D&D (2024) Should the PHB have an arcane half caster?

[tetrasodium]

2E - Advanced extremely fast, to the point where you actually got fifth-level spells before a Fighter/Mage did. Were more than a "half-caster". A 2/3rds or 3/4s caster, which is more appropriate. Was a true Jack of all Trades.

This is factually incorrect. You simply cannot compare level x to level x in 2e because there were too many class specific variances. Bards advanced fast yes but they had a completely different spell slot progression that capped at 6th level spells. They capped out at 6th level spells & didn't even get one till level 16.
I'm not going through the level to spell slot ratio for every level but here are a few unless I screwed up copying or typo'd

• Bard5: 10,000xp 3 1st level slots 1 2nd level slot
• Bard 10: 160,000xp 3 1st level slots/3 2nd level slots/2 3rd level slots/1 4th level slot
• Bard 15: 1,100,000xp 3 1st level slots/3 2nd level slots/2 3rd level slots/2 4th level slot
• Bard20: 2,200,000xp 4 1st level slots/4 2nd level slots/4 3rd level slots/4 4th level slot/4 5th level slots/3 6th level slots
• Wizard5: 20,000xp 4 1st level slots 2 2nd level slot/1 3rd level slot
• Wizard 10: 250,000xp 4 1st level slots/4 2nd level slots/3 3rd level slots/2 4th level slot/2 5th level slots
• Wizard 15: 1,875,000xp 5 1st level slots/5 2nd level slots/5 3rd level slots/5 4th level slot/5 5th level slots/2 6th level slots/1 7th level slot
• Wizard 20: 3,750,000xp 5 1st level slots/5 2nd level slots/5 3rd level slots/5 4th level slot/5 5th level slots/4 6th level slots/3 7th level slot/3 8th level slots/2 9th level slots
• Priest 5: 13,000xp 3 1st level slots 3 2nd level slot/1 3rd level slot
• Priest 10: 450,000xp 4 1st level slots/4 2nd level slots/3 3rd level slots/3 4th level slot/2 5th level slots
• Priest 15: 1,575,000xp 6 1st level slots/6 2nd level slots/6 3rd level slots/6 4th level slot/4 5th level slots/2 6th level slots/1 7th level slot
• Priest 20: 2,700,000xp 9 1st level slots/9 2nd level slots/9 3rd level slots/8 4th level slot/7 5th level slots/5 6th level slots/2 7th level slot

Bard got their first 5th level spell at 13 (660,000xp) compared to wizard & priest's 9(135,000 xpwizard/225,000xp priest). Yes it's popular to point out that thief table PCs (like rogue) got experience for gold on dmg70 but you can't ignore that wizard & priest table ones got it for casting spells making scrolls or potions & crafting permanent magic items on the same page.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The problem here isn't the bard class. One of its strengths was support. But they were also enchanters with save or suck spells (Tasha's Hideous Laughter, for example, was a first level spell for bards but a second level one for wizards and sorcerers), party faces in a way rogues couldn't touch (Charisma primary, joint second highest skill points in the game, spells like the unique Glibness for +30 (!) to bluff), scouts in a way rogues envied (Hide and Move Silently on the skill list plus Invisibility and possibly even Sculpt Sound) and more.

If you take the class that's simultaneously a better face and a better scout than the rogue, an almost specialist sorcerer level illusionist/enchanter, and a loremaster that can maintain a buff throughout the dungeon while still hitting as hard as a non-raging barbarian while making the barbarian hit harder than if they were raging, and you use this base to make a stand-and-do-nothing character then the problem is not the class. It's the player.

I don't agree. There's a reason people like the 5E design much better. The 3.XE design was basically a bad, meme-y joke even after the improvement. The idea that they're "almost a sorcerer" is pretty funny. As for "a better scout than a rogue", so is literally anyone who can cast Invisibility lol. Skills were largely a joke in 3.XE because spells outperformed them so wildly, and the ways they were suggested to be rolled made them massively likely to fail (PF1 did some slightly more interesting things here). And let's be clear, you can't cast spells, use magic items, and so on whilst singing your magic song, you can only attack with your weak-sauce attacks ("as hard as a non-ranging barbarian" lol who are you trying to fool - as "hard as any generic character with no special combat abilities and a Rogue/Cleric BAB" I think you mean).

