Saving the Bard

[Arnwolf666]

These have potential for coolness. The acolyte-bard is the guy in the dark, ceremonial robe who plays a recorder between the passages of the head priest. Maybe the recorder helps the congress see fantastic visions. Or maybe the acolyte also has a nasty stiletto under his robe, just in case.

I'm a fan of the outlander-bard. Yeah, she sings and plays some odd, foreign instrument, but she's weathered and tough - because traveling for a living isn't safe or easy.


A knowledge-carring bard could possibly be more practical - especially for adventuring parties that can't afford to hire a sage (and keep him alive). But I think there should still be room for the rock-star bard: the hero who contributes to adventures by being famously awesome. Sort of like having John Lennon in your party. Undead. Anyway, the knowledge bard makes sense if the other members of the party have poor/no educations (which ought to be the norm, but isn't). After all, wasn't it Confucius who said "knowing is half the battle?"

Off-topic:
Shape-shifting Druids is weird. But, you know, the marketers said that they were getting a good, high-dollar response, so it snowballed. According to Etymology Online, "druid" means "they who know the oak." So, you know, I guess that means they turn into grizzly bears every once in a while.

it wouldn’t be so bad if they would put alot of emphasis on their priestly role also. Their were alot of cool Druidic rites and alot more to their mythologies. They didn’t isolate themselves from society they were the leaders and cultural teachers and keepers of their people.

 

[Salthorae]

Yeah. But that’s just because minstrel’s stole the name bard to make themselves sound cool. The Celtic bard is much more suited to adventuring. The English were killing them after all because they were trying to preserve their culture and heritage.

I've literally never done any digging into the history of the term "bard" before today.

But I think D&D does a good job giving space to create something that mirrors what the earliest bards were as lore keepers, genealogy keepers, eulogists, and satirists for their lords as well as the minstrel space. Especially 5e. You don't have to use an instrument at all to do anything Bardic in 5e. You can be a lore bard who recites histories or sings with no instruments. You can just do magic without any signing or recitation at all! With Magical Secrets you can grab spells off the Druid list to really align in that direction if you wanted.

Plus... 5e bards can pretty much do this:

It was believed that a well-aimed bardic satire, glam dicenn, could raise boils on the face of its target.

So that's fun

 

[Arnwolf666]

I've literally never done any digging into the history of the term "bard" before today.

But I think D&D does a good job giving space to create something that mirrors what the earliest bards were as lore keepers, genealogy keepers, eulogists, and satirists for their lords as well as the minstrel space. Especially 5e. You don't have to use an instrument at all to do anything Bardic in 5e. You can be a lore bard who recites histories or sings with no instruments. You can just do magic without any signing or recitation at all! With Magical Secrets you can grab spells off the Druid list to really align in that direction if you wanted.

Plus... 5e bards can pretty much do this:



So that's fun

I hope u continue to mine history for ideas. I get many from it.

 

[wizard71]

I'm occasionally annoyed that a bard HAS to be a separate class. One great way to "save" the bard is to simply give the fighter a decent number of skill points and/or appropriate feat, combat maneuver, martial archetype, or whatever you call in your given edition. Then the bard can just be any warrior who happens to play some songs. In a setting where magic is real and can be performed completely silently, there's no reason the musician should have to have highly specialized magic to use perfectly realistic melodic skills.

That is completely unnecessary. Just take the entertainer background for your fighter and you are good to go. No need for the fighter to poach abilities or skills from other classes. Not every dude who swings a sword can carry a tune.

 

[GMMichael]

That is completely unnecessary. Just take the entertainer background for your fighter and you are good to go. No need for the fighter to poach abilities or skills from other classes. Not every dude who swings a sword can carry a tune.

And not every dude who can carry a tune can swing a sword. But I have a question - aren't "backgrounds" free of prerequisites? Wouldn't using those mean that yes, any dude who can swing a sword can also take the entertainer background and be a "bard?"

I've been toying with adding a Character Class module to Modos RPG. If there were a bard class, it might look like this:

Bard prerequisite: 1 skill point in Knowledge (Lore), 1 skill point in Engage, Flaw: can't resist a crowd
Benefit: bonus daily hero point for creating a diversion, Hold 1 is unlocked and the first daily usage has no MP cost

Loosely translated: if you are someone who talks to people and draws information and attention, you gain a special ability to distract someone or hinder his defenses.

 

[Salthorae]

Wouldn't using those mean that yes, any dude who can swing a sword can also take the entertainer background and be a "bard?"

Yes. I play a "bard" pc who is just a rogue with the Entertainer background.

 

[aramis erak]

As an Irishman I would kind of like the bard to be a Druidic order kind of like it was historically. But a skald archetype would be great for a fighter.
Maybe a separate minstrel archetype for the rogue.

That third is already the D&D standard... has been since 1988 and AD&D 2E.

 

[Arnwolf666]

I’ve often thought the bard and monk should just be an archetype for the fighter rogue, cleric, and wizard. Think that over a bit. Lol. Just an opinion.