Belen
Legend
Hey all,
There is a debate in the rules forum, but I thought my philosophy would apply here as well and I wanted to get your take. The following are my feelings on the Bard class that I reposted here:
As the Bard is my favorite class, I have spent a lot of time thinking about perform. The RULES say that for each rank you spend on perform, you get one type of perform skill. Therefore, 10 ranks would equal ten different instruments etc. However, the person must write down each type of perform known. It is not a blanket skill and it will never cover every type of performance. Since a Bard has a limited number of skill points, it is unreasonable to ask them to spend a significant amount of them on learning different performs. That defeats the entire point of a master performer.
To those of you who bring in real world examples, like muscians that you know etc. then you are not considering a keen fact. A modern say musician is NOT a bard. They are a singer or instrumentalist, but not a performer.
Ancient Bards were entertainers and were forced to know a lot of different skills to please an audience. Ancient Bards were ONE man shows. They had to sing, act, juggle, play instruments, recite ballads, write poetry, read poetry outloud....a traveling Bard had to know many different skills. What happened if he got to a town who hated dance? Modern day examples are erroneous and have no basis when you think of ancient Bards.
Modern day people SPECIALIZE. Look at how many different engineers are out there, or doctors. Our entire society specializes, which is why things such as decent writing skills suffer. People know a lot in a specific area, but not a lot across the board. It's sad really.
Ues, a modern day Violin player would kick the tail out of a ancient Bard who played violin because that Violin player ONLY plays the violin. The Bard may play three different instruments, dance and juggle too! Of course, a specialist would win when competing in their specific area. However, a Bard is a better all-around performer. He/she could entertain with many different areas rather than excel at one.
Therefore, one performace type per rank is exactly how the ancient Bard operated. If a person wanted to excel at one or two types of perform, then they should tell the GM and the GM should apply a circumstance bonus for exceling at one or two types or performances because that Bard gave up the ability to be a general entertainer. If the Bard specializes, then the GM should also grant negatives to the Bard when that Bard finds themselves in a situation where the specialty is not in demand.
Finally, for those who still complain, then a variant rule a friend of mine uses is to grant one type of perform per Charisma modifier. This limits the Bard from choosing 20 types of perform, but gives them a bonus for high charisma. However, I still believe that this limits the concept of a general entertainer.
Dave
There is a debate in the rules forum, but I thought my philosophy would apply here as well and I wanted to get your take. The following are my feelings on the Bard class that I reposted here:
As the Bard is my favorite class, I have spent a lot of time thinking about perform. The RULES say that for each rank you spend on perform, you get one type of perform skill. Therefore, 10 ranks would equal ten different instruments etc. However, the person must write down each type of perform known. It is not a blanket skill and it will never cover every type of performance. Since a Bard has a limited number of skill points, it is unreasonable to ask them to spend a significant amount of them on learning different performs. That defeats the entire point of a master performer.
To those of you who bring in real world examples, like muscians that you know etc. then you are not considering a keen fact. A modern say musician is NOT a bard. They are a singer or instrumentalist, but not a performer.
Ancient Bards were entertainers and were forced to know a lot of different skills to please an audience. Ancient Bards were ONE man shows. They had to sing, act, juggle, play instruments, recite ballads, write poetry, read poetry outloud....a traveling Bard had to know many different skills. What happened if he got to a town who hated dance? Modern day examples are erroneous and have no basis when you think of ancient Bards.
Modern day people SPECIALIZE. Look at how many different engineers are out there, or doctors. Our entire society specializes, which is why things such as decent writing skills suffer. People know a lot in a specific area, but not a lot across the board. It's sad really.
Ues, a modern day Violin player would kick the tail out of a ancient Bard who played violin because that Violin player ONLY plays the violin. The Bard may play three different instruments, dance and juggle too! Of course, a specialist would win when competing in their specific area. However, a Bard is a better all-around performer. He/she could entertain with many different areas rather than excel at one.
Therefore, one performace type per rank is exactly how the ancient Bard operated. If a person wanted to excel at one or two types of perform, then they should tell the GM and the GM should apply a circumstance bonus for exceling at one or two types or performances because that Bard gave up the ability to be a general entertainer. If the Bard specializes, then the GM should also grant negatives to the Bard when that Bard finds themselves in a situation where the specialty is not in demand.
Finally, for those who still complain, then a variant rule a friend of mine uses is to grant one type of perform per Charisma modifier. This limits the Bard from choosing 20 types of perform, but gives them a bonus for high charisma. However, I still believe that this limits the concept of a general entertainer.
Dave