Also, weren't you claiming you could get Inspire Courage to give a +4 to attack and damage at L3? How does that work. I'm looking at the 3.5 Bard and it's +1 at L3. Is there some Feat or something? You don't get to +4 until level 20.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This is factually incorrect. You simply cannot compare level x to level x in 2e because there were too many class specific variances. Bards advanced fast yes but they had a completely different spell slot progression that capped at 6th level spells. They capped out at 6th level spells & didn't even get one till level 16.
I'm not going through the level to spell slot ratio for every level but here are a few unless I screwed up copying or typo'd

• Bard5: 10,000xp 3 1st level slots 1 2nd level slot
• Bard 10: 160,000xp 3 1st level slots/3 2nd level slots/2 3rd level slots/1 4th level slot
• Bard 15: 1,100,000xp 3 1st level slots/3 2nd level slots/2 3rd level slots/2 4th level slot
• Bard20: 2,200,000xp 4 1st level slots/4 2nd level slots/4 3rd level slots/4 4th level slot/4 5th level slots/3 6th level slots
• Wizard5: 20,000xp 4 1st level slots 2 2nd level slot/1 3rd level slot
• Wizard 10: 250,000xp 4 1st level slots/4 2nd level slots/3 3rd level slots/2 4th level slot/2 5th level slots
• Wizard 15: 1,875,000xp 5 1st level slots/5 2nd level slots/5 3rd level slots/5 4th level slot/5 5th level slots/2 6th level slots/1 7th level slot
• Wizard 20: 3,750,000xp 5 1st level slots/5 2nd level slots/5 3rd level slots/5 4th level slot/5 5th level slots/4 6th level slots/3 7th level slot/3 8th level slots/2 9th level slots
• Priest 5: 13,000xp 3 1st level slots 3 2nd level slot/1 3rd level slot
• Priest 10: 450,000xp 4 1st level slots/4 2nd level slots/3 3rd level slots/3 4th level slot/2 5th level slots
• Priest 15: 1,575,000xp 6 1st level slots/6 2nd level slots/6 3rd level slots/6 4th level slot/4 5th level slots/2 6th level slots/1 7th level slot
• Priest 20: 2,700,000xp 9 1st level slots/9 2nd level slots/9 3rd level slots/8 4th level slot/7 5th level slots/5 6th level slots/2 7th level slot

Bard got their first 5th level spell at 13 (660,000xp) compared to wizard & priest's 9(135,000 xpwizard/225,000xp priest). Yes it's popular to point out that thief table PCs (like rogue) got experience for gold on dmg70 but you can't ignore that wizard & priest table ones got it for casting spells making scrolls or potions & crafting permanent magic items on the same page.

Ummmm you didn't show it to be factually incorrect. I'm not seeing any figures for an F/M there and you missed the 5th-level slots for "Bard 15" (despite mentioning them later).

 

[Corinnguard]

I don't agree. There's a reason people like the 5E design much better. The 3.XE design was basically a bad, meme-y joke even after the improvement. The idea that they're "almost a sorcerer" is pretty funny. As for "a better scout than a rogue", so is literally anyone who can cast Invisibility lol. Skills were largely a joke in 3.XE because spells outperformed them so wildly, and the ways they were suggested to be rolled made them massively likely to fail (PF1 did some slightly more interesting things here). And let's be clear, you can't cast spells, use magic items, and so on whilst singing your magic song, you can only attack with your weak-sauce attacks ("as hard as a non-ranging barbarian" lol who are you trying to fool - as "hard as any generic character with no special combat abilities and a Rogue/Cleric BAB" I think you mean).

Also, weren't you claiming you could get Inspire Courage to give a +4 to attack and damage at L3? How does that work. I'm looking at the 3.5 Bard and it's +1 at L3. Is there some Feat or something? You don't get to +4 until level 20.

Any chance you have looked at Level Up: A5e's take on the Bard? curious

 

[accountcreatedtopostthis]

I don't want an "arcane half-caster"; I want an artificer and if the implementation happens to be an arcane half-caster then I want that. I'd also prefer the bard to be nearer the 3.5 bard rather than feeling so much like Another Spell-Slinger.

Part of it is that 5e is exceptionally high magic as a game. I'd rather also be able to easily be able to run it for some settings in a much lower magic way with bards, rangers, paladins, alchemists, and enchanters (of items) as well as martials and have it feel a lot more complete than it currently is.

Quick question to all Artificer lovers out there:
How do you feel about your class of choice being reskinned as the Hedge Mage archetype?
Now, don't get your noose and pitchfork quite yet! I don't expect it to be a realistic change, I'm simply curious.

The classical Hedge Mage could fit with the artificer's current subclasses with some reskining. Hell, artificer itself could be a Hedge Mage subclass.
And if you shed the steampunk vibe for a more fantasy one, it would then create leeway for more subclasses. Even Gish-ish ones.

Mainly asking in case you've homebrewed something similar and know if it runs well?

