Pretty much every bard in fiction/folklore/mythology has been able to use magic. Take that away, or the music, and you've so fundamentally changed the class from its literary roots that you've created a brand-new class.
The bard could use some tweaking, especially with all of the slight up-sizing we've been seeing for the classes that have come out so far. But by tweaking, I'm not saying take anything away from him.
I'll take that back. If something has to go, the bardic knowledge ability is almost pure 3rd ed.
An argument could be made that historical bards were given such a broad education that it supports such an ability, but if something's got to go, that's the least "flavorful" of his abilities.
I'd leave the music but incorporate magic into the music and not as a slapped on ability that makes a bard a poor sorcerer. Abilities similar to that of a warlock but that are sonic in nature would be fitting.
I'd leave the music but incorporate magic into the music and not as a slapped on ability that makes a bard a poor sorcerer. Abilities similar to that of a warlock but that are sonic in nature would be fitting.
You mean like a scaling sonic attack (a watered-down Shout if you like)? That would be great, but maybe too cool...
I love being able to cast spells on the fly like a sorcerer does, but for me at least, having a severely limited amount of spells to choose from is more of a hinderence than it should be. If the bard that folks are describing here would be typical, then why not have them know a small charm of illusion, learned from the Pasha's daughter, or a spell of opening picked up from a priest of Mask, or a lance of sound effect crafted from his studies into the primal forces of music? The way the bard works now, they are never learning any high magic anyway. Seventh through Ninth level spells are impossible for them to cast without it being through some magical medium (like a scroll), and since it's not on their spell list it's even more difficult to attempt. Even the number of spells that they can cast per level, per day is limited.
So, they are clearly not a wizard (lack of ability to know every spell), but not a sorcerer either (lack of power). However, if you wanted to give them a boost, you could make it so that they had a few more spells known, but still keep the number of spells that they can cast each day to a minimum. You could also bring back a few of the better sound spells or create new ones. Bridge of Sound comes to mind, and maybe Thunderlance... Heck, waaay back in 2nd Ed, there was a specialty school of magic called Song (of course, it went up to level 9, but hey, the point is valid...)
I say! What uncouth verbage doth the OP use!
Thou sayest I "sucketh"? I take great offense. Untruer words were never said. Why, I inspire with words and music, the greatest magic of all. The magic of the soul. I play the lute -- and women weep ... (uh, with joy).
As for skills, they are mine to cultivate (until Mssr. Bulmahn doth consolidate them into the sort of package that would fit into a Wizard's wee li'l bitty codpiece.).
I am in no need of an overhaul. They sayest this Fourth Edition will do away with the great players and poets of the age. Nonsense! I forsake this Fourth Edition, and its attempt to change me into something mundane and boring -- like most followers of Bocobb.
Olidammara be praised. There are still feasthalls and taverns and inns where my great works are appreciated, and for villages like Homlett, wherein resides the Welcome Wench, where I can ply my trade before a grateful and appreciative audience.
Men of parts, unite, I say. Beat back these foul rumors of bards that "sucketh." Truly, all the great deeds of adventurers would be forgotten if not for men and women of my vocation, who tell tales tall and true.
Sucketh? My ass!
Bardic Music can be greatly improved, if the bard is able to chose between different possible bardic music abilites and doesn't get them automatically. You could use all the abilities of the PHB as they are and create some more, and allow the bard to pick new ones at the same levels as in 3.5e. So you still have 100% combatibility. Every bard created with the PHB simply uses the same custom ability selection.
You mean like a scaling sonic attack (a watered-down Shout if you like)? That would be great, but maybe too cool...
I was more refering to the invocation mechanics. The bard could have a version called something along the lines of "spell songs" which allow the them to produce a magical effect via their music.
Monte's bard variant from CBoEM is awesome. Any consideration of changes to the typical bard should look there for inspiration, imo.
Best.
Ok, I'm going to ask this in all seriousness now:
Do we really HAVE to have Bards?
I mean, I understand the whole genre and the inpirational stuff and all that, but even in the most ridiculous circumstances what kind of dolt is going to sit in the middle of battle playing music to inspire and uplift everyone.
I understand we want to keep some backwards compatability. Yes, I really get it. But Bards suck. They just really, really, really suck.
There has been some pretty interesting discussion in the tread so far, but I'm going to ignore that for a moment and make the observation that the Original Poster has clearly never read Egils Saga or Gisli Sursson's Saga..
this is my idea for the bard...
