D&D 5E Time to remake the Bard

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
This one should be shorter. Good luck with my last one though, lol.

Luckily since it wasn't directed at me I feel no obligation to read it. I was, however, stuck reading this one. ;)

A lot of people complained and things changed. Druids were almost always alternatives and bards were almost always backup bonus healing even with the cleric healing as typical.

So, now instead of some people complaining the cleric was too "support"-oriented, we have the bard--which apparently is all about support. Not an improvement IMO.

That's always what they've been and also has a basis in history, The original had rogue abilities, magic user spells, and some basic combat in the progression and weapons. AD&D changed to dual-classing and swapping druid for magic user in it. Those bards also had backstab and shapechanging without some recommended house ruling. Druids were a cleric / wizard hybrid design with some unique class abilities. 2e was back closer to the original but the thief abilities were more limited. 3.x added the healing heritage back in that 2e removed and they were still a type of skill class with a mix of spells from the arcane and divine classes, and a slight bit of combat ability.

Now they are still the same. Major casting, a small nudge to combat (shown in the proficiencies and hit die), and a skills focus. The jack-of-all-trades trope was always applied to bards.

The original bard was left in the Appendices though! That should tell you something. Even though left out-of-order, the Monk didn't even rate an appearance in the Appendices despite being thought a powerful class. And Gygax admitted the combination was powerful and left up to the DM do allow it or not (true, now the DM can always do that, but back then a lot of people really played more "by the law of Gygax)"). Also, you followed the path to get the power, you didn't get it from the beginning. It took a lot of dedication to get to be a bard in AD&D.

You know a funny thought just occurred to me. I didn't spend long in 3/3.5E (a little less than a year), but even then NO ONE I ever knew played a BARD!!! Not a single player, in any game I was in, ever. And one of the guys in our group was actually a professional musician (french horn and others).

Because the class does have relevant options in almost every scenario. They are not really the best at anything but they can be decent at a lot. Skills plus a very wide selection of spells has that effect. They also have a tradition as the fifth member for supporting multiple roles in a pinch and generally being a party multiplier. A lot of players like the flavor concepts too.

Real answer, because they are fun.

Yawn... :sleep:

Sorry, what? :oops:

(j/k)

And even though they aren't the best at all the things they can do, they can be pretty awesome at whatever they choose to be good at. Secondary, in their primary choice, is barely secondary from what people are saying given the wide variety of features a bard can potentially acquire.

As far as fun goes? Well, everyone likes strange things so I can't judge on that. Heck, I put peanut butter on hot dogs and hamburgers LOL!

Lol, they don't make any class obsolete. I've played in a group of 4 bards and a rogue. Squishy as hell other than the rogue, and multiple opponents are generally bad for rogues. We spent most of the time avoiding direct conflict. ;)

I suppose that depends entirely on the game-style and table. I actually thought of challenging our group to an all-bard campaign, just for a while to see what would happen. Response: HARD NO! Other than the one attempt by myself and the dwarven orator-bard which never really happened, no one at our table likes the class really or wants to play it.

THAT is another reason why I think it is "Time to remake the bard." :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I suppose that depends entirely on the game-style and table. I actually thought of challenging our group to an all-bard campaign, just for a while to see what would happen. Response: HARD NO! Other than the one attempt by myself and the dwarven orator-bard which never really happened, no one at our table likes the class really or wants to play it.

THAT is another reason why I think it is "Time to remake the bard." :)
Again: given the nature of the dislike you've described so far, it's hard to see what we could realistically change about the bard that would improve your table's opinion of the class.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Again: given the nature of the dislike you've described so far, it's hard to see what we could realistically change about the bard that would improve your table's opinion of the class.

Other than some of the points I made in the OP, I am not entirely sure myself, which is why I started the thread. It could very well be there is no solution or way to make the class into something that I would want to play that couldn't be made just as well via multiclassing.

As I see it, a quick summary would be:
  1. Remove expertise and grant additional skill proficiency instead. Bards are known, generally, to have a wide breadth of knowledge, but not incredibly deep IMO.
  2. Admittedly, slightly contradictory to the aforementioned, return the legend lore ability. Having obscure knowledge that was picked up here or there is great for a bard.
  3. Decrease spell progression, but increase spell-selection. I am thinking more "warlock-based." Few spell slots, maxed out a 5th level of power, but virtually from any lists.
  4. Remix special features similar to 3E (from what I have quickly looked over) or equivalent that function in a way the portrays a bard in a reasonably historical fashion.
  5. Maybe add some unique combat features? Nothing super powerful, but versatile and useful, things the could give the bard an edge, especially in a straight-up fight.
We are playing tomorrow, so I will spend some time discussing peoples' responses to this and other threads. While I know at times it might seem like I am just being difficult, it bothers me on a level that there is a class, supposedly loved by many, which seems non-inspiring at our table. We have literally had every other class played at some point or another, only the bard has been left out because no one really wants to play one.

