Bardic Rant

[Number47]

If you want a bard to blast stuff, use wands and scrolls. Really, everyone always forgets that bards are the ONLY class designed to really take advantage of UMD. It is a powerful, powerful ability and can lay the smack down in combat.

If you can't build a bard that does what you want him to do, in combat or out, than the problem is you.

 

[Draugin]

So, Wizards should make their books based on the fact that some DMs don't know what they are doing and shouldn't DM? Do we really need to go to the lowest common denominator here?

Well, they are already doing that.
I bet that in the new books we will find less than 3 times the sentence "at DM's discretion". Luckily there will be Arcana Unearthed and we'll feel a little less brainwacked.

 

[Sejs]

One of the meanest opponents my group has had to fight thus far was a Half Fiend(Human) Bard/Spelldancer with one level of Shadowdancer.

HiPS, Sound bubble, (brought back from 2nd ed.. good spell, heh) Displacement. .. spelldance, curse, slow, debuff, debuff, debuff.. oh look.. and there's nothing you can do about it because you can't frickin' FIND him. And he had some frickin' bone flute thing that could Create Undead but required a perform check to use.


Man I still get pissed when I think about fighting that guy.

 

[RigaMortus]

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

You forgot my favorite direct-damage Bard spell... Sonic Burst! 1d8 damage that they can't save for AND a chance to Stun them, all in a 10' burst. Sonic Burst OWNS at low levels, and is quite decent at higher levels too.

 

[jmucchiello]

You have to remember, players who played 2nd ed are use to their bard having access to magic missile and fireball. Bard's kicked butt in combat in 2nd ed compared to 3rd ed bards. This is why to some people the bard is a let down. It's just like the ranger, some people see the bard as a fighter/sorcerer/rogue instead of seeing the bard as a bard.

 

[RigaMortus]

Healing: no need to waste spell slots if a cleric, druid or paladin is around.

Right, IF they are around. Have you never played in a game where you had no healer with you? I am playing in such a campaign now. It's difficult, but fun. And even if there IS a healer around, that frees up their spells as well. The Cleric can cast something else if he knows you are going to back him up with heals. And what happens if the Cleric falls in combat? The Bard can heal the main healer of the group and get him up and running again.

Offensive spells: All other spell casters are better in that than a bard.

This is pretty much true, but I think most people here are stating that the bard ISN'T supposed to be better or even AS GOOD AS those other spell casters. They do have SOME damaging spells to help aid in battles, just don't expect him to take out an army with a massive fireball spell like a Wizard would (unless you cast Sound Burst on a group of Kobolds, which I highly recommend trying =)

Skills: A rogue has more skill points and more class skills.

True, but Rogues rarely ever take Perform (even though it is a class skill for them) which the Bard NEEDS. This is what makes him a Bard. It powers his songs, and earns him money. Luckily they are giving Bards a boost in Skill points in 3.5.

Anyway, the only thing a Rogue has over a Bard that stands out is Sneak Attack (yeah they get UD and stuff like that, but Bards have their own spells/abilities to make up for that). If your party doesn't have a Rogue to Disarm Traps or Open Locks, the Bard fit's this niche nicely.

Melee combat: weaker as a rogue (no sneak attacks),

Right, but when a Rogue can't use sneak attack (can't get into position) or are fighting creatures immune to sneak attack (undead) the Bard can still cast their spells on such creatures. So in those instances, a Bard would outdamage the Rogue, if you are worried about that kind of thing.

ranged combat: as a rogue.

Better than a Rogue actually, as they have spells that can modify their ranged abilities. Spells that help them hit better and such.

Feats: only a few, like a sorcerer.

True dat.

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).

Again, this has to do with a DM issue, not a Bard or Bardic Lore issue. Hopefully Bardic Lore will be MUCH better explained in 3.5 in terms of what you can and can't get out of it.

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...

My impression is that a Bard is a great class to play depending on if you want to hack n slash or play a social character. If you want to be the center of attention (Hey look at how much damage I can do to this Orc. Hey, look at this new fireball spel I got) or a subtle player or support character. There will be times that you should play a Bard, and times you shouldn't. Once people realize this, they'll hopefully have more fun playing a Bard.

 

[Daalbar]

On another note (no pun intended), Bards make great cohorts. Sure a Cleric might be a more effective pure support character from a dungeoneering perspective (assuming your DM doesn't enforce a strict adherence to the principles of that Clerics religion on your PC to continue to to enjoy the Cleric cohorts services). Once they get Inspire Greatness, and now at high levels with Inspire Heroics, etc they can be your combat-oriented character's best asset.