*1d8 hit points a level
*bardic "inspiration" (then it can be rousing speeches, or blood pumping melodies)
*NEVER have 0 spells per day, replace that with "1" (I friggin hate having maybe one spell per level)
bam! much cleaner
I'm a little on the fence about Bardic Knowledge, but mostly in how it interacts with other Knowledge Skills. My problem is that people treat it as Knowledge (everything) rather than as Knowledge (bits from everywhere).
It's not even 'little bits of everything.' I'm actually shocked at how many people don't actually read the Bardic Knowledge ability as written. It ridiculously restrictive in 3.5. "to see whether he knows some relevant information about local notable people, legendary items, or noteworthy places"
Those are very narrow topic areas and virtually require that a DM or Module Writer plan for the use of Bardic Knowledge. I would very much like to see this revised to a straight class bonus to Knowledge Skill Checks (which are all class skills). Say 1/2 Bard class level?
I agree with the clarification of using all Perform skills, or perhaps a bit more difference in how the categories affect the abilities.
Dance and other movement based performnaces should have a more direct effect on the Bard.
Non-Instrument Non-Movement based should be typical bard abilities.
Instrument based, which requires one or more hands and thus prevent a bard from attacking, should have additional effects and powers.
I agree with adding Sonic spells to a Bards list. I also wonder if the Bard should be returned to Spellbook/Memorized caster that it was in 2nd Edition?
The Bard's niche is as an Arcane Expert. This means both skills and the use of various magical powers to solve problems. Divination (knowledge), Enchantment(manipulation), and Illusion(application of both knowledge and manipulation) are the bards focus areas. As the class is flavored to draw Arcane power from music adding Sonic damage spells works. I'd say their magic is almost Fey.
I'd love for the Bard, Druid and Ranger to be moved closer thematically. And I'd love to see the Bard draw more spells from the Druid list.
But then again, I remember a time when Rangers used to cast Druid and Magic-User spells... :)
|
The bard does have many flavors. The original 1E Bard was basically the first Prestige class of D&D, as you had to have levels in Fighter, Thief and Magic User first.
The 2E & 3E bards were a gestalt of those three classes, but with emphasis on music. This is unusual compared to other classes because the special abilities were dependent on you having enougth skill points to actually use them.
Now if you consider a "Bard" a combination of three classes, then these are also "Bardic" classes;
Factotum (Dungenscape): Stupid name, but great class. And it is Proto-4E with it's encounter based Inspiration points abilities.
Healer (Mini Handbook): Broken class, but can be fixed and made into an interesing expert-style class.
Hex Blade (Complete Warrior): Nice idea, but I would like it to be focused more on curse-weaving instead of combat. It could be a nice assassin-bard, like from Dark Sun.
Ninja (Compete Adventurer); Very nice, especially with the spell-like abilites instead of spells.
Beguiler (Player's Handbook II): The true charmer of the bardic classes. Makes a great con-artist, grifter and spy.
Basiran Dancer (Kalamar): More monk than fighter and can use her dancing to fight and cast spells.
Akashic (Arcana Evolved): The best Psionic Bard out there, using a combination of Telepathy and Clairvoyance to gain their knowledge and abilities.
Monte Cook's Variant Bard (Book of Eldritch Might II): Takes the music aspect to the next level by replacing spells with Spellsongs.
I think that bards could use a bit of a boost on the "me" factor... and we need to keep them in the game in order to ensure backwards compat.
IMHO, the Bard doesn't 'suck' nor does it need improvement to be a viable class. However, looking at the revamped fighter and rogue, it would NOW need tweaks to keep up with the power level of the revamped classes. But again, I don't think a major overhaul is in order.
Even assuming the bard gets no change (and assuming the skill system stays as printed in alpha) I would love to start a character as a 1st lvl rogue and then go the rest of the way bard. I can then be the trap monkey and concentrate the rest of the skills to be the "Face". Now if I can get a "Tank", a "Militant Healer" and an "Arcanist" to follow me around...we're all set...
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
What if we make the bard the new "skillmonkey"?
What if the bard now has the most skills, as opposed to the rogue? The rogue got some really cool enhancements, and it would fit since bards are jacks-of-all-trades.
Possibly, I might also advocate for increasing their hit die to d8.
|
Upping the Bard's skill list would be a great way to help the Bard but that's a double edged sword. I think upping his musical abilites would be the most helpful to his class since that is central to that class. Inspire Courage is the only self booster and Fascinate/Suggestion/Mass Suggestion are his only offensive uses of music. Evertying else is just party buffs. Maybe give his music some more offensive power and a boost everytime he plays music to buff his party are some viable options. IMO, the bard is great and doesn't need a lot of changes.