 

[tetrasodium]

I don't agree. There's a reason people like the 5E design much better. The 3.XE design was basically a bad, meme-y joke even after the improvement. The idea that they're "almost a sorcerer" is pretty funny. As for "a better scout than a rogue", so is literally anyone who can cast Invisibility lol. Skills were largely a joke in 3.XE because spells outperformed them so wildly, and the ways they were suggested to be rolled made them massively likely to fail (PF1 did some slightly more interesting things here). And let's be clear, you can't cast spells, use magic items, and so on whilst singing your magic song, you can only attack with your weak-sauce attacks ("as hard as a non-ranging barbarian" lol who are you trying to fool - as "hard as any generic character with no special combat abilities and a Rogue/Cleric BAB" I think you mean).

Also, weren't you claiming you could get Inspire Courage to give a +4 to attack and damage at L3? How does that work. I'm looking at the 3.5 Bard and it's +1 at L3. Is there some Feat or something? You don't get to +4 until level 20.

That's another area where you can't compare 2e like other editions. Fighter/mage dual class or fighter/mage multiclass? The fact remains that there is no way to peg 2e bard as half or fractional caster because the system simply didn't work in any way close to a way that would even allow such an objective metric to be marked to be made. What's important is that compared to the other casters they lagged considerably. The bard however could do something a fighter/mage could not, specifically they could cast in armor

Spoiler: because

where mortals were never meant to go.
Wizards cannot wear any armor, for several reasons. Firstly,
most spells require complicated gestures and odd posturings
by the caster and armor restricts the wearer’s ability to do
these properly. Secondly, the wizard spent his youth (and will
spend most of his life) learning arcane languages, poring
through old books, and practicing his spells. This leaves no
time for learning other things (like how to wear armor prop-
erly and use it effectively). If the wizard had spent his time
learning about armor, he would not have even the meager
skills and powers he begins with. There are even unfounded
theories that claim the materials in most armors disrupt the
delicate fabric of a spell as it gathers energy; the two cannot
exist side by side in harmony. While this idea is popular with
the common people, true wizards know this is simply not
true. If it were, how would they ever be able to cast spells
requiring iron braziers or metal bowls?
For similar reasons, wizards are severely restricted in the
weapons they can use. They are limited to those that are easy
to learn or are sometimes useful in their own research. Hence,
a wizard can use a dagger or a staff, items that are traditionally
useful in magical studies. Other weapons allowed are darts,
knives, and slings (weapons that require little skill, little
strength, or both).
Wizards can use more magical items than any other char-
acters. These include potions, rings, wands, rods, scrolls, and
most miscellaneous magical items. A wizard can use a mag-
ical version of any weapon allowed to his class but cannot
use magical armor, because no armor is allowed. Between
their spells and magical items, however, wizards wield great
power.

A bard, by his nature, tends to learn many different skills. He
is a jack-of-all-trades but master of none. Although he fights as
a rogue, he can use any weapon. He can wear any armor up
to, and including, chain mail, but he cannot use a shield.

Wizard: A multi-classed wizard can freely combine the
powers of the wizard with any other class allowed, although
the wearing of armor is restricted. Elves wearing elven chain
can cast spells in armor, as magic is part of the nature of
elves. However, elven chain is extremely rare and can never
be purchased. It must be given, found, or won.
...
Once these restrictions are lifted, the character must still
abide by the restrictions of whichever class he is using at the
moment. A dual-class fighter/mage, for example, cannot cast
spells while wearing armor.

A build that needs to say "Hold on let me take off my armor to cast that spell" is hardly worthy of much discussion. I don't remember if bard was present in basic where you had a fighter/mage-like "elf" class that might have been reasonable to compare against if so but we haven't have "elf" as a class for a long time.... are you thinking of basic or something?

 

[Neonchameleon]

I don't agree. There's a reason people like the 5E design much better.

Mostly that the wizard and CoDzilla aren't ridiculous.

The 3.XE design was basically a bad, meme-y joke even after the improvement. The idea that they're "almost a sorcerer" is pretty funny.

The 3.X sorcerer had serious issues. It didn't know enough spells. And I can't take you seriously if you're still talking about "the 3.X bard".

As for "a better scout than a rogue", so is literally anyone who can cast Invisibility lol. Skills were largely a joke in 3.XE because spells outperformed them so wildly, and the ways they were suggested to be rolled made them massively likely to fail (PF1 did some slightly more interesting things here).

PF1 managed to break the bard with its "more interesting things" because the designers didn't understand how the bard was supposed to work. You gain a few new things (Dirge of Doom not having a save being a highlight) but Pathfinder managed to significantly nerf literally all the existing bard abilities.

