dmccoy1693
Adventurer
I wrote a completely serious blog post about why the Bard could be the best, most epic class in all of D&DNext. Once you stop laughing, give it a read and share your thoughts.
D&D 5E Why the Bard Could Be the Best Class in D&DNext
- Thread starter dmccoy1693
- Start date
I think bard is a great class in 4e, does everything it sets out to do. Awesome skills, decent healing, great buffs, reasonable enabling, can't ask for much else.
And I thought it was fine in 3e. It did exactly what you're claiming will be good about the bard. Between our ranger's and fighter's multiple attacks, my wizard's summoned menagerie and leadership cohort, and our cleric's greater/lesser ally, we dipped into the bard's bonuses so many times, it didn't matter if the bard did anything else, but she could shoot stuff dead just fine too, and could switch to healing mode when needed.
The flatter math probably means attack bonuses will be much harder to come by, so I can't even speculate if the 5e bard would provide that or not.
And I thought it was fine in 3e. It did exactly what you're claiming will be good about the bard. Between our ranger's and fighter's multiple attacks, my wizard's summoned menagerie and leadership cohort, and our cleric's greater/lesser ally, we dipped into the bard's bonuses so many times, it didn't matter if the bard did anything else, but she could shoot stuff dead just fine too, and could switch to healing mode when needed.
The flatter math probably means attack bonuses will be much harder to come by, so I can't even speculate if the 5e bard would provide that or not.
dmccoy1693
Adventurer
I'm assuming it won't, but that was why I did the damage bonus first.
Bard dipping in 3E was good, but have you tried playing a straight bard? Many complained they were not capable of doing much.
Played alongside one, level 1 to 14. Everything from inspiring courage to competence to greatness was incredibly useful. They can heal. They have a good selection of spells from debuffs like Slow and Hold Monster to utilities like Invisibility and Cat's grace to divinations like Legend Lore. They also have very good skills. If people are complaining the bard can't do much, they're doin' it wrong.
dmccoy1693
Adventurer
You actually hit on it. They are most useful ... to others. Their time to shine is to help others be awesome. That is the common complaint about bards.
Chris_Nightwing
First Post
Oh god, if 5E can handle a class that doesn't really do that much by itself, whose role is almost entirely helping others and handling the social pillar, well, they'll please so many old school fans!
It seems the much reviled 3e bard can do what the OP claims the DDN bard will be so wonderful for: make others around them better. The common complaint about the 3.X bard, IIRC, wasn't that they couldn't boost others around them, it was that D&D is mostly a small party adventure game, not a war game (complaints about recent Editions notwithstanding); and while making others in your party better is nice and all, it really doesn't cut it for many who want to be a hero adventurer.
Though that is a nice point about the results of the Bounded Accuracy making this ability to boost others more prominent and effective among the NPC as well as the PCs (assuming Bards get similar abilities in DDN, which I don't think is a give at this point).
Though that is a nice point about the results of the Bounded Accuracy making this ability to boost others more prominent and effective among the NPC as well as the PCs (assuming Bards get similar abilities in DDN, which I don't think is a give at this point).
If others have complained about this, thats there problem. For me personally I have played bards and have ALWAYS loved them. My first D&D experience was playing a bard and they have had a mystique ever since.
I love the support role and frankly, as a bard, I have always loved being able to do something in every situation, even if I wasnt the best at it.
The fact that people complain about bards indicates more that the play-style isnt well suited to alot of people, not that they are a "bad" class.
To answer your post : it really comes down to how they are going to handle the bonus a bard gives and how it scales. We just arent sure what path they are going to take yet.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
the bard in 2nd edition was great... ok, maybe not the true bard, but most of those you found in the complete bard´s handbook.
In 3rd edition he lost a lot of that power... but with later spell additions, you could play a bard, that at level 8 or so gave a +4 bonus to hit and damage to his allies... which is huge.
In 4e, the bard is quite nice. Does a lot I expect from a bard. The skald is also quite nice, but he has minor (action) problems.
But yes, you have a point. In 5e, a bard, although there will be +1 to hit bonuses for other classes, would be able to make a band of commoners fight like warriors. A +1 to hit and maybe some temp hp will make them respectable combtants. Seems good!
And when you remember, that they will be going away from the arcane bard and to the skaldic one, yes, i have great hopes!
In 3rd edition he lost a lot of that power... but with later spell additions, you could play a bard, that at level 8 or so gave a +4 bonus to hit and damage to his allies... which is huge.
In 4e, the bard is quite nice. Does a lot I expect from a bard. The skald is also quite nice, but he has minor (action) problems.
But yes, you have a point. In 5e, a bard, although there will be +1 to hit bonuses for other classes, would be able to make a band of commoners fight like warriors. A +1 to hit and maybe some temp hp will make them respectable combtants. Seems good!
And when you remember, that they will be going away from the arcane bard and to the skaldic one, yes, i have great hopes!
