EDIT: Bbn 1 or Rgr 1/Brd 9/Eldritch Knight (rest) (CORE ONLY)

[Arkhios]

Hi,

In general, I'm pondering 1) whether making an Eldritch Knight from Bard is wise, and more specifically, 2) which one of the mentioned martial classes (barbarian, fighter, or ranger) would be the best choice to get proficiency in all martial weapons.

A little background for this: In relation to the other character build some of you may remember a few pages ago ("Witch Hunter (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?615377-Musings-about-a-witch-hunter)"), I've had several other concepts in mind, and this is only one of them. I like to call it a pre-PFRPG Skald, in that the character feels more than comfortable in the thick of battle, inspiring allies to great deeds in combat.

If the ability rolls make it possible, I would like to take the full two-weapon fighting approach. If not, I would settle on either "sword and board" or any two-handed weapon. I'm aware that using a shield makes casting bard spells more difficult, but I'm prepared to take my chances (might even take the Still Metamagic feat and use heavier than light armor, even though it means casting any spell as a bard would take a full-round or longer).

Our next campaign is the first Pathfinder Adventure Path to introduce Traits, and this build would make a whole lot of use of Magical Knack (Bard), making my caster level as bard equal to my character level, but only if I take one level of the martial class of choice.

ESSENTIAL INFORMATION TO KEEP IN MIND: I can use ONLY the CORE material from 3.5 SRD (content matching PHB (all), DMG (prestige classes), Deities & Demigods (feats and domains), XPH (all except races)), as well as Pathfinder Chronicles material made specifically for 3.5: Campaign Setting, Gazetteer, and Gods & Magic). We have not rolled the stats yet, so this is only preliminary planning, so that I would have options to choose from when the rolls are made, and I wouldn't waste hours in our session zero just to figure out what to play.

FWIW, the other members of the group are likely these; I'd prefer to avoid those classes even partially:
Elf Rogue
Gnome Druid
Human Sorcerer

[Kurald Galain]

I'd say no to that. For a bard, the only benefit you get is +2 BAB over twenty levels; and for this you lose spellcasting, bard abilities, and tank your saving throws. It's not a good tradeoff.

[Arkhios]

I'd say no to that. For a bard, the only benefit you get is +2 BAB over twenty levels; and for this you lose spellcasting, bard abilities, and tank your saving throws. It's not a good tradeoff.

Why's that bad though? My intent is not to be the primary spellcaster of our group, and the Magical Knack Trait mitigates the 2 levels of caster levels I would lose from doing this. The primary function from bard that I would be using would be bardic music, especially inspire courage. I get that taking 1 level in other than bard would delay the increase to +2 by one level, but waiting for a +3 seems like a waste of time. On hindsight, I think I might actually take bard to 9th level, before branching out, because Inspire Greatness is a pretty good feature as well.

Assuming I remember right what you mean by tanking saving throws, I don't think this combination does so for my saving throws. Quite on the contrary, I feel it makes them better overall. Over twenty levels I would get fort +12, and also ref and will both +9. Compared to a plain fighter, that'd be a lot better, and compared to a plain bard, it'd be "equal" 12+9+9 = 30 vs. 6+12+12 = 30. And I prefer to think of this concept as a more warrior-like bard, than a spellcasting focused bard.

That being said, seeing that you replied to this, how would you make a "Suel Arcanamach" -esque "Magus" using the resources I have available? You seem to be something of an expert in that concept.

[Psyren]

The main issue I see is that core-only means a lot of the tools you might use to let you cast your bard spells in heavier armor or with your hands occupied are off the table. You can increase your BAB and keep your caster level up, sure, but you lose almost every other reason to be a bard, like your music and skill points - and since you're using 3.5 as the chassis you'll want as many as possible.

I would try and get your DM to flex "core-only" to mean allowing the SRD so that you can be a Battle Sorcerer - same "cast in light armor" feature as the bard, but you get a lot more magic and give up a lot less... everything else.

[Arkhios]

The main issue I see is that core-only means a lot of the tools you might use to let you cast your bard spells in heavier armor or with your hands occupied are off the table. You can increase your BAB and keep your caster level up, sure, but you lose almost every other reason to be a bard, like your music and skill points - and since you're using 3.5 as the chassis you'll want as many as possible.

I would try and get your DM to flex "core-only" to mean allowing the SRD so that you can be a Battle Sorcerer - same "cast in light armor" feature as the bard, but you get a lot more magic and give up a lot less... everything else.