Every stoic warrior-hero need a troubadour to spread knowledge of his exploits far and wide! Assuming of course that your exploits are such that you want them known about...

"Bravely brave Sir Robin, rode forth from Camelot... He was not afraid to die, no, brave Sir Robin. He was not at all afraid to be killed in nasty ways..."

 

[Sejs]

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.

So a bard isn't as good a buffer as a spellcasting specialist. Gotcha.

Healing: no need to waste spell slots if a cleric, druid or paladin is around.

When they're around. But, granted - a bard isn't as good a healer as a healing specialist. It's been my experience that a bard is a -better- healer than a paladin, however.

Offensive spells: All other spell casters are better in that than a bard.

So again, the bard isn't as good a offensive caster as the offensive caster specialist. Understood.

Skills: A rogue has more skill points and more class skills.

Yup, not as skillful as the skill specialist.

Melee combat: weaker as a rogue (no sneak attacks), ranged combat: as a rogue.

Sneak attack is quite situational, if you're flanking an opponent with any modicum of intelligence the first thing they're going to try and do is stop being flanked. To say nothing of the various sneak attack immune creatures. Otherwise bards are just as on-par with the other 3/4 ba classes.

Feats: only a few, like a sorcerer.

or the barbarian, cleric, druid, paladin, or old ranger. Not a whole lot of classes get bonus feats.

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).

It is heavily DM-dependant, I'll agree with you 100% there, but I don't agree it can be replaced with Legend Lore or Commune - those are spells, that are limited-use per day (spell slot limitations), and take time to use. Bardic Knowledge is passive and unlimited. You can use it anytime, anywhere, no preperation required.


So basically they don't buff as good as the buff specs, they don't heal as good as the heal specs, nuke as good as the nuke specs, are as skillful as the skill specs, and are on par with the bulk of the sorta-melee classes. Problems? None. Because they CAN buff and heal and nuke and get their skill on and melee respectivly. And they have the music thing which can be damn handy. And with 3.5 they can cast in armor. And bardic knowledge on demand. And they're the best UMDers in the game by default. And they're the only half-caster hybrid that doesn't have a penalty to their caster level.

 

[Belen]

I guess all of you have magical GMs that know how to run social interactions for the Bards. Therefore, since EVERY GM can run a game full of social stuff, then the Bard is balanced.

Sorry to say...that is the most useless argument alive. DnD is CENTERED around combat. Every other class is balanced according to combat except the Bard. The bard is social guy and really cannot do much at all in combat.

Basically, a 3e bard is a henchman. They sing to buff the party while everyone else gets to fight and have fun. Sorry, but that is bull. I am tired of hearing the second best argument as well. I am not asking that a Bard get a maxed out combat load, but what damage would it do, if a Bard could choose Lightning Bolt as a spell at 7th level, heck even 9th level!? How in the world is that bad? I mean, it is still second best to any other caster!

If you have a GM that loves to run combat, and you want to play a Bard just for flavor or as a character concept, then you're hating life. You're the henchman and may as well just be someone's cohort.

Tons of fun...

 

[Apok]

Right, but when a Rogue can't use sneak attack (can't get into position) or are fighting creatures immune to sneak attack (undead) the Bard can still cast their spells on such creatures. So in those instances, a Bard would outdamage the Rogue, if you are worried about that kind of thing.

A minor point; the majority of Bardic spells are either of the Illusion or Enchantment school or are mind-affecting effects, which are basically useless against undead or constructs. They do have some spells that can help, but I find that Bards are just about as handicapped as Rogues when it comes to Undead and Constructs.

One of the biggest problems I can see for a Bard (other than their lack of self-buffing combat spells, the saving grace of the 3.0 Bard) is feats. Given the fact that he's such a generalist, his focus comes through in his feat selection.

Melee-centric Bards will take Weapon Focus, maybe Power Attack, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, TWF, Improved Critical, etc.

Archer Bards will take Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Precise Shot, etc.

Bards focusing on spellcasting will likely take Spell Focus, Combat Casting, various Metamagic feats, etc.

The fact that the Bard has a very limited number of Feats means that he'll have to be especially careful in what he chooses. You could mix 'n match to get a conglomeration, but you'll never be quite as good at what you do if you took a more focused approach. My advice is to pick an area of specialty for your Bard and choose your feats accordingly.