Bards and healing magic?

Okay, anybody got an Idea what the rationalization behind this one was? I've just ruled that no bard in my games can cast healing magic, because in my eyes, that just doesn't fit the character of the Bard, and it takes too much away from the cleric/druid characters (I'm actually trying to get someone to PLAY on of them...)

-Alla

As far as I can tell, the bard's intended niche in D&D is as the jack-of-all-trades; they can do a bit of what everyone else can do, and healing is part of that.

You are having trouble trying to get somebody play a cleric, but no trouble having them play a bard?

Now that is different. Nearly every party I have every heard of has a cleric, and I seen nary a bard in all of my adventuring career (except the one that I played).

omedon said:

You are having trouble trying to get somebody play a cleric, but no trouble having them play a bard?

Now that is different. Nearly every party I have every heard of has a cleric, and I seen nary a bard in all of my adventuring career (except the one that I played).

Click to expand...

We had a bard in our party once, but that was some time ago. The problem is that the class is really boring to play in combat, and ours was a pretty combat-heavy campaign. Singing to inspire courage is a nice way to help the other PCs, but it means the bard's player has a strong chance of falling asleep during fights.

Bards in combat

Now this is strange. My recently deceased bard had some fightertype levels, but that's not the only reason why he was good in combat. Tumble plus good movement and flanking, some boost spells for friends, aid another, blocking positions with full defence.... sitting on the chandelier and swinging around ...

And singing while fighting. He was not at all useless in combat.

As for bards and healing magic: They got it cause they don't have evocation spells. For taking something away from druids and clerics: No idea what you are talking about. No bard can ever cope with even a multiclassed fighter cleric concerning the healing power. He simply does not have enough spells. He MAY use wands of cure light wounds, but only with Use Magic Device like every rogue could.

Personally I like the healing for him more than some flashy boomboom spells like he used to have in 2nd edition.

Re: Bards in combat

Darklone said:

And singing while fighting. He was not at all useless in combat.

Click to expand...

Nobody said bards were _useless_ in combat. The inspire courage ability can be a lifesaver. However, while singing, the bard's _player_ is effectively doing nothing each round.

Re: Re: Bards in combat

hong said:

Nobody said bards were _useless_ in combat. The inspire courage ability can be a lifesaver. However, while singing, the bard's _player_ is effectively doing nothing each round.

Click to expand...

I disagree. He is doing as much as the rogues or fighters player. Move and roll attacks.

Re: Re: Re: Bards in combat

Darklone said:

I disagree. He is doing as much as the rogues or fighters player. Move and roll attacks.

Click to expand...

Hm, for some reason we assumed the bard couldn't do anything while singing. Oh well, that's another reason to play a bard then.

I played Fighter type characters all over again, and then switched to bard, and I really loved playing him, even when I was near complete useless in regard to direct damage dealing (didn`t hit, and when hit, didn`t do much damage). But hey, who cares?
I was able to throw some nice buffing spells in (here a cat`s grace, there a bull strength), and keep the fighters up (and I used cure light wands for the job, and only in emergency cases relied on my spells).
When my Use Magic Device rank was high enough, I even throw around some Magic Missiles and protected myself with a wand of shield.
I played the bard from 5th to 11th level and I stopped only because the camaign ended (at least for now).

In another campaign a player decided to play a halfing bard-rogue - no combat abilities expect bardic music buffing, and I believe the player has still much fun. (And yes, he could use sneak attack - if he wouldn`t play the herald`s trumpet during battle. )

But back to the reason why bards can cast healing spells:
Why shouldn`t they? They are Jack of All Trades, right?
And they can`t cast real damaging spells (shout isn`t very powerful... ). He is able to buff the other characters (Diviniation spells, social skills can never substitute a tough fight, but they may avoid the unncessary combats or allow the characters to prepare for them.)
The bard in combat is not to be meant as the focus. That is not his job. He is just there to keep it going on, so later he can report about the "tale of the Krust the Barbarian, Mialee the Wizard, Lidda the rogue". The story of "Elric, the Bard" isn`t meant to be interesting. Talking about yourself becomes boring to listeners. They tend to not believe your stories if they are about yourself.
("Yes, for sure. And then you killed the dragon? With that pitiful rapier, or what? I don`t believe a single word!" VS "Please, tell us the story about Krusk, the Half Orc Barbarian, when he defended the city against the invading orc armies!")
Short: To do his job, the bard does not have to be powerful in combat on its own (expect for his own defense) - but he has to be powerful in support for his comrades. And an important part of this is healing magic.
(And why don`t we hear tales where the heroes are healed by bards? Well, what sounds more impressive, what is the better story: The story about Krusk and Henry slaying two dozens orcs trying to invade the city, or the sory of Krusk and Henry running into two dozens orc, killing 4 of them, running back to the bard who heals them, running back towards the orcs and slaying 5 of them, but dropping Henry on the floor so the bard must come to heal him, then slaying another number of orcs, running back to the bard ... and so on... )

*bump*