[3.5] Bard Spell list Changes Summary

[rjoyner6]

Actually, I think the reason they added the level requirement to the bard songs is so that people could NOT take levels in Virtuoso and still advance their bard songs. After all, bard songs are BARD songs; Virtuoso develops skill in their own song list. If I could use Virtuoso levels toward Bard songs, that would be having my cake and eating it too. All I'd pass up would be a REF save and a +1 in Bardic Knowledge. In fact, it was the prospect of getting so much and losing so little that was the reason I was planning to do it. Now there would be a real cost to multiclassing.

 

[chalcedony]

I gathered that the reason they added level requirements was to prevent people from taking one level in Bard and putting points into Perform, thus getting all the songs for free, although inspire greatness required actual levels to effect multiple creatures.

Like I opined, virtuoso is a bard that specializes in the bardsong ability, so I don't share the opinion that virtuosos should have their own bard songs. Their base attack bonus becomes that of a mage, and they lose a save. IMHO it's not overpowered because you can only sing one song at a time.

At this rate there will be hardly any need for virtuosos now...

 

[tarchon]

The one-level-wonder bard multiclass scheme only gets 1 bard song/day though. I never got the sense that some sorcerer who took one level of bard and bought Perform up to 12 ranks to get Inspire Greatness once a day was getting that good of a deal. It's really only bard multiclasses which are primarily bards or about half and half that get significant benefits from the old Perform mechanic, and, as I've often said, that makes perfect sense to me for the "jack of all trades." In my experience, you really need to have at least 3-4 songs per day available before the ability really starts making an impact. I routinely use 2 or 3 per combat.

There never was much need for Virtuoso to begin with. S&S really struck out with PrCs for the bard - through most of the book I had a hard time believing the authors had ever played the class in 3E, though the special MW instrument effects were kind of cute.

 

[rjoyner6]

It's not an "opinion" that virtuosos get their own bard songs. It's a fact of the Virtuoso class. Look up Virtuoso in S&S: the class's own unique songs are spelled out for you.

 

[Dthamilaye]

It is also Virtuoso class ability that they get all bard songs normally. Imho, that means they get all the new bard songs too. So taking virtuoso doesn't prevent getting bard songs. Of course, bard knowledge is a different thing.

I hate that they took away Plane Shift from bard .

Otherwise, not much to be sad for. Well, contact other plane too, but I don't know if the name has been altered or if the spell has been removed totally.

 

[chalcedony]

It is also Virtuoso class ability that they get all bard songs normally. Imho, that means they get all the new bard songs too. So taking virtuoso doesn't prevent getting bard songs.

S&S just says that they get all the (old) bard songs subject to meeting the Perform reqs, and that the bardic song uses stack. Of course, this is because they didn't write it for 3.5. But now they have new songs, and songs like inspire courage, inspire greatness, fascinate, etc give benefits for a higher bard level. So I guess it would really be up to a DM now to rule whether virtuoso levels should be considered bard levels to determine the strength of the song... or like I said, wait for a 3.5 S&S.

Then again, remember the mantra: nothing is final until you....

 

[Dave Turner]

There are many spells on the bard list that I don't imagine many bards choosing to learn. However, that doesn't eliminate the utility of the spell appearing on the spell list, since it opens up scroll and wand use of those spells. (I've found in my campaign that the bard tends to become a repository for scrolls and wands that the primary spellcasters don't want, which simply adds to the character's amazing versatility.)

I don't mean to sound overly critical, but could you explain this sentence? That seems like a very strange way to approach game design:

"What spells should we give the bard?"
"Well, there's three or four I think bards would really like. After that, I'll just fill up most of the list with some throw-away, trash spells that I don't think anyone would want anyway."

Why not just give the bard those few spells as spell-like abilities and ditch the spellcasting altogether? Shouldn't the bard spell list have lots of excellent choices? If the spell list seems a bit bare, shouldn't you either redesign some spells or design some new ones?

 

[wujenta]

I dont like the changes at all. Keen edge was one of the spells they used to be better fighters, and mirror move should not be in the new list, so the bard has lost the ability to "replace" a fighter. Now it is very difficult to play a combat bard. I had a bard/fighter 12/6 and it was very good in combat and could cast some cure spells and buff spells to make him better, like keen edge. He didnt do as much damage as the fighter in the group, but he made his part as a front fighter using mirror move to copy power attack from the fighter, spring attack from the rogue, and everything cool that the BBG did.

 

[JPL]

I think being able to cast in armor goes a long way towards letting a bard fill in for the fighter.

Having seen the new spell list, has anyone changed their opinion of the decision to have bard as the preferred class for gnomes?

 

[Limper]

I do hope they added something useful to the class because the Spell List changes are pretty weak compared to what they had... oh but I forget! 3.5 hates spells and magic!


3.5 Bard! Now with less use...