Can a bard / barbarian maintain Inspire Courage while Raging?


Rules Questions

51 to 77 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Chess Pwn: How is it supposed to work when an ability from one class (bard, inspire courage) replicates, or is similar to, the ability of another class (barbarian + 2 rage powers), but where that latter class grants its abilities such that they allow use of that ability under special circumstances (like rage) and where they are harder to obtain? I'm open to clarifications for how that is supposed to work. It's not just a simple stacking discussion. To me, it looks like a fundamental conflict of definitions.

Darksol: With a minor and, in my opinion, necessary change or clarification to the wording in the rage restrictions for barbarian (which seems like a possible design oversight), the discussion of Inspire Courage is moot. If the rage text were to limit charisma-based abilities in addition to skills (which makes sense to me given the class design and game balance), there would be no discussion.

In addition, if you consider how various conditions apply, impact on skills and abilities is very common. For example, consider what happens with various negative conditions like sickened, shaken, frightened, panicked, etc. - they affect both skills and abilities.

I see rage as conceptually similar in that regard (anger axis vs. fear axis, for example), where it could logically affect both skills and abilities, and I believe that the intent of the barbarian rage definition was to tightly restrict what barbarians could do while raging, while further defining what is possible via additional rage powers granted through level progression. Or, in other words, like a good firewall - DENY ALL (or in this case DENY MOST), then ALLOW, ALLOW, ALLOW, etc.

The rulesmith counter-argument (non-pejorative use here) is that it is not technically defined that way per RAW (and I agree with respect to the high-level definitions without inclusion of rage powers), leaving the door open to Inspire Courage. My point is that I think that open door is inadvertent and is legitimately blocked by the defined rage powers re: what can happen during rage while trying to inspire allies.

If a barbarian wants to take a level of bard and maintain Inspire Courage while NOT raging, great. We all agree. But, once the barbarian starts raging, he is treading in the domain of rage powers that do the same thing, and which, by their text, define what is possible in rage, including with respect to supernatural abilities (that also require rage powers to function during rage). So, since the bard does not have rage as a class feature, there is no expectation that that ability should work or stack with a class that has rage and requires rage powers for similar abilities to work (not to mention the fact that inspire courage is buff only with no penalties).

Derklord: The purpose of rage powers is that they specifically grant back and define what barbarians can do during rage and represent class training for the barbarian. Generally limiting charisma-based skills and abilities does not preclude rage powers from granting back specific functions through class progression.

And, from the standpoint of balance, the bard dip, even with the loss of BAB, still trumps the two required rage powers and 4 barbarian levels to do the same thing (while raging) and is, therefore, the greater point of imbalance, in my opinion, not to mention the difficult build choice of not taking other rage powers to get Reckless Abandon and Inspire Ferocity to be able to inspire allies while raging.

The need for FAQ treatment/rules clarification for how all these things work together seems clear (and has been needed for a long time, given that this debate stretches back into earlier D&D and probably spans at least a decade). It is also nice to see the FAQ vote support in post #1 - very encouraging. On my part, I look forward to the clarification and find the discussion very educational, regardless of how it resolves.

Thanks to those who replied to my rage power questions.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And you'd be correct: If it said abilities based off of mental stats (in which case, you'd need a FAQ that clarifies what constitutes an ability being "based off of" a mental stat, and whether adding one or two mental stats to a non-mental stat would constitute as still being "based off of" that mental stat), then there would be no argument.

But it doesn't say that. And since it doesn't say that, we go with what it does say, and how it's being said. Here's the relevant text from the Rage ability.

Rage wrote:
While in rage, a barbarian cannot use any Charisma-, Dexterity-, or Intelligence-based skills (except Acrobatics, Fly, Intimidate, and Ride) or any ability that requires patience or concentration.

From this, we can tell that this serves as exclusionary language (that is, it lists what it disallows, and that everything else that doesn't fall under that list is usable with the Rage). So, while raging, you can't:

-Use skills that are based off of mental statistics. Since skills are a defined game term, and not skills as in capabilities of the character, we go with the former definition, meaning abilities don't fall under this category unless they are intrinsic to the skills; this was covered, and is ruled that a Raging Bard-Barian cannot use performances like Fascinate or Countersong exclusively because they require the usage of the Perform skill (which is mental-based).

