective enough). But the next encounter, the party might need a second healer; you can do that too. Or a second debuffer/crowd-controller; you can do that as well. In each case a specialist would be better, yes...but then you're bringing eight people instead of, say, five (e.g., Fighter x2, Wizard x2, Cleric x2, and Rogue x2 instead of Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue, Bard). Having the second Fighter doesn't help if what you really need at the moment is a second Wizard; having a second Wizard doesn't help you as much if what you need a second Rogue. But having the Bard helps in either case.

And if, Pelor forbid, the party ends up split, it almost doesn't matter which group you're with.

EDIT:


This is another Valor Bard problem: when you're not level 20, it flows very slowly. Levels 3-5 are the saddest you'll ever see in terms of melee capability. And you'd better not be hungry for feats, because you want to max CHA, max WIS and probably get either Resilient (CON) or War Caster if you want to concentrate on anything. All of that with 5 ASI's.

I wouldn't say it takes until 20th. Half that at most. Archer VBs in particular tend to take off around level 7-8 when you can start casting Greater Invisibility on yourself. Single-class VBs have more difficulty in melee before then, yes, but the feat or ASI at 4th, or a feat at the start through VHuman, can go a long way.

[Specter]

I wouldn't say it takes until 20th. Half that at most. Archer VBs in particular tend to take off around level 7-8 when you can start casting Greater Invisibility on yourself. Single-class VBs have more difficulty in melee before then, yes, but the feat or ASI at 4th, or a feat at the start through VHuman, can go a long way.

Maybe I was hyperbolic. I didn't really mean level 20, especially because the Bard capstone is irrelevant. But until you get all your ASI's, something will be missing (and maybe even after that).

Let's consider the archer, for instance. Before level 6, you're the worst archer ever, because all you have is one arrow a turn and nothing to give you damage or precision or defense.
If you go for Sharpshooter at level 4, you won't be able to move either DEX or CHA beyond 16.
After level 6 you get a power bump, but still being behind any martial (as it should be).
At level 7, you get Greater Invisibility. That makes you good but not great, as it takes one action to cast it and you still don't have the +2 from Archery to make the most out of it.
Level 8, let's assume +2DEX. Now you have 18 DEX.
At level 10, you get Swift Quiver. Four attacks, yay! But now you can't combine it with Greater Invisibility. And still no Archery.
Level 12 comes around, and now you can either boost your CHA or your DEX. You could max DEX, but then your CHA would be seriously hurt by now.

See what I mean?

[DivisibleByZero]

I think you're overestimating the value of raising stats. This isn't 3.5 or 4e. Thanks to Bounded Accuracy, stats actually mean very little in the grand scheme of things.

[EvilAnagram]

I think you're overestimating the value of raising stats. This isn't 3.5 or 4e. Thanks to Bounded Accuracy, stats actually mean very little in the grand scheme of things.

I disagree. Sure, a 16 won't be terrible, but you're hitting like 50% of the time against CR appropriate enemies at level 8 with that score. In smaller ranges, small boosts count for a lot

[Specter]

I think you're overestimating the value of raising stats. This isn't 3.5 or 4e. Thanks to Bounded Accuracy, stats actually mean very little in the grand scheme of things.

The fact that earlier editions gave huge importance to stats doesn't mean 5e gives little importance to it.

By not boosting your DEX you don't get:
- +1AC
- +1initiative
- +1 to-hit
- +1 damage
- +1 in 3 skills
- +1 to DEX saves

By not boosting your CHA you don't get:
- +1 inspiration dice
- +1 to save DCs
- +1 to spell to-hits
- +1 to 3 skills (probably the most important for you)
- +1 to ability checks like Counterspell/Dispel Magic
- +1 on healing spells
- +1 to CHA saves (mostly irrelevant)

If you want to do without those in exchange for feats, go ahead, but don't pretend it doesn't hurt.

[DivisibleByZero]

The stat cap of 20 means that even with two primary stats, if you start them both at 16, you still have room for one feat.
It isn't a matter of giving that stuff up. It's a matter of waiting 4 levels to get it.
You simply trade those boosts temporarily for the power of a feat earlier.

[JAL_1138]

Maybe I was hyperbolic. I didn't really mean level 20, especially because the Bard capstone is irrelevant. But until you get all your ASI's, something will be missing (and maybe even after that).

