Except, unfortunately, they are also from a Dragon article.
What to do with a crappy PP power?
- Thread starter Felon
- Start date
Except, unfortunately, they are also from a Dragon article.
You simply don't get to do everything you want in 4E. The Prescient Bard gets a big boost already in that for the cost of a feat he gets a d12 damage die. And again, because the power doesn't get much use in your opinion in your outlier game does not put an impetus on the designers to create power swaps. It's a very useful power in a vast majority of games. That's the designers' job to create. They simply can't create a situation to appease every outlier. 3E tried and became a useless mess in some cases in that regard.
Well, anyone with a [W] power can get a d12 damage, unless they've got specific requirements like the rogue (which means pretty much just the rogue). In the bow-bard's case, however, there are only a couple of ranged powers at a given level (if that), and only one ranged-weapon at-will. So, that build is likely picking some implement powers to fill them out, which creates a need to mitigate it. A songbow or the euphonic bow PP are the two chief options.
This is neither here nor there. Nobody's expressing a sense of entitlement for personally-customized content, just the options that are generally available, which in this case seems to keep coming back to the familiar feats.
Again, I don't want any kind of special treatment. I want to use the extant tools. Doing so is part of the enjoyment of character creation (IMO).
A happy compromise might be sweet-talking the DM into allowing some Dragon Mag. content.
Last edited:
I wouldn't call the bow using bard an outlier. . .it is a supported build. When it was released in PHB2 it was supported. There are powers for it. Implements for it. Feats for it. And *one* paragon path for it.
This is one of those situations where I see the need for more options for classes like Fighter, but not at the cost of getting at least one or two more PP's for this build, and others. I was similarly frustrated with the Assassin, as his only magic items for awhile were the generic ones, and it wasn't until the Monk was given the same mechanic that he got some more options. For the most part I like WotC's method and the magazines' addition to the game, but I really think some builds have had plenty of attention, while others could use a little love. Bow using Bards seem to be one of them. Not that this Path is inherently *bad*, since that is a subjective judgement, but that all bards who want to use their bow must either use this class or a certain implement. No real bottleneck exists for Flail using fighters. Give Bards more Paths, or a Feat.
For Felon though, unless his DM allows some Dragon content this kind of kills his character. Not because it is less powerful, but because I'm sure he has come to resent that power, and that can suck the fun out of playing real quick.
Jay
Nifft
Penguin Herder
There is actually one other option: make the power relevant.
Get some magic items that create cover and/or concealment which function for both you and your opponents, then negate theirs. Basically, make a situation which should be a wash and turn it into a solid win.
Cheers, -- N
For what it's worth, I don't think there were any ranged-weapon powers in PHB2. Arcane Power introduced the whole bow-bard concept. Karmic singer is also intended to be a bow-bard PP, and it actually has a utility that will offer too many opportuinities to employ, not too few. And it's an honest-to-gosh, bonafide leader power, which I think is more to the point. If I was a ranger, I think I'd like the ability to eliminate concealment penalties more.
But, at the time I dinged 11, it didn't seem like a +3 songbow was in the cards, so my choice was more or less made for me by circumstance. Eventually, one of those item-upgrading dragonshards dropped, so I was able to buy and upgrade a +2 songbow.
As to the utility being a deal-breaker...well, I wouldn't go that far. The other players really think this bard is pretty cool, since it helps their attacks hit. Concerted effort, glimpse the future, the blood-seeking arrow, insightful shot, and the virtue of prescience class feature have them annoyed at the idea of me looking to the possibility of swapping classes. I see it more as a glitch to debug than a cursed albatross necklace that sucks the fun out of my character. Despite the claims of "whining", my dispostion from the get-go has been pretty glib about it: "Don't think it's too hot, wanna get rid of it, how to do it?" Even so, some folks find the notion of a person openly daring to actively optimize their character to be such an atrocity that it warrants some pot-shots. That's when things get dramatic.
Last edited:
Having read the whole thread I think the reaction you're getting Felon is something along the lines of.... "What's the point in having a Paragon Path if you can just swap out the features you don't like?" To use a 3e analogy I'd say it's like saying "I want to be a Shadowdancer, but I don't like the extra sneak attack damage it gives me so I want to swap it out for something else." Having DM'ed 4e for over a year now I can tell you that my first reaction is very similar in that PP's and ED's are like a package just like being a Cleric or Ranger. You can't just decide you want Healing Word from the Cleric class and Hunter's Quarry from the Ranger class, it just doesn't work like that in a class based system and suggestions or requests about how to do such a thing grate some people the wrong way.
I'd say your problem is with a different portion of the system itself (implement vs. weapons) and what you really need is an improvement to get rid of THAT problem so you don't feel cornered into this particular PP for one specific feature. But in general my reaction is mostly the same in that a class, PP, or ED is a package and you take the whole thing or pick something else and my sense is that if people find a way to do what you are trying to do we will see errata from WotC to close whatever method gets used.
As a DM I'd rather address the core issue, whatever that might be, up to and including a house rule if that's what it takes. Do what you like in your game. Do whatever you can agree to with your DM. Don't be surprised if what you're trying to do gets errata. In the final analysis I can't stress enough that I really feel this is an issue you should work out directly with your DM by telling him what you want to achieve and what the issues are with that in regards to the system itself. Any decent DM will help you out with a failing in the system. I know I would.
I'd say your problem is with a different portion of the system itself (implement vs. weapons) and what you really need is an improvement to get rid of THAT problem so you don't feel cornered into this particular PP for one specific feature. But in general my reaction is mostly the same in that a class, PP, or ED is a package and you take the whole thing or pick something else and my sense is that if people find a way to do what you are trying to do we will see errata from WotC to close whatever method gets used.
As a DM I'd rather address the core issue, whatever that might be, up to and including a house rule if that's what it takes. Do what you like in your game. Do whatever you can agree to with your DM. Don't be surprised if what you're trying to do gets errata. In the final analysis I can't stress enough that I really feel this is an issue you should work out directly with your DM by telling him what you want to achieve and what the issues are with that in regards to the system itself. Any decent DM will help you out with a failing in the system. I know I would.
The outlier isn't the character (which was pretty much an Arcane Power build) but a game where cover "never" comes up.
Yeah, after I posted I read it all again, and realized I had mis-interpreted your post in an interest to respond quickly. I'm sure that never happens on the internet! =\
The core of the idea is the same though. WotC makes a set of Bard powers that are usable with a bow, and some implements that make using a bow more attractive, but only make a couple of okay PP's for that build. Having never played a bard, I can only judge what I've read on how it *seems* to play, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
Jay
The core of the idea is the same though. WotC makes a set of Bard powers that are usable with a bow, and some implements that make using a bow more attractive, but only make a couple of okay PP's for that build. Having never played a bard, I can only judge what I've read on how it *seems* to play, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
Jay
