Should Bards level 2 and 3 be reversed?

[diplomancer]

Bards are the only full-caster that gets their subclass at 3rd level instead of 2nd. This makes 3rd level a huge level for bards (they double their spellcasting, as the other casters, AND they get their subclass features), and 2nd level relatively unexciting (you have a +1 to initiative is the most exciting thing about Jack-of-All-Trades at that level, and song of rest is nice but not exactly great).

Maybe just switch jack-of-all trades and subclass, keeping song of rest and expertise where they are.

Would that create any weird multi-class interaction that I haven't foreseen?

[NaughtyTiger]

in my mind, bards are more martial than their other full casters, so the 3rd level thing seems natural.
that said, i don't see anything broken by swapping them.

some might point to warlock as disproving your theory, but we both know why they don't count (*wink)

[diplomancer]

in my mind, bards are more martial than their other full casters, so the 3rd level thing seems natural.
that said, i don't see anything broken by swapping them.

some might point to warlock as disproving your theory, but we both know why they don't count (*wink)

Which is another reason why I created the other thread about what is the real warlock subclass, the pact boon or the patron. Most people seem to be going with "patron", so Bard is the only full caster that gets its subclass at 3rd level, no matter whether you consider Warlocks to be full casters or not :smallwink:

Also, I don't think that Bards are more martial than Clerics or Druids (or Warlocks :smallwink:)

[GreyBlack]

No. Because this makes Bards more splashable than they already are.

Given the number of classes that require charisma for multiclassing, it's already a fairly easy task to take one of the Charisma classes and splash it into another. By making you wait that extra level, it forces you to choose whether that splash is worth it or not.

Granted, most multiclasses just go X 2/Bard 18 anyway, but it does prevent some stuff like Paladin 2/Bard 2/Warlock 2/Sorcerer 14 from being a bigger thing than normal.

[JackPhoenix]

Bards are the only full-caster that gets their subclass at 3rd level instead of 2nd.

And druids and wizards are the only full-casters that get their subclass at 2nd level instead of 1st level.
And clerics and sorcerers are the only full-casters that get their subclass at 1st level instead of 2nd. Also warlocks, if you count them as full casters.

Different classes get their subclass at different levels. Though 3rd level is the most common.

[diplomancer]

No. Because this makes Bards more splashable than they already are.

Given the number of classes that require charisma for multiclassing, it's already a fairly easy task to take one of the Charisma classes and splash it into another. By making you wait that extra level, it forces you to choose whether that splash is worth it or not.

Granted, most multiclasses just go X 2/Bard 18 anyway, but it does prevent some stuff like Paladin 2/Bard 2/Warlock 2/Sorcerer 14 from being a bigger thing than normal.

And how "normal" is that really? I never saw that build, be it in table or in forums. And are 14th level sorcerer abilities that much better than jack of all trades and expertise, so it makes it an "obvious" pick?

Bards are not that "splashable", as you yourself recognized. A case can be made that jack of all trades is better as a "splash" than a bard's subclass feature, even if it's not that exciting at Character level 2. Most Bardic Inspiration uses only "pick up" after Bard level 5.


And druids and wizards are the only full-casters that get their subclass at 2nd level instead of 1st level.
And clerics and sorcerers are the only full-casters that get their subclass at 1st level instead of 2nd. Also warlocks, if you count them as full casters.

Different classes get their subclass at different levels. Though 3rd level is the most common.

All non-full caster classes, without exception, get their subclass ability at 3rd level. Why should Bard, a full-caster class, get their abilities at 3rd level, and not 1st or 2nd, like all the other full-caster classes?

The Bard level 3 subclass feature is also the ONLY subclass feature that ANY fullcaster gets at odd levels except 1 (and 17 for the cleric). It's "out of sync".

That's the main argument. The minor argument is level 2 for Bards is not very exciting, with 2 not very exciting features (at least at character level 2), while level 3 is probably the best relative level, with 2 very powerful and defining features, in addition to more than doubling their spell capacity. Why not swap one of those features with the other?