Tried. Won't happen, sadly. Actually, we used to have unearthed arcana available when we started our Pathfinder Adventure Path Marathon (with Rise of the Runelords) but UA was taken away for some reason.

[Psyren]

Well, to try and help you make some lemonade out of your GM's lemons...

Archives of Nethys has a great "Sources" (https://aonprd.com/Sources.aspx?ProductLine=CampaignSetting) feature that lets you query the mechanical information from each of the splatbooks its database tables pull from. Scroll to the bottom of that page and you should see, among the very earliest books included on the site for each product line, most of the pre-PF "Chronicles" books that your GM has allowed you to pull material from, like all the crunch that can be found in the 3.5 Campaign Setting book (https://aonprd.com/SourceDisplay.aspx?FixedSource=Pathfinder%20Campai gn%20Setting). It'll be a bit of a chore since you'll have to click on a rules element (e.g. the Harmonic Spell feat (https://aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Harmonic%20Spell)) and then look it up in your 3.5 source to ascertain what its wording was before it got updated later in a Pathfinder source - but it should be a lot faster to get all1 your crunch this way than by simply reading every Chronicle front to back, because those books were organized in such a way as to introduce players to their shiny new "Golarion" setting first, and help them actually build characters second. Hope this helps - good luck.

1Even this method might not have all the crunch - for example, PCS' 3.5 Bard gets an additional ability called Specialized Training (PCS 42) that I don't think is on the PRD - but again, this method will let you skim the titles of various feats/spells/equipment for things that might help you with this build.

[H_H_F_F]

How important to you is the light armour? You could always just go with 6 sorc levels before eldritch knight, or even wizard (though I don't think that's the feel you're going for). 1 Fighter/Barbarian/Paladin/Ranger, 6 sorc, then eldritch knight. Finish it up with more martial levels instead of sorc levels - would be weaker overall, but still miles ahead of your bard. Wizard will obviously be stronger, but again, probably flavour issues.

Now, if you anticipate the game to end in low or mid levels, then taking the HP and BAB hit that early sucks. If it should go to late levels, well - you lose the same BAB overall, and you're actually getting some milage out of Eldritch Knight.

Otherwise, how would you feel about just going straight bard? Yes, you'll lose BAB, but You'll have more skill points, better HP, and you could play a melee bard even in core in an OK way, I think.

[el minster]

try a sorceror-paladin into eldritch knight

[Arkhios]

We have a player in our group who has voiced interest in making a sorcerer, so I'd rather not make one; even partially.

Paladin would be a fish out of water in this particular AP, as it starts in a city ruled by cutthroats and pirates.

Straight Bard wouldn't have better hit points. Their HD is d6. A barbarian/fighter/ranger 1, bard 8-9, eldritch knight 10 would end up having 2 to 6 HP more than a pure bard.

[el minster]

Maybe a CoDzilla then

[Arkhios]

Maybe a CoDzilla then

To be frank, that's miles away from the concept I had in mind for this particular thread. Not helpful, man.

[ericgrau]

For sor vs bard in core only, I would compare spell level, BAB, HP and AC. Also note that bard spell selection is limited but good, so just a little worse than equal level sorcerer spells. Likewise decide what type of spells you want and see which list has them. If not plan your entire spell list from the start. You can often start playing bardic music for a long time and then stop playing as soon as a fight starts. Inspire courage and inspire greatness works this way and lasts another 5 rounds. Consider this when considering BAB and so on.

Martial class I don't think is that important. Barbarian is strongest by a good margin, but then you would need to time your spellcasting around your rage timing. Which may make it worst by a good margin depending on your style. Ranger is weakest but only barely, and it's hard to get skill points otherwise. So if you want skill points for something in particular then ranger is best. Paladin has nice saves, which is especially nice in core, but then sorcadin loses a spell level compared to the highest spell level options. And bardadin more than that of course. And fighter is good in because your feats will be limited. So especially if you want to trip or some such, but compared to other core options weapon focus and other core feats are good too. So I think any of these could work well, and it won't help or hurt you much regardless.

[Arkhios]

For sor vs bard in core only, I would compare spell level, BAB, HP and AC. Also note that bard spell selection is limited but good, so just a little worse than equal level sorcerer spells. Likewise decide what type of spells you want and see which list has them. If not plan your entire spell list from the start.

