Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Bards Should Be Half-Casters in 5.5e/6e
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 8391358" data-attributes="member: 7023887"><p>Where does it say that in the PHB's section explaining the bard? Furthermore, having the charisma to have people like you and be more willing to accept them into your home is absolutely not the same as having the ability to draw a magical, runic circle on the ground to create a permanent wayport between other teleportation circles. That's not Bardic in theme, that's Wizardry. </p><p></p><p>Yeah, no. If Bards were more "Words of Power" and "True Naming" magic, sure. I could absolutely see "Avada Kedavra" be a spell that they get access to. However, the rest of the bard spell list and the bard's flavor text both beg to differ. </p><p></p><p>. . . That's not what foresight does. Foresight lets you see a few seconds into the future. It's not a "lorekeeper/master" spell, it's a "time-magic" spell. That's not at all bardic. (Especially because the actual Lorekeeper class, the Wizard, is the one that have that theme. Especially Chronurgy Wizards.)</p><p></p><p>. . . Which, again, is not explained in the PHB's Bard fluff text, and there's a <em>major </em>difference between a Light Show (Dancing Lights, Minor Illusion, Silent Image, or the many other illusion spells that the bard gets access to) and the "I will incinerate/freeze/dissolve/poison/electrocute you to death, or possibly of blinding you and sending you to a random plane of existence, or turning you to stone, or do two of these options". </p><p></p><p>Tell me how that's bard magic again? (And, if Bard Magic (or at least a major part of it) is a "light show", why don't bards get the radiant-damaging spells that are literally light shows?)</p><p></p><p>I agree that it's too easy. However, Clerics are traditionally the "I will bring back dead people", class, as well as Druids for Reincarnate. Bards don't have that theme. </p><p></p><p>. . . But why? Why is healing a part of the bard archetype? I'm guessing it's for the reason I explained in the OP (WotC not knowing how to do buffing unless it's just plain healing, when other types of buffing work way better for bards). </p><p></p><p>I only gave a few examples. There are many, many others that I chose to leave out but I also feel have absolutely no point being on the Bard's high level spell list (besides giving them a high level spell list, when, IMO, they should be half-casters). </p><p></p><p>Wizards are the arcane casters. The studiers of the nature of the universe, magical scholars, etc. Yes, there will be overlap between the two classes that study their way to magic. However, making it more clear that one is the magic of emotion/story/song (the Bard), and the other is the magic of the Arcane/Eldritch/fabric of reality (Wizard) helps differentiate them and have their own niches. 5e fails at that, IMO (especially due to the higher-level spell list issue that I mentioned before). </p><p></p><p>Agreed, as any sane person would. </p><p></p><p>. . . Besides their main mechanical feature that they get upon taking the subclass at level three being about dealing extra damage through their melee weapon attacks, that scales greatly as they reach higher levels? Yes, besides their main feature being focused on using their Bardic Inspiration to bolster their own melee combat, there's absolutely no overlap between the College of Whispers and that of Swords/Valor Bards. </p><p></p><p>That's not how they work mechanically, and they have a great deal of thematic overlap. Yes, the Glamour bard wants to be the "center of attention", just like the Eloquence bard who will be the face of social interaction for the party (due to Silver Tongue and Universal Speech). Yes, the Glamour bard has a bit more fey/illusion magic in theme, but there's too much overlap between them, IMO. The "Magical Center of Attention Bard that manipulates and debuffs enemies with subclass features" and the "Less-Overtly-Magical Center of Attention Bard that manipulates and debuffs enemies with subclass features" are absolutely currently thematically independent bard subclasses <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite11" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes :rolleyes:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" />.</p><p></p><p>You say that like it isn't a bad thing. It's a bad thing that the Berserker's flavor is "Barbarian, but MOAR BARBARIAN!", that the Land Druid's theme is "Druid, but even more nature-connected", that the Champion and Battlemaster Fighters are "Just the Fighter, but even better at martial combat", that the Open-Hand Monk is "Just the monk, but even more monk-y than the other monks", that the Hunter Ranger is "the Ranger, but with more Ranger added", and so on, and so on, and so on. </p><p></p><p>Those . . . aren't good subclass ideas. If the subclass choice is between "cool differentiations from the base class" and "the base class but with more base class theme", that's not creative or intelligent design. Yeah, my criticism of the Lore Bard applies to much of the other subclasses in the PHB, but that doesn't make me wrong. </p><p></p><p>So, yeah, you're right that other subclasses in the PHB do that. That doesn't mean that they're "thematically different ideas" from the rest of the subclasses, because <strong>you can't be thematically different as a subclass if your theme is the base class</strong>. </p><p></p><p>Okay, you want me to be a bit more fair? Fine. I'll count the Valor/Swords as one subclass identity (martial bard), the sneaky, scary Whispers bard as 1/2 of a subclass identity (because it still relies a ton on the martial bard theme), the Creation and Spirits bards each as their own thematically different subclasses, and have the "Illusion Fey Bard" and "Extremely Social