-Use any sort of ability that requires patience or concentration. The latter is a defined game term, referred to a requirement in order to properly cast a spell. The former has no proper definition, meaning we have to revert to the dictionary definition, which I've cited in a prior post, and have concluded that a Bardic Performance, which takes place immediately, does not constitute as requiring patience to activate. Effects which take a fair amount of time to occur, and have little to no immediate application, would not be allowed.

Everything else should be allowed, as Rage cites what things you can't do while under its influence.

Keep in mind that it has to be exclusionary language for it to make sense; otherwise, it's telling us that we can only do the above bulleted items while Raging, and that makes no sense. This is true when we decide to, for example, take the Wild Rager archetype. Here's what it's Rage ability says:

Uncontrollable Rage wrote:
A wild rager's rage functions as normal, except that when she reduces a creature to 0 or fewer hit points, she must attempt a Will save (DC 10 + 1/2 the barbarian's level + the barbarian's Constitution modifier) or become confused. For the remainder of her current turn, she attacks the nearest creature other than herself. On the following round, refer to the confusion spell to determine her actions. At the end of this round, and each round thereafter, she can attempt a new saving throw to end the confusion effect. The rounds during which she is confused do not count against the rounds she has spent raging that day, but she cannot end her rage voluntarily, nor can she use rage powers while confused.

This means that when I take this archetype, in addition to the above buletted items, I also am required to follow the drawbacks (and benefits) of this feature as well, since it otherwise functions as if the effect(s) listed here didn't exist.

Grand Lodge

Thanks. I appreciate the extra description. I understand and agree with the community-parsed RAW argument on the top-level definitions (..but I think the rage description may need additional review because of the intent of the rage class feature. It seems like it should be more restrictive and is, perhaps, remiss for not excluding ability checks based on how other mechanics work). Maybe the designers didn't have Inspire Courage for a multi-classed Bard-barian on the radar when penning the definition - I don't know. If they did, OK, but then it's an easy post for them to say - "Inspire Courage is allowed during rage"...but it seems very inconsistent to me, especially given the subsequent APG definition of certain rage powers.

And, it has required multiple (subtle) clarifications from people like JJ on the class description and nature of skill checks. So, it seems unlikely to me that Inspire Courage was ever considered for use with barbarian rage. It would certainly be understandable as an oversight, because there is a lot of rules complexity that requires constant cross-reference at the design level. But yes - it doesn't explicitly say that. However, the fact that it is worded as it is does not negate the request for clarification of RAW vs. RAI and/or possibility of an oversight.

The place where I have trouble accepting Inspire Courage during rage is with the definition of rage powers vs. bardic abilities, where rage powers define what can happen specifically during rage and Inspire Courage strongly resembles existing rage powers, as before, and also comes from a class that is non-raging. So, what is the best way to resolve the obvious conflict/duplication vs. rage powers that say what can be used during rage in a restricted class?

Anyway, no argument or lack of clarity on RAW for top-level stuff, but I see a definite conflict with the existing rage powers (not included in your otherwise fine explanation).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Class abilities of different classes are independent and designed for different roles. You cannot compare a barbarians abilities to a bards, they are designed to be harder to achieve for one class, or be more effective for the other class. One of the perks to multiclassing is tacking an easy to get or more effective ability on to a different class. This is a feature, not a bug.


You aren't supposed to view the rules in a vacuum, but that doesn't mean you should use the mere existence of a class feature to rule that a different class feature doesn't function during a third class feature, just because A superficially resembles B and explicitly works with C.

You're falling into the trap of using the abstraction of the abilities to arbitrate on their mechanics. Inspire Courage and Inspire Ferocity might as well have been called BardClassFeatureF and BarbRagePwr6 for all the difference it makes. The fact that the abilities are both called "Inspire whatever" isn't germane to question of Inspire Courage working or not during rage. "Inspire" is not a game term. There is no rule, written or otherwise, that states that multiple abilities with "Inspire" in their names are incompatible. They both provide bonuses to combat stats in certain situation. The abstraction of exactly how those abilities work isn't relevant. In fact, Inspire Ferocity is in no way at all relevant to Inspire Courage, as far as the rules are concerned.

Do Aura of Courage and Inspire Courage stack? They're both about making your allies more courageous, but have totally different effects. By the logic put forth saying a raging barb can't inspire more than one thing, these abilities don't function together, because how do you decide how the abstraction of two courage-bolstering abilities work together?

