Half Caster Bard?

[Saelethil]

I’ve seen a lot of people here and elsewhere on the Internet say that in previous additions Bards we’re not full casters. Now, I’m only familiar with the fifth edition so I can’t speak as to how well it was implemented in the past but I am intrigued by the concept.

My question for The Playground is, what features would you add or change to make a Bard a relatively balanced half caster in 5e?

[Christew]

I’ve seen a lot of people here and elsewhere on the Internet say that in previous additions Bards we’re not full casters. Now, I’m only familiar with the fifth edition so I can’t speak as to how well it was implemented in the past but I am intrigued by the concept.

My question for The Playground is, what features would you add or change to make a Bard a relatively balanced half caster in 5e?
3e Bard only went up to 6th level spells and Bardic Music used the perform skill to produce a bunch of different effects (suggestion, countercharm, etc). It was ... not great.

If I were trying to make Bard a half caster in 5e, I would use rogue abilities -- giving a spectrum of Rogue (0), Arcane Trickster (1/3), Bard/Rogue hybrid (1/2), Current Bard (1).

[Dienekes]

I would make Bards have a mechanic which involves them actually playing music in a Performance. These Performances would provide buffs to allies/nerfs to enemies, that you could change on each of your turns. At some point, probably around level 5-ish, they would gain the ability to cast spells while making their Performances so their songs are literally unleashing magic.

[jaappleton]

I would make Bards have a mechanic which involves them actually playing music in a Performance. These Performances would provide buffs to allies/nerfs to enemies, that you could change on each of your turns. At some point, probably around level 5-ish, they would gain the ability to cast spells while making their Performances so their songs are literally unleashing magic.

This, but I wouldn't necessarily restrict it to music. Plenty of Bards aren't musically oriented.

Basically, to do stuff like this, you need to bring back 'spell like abilities'.

They'd need to add a new ability that would scale as you level up to make up for the lack of spells, giving different abilities based on your subclass.

IMO doubling the amount of Bardic Inspiration dice and utilizing that would be a solid way, or giving X ability and scaling the number of uses off proficiency bonus is likely the best route to go.

[Waazraath]

3e Bard only went up to 6th level spells and Bardic Music used the perform skill to produce a bunch of different effects (suggestion, countercharm, etc). It was ... not great.


Correct, though I don't really agree with the 'not great' part - ok, in core it was not great, but with splat (and there was oh so many splat that edition) you could make the bardic music really interesting, especially Inspire Courage (bonusses for every ally on to hit and damage). But you could also empower their spellcasting with the right feats and prestige classes.

Thematically, I liked that a lot better than the 5e approach, where they are as powerfull as wizards and sorcerers (knowing 9th level spells) while being dabblers who do a little magic in addition to other stuff. Half caster with other benefits is more logical, and the classes in 5e that have more resource pools (arteficer and warlock with both spells and infusions/invocations) are imo more interesting and customizable than just having a pool of spells.

In reply to the OP: that's what I'd do. Half-caster, maybe add a few good spells at the lower levels for balance, and bring back bardic music as a resource that gets better over the levels, drawing inspiration from earlier edition and flavour: have allies overcome fear, boost their morale, inspire them to great deeds (either skills or in combat), etc.

[jaappleton]

Correct, though I don't really agree with the 'not great' part - ok, in core it was not great, but with splat (and there was oh so many splat that edition) you could make the bardic music really interesting, especially Inspire Courage (bonusses for every ally on to hit and damage). But you could also empower their spellcasting with the right feats and prestige classes.

Thematically, I liked that a lot better than the 5e approach, where they are as powerfull as wizards and sorcerers (knowing 9th level spells) while being dabblers who do a little magic in addition to other stuff. Half caster with other benefits is more logical, and the classes in 5e that have more resource pools (arteficer and warlock with both spells and infusions/invocations) are imo more interesting and customizable than just having a pool of spells.

In reply to the OP: that's what I'd do. Half-caster, maybe add a few good spells at the lower levels for balance, and bring back bardic music as a resource that gets better over the levels, drawing inspiration from earlier edition and flavour: have allies overcome fear, boost their morale, inspire them to great deeds (either skills or in combat), etc.

Emphasis mine. A bit off topic, but what would you say had more splat; 3.X or 4E? If you only count official stuff it might be a close race... maybe.

In 3.X, I'd say that Bards were 'two thirds caster'. 5E doesn't really do this, with IMO the closest thing being the Artificer.

Though opening up 5E and doing a 2/3rd caster would be quite an interesting idea...

[Amechra]

It was ... not great.

Only in comparison to the Stupidly Broken classes (Artificer/Cleric/Druid/Psion/Wizard). Outside of that, their spell list had some absolute gems, and there were some incredibly powerful things you could do with Inspire Courage. Like, say, adding +4d6 fire damage to all of your allies' attacks. Including your own. At 3rd level.

Sure, it wasn't arguably one of the strongest classes in the game, like it is in 5e. But considering how mechanically broken 3.5 was... yeah, that's a good thing.