Let's consider the archer, for instance. Before level 6, you're the worst archer ever, because all you have is one arrow a turn and nothing to give you damage or precision or defense.
If you go for Sharpshooter at level 4, you won't be able to move either DEX or CHA beyond 16.
After level 6 you get a power bump, but still being behind any martial (as it should be).
At level 7, you get Greater Invisibility. That makes you good but not great, as it takes one action to cast it and you still don't have the +2 from Archery to make the most out of it.
Level 8, let's assume +2DEX. Now you have 18 DEX.
At level 10, you get Swift Quiver. Four attacks, yay! But now you can't combine it with Greater Invisibility. And still no Archery.
Level 12 comes around, and now you can either boost your CHA or your DEX. You could max DEX, but then your CHA would be seriously hurt by now.

See what I mean?

Go Vhuman and start with 16 Dex, 16 Cha, and a feat. I strongly favor a level of Fighter on an archer VB, because Archery, but even without it it's doable. Take Crossbow Expert as your starting feat and get a hand crossbow ASAP. Two attacks at d6+mod isn't spectacular but you're not the worst ever by any means. At 4, bump Dex to 18 or take Sharpshooter. Sharpshooter's accuracy penalty is steep enough, especially at early levels, that I'd probably suggest the Dex bump instead for level 4. At level 6, you can make three attacks per round, so you're not doing too shabby (still not quite up there with Fighters or Rangers, but not bad at all). At 8, Sharpshooter (or Dex, whichever you didn't do at 4). Commence Greater Invis + Sharpshooter shenanigans. At 12, Cha to 18 (16 Cha is actually still fairly decent clear up 'till this point, IME). Since you don't have Archery style, take Elemental Weapon instead of Swift Quiver to get a to-hit bonus and damage bonus, plus make the weapon count as magical. If you already have a magic weapon, take Swift Quiver, since EW requires a nonmagical weapon; a magic weapon also takes some of the stat-boost pressure off you.

[Specter]

The stat cap of 20 means that even with two primary stats, if you start them both at 16, you still have room for one feat.
It isn't a matter of giving that stuff up. It's a matter of waiting 4 levels to get it.
You simply trade those boosts temporarily for the power of a feat earlier.

If you look at my own quote below:


This is another Valor Bard problem: when you're not level 20, it flows very slowly. Levels 3-5 are the saddest you'll ever see in terms of melee capability. And you'd better not be hungry for feats, because you want to max CHA, max WIS and probably get either Resilient (CON) or War Caster if you want to concentrate on anything. All of that with 5 ASI's.

You will see I said something similar to that, and that's what makes a valor bard progression sad.


Go Vhuman and start with 16 Dex, 16 Cha, and a feat. I strongly favor a level of Fighter on an archer VB, because Archery, but even without it it's doable. Take Crossbow Expert as your starting feat and get a hand crossbow ASAP. Two attacks at d6+mod isn't spectacular but you're not the worst ever by any means. At 4, bump Dex to 18 or take Sharpshooter. Sharpshooter's accuracy penalty is steep enough, especially at early levels, that I'd probably suggest the Dex bump instead for level 4. At level 6, you can make three attacks per round, so you're not doing too shabby (still not quite up there with Fighters or Rangers, but not bad at all). At 8, Sharpshooter (or Dex, whichever you didn't do at 4). Commence Greater Invis + Sharpshooter shenanigans. At 12, Cha to 18 (16 Cha is actually still fairly decent clear up 'till this point, IME). Since you don't have Archery style, take Elemental Weapon instead of Swift Quiver to get a to-hit bonus and damage bonus, plus make the weapon count as magical. If you already have a magic weapon, take Swift Quiver, since EW requires a nonmagical weapon; a magic weapon also takes some of the stat-boost pressure off you.

This is all good, but since you can't keep up both Greater Invisibility and Elemental Weapon at the same time, there's nothing impressive happening.

[DivisibleByZero]

If you look at my own quote below:
You will see I said something similar to that, and that's what makes a valor bard progression sad.

I know what you said.
I disagree with it, vehemently.


This is another Valor Bard problem: when you're not level 20, it flows very slowly. Levels 3-5 are the saddest you'll ever see in terms of melee capability. And you'd better not be hungry for feats, because you want to max CHA, max WIS and probably get either Resilient (CON) or War Caster if you want to concentrate on anything. All of that with 5 ASI's.

You don't need max Dex. You don't need max Cha. You don't need Resilient. You don't need Warcaster.
You can play, perfectly fine, starting with 16 Dex/Cha, 14 Con (or even 10 if you want to get right down to it), and never take a single feat, and raise Dex/Cha to 18, not needing max, and you'll be just fine.

[JAL_1138]

If you look at my own quote below:



You will see I said something similar to that, and that's what makes a valor bard progression sad.



