Rangers were given a small amount of spells. Bards have never had a lot either.
D&D 5E Legends & Lore 03.10.2014: Full-spellcasting Bard
Rangers were given a small amount of spells. Bards have never had a lot either.
I believe the key to making the bard feel boarding is to keep the number of spells known/prepar
ed low.
Like 1+half bard level.
Or equal to their spell slots as current.
That way the bard doesn't have enough options to "cast away problems" and is forced to use their skills and weapons.
ed low.Like 1+half bard level.
Or equal to their spell slots as current.
That way the bard doesn't have enough options to "cast away problems" and is forced to use their skills and weapons.
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
They did have music abilities, but were limited to charm effects in 1E. Spells were druidic then with an abbreviated progression. I would still consider the 1E Bard to be in the "partial caster" category myself. (For those interested, WotC posted the 1E Bard Extract on their website.)
Mixed feelings personally on a "full caster" bard -- I'll have to see what that means in practice. I've always rather enjoyed the "jack of all trades" bard approach myself. Heck, a bard was the *first* character I played in 3E!
*****
Who's the iconic character from fiction for the D&D bard, anyway? I've always thought Fflewdur Fflam from The Chronicles of Prydain or Thom Merrilin from Wheel of Time were good examples, and they're closer to the "jack of all trades" model in my mind.
Last edited:
Falling Icicle
Adventurer
Am I the only one that kind of misses the days when wizards were the only "full" spellcasters that got up to 9th level spells? Being a full caster meant something back then. Bards could only get 6th level spells, rangers could only get 3rd, paladins could only get 4th, and clerics and druids could only get up to 7th. Now, it seems like being a full caster really isn't that big of a deal, since they hand it out like candy these days.
DMZ2112
Chaotic Looseleaf
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Rangers were half-casters, just like now. Bards were too, but they made them full casters (and in 2nd edition they leveled so much faster than wizards that they often effectively had more spells until high levels). Now I agree I don't much like that, but I don't see it supporting your point of, "I think just giving the classes spells is becoming a default for Next." Other than Bards getting more spells than normal, how is giving classes spells becoming default? Don't you at least need a few of those things to call it a trend of some sort?
Last edited:
TarionzCousin
Second Most Angelic Devil Ever
I didn't see any reference to Bardic Knowledge in the article. I hope it isn't going away, because as a DM I rely on it for my current group to "know" any backstory--they have very few ranks in Knowledge skills among the six of them (two or three, I think).
That's what the article's bard looks like to me, too: fewer "bardic" abilities.
My vote goes to Felimid mac Fal, the title character from the "Bard" series of five books by Keith Taylor. He's Irish, plays a magical harp, and fights pretty well while adventuring far from home.
You are right -- the article referred to "bardic music" and it's likely talking about "bardic performance"
and not "bardic knowledge".
I'm actually fine with bardic knowledge, but I don't like bards having both bardic knowledge and expertise: it means that the skill-monkey archetype is now better filled by the bard than the rogue (in that a third level rogue is objectively better at more skills than a third-level rogue). But that is a different point.
Similar Threads
