D&D 5E The Bard: A missed opportunity.

[AverageCitizen]

I feel like critics are under-valuing the defining nature of the composition of a class's spell list. I think it's easy to say wizards have spell lists and 9th level spells, bards have spell lists and 9th level spells, therefore bards = wizards. But the actual content of the spell list really distinguishes a character, IMO.

That is why I don't like the spell lists, not because of the content, but because of the way it is presented. To find out what a class is like you have to do 45 minutes of homework. Still, that is just a presentation issue.

 

[Imaro]

You are correct, the ally can choose to spend it or not.
A combat is unlikely to last more than 10 minutes, but it's also unlikely that a party will get through more than a couple combats in 10 minutes, even if rushing from room to room. If the ally does not roll within the "sweet spot" where a +1d6 or +1d8 would likely make a difference, then the inspiration will expire. In fast paced 5e combat, you may not get more than 2-3 turns per encounter. If a character's opponent dies and they cannot reach another foe, that's one less turn.

Yes but there are multiple attack rolls, ability checks and saving throws made within a single combat, over a relatively shorter period of time... thus you have a greater chance of getting an opportunity to use the inspiration die in a beneficial way. I'm still not seeing how it's better to wait until a specific check is about to be made and then cast it... because you don't know what the ally will roll for that check... in combat it actually has better odds of being used at some point which is actually contrary to the position you stated.

So, there's no guarantee the ability will be used. The bard uses their signature ability and nothing happens.

Isn't this always a risk with a buff? That whoever is buffed is essentially lucky enough in their roll not to need it... or rolls so low it doesn't help? How is this complaint specific to inspiration?

There's the same chance for rolls negating the usefulness of bardic inspiration out of combat. But there's less chance of someone losing their turn due to a stun or being unable to reach an opponent or the like. With one less variable, it's slightly more reliable. But still not necessarily useful.

What does a lost turn have to do with it? A trap sprung while out of combat could stun an ally, of course out of combat you usually have less rolls over a longer period of time so it's more likely the inspiration could wear off before you get to use it.. I'm really not grasping the logic you are using here to make this assertion...

 

[Viridian]

For anyone who feels that inspiration is underpowered, I'd encourage you to try the "tick off your DM for fun and profit" combo with Lore. Bane and Cutting words can absolutely ruin the day of otherwise nasty baddies. Ogre runs past your party to go squish your Wizard? Good luck with that. Said Wizard casts a "save or die" effect on the big bad? Good luck saving. Vicious Mockery and the like are just icing on the cake.

 

[Sailor Moon]

(Pest though? I'm a little insulted.)

I'm really confused by the remark about being a pest from Umbran. I didn't know stating one's opinion about a class that you would like to have changed is being a pest. Unless being a pest on these boards is when you don't agree with someone no matter how much they try and tell you your wrong.

 

[Sailor Moon]

Relying on "spell lists" is very lazy design and it really shows in the Bard class.

 

[Imaro]

Relying on "spell lists" is very lazy design and it really shows in the Bard class.

Or one could say it's consolidated and elegant design... depending on your P.o.V

 

[SigmaOne]

Relying on "spell lists" is very lazy design and it really shows in the Bard class.

Ha! "I don't like it, therefore it's lazy." That's a new one.

 

[Mistwell]

Relying on "spell lists" is very lazy design and it really shows in the Bard class.

You thought "Static ability you must get at X level" was more elegant than "choice of a variety of abilities at that level, which can be increased in power when used with a higher level ability"? I don't. I think the way they did it is much more elegant.

 

[AverageCitizen]

Relying on "spell lists" is very lazy design and it really shows in the Bard class.

They used their magic system to represent a class that uses magic. Saying that is lazy is like saying the fighter design is lazy because it uses d20s to attack.

 

[Gladius Legis]

One level of rogue and they can.
Okay, that is a nice bonus. But it still only means a bard is 15%

At 1st level. Expertise eventually accounts for up to a 30% difference. And even 15% is a big deal, especially in bounded accuracy.

Also, Rogue levels aren't part of the Wizard class.

If you're building a charming enchanter, you'd most certainly bump Cha and pick a relevant background.

Not before maxing out Intelligence. And the only ability that relies on CHA the Enchanter has is at Lv. 14 and isn't exactly an ability that makes me want to race my CHA to 20. Bards cast with their CHA and want to get it up to 20 ASAP, though.

They're comparable, but one is a debuff and the other is a buff. Debuffs are much more wizardly. And the bard relying on an evocation spell as their signature spell to aid attacks is... weird.
--edit--
It's actually a pretty good example of how the 5e bard misses the mark. They get bane and faerie fire and seem much more focused on self-offense. The 5e bard is either the healer or the damage dealer, with a dash of skill money.

1e Bards could cast Call Lightning. 2e Bards could cast Fireball. And didn't even need a Magical Secrets-like ability to do it.

Now, I think the concept of the Bard has evolved past those direct damage spells, but there is precedent for Bards to use Evocation, and directly damaging evocations at that. Faerie Fire at least serves the Bard's role as a combat leader.