D&D 5E Casting with Shield - Bard Style

[The Crimson Binome]

It's actually a bad idea in a non-magical world. given the premises of the game (with fireballs flying overhead), if playing a fife will allow me to actually work magic every six seconds, then darn-tootin' I'd be working on my arpeggios.

Whether it's a good idea in any given magical world is going to depend heavily on the nature of magic in that world, and how it interacts with musical instruments. In a Harry Potter world, for example, that pipe is going to do you no good - you need a wand.

D&D rules aren't based on Harry Potter, but they surely have more in common with that than they have with (for example) Lord of the Rings... at least, as of the better part of the last decade. So while you might be able to produce some magic by blowing on your instrument, that's not enough evidence to suggest that it's a good idea to do so in the middle of a pitched battle.

 

[Herbalizer]

The rules for the bard's implements are especially weak. The devs were told this throughout play testing, and in the end it wasn't seen as something important enough to address (I think on the assumption that most tables won't care). Since it's a personal hobby horse of mine, I'll weigh in...



Yes, the rule is badly written:
1. Holding an instrument with one hand is what's required for a bard to cast spells, not actually playing it. (Cue people who point to people playing guitars with one hand; obviously that's not the point.) Lame verisimilitude.
2. Bards get proficiencies in three instruments, but there's no correlation between that proficiency and using an instrument for spell components. Lame internal logic.
3. The list of instruments in the PHB is different from the list of magic instruments for which proficiency might be required in the DMG. Lame proofreading.

To whatever degree this sort of thing bugs you, each table needs to find a solution for all of these things. And, I agree, most won't make a big deal about it.

But you still need workarounds, such as the one Saelorn mentions from 3.x. However, I don't buy this argument:



It's actually a bad idea in a non-magical world. given the premises of the game (with fireballs flying overhead), if playing a fife will allow me to actually work magic every six seconds, then darn-tootin' I'd be working on my arpeggios.

Great post Kobold Stew !! I completely agree with everything you said !! I guess the issue is sometimes having to "argue" with the DM or players on certain technicalities that could have been avoided if rules would have been better written ...I'm also in agreement with Unwise in the sense that regardless of small technicalities, it's a game, and you should be able to play your character according to its concept ! A bard is a spellcaster that channels the forces of "magic" through musical instruments ..so in theory, the musical instrument should be played, even if it's not stated in the rulebook ...A Bard portrayed in a movie, for example, would not be shown waving around a horn in his hand wile casting a spell (Shatter), he would be shown as blowing into it and creating a thunderous sound that shatters objects and damage foes ..

Some might not like the concept of a Bard, and that's fine, they can just not play them, but since they were created, and are part of that world and can be played and have great features and skills, it'd be nice if they had elaborated a bit more on it ...The "Spellcasting Focus" section of each class is literally only 1 sentence ! Add 2 more and you can clarify certain things ...I thought the goal of the 5e was to simplify rules and get rid of the micro-managing ..Let the Bard be a Bard

The War Casting feat already provides adv on Concentration check, the ability to cast all spells with both hands full (which is an advantage since normally, a Caster would have to sheath his weapon to cast a spell with S and/or M, and therefore wouldn't have AoO) and allows spellcasting on AoO.

So even if the Bard is allowed to sheath, pick up a lyre and play within the same round, with 1 free hand, the War Caster feat is still interesting and we don't have micro managing to do ..

I like playing a Bard, it's brings humor into the fold with funny ways to interpret spells, but the complex mechanics to cast spells is an annoyance

 

[Prism]

A bard is a spellcaster that channels the forces of "magic" through musical instruments ..so in theory, the musical instrument should be played, even if it's not stated in the rulebook ...A Bard portrayed in a movie, for example, would not be shown waving around a horn in his hand wile casting a spell (Shatter), he would be shown as blowing into it and creating a thunderous sound that shatters objects and damage foes ..

I think the material somatic gestures part works pretty well except for a horn. I mean most of the other instruments require hand movement (somatic) and the instrument (material). They all pretty much need two hands to use but using a horn with somatic gestures is hard to picture. For a lore bard this works pretty well as they don't have a shield to worry about and can use a two handed instrument and easily draw a one handed weapon for the occasional attack.

Its the valor bard that has the problem and I honestly don't think they are designed to play instruments in battle. I have a valor bard and I specifically pick somatic only spells for combat, like thunderwave. I use the spell casting far more as an out of combat healing/exploration/interaction tool. A Valor bard is best seen as primarily a weapon user with the ability to throw the occasional spell into the mix. Pretty much the 1e fighter/rogue/druid type bard that didn't use an instrument

The War Casting feat already provides adv on Concentration check, the ability to cast all spells with both hands full (which is an advantage since normally, a Caster would have to sheath his weapon to cast a spell with S and/or M, and therefore wouldn't have AoO) and allows spellcasting on AoO.