You don't have to advocate increasing Bard HD to d8. That's automatic; they have medium BAB, so they use d8's. Similarly, Sorcerers will get d6's, because they have poor BAB. No class uses d4's in PFRPG, and only Barbarian gets d12. This is all in one of the sidebars early in the document.
What if we make the bard the new "skillmonkey"?
A Bard is a skill monkey... It starts with 6+Int skills and assuming it stays adds a skill at every even level... and I assume that the bard will have as many class skills as the rogue (just different ones)...
The Bard is only underpowered in campaigns that emphasize pure combat and nothing else.... in social situations the bard is king... and he can be a secondary healer, secondary arcanist, isn't inept at combat, has the best shot at discovery obscure clues that might just save you're party's three-letter-equine-that's-not-a-horse...
If you have the mentality that the quarterback, runningback and wide recievers are the offense (or putting it another way.. you need to be "the star") you probably won't like bards... if on the other hand, you suscribe to the "there is no 'I' in team" the bard probably doesn't look that underpowered to you.
So I have a proposal: Change the bard from the lame musical pest of the D&D world into some kind of Skill Based Class
Skill-based classes are nixed after 1st level in the 1.0 Pathfinder rules, so that solution won't work unless the skills rules are radically overhauled. As it is, one level in a skill-based class gives you the maxed-out skills for life, so rogue, ranger, and bard are in effect 1-level classes.
Wizard and fighter are still 20-level classes, however. The new philosophy seems to be that "skill monkey classes suck." I strongly disagree with this sentiment (I loved playing rogues and bards in 3.5), but then again, I'm not in charge of writing the Pathfinder rules.
|
|
I really don't see the Learned Bard variant as good. It's the same as the 3.5 bard but hampered because he can learn lest spells but those spells can be any. Not really an improvement. In 2nd ed., according to the Complete Book of Bards, Bards are able to cast spells, wear Medium armor, and can use any weapon. Definately different from the 3.5 Bard. I will continue reading through Complete Book of Bards to see if anything worthwhile turns up.
My MAJOR problem with Bards is that they can't learn new spells from their travels like Bards in 2nd edition could.
I'd be infinitely more happy with them if you made it so that Bards could actually learn new spells like wizards instead of like sorcerers. I mean, sorcerers learn magic the way they do because they've got some sort of weird bloodline in them. But Bards don't have that distinction, but carry the same limitation.
I'd like to see Bards be the skill monkey/utilitarian jack-of-all-trades they really should be. I'm not married to the whole idea of singing in the middle of battle, but I can overlook that if you fix the other major problems with them.
Reviewing the content on bards in these messageboards, it looks like the criticisms about it are
1.) Its a support character and certain members on these boards don't want other players to have the option of playing support characters
2.) Its a JoaT and most members want it to have its own niche
3.) Certain members want options for other than music
Is that a complete high level list of all the criticisms?
1)If you don't like playing a supporing character..don't play the bard...problem one solved...
2)If you want very specialized niche as opposed to a JoaT...don't play a bard...problem solved...
3)Here I can see a sidebar for an alternate ability (similiar to what PHB II did)... though a bard was one of a caste of poets and scholars of medieval and early modern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Cornwall.. by the way, I'ld change the ability to Bardic Performance... Perform(Oratory) [rousing speeches] and Perform [Poetry] [Epic Poems always have heroes larger than life] are just as morale inspiring to some as music is to others... and really no Dwarf Bard should be Perform (singing) [oh my poor ears].
My MAJOR problem with Bards is that they can't learn new spells from their travels like Bards in 2nd edition could.
I'd be infinitely more happy with them if you made it so that Bards could actually learn new spells like wizards instead of like sorcerers. I mean, sorcerers learn magic the way they do because they've got some sort of weird bloodline in them. But Bards don't have that distinction, but carry the same limitation.
I'd like to see Bards be the skill monkey/utilitarian jack-of-all-trades they really should be. I'm not married to the whole idea of singing in the middle of battle, but I can overlook that if you fix the other major problems with them.
No arcanist in my any of my parties since 3.5 started have taken the wizard... yes the sorcerer knows less spells but he can bloody cast more of them...and then for the arcanist are only good for blasting types, the warmage is a sorceror with armor to boot.
I like the progression which allows more oppertunities to make a bard your own :)
ummm, the progression gives one skill +10, another +9, another +8 etc... i think that is not balanced...
making the bard your own is a matter of roleplaying, not stats on a paper...
I like the bard...
No, bards shouldn't have the same spell list as sorcerors and wizards...