For something that so many think is so great, doesn't that seem odd to you?
 

  1. Remove expertise and grant additional skill proficiency instead. Bards are known, generally, to have a wide breadth of knowledge, but not incredibly deep IMO.
  2. Admittedly, slightly contradictory to the aforementioned, return the legend lore ability. Having obscure knowledge that was picked up here or there is great for a bard.

Take 5e Bard. Choose Arcana, History, Nature and Religion as Expertise skills.

There's your Legend Lore Bard.


We have literally had every other class played at some point or another, only the bard has been left out because no one really wants to play one.

For something that so many think is so great, doesn't that seem odd to you?
Maybe they have lingering prejudices against Bards carried over from previous editions? Or lingering prejudices from the weaksauce "spoony bard" Edward character from Final Fantasy IV? Whether fairly or not, Bards were ridiculed by a lot of gamers back in 2e's and 3e's heydays.
 



I've always found the idea of a bard singing it's way through small group skirmish combat really silly.

In a massed battle I can see a place for a Skald - but a five person skirmish?
 

I've always found the idea of a bard singing it's way through small group skirmish combat really silly.

In a massed battle I can see a place for a Skald - but a five person skirmish?
Wizards recite complete gibberish through small group skirmish combat, and that seems to work for them. Singing is downright coherent in comparison.
 

Staffan

Legend
5e has mostly given up on niche protection, so not the issue it used to be.
Niche protection is an idea that needs to die in a fire. It might have a place in a game with 4-5 classes, but in one with 12-13 classes like D&D it just leads to the party missing out on capabilities.
 

Ashrym

Legend
I'm will aware other builds out damage vardsbut bards can put out reasonable damage.

It's decent damage doing nothing in combat but spamming damage. Doing anything else in combat drops the damage and doing nothing but damage means it's playing one-trick-pony. Picking up eldritch blast is a at least adding a damage option while hex really does lock out a lot of good spells if concentration is always being used for that spell.

Action economy prevents doing that damage and doing other things. You can shore up the squishiness a fair bit too but that comes at the cost of something else. We could change the name to "walking opportunity cost" and it would accurately reflect bards.

And also da age scaling what about level 7, 8,9?

Character levels? The fireball potential goes up 1d6 per 2 levels and applies to a single round of combat. Sneak attack scales up at the same rate but applies to each round of combat. That's going to favor rogues.

With the 6-8 encounters a day and dice refreshing and being able to heal the bard can do other stuff as well.

Bardic inspiration dice are definitely useful. So are other class features in the class and in other classes. Song of rest at 2nd level in a 5 PC group that takes 2 short rests can spend 1 HD each on each short rest to multiply that out to 10d6 bonus healing. The bard will be doing that regardless, and even though the scaling isn't impressive it's really helpful at low levels.

Let's work with it. Your support sucks with what's given so far. It's mob damage and weak healing, and the damage really isn't anything yet at 6th level using secrets for fireball and eldritch blast.

Forget secrets for the cantrip. Go variant human, use a feat if you weren't already. Unless there is something you really want in the warlock cantrips or a single shot 1st level spell you should take spell sniper for double range and ignoring cover to get eldritch blast. It will still use your CHA and won't matter on that it's not a bard spell for you.

1 -- light, prestidigitation, sleep, healing word, heroism, unseen servant
2 -- thunderwave
3 -- lesser restoration
4 -- minor illusion, magic mouth
5 -- leomund's tiny hut; swap sleep out for dispel magic
6 -- fireball, spiritual hammer or healing spirit

That list might seem a bit odd. Heroism is your go to spell for damage mitigation if you need it. Using it will cost you damage in the first round. Heroism will become a decision point in every battle for the use of that slot to balance out damage mitigation versus damage so you might want to hold off on spiritual weapon; an efficient healing spell takes pressure off that decision point. Healing word is strictly for emergency healing.

It's tempting to take hex at 6th level. It's not worth it. d6's on 2 attacks won't net as much damage as spiritual hammer will using it on important fights. Spiritual hammer also doesn't take concentration so heroism can be used if needed. The alternative to spiritual hammer is healing spirit. It's damage or healing but not both.

Thunderwave scales up to the same damage as shatter in the same slot anyway. Range is shatter's advantage and knocking targets away is thunder wave's. That nets you an AoE one level earlier and if you'd rather have shatter just trade it up at 3rd level when you add lesser restoration.

Slots are going heavy on damage. That's why leveraging the ritual caster feature is important. They will still be interrupting concentration so we'll be clearing 1st level spells out. Leomund's and unseen servant are obvious choices. Magic mouth doubles as a messaging system, alarm, or diversion.