Emphasis mine. A bit off topic, but what would you say had more splat; 3.X or 4E? If you only count official stuff it might be a close race... maybe.

Checking the Wikipedia page...

If you just count 3.0 and 3.5 (so not Pathfinder), 3.x has 69 official books, which goes up to 72 books if you count the 3.0 core books as different from the 3.5 core books.

4e had 43, which pops up to 54 if you include campaign setting guides.

Compare that to 2e, which had... 96 books, as far as I can tell? Most of those books not having been playtested, of course, because TSR just started shoving books out the door near the end.

[Waazraath]

Emphasis mine. A bit off topic, but what would you say had more splat; 3.X or 4E? If you only count official stuff it might be a close race... maybe.

In 3.X, I'd say that Bards were 'two thirds caster'. 5E doesn't really do this, with IMO the closest thing being the Artificer.

Though opening up 5E and doing a 2/3rd caster would be quite an interesting idea...

True about 2/3rd caster - I think half caster with Artificer as example is close enough for 5e. As for which edition had more splat (3.5 or 4e): I didn't play the latter, so I'm not the one to answer that. I do know that 3.5 had prestige classes that made Bardic Music the focus point, you had a prestige class that turned the 2/3rd caster into a full caster (up to 9th level spells) if you wanted to focus on the spellcasting, you had lots of thematic subclasses (draconic, undead), you had prestige classes that turned the bard into a more martial character... so where without splat, it was a bit redundant 5th wheel character that could do a lot of things ok-ish but nothing as well as the specialists, the splat-bard could be a lot of things, and very good at these as well. So at least it had enough splat :) (but given the amount of non-options that got published, I'd agree with 'too much' as well).

[RogueJK]

A half-caster Bard variant begs for a Skald-style class, something like a hybrid Fighter/Bard (or potentially even a Barbarian/Bard like Pathfinder's Skald class). Lean even further into martial capability than the Valor/Swords Bard, at the cost of some of your spellcasting capability. It'd be similar to Christew's Rogue spectrum, only on the Fighter side of things: Fighter (0), Eldritch Knight (1/3), Skald (1/2), Valor/Swords Bard (1).

You could also go further and turn it into a battlefield leader/inspirer. Possibly bring back the Bard Song mechanic from earlier editions, letting you use performances and music to buff your allies, making it an aura/radius similar to the Paladin to encourage sticking close to your allies on the front lines. And/or perhaps trade out Bardic Inspiration for some abilities that allow you to reposition/command allies (similar to Battlemaster's Maneuvering Strike and Commander's Strike). Maybe even let them burn spell slots for these combat leader maneuvers, like Divine Smite. Stuff like the buff aura and ally maneuvering/commanding would be similar to 4E's Warlord, which doesn't have a direct analogue in 5E.

[SLOTHRPG95]

I'll second half-caster Bard could work in a similar vein as to Artificers, with subclasses determining whether they're more martial (Swords, Valor, Whispers) or cantrip-based (Lore, Glamor) just like Armorer/Battle Smith vs. Alchemist/Artillerist. With that said, the existing subclasses would need to be significantly beefed up to make up for the significant loss in casting prowess.

Also, slightly off-topic but Bards were only sort of 2/3 casters in 3.X. Their maximum spell level was 6 instead of 9, but because of how spell lists worked in that edition, theirs included some spells that Sorcerers and Wizards wouldn't access until getting 8th level spells, which somewhat evened things out. This mostly impacted enchantment spells, but meant that Bards got access to spells like Suggestion, Charm Monster, Dominate Person, etc. all the way to Mass Charm Monster anywhere from just one level behind Sorcerers to two levels before them (if they had enough Charisma for bonus spell slots of that level). They did have fewer spell slots, but could also spam buffs/debuffs via bardic music at higher levels, so I'd say they were more potent than 2/3 caster would suggest, while still not getting access to Sor/Wiz high-level goodies like Wish. Unless they took the Sublime Chord prestige class, but that's another kettle of fish.

[Hytheter]

If you're going to reduce their casting you definitely want to amp up their bardic inspiration or at least the general idea behind it. In other words, you want party buffs. Auras, actions that enhance allies, expanding the base inspiration mechanic or whatever else.

[Chronos]

The problem with giving them mechanics based on skill checks, in 5e, is that then you'd need to build a mechanic for skill checks, something that 5e currently lacks. Bounded accuracy can maybe work kind of OK for things like combat, where there are a large number of die rolls before anything catastrophic happens, but is terrible for skill checks, where a single bad roll can be catastrophic.

[Jakinbandw]

The problem with giving them mechanics based on skill checks, in 5e, is that then you'd need to build a mechanic for skill checks, something that 5e currently lacks. Bounded accuracy can maybe work kind of OK for things like combat, where there are a large number of die rolls before anything catastrophic happens, but is terrible for skill checks, where a single bad roll can be catastrophic.

So work with that. Give them an ability that allows them to expend a use of bardic inspiration when someone fails a check to increase result of the die to a minimum roll of 10 instead.

