This Effin’ GM
Hero
Illicit? Well I never. (Roll deception 1d20+2: 4) I am using these simply to gain an upper hand the being selecte-DANG.
[MENTION=6788194]Zansy[/MENTION] No, quite the opposite - there is _nothing_ bad about the Bard. On top of that, it is arguably one of the strongest 5e classes (historically, it's been a sub-par class and subject of much ridicule trope-wise).
[MENTION=6788194]Zansy[/MENTION] Again, you're missing the point. Bard is likely comparable to "tier 1" now - MAYBE "tier 2".
Once you get to 3rd, you can choose to go down one of two paths - Lorebard, which allows you to poach spells from any class (and often earlier than said class gets it themselves), or Skald, which makes you a fighter in medium armor and shield.
Half-Elf + Bard = You Win All The Things.![]()
Are you saying I can't just *not* optimize? If I took lore, for instance, does that mean I have to take spells that are universally OP?
No. Because There could be lots of spells that are not strictly OP that could cater to what I want out of my bard better. You are expressing your concerns, and they are legitimate based on what you are telling me, but it's unfair to glare at me like a cheese munchkin before I even DID anything.
Based on Herobizkit's earlier statement that they prefer playing Bards, I believe they are more celebrating that the bard is (from a mechanics standpoint) finally in a position to stand "with the big boys", vs. being stuck in that 5th wheel position.
If that is the case, then I genuinely don't understand what the fuss is about. Did he want to play a bard first or something?
I think he was excited for you to be able to play a bard and have it be able to shine as well as other classes. He was sharing your enthusiasm but maybe enthusiastic about something different than what you were enthusiastic about.If that is the case, then I genuinely don't understand what the fuss is about. Did he want to play a bard first or something?