Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
I don't know. Ask the swordmage, the warlord or the warlock.The Shadow said:
Do We Need A Bard Class?
- Thread starter The Shadow
- Start date
In light of the Sneak Attack, I can certainly see a place for Bards in 4E, considering their new 'roles' model.
Fighter = martial Defender.
Swordmage = magic Defender
Ranger = skillmonkey Defender
Paladin = divine Defender
Monk = martial Striker
Warlock = magic Striker
Rogue = skillmonkey Striker
Wizard = magic Controller
Cleric = divine Leader
Warlord = martial Leader
Bard = skillmonkey Leader
If I'm right, they've left themselves plenty of spots open for new classes to fill gaps.
Fighter = martial Defender.
Swordmage = magic Defender
Ranger = skillmonkey Defender
Paladin = divine Defender
Monk = martial Striker
Warlock = magic Striker
Rogue = skillmonkey Striker
Wizard = magic Controller
Cleric = divine Leader
Warlord = martial Leader
Bard = skillmonkey Leader
If I'm right, they've left themselves plenty of spots open for new classes to fill gaps.
Chimera
First Post
I sure hope there is a Bard, or it's going to be hell to recreate my WotBS Bard (now 6th level) when we do the conversion next fall.
Sure, I'm not much in combat, other than by boosting the crap out of my allies (Song of the Heart + Inspirational Boost = +3 to hit/damage; but even that's recognizing that a mere +1 for a normal PHB Bard would SUCK!), the occasional lucky shot and judicious use of the reserve healing feat. But then again, our Cleric tends to do even less damage than me, because he's running around healing people. So really, I am more useful in combat than he is.
In social situations, I rule. Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Gather Information, Bardic Knowledge, Language skills. I totally rule. To the point that our GM decided not to send the Diplomat NPC with us for the Mad King's Ball scenario. My Bard can handle that aspect easy enough and it places those tasks in my hands, not in the hands of an NPC.
Spellcasting? Sure, I'd love a couple of attack spells. The Bard has a large number of spells, but most of them aren't really useful. While I drool over the 2nd level spell possibilities and mourn that I only get to chose four of them, when I look at the higher level spells there's really nothing that thrills me all that much.
Skills? To be sure, there's a couple that I'm really annoyed are not on my list (Spot). And I think that six isn't enough for a "jack of all trades" character. Should be eight, same as the rogue.
Sure, I'm not much in combat, other than by boosting the crap out of my allies (Song of the Heart + Inspirational Boost = +3 to hit/damage; but even that's recognizing that a mere +1 for a normal PHB Bard would SUCK!), the occasional lucky shot and judicious use of the reserve healing feat. But then again, our Cleric tends to do even less damage than me, because he's running around healing people. So really, I am more useful in combat than he is.
In social situations, I rule. Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive, Gather Information, Bardic Knowledge, Language skills. I totally rule. To the point that our GM decided not to send the Diplomat NPC with us for the Mad King's Ball scenario. My Bard can handle that aspect easy enough and it places those tasks in my hands, not in the hands of an NPC.
Spellcasting? Sure, I'd love a couple of attack spells. The Bard has a large number of spells, but most of them aren't really useful. While I drool over the 2nd level spell possibilities and mourn that I only get to chose four of them, when I look at the higher level spells there's really nothing that thrills me all that much.
Skills? To be sure, there's a couple that I'm really annoyed are not on my list (Spot). And I think that six isn't enough for a "jack of all trades" character. Should be eight, same as the rogue.
Aus_Snow
First Post
Nothing.The Shadow said:
I think they most likely made the right decision here. If I was going to be running 4e, I would also hope that they don't add the class some time later.
Fine, be a leader/inspirational type, be a skill monkey, take ranks in perform, diplomacy or what have you. Call yourself a 'bard' if you must.
Beyond that, why bother with it?
I'm right there with you on fewer base classes too, these days. Zero, in fact. But I've been quite happy with fewer than the number allegedly in the 4e PHB.
lutecius
Explorer
Aus_Snow said:
have you read all the previous posts? :\
because doing what you said, you would end up with something that has a lot of extra baggage you might not want (do you mean leader type as in Cleric? Warlord? does every bard player want to be a sneakbackstabbing Rogue by default?)
and does not begin to cover what you might want (how do I simulate charisma-based song magic? where do I find a spell list based on enchantments rather than clericky things, infernalpacty things or goldenwyverny schools)
Is there a base class that has the necessary number of free skills to be a skill monkey anyway?
Assuming you can just dip into other classes (like has been mentioned in previews) AND find exactly what you need, what level of a class you did not want to play should you be to get enough feats to play a bard?
Again I am all for generic classes or even a classless system but D&D as is just does not work that way.
and by that logic, other existing and previewed classes have even less flavor of their own and less mechanical reasons to exist.
What I really think, is that they didn't want less but more classes. otherwise the PHBI classes would be more generic and there would be means to rebuild the old bard (none of which has been hinted in the previews). I am sure the bard, druid and sorcerer have just been put off to sell the next PHBs.
fuindordm
Adventurer
You know what would be really nice?
The Bard has a selection of leader-type (buffing, combat healing) powers and very focused arcane powers that require an implement, or perhaps are boosted by a Perform check instead. Fascination and Suggestion are powers that can apply to almost any performance art, and are often useful.
On top of that, they get to select half their powers from any other class list without expending a feat for the privilege.
This gives them a clear role (arcane leader), some signature moves to define the class, and the freedom to construct anything you want on that basis.
Then bards who want to have real spells can take them from the wizard or priest classes. Bards that want to be fey-touched can take Warlock powers. Bards that want to be as unmagical as possible can just take combat powers, but they'll still have the semi-magical effect of their songs.
The Bard has a selection of leader-type (buffing, combat healing) powers and very focused arcane powers that require an implement, or perhaps are boosted by a Perform check instead. Fascination and Suggestion are powers that can apply to almost any performance art, and are often useful.
On top of that, they get to select half their powers from any other class list without expending a feat for the privilege.
This gives them a clear role (arcane leader), some signature moves to define the class, and the freedom to construct anything you want on that basis.
Then bards who want to have real spells can take them from the wizard or priest classes. Bards that want to be fey-touched can take Warlock powers. Bards that want to be as unmagical as possible can just take combat powers, but they'll still have the semi-magical effect of their songs.
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
Yes, we do. The class-based system reduces the number of archetypes, and the wandering minstrel/performer who gains power from performance simply isn't represented by the other types. Especially as it appears that the classes are mroe restrictive in 4E (looking at thr Rogue description, anyway).
Plus bards have been part of the base game of each edition except basic D&D. Why shouldn't they be part of the base of this edition? We have to sacrifice a treasured part of the history of the game for a newcomer (Warlord, dragonborn ...)? Bah.
Plus bards have been part of the base game of each edition except basic D&D. Why shouldn't they be part of the base of this edition? We have to sacrifice a treasured part of the history of the game for a newcomer (Warlord, dragonborn ...)? Bah.
Similar Threads
