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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="UngeheuerLich" data-source="post: 8783834" data-attributes="member: 59057">Depending on definition, clerics also were a semicaster before 3e.You are not wrong, but comparing editions here is difficult.Bards in 2e were very close to a full caster until they got 3rd level spells at least. This was mainly due to a more generous xp table compared to the wizard, which was not taken into account in the 3.0 era, leading to a very underwhelming class.To rub salt into the wound, wizards got extra spells for int, on top of the spell slots they got from the table which was exactly ported over from 2e (until level 10), while the bard had to have high charisma to even have the spells they had in 2e, because they somehow substracted 1 from each level's spell slots. So they started with 0 slots of each level. Which lead to the conclusion, that high stats everywhere was a requirement...Also, spell slot DC was dependend on level, so gaining some spells a little earlier only partially helped. Also the spells bards got did nkt help woth defense, so they were very very mad...Sorry got derailed...What I wanted to say: bards in 2e were very capable casters, and they were not in 3e. I love that they were upgraded to "full caster power" in 5e. Although I'd say, only the wizard is a real full caster, as well as the land druid and the sorcerer, because they not only get the full caster spell progression, but a few spells on top and ways to make even more of their spells.With the tasha upgrade to channel divinity, the cleric also got to "full caster +" power.So downgrading the bard to half caster would do them a disservice, because it nerfs them below 3.x power which does them a disservice.If you'd introduce 2/3 casters (going up to level 7) and compensate with something extra, I can live with that. But I can't let it stand that bards were always "half casters".</blockquote>

Verification