Your Opnion Of the New Bard Info

[Witch Doctor]

Where can I find the new bardic info?

::EDIT::

I really cant spell anything =/

 

[Green Knight]

I like them! I've never before played a Bard in my life, and now all of a sudden being a Bard looks interesting. For one, no Arcane Spell Failure. I thought it was dumb that they had Medium Armor Proficiency, but pretty much got nothing out of it, as they wouldn't be able to effectively cast magic with it on. So I'm glad they got rid of that. Also like the increase in skills. Extra Bardic songs will be great, too.

Soon as a new Forgotten Realms game starts up, here, I'm gonna be playing a Bard/Paladin. Formerly a foppish nobleman, he answered the call to Paladinhood and became a Purple Dragon, where he used his Bardic music to inspire the troops around him. Hell, I've even found a use for the Bard proficiency with the whip. I'm gonna give my character this whole Draconic look (Dragon armor, etc), with different armaments representing different parts of a dragon. The sword will be a dragon tooth, the lance a dragon claw, the crossbow the dragons' breath (Purple Dragons are Black Dragons, so I'm hoping to eventually get a magic crossbow with the Acidic enchantment on it, because black dragons breathe acid), and the whip a dragons' tail.

Note: Bardic Music doesn't involve just singing, but chanting as well, among other things (So I don't have to be The Singing Paladin, or anything like that. Hehehe. "I ... am ... The Singing Paladin..." *BLAM*). I bring that up because I've seen The 13th Warrior a buttload of times. Anyone remember that part at the end where Buliwyf comes out and does that line? The "Lo, there do I see my father", line? Well, I imagine that'd be what my character will do a lot. Now all I need is to come up with a Cormyrean version of that.

 

[Jeph]

Bards are evil

Of course they are. All of DnD is evil. Jack Chick said so, so it must be true.

 

[Oneiromancer]

No armor spell failure will make my fiancee very happy...she loves her bard but hates having to cast mage armor all the time. Now, here is a thought. Since bards only get up to medium armor proficiency, it isn't too unreasonable to totally remove the armor spell failure. But if the bard takes the heavy armor proficiency, or multiclasses with, say, fighter, then they might start wearing heavy armor. And then it does become important how the bards cast spells. If it is totally verbal, then no problem. But if not, should heavy armor still impose a penalty? And what about using bardic music in plate armor? If the bard uses an instrument (which they don't have to, of course) won't the armor be pretty restricting?

I will definitely be curious to see the official wording in a few months.

Game on,

 

[Mercule]

Okay, serious question, but it should give away my position on the issue:

I thought the new bard info was an April Fool's joke. Are you telling me it's serious?

 

[Merlion]

Yep quite serious. although in truth the only part thats really "new" is the no spell failure thing...we already basicaly knew about the more skill points expanded spells and bardic knowledge etc.
I am wondering what sort of new spells and BM abilities people think they will be giving them

 

[Mercule]

Yep quite serious. although in truth the only part thats really "new" is the no spell failure thing...we already basicaly knew about the more skill points expanded spells and bardic knowledge etc.
I am wondering what sort of new spells and BM abilities people think they will be giving them

Right. It's the verbal only spells and no arcane failure that I was referring to.

*sigh*

Obviously, I don't like either. Good from a power-gaming standpoint, but they don't seem to make sense for any arcane caster. *shrug* I'll just see how it all plays out.

 

[Merlion]

Well the havent said verbal only...just no spell failure. and how does that not make sense for Bards? Already all of their spells reqiure a verbal component regardless...and singing as spells is a pretty well established fantasy concept

 

[Urbannen]

Where did you see the new info?

 

[rounser]

but they don't seem to make sense for any arcane caster.

For all you know, bards could (and IMO, should) cast spells in a completely different manner to other casters. I find it unnecessarily and distastefully generic to envision bardic magic as being identical to sorcery, for instance.