• Bardic Knowledge scaling changed; the 3.5 Bard's knowledge scaled with level making you a good generalist while pathfinder's scaled with half level but added to knowledge skills for a tight focus. Weaker, less interesting.
• Bardic Music uses plummeted from Level uses/day to a set number of rounds per day. You had to dole out your performances like a miser and basically couldn't perform one three minute song and empower the whole thing. A 3.5 (or even 3.0) bard could go through entire works of epic poetry.
• Inspire Courage was shattered in three ways
  • It was actively nerfed in duration; in 3.5 you keep Inspire Courage for five rounds after you stop hearing it (among other things giving some protection from spells like Silence). In PF you only get as long as you hear it
  • All the support for it went and I don't think was ever replaced
  • Due to the incredibly limited duration you couldn't use it as an ongoing thing. This made it almost useless other than in an ambush until level 7 as you had to give up your action to set it up.
• Fascinate was destroyed. In 3.5 fascinate was a very weak effect that had two things going for it; it had the hardest save DC in a game, and a basically unlimited duration as long as the bard remained present and performing. So you could use it as a viable long term distraction. Pathfinder broke all that and Fascinate still has a very weak and easy to break effect but now only has an average save DC and rather than taking a single performance burns your number of rounds per day of music.
• Inspire competence remained useless.
• Suggestion was sideways nerfed. You need to fascinate before you can suggest and you get a saving throw against suggestion. So far so good. In 3.5 Fascinate's DC is a skill roll and very hard to beat. But as the PF fascinate is pretty easy to beat then Suggestion has a very low chance of success.
• Inspire Greatness was, guess what, nerfed (although you can at this level start it as a move action). In 3.5 it lasts for 5 rounds after someone stopped hearing it - while in PF it lasts only while it can be heard. This, among other things, allows for buff stacking and for protection from silence.
• Inspire Heroics. 5 round buffer gone.
• Mass Suggestion. As Suggestion - sideways nerfed through fascinate.

Oh, and a couple of the bard mainstay spells (Tasha's Hideous Laughter and Glibness spring to mind) were nerfed.

The main "interesting" things PF did to the 3.5 bard was added high level bling - while throwing grit into the engine of what made the core bard work.

And let's be clear, you can't cast spells, use magic items, and so on whilst singing your magic song, you can only attack with your weak-sauce attacks ("as hard as a non-ranging barbarian" lol who are you trying to fool - as "hard as any generic character with no special combat abilities and a Rogue/Cleric BAB" I think you mean).

Apparently you don't believe in adding the buffs to the effect of the attack. As I mentioned +4/+4 is achievable by level 3. (One feat, one spell, one magic item). If you think that level of swing is meaningless I don't know what to tell you.

Also, weren't you claiming you could get Inspire Courage to give a +4 to attack and damage at L3? How does that work. I'm looking at the 3.5 Bard and it's +1 at L3. Is there some Feat or something? You don't get to +4 until level 20.

I thought I'd said. There's a feat for +1, a first level spell for +1, and a 1600GP magic item 3/day all in the obvious splatbooks (no going dumpster diving into e.g. Secrets of Sarlonia).

 

[Neonchameleon]

Quick question to all Artificer lovers out there:
How do you feel about your class of choice being reskinned as the Hedge Mage archetype?
Now, don't get your noose and pitchfork quite yet! I don't expect it to be a realistic change, I'm simply curious.

The classical Hedge Mage could fit with the artificer's current subclasses with some reskining. Hell, artificer itself could be a Hedge Mage subclass.
And if you shed the steampunk vibe for a more fantasy one, it would then create leeway for more subclasses. Even Gish-ish ones.

Mainly asking in case you've homebrewed something similar and know if it runs well?

If you want to make the artificer a hedge mage subclass I'm getting the pitchforks. It's a strong and varied enough archetype that it's a class. (I'd say the current D&Done Ranger is a good hedge mage). The alchemist isn't steampunk, the battlesmith reflects Hephaestus in Greek myth, and the Artillerist is fine. (The Armourer I agree is pretty steampunk).

But if you want to run an artificer as a hedge mage or have a hedge mage subclass of artificer, be my guest.

 

[Clint_L]

In the short term, how many folks would be interested in a paladin sub-class that was explicitly an arcane user rather than divine?

Edit: what I mean is that it used spells from the wizard list, not the cleric one.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I thought I'd said. There's a feat for +1, a first level spell for +1, and a 1600GP magic item 3/day all in the obvious splatbooks (no going dumpster diving into e.g. Secrets of Sarlonia).

I can't find you saying anywhere, but maybe I'm blind.

The rest of your post is pretty incomprehensible. I was talking about skills, not PF1's Bard re: "more interesting".