This is all good, but since you can't keep up both Greater Invisibility and Elemental Weapon at the same time, there's nothing impressive happening.

Greater Invis. is a great interim spell until you get Elemental Weapon, and a situational but still highly-useful utility or buff spell after that.

Also, Blindness/Deafness (use Blindness) can get you fairly reliable Advantage after that (pre-cast Elemental Weapon since it lasts an hour), since Blindness/Deafness is non-Concentration, although granted it's not nearly as strong as Greater Invis, and targets a save a lot of enemies are better at. When you're at Bard 14, you can start taking a bonus-action attack after casting it, too.

[Specter]

I know what you said.
I disagree with it, vehemently.

You don't need max Dex. You don't need max Cha. You don't need Resilient. You don't need Warcaster.
You can play, perfectly fine, starting with 16 Dex/Cha, 14 Con, and never take a single feat, and raise Dex/Cha to 18, not needing max, and you'll be just fine.

Yeah, well, you can use a dagger as a Barbarian and still be 'fine', but I doubt that's what we're talking about here.
For archers, no Sharpshooter means attacking engaged and slightly hidden foes under a -2 penalty (or even -5), and not being able to attack from afar decently. Not even mentioning the +10 to damage for the advantaged rolls. You can't live like this and say it's fine.

Not having a concentration feat (Resilient/War Caster) means your best bard spells are always a hard gamble of wasting an action, because any hit you take has at least a 35% chance of dispelling your spell.

You don't need to do anything in D&D, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do some things regardless.

[DivisibleByZero]

Yeah, well, you can use a dagger as a Barbarian and still be 'fine', but I doubt that's what we're talking about here.
For archers, no Sharpshooter means attacking engaged and slightly hidden foes under a -2 penalty (or even -5), and all enemies your buddies and not being able to attack from afar decently. Not even mentioning the +10 to damage for the advantaged rolls. You can't live like this and say it's fine.

Not having a concentration feat (Resilient/War Caster) means your best bard spells are always a hard gamble of wasting an action, because any hit you take has at least a 35% chance of dispelling your spell.

You don't need to do anything in D&D, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't do some things regardless.

So Min/Max or go home?
That's terrible advice.
You don't need any feats. They aren't bad to have, but they aren't mandatory like you're making it sound.
You don't need max stats. They aren't bad to have, but they aren't mandatory like you're making it sound.
You especially don't need max stats *and* feats. None of it is mandatory, but they're especially optional in combination.

[Biggstick]

Who says a Valor Bard has to even put points into Charisma? Starting with and staying at 14-16 Charisma is going to work out just fine tbh.

Max out Dexterity, follow the Crossbow Expert and/or Sharpshooter idea presented a few posts up. I'd personally say start with Sharpshooter, and then grab Crossbow Expert (we want to be shooting enemies from beyond 30' without having to shoot at disadvantage).

Take spells that don't care about your actual spell modifier. (Silence, Greater Invisibility, friendly Polymorphs, Healing Word, Tongues, Force cage, etc).

Start with a level of Fighter for Archery (or two for Action Surge), or don't. It's really a matter of personal preference. I've done both, and can say I prefer the single class Valor Bard (waiting on that 10th level seems to take forever!).

Valor Bard is most definitely a Swiss army knife that will be welcome in practically any party you offer him/her up to join.

[Talionis]

Something not really brought up is the extra defense you get over a normal bard. Being proficient in Medium Armor and Shields is a big boost to your Defense. Its not heavy armor, full caster like Cleric is...

But I think the thread missed that Valor Bard can be one of the better armored full casters.

[Specter]

This has become a different debate than I imagined, but anyway.

You don't 'have' to do anything, period. But if you're talking about what others should do or not, you need to come up with good reasons for that.

It was said that you don't need to max Charisma, fine. But why is that a good decision? What makes a lower-Charisma bard better than a full-Charisma bard?

"You get a feat earlier." Now it's a better argument. But to take that feat you have one less inspiration die (think you're a battlemaster with only 3 dice instead of 4 per rest), have a lower save DC (consequently a thinner spell list that's good), a lower to-hit and a lower ability check modifier (for skills and miscellaneous like Dispel Magic). Is it worth it? I say no, but if you disagree...

[Mandragola]

I think that valour bards are fine, so long as you don't expect them to be things that they are not.

The main thing that they are not is damage dealers. But they can do a bit of damage when they've got nothing else to do.

They also aren't tanks, but they are tougher than a lot of arcane casters. They aren't made of paper.

And this is the pattern all over. They aren't spectacular at anything, but they can help out with anything.

