Wizards: Bard to no longer suck

[Mercule]

I actually liked the way factotums (from Dungeonscape) imitated bards as the "generalist." They were great at info gathering, etc. yet had abilities that were very useful in the midst of combat. If the 4E bard followed similar suit, I could learn to love it.

I actually really disliked the Factotum. It seemed too much of a kitchen-sink class.

In thinking about it, though, I could see where changing out some of the trappings would make it an interesting bard. They don't actually know spells, but they've watched the others do it often enough. That sort of thing. Not so much of an intentional generalist as someone who is just good at observing.

 

[Vigilance]

Considering that they've been saying that the current edition of their own game sucks, left and right (in order to pre-sell the next one, obviously) I would take that claim with a whole planet's worth of salt. Or so.

Unless, of course, you happened to have a strong desire to feel justified for some kind of extreme bias, past and/or present. Then, well, it might appear to be deeply meaningful. Yes.

Funny, I don't see the word "suck" a single time in that article.

They are endeavoring to improve the Bard, along with everything else, is what he actually says.

Doesn't that seem like what he SHOULD be doing?

 

[Mortellan]

But I'm more interested in the other part: in D&D as it is now, how do you think bards are invaluable outside combat? What non-combat role do they play that couldn't be filled just as well by some other character?

That's just it, Bards are the perfect backup. It's that whole generalist thing again. Sure the rogue might be the most charismatic or the wizard the smartest, but they aren't infallible, they fail sometimes at what they do best. To use a sports analogy, the bard is the utility guy on the team that plays every position and sometimes just happens to be the heart and soul of a squad. I do hope 4E makes bards leaders, it sounds like a good direction.

 

[Kerrick]

Why not?

Seriously, I'm not being snarky here. Why shouldn't bards be equally effective as other classes both in and out of combat?

Because a bard's "role" isn't combat - it's support. They shine in RP situations, as everyone's already noted, and in combat, they're designed to support others with their songs. A multiclass bard (bard/fighter, bard/ranger, bard/barbarian) can be really badass, though, properly done. Greatswords aren't too conducive to making a good bard, though.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Funny, I don't see the word "suck" a single time in that article.

They are endeavoring to improve the Bard, along with everything else, is what he actually says.

Doesn't that seem like what he SHOULD be doing?

Funny indeed! I should perhaps not simply take a post in any thread at face value. In fact, I should've learned that one a while back. . .

Good call, and right you are. And yeah, I'm glad to hear they aren't (IMO) overdoing the whole "3e sucks" routine, again.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Except that bards *did* suck a lot of the time.

Round 1: Bard Song
Round 2: Haste
Round 3... oh, what do I have that is actually effective?

Sure, you could outskill anyone, but a lot of D&D is about combat, where their options are... limited, to say the least.

Cheers!

I'm beginning to think the D&D RPG line ought to be scrapped so everyone can play DDM where all the playing pieces are designed for combat.

 

[Agamon]

I dunno... My bard is pretty awesome. You just have to know how to play them properly. Finesse and social manipulation on and off the battlefield is kind of fun.

I've also played an fun, effective bard (not to very high level, but she was fun while it lasted). I wouldn't say it's impossible, but the style of both the game and the player makes a huge difference. I wouldn't say that about most other classes.

Bard is niche. WotC is trying to un-niche them.

 

[Umbran]

The role name "leader" rubs me the wrong way, and I think embodying "leadership" in a class is asking for trouble. Real leadership isn't about the class you take, and simply taking class levels doesn't mean you really lead the party.

 

[Greg K]

Agreed. That's one reason the Marshal never say the light of day, IMC.

Same here.

 

[Cadfan]

There is no reason that each character class cannot have something good to do in combat, and something good to do out of combat. Trading off between the two just bifurcates the game.