Bards, Badass or Not

[Dandu]

It would not make sense for it to appear as spellcasting, since it requires you to fascinate a target and obvious threats, such as spellcasting, automatically break the fascinate effect.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Or if your DM is questioning you about it, the Subsonics feat (lets you use bardic music without making noticeable sound or draw attention to yourself) is a lovely combo with Suggestion.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Skills, utility, and possibly combat.

Anything's possible, but I find the claim that bards are generally "stronger" at combat than fighters, paladins, or monks to be laughable.

As for skills and utility...uh, sure, OK. But rogues are even stronger in that regard, of course.

I mean, I get it: bards can do a little bit of everything. They're stronger than anyone else at being "well-rounded." But D&D tends to reward specialized skillsets over generalized ones, so in my experience, bards suffer as a class.

 

[Dandu]

Anything's possible, but I find the claim that bards are generally "stronger" at combat than fighters, paladins, or monks to be laughable.

I'll bring a level 20 melee bard to the discussion if you bring a level 20 monk.

As for skills and utility...uh, sure, OK. But rogues are even stronger in that regard, of course.

The only advantage rogues have in that department is trapfinding. A bard's spells can make up for the 2 less skill points/level.

 

[Vegepygmy]

I'll bring a level 20 melee bard to the discussion if you bring a level 20 monk.

And what, we have them fight each other in some hypothetical arena? Such attempts to prove one character is "stronger" than another are a waste of time, not to mention criminally geeky. There is simply no "level playing field" on which to compare two different characters; combat doesn't occur in a vacuum. Both sides just wind up bickering about what kind of terrain features should be present, whether and what kind of non-core rules should be allowed, and every other variable imaginable.

I have no interest in such things, so I guess I'll just have to wait for the day when I see a bard mop the floor with an equal-level monk in actual play. Then I'll see the error of my ways.

 

[Dandu]

And what, we have them fight each other in some hypothetical arena? Such attempts to prove one character is "stronger" than another are a waste of time, not to mention criminally geeky. There is simply no "level playing field" on which to compare two different characters; combat doesn't occur in a vacuum. Both sides just wind up bickering about what kind of terrain features should be present, whether and what kind of non-core rules should be allowed, and every other variable imaginable.

I had in mind comparing the capabilities of each character vs a challenge that a level 20 melee character should be able to handle.

 

[Nifft]

...which I never enjoyed using as a bard, so no loss to me. But regarding the errata, StreamOfTheSky, you didn't use your limited per day class feature to heal a whopping 13 hp with a cantrip. You used it after a fight, when everyone was wounded, to make ALL your cantrips do a whopping 13 HP. So if you needed to do 130 hit points of healing spread out of your 5 allies, you would sing the Healing Hymn, then cast 10 cure minor cantrips, and all the castings would benefit from that one song. Thus, 10 cure minor spells which would normally heal 10 points would instead heal 130 points.

Yeah, seriously, out-of-combat healing is a solved problem, and you just need to buy a stack of wa--

If it's only useful for out of combat healing, then the nerf's even dumber than I thought! Have the writers never heard of wands of cure light wounds*?

... what he said.

By the level where Healing Hymn is turning a cantrip into cure moderate, you already have access to enough cure light that it's not a balance factor any more.

I think WotC employers are rather tired of people complaining into their ears how a lousy work they do. I would be, for sure.

If you were them, I sincerely hope you'd stop publishing such lousy work.

- - -

Regarding Bards in combat, the Bard archer is surprisingly awesome. Like the 3.0e Cleric archer, he does it by stacking on bonus upon bonus.

A very simple and efficient Bard archer build is just Barbarian 1 / Bard ++. (Note that your Inspire Courage song is compatible with Rage.) Pick up a longbow and your first three feats are Weapon Focus, Point Blank Shot and Rapid Shot. Get more attacks whenever possible (i.e. haste). Get more bonuses whenever possible (but watch out for morale bonuses, which won't stack with your song). Buff yourself & your party, then lay down the smack.

Cheers, -- N

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Barbarian dip is especially nice for archery if you can use Whirling Frenzy instead of normal rage, for the extra attack. But I guess if we're talking about core rules that's not an option (not to mention lack of the Extra Rage feat or other means to get it more than once/day as a low level barb).

 

[Vegepygmy]

I had in mind comparing the capabilities of each character vs a challenge that a level 20 melee character should be able to handle.

The same problems arise. What kind of challenge? Why only that one/those few? Using what rules/supplements? Why 20th level? And so on...

As far as I'm concerned, the only meaningful comparison occurs in actual play, from 1st on up to (possibly, though rarely) 20th level. You can't duplicate that in an online debate; the most you can do is post stat blocks and compare them side by side. But even then, two people will look at the same stat block and draw different conclusions about how "powerful" or "effective" the character is, based on their different play styles and experiences.

So in the end, all we can really do is look to our own experiences actually playing the game. One may have seen a kickass bard who put fighters, paladins, and monks to shame. Personally, I have not. YMMV, as they say.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Well, I think monk is the weakest class in core, but I also like martial arts and asian-themed stuff in general, so I like the class anyway. I'll provide a baseline for Dandu to compare a Bard 20 to. I'll assume PH/DMG/MM only, 32 point buy and no multiclassing? If MCing is ok, it REALLY would benefit a core monk to dip a caster class for wand and scroll access. Oh, and no using the Leadership feat, ok?
Not doing magic items yet, that's always the biggest pain to figure out for high levels. As an elf, he definitely takes advantage of the longbow proficiency to have a respectable ranged option, and can fight unarmed easily without needing to drop the bow.

Wood Elf Monk 20
Starting: Str 16, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 8
At 20 (before magic items): Str 20, Dex 16, Con 13, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 8

Feats:
1 Improved Grapple
3 Power Attack
6 Improved Natural Attack (Unarmed Strike)
9 Weapon Focus (Unarmed Strike)
12 Improved Critical (Unarmed Strike)
15 Improved Initiative
18 Cleave

Monk bonus feats: Stunning Fist, Deflect Arrows (with no reach weapon or splat book feats, I don't think Combat Reflexes means much, swap if you disagree), Improved Trip

Skill ranks:
Balance 5
Jump 5
Listen 23
Sense Motive 12
Spot 23
Tumble 12

Tactics: Shoot the bow and run around really fast to harass enemies; flurry of misses and/or ground and pound when in melee and doing so isn't suicidal. Beg the DM to let you throw away Perfect Self for no return benefit at all since losing Enlarge Person is a greater penalty than anything some crappy monk capstone ability could ever hope to be.