D&D 5E Casting with Shield - Bard Style

[Prism]

I obviously want the shield for the +2 AC because I am expected to be in the thick of things from time to time (we are only 3 in our current party), and I want to play an instrument because it improves the role play, the story, it personifies the character ... whether I'd cast a spell that requires a M using a component pouch or be allowed to switch weapon/instrument, the end result would be the same.

Ex 1 - According to rules:
Round 1: (Bard with shield) Sheath weapon, pick up component from pouch, cast spell (V,S,M)

Ex 2 - According to rules:
Round 1: (Bard with shield) Sheath weapon, ...cast spell (V,S only)
Round 2: (Bard with shield) Pick up lute, cast spell (V,S,M)

Ex 3 - What could be
Round 1: (Bard with shield) Sheath weapon, pick up lute, cast spell (V,S,M)

Hence, for example 1 and 3, the end result is the same, only the spoken words of the player changes :
Ex.1: "I sheath my sword, grab a handful of fine sand in my hand and throw it towards the enemies and put them to Sleep (V,S,M)
Ex.2: "I sheath my sword, grab my lute and start playing a relaxing melody to put them to Sleep (V,S,M)

Same end result, different interpretation ..some might like the former, some the later, but if you like the later, you can't do it because the rules make it that you'll have to wait for the next round to do that just as described in Ex.2

Anyway, this was a good discussion, and exactly what I was looking for! I wanted to know the consensus on the topic and I see that it's divided, that there is no clear preferred method and that basically it's up to each table to decide what they want to do with it ...Thanks everyone for contributing !

I'm in total agreement when it comes to game balance. I just can get over the idea of playing a lute while still wearing a shield. I don't see any real way around it unless you rule that holding and waving is enough which I don't think either of us want. My valor bard wears a horn around her neck for quick access. My DM allows me to use it without using an interaction rather than having to drop my weapon, but I'd be ok either way as I hardly ever cast a spell in combat that needs it

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The jack of all trades schtick goes way back to Ad&d bards who HAD to multi class as Fighter, Thief and Druid - hence the theme.

In 1E, maybe. By the time 2E came around, they were just one class who advanced in fighting, thieving, and wizarding simultaneously. Third Edition carried on that tradition. I can't speak for 4E, though.

The PHB says
The bard is a master of song, speech, and the magic they contain. Bards say that the multiverse was spoken into existence, that the words of the gods have it shape, and the echoes of these primordial words of creation still resound throughout the cosmos. The music of bards is an attempt to snatch and harness these echoes, subtly woven into their spells and powers.
It then goes on to mention "the magic hidden in music".
It's not a party trick, it's their raison d'être.

"Bards say" this. That doesn't mean they're right.

And even if you want to assume that they're right, and the world really does work that way, then so what? You stand in the middle of the battlefield, play your lute, and get shot a bunch of times because you don't have a shield. The Bard faces no more difficulty in this regard than a Wizard would, given that Wizards also can't cast a spell while wearing a shield.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Saying "bards say this" and "doesn't mean they're right" when it is in the rules for the definition of a bard and the source of their magic, means that you're choosing to ignore what the rules say. So it's your ruling, your house rule, in effect.

I was merely pointing out that in your previous comment you laid out the line that music and magic for bards are not linked, which as an absolute statement is very much against the rules as written. Stating your personal definition does not make the raw go away. That was all.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Saying "bards say this" and "doesn't mean they're right" when it is in the rules for the definition of a bard and the source of their magic, means that you're choosing to ignore what the rules say. So it's your ruling, your house rule, in effect.

It's my interpretation, based on the quoted text. A house rule changes something. An interpretation is a disagreement about what the thing actually is in the first place. I would have to check the full text in order to see what applies, in this case.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

If it helps, I'm more inclined to give the bardic power to the voice anyway, which makes a lot of bard spells a bit weird thematically needing a piece of iron etc etc.

I would say so long as you can hold a component pouch and make a rhythmic noise with it (like a chicken shake) it's fine. Tiny bit of colour - wizards clutch their pouches, bards rattle them. Maybe they have tiny little bells stitched into the pouch. No biggie.

Otherwise just go with the one man band harmonica mount and you're golden.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

It's my interpretation, based on the quoted text. A house rule changes something. An interpretation is a disagreement about what the thing actually is in the first place. I would have to check the full text in order to see what applies, in this case.

I would read the Bard introduction again - from the examples of bards in action at the start right through it seems fairly obvious that, "in the worlds of D&D", bards get their magic from music. I'm not convinced anyone would find it an easy interpretation to see otherwise - as written - without a lot of off-page yes-butting.

In other words, "yes, but I'm not happy with this setup. I want my bards to be different to this description of their source of magic"; which would be a change.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if they did make that into a real thing in this edition. It's entirely in line with their treatment of monks :-/

 

[Unwise]

To me, almost any rules that discourage a bard from pulling out an instrument when they want to use some magic are bad rules. If it makes the class less characterful and sabotages its shtick, then its a bad rule.

In a local game houseruling is discouraged as they swap DMs a lot. So I made up this magic item instead.

Lute of Harmonic Balance
- Grants the users +2 shield AC bonus when wielded in one hand.
- When casting spells, magical components simply turn to harmonic vibrations and float away, without the need to handle them.
- If played with both hands as an action, all attacks on the user have disadvantage. The user may make a speech roll as if they had spent an entire action to do so.
- Has a built in 'delay pedal' rune, just for the awesome.

This is really a Lute that does nothing but reflavour a shield and the dodge action and allow proper bardic casting. The added advantage is that they can take a full action to intimidate/persuade/insight etc as well as dodging. In our games, an incidental speech check is harder than one where you pay your full attention to it.

 

[Herobizkit]

Strap a tambourine on your shield. Jingle jangle, there's your spell focus.

 

[ChrisCarlson]

Strap a tambourine on your shield. Jingle jangle, there's your spell focus.

...isn't a round metal shield really just a gong?