Simple. They just work, because it's a game. And a Barbarian in a rage can inspire courage, ferocity, fear, hunger, wistfulness and whatever other emotions he or she wishes, as long as they meet the requirements for each ability. None of them are mutually exclusive unless they say they are, no matter how little sense that makes from an abstraction standpoint.

Now sure, if you decide that it doesn't make any sense to you, and you're the GM, fine, go ahead and disallow it, it's your game.


Inspire courage is not a skill, nor does it specifically require a skill. It does not require concentration either as an action, because it's standard than free, nor in any sense the rules may require. Therefore there are no restrictions against based on raging. Even if there are other rage power related to inspiration, because it's simply a question of whether a different classes power may be used while raging; since inspire courage doesn't break any of rage's restrictions it may be.


Mr. Pitt, anything you can make of this?

"This ability is similar in all respects to bardic performance as used by a bard of the storyteller's medium level (including interactions with feats, spells, and other abilities), and uses Perform (act), Perform (comedy), or Perform (oratory) as the storyteller's performance skill. However, a storyteller gains only the following types of bardic performance: inspire courage (2nd level), inspire competence (3rd level), inspire greatness (9th level), and inspire heroics (15th level)."

This is from an RPG line book, and says it's limited to certain perform skills, yet none of the types of performances it can do require a skill check. So why say it can only use certain skills as the performance skill if none of them need a performance skill?

This would seem to indicate that you are using the skill for bardic performance, just that the result of the check doesn't effect the mechanical strength of the performance.

Grand Lodge

Thanks for the comments. I understand what both of you are saying.

My comments are not about the word "Inspire," per se, but rather about the common or similar effect and the related restrictions involved, as previously explained.

So, I don't see these two class abilities as functioning as totally neutral or disconnected abstractions (but I understand that many class combinations in Pathfinder work that way), and I think that the rage text would benefit from further clarification vs. the extended micro-parsing to allow something that seems like it shouldn't be allowed.

RAW? - OK, it works because we have to go by the rules text as is when we GM. RAI/Design? - should rage really allow charisma-based abilities like Inspire Courage? I don't think so at the design/RAI level.

In terms of mechanistic precedents for when X has the potential to undercut Y - class features, spells, oversight, unintended combination, etc., there are rules/FAQs that further specify what is possible.

Here are some random examples in no particular order:
- Archetypes that replace class abilities with more specific versions and whether or not they count for things that improve the original ability. The archetype is intended as more restrictive and you have to make a choice.

- Using SLA's as prestige class prerequisites to trump the required level progression or caster class/level requirement to gain very early access to the prestige class. If you want the prestige class, you have to go through the designated level/class/skill, etc. progression to earn the necessary prerequisites.

- Fighter armor proficiency that functions (and is named the same) as dedicated feats. You can't replace proficiencies as though they were feats, even though they function the same way. If you want certain feats, you have to make a choice and/or wait for level progression.

- Determining the spell level for a wand such as Lesser Restoration. It's not a 1st level wand, since it derives from the cleric list, rather than paladin list. There's a rule for that that restricts low-level access to Lesser Restoration (and would basically nullify the impact of most poisons, if allowed). Go ahead and poison me, I've got my 2PP (free) wand.

The above examples are obviously not exact parallels but are conceptually similar in certain ways to the issue at hand. When I ask the question about whether or not it makes sense to allow a bard ability to (as I see it) undercut a relatively similar barbarian ability that is specifically designed to work in rage and that is much more difficult to obtain (4 levels, 2 rage powers with penalties vs. 1 level and no penalties) and when there seems like an oversight in the rage description that allows it, I don't see that the question is without a mechanistic precedent from a rules/FAQ standpoint.

I look forward to a formal FAQ clarification, if any!


Chess Pwn wrote:

Mr. Pitt, anything you can make of this?

"This ability is similar in all respects to bardic performance as used by a bard of the storyteller's medium level (including interactions with feats, spells, and other abilities), and uses Perform (act), Perform (comedy), or Perform (oratory) as the storyteller's performance skill. However, a storyteller gains only the following types of bardic performance: inspire courage (2nd level), inspire competence (3rd level), inspire greatness (9th level), and inspire heroics (15th level)."

This is from an RPG line book, and says it's limited to certain perform skills, yet none of the types of performances it can do require a skill check. So why say it can only use certain skills as the performance skill if none of them need a performance skill?

