• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Taking Bards Back to Their Roots

airwalkrr

Adventurer
I don't like the Fochluchan Lyrist for several reasons. First of all, you can't take levels in the class until you are 11th level (because the class is obviously so overpowered... yea right). Second of all, it requires three different classes (bard, druid, and rogue), one of which was not a requirement of the original bard. Bards in 1st edition never took levels of druid. They were fighter/thieves turned bard, a class which cast spells from the druid list and gained bardic music abilities upon which 3rd edition's bardic music abilities are based. Not that I am a big fan of the mechanics for becoming a bard, but the bard class itself I liked. For that matter there was never anything wrong with letting players be a bard at 1st level and giving them the fighting ability of a thief. Such a thing is pretty similar to a 3rd edition bard who simply casts spells from the druid spell list, hence the idea.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Arkhandus

First Post
*sigh*
Such a petty argument against the Fochlucan Lyrist, which is basically the 3E version of the 1E bard. If they gain druid spells from the class, what's wrong flavor-wise from requiring some druid levels beforehand? And so far as I know, didn't 1E bards need some significant levels usually, by the rules as written, before they could become bards? I just don't see the logic for your dislike of the prestige class.

.......

If you are in dire need of a standard 3E bard with druid spells, and simply must have it even if you have to gouge out poor Odin's one remaining eye to get it, then fine.

Drop bard skill points to 4 + Int mod. Lower Reflex save to poor. Remove armor and shield proficiencies from the bard. Remove the no-arcane-spell-failure-in-light-armor benefit. Reduce number of bardic music uses per day to equal 1/2 bard level, rounded up. Reduce bardic music bonus to Intelligence modifier + 1/2 bard level, rounded up. Remove all spells from the bard spell list that are not exclusive to bards. Add to bard spell list all druid spells from 0th to 6th level. Keep bard spellcasting otherwise as-is, including it being arcane despite its basic effects (not like fey themselves don't become sorcerers on occasion, being innately magical).

Then, just maybe, possibly, the Bard might've lost enough general utility and prowess to compensate for the significant direct-offense and direct-defense boost of nitroglycerine that the Druid spell list will be giving him. Because I know you'd just spit if anyone insisted the Bard must give up his decent Base Attack Bonus advancement for that raw eldritch power.

*flame strikes the bard in derision and escapes through an obscuring mist and tree stride*
 

airwalkrr

Adventurer
I don't share your perception of the druid spell list as being enormously powerful in terms of blasting potential. Looking at the list, I see a few spells with significant combat utility in the bard's range.

Flame strike is the biggest offender, a spell many bards under this system would probably pick up. But they would not gain it until 10th level, and even then would only be capable of doing so once per day baring extreme circumstances.

Entangle is a good battlefield control spell. But while its area is huge, so are its limitations, which in many cases makes color spray or even grease relatively similar in utility. Entangle is limited to areas with vegetation, is not dismissible, and hampers, but does not remove a creature's spellcasting potential. Color spray cannot be used against constructs and undead, and certainly has a smaller area, but is more detrimental at lower levels. Entangle is more powerful in the situations in which it can be used, but it is certainly not leaps and bounds ahead.

Flaming sphere is another good blasting spell for low levels, but hardly an overpowered one. Call lightning and call lightning storm are very similar spells, but they have the limitations of being useful only outdoors. Produce flame to a much lesser extent can be used in a similar method. All of these spells are useful as blasting spells, but much less so than sorcerer/wizard spells. They certainly are not going to turn bards into blasting machines like sorcerers and wizards. They do not turn druids into such.

And of course there is fire seeds. A spell bards would not receive until 16th level. A potent blasting spell indeed, but again hardly a dealbreaker given its limited targetting potential. I've found druids often prefer the area of flame strike anyway.

Ice storm is mildly useful, but as a 4th level spell, it isn't any more powerful than shout, and in general shout is more detrimental to enemy spellcasters.

So let us look at the means a bard has to deal direct damage. The list is limited to summon monster I through VI, shatter (in limited circumstances), sound burst, shout, shadow conjuration, shadow evocation, and greater shout. A bard's ability to deal damage is quite limited until he gains 4th level spells at 10th level, but shadow conjuration and shadow evocation can very easily increase his damage potential in the right circumstances, far more than any druid spell of similar level. Compare that to the druid list up to 6th level. The druid gets produce flame, summon nature's ally I through VI, chill metal/heat metal, flaming sphere, call lightning, flame strike, ice storm, call lightning storm, wall of fire, and fire seeds. In all the bard would gain a few more blasting options at low levels, and nothing significant at high levels besides flame strike, although it could be argued that a bard who wants to blast would have more reliable options with druid spells than bard spells like shadow evocation.

Overall, is it really that big of a difference? Bards are still limited to a very small number of spells per day. That means they certainly won't be outshining anyone when it comes to blasting spells. They can't even outlast a wizard much less a sorcerer or druid. The bard loses a number of enchantments but I have rarely known bards to specialize in those anyway since many effective (like hypnotize and suggestion) can be more easily simulated with bardic music.

I don't think giving them druid spells would require such strong nerfing of all a bard's other abilities (if any nerfing was required at all). The main benefit is that bards have more utility in the average campaign since druid spells, although focused on nature, are less specialized in their effects than bard spells. Is this really a bad thing for a class that is often decried (although falsely IMHO) for being useless in campaigns with little roleplaying? So the bard can deal a little more damage than before in a limited capacity. Does that make the class unbalanced? I hardly think so. The bard gains the ability to deal a little more damage at the expense of some of the more useful arcane battlefield control spells. That seems quite a fair trade and it accomplishes some of the druidic flavor that was present in the 1e bard without requiring a prestige class or other such silliness.

And actually, I wouldn't object strongly to giving the bard a poor base attack bonus. Bards do not have much incentive to spend time attacking anyway.
 

airwalkrr

Adventurer
You also mentioned defensive spells so I will touch on them briefly. The big powerhouses of defensive spells for bards are enormously useful. Mirror image, blur, invisibility, several stat boosters, haste, good hope, heroism, freedom of movement, greater invisibility, greater heroism, and heroes' feast are all big winners. Compare that list to the druid's. The druid gets more stat boosters, but its other offerings are more paltry. Magic fang, greater magic fang, barkskin, resist energy, protection from energy, freedom of movement, death ward, stoneskin, ironwood (occassionally useful) all round out the druid's defensive array. Some of the higher level spells are definitely handy, but often in a more limited way. Arcane defensive and enhancing spells are universally better and the bard has many more of those. So overall, the bard is trading buffing potential for blasting potential, but the shift is not enormous in either direction.
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top