Personally I don't think I'd multiclass a bard with fighter for archery. If I wanted to make an archer I'd make a fighter, or possibly a revised ranger if available. If I wanted a ranged damage character who had spells I'd make a warlock. The fighting style helps your archery but delays your spells and support abilities, which are your main job.

I also wouldn't go with crossbow mastery. Bards have lots of uses for their bonus action, and an archer bard probably wants swift quiver too.

Instead my advice would be to embrace the valour bard's nature. Balance your dex and cha. Take expertise in stealth and persuasion (or perception!). Be quite good at lots of stuff and have fun doing it.

[JAL_1138]

I think that valour bards are fine, so long as you don't expect them to be things that they are not.

The main thing that they are not is damage dealers. But they can do a bit of damage when they've got nothing else to do.

They also aren't tanks, but they are tougher than a lot of arcane casters. They aren't made of paper.

And this is the pattern all over. They aren't spectacular at anything, but they can help out with anything.

Personally I don't think I'd multiclass a bard with fighter for archery. If I wanted to make an archer I'd make a fighter, or possibly a revised ranger if available. If I wanted a ranged damage character who had spells I'd make a warlock. The fighting style helps your archery but delays your spells and support abilities, which are your main job.

I also wouldn't go with crossbow mastery. Bards have lots of uses for their bonus action, and an archer bard probably wants swift quiver too.

Instead my advice would be to embrace the valour bard's nature. Balance your dex and cha. Take expertise in stealth and persuasion (or perception!). Be quite good at lots of stuff and have fun doing it.

I ran the numbers, finally, on Swift Quiver vs Elemental Weapon with a 5th-level slot, using Sharpshooter's -5/+10, all versus AC 18 because that seemed like a reasonable number and I'm too lazy to run it against the whole range of possible ACs.

Vs AC 18, EW with a 5th-level slot (assuming +6 prof, +5 Dex, no Archery style) = 40.5 dpr
((0.05*(15+(3.5*2)+(2.5*4)))+(((21+6+5-5+2-18)/20-(0.05))*(3.5+15+(2.5*2))))*3=40.5

Vs AC 18, SQ (also +6 prof, +5 dex, no Archery style. Longbow) = 36 dpr.
SQ with Heavy Crossbow (requires Crossbow Expert): 38 dpr.
((0.05*(15+(4.5*2)))+(((21+6-18)/20-(0.05))*(4.5+15+)))*4=36
((0.05*(15+(5.5*2)))+(((21+6-18)/20-(0.05))*(5.5+15)))*4=38


Swift Quiver is actually worse than Elemental Weapon, if you don't have a magic weapon, and try to Sharpshooter against AC 18. Without Sharpshooter (and with no magic weapon, still), you do even worse, at only 27.5 dpr.

If you have a magic weapon, it pulls ahead by a slim margin for a +1 weapon and a respectable amount for a +2 weapon:
Longbow +1 = 41.9 dpr
Longbow +2 = 48.2 dpr

That said, it eats your bonus action each round to get any benefit from it, and it lasts a total of 10 rounds. So if you want to Healing Word someone back to their feet, for instance, or pass out a Bardic Inspiration die, you've wasted a round of SQ. By RAW, unless it's been errata'd, SQ does give you two bonus-action attacks regardless of what you use your Action for, however. You could Dash, Hide, or cast a spell with a one-action casting time. If you don't have a magic weapon, SQ will not help you bypass resistances. Your bonus-action damage without a magic weapon is 18 dpr.

EW, on the other hand, lasts an hour, makes the weapon count as magical, can be upcast, can be cast on another person, can be tailored to target enemy element weaknesses if they have them, and applies to all attack rolls with the weapon. So if you use a bonus-action spell, or pass out a Bardic Inspiration, you still get the benefit of it for two attacks. You can get one attack with EW's effects applied to it as a bonus action after casting a Bard spell with a casting time of one action, via Battle Magic. For two attacks, EW gets you 26.7, and for one, 13.35.

Upcast to 7th level, EW gets you 48.45 with three attacks, 32.3 with two, and 16.15 for a single attack.

They're a lot more even than you'd think in terms of dpr, assuming you can get a magic weapon of at least +1 (which you're very likely to, and nearly guaranteed to in Adventurers' League). If you can't guarantee a magic weapon, though, skip Swift Quiver and snag EW instead.