Manipulator/Persuader" count as 1.5 thematic ideas. The Lore Bard doesn't count, because it's just "The Bard! But as a Bard subclass!" (Oh, the ingenuity with this last subclass is staggering!) </p><p></p><p>That's a grand total of 5 out of 8, with many of them being very, very similar in theme. Drop the Lore Bard, drop either the Valor or Swords Bard, drop the martial part of the Whispers Bard, drop the overlapping part of the Glamour/Eloquence Bard, and you've got some thematically and mechanically distinct subclasses. </p><p></p><p>They're thematically different. There's no question that Illusion Wizards are different thematically from Necromancers, who are different from Evokers, who are different from Transmuters, and so on. However,</p><p></p><p>Oh, please. You don't even know me, [USER=87792]@Neonchameleon[/USER]. Stop making assumptions about my person and my taste in classes just because I think there are mechanical and thematic problems with one, please. Just because I don't like the execution of the bard in 5e doesn't mean that I don't like the idea of the bard in D&D. Those are two very, very distinct issues, and you would do better to not conflate them when debating with me in this thread. </p><p></p><p>I love the theme of the bard. I'm a musician in real life. I grew up in a home of musicians (my mother is a music teacher, all of us that are/were old enough have/had been in Choir/Band in 5th-12th grade as well as in college, did musicals and plays for extracurriculars, etc). I was in my high school's chamber choir for 3 years (I'm 19, so that wasn't long ago for me), would always sing in my church's choir (back when I was a member of the church), and so on. </p><p></p><p>I love music. I love how music makes me feel. I love the idea of a fantasy character using song or instrument or poem or story to make/channel magic, and to support their party. Bard characters on D&D livestreams and campaign stories are some of my favorite out of all of them. I love the idea of the bard. I just think that it's executed poorly in 5e, and want to fix it in a manner that suits my tastes. </p><p></p><p>I know bards are popular. I've played a bard, both as a player and as a DM (not a DMPC, but as an NPC that was there to support the party due to them lacking players). I love bards. I just dislike how they're executed mechanically and thematically (to an extent, as described in the OP). </p><p></p><p>Disliking how a class is mechanically and thematically executed is not the same thing as disliking the class. Don't conflate the two, and <strong>especially don't accuse me of not liking a class</strong> (or even worse, <em>accuse me of wanting to nerf a class <strong>because you</strong> <strong>think that I don't like it</strong>)</em>. </p><p></p><p>Again, no. That's not what I'm saying. Read the OP, please. I gave some examples of how to make up for the loss of 6th-9th level spells there. Stop painting me as a "Evil, bard-nerfing, music-is-magic minstrel killer". You're mistaking me for someone else/painting me as someone that I am not. [USER=7023840]@Snarf Zagyg[/USER] is the one that dislikes bards (or at least, jokes a ton about how much they hate bards), not me.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Levistus's_Leviathan, post: 8391358, member: 7023887"] Where does it say that in the PHB's section explaining the bard? Furthermore, having the charisma to have people like you and be more willing to accept them into your home is absolutely not the same as having the ability to draw a magical, runic circle on the ground to create a permanent wayport between other teleportation circles. That's not Bardic in theme, that's Wizardry. Yeah, no. If Bards were more "Words of Power" and "True Naming" magic, sure. I could absolutely see "Avada Kedavra" be a spell that they get access to. However, the rest of the bard spell list and the bard's flavor text both beg to differ. . . . That's not what foresight does. Foresight lets you see a few seconds into the future. It's not a "lorekeeper/master" spell, it's a "time-magic" spell. That's not at all bardic. (Especially because the actual Lorekeeper class, the Wizard, is the one that have that theme. Especially Chronurgy Wizards.) . . . Which, again, is not explained in the PHB's Bard fluff text, and there's a [I]major [/I]difference between a Light Show (Dancing Lights, Minor Illusion, Silent Image, or the many other illusion spells that the bard gets access to) and the "I will incinerate/freeze/dissolve/poison/electrocute you to death, or possibly of blinding you and sending you to a random plane of existence, or turning you to stone, or do two of these options". Tell me how that's bard magic again? (And, if Bard Magic (or at least a major part of it) is a "light show", why don't bards get the radiant-damaging spells that are literally light shows?) I agree that it's too easy. However, Clerics are traditionally the "I will bring back dead people", class, as well as Druids for Reincarnate. Bards don't have that theme. . . . But why? Why is healing a part of the bard archetype? I'm guessing it's for the reason I explained in the OP (WotC not knowing how to do buffing unless it's just plain healing, when other types of buffing work way better for bards). I only gave a few examples. There are many, many others that I chose to leave out but I also feel have absolutely no point being on the Bard's high level spell list (besides giving them a high level spell list, when, IMO, they should be half-casters). Wizards are the arcane casters. The studiers of the nature of the universe, magical scholars, etc. Yes, there will be overlap between the two classes that study their way to magic. However, making it more clear that one is the magic of emotion/story/song (the Bard), and the other is the magic of the Arcane/Eldritch/fabric of reality (Wizard) helps differentiate them and have their own niches. 