Martial class I don't think is that important. Barbarian is strongest by a good margin, but then you would need to time your spellcasting around your rage timing. Which may make it worst by a good margin depending on your style. Ranger is weakest but only barely, and it's hard to get skill points otherwise. So if you want skill points for something in particular then ranger is best. Paladin has nice saves, which is especially nice in core, but then sorcadin loses a spell level compared to the highest spell level options. And bardadin more than that of course. And fighter is good in because your feats will be limited. So especially if you want to trip or some such, but compared to other core options weapon focus and other core feats are good too. So I think any of these could work well, and it won't help or hurt you much regardless.

The core idea I had for this particular concept was a "marooned seafarer/raider/viking*" so I suppose quite a few skills would be almost mandatory. Such as ranks in Profession Sailor :P

That'd probably leave Fighter out of the list and necessitate a set of spells fitting that theme.

Btw, Paladin/Bard doesn't work by RAW. Both have contradicting alignment restrictions and penalties if they cease to be one or the other.

*Which, actually, is thing in the Golarion's Ulfen ethnicity lore.

[Biggus]

The core idea I had for this particular concept was a "marooned seafarer/raider/viking*" so I suppose quite a few skills would be almost mandatory. Such as ranks in Profession Sailor :P


Sounds to me like a level of Barbarian would fit best with the viking concept, and you could certainly use the Con bonus from rage if you're going to be getting into melee as your HPs will be fairly low.

I'm not sure the extra +2 BAB and a Fighter feat is worth the loss of Bardsong improvements, loads of skill points and a level of spellcasting though, I'd be more inclined to go Bb1/Bd19.

[Quertus]

To be frank, that's miles away from the concept I had in mind for this particular thread. Not helpful, man.


I've had several other concepts in mind,

If the ability rolls make it possible, I would like to take the full two-weapon fighting approach.

ESSENTIAL INFORMATION TO KEEP IN MIND: We have not rolled the stats yet, so this is only preliminary planning, so that I would have options to choose from when the rolls are made, and I wouldn't waste hours in our session zero just to figure out what to play.

FWIW, the other members of the group are likely these; I'd prefer to avoid those classes even partially:
Elf Rogue
Gnome Druid
Human Sorcerer


We have a player in our group who has voiced interest in making a sorcerer, so I'd rather not make one; even partially.

So, I'm confused.

If you're rolling stats… and need multiple build ideas …to work with whatever stats you roll…then… why are you assuming that one of the players *will* be playing the sorcerer he wants? Why are you not even considering sorcerer?

Also, *sorcerer" is a class, not a role - you can easily have a party of 4 Sorcerers, and still not have anybody stepping on anyone else's toes. And "Sorcadin" is generally a different niche than "Sorcerer".

Lastly, it feels like we're operating a bit in the dark on your thought process: is it "if I get high X, I'll play Y", "if I get high X and Y I'll play Z", more "here's a few concepts that speak to me; let's see if I roll stats that enable any of these concepts", or what? Knowing how you approach character creation will help us know how to advise you.

[Arkhios]

So, I'm confused.

1)If you're rolling stats… and need multiple build ideas …to work with whatever stats you roll…then… why are you assuming that one of the players *will* be playing the sorcerer he wants? Why are you not even considering sorcerer?

2)Also, *sorcerer" is a class, not a role - you can easily have a party of 4 Sorcerers, and still not have anybody stepping on anyone else's toes. And "Sorcadin" is generally a different niche than "Sorcerer".

3)Lastly, it feels like we're operating a bit in the dark on your thought process: is it "if I get high X, I'll play Y", "if I get high X and Y I'll play Z", more "here's a few concepts that speak to me; let's see if I roll stats that enable any of these concepts", or what? Knowing how you approach character creation will help us know how to advise you.

1) I never said I need new ideas or concepts. I said I have several already, and this is only one of them. I came here to ask two very simple questions: 1st, whether this particular idea is viable and 2nd, which one of the three martials I mentioned would make it the most viable. Notice that I excluded Paladin knowingly. Paladin has to be Lawful Good and Bard has to be any non-lawful. I really wouldn't want to resort to messing with alignments just to make the build work. Especially if it would need a thorough explanation why this would happen during game.
Also, I'm not assuming, I know they've made up their minds already. Those three other characters are already set in stone. Each of them are pretty easy to make work even with mediocre stats. A sorcerer would basically only need a good charisma, and possibly decent dex/con. The player even mentioned he'd want to play a character with negative strength (I don't get it, but OK. His character, not mine! :smallbiggrin:)
A druid doesn't really need to have much in regards to str, dex, or even con, as wild shapes replace them anyway, so a good wisdom would be enough. And a gnome could hide behind a likely more beefy companion until they can wild shape.
A rogue really only needs good dexterity. Anything else is just a bonus.

