Bardic Rant
- Thread starter Belen
- Start date
Tsyr
Explorer
Re: Bards are illusionists?
*nod*
Exactly.
I mean, Belen, it seems you you want the bard to become some sort of fighter-mage... Wading into melee, casting magic missle around, etc.
That's not what the bard class is supposed to be.
The bard class is a subtle, social character, that is enough of a jack of all trades that he can do anything he puts his mind to... He can function as a thief, a backup healer, a melee fighter, a ranged fighter, a minor mage, plus some things that are unique to him (Bardic songs, and presumably high enough social skills to be a wonder in a city). That is what the bard is supposed to be, and it does that quite well. If you want to be truely GOOD at one of those things, you can do that too. I've seen bards that were more than able to hold their own in melee combat, for example. It just means you wont be quite as well rounded. I mean, who said every bard is going to have bad STR and CON? Just because that's how you would do it, doesn't mean that's how everyone would do it. I've seen nordic skald type bards that were terrors in combat.
Just as a druid or ranger isn't an appropriate class for a group that never leaves cities and dungeons, or a paladin isn't any good for an evil group, the bard isn't a good class for a group that never does the type of things bards are good for.
ajanders said:
*nod*
Exactly.
I mean, Belen, it seems you you want the bard to become some sort of fighter-mage... Wading into melee, casting magic missle around, etc.
That's not what the bard class is supposed to be.
The bard class is a subtle, social character, that is enough of a jack of all trades that he can do anything he puts his mind to... He can function as a thief, a backup healer, a melee fighter, a ranged fighter, a minor mage, plus some things that are unique to him (Bardic songs, and presumably high enough social skills to be a wonder in a city). That is what the bard is supposed to be, and it does that quite well. If you want to be truely GOOD at one of those things, you can do that too. I've seen bards that were more than able to hold their own in melee combat, for example. It just means you wont be quite as well rounded. I mean, who said every bard is going to have bad STR and CON? Just because that's how you would do it, doesn't mean that's how everyone would do it. I've seen nordic skald type bards that were terrors in combat.
Just as a druid or ranger isn't an appropriate class for a group that never leaves cities and dungeons, or a paladin isn't any good for an evil group, the bard isn't a good class for a group that never does the type of things bards are good for.
Last edited:
Eternalknight
First Post
Snapdragyn said:
The bards that I've played usually have a good Dexterity. So my advice is: crossbow, + Weapon Finesse and finessable weapon. Works for me.
As for combat spells, just choose from the following (granted they are much more subtle than a fireball...)
Cantrips: daze, flare
!st level: cause fear, grease, hypnotism, magic weapon, sleep, summon monster I
2nd level: bull's strength, cat's grace, hold person, hynotic pattern, scare, sound burst, summon monster II, summon swarm...
Etc
Cthulhu's Librarian
First Post
I'm currently playing a Bard in a game that has run almost 2 years. I took a few levels of Sorcerer, both for a bit more spell firepower and because it fit into his background, but first and foremost, he's a Bard. For roleplaying opportunities, I think the Bard is a great choice, and he's not that far behind when it comes to following the rest of the party into combat (part of that is my fault, I took some feats & spells that ended up being nearly useless). I've given him a few archery feats and he has become one of the partys 2 archers, and he certainly can hold his own in combat. I guess its all at how you look at the class, and what you expect to get out of it. I'm very happy with the bard, and would definilty play one again.
Belen
Legend
The point is that the PHB bard is stuck in ONE mold. Personally, Bard is my favorite class and I am not asking that they stand up to a fighter in a fight. I am asking that they be somewhat MORE jack of all trades.
How is it that a jack of all trades is stuck to one path of spells? That path covers ONLY illusion and charm with very little in the way of sonic-type spells. Heck, a Bard does not even have to sing her spells in PHB-land. They should have a unique list that really locks in the flavor of a bard.
This should include by sonic damage and non damage spells. The hodge-podge list in the PHB is just taken from other classes and does not work well and with the general spell nerfing in 3.5, the Bard only gets weaker.