5e fails at that, IMO (especially due to the higher-level spell list issue that I mentioned before). Agreed, as any sane person would. . . . Besides their main mechanical feature that they get upon taking the subclass at level three being about dealing extra damage through their melee weapon attacks, that scales greatly as they reach higher levels? Yes, besides their main feature being focused on using their Bardic Inspiration to bolster their own melee combat, there's absolutely no overlap between the College of Whispers and that of Swords/Valor Bards. That's not how they work mechanically, and they have a great deal of thematic overlap. Yes, the Glamour bard wants to be the "center of attention", just like the Eloquence bard who will be the face of social interaction for the party (due to Silver Tongue and Universal Speech). Yes, the Glamour bard has a bit more fey/illusion magic in theme, but there's too much overlap between them, IMO. The "Magical Center of Attention Bard that manipulates and debuffs enemies with subclass features" and the "Less-Overtly-Magical Center of Attention Bard that manipulates and debuffs enemies with subclass features" are absolutely currently thematically independent bard subclasses :rolleyes:. You say that like it isn't a bad thing. It's a bad thing that the Berserker's flavor is "Barbarian, but MOAR BARBARIAN!", that the Land Druid's theme is "Druid, but even more nature-connected", that the Champion and Battlemaster Fighters are "Just the Fighter, but even better at martial combat", that the Open-Hand Monk is "Just the monk, but even more monk-y than the other monks", that the Hunter Ranger is "the Ranger, but with more Ranger added", and so on, and so on, and so on. Those . . . aren't good subclass ideas. If the subclass choice is between "cool differentiations from the base class" and "the base class but with more base class theme", that's not creative or intelligent design. Yeah, my criticism of the Lore Bard applies to much of the other subclasses in the PHB, but that doesn't make me wrong. So, yeah, you're right that other subclasses in the PHB do that. That doesn't mean that they're "thematically different ideas" from the rest of the subclasses, because [B]you can't be thematically different as a subclass if your theme is the base class[/B]. Okay, you want me to be a bit more fair? Fine. I'll count the Valor/Swords as one subclass identity (martial bard), the sneaky, scary Whispers bard as 1/2 of a subclass identity (because it still relies a ton on the martial bard theme), the Creation and Spirits bards each as their own thematically different subclasses, and have the "Illusion Fey Bard" and "Extremely Social Manipulator/Persuader" count as 1.5 thematic ideas. The Lore Bard doesn't count, because it's just "The Bard! But as a Bard subclass!" (Oh, the ingenuity with this last subclass is staggering!) That's a grand total of 5 out of 8, with many of them being very, very similar in theme. Drop the Lore Bard, drop either the Valor or Swords Bard, drop the martial part of the Whispers Bard, drop the overlapping part of the Glamour/Eloquence Bard, and you've got some thematically and mechanically distinct subclasses. They're thematically different. There's no question that Illusion Wizards are different thematically from Necromancers, who are different from Evokers, who are different from Transmuters, and so on. However, Oh, please. You don't even know me, [USER=87792]@Neonchameleon[/USER]. Stop making assumptions about my person and my taste in classes just because I think there are mechanical and thematic problems with one, please. Just because I don't like the execution of the bard in 5e doesn't mean that I don't like the idea of the bard in D&D. Those are two very, very distinct issues, and you would do better to not conflate them when debating with me in this thread. I love the theme of the bard. I'm a musician in real life. I grew up in a home of musicians (my mother is a music teacher, all of us that are/were old enough have/had been in Choir/Band in 5th-12th grade as well as in college, did musicals and plays for extracurriculars, etc). I was in my high school's chamber choir for 3 years (I'm 19, so that wasn't long ago for me), would always sing in my church's choir (back when I was a member of the church), and so on. I love music. I love how music makes me feel. I love the idea of a fantasy character using song or instrument or poem or story to make/channel magic, and to support their party. Bard characters on D&D livestreams and campaign stories are some of my favorite out of all of them. I love the idea of the bard. I just think that it's executed poorly in 5e, and want to fix it in a manner that suits my tastes. I know bards are popular. I've played a bard, both as a player and as a DM (not a DMPC, but as an NPC that was there to support the party due to them lacking players). I love bards. I just dislike how they're executed mechanically and thematically (to an extent, as described in the OP). Disliking how a class is mechanically and thematically executed is not the same thing as disliking the class. Don't conflate the two, and [B]especially don't accuse me of not liking a class[/B] (or even worse, [I]accuse me of wanting to nerf a class [B]because you[/B] [B]think that I don't like it[/B])[/I]. Again, no. That's not what I'm saying. Read the OP, please. I gave some examples of how to make up for the loss of 6th-9th level spells there. Stop painting me as a "Evil, bard-nerfing, music-is-magic minstrel killer". You're mistaking me for someone else/painting me as someone that I am not. [USER=7023840]@Snarf Zagyg[/USER] is the one that dislikes bards (or at least, jokes a ton about how much they hate bards), not me. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Bards Should Be Half-Casters in 5.5e/6e
Top