This would seem to indicate that you are using the skill for bardic performance, just that the result of the check doesn't effect the mechanical strength of the performance.

I'm not Mr. Pitt, but it looks to me that the Storyteller Medium has a less freeform derivative of Bardic Performance than the original, so while a multiclass Bard/Barbarian may be able to use some Bardic Performances, a multiclass Storyteller Medium/Barbarian cannot do so.


Chess Pwn wrote:

Mr. Pitt, anything you can make of this?

"This ability is similar in all respects to bardic performance as used by a bard of the storyteller's medium level (including interactions with feats, spells, and other abilities), and uses Perform (act), Perform (comedy), or Perform (oratory) as the storyteller's performance skill. However, a storyteller gains only the following types of bardic performance: inspire courage (2nd level), inspire competence (3rd level), inspire greatness (9th level), and inspire heroics (15th level)."

This is from an RPG line book, and says it's limited to certain perform skills, yet none of the types of performances it can do require a skill check. So why say it can only use certain skills as the performance skill if none of them need a performance skill?

This would seem to indicate that you are using the skill for bardic performance, just that the result of the check doesn't effect the mechanical strength of the performance.

Just inserting my off-the-cuff take on this.

I'd agree that this muddies things since per the CRB you can't be considered using a skill if you're not making a skill check. And to make a skill check, you must be rolling or Taking 10 or 20 and comparing the result to a DC.

So this is flying in the face of the core system on skill use that was established 6 years prior. Unless the developers wish to change how things work, it sounds like this bit of supplemental rule slipped past the editors and is in need of errata. Otherwise I don't see why the core system should be reinvented to accommodate it.


UnArcaneElection wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

Mr. Pitt, anything you can make of this?

"This ability is similar in all respects to bardic performance as used by a bard of the storyteller's medium level (including interactions with feats, spells, and other abilities), and uses Perform (act), Perform (comedy), or Perform (oratory) as the storyteller's performance skill. However, a storyteller gains only the following types of bardic performance: inspire courage (2nd level), inspire competence (3rd level), inspire greatness (9th level), and inspire heroics (15th level)."

This is from an RPG line book, and says it's limited to certain perform skills, yet none of the types of performances it can do require a skill check. So why say it can only use certain skills as the performance skill if none of them need a performance skill?

This would seem to indicate that you are using the skill for bardic performance, just that the result of the check doesn't effect the mechanical strength of the performance.

I'm not Mr. Pitt, but it looks to me that the Storyteller Medium has a less freeform derivative of Bardic Performance than the original, so while a multiclass Bard/Barbarian may be able to use some Bardic Performances, a multiclass Storyteller Medium/Barbarian cannot do so.

But it treated just as a bard's bardic performance for everything


Chess Pwn wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

Mr. Pitt, anything you can make of this?

"This ability is similar in all respects to bardic performance as used by a bard of the storyteller's medium level (including interactions with feats, spells, and other abilities), and uses Perform (act), Perform (comedy), or Perform (oratory) as the storyteller's performance skill. However, a storyteller gains only the following types of bardic performance: inspire courage (2nd level), inspire competence (3rd level), inspire greatness (9th level), and inspire heroics (15th level)."

This is from an RPG line book, and says it's limited to certain perform skills, yet none of the types of performances it can do require a skill check. So why say it can only use certain skills as the performance skill if none of them need a performance skill?

This would seem to indicate that you are using the skill for bardic performance, just that the result of the check doesn't effect the mechanical strength of the performance.

I'm not Mr. Pitt, but it looks to me that the Storyteller Medium has a less freeform derivative of Bardic Performance than the original, so while a multiclass Bard/Barbarian may be able to use some Bardic Performances, a multiclass Storyteller Medium/Barbarian cannot do so.

But it treated just as a bard's bardic performance for everything

No, it's not. If it was treated 100% exactly like the Bardic Performance of the Bard class, it wouldn't be limited to only 3 Perform skills, when a Bard class has access to all Perform skills usable in regards to the Performances which require them. It alters how the base Bardic Performance class feature operates, if we go by the altering archetypes FAQ, which means if I decided to dip into Bard when progressing as a Medium, I'd have two separate Bardic Performance pools, since one is keyed off of every Perform skill in the game, and the other is keyed off of only 3 Perform skills mentioned in the entry; especially if we go by the Channel Energy FAQ.

