Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Saving the Bard
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="uzirath" data-source="post: 7828977" data-attributes="member: 8495"><p>If every social interaction had to be handled by the Face, then, sure, that would be a bore. Just like if every battle had to be handled by the Beefcake and every puzzle by the Brain. With that said, though, I can't think of a group I've played in where we didn't develop a sense of who-would-be-best in various situations. We don't send the scholar to the front line in a fight with the troll. We don't ask the barbarian to pick the lock on the casket of jewels (though we might ask him to bash it open). Similarly, although all of the characters role-play during social scenes, if the stakes are high, we will usually depend on the most diplomatic character to do the bulk of the negotiating because it gets us a better deal. That has always seemed fun to me. And, of course, depending on circumstances, we might use a different Face. In my GURPS games, we commonly see three different types of Faces, the high-status negotiator, the terrifying intimidator, and the streetsmart underworld person. Sometimes these are combined into one character; sometimes not. I've seen bards excel in all three roles in various combinations.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree. As with combat, player skill can be rolled into this if that is the group's preference. With combat, players who have a better sense of strategy and tactics will often have an advantage, even if these skills are not represented in the mechanics. In social situations, glib players who pay attention to the social dynamics of the setting might have a natural advantage. More detailed mechanics can mitigate this and can allow players to play characters who have expertise in areas where they don't excel. If a player with little interest in military strategy and martial arts wants to play a skilled combat leader, we can represent that with a mechanical skill. A socially-oriented character, like a bard, might have skills that represent empathy, social awareness, etc., that help the GM provide tips to an otherwise clueless player. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I would hope that a GM who intended to entirely nerf a class would just ban it outright, or at least include that information in their session zero notes. I've run games, for example, where magic was severely limited, but still allowed players to choose a magical character. They knew, going in, that they were choosing the "hard" skill-level for the game. If I had dropped the bomb on them mid-campaign, that would be no fun for any of us.</p><p></p><p>In most games that I've played, whether 5e or various GURPS flavors, the bard concept has worked fairly well. I even know of a group that was entirely composed of bards!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="uzirath, post: 7828977, member: 8495"] If every social interaction had to be handled by the Face, then, sure, that would be a bore. Just like if every battle had to be handled by the Beefcake and every puzzle by the Brain. With that said, though, I can't think of a group I've played in where we didn't develop a sense of who-would-be-best in various situations. We don't send the scholar to the front line in a fight with the troll. We don't ask the barbarian to pick the lock on the casket of jewels (though we might ask him to bash it open). Similarly, although all of the characters role-play during social scenes, if the stakes are high, we will usually depend on the most diplomatic character to do the bulk of the negotiating because it gets us a better deal. That has always seemed fun to me. And, of course, depending on circumstances, we might use a different Face. In my GURPS games, we commonly see three different types of Faces, the high-status negotiator, the terrifying intimidator, and the streetsmart underworld person. Sometimes these are combined into one character; sometimes not. I've seen bards excel in all three roles in various combinations. I agree. As with combat, player skill can be rolled into this if that is the group's preference. With combat, players who have a better sense of strategy and tactics will often have an advantage, even if these skills are not represented in the mechanics. In social situations, glib players who pay attention to the social dynamics of the setting might have a natural advantage. More detailed mechanics can mitigate this and can allow players to play characters who have expertise in areas where they don't excel. If a player with little interest in military strategy and martial arts wants to play a skilled combat leader, we can represent that with a mechanical skill. A socially-oriented character, like a bard, might have skills that represent empathy, social awareness, etc., that help the GM provide tips to an otherwise clueless player. I would hope that a GM who intended to entirely nerf a class would just ban it outright, or at least include that information in their session zero notes. I've run games, for example, where magic was severely limited, but still allowed players to choose a magical character. They knew, going in, that they were choosing the "hard" skill-level for the game. If I had dropped the bomb on them mid-campaign, that would be no fun for any of us. In most games that I've played, whether 5e or various GURPS flavors, the bard concept has worked fairly well. I even know of a group that was entirely composed of bards! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Saving the Bard
Top