2) A class is not a role, yes. But I didn't speak of filling a role (except briefly when I said I don't intend to be a primary spellcaster). Besides, every class still has a lot of flavor of its own, and I know for a fact that some of the persons in my group would feel bad if I took even just one level of the same classes they've chosen to play. I respect that, and don't want to cause any chafe in our mutual relationships over the course of our Marathon. This is why I'm trying a bit of out-of-the-box builds, that, not only speak to me, but are viable in the long run, and won't end up in a crash course with the other three characters. The people I play with have different mindset to making characters than I do. They make up their minds early on, while I often have too many ideas to choose from. I've also been playing 3.5 for a decade longer than any of them, so I've had a lot of chances to try out different builds, and thus I prefer to let them choose their classes first. Which actually helps me to narrow down my own options.

3) My approach to character creation is this: I make a concept, then fill out a progression "table" of sorts filling out class levels, level by level, slotting feats where I would get them and such. When I don't know my rolls yet, I tend to use point-buy to get guideline to compare my rolls against later, and replace them accordingly.

For example, for this build I have a pre-roll point buy set at Str 14, Dex 15, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 8, Cha 13. If my eventual rolls end up somewhere close to this, I would replace the bought scores with rolled ones.
Assume I rolled 16, 15, 14, 14, 11, 8; I'd replace the row like this:
Str 14 → 16 (because I plan to use Strength for attack rolls)
Dex 15 →15 (requisite for twf)
Con 14 →14 (I try to have con 14 at minimum for any class I play. Extra Hit Points pile up nicely.)
Int 8 → 8 (I'm playing human)
Wis 8 →11 (as fun as it might be to play with negative wisdom, I'd rather not)
Cha 13 →14 (requisite for up to 3rd-4th level spells)

[Firebug]

Btw, Paladin/Bard doesn't work by RAW. Both have contradicting alignment restrictions and penalties if they cease to be one or the other. Ex-Paladin loses everything, Ex-Bard simply can't continue to advance as bard. But you want Eldritch Knight, not Bard.

So, Bard 7-8 then alignment shift to Lawful Good, Paladin 2, Eldritch Knight(Rest).

Failing that, I vote Ranger to mix up your class skills.

[Arkhios]

Ex-Paladin loses everything, Ex-Bard simply can't continue to advance as bard. But you want Eldritch Knight, not Bard.

So, Bard 7-8 then alignment shift to Lawful Good, Paladin 2, Eldritch Knight(Rest).

Hmm, that's true. That does make it more viable I suppose, but I would prefer taking the martial level at 1st character level for (I think) obvious reasons. And that wouldn't work. But, again, Bard first, then Paladin would work, sure. I'd still have to explain my DM why would this happen, lorewise.

[Firebug]

XPH is available, so how about Psychic Warrior? Basically Fighter with slightly different skills, d8 vs d10 and a power or two.

Or fulfill the martial weapons requirement with another prestige class?

Bard 8 would meet the prereqs for Arcane Archer which does give proficiency in all martial weapons. However, you would be spending 3 feats in a fighting style you weren't looking for (Archery), and possibly a race you weren't looking for (elf/halfelf).
Duelist is the same (Bard 8 would satisfy BAB prereq), but doesn't really get you much other than the possibility of +1 AC when not wearing armor, and 4 skill points/level. Prereq feats are not terrible, as in, they are useful to a melee fighting style.
Dwarven Defender could also work, but BAB +7 is a bit high for what you were looking for. Feat prereqs are again not terrible, but locking into dwarf probably is.

Minor things of note, per the legal sources you mentioned:
Bard 1: you can choose a single subskill in perform and you effectively count as 2 levels higher for bardic performance (effect and save DC) and you get 1 additional use per day. You trade out Bardic Knowledge for this.
Fighter 1: You gain additional class skills, and 4 skill points per level instead of 2. You trade out your bonus feat.
Cayden Cailean's Bards can learn Pick your Poison (Brd 1) and Knock as a 2nd level spell.
Nethys' Bards can give spell slots to their allies (effectively) with Channel the Gift.
Pharasma's Bards can learn Augury, Death Knell, Speak with Dead.
Serenrae's Bards can learn Flame Blade and a variant Fire Shield.
Shelyn's Bards can learn Eagle's Splendor as a 1st level spell, and a spell called Unbreakable Heart.
Enforcer (deal nonlethal damage, make an intimidate check) is on the table if you are from Razmiran.
Storm-lashed if you are from the Shackles.
Varisian Tattoo (+1 CL to a school, some cantrips/day), though it looks like the prereqs don't require being from Varisia.
Firearms.
Harmonic Spell, basically activate your bardic music at the same time as casting... but it doesn't say its Metamagic so shouldn't increase cast time? Probably an oversight.