**EDIT**

The funny thing is, there's no reason to reference the Perform skills, considering none of those performances actually require a Perform check to use.

It's also been mentioned by JJ, the lead designer regarding the Bard class, that it's not intended for every Bardic Performance to require a Perform skill to use.

Grand Lodge

Forensically speaking, it could also be a clue that, even at the designer/reviewer/playtest level, there is some confusion about bardic performance vs. skill checks and concept of how performance is supposed to work. It begs the question of whether or not bardic performance was intended/assumed to be restricted by the rage description in the CRB, not to mention conflicts that arise from the creation of the additional APG rage power content.

Also, if you read the JJ post on bardic performance and skill checks, you will note that he says the bard class was the last class to be finished, which means it likely resolved after barbarian was complete, where the barbarian design may have referenced performance as a perform skill check (again, possible confusion) since the "flavor" text is still in the current CRB. So, maybe barbarian didn't get full rules synthesis vs. bard, especially since the JJ point about Perform skill was not publicly clarified until 2012 and some confusion or rules mongering gaps probably existed at the start.

And, this kind of issue that could have legitimately occurred because of design time sequencing and publishing pressure makes more sense to me than trying to cram what I see as the square peg of bardic performance into the round hole of barbarian rage by attempting a synchronized RAW interpretation on top of rules that appear to have been out of sync (or misunderstood, including at the design level) from the start. Just conjecture, however, as I continue to think about this discussion.

Shadow Lodge

If we're looking for clues to developer intent, it's worth noting that in 3.5 rage and bardic performance were compatible. ("The 'bardarian' has two choices in a battle: use a mix of party-aiding spells and attacks, or rage and use inspirational music to urge the rest of the party on as he attacks.") Given that rage and performance were generally more restrictive in 3.5 than in PF (eg you couldn't use Combat Expertise when raging or cast spells while maintaining a bardic performance) it seems unlikely that the PF team intended to add a new restriction against using bardic performance or similar abilities when raging.

HoloGnome wrote:
The above examples are obviously not exact parallels but are conceptually similar in certain ways to the issue at hand. When I ask the question about whether or not it makes sense to allow a bard ability to (as I see it) undercut a relatively similar barbarian ability that is specifically designed to work in rage and that is much more difficult to obtain (4 levels, 2 rage powers with penalties vs. 1 level and no penalties) and when there seems like an oversight in the rage description that allows it, I don't see that the question is without a mechanistic precedent from a rules/FAQ standpoint.

It is easier for a bard to inspire people than it is for a barbarian to do so because inspiring people is the bard's primary role, while a barbarian's primary role is fighting. Multiclassing can add breadth to a character but thanks to the way major class features tend to scale, a multiclassed character usually ends up with weaker class features than a single-classed one. This is the balancing factor that I think you are not considering.

As a barbarian who wants to inspire people, you can either spend two rage powers to get the Inspire Ferocity ability without sacrificing a significant amount of combat ability, or you can spend a level in bard in order to get level 1 Inspire Courage. And while full progression Inspire Courage is definitely better than full progression Inspire Ferocity, 1st level Inspire Courage is limited in uses per day, requires a standard action to use (instead of a move for Inspire Ferocity), and doesn't scale with your barbarian levels. Meanwhile, the single-classed barbarian with Inspire Ferocity has an extra point of BAB, about 2 HP more, and a level earlier access to upgrades to their rage ability including high-level rage powers and scaling of powers like Inspire Ferocity.

Similarly, a sorcerer who takes a few levels in paladin is going to be better in combat than a single-classed sorcerer, but their spellcasting will suffer. And while the levels in paladin don't remove the sorc's armour restrictions, the sorcerer isn't prevented from gaining the AC bonus from smite, or using other "tanky" abilities derived from paladin levels.

HoloGnome wrote:

I see rage as conceptually similar in that regard (anger axis vs. fear axis, for example), where it could logically affect both skills and abilities, and I believe that the intent of the barbarian rage definition was to tightly restrict what barbarians could do while raging, while further defining what is possible via additional rage powers granted through level progression. Or, in other words, like a good firewall - DENY ALL (or in this case DENY MOST), then ALLOW, ALLOW, ALLOW, etc.

...
The purpose of rage powers is that they