At least in 2e a Bard chose a limited number of spells from the arcane list, which correctly summized the "grazing/ picking up on the fly" aspect of the bard nature.
This is why we use Monte's bard. It is a BALANCED class, unlike the PHB version which can never be more than support for others.
How is it that a jack of all trades is stuck to one path of spells? That path covers ONLY illusion and charm with very little in the way of sonic-type spells. Heck, a Bard does not even have to sing her spells in PHB-land. They should have a unique list that really locks in the flavor of a bard.
This should include by sonic damage and non damage spells. The hodge-podge list in the PHB is just taken from other classes and does not work well and with the general spell nerfing in 3.5, the Bard only gets weaker.
At least in 2e a Bard chose a limited number of spells from the arcane list, which correctly summized the "grazing/ picking up on the fly" aspect of the bard nature.
This is why we use Monte's bard. It is a BALANCED class, unlike the PHB version which can never be more than support for others.
MarauderX
Explorer
I play a Bard in a campaign I am in, and am the only arcane caster in a group of 5. Weak in combat? You bet, which is why his feats are all centered around ranged combat since his abilities are really as just a support to everyone else.
BUT his social skills are second to none in the group and has managed to diplomacy his way into and out of several tight spots for the party so far. You can say that the DM has a lot to do with carving out a niche for the PC, but I will look forward to talking our way out of a nasty fight instead of wasting half of our resources. Not only that, but I like him more than the same level wizard I was playing in the same campaign and think he has more firepower, equal spells, more skills and far better combat BAB and AC.
I was second guessing myself for not choosing a sorcerer at first since they also have the CHA for the role playing and diplomacy, but realized how much more I wanted a PC with better physical characteristics and abilities. Plus I get to make up songs and such that affect the game world as well as find alternate game world lyrics to popular songs to spice up the game table. "...two goat herding girls go 'round the outside, 'round the outside, 'round the outside..." Above all, it's fun being a bard instead of a combat-oriented, monster-destroying tank. Perhaps you are looking at the Bard for the wrong reasons.
As a DM I will use a bard with the BBEG to buff the hoards of meat shield soldiers in a final battle. It can give the edge to take 20 peon fighters up with a +1 each and having them swarm the front lines of the party. As for incorporating 3.5, I understand that there are some improvements but I will probably still house rule the class a bit stronger if I feel there hasn't been enough change for the better.
BUT his social skills are second to none in the group and has managed to diplomacy his way into and out of several tight spots for the party so far. You can say that the DM has a lot to do with carving out a niche for the PC, but I will look forward to talking our way out of a nasty fight instead of wasting half of our resources. Not only that, but I like him more than the same level wizard I was playing in the same campaign and think he has more firepower, equal spells, more skills and far better combat BAB and AC.
I was second guessing myself for not choosing a sorcerer at first since they also have the CHA for the role playing and diplomacy, but realized how much more I wanted a PC with better physical characteristics and abilities. Plus I get to make up songs and such that affect the game world as well as find alternate game world lyrics to popular songs to spice up the game table. "...two goat herding girls go 'round the outside, 'round the outside, 'round the outside..." Above all, it's fun being a bard instead of a combat-oriented, monster-destroying tank. Perhaps you are looking at the Bard for the wrong reasons.
As a DM I will use a bard with the BBEG to buff the hoards of meat shield soldiers in a final battle. It can give the edge to take 20 peon fighters up with a +1 each and having them swarm the front lines of the party. As for incorporating 3.5, I understand that there are some improvements but I will probably still house rule the class a bit stronger if I feel there hasn't been enough change for the better.
Zappo
Explorer
Sonic type spells? Like, 1d4 sonic damage/level, save for half?
Let me get this straight. You think that a direct damage sonic spell is appropriate to a bard, just because it's sonic?
The bard doesn't have fireballs because he's not supposed to have them. Want to cast fireballs, play a sorcerer; want to cast fireballs and chop things up, play a fighter/sorcerer (but don't complain when you'll see that it's ineffective).
