Bards: bringing back the bad in badass.

[Kzach]

(A conversation between a DM and two NPC's: Jake Armageddon, a half-orc fighter/assassin, and Jake's brother Alphonse, a cleric/assassin.)
DM: Guys, I'm glad you could come. I want your opinion on a particular subject.
Jake: Go ahead, boss. Whatcha wanna talk about?
DM: Um... bards.
(The two valiant half-orcs immediately run into the nearest corner, cowering and whimpering.)
Alphonse: Ach, sss, it hurts uss. It hurts usss, nasssty DM.
DM: Don't worry, I'm not going to bring one here right now. I just wanted to talk about them.
(Jake and Alphonse apprehensively combe back from the corner.)
Jake: Boss, bards are just plain mean! Me and Alphie will probably be in the runnin' for guildmaster pretty soon now, but these bard guys could lick the tar out of both of us.
DM: Which ones are worse, the old-type bards or the newer-type ones?
Jake: Well, I'll tell ya, I'd rather run into a division of Sherman tanks than one of the old ones, and the newer ones are just as bad 'cept nowadays there sure are less of 'em, 'cause it takes them so long to become one.
Alphonse: Ach, sss, nasssty bardsses.
DM: Jake, where did you learn about Sherman tanks?

This was pretty much my impression of 1e bards as well. And then they were hit by the nerf bat in 2e, hard. They became pretty much irrelevant. I never saw anyone play one, and back then I played a lot of D&D with a lot of different groups.

And then they got prettified in 3e. They were an ok class, but I think pretty much everyone agreed that they were underpowered. They got a nice boost in 3.5 but they just didn't have the flavour I hungered for that was born of my first impression of bards from Celtic tales and 1e uberness.

4e, Allah praise thee, has made bards kickass again. I was really hanging out for PHB2 because the sampling of the bard I'd seen in the character builder was awesome and I wanted more. I wanted to see this class get a rejuvenation spell cast on it so that it could once again shine.

Man, did it ever get that boost! I love that I can play a melee bard and have him use awesome party affecting powers. His Charisma is now a force on the battlefield where I can play a take-charge, in your face, battle leader, hardened by his mercenary life-style and having been forced out of his homeland by an invading army.

No sweet melodies here and prancing ponies, no, his songs are dirges that drive you on into the maw of terror, his poems are inspirational speeches that speak to the heart of all warriors who bleed for their home and country, and his music is the respite the few left standing can lose themselves in, as they tend their wounds and prepare for the next onslaught.

Bards rule again.


P.S. Yes, I know I previously posted something similar to this, but dammit, that was pre-PHB2, and bards deserve the praise!

 

[Felon]

I ran four players through one of the Dungeon Delve scenarios tonight. One guy played a bard. Did a whole lot of nothing. Offered no damage mitigation outside of the healing-word-type power. The only memorable thing he did was shift an ally one square after an enemy miss...which was annoying, to be frank. Is that the schtick of the 4e bard's leadership? Having allies dance around the board?

 

[Wik]

Dude, bards rock now. They can act as front line attackers, or ranged snipers. They have some neat tack-on effects that seriously "de-buff" enemies, and they can do some very nice things for their allies, too. Gotta say, I'm with you - they rock. I get to play my bard on tuesday, and I'm really excited for the opportunity.

 

[WanderingMonster]

On reading the Bard (not playing one), the thing I noticed was that a few powers marked the target on the behalf of an ally. The wise bard chooses a defender of course. So now, when I play a 4e bard, I can swashbuckle as much as I want and blame it on the fighter!

I'm thinking if the bard in the above case did a whole lot of nothing, then the player might not have gotten it. Bards aren't primarily for damage mitigation (unless you count the damage they avoid themselves!) but for buff/debuff. It's a great version that lets "bard players" be the character they wanted to be for the past two editions.

 

[Starbuck_II]

Are talking Core?

Because 3.5 non-Core Bards were powerful.
The Bard gets a *lot* of love (or "stealth rebalancing") from supplements.

Feats for Badass Bard: The following feat improve Inspire Courage
1) Song of the White Raven: Swift action to use song. Also stacks Crusader/Warblade levels with Bard for bonuses gained from level. (ToB)
2) Song of The Heart: (Ebberon) (+1 bonus/DC for all musics)
3) Dragonfire Inspiration: add energy damage equal to bonuses (DM)
4) Song of Creation: take nonlethal damage to boost song (BoED)

Feats that buff Bard directly:
Snowflake Dance (add Cha to hit this is in addition to Str/Dex)

Magic Items:
"Badge of Valor"
"Vest of Legends."

Also Crystal Echoblades add 1/2 Bard level to damage.

Harmonizing is a +1 ability that lets weapon play for you for 1 minute (so you are free to cast spells without ending song).

Bard spell upgrades:
Inspirational Boost"

Mundane:
"Masterwork Instrument (the CA ones)"

Remember:
These things all stack, and they are a big part of why the Bard is considered a useful class when a little planning is put forth.

 

[Remathilis]

I gotta disagree on 2e bards as well; they are the only bards that could fight at low levels (chainmail + longsword, on par with thief, or simply longbow it) and then at higher levels whip out those awesome wizard spells (fireball, knock, magic missile, invisibility, and eventually disintergrate). Plus, they leveled as thieves, so they were usually 1-2 levels ahead of everyone else. Oh yeah, a bunch of free NWPs (and they only had one NWP that was out of group: heal) and a 5%/level ability to identify items.

Sure, they're "bardic" powers were weaksauce, but played as a fighting-arcanist, they were surprisingly good...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

2nd edition bard with complete bards handbook were great... the standard bard however sucked a little bit...

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

I have this feeling that had the bard appeared in PHB1, it'd've been far less badass, using Str for melee attacks and Cha for its ranged attacks, instead of Cha for both.

(wishes Cleric had gotten some of that love)

Brad

 

[Leatherhead]

If Warlords were as flexible in combat as Bards are, I might actually like Warlords.

Also, I must have been one of the few people that thought 2nd edition Bards were overpowered.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I always thought that 2e bards were the best - capable fighters, capable magic users, capable thieves and lots of flavour.

3e bards had neutered magic ability (weaker spells available more slowly). 1e bards were just strange (do x levels fighter, y levels thief (and was it z levels druid or was it just that you got druid spells once you became a bard?).