[Kurald Galain]

Why's that bad though? My intent is not to be the primary spellcaster of our group, and the Magical Knack Trait mitigates the 2 levels of caster levels I would lose from doing this.
You still get 4th/5th level spells two levels later than you normally would; that's a big deal in actual gameplay, if not in level-20 theory op.

I'm surprised to learn that switching from a class with two strong saves (bard) to a class with one (EK) doesn't nerf your saving throws, but turns out it doesn't. Good.


That being said, seeing that you replied to this, how would you make a "Suel Arcanamach" -esque "Magus" using the resources I have available? You seem to be something of an expert in that concept.
What does Suel mean to you... is it a wizard in armor? Because the prestige class doesn't really do a lot besides that. And the bard is already a caster in armor anyway.

Within the limits of CORE ONLY? I'd go bard/20, and see if I can scavenge some feats or spells from all the non-core material that's allowed.

[Arkhios]

You still get 4th/5th level spells two levels later than you normally would; that's a big deal in actual gameplay, if not in level-20 theory op.

I'm surprised to learn that switching from a class with two strong saves (bard) to a class with one (EK) doesn't nerf your saving throws, but turns out it doesn't. Good.


What does Suel mean to you... is it a wizard in armor? Because the prestige class doesn't really do a lot besides that. And the bard is already a caster in armor anyway.

Within the limits of CORE ONLY? I'd go bard/20, and see if I can scavenge some feats or spells from all the non-core material that's allowed.

Well, Suel is just an ethnicity from Greyhawk/Oerth. To me it means what it is, a pale-skinned human ethnicity (quite typical Caucasian, really) from the northern hemisphere. :smallbiggrin:

Now, what an Arcanamach means to me, I think the most iconic part of them (IIRC) is that they excel at combat against other magic users, and are especially skilled at dispelling magic, while at the same time their own spells are more difficult to dispel.

[Kurald Galain]

Now, what an Arcanamach means to me, I think the most iconic part of them (IIRC) is that they excel at combat against other magic users, and are especially skilled at dispelling magic, while at the same time their own spells are more difficult to dispel.

Right.

But most of that is flavor. I don't see the prestige class being mechanically excellent at combat against casters, or at dispelling. So your bard can easily have the same flavor.
The prestige does take a +6 bonus against being dispelled, but I don't think that can be duplicated in CORE ONLY.

[Arkhios]

Right.

But most of that is flavor. I don't see the prestige class being mechanically excellent at combat against casters, or at dispelling. So your bard can easily have the same flavor.
The prestige does take a +6 bonus against being dispelled, but I don't think that can be duplicated in CORE ONLY.

Fair. IIRC, Arcanamach has generally been rated as only mediocre at best. I suppose it's only flavor what I'm looking for from it, and that doesn't really need a specific class in order to make it work.
A magus-esque character was really a fleeting thought to be honest, inspired by your own magus expertise. :smallwink:

I guess if there was a way to cast abjuration spells at a higher caster level in CORE ONLY, you could emulate their better dispelling.

[Kurald Galain]

Since traits are on the table, as your GM for this one (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/regional-traits/spell-duel-prodigy-regional)...

[claypigeons]

Barbarian 1/bard X. Eldritch knight doesn't do much besides stop you advancing your bard features.

Will you get more mileage/utility out of an extra iterative attack, or from advancing inspire courage (and other music), and more skill points from a Face list.

[Arkhios]

Since traits are on the table, as your GM for this one (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/regional-traits/spell-duel-prodigy-regional)...

I'm afraid we're limited to only the ones found in Second Darkness player's guide. Yeah, it's a bummer. I'm AFB, right now, but I'll check if there was something along those lines in there when I'm able.

Edit: Nope, nothing of the sort in there. Though, I suppose I could take Gifted Adept and choose Dispel Magic, even if I couldn't cast it yet?

The DM made up his mind about going through Pathfinder Adventure paths in chronological order, including when each sourcebook was released. Bastards of Golarion is still way ahead of us.

[Zancloufer]

So quick question: Why even go Eldritch Knight on bard? Wouldn't Bard 18 be better than Bard 8/Fighter 1/Eldritch Knight 10?