I like being the secndary fighter, the secondary arcanist, the seconary healer and the primary face all at the same time... If I wanted to be a glory hound I would be Codzilla...
and simply allowing the bard access to the wizard/sorcerer spell list (though still restricting them to 6th level spells).
This is a bad idea, IMO. Bards in 3.5 are full spellcasters (as opposed to rangers and paladins, who only get 1/2 class level to caster level) and are balanced as such. They have access to certain spells - and more importantly, certain power levels of spells - at a lower spell level than wizards and sorcerers. Forcing them to use the sorc/wiz spell list with the 6th level restriction will pretty much eliminate the usefulness of their spellcasting entirely. It wouldn't be much different from multiclassing rogue/wizard with no prestige classes, as far as spellcasting is concerned - in other words, completely inept at magic. It also removes several niches from the bard - secondary healer, for example, which the second Pathfinder adventure path default party requires access to, with no primary healer.
I will also state that i like the bard spell list...yes a wizard has a much greater percentage of offensive spells (but if i wanted to be a blaster i'ld be a sorceror/warmage/evoker and not a bard)but a wizard doesnt get healing spells like the bard does...
ya know when I started playing bard could cast any wizard spell of there level they learned .I miss that.
|
The bard as presented by Monte Cook in Eldritch Might II is pretty sweet and really stands out on its own. If Paizo went that way I wouldn't have a problem with it. I think the biggest issue with the bard as presented in the core 3.x is that they really don't stand out on their own when it comes to anything, they are literally the jack of all trades master of none. They need to be given a focus that fits into a niche within the party and kept there. If you design them like Monte with their own magic system then they stand out, being able to combine stuff on the fly for spells was a great idea on Monte's part. The bard needs to be designed so it can be played either to complement the group or to stand alone; I think giving them a choice like the ranger has between swords or bows, but more bardly would work. The focus could be related to thieving as well; traveling musicians need to eat and pay for rooms and sometimes people don't want to hear music so being able to pick a pocket helps. They need to remain the social class as well as who better to get information than someone who can be put in a position to hear everything. Tell someone a good story and and after awhile they start loosing up, telling their own stories. There have been a lot of interesting changes presented so far and until we see what Paizo doesn't I'd just wait and see before decrying their removal or changing to a prestige class, though I have always thought that wouldn't be too bad as they were actually the first if you think about it. I remember when you had to take so many levels of fighter, rogue, and druid before you could become a bard back in 1st ed. Yep, I think I'll wait and see what happens.
|
|
ya know when I started playing bard could cast any wizard spell of there level they learned .I miss that.
The beguiler class in PHB II is a good twist of what a bard should be like also and they learn all the spells on their list for a given level when they have access to it. Not to mention they get to cast from a given level a number of times a day like a sorcerer.
I dont have that book dm4hire may have to look into it thanks
I've been extremely happy with the SRD Prestige Bard. The Prestige Paladin and Prestige Ranger have gotten large-scale acceptance in our campaigns as well.
they are literally the jack of all trades master of none. They need to be given a focus that fits into a niche within the party and kept there. The bard needs to be designed so it can be played either to complement the group or to stand alone;
No, no, no, and no.
Bards ARE the master of one: non-hostile interactions with NPCs. They have so many tricks up their sleeves to use to persuade, trick, aid, hinder, or just sneak past NPCs that there is no other class that even comes close to them in that regard.
They do NOT need to be crammed into a pigeonhole niche. They're perfect as a class that has superior non-combat options backed with a wide range of second-tier combat options - taking enemies out of the fight, dramatically improving the abilities of their allies, healing, debuffing, direct damage, hell they can even be great melee fighters if you build them right (bladeweave and snowflake wardance are your friends).
They don't need to be designed so that they can complement a group or be played solo because they ALREADY CAN DO THAT. There's nothing stopping you from playing a solo bard. Actually, they're probably the second best solo class from the PHB after Druids, and the improvement to d8 HD will help that even more.
One thing to keep in mind is that James Jacobs likes bards, so they won't dissappear, but will very likely get a decent overhaul. I still wouldn't bet on thier 'me' factor being high though, except in social situations.
Bards, as they are presented in the 3,5 PHB are not underpowered compared to other classes. That said, they could certainly use some tweaking. Fluff-wise, bards make a lot of sense. As before mentioned, bards have existed in for ages, both in the real world and in the D&D world. However, I think a lot of people seem to get stuck on the "song" part.
I'd like to direct you to your favorite action movie of choice. Now focus on any good fight scene with more than one character involved on the "good" side. Alright, now tell me, do the characters not indulge in idle conversational banter which may or may not be humorous but certainly keeps up the morale?
