Bard & Sorcerer - what should they be?

[Kzach]

I'm curious to see what the majority think these classes should be in terms of role and power source. There seems to be a common opinion that the bard is going to be an arcane hybrid of some sort and that the sorcerer will be an arcane controller.

I think this is way off the mark.

Personally, I think the bard should be a primal leader, but then I'm a fan of the 1e bard I think the sorcerer should be a primal striker, mainly because I'd like to see them get more elemental based powers and because everyone I knew who ever made a sorcerer, gave them all the big damage spells with just a few basic utility spells.

A sorcerer with elemental-based striker powers would be awesome. Not sure what class features they should have, but should definitely be elemental in nature.

The bard, to me, failed in 3.x because the concept was entirely wrong for the game. In 4e where your class is basically defined by its combat role, I think the entire concept of the 3.x bard is full of fail. By returning to its 1e roots, I think you'd have a far more solid concept to work with and therefore a far better class all 'round.

The bard as a primal leader would be an in-your-face leader, striking with primal forces and inspiring comrades with their courage, tenacity and resilience. I like the celtic ideal of the bard a helluva lot more than the renaissance romanticised version of a fop.

 

[Alarius]

The bard in 3.5 was only full of fail because his bonuses were morale bonuses and thus didn't stack with the cleric buffs (which were equally good). At the same time the Bard didn't have enough combat power in itself and the spell selection was too limited.

You can make the bard a very interesting character in 3.5 if you change his song a bit and provide him with more spells per day and spells known. The bard standing as he did in 3.0 core and 3.5 core is too weak a class to act its role ("leader") without heavy multiclassing (which ruins the concept).

 

[doctorhook]

I'm curious to see what the majority think these classes should be in terms of role and power source. There seems to be a common opinion that the bard is going to be an arcane hybrid of some sort and that the sorcerer will be an arcane controller.

I think this is way off the mark.

...

Wait, who thinks the Bard is gonna be an Arcane 'Hybrid'*? I thought it was a shoe-in for Arcane leader, having been tentatively described as such on several occasions by WotC staff....

*I really hope we don't see any 'hybrid' role classes, at least not any more 'hybrid' than the Paladin is a defender/leader hybrid. (Which is to say, he ain't; he's a defender with some leader-y flavour.) A 'hybrid' role would undermine the effectiveness of the combat role system; why have roles at all if we're going to start making classes that don't fit them properly? [/rant]

 

[Quartz]

The bardic Bard operates on people's minds. That bespeaks a Psychic power source. So Psychic Defender or Controller? (Note that I'm not fully au fait with all the lingo yet).

The loremaster Bard should be an Arcane type. Again Defender or Controller?

 

[Shroomy]

I'm fairly confident that WoTC has already stated that the bard is an arcane leader.

 

[drothgery]

I'm fairly confident that WoTC has already stated that the bard is an arcane leader.

Yup. And they've already stated the sorcerer is an arcane controller, too.

 

[lutecius]

The bard as a primal leader would be an in-your-face leader, striking with primal forces and inspiring comrades with their courage, tenacity and resilience. I like the celtic ideal of the bard a helluva lot more than the renaissance romanticised version of a fop.

Do you really need another Warlord?

The celtic bards have been poets/scholars since before the roman conquest.[sblock=pedantic fit]The word originated in ancient Gaul and specifically meant "poet, singer", even before coming into Gaelic and Welsh.
Strabo, Poseidonius and Lucan decribed Bard as a class of poets and scholars with some religious status.
So maybe not fops, but definitely not war leaders.[/sblock]Making them Primal might reinforce the historical connexion with the Druid, but I doubt there will be anything much historical about 4e's shapechanger druid anyway. So Arcane Leader is as good as anything else.

I hope he and the Sorcerer won't be yet more blasters (sonic attack as the Bard's main theme: blergh!) and will have truely different mechanics.

I also hope the bard will be the new Enchanter instead of Psion, like i've read somewhere (blergh again)

 

[Kzach]

The word originated in ancient Gaul and specifically meant "poet, singer", even before coming into Gaelic and Welsh.

Might want to look a bit further than just a dictionary definition.

 

[Armadillo]

The bardic Bard operates on people's minds. That bespeaks a Psychic power source. So Psychic Defender or Controller? (Note that I'm not fully au fait with all the lingo yet).

Yeah, my thought is that the Bard would work best as a Psychic Leader.

 

[Steely Dan]

Yup. And they've already stated the sorcerer is an arcane controller, too.

Yup, and they confirmed the Shaman class as a Leader (I'm thinking Primal).