I run into a bit of trouble trying to figure up how it compares to Warlock, because Darkness+Devil's Sight confers Advantage and I'm not certain how to figure that into to-hit and crit chance (I got the formula I'm using for dpr in an older thread a few months back. If anybody knows, please help me figure out how, because I'd like to run the average dpr for a bard using Greater Invisibility too.) I do know how to figure it up for Hex, though. Applying Hex to each beam of an Eldritch Blast, with four shots from EB at level 17 and with Agonizing Blast, it comes out to an even 41 dpr.

[EvilAnagram]

snip

Okay... you realize you're comparing a Bard using a seventh level spell slot to a Warlock using a cantrip, right? What's the DPR for a Warlock who casts Wall of Fire and keeps shooting enemies back into it with Repelling Blast? Because that's still fewer resources than the Bard.

[Corran]

I run into a bit of trouble trying to figure up how it compares to Warlock, because Darkness+Devil's Sight confers Advantage and I'm not certain how to figure that into to-hit and crit chance
Say X is your hit chance. With advantage, your hit chance becomes X + X - X^2.
So for example, if your hit chance (without advantage) is 50%, with advantage it becomes 50% + 50% - (50% * 50%) = 75%. That's your chance to score a hit now, including criticals.

If you want to calculate the crit chance, you do the same thing. Before advantage your crit chance is 5%. With advantage it becomes 5% + 5% - (5% * 5%) = 9.75%.

So, to put it all in perspective, if your initial hit chance was 65% (including crits), that means that you score a normal hit with a chance equal to 60%, and a critical hit with a chance of 5%.

With advantage, your hit chance will now be 87.75%, meaning that you will score a normal hit with a 78% chance, and a critical hit with a 9.75% chance.

(In practice it is just easier to calculate the miss chance, and the figure out what the hit chance is, but I chose to give you the version I thought was easier to showcase)

[agnos]

If you start with 2 levels of Pally you really can do everything after you hit 7th level

[JAL_1138]

Okay... you realize you're comparing a Bard using a seventh level spell slot to a Warlock using a cantrip, right? What's the DPR for a Warlock who casts Wall of Fire and keeps shooting enemies back into it with Repelling Blast? Because that's still fewer resources than the Bard.

I'm actually counting the Warlock's damage with Hex in it, which would be cast at 5th level (so same spell slot expenditure as Elemental Weapon at 5th level, although the Warlock of course can recharge it on a short rest and doesn't need two feats for it). Warlock's DPR with Hex is half-a-point higher than the VB's with a 5th-level slot. Without Hex, the Warlock's EB+AB DPR is 30.5. Without Elemental Weapon, the Bard's DPR with crossbow expert+sharpshooter is 25.5.

As for Wall of Fire, basically add 27 (failed save) or 13.5 (passed save) each time the damage procs, since a 'lock will cast it at their highest spell slot (5th) for 6d8. They won't get Hex damage with it, since Hex is Concentration as well, so their EB+Agonizing (I'm just assuming they took it in addition to repelling) damage will be the 30.5. It seems likely to me that you'll only get the 27/13.5 to proc once per turn, but that's plenty. Really strong combo, assuming the creature isn't resistant/immune to fire and you can consistently knock the creature into it. One downside is that without careful positioning, the creature could end up using the wall as cover from you, since it's opaque.


Say X is your hit chance. With advantage, your hit chance becomes X + X - X^2.
So for example, if your hit chance (without advantage) is 50%, with advantage it becomes 50% + 50% - (50% * 50%) = 75%. That's your chance to score a hit now, including criticals.

If you want to calculate the crit chance, you do the same thing. Before advantage your crit chance is 5%. With advantage it becomes 5% + 5% - (5% * 5%) = 9.75%.

So, to put it all in perspective, if your initial hit chance was 65% (including crits), that means that you score a normal hit with a chance equal to 60%, and a critical hit with a chance of 5%.

With advantage, your hit chance will now be 87.75%, meaning that you will score a normal hit with a 78% chance, and a critical hit with a 9.75% chance.

(In practice it is just easier to calculate the miss chance, and the figure out what the hit chance is, but I chose to give you the version I thought was easier to showcase)

Thank you! Very much appreciated. I'd never been able to figure out how to calculate it before; that should be easy enough to drop into Excel.

[Dudu]

For extra SAD bard you can always one level dip in Hexblade.

Might be a cheap move though, but nonetheless a solid one. Locks you into sword and board style, which is not bad.
A bard with Shield Mastery coupled with Expertise in Athletics might rock in Shoving foes. You might consider not dumping Str entirely due to this strategy. I say 12 or 14 in Str is fine.

Edit: Well, you cannot "always" dip in Hexblade since the DM might not even consider it an allowed source. AL certainly does not.