D&D 5E Bards Should Be Half-Casters in 5.5e/6e

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Yeah, this. They tried the half-caster Bard before, and it didn't work.

Just because one attempt fails doesn't mean that all versions of it will fail. There's a major difference between "Try the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result" and "tried one version, and gave up because it wasn't executed correctly", and WotC hasn't really learned how to find the correct balance between the two.

The 5E PHB version, however, does work. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

It works fine, but isn't perfect. "If it ain't perfect, it might be in line for improving", IMO.

 

[Yaarel]

The bard makes an excellent Merlin or enchanter-type magician - that’s the easiest refluff the (5e) bard can get. No only is it a good archetype for the mechanics, but as you said, it fits the name of the class! (it's missing the enchanting of items however).

Good point about the accurate Bard enchanting items. This is true for Celtic and Nordic.

My impression is, Celtic is about even charming inanimate objects, and Nordic is about imbuing ones mind into the object making the object an extention of self. Both are psionic concepts.

But in the tradition of D&D, the bard was (is) a wandering minestrel or troubadour, jack of all trade, sharing "features" with all classes. That's still the fluff they give it in the PHB. When the fantasy RPG bard is mentioned, Taliesin or Merlin aren't what come to mind in popular culture. Merlin actually, very much evokes the image of the wizard for the grand public. I'm not saying D&D should stick with popular culture, but those are the expectations people are coming to D&D with.

Happily, many D&Disms are now part of pop culture. That means D&D players have more responsibily to do the right thing.

The wandering troubadour bard would be best served as a half-caster IMO. I'm not too keen in making it a third-caster rogue archetype, for one thing because it would compete uncomfortably with the Arcane Trickster, and because the wandering troubadour bard has enough for itself to warrant a full class with it's own archetypes. At least, I believe that would best represent the expectation of a fantasy bard for a vast majority of people.

If the Rogue class has a "Troubador" subclass that is a partial caster using the Bard spell list along with the Rogue jack-of-all-trades skill niche, I am fine with that. But call it a "Troubador", not Bard.

So far, 5e designers have made subclasses that are partial casters for noncaster base classes. But it is also possible for a subclass of a fullcaster class to swap out spell slots for specific class features. In this way, the partial caster Troubador can be a subclass of the fullcaster Bard.

 

[Parmandur]

Just because one attempt fails doesn't mean that all versions of it will fail. There's a major difference between "Try the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result" and "tried one version, and gave up because it wasn't executed correctly", and WotC hasn't really learned how to find the correct balance between the two.

It works fine, but isn't perfect. "If it ain't perfect, it might be in line for improving", IMO.

Arguably, but I'm not feeling it. The Bard as is works more than adequately, neither over or under powered.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

4e threw the very concept of the Bard as a jack of all trades in a fire, and 5e spread the ashes and gave it one feature that bore the name that has only to do with skills.

The Bard in the last two editions was NEVER meant to be the jack of all trades as you knew it from 2e and 3e.

Well this is patently false.

The 4e bard could be built to be a primary healer, controller, or striker, had Jack of all trades and a feat that boosted it, and had no limit on how many classes it could MC. With MC and at least one or two paragon paths, Bards could even grab some Defender, though it was their weakest secondary role*.

*kinda. They could be built for a very swordmage style tricky kiter defender with decent control style, but making them to traditional tanking was hard.

5e gives them skills all over the place, a very wide spell list, ability to Jack other classes spells, and subclasses that cover roles the base class isn’t good at.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Arguably, but I'm not feeling it. The Bard as is works more than adequately, neither over or under powered.

Which is perfectly fine. Agree to disagree.

 

[Yaarel]

Why not both though? Certainly there can be some overlap, but having unique spells within each caster class could be a good thing.

Because the Druid is a fire elementalist, the Druid should have Fireball on the Druid spell list. But here Wizard niche protection interferes with class concept. Conversely the fire spells that the Druid class can access are appallingly subpar. Heh, and the "special" spell Storm of Vengeance is almost offensively subpar.

To restrict spells creates all kinds of nuisances.



It is better to let each spell stand on its own merit. Assign itva level that is comparable to other spells of the same level. Use the spells as legos to build whatever mage concept one wants.

Classes have various features, but spells need to be their own system.

 

[FrogReaver]

Because the Druid is a fire elementalist, the Druid should have Fireball on the Druid spell list. But here Wizard niche protection interferes with class concept. Conversely the fire spells that the Druid class can access are appallingly subpar. Heh, and the "special" spell Storm of Venveance is almost offensively subpar.

To restrict spells creates all kinds of nuisances.



It is better to let each spell stand on its own merit. Assign itva level that is comparable to other spells of the same level. Use the spells as legos to build whatever mage concept one wants.

Classes have various features, but spells need to be their own system.

I think you just don't like class based games.

 

[Yaarel]

I think you just don't like class based games.

It depends on the class. Some classes are designed well, with coherence of concept and mechanics, and strong balance with other classes. But some classes are done less well.

 

[Parmandur]

Which is perfectly fine. Agree to disagree.

On the Internet???

Heresy!

 

[Minigiant]

Arguably, but I'm not feeling it. The Bard as is works more than adequately, neither over or under powered.

The 5e bard works.

I just think that the Bard as a full caster with few unique spells and limited fantastical use of Bardic Inspiration is just leaving a ton of potential at the door. It feels to me like it was designed to function first and second then display a master of magical music third.