Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7645712" data-attributes="member: 996">I don't see how it does, actually.&nbsp; Any other ratio could have been used, or classes could have been given explicit 'caster levels.' Not surprising, but the 3e bard was, as you point out, also technically a full caster, just one with a slower progression that only reached 6th level spells.&nbsp; Oh, they have been, though you can debate to what degree.&nbsp; And, I don't think it's irrelevant to the Bard's WotC-edition arc:&nbsp; from 3rd Tier compared to the Wizard's Tier 1 in 3e &amp; the butt of jokes, to nominally balanced with everything from Wizard down to lowly fighter in 4e &amp; rehabilitated as a 'leader,' to finally being the traditional Wizard's near-equal in 5e &amp; kinda baddass.&nbsp; The Bard's quite a success story.And a pretty serious alternative to Cleric. (to nod towards the actual topic)3e Bards were not a badly-designed class in 3e, and if you were willing to mess with their schtick, could be adapted to some quite interesting concepts.&nbsp; The Fighter &amp; Sorcerer were better designs, in that they were more elegant, but the Bard wasn't far behind. One concept I never got to try in 3e was a Bard who's 'inspiration' took the form of unsolicited advice - a comical, yet useful, backseat adventurer (ironically, it worked even better as a warlord in 4e, and is out of bounds, again, in 5e).&nbsp; If that latitude it was given with it's inspiration in 3.x had been more assertively put forth and/or broadly accepted, it might've been better received.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7645712, member: 996"] I don't see how it does, actually. Any other ratio could have been used, or classes could have been given explicit 'caster levels.' Not surprising, but the 3e bard was, as you point out, also technically a full caster, just one with a slower progression that only reached 6th level spells. Oh, they have been, though you can debate to what degree. And, I don't think it's irrelevant to the Bard's WotC-edition arc: from 3rd Tier compared to the Wizard's Tier 1 in 3e & the butt of jokes, to nominally balanced with everything from Wizard down to lowly fighter in 4e & rehabilitated as a 'leader,' to finally being the traditional Wizard's near-equal in 5e & kinda baddass. The Bard's quite a success story. And a pretty serious alternative to Cleric. (to nod towards the actual topic) 3e Bards were not a badly-designed class in 3e, and if you were willing to mess with their schtick, could be adapted to some quite interesting concepts. The Fighter & Sorcerer were better designs, in that they were more elegant, but the Bard wasn't far behind. One concept I never got to try in 3e was a Bard who's 'inspiration' took the form of unsolicited advice - a comical, yet useful, backseat adventurer (ironically, it worked even better as a warlord in 4e, and is out of bounds, again, in 5e). If that latitude it was given with it's inspiration in 3.x had been more assertively put forth and/or broadly accepted, it might've been better received. [/QUOTE]

Verification