Bard namechange to Warlock

[Darklone]

Bards forever!

I still think it's a problem of the players if they don't like bards, not a problem of the bard class...

Your proposals are nice for flavor, but I still would rather see a sorcerer as warlock. A bard simply lacks the evocations usually associated with a warlock (fightermage that he is).

 

[hong]

I too tend to see the sorcerer as being a better base for a "warlock" type. They both cast spells in the same manner, but taking into account the rest of the class skills and abilities, the sorc is the better fit. I can't really see a warlock using a rapier, fiddling around with Use Magic Device skill, or wearing light armour.

 

[Zerovoid]

Re: Bards forever!

I still think it's a problem of the players if they don't like bards, not a problem of the bard class...

Your proposals are nice for flavor, but I still would rather see a sorcerer as warlock. A bard simply lacks the evocations usually associated with a warlock (fightermage that he is).

I always like the bard class in 2nd edition. It was, and still is, probably my favorite class. I like to be able to do just about anything pretty good. While I still like bards, I would not play one as written in 3e. Only 4 skill points, and worse fighting and spells than a cleric does not make a good class.

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Bards forever!

I always like the bard class in 2nd edition. It was, and still is, probably my favorite class. I like to be able to do just about anything pretty good. While I still like bards, I would not play one as written in 3e. Only 4 skill points, and worse fighting and spells than a cleric does not make a good class.

?? The 3E bard is pretty much a straight port of the 2E bard. It can do everything the 2E bard could do, and shares most of the weaknesses as well. The only substantial difference is that the 3E bard doesn't have a spellbook and uses spontaneous casting instead.

 

[Pazu]

Re: Re: Re: Bards forever!

?? The 3E bard is pretty much a straight port of the 2E bard. It can do everything the 2E bard could do...

Except hurl fireballs.

I seem to recall that due to the varying experience point requirements for levels, bards could actually hurl fireballs earlier in their careers than wizards could. I might be misremembering, though.



--Pazu

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Bards forever!

Except hurl fireballs.

Yeah, well, personally I think that's a _good_ thing.

I seem to recall that due to the varying experience point requirements for levels, bards could actually hurl fireballs earlier in their careers than wizards could. I might be misremembering, though.

It's quite possible. Those were the good ol' surreal, wacky days of 2E....

 

[LostSoul]

I too tend to see the sorcerer as being a better base for a "warlock" type. They both cast spells in the same manner, but taking into account the rest of the class skills and abilities, the sorc is the better fit. I can't really see a warlock using a rapier, fiddling around with Use Magic Device skill, or wearing light armour.

It all makes some sense. Swap a rapier for a longsword (or any other martial weapon). Use Magic Device exists because, well, the guy studies magic. And maybe he's never had the time to learn how to fight in heavier armours, because he's busy learning magics.

Hit points are a little low, though.

 

[hong]

It all makes some sense. Swap a rapier for a longsword (or any other martial weapon). Use Magic Device exists because, well, the guy studies magic. And maybe he's never had the time to learn how to fight in heavier armours, because he's busy learning magics.

That's not quite my point. Why bother with UMD when as a sorc, you would get access to all the arcane spellcaster items? Similarly, the point about light armour is not that the warlock needs to justify not wearing heavier armour, but that he needs to justify having light armour proficiency in the first place.

 

[firegold]

Re: Bards forever!

I still think it's a problem of the players if they don't like bards, not a problem of the bard class...

I couldn't agree more. The bard has some unique abilities that can really come in handy. In a party of, say, six 1st level characters, you can "inspire courage" and give ALL of them +1 to hit, +1 to damage. If your party has a lot of dealings with NPCs, there is no finer negotiator than the bard. And only a bard can walk out of a tavern with more money than she walked in with. . .
Give the bard a chance.

 

[simonski]

That's not quite my point. Why bother with UMD when as a sorc, you would get access to all the arcane spellcaster items? Similarly, the point about light armour is not that the warlock needs to justify not wearing heavier armour, but that he needs to justify having light armour proficiency in the first place.

Well, one should not look just at the best combination of rules, but what suits the character

If a wizards was a better class than the sorcerer I could just as well play the sorcerer if it fits the theme of the character im developing It's all about the fun