Recent Posts
I really want to like them. They sound like a cool class. In first edition they just were such an odd thing. In 2e and 3e they just seemed sub par to all other classes. Could someone tell me why bards are worth while?
If you want to love bards, I recommend the following:
1. re-read Bilbo's encounters in the Mirkwood with the spiders, and consider his songs and poems as efforts to enhance his own abilities, and/or those of his dwarven pals. (Yes it's just one scene of Bilbo being bard-y, but it's a GREAT scene).
2. Watch the 2004 version of The Alamo. Specifically, BB Thornton as Davy Crockett, facing off cannons with a fiddle.
3. Watch (just the end of) The rundown, and consider the bagpiper as a bard.
4. Read up on dances and dancers of India.
5. Read any book from Dragons of Pern that focuses on the harpers. Of the Arrows of the Queen books that look at bards. Of both.
Now, sit down and decide to make a character that draws on all that for inspiration...
Are you asking how bards are worthwhile in a flavor sense, or in a mechanical sense?
Flavor wise, they've covered it.
Mechanically, Bards are not the "second best at everything" class- they're the most powerful buff class in the game. Bards benefit from having access to some of the most powerful buff spells, like haste & good hope, as well as the ever-powerful bardic music that makes everyone (the bard included) better at their jobs.
Yes, bards are buff-bots, but if you play the bard as a character who buffs himself (ala gish) while also buffing all of her allies, she's an incredibly powerful class. No, you're not smashing faces like a barbarian or rebuilding the cosmos like a wizard, but you're running your own little niche. Plus, ignoring the nay-sayers around here, Bards are excellent combat characters, even by core. And that goes for ranged OR melee.
For example, Bards do fine to stick with 16 charisma. At 10th level bard with 18 strength and wielding a +2 rapier in one hand (shield in the other) can attack with a +18/+18/+13(inspire courage, haste, good hope, flanking, power attack) and deal 1d6+17 (inspire courage, good hope, arcane strike, power attack) on a successful hit, which is roughly what a rogue is doing with the same weapon in the same situation.
Nobody ever complains that rogues don't do enough damage. :)
For example, Bards do fine to stick with 16 charisma. At 10th level bard with 18 strength and wielding a +2 rapier in one hand (shield in the other) can attack with a +18/+18/+13(inspire courage, haste, good hope, flanking, power attack) and deal 1d6+17 (inspire courage, good hope, arcane strike, power attack) on a successful hit, which is roughly what a rogue is doing with the same weapon in the same situation.
Heck a bard can start out with a Cha 13 and do just fine...
However there are already several threads about the Bard in pathfinder on this site.
I played a second edition bard when the Bards Handbook came out. Before that they were really kind of dull and you didn't know what to do with them. Once that book was I had a blast playing a bard. It's all in the the game you play. I'd play a bard for sure in the Council of Thieves adventure path.
I find though the bard can be fun to play a lot adventure and DMs ignore the bards fun points and the bard player finds themselves competing to useful position in the party.
At that point you kind if have to force the issue. The Pathfinder Bard fixes and clareifies that classes use of knowledge skills. The old bardic knowledge was ruled between two exteams, over broad and used for everyong or on a very narrow subset that was basically DM handout if they bothered to think about it. Now it's pure knowledge skill based.
This plays to the bards other skill set you don't often see, premention. The bards spell list isn't just charms and illusion, it also has a decent subset of divination. So fights are much easier if you know what's coming and what the enemy is. If a bard can give a party wizard a 24 hour notice on what's comming the wizards effectiveness suddely jumps dramatically. Same deal goes reactivly in IDing monsters in combat. Nice to know if that outsider is a Devil or Demon... or Daemon and if Cold or Fire is better to use. Or which special material will hurt most.
One of the best ways I've found to tack a bards addition to combat is to count damage that comes from your bonus as yours. That includes full value for attacks that would have missed without you, and options like power attack that would not have been used without your backing.
I have always found the bard-archer a very effective build. Max out dex and chr, and you get several benefits. You have a great DC for all of your will based enchantments. Your high dex helps your AC and your chance to hit. With a very modest feat investment, you can be quite effective with a bow. Since you don't move before shooting, you get to take full attack actions more than melee classes do. Oh, and you can maintain your buffs while shooting or casting. Its a win-win combo.
If you mutliclass into arcane archer after 8th level, the carnage can be impressive.
I play the bard in Galnorag's Second Darkness Campaign, and he's really useful for getting information about...well...anything really. I admittedly don't play your typical Lute-and-pantaloons trope, but that just goes to show you that there's some customizability in the class too.
The bard's mastery of the knowledge section of the skill table makes them a valuable resource that can save lives by allowing the party to prepare for encounters or RP situations. Very useful for plot development and trivia machine night at the bar too. :)
This is the first time I've seriously given the bard a go, and I must say that it's the most fun I've had with a character for some time.