The bard is a completely different thing; it was good enough in 3.0 and is very good in 3.5. He's just not supposed to be as good at damage-dealing as the other classes. It's a difficult class to play, which can do wonders in the hands of a good player. People who equal combat effectiveness to damage output should stick to fighters and sorcerers.
Let me get this straight. You think that a direct damage sonic spell is appropriate to a bard, just because it's sonic?
The bard doesn't have fireballs because he's not supposed to have them. Want to cast fireballs, play a sorcerer; want to cast fireballs and chop things up, play a fighter/sorcerer (but don't complain when you'll see that it's ineffective).
The bard is a completely different thing; it was good enough in 3.0 and is very good in 3.5. He's just not supposed to be as good at damage-dealing as the other classes. It's a difficult class to play, which can do wonders in the hands of a good player. People who equal combat effectiveness to damage output should stick to fighters and sorcerers.
so, on the one hand, you're complaining that "the PHB bard is stuck in ONE mold..." and on the other hand you're saying they should be locked into a specific flavor? want to make up your mind?BelenUmeria said:
actually, i'm quite grateful the PHB bard isn't locked into singing her spells and having a spell-list full of sonic spells. that would've made my storytelling / oratory bard hard to play. he didn't sing or play an instrument and was decidedly unmusical, but he was still a bard. the PHB spell list with the enchantment and illusion spells worked perfectly for him. Monte's bard would've been a very poor fit.
Dark Dragon
Explorer
We've house ruled the bard to be both a specialist in singing (with a lot more of bardic songs than those few in the PHB) and charming / enchanting people and monsters. Plus he is good in knowledge related skills and the only one who has Perform (splitted in several subtypes) as a class skill (so no rogue is better in perform than a bard..
).
The 3.5 bard is quite dissapointing, IMO. Each class has the ability to hold its ground in combat, being a good party supporter (yes, even a fighter can support the party with more than sword play) and shine in role-playing.
Of course, the bard is good at the last two points, and if you're focused on them IYC, the bard will provide lots of fun.
Combat takes a great part of D&D (the rules indicate that), and if there's something where the bard is weak in melee and spells and songs, than it's combat. His few spells might buff a bit, as can do his songs, but a wizard / sorcerer (perhaps with the virtuoso prc) or a cleric can do at lower levels with spells of similar effect. Healing: no need to waste spell slots if a cleric, druid or paladin is around. Offensive spells: All other spell casters are better in that than a bard. Skills: A rogue has more skill points and more class skills. Melee combat: weaker as a rogue (no sneak attacks), ranged combat: as a rogue. Feats: only a few, like a sorcerer. Bardic Knowledge: Ok, but depends on the DM what info is gained. And it can be replaced later with Legend Lore or Commune (to some degree).
My impression is that the bard gets a lot of drawbacks compared to other classes but only a little of pluses that CANNOT be replaced by a spell or ability from another core class.
My 2 cents...
). The 3.5 bard is quite dissapointing, IMO. Each class has the ability to hold its ground in combat, being a good party supporter (yes, even a fighter can support the party with more than sword play) and shine in role-playing.
Of course, the bard is good at the last two points, and if you're focused on them IYC, the bard will provide lots of fun.
Combat takes a great part of D&D (the rules indicate that), and if there's something where the bard is weak in melee and spells and songs, than it's combat. His few spells might buff a bit, as can do his songs, but a wizard / sorcerer (perhaps with the virtuoso prc) or a cleric can do at lower levels with spells of similar effect. Healing: no need to waste spell slots if a cleric, druid or paladin is around. Offensive spells: All other spell casters are better in that than a bard. Skills: A rogue has more skill points and more class skills. Melee combat: weaker as a rogue (no sneak attacks), ranged combat: as a rogue. Feats: only a few, like a sorcerer. Bardic Knowledge: Ok, but depends on the DM what info is gained. And it can be replaced later with Legend Lore or Commune (to some degree).
My impression is that the bard gets a lot of drawbacks compared to other classes but only a little of pluses that CANNOT be replaced by a spell or ability from another core class.
My 2 cents...
Similar Threads