I mean you gain: 4-6 HP, +3 BaB, +3 Fort save, Weapon proficencies (technically armour as well but you can't use any of the armour and still cast spells so), and two Fighter feats.
On the flip side you loose: 2 CL, spells know/per day, are behind on spell level, 3 Will and Ref saves and 66 skill points plus all of the bard features.
Also you do loose out on +1-2 Inspire Courage and Inspire Greatness (which literally comes next level). FYI +1 in Courage and Greatness does grant 3 HD worth of HP, +3 to hit, +1 damage and +1 fort saves.

I'm not saying melee bards are bad, I'm just saying straight bard 18-20 is probably better in melee than splashing Eldrich Knight while also having more utility
.

[Cerefel]

I think some people in this thread are forgetting 15-16 BAB is an important break point for how many attacks you get per round, and bards can't get there without something like Eldritch Knight.

I will say that you should try to limit the amount of Eldritch Knight to about 5ish levels so you don't lose too much of your cool bard stuff

[Kurald Galain]

I think some people in this thread are forgetting 15-16 BAB is an important break point for how many attacks you get per round,
Only in theory op.

In practical gameplay, it doesn't matter what your BAB is at level 20 because most or all of the time you're not playing at that level.

And when looking at actual gameplay, higher-level spells trump getting an extra attack at -15.

[Quertus]

So, I think I follow you, and hopefully this will cut down on off topic comments… but one bit still confuses me:


Also, I'm not assuming, I know they've made up their minds already. Those three other characters are already set in stone. Each of them are pretty easy to make work even with mediocre stats.

How is the one guy supposed to play a Sorcerer if he rolls a 5 on Charisma? :smallconfused:

[Arkhios]

So, I think I follow you, and hopefully this will cut down on off topic comments… but one bit still confuses me:



How is the one guy supposed to play a Sorcerer if he rolls a 5 on Charisma? :smallconfused:

Well, we don't roll stats in order. We can distribute the rolls however we want to.

We use the guidelines laid out in (IIRC) 3.5 PHB, that if your highest score is 13 or if the sum of the modifiers before racials is +0 or less, you can roll them all again.

For example, should he roll really bad, like if his best roll was a 5, he'd definitely get a reroll.



Regarding this thread's topic, I think I would go with Ranger or Barbarian for a lot more skills and a bit more flavor than a fighter, even though Fighter would get me an extra feat. Paladin I have decidedly left out for Second Darkness Adventure Path's starting location, Riddleport (wretched hive safehaven for pirates and other lowlifes, ruled by crimelords, where goody two-shoes like paladins are more than likely to end up "missing" and found dead in a shady alley, more or less.)

As for the Pathfinder Chronicles variant class features, my DM was very clear that every option we use should reflect the local flavor. Bard's variant requires training at a specific college which is too far away to be considered local. Similarly, the fighter variant requires training at one of the named/famed academies, and my character hails from a place that lacks such a premise, having lived most of his life over seas.

Barbarian does have a fitting variant, but that likely won't matter because I doubt I will take 3 or more levels in the class anyway. Either way, it'd give me a stacking Resist 2 vs Cold damage, replacing Trap Sense. I know it's not much, but it's flavorful.
Same applies for Ranger. They have a variant that loses Wild Empathy but gains an enhanced companion. It would have to be one of the animals listed for a 4th level ranger, but your effective druid level would be Ranger Level -2 (instead of Ranger Level Halved). But again, this likely wouldn't matter. In fact, as a ranger/bard, my charisma would be quite high, so Wild Empathy wouldn't suck that much, even though the check bonus would be quite low.

I have decided that should I go with this concept, I'd stick to Bard for 9 levels (inspire greatness!) before becoming Eldritch Knight. I'm not that excited about the other bard features available after 9th level, except the spells, and those I will get at a small delay. Besides, this Adventure Path should end at around 15th or 16th level according to the vast interwebs. If we're lucky, at 17th.

Oh, and regarding the Psychic Warrior suggestion, I am currently playing a Cerebremancer (non-specialized wizard/Kineticist Psion base), and it's a real wrecking ball with (almost) UNLIMITED POWER (and I'm lovin' it!), I think after this AP ends soonish, I've had my fill of psionics for the time being. Once we get to Legacy of Fire (the fourth AP set in Golarion, before Pathfinder Core Rulebook was released and same restrictions as now will apply), I might make a Psionic Fist with Monk/psychic warrior base. But I'll think about it more later, when the time is right.