War casting doesn't really help a valor bard cast spells while using a shield as it still doesn't remove the material component requirement and solve the weirdness of the one handed lyre. I would say its not required

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I think the material somatic gestures part works pretty well except for a horn. I mean most of the other instruments require hand movement (somatic) and the instrument (material). They all pretty much need two hands to use but using a horn with somatic gestures is hard to picture.

The "somatic gesture" when using a horn is "raising it to your mouth."

The three components of a spell can basically be boiled down to a checklist:

Verbal) Are you gagged, or in a zone of silence? Are you willing to make noise that can be heard from more then ten feet away?
Material) Do you physically possess the thing, on your person? Can you physically reach the thing?
Somatic) Can you move your arms? Are you physically bound with rope, or chained to a wall?

You should be able to cast a spell as long as you aren't bound, gagged, or stripped of your possessions. Not everything needs to be full-on chanting and waving a dead chicken around.

 

[Prism]

Not everything needs to be full-on chanting and waving a dead chicken around.

Agreed, although that might well be the inspiration for my next character

 

[Herbalizer]

You should be able to cast a spell as long as you aren't bound, gagged, or stripped of your possessions. Not everything needs to be full-on chanting and waving a dead chicken around.

Yes ! Exactly ! That's what I'm saying ! Instead of having to figure out if you can sheath a weapon and pick up your lute in the same round, it should be allow the character to do what's it's supposed to do ..so for a Bard, pick up a an instrument and play when they have to.

War casting doesn't really help a valor bard cast spells while using a shield as it still doesn't remove the material component requirement and solve the weirdness of the one handed lyre. I would say its not required

Very true !! And now I'm thinking that the valor bard is a bit broken ..gets screwed over ...A cleric, paladin, even an eldritch knight (could have a crystal embedded into a Shield) can benefit from War Caster much more than the Bard can, AND the Bard still has to whip out his instrument and play with it when Material is required ..And hence, not being able to have a weapon attack of opportunity ...

 

[MostlyDm]

Not coming from a D&D background, I really have to ask, does the D&D casting system of components etc really add anything to the game? If you are playing a class designed to use a shield and sword and cast spells, what are you adding to the game by accounting for all this stuff? In a system that tries its best to streamline and get rid of micro-management, why the heck do we even need to have discussions around this?

Why does the warcaster feat need to exist in its current for? Why can a War Cleric/ Eldritch Knight etc wear platemail and wield greatsword, but not be able to use their spells if they don't juggle? It all just seems so arbitrary and silly.

The point seems to be that some spells can't be cast if you are silenced, some can't be cast if you are tied up, some can't be cast if you are robbed of your components. Why not leave it at that? Why not just say that those things come into play in those and similar circumstances.

It just seems like such an odd thing to get hung up on. It is like having an entire rule set for how full your waterskin is. If it is half empty, it will slosh when you sneak, so you get disadvantage. If it is full or empty you are OK. Sure, I see how that makes sense, but seriously, who wants to play like that? Would you make a rogue state that they put down or fill up, or consolidate their waterskins before making a stealth role?

To me, if in combat the class is doing the things you would expect it to do, I don't feel compelled to nerf it or add in micro-management. If the EK is beating people up and casting the odd spell that is fine. If the wizard wants to lift a portculis while casting a somantic spell, we might have an issue. I am sure if I came from a background of an edition where I had to count the feathers and slugs I kept in my mages pockets I might feel differently.

Agreed 100%, except that warcaster is still super good even if your DM isn't an anal-retentive pedantic rules lawyer about casting while carrying gear.

It's other two abilities are worth it. Advantage to maintain concentration is essential for any spellcaster in enough melee to want a shield.

And the other ability... Opportunity attack shocking grasp or hold person? Yes please.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

So, I looked at how many Bard spells that can realistically be considered combat spells require an M component.

I got as far as 2nd level spells - one cantrip (dancing lights), three 1st level (bane, sleep, Tasha's HL), but once at second level spells, there's a ton. So it looks as though this may be a genuine problem in terms of making bards feel bardy.

Consider making bardic spell focus to be dependent on the creation of a musical note;
- obviously a Musical instrument (but better for out of combat/hiding at the rear)
- The zing of sword on shield rim
- Rhythmic drumming of the feet
- clicking of fingers
- shaking of a jangly charm bracelet

Bit weak I know.

 

[crashtestdummy]

Regarding somatic components, consider the real-life example of a snake charmer that uses the movement of his pipe as part of the action to 'charm' the snake. The movement of the musical instrument can form part of the somatic component of the spell.

 

[Kobold Stew]

The difficulties faced by a bard when using a spell focus as a full spell caster are different than other full spell casters in the game. The difficulties emerge both in game mechanics and in the rationalization that is required to make sense of how the rules can be made to work.

The fact that one can invent situations that can be made to fit the rules is irrelevant: other full casters don't face these arbitrary constraints, and the rules do not seem aware of their own inconsistencies.