D&D 4E Your thoughts on the 4E bard and other classes?

[Storminator]

One thing I underestimated from reading the rules is the forced movement powers. Pushes, pulls, and slides are great in 4e. The most important thing in D&D is where you're standing, so controlling that is huge.

In our first run we had a couple of movement powers but when our DM let us respec our PCs we ALL got them.

Not really a comment on classes, but something to think about as you consider them.

PS

 

[Saagael]

Never judge a leader class by its healing ability alone. A good leader does 4 things:
- own damage
- buffs to allies
- tactical positioning
- healing
There is a reason why the role is called "leader", not "healer"

This.

I DM for a group with a Inspiring Warlord, which is considered one of the weaker leaders, and I can say that they're anything but weak. Bards are the same way in that they are excellent when it comes to positioning, buffing and debuffing. If you're looking for a good healer, look at the cleric, as they can get the highest amounts of healing in the game. Bards are excellent skill monkeys and utility characters that are actually good at most things, yet not deficient in most (if any at all). This is just my opinion though.

 

[Haltherrion]

Having played early level Bow Cunning Bard I must say I'm surprised by the class.
The multiclass options aside, I wasn't too crazy about the class in and of itself until I tried it out. As Artoomis said, you pretty much always have something to do.

Firemetal Shot makes my bard a psudo striker for one round as the party focus fires for big damage. The at-wills are very fun and highly flexible. Jinx Shot is funny with high AC defenders and setup the Rogue nicely.

The healing option to slide 1 doesn't seem good on paper, but proves to have a lot of potential combo's based on party composition. Use the heal/slide to move melee PC's away from prone/immobile/restrained enemies. Or simply use it setup a flank. It's become my second favorite heal next to cleric despite the lack of healing it provides.

As for the other classes you've not yet tried. I highly encourage you to try the Wizard as a controller rather than striker. It really excels at controlling the battlefield more than any other class I've played. The wizard controller has the ability to turn things around quickly and is great for tactical players.

The Avenger is very fun to play because it almost never misses. It has a unique style of play making it very different from other strikers. This is a good thing, though I could easily see players who like 'strikers' to find this particular take on it to be lacking.

Yeah, wizard as a controller looks very cool to me. And I did mean avenger as dps, not controller, an error in my OP.

I think we've already keyed onto the movement and control aspects of 4E. I think it is one of the strengths of the system. Much more dynamic and interesting combats with it.

Your posts and others are in-line with what I saw in the bard from my read of it. I'm still a little leery about it carrying healing without a paladin defender given what I've seen so far but in the end, playing classes for a single session (each) means we haven't really had a chance to master any of them yet.

These posts have been useful. I've shared them with the rest of the group and they are hitting the books again and reconsidering.

 

[Haltherrion]

And for those of you who posted about how cool the bard is, sounds great. I'll probably go with the bard although we have a funny way of putting parties together so I might end up with something else as well (druid or wizard most likely).

 

[fba827]

Never judge a leader class by its healing ability alone. A good leader does 4 things:
- own damage
- buffs to allies
- tactical positioning
- healing
There is a reason why the role is called "leader", not "healer"

Although someone already quoted it, I'm quoting this again to save myself typing

Some of the leader classes to focus on the healing aspect of it (such as the cleric, and shaman).

The warlord and bard are more about tacticl positioning and buffs (and/or granting allies some extra attacks). -- Because you won't necessarily -need- as much healing if you are buffed to hit more often/do more damage to kill the enemies faster or positioned better to get flanking/positioned better to not be in zones or not get flanked/etc - that's all more proactive actions (doing something before allies do to make them do it better)... versus reactive leading which is the healing them after they get damaged.

Of course, if you/your group specifically wants a leader that is focused in healing, then cleric (the best) or shaman (probably second best) is the way to go.

So it really comes down to preferred play style of the player, and preferred request of what the group wants more of... There is nothing wrong with being a strong healer, but at the same time, there is nothing wrong with being focused on the other aspects of the leader classed either.

 

[Turtlejay]

Avenger is a pure-blood striker. There is nothing controllery about the class.

Not true, really. Avengers Censure has a way of convincing enemies to do something other than the optimal. Just like the Assault Swordmage in my group's mark gives enemies a lose/lose choice. Defenders all have a little Controller in them, in that they really have an impact on the flow of the battlefield. Avengers get a little of it too.

Jay

 

[eriktheguy]

I'm very impressed that your group is waiting for the miniatures and testing things out before you even start the campaign. It seems like they put a lot of emphasis on flavor and the campaign world in general, and all DMs could use a few more players like that.

Your group seems to be interested in building optimal characters as well. I believe the general consensus is that Fighters and Rangers make about the best defenders and strikers respectively. All the controllers and leaders are playable, though I think invoker and shaman take the cake in a popularity contest.

I wonder why you ask about bards in particular. I think they have moved from being underpowered in previous editions to being able to hold their own pretty well in 4e. They have an array of abilities that give +x to hit and -x to hit. These powers are much better than they were in 3.5 because balance is much tighter this edition and little attack modifiers make a big difference.

Good luck!

 

[DracoSuave]

I'm shocked the warlord didn't wow anyone!

Warlords are the kings of 'I hit that guy now everyone gets free swings on that guy!'

If you have a group that loves attacking, hitting, or damaging, a warlord is NOT a bad mix. And the healing is NOT terrible: It's as effective as it has to be, while your party just -does more damage- or -takes less damage.-

And meanwhile, you smash face with everyone else.

 

[Blackbrrd]

I must say that I am really impressed by the balancing done in 4e. I like the following classes after seeing them in play: Fighter, Warlord, Cleric, Bard, Sorcerer, Wizard, Ranger, Rogue, Barbarian, Paladin, Invoker.

I haven't seen the Shaman in played and it doesn't look like my cup of tea. I disliked the first incarnation of the Druid, but it might be fixed now. I am undecided about the Avenger after seeing him in play, he sure isn't a high damage striker, but he has a lot of control and single-tank aspects and to him.

I think 4e has done a really good job and there is surprisingly low amounts of cheese available with unbelievable amount of good builds available.

Regarding the bard: being able to move allies out of flanking positions and giving loads of temp hp makes them very good healers. Their at-will powers are really really good. Effectively giving the WHOLE party a +2 bonus to hit a single enemy with an at-will is awesome.

One note regarding the Fighter, I have a Dwarf Battlevigor Fighter in my current group and he is SO hard to take down. He generates ridicules amounts of temp hp and with the level 7 encounter power come and get it/get over here, or whatever it's called he has great control as well. He can switch from a 100% defensive at-will to 100% offensive at-will making no choice "good" against him.

So in short: I think you will find all classes very playable and I am impressed about how little power creep there has been. Overpowered powers have been errataed and new feats and powers added to support weak builds or classes.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I have tested the bard with multiclass barbarian at first level in the solo adventure... surely non optimized, but very very efficient due to good skills, good defenses and great powers which can even buff himself to a certain extend.

A valorous bard seems to be a durable leader who can defend himself very well.