[Quietus]

If I wanted to make a bard that was less caster-y, then I'd just multiclass, to add the abilities I wanted outside of the usual Bard kit. Rogue and Fighter would be my primary targets, but I could see argument for lots of different bases. Paladin6/Bard14 could be fun, and would reduce your top level spells to level 7, pretty close to the 2/3 caster they were previously, but with a strong martial bent.

[Arkhios]

3.5 (and PF1e) Bards did get only up to 6th level spells, but they had a total caster level equal to their class level, and their spells scaled just as well as for classes that had up to 9th level spells, so saying they're not "full casters" is questionable at best. Maybe not per se, but close enough. At least compared to actual half casters: 3.5* paladin and ranger, whose caster level was equal to half their class level, and started getting spells at 4th class level.
(*PF1E paladin and ranger's caster level was equal to their class level -3)

FYI, caster level was the means that was used to portray each spellcaster's spell power, opposed to spell slot levels in 5e.

Anyway, what I would do in case of a half-caster 5e bard would probably give them some abilities more akin to their 3.X edition bardic music (or bardic performance if you're more into PF).

Obviously magical effects that are not spells, that grant lasting effects over their entire duration, not just for one roll during that duration. Either with or without concentration.

Most likely I would have these replace the current Bardic Inspiration mechanic, but possibly keeping the dice and recovery method.

[Sindeloke]

Uh, well, I would do this (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?637362-the-Bard-reimagined-as-a-half-caster).

Somewhat in line with Dienekes', Hytheter's, and Arkhios' suggestions, the class is based around performing Bardic Music, a spell-like concentration effect that buffs allies (with some spells that are basically ACFs that let you affect enemies instead). Honestly it's probably too based around bardic music. But they have their half-caster spell progression alongside that, and the remainder of the class budget is small proficiency bumps in the subclasses and a free infinite bonus action that lets them hand out half-Dashes and Help actions.

[Havlock]

If I wanted to make a bard that was less caster-y, then I'd just multiclass, to add the abilities I wanted outside of the usual Bard kit. Rogue and Fighter would be my primary targets, but I could see argument for lots of different bases. Paladin6/Bard14 could be fun, and would reduce your top level spells to level 7, pretty close to the 2/3 caster they were previously, but with a strong martial bent.

Yep totally. And if as a DM I wanted to enforce that design requirement I'd just say Bard has a max lvl of x, and/or the class is unavailable until a character has y lvls of a martial class.

[SLOTHRPG95]

If I wanted to make a bard that was less caster-y, then I'd just multiclass, to add the abilities I wanted outside of the usual Bard kit. Rogue and Fighter would be my primary targets, but I could see argument for lots of different bases. Paladin6/Bard14 could be fun, and would reduce your top level spells to level 7, pretty close to the 2/3 caster they were previously, but with a strong martial bent.

Depending on how you envision the Bard and what you want from Rogue, there might be some redundancy in terms of skill monkey-ing. Or hey, maybe not. Half-Elf (one of the classic Bard races) Rogue 6/Lore Bard X ends up with 12 skill proficiencies, eight of which have Expertise, which could fit a jack of many trades theme. Personally, I'd rather go Fighter 6 or 7/Bard X for a more distinct martial bent with less redundancy.

[Quietus]

Depending on how you envision the Bard and what you want from Rogue, there might be some redundancy in terms of skill monkey-ing. Or hey, maybe not. Half-Elf (one of the classic Bard races) Rogue 6/Lore Bard X ends up with 12 skill proficiencies, four of which have Expertise, which could fit a jack of many trades theme. Personally, I'd rather go Fighter 6 or 7/Bard X for a more distinct martial bent with less redundancy.

Absolutely! And the beautiful thing is, these are all valid options. You could even take Ranger or Druid, if I recall correctly, Bard originally required you to be a multiclass character with some Druid in there. Trading the absolute strength of spellcasting, for a much broader toolkit.

There are very few character pitches that would be appropriate for a 1/2 to 2/3 caster bard, that I couldn't resolve with multiclassing in some way. The beauty of Bard being versatile is that it can fit with lots of different styles. There's a few that would be a stretch - Bard/Barbarian is difficult unless you're trying to make a skald, Bard/Monk is just so MAD that it's hard to justify - but in general, for most variations of "I want a less casty bard", some flavor of Rogue or Fighter will do. Mastermind Rogue/Eloquence Bard would be a hell of a party support character, for example, or either Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster/Bard to get a martial take on a Bard, but with the Shield spell. Actually, now that's tempting, a swords bard X/arcane trickster 3 could achieve some truly ridiculous shenanigans.

::Edit:: Swashbuckler 3/Swords Bard X. Swashbuckler gives you charisma to initiative and a free disengage when you attack a target, Swords Bard gives you +10 feet of movement if you took the attack action. Swords Bard also gives you a fighting style (TWF, because your bonus action is suddenly less crowded), and the various flourishes. I think this could be a really fun setup.

[Bobthewizard]

Splitting a character about 50/50 between bard and rogue would give you better at-will damage than a bard, better spellcasting than an arcane trickster, and incredible skills. It wouldn't be top-tier power but it would still be fun and playable.