D&D 5E (2014) Are you happy with the Bard being a full spellcaster?

[TerraDave]

what I would like to see is something that makes it easier for bards to multiclass, this gives a nod to 1E and makes a less magic bard an easy option.

But I have no problem with the full-caster as a default.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I need a "Just plain don't care at all" option. I don't play bards. My players don't play bards. They may technically exist but feature not a whit in any game I ever run. I doubt that will change. May as well make them all gnomes too.

Edit: No, I take that back. After 30 seconds additonal consideration I think that making a bard MORE of a spellcaster lowers my level of "approval."

 

[Gadget]

Answering the poll is a little premature. It is a bit hard to say without seeing the final product. I'm convinced that 'full caster' doesn't carry the same weight it did in previous editions, so much of the histrionics over the issue will prove to be misguided. I'm also a bit surprised that a similar outcry did not happen over the Ranger and Paladin; many were hoping for spelless versions of those classes as well, either through auras and special abilities, or some such design. It seems clear that the designers are going to have the spellcasting system take on the burden of many special and supernatural like abilities rather than have a bunch of half-backed subsystems for each class. I for one, am interested in how it turns out, as this seems to be one area where they are innovating a little in the design.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm very happy, for multiple reasons.

1) My personal view of the Bard archetype has always been more magical and less skills guy.

2) Beguiler was always one of my favorite 3e classes. Bard being a Beguiler + bardic music is a great class chassis.

3) It shows WotC is willing to mix up the class stories for 5e a little bit, especially for a class that has always been somewhat ambiguous in its design goals. Sorcerer had me bummed out a little bit, but warlock and bard show that WotC is still willing to put some novelty into its design.

4) There are several posters who I use as a personal barometer for whether WotC is making good choices. Based on those reactions, I think WotC has made a solid choice here.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't want them to know the amount of spells as a full caster.
Something like 10-13 spells known at level 20. And most of the spells over 6th level would be improved or mass versions of lesser spells. Mass Heal, yes. Meteor Storm, no. Regeneration, yes. Earthquake, no.

Well, doesn't it require us to actually know what is in the bard's spell list before we can figure out whether being a "full caster" or "half-caster" actually matters? I mean... if Earthquake was on the bard's spell list, then "full" or "half" really doesn't make any difference at that point, because it's the spell itself (and not the amount) that is the issue there.

If people are associating "full caster" with "breadth of the Wizard's spell list!"... then sure, I'd understand their concerns. But that really can't be it, can it? No one actually believes that because the bard is "full caster" that the bard's spell list is now going to include all kinds of non-bard spells just to fill it out, do they? That seems like a jump in logic way too out there to believe.

 

[Minigiant]

Well, doesn't it require us to actually know what is in the bard's spell list before we can figure out whether being a "full caster" or "half-caster" actually matters? I mean... if Earthquake was on the bard's spell list, then "full" or "half" really doesn't make any difference at that point, because it's the spell itself (and not the amount) that is the issue there.

If people are associating "full caster" with "breadth of the Wizard's spell list!"... then sure, I'd understand their concerns. But that really can't be it, can it? No one actually believes that because the bard is "full caster" that the bard's spell list is now going to include all kinds of non-bard spells just to fill it out, do they? That seems like a jump in logic way too out there to believe.

That's why I at "wait and see"'

Really it is how Next handles spells of the 6th level and higher. Mearls stated that these are the game changer spell and that's why you only get 1 of each. I just don't see bards as people who have problem erasing spells outside of a select few types (healing, charms, and illusions) if any. That is what I wonder about.

How will they give bards spells of the 6th or higher level without making them Big Damn Mages who cast a spell and an obstacle saves or disappears? Because that is what high level magic in D&D does.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

That is the thing.

I don't mind if the bard has the slots for a full spellcaster. 4/3/3/3/2/1/1/1/1.

I don't want them to know the amount of spells as a full caster.
Something like 10-13 spells known at level 20. And most of the spells over 6th level would be improved or mass versions of lesser spells. Mass Heal, yes. Meteor Storm, no. Regeneration, yes. Earthquake, no.

And that's fair.

I'd also like to see spells with a musical component, and the like, though I could see subclasses filling some of those roles.

 

[fjw70]

Insufficient data.

Agreed. I have very little preconceived notions about the bard. I look forward to seeing the full rules..

 

[tuxgeo]

The "full spellcaster" designation is a mite misleading: in the playtest, the Bard had few Spells Known, starting with 2 Spells Known at 2nd level and rising to 11 of them at 19th-20th levels. If a Bard is truly limited that way, he or she doesn't have the versatility either of a Cleric (choose any spell on the list daily!) or of a Wizard (learn additional spells from scrolls and books).

If the final game has the Bard's number of "Spells Known" similarly restricted, that would keep the Bard from stepping on the toes of the other full 'casters IMHO, and that would make it alright with me.

Of course, we don't have the final game yet, so it's still too early to tell.

 

[Remathilis]

Put me down for like. I think it will allow bard spells to scale properly and put them on par with clerics.

That is something that is bothering me in these discussions: a bard is a buffer, healer and warrior with unique powers; half caster. A cleric is a buffer, healer, and warrior with unique powers; full caster. Why?