Spells after 6th level need to work around using fireball for damage. That means either they are rituals (unlikely) or the bard expects to situationally use them. Otherwise, the fireball damage does not occur and kills the concept early because of the slot bottleneck.

7 - improved invisibility
8 - dimension door
9 - raise dead
10 - thunderclap, hex, healing spirit or spiritual weapon; swap heroism for greater restoration.

You mentioned wave of destruction a few times. It's not worth giving up something else. Improved invisibility is one of the few concentration spells on this list, but if someone really needs to hide fast it's there. Plus, you cannot be counterspelled facing other casters if they cannot see you.

11 - True seeing
13 - Teleport
14 - Disintegrate, Plane Shift

More spells to cover a wizardly trope. Disintegrate is the big one here. It bypasses the friendly fire issue the build has with fireball. We're going mostly with utility here instead of status effects to keep away from concentration and needless action conflicts.

15 - Dominate Monster
17 - True Polymorph
18 - Wish, Sunburst

It's nowhere near the support a cleric has, and it's also nowhere near the range of a wizard. It is a decent blended list with a lot of utility, low to moderate healing, and decent damage options. The spells tend to be trailing behind in gaining them but that's the way secrets is designed. There's you're red mage build.

Yes it is decent enough and it is patterned after a wizard style. It's still behind and tweaking it requires giving something up in any direction it's tweaked. Divinations are lacking so drop healing, or damage, or some of the other utility spells for them; or work the skills system you were poopooing earlier. ;)

It's also lacking in defensive spells but the bard list suffers a lack there and grabbing from other classes is a giving something up again. That's hard to accomplish because there aren't enough magical secrets to pull much off. ASI's at 4th and 8th level, war caster or resilient CON at 12th level so a person might sneak a minor defensive boost at 16th level in the feats.

The closest thing to fighter this fits in is light armor and a couple weapon proficiencies.

This is just a quick brainstorm, so if you have suggestions or want to discuss why it's pretty far behind clerics or wizards in detail we can do that.

And that's doing something lore bards actually aren't very good at. By level 10 you can pick up destructive wave and can drop a level 3+ spell every combat. Not much is immune or resistant to force damage either better hope Mr Rogue gets a magic weapon.

The lore bard still isn't good at the damage, just decent enough, lol.

Mr Rogue is good with looking for a magic weapon or letting a party member who does better support help out. The example I gave above stated destructive wave isn't worth it. It's not. Shatter is still there as a back up AoE that's rarely resisted immune, and disintegrate is added for force damage that's higher than destructive wave. The only thing you are really getting out of destructive wave is the status effect, and to get it you need to drop something else, and it's got to be other magical secrets that you are giving up.

There's no Shrodinger's Bard going on here. You are waiting until 14th level for wave of destruction which is pointless given disintegrate becomes available; or you are giving up hex, or healing spirit, or spiritual hammer; or you are giving up fireball and delaying that AoE damage in the meantime.

The damage won't be that far behind the rogue, probably exceeds it later (lvl 8) and is close enough on skill checks and can use invisibility as well. You also have the options of every other spell on the bards list as options to pick.

You were just giving up damage or the only worthwhile healing you had for destructive wave. The damage is behind most even fireballing your party and it is definitely behind the rogue. You also need to drop something else for invisibility sooner. I didn't leave it out. ;-)

You do have every other option on the bards list to select. What you are lacking is more spells known so that you can have them. You are also lacking concentration for a huge selection of them by adding hex. I gave you a good example of a solid spell list. What else are you specifically adding and what are you removing to add it?

But a rogue is still stuck doing SA which is also unreliable and not that good at range either.

Sneak attack needs an ally by the target. Sneak attack is very reliable. Not having it is the exception. The range part is true but the distance can be crossed fast. Range is a definite advantage for the bard.

So yeah it's the total package.

If the bard has hex on the target and the target has no bonus to the save against fireball and the bard casts spiritual weapon the first round plus eldritch blast, then fireball, then eldritch blast they are very similar from levels 11 through 13, barring a range first strike for the bard or losing hex to fall behind the rogue.

Switching to disintegrate the rogue finally falls behind those high level slots under the same assumptions. Losing hex or giving saving throw bonuses closes that gap. At 20th level the bard has 6 spell slot from 6th level and up to maintain this advantage and does nothing else with those slots.

That's also before adding in death strike or thief's reflexes which slightly favors the rogues again.

No sneak attack req's met and the rogue damage turns into utter garbage. That should clear up the level expectations unless I'm tired and my match is off. It's assuming no save bonus and 65% attack accuracy.

What's sinking your bard concept is the spells apply to 1 out of 3 rounds as damage scales up and those spells don't crit, and TWF sneak attack gives a really high accuracy on the bulk of the rogue's damage, and the sneak attack damage scaling up applies to all 3 rounds of combat in the example.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top