Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 339526" data-attributes="member: 2067">This is quickly turning into a "Bard Thread," but I'll toss in my few coppers...The Bard is well balanced as a Jack-Of-All-Trades. No other arcane caster can heal. Even a cleric can't cast as many Cure Light Wounds as a Bard can per day.Plus, they've got decent fighting ability. Your Sorc can't say that, and even a Rog/Sor is more handicapped than a straight bard in this area (check out the BAB, the HD, and the TWO good saves).Countersong is a rather trivial ability most of the time, but Energy Substitution (sonic) is enough reason to do it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> That, and that a lot of charm spells are sound and language-dependant.In fact, I think that the only problem the bard has is that it doesn't satisfy the image of a sonic weaver of music and magic it sounds like it probably should. It's very much a jack-of-all-trades. A flavor change is mostly what's required, maybe with some rogue powers to substitute for their bardic music abilities...The Ranger also suffers from a rather misplaced use of his skills. He wants to beat up things like a fighter, and they think "Cool! Two free weapons!" and not a lot beyond that. When I think Ranger, I think Stealthy Fighting Guy...and some Druid magic and Favored Enemies thrown in for no real reason. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> When most people think Ranger, they think: Two Weapon Fighter.The Monk is also this. Monks are survivors and supporters. When I think Monk, I think of an unbeatable master of their environs. When most think Monk, they think: Fist Fighter.The Cleric almost suffers from the reverse of this. They're fundamentally healers, but they have to have the religious dimension tacked on, so that they're healers + wielders of the energy of the gods. And they don't readily fit this image, either.And it remains true that most of the "weak" classes are just very diverse classes. It's a maxim of D&D: Any character who is not specialized is going to not be as good as the specialized characters. Clerics, Wizards/Sorcerers, Fighters, and Rogues are all specialized. The rest of the classes, in some way, can be boiled down to being a mix of class features and abilities (maybe with the exception of the Barbarian and the Monk).You're a Ranger? You're basically a Druid/Rogue/Fighter. You're a Druid? You're basically a Cleric/Wizard ('cuz of the destructive power + the curative power + the adaptability). You're a Bard? Bravo for Cleric (healing)/Wizard (magic)/Fighter (weapons)/Rogue (skills).When you're a ranger, you're never going to be as good at fighting as the Fighter, never as good at sneaking as the Rogue, and never as good at using nature as a Druid. Otherwise, what's the point for any of those classes?</blockquote>

Verification