There you have it, one of them is a "bard" and is using perform:oratory to boost the morale in the party. Is that not cool? I think it's awesome.
Bards are the face, the ambassador, the encourager and the morale officer of any party. They can fill in any role and do it well. They might not have a specific function except boosting when it comes to fights, but they're not supposed to have one.
To make the bard more on par with the other alpha release classes, I'd suggest the following:
At first level, the bard may choose one weapon which he is proficient with in addition to his usual proficiencies. -this would reflect his traveling nature and his ability to absorb cultures and styles, while also adding another bit of flavor and combat strength.
Instead of a specific progression of his bardic music ability, allow the bard to choose which new music abilities to learn. They could choose these from a list, similar to the way a rogue chooses her rogue talents. This would make the bard more adaptable while still remaining true to his nature.
Remember that the Bard is more like a divine caster rather than a arcane caster. He gains his spell-casting powers not from arcane runes or magical blood, but from music itself. Adding sonic spells to his list would definetly be handy, and perhaps doing it in a way which incorporates his musical abilities would be great.
In my opinion, the limited spell list and spell per day function works very well for the bard. Perhaps giving the bard more known spells wouldn't be half bad, as long as the spells he can choose from are still focused on the bard class or perhaps very compatible with it.
Fix the broken level progression. (Which I am sure is already the intent) Bards have plenty of broken levels where they receive nothing but some saves and a spell or two. Giving them new and interesting things at each level would revitalize the class and make it worth playing even for roll players as opposed to role players.
Maintain the team-based spirit of the bard. The bard has great survivability on his own as is, and his diversity is part of what makes him so awesome in a group.
So, to conclude, I think that changing the bard as drastically as the OP and his supporters have suggested would defeat the purpose of the bard entirely. The "song" part of the bard need not literally be him singing but could be whatever you interpret it as, be it playful banter, chanting, playing the piano or singing scales or even doing some interpretive dance. It already is like this (Except for the dance part), so what people seem to want is for it to be put in print, detailing specifically what is allowed and what is not advised.
It seems that a lot of the resentment towards bards comes from peoples' own lack of imagination. The bard can be a lot of things, but crappy or lame are not on the list of things I'd call them.
There's an interesting PDF available called the Enchiridion of Mystic Music which has some very interesting Bardic Music abilities. It's a great PDF which could be mined for interesting OGC ideas.
What would be AWESOME is if one could make a bard like the Everquest bard - bardic songs which grant the party movement increases, heals the party of damage, inflicts damage on their enemies, etc.
Awesome stuff.
But then, that creates a separate problem - a boring character who only "continues to play his lute" every round of the entire game.
Ok, I'm going to ask this in all seriousness now:
Do we really HAVE to have Bards?
I mean, I understand the whole genre and the inpirational stuff and all that, but even in the most ridiculous circumstances what kind of dolt is going to sit in the middle of battle playing music to inspire and uplift everyone.
I understand we want to keep some backwards compatability. Yes, I really get it. But Bards suck. They just really, really, really suck.
So I have a proposal: Change the bard from the lame musical pest of the D&D world into some kind of Skill Based Class.
I think I disagree pretty strongly with this, and in fact, would go in the opposite direction if I were overhauling the bard class. Personally, I find bards as they're written now to be one of the more interesting classes to play precisely because of the versatility. This is not to say that I wouldn't change some things.
There are two major changes I'd like to see in the bard class:
1. I'd like to see a longer spell list, with more bard-specific spells. I'd like to see the spell progression go faster, and with a more powerful upper limit, and I'd reduce the automatic 'bardic music' abilities accordingly by transferring a lot of the "inspire" and "song of (whatever)"abilities to spells. This could allow for a greater variety of bardic magic effects, and more player choice in customizing the character based on spell choice rather than being locked into a specific progression of bardic abilities.
2. I'd like to see options for more flexibility in using bardic magic while engaged in melee combat directly. My current DM created a custom feat that allows bards to expend two uses of bardic music on a successful melee attack to inspire courage, and I'd like to see something like that become standard in the rules.
In school today I was thinking that the Bard might get some limited Sneak Attack capability or something similar. Seriously, a Bard might not be the best in melee but I could totally see a Bard being able to get in a devastating shot in certain circumstances. Probably it'd start at like 2nd or 4th and get to like 5d6 or 6d6 at 20th level.
And again I'd like to suggest that the Bard be able to use certain Bardic Music abilities even while attacking. For instance at 1st level Countersong and Fascinate would probably not be able to be used while attacking, but a Bard could Inspire Courage while attacking.