Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="roguerouge" data-source="post: 4627345" data-attributes="member: 13855">OT: I recommend giving the player a lore book option. With this house rule, the player still casts the same number of spells per day, but drops the &quot;spells known&quot; class feature in favor of a lore book that works exactly like a wizard's spell book. There are so many spells in the splat books that are flavorful that I'd love to see in play but that I'd never, in a million years take as one of a handful of spells I'll ever know. In my experience, the lore book option ends up promoting flexibility in the long term. /OTMax out diplomacy, bluff, sense motive, and use magic device. Do me a favor. Ask your DM point blank if an illusion or a charm will ever defeat a big bad. A lot of DMs who are inexperienced with bards get &quot;frustrated&quot; that the bard allows the PCs to subvert and recruit guards rather than murdering them in cold blood. They think of the use of illusions, enchantments, and diplomacy to deal with encounters nonviolently and creatively as &quot;broken&quot; and &quot;cheating.&quot; If your DM says something other than an enthusiastic &quot;Yes, you can defeat big bads with your class skills,&quot; then you have a &quot;Bards at the Back of the Bus&quot; DM. In that case, don't challenge him, but don't play a bard. Play a conjurer or a barbarian. That kind of DM will never let your bard shine, and it's deeply unfair to play in a campaign where the evoker's class abilities are always relevant, but yours aren't.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="roguerouge, post: 4627345, member: 13855"] OT: I recommend giving the player a lore book option. With this house rule, the player still casts the same number of spells per day, but drops the "spells known" class feature in favor of a lore book that works exactly like a wizard's spell book. There are so many spells in the splat books that are flavorful that I'd love to see in play but that I'd never, in a million years take as one of a handful of spells I'll ever know. In my experience, the lore book option ends up promoting flexibility in the long term. /OT Max out diplomacy, bluff, sense motive, and use magic device. Do me a favor. Ask your DM point blank if an illusion or a charm will ever defeat a big bad. A lot of DMs who are inexperienced with bards get "frustrated" that the bard allows the PCs to subvert and recruit guards rather than murdering them in cold blood. They think of the use of illusions, enchantments, and diplomacy to deal with encounters nonviolently and creatively as "broken" and "cheating." If your DM says something other than an enthusiastic "Yes, you can defeat big bads with your class skills," then you have a "Bards at the Back of the Bus" DM. In that case, don't challenge him, but don't play a bard. Play a conjurer or a barbarian. That kind of DM will never let your bard shine, and it's deeply unfair to play in a campaign where the evoker's class abilities are always relevant, but yours aren't. [/QUOTE]

Verification