[GreyBlack]

And how "normal" is that really? I never saw that build, be it in table or in forums. And are 14th level sorcerer abilities that much better than jack of all trades and expertise, so it makes it an "obvious" pick?

Bards are not that "splashable", as you yourself recognized. A case can be made that jack of all trades is better as a "splash" than a bard's subclass feature, even if it's not that exciting at Character level 2. Most Bardic Inspiration uses only "pick up" after Bard level 5.



All non-full caster classes, without exception, get their subclass ability at 3rd level. Why should Bard, a full-caster class, get their abilities at 3rd level, and not 1st or 2nd, like all the other full-caster classes?

The Bard level 3 subclass feature is also the ONLY subclass feature that ANY fullcaster gets at odd levels except 1 (and 17 for the cleric). It's "out of sync".

That's the main argument. The minor argument is level 2 for Bards is not very exciting, with 2 not very exciting features (at least at character level 2), while level 3 is probably the best relative level, with 2 very powerful and defining features, in addition to more than doubling their spell capacity. Why not swap one of those features with the other?

Except, as noted, it's not really out of sync. Warlocks get their spec at 3, cleric's get theirs at 1... there's no reason to get weird about it.

It's fine.

[JackPhoenix]

All non-full caster classes, without exception, get their subclass ability at 3rd level. Why should Bard, a full-caster class, get their abilities at 3rd level, and not 1st or 2nd, like all the other full-caster classes?

The Bard level 3 subclass feature is also the ONLY subclass feature that ANY fullcaster gets at odd levels except 1 (and 17 for the cleric). It's "out of sync".

Why wouldn't they get their subclass at 3rd level? Each class is designed differently. It's not "out of sync", because there's no "sync" in the first place. There's no rule saying that full casters (which is a fan name, not rule term) must receive their subclass feature at level 1 or 2. That most do is a coincidence, not design intent in itself.

Clerics, sorcerers and warlocks need to get their subclass at level 1, as their subclass is their power source (so should paladins, but that's whole 'nother can of worms). There's no reason why should druid and wizard get their subclass at level 2, but out of all the classes in the game, they have the most "dead levels" at 8, and the best spell lists, while bard has the fewest out of "full casters", just two, comparable to half-casters (which apparently the bard was originally designed as).


Except, as noted, it's not really out of sync. Warlocks get their spec at 3, cleric's get theirs at 1... there's no reason to get weird about it.

Warlock's subclass is patron, not pact boon. Though you could propably make an argument that warlocks have different 2 subclasses to pick from.

[diplomancer]

Why wouldn't they get their subclass at 3rd level? Each class is designed differently. It's not "out of sync", because there's no "sync" in the first place. There's no rule saying that full casters (which is a fan name, not rule term) must receive their subclass feature at level 1 or 2. That most do is a coincidence, not design intent in itself.

Not a coincidence per se, more of a consequence of the design decision of giving new spell levels every odd level for full casters, which is why almost all subclass features of full casters come at even levels.

As you said, Clerics, Sorcerers and Warlocks, pretty much for thematic reasons, get their subclasses at 1st level, so it is reasonable in their case to break the general pattern of subclass features. Druids and Wizards get theirs at 2nd, following this general pattern, which exists in order to avoid getting subclass features and new spell levels at the same time. So, is there a thematic reason for the Bard breaking that pattern?

Edit: Druids and Wizards (and Bards) have no dead levels once you factor in spellcasting levels, which you absolutely should. Those "dead levels" are actually the levels that players are most excited about.

[GreyBlack]

Warlock's subclass is patron, not pact boon. Though you could propably make an argument that warlocks have different 2 subclasses to pick from.

To be honest, I would. Both patron and pact boon change the class in the ways that subclasses in other classes do, and I'd argue the pact boon changes the class more than the patron.

But we're also splitting hairs at that point and I have no real desire to debate that; either way, it's a full caster who doesn't get a subclass at 2.