Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gort" data-source="post: 3305397" data-attributes="member: 11239">I love all the replies saying, "Well, in a game where there is no combat at all, bards are great!" - why are you playing D&D if there's not going to be any combat? Did you miss the fact that 99% of the rules pertain to combat, all the classes are balanced with combat effectiveness in mind, one of the books is full of monsters to fight and so forth? Did you also miss that the main interaction skill (diplomacy) is very poorly written? Surely there's a better rules system for your purely non-combat game to take place under?In any case, I voted monk. It doesn't do what it's meant to do. The bread and butter of the class is meant to be unarmed melee, and it doesn't do that very well. The class is very under-powered as it is, so much so that I'd advise simply giving it full BAB. Although full BAB, full saves, decent HP, good skills and a variety of spell-like abilities seems overly powerful to begin with, the fact that the class requires every stat except charisma to be high brings it down significantly. Also, adding your wisdom to your AC is not, in my opinion, as good as being able to wear armour.If I was able to make a second vote, I'd go with bard. The trouble with bard is that parties in my experience are rarely large enough to have niches that aren't already full. A D&D party requires GOOD healing (by high levels you'll wish you had access to the heal spell), trap disposal (only the rogue and the beguiler can do this), the ability to absorb melee attacks (usually a fighter-types job), and the ability to reliably do damage (the fighters job, again). That's at least three characters right there, and an arcane spellcaster, while not NECESSARY per se is very handy to have around. Spells like fireball and wall of force can make difficult fights trivial - though clerics can do that stuff quite easily at the higher levels.I just don't tend to play in groups large enough that I can afford to have a party member who doesn't perform any critical function. They feel hangers-on, rather than useful party members.I think bards need to be made into true jacks of all trades. Make them into a rogue/wizard/cleric cross-class. Give them a little sneak attack so they can contribute to melee fighting - half as much as a rogue, say. Give them trapfinding so they can fill the trap disposal niche if they should choose to. Give them spellcasting, but keep them a few levels behind full casters, maybe three or so. Penalise their caster level in the same way. However, don't limit their spell list - let them pick from the entire wizard/druid/cleric list. Like my suggestion for the monk (full BAB) it looks overpowered on the surface, but keep in mind that the bard is also highly dependent on high stats. They need almost every stat to be high to excel in every field, which shouldn't really be achievable. Also, remember how much people complained about the mystic theurge being overpowered because they got both arcane and divine casting? Nobody complains now, because it simply isn't as powerful as a single classed caster. The bard would be like that.</blockquote>

Verification