Looking for help building a low level archer bard

[abirdcall]

- The ability to use your weapon as a spell focus, solving the problem how to cast weapon in hand. (Valor doesn’t have this)

You can cast just fine while holding a bow since you will have a hand free.

- Blade flourishes at level 3 which to me seem to be far superior compared to valor’s combat inspiration

Inspiration for damage is the worst use of them. That is pretty much all they do when you're using them at range. The armour one is okay, but will usually be a waste. The pushback is very situational.

Instead you can give your inspiration to your allies and they can use it when it matters to succeed on Saving Throws and improve their AC to avoid a hit. A Valor Bard in the party makes the party much more resilient as the most fragile characters have that bump to AC when they need it. Saving Throws can also be the difference between life and death.

Dealing an extra d8 damage is just not worth it.

Instead of looking for ways to 'abuse' things, just play them as intended and you will be much stronger for it.

But by making a bard who by default uses weapons rather than spells, I end up with unused spell slots which I can use to at the very least revive a fallen comrade with a healing word as a bonus action.

If your plan is to not take advantage of your spell slots then Bard isn't for you. Your bow is for when you don't have enough spell slots left (or need to conserve them). It is a fallback option. Making the best use out of your spell slots is much more of an 'optimization' concern than 'character build'. 5e is mostly played at the table, not in the drafting room.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Because Blade flourishes are useless to an archer...

 

[smbakeresq]

Warcaster you take anyway, as it’s other benefits are great. Being able to cast with hands full is the least of its benefits. If you have Booming Blade then of course you take it as you can use Booming Blade for opportunity attacks, which you create with Dissonant Whispers or someone else’s command.

IMO opinion the Sword bards need to be in melee to get the most out of their powers and they are not built for melee. Valor bards need to be near melee sometimes to get the most out of their powers. If Sword bard then you need mobile for the speed bonus and the ability to get out of combat.

Playing a Valor Bard now with a Halberd, the reach is actually pretty effective. BB and the rest don’t work at reach range, but it still adds a nice way to do something while being tucked behind your tank.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Booming Blade isn't on the bard spell list.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Because Blade flourishes are useless to an archer...

Which is totally wrong. It is no restricted to melee.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Which is totally wrong. It is no restricted to melee.

That looks like an oversight to me. The abilities make little sense with a ranged weapon.

 

[cbwjm]

I have a hard time understanding why everybody here prefers College of Valor over College of Swords. College of Swords gives:
- Medium armor just like valor
- The ability to use your weapon as a spell focus, solving the problem how to cast weapon in hand. (Valor doesn’t have this)
- Extra attack at level 6 just like valor
- Blade flourishes at level 3 which to me seem to be far superior compared to valor’s combat inspiration
So to me swords seems to be superior to valor in pretty much every way.

On the question of “what else does the party need”, the answer is always the same: A healbot. Nobody wants to play a healbot. I don’t want to play a healbot. But by making a bard who by default uses weapons rather than spells, I end up with unused spell slots which I can use to at the very least revive a fallen comrade with a healing word as a bonus action.

Reading through the swords bard, I'd probably go with that subclass over valour for an archer, since the flourishes definitely work with a bow, unless I wanted to provide more support for my team via bardic inspiration. I probably wouldn't worry about getting a longbow via multiclassing and would just stick to a shortbow unless I happened to also want to play an elf bard.

One thing of note, the sword bard's weapon as a spell focus seems to directly refer to melee weapons so you won't be able to use your bow as a focus.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

That looks like an oversight to me. The abilities make little sense with a ranged weapon.

Hmmh. I agree with slashing flourish. But to ise it you have to accept disadvantage. The other two make as much sense in melee as in ranged combat.

 

[smbakeresq]

On the question of “what else does the party need”, the answer is always the same: A healbot. Nobody wants to play a healbot. I don’t want to play a healbot. But by making a bard who by default uses weapons rather than spells, I end up with unused spell slots which I can use to at the very least revive a fallen comrade with a healing word as a bonus action.

As a side note, Bards make effective healbots. One level of Life cleric and magic secrets for Aura of Life is very effective. I am in a group with no Cleric, our Bard did this and took Healer feat and it’s not a problem at all.

 

[Yunru]

To paraphrase: in exchange for a +2 hit bonus you are screwed at level 4, 5, and 6.

To clarify (since paraphrasing seems to have muddied):
Starting with a level of Fighter gets you;

• More health to start with.
• +4 to +6 to attack rolls (+2 from Archery fighting style, +proficiency from... being proficient).
• Proficiency in all armours.

Doing so effects you thus:

• You get your ability bump at level 5, not level 4.
• You get your second level spells at level 6, not level 5.
• You get your second attack at level 7, not level 6.

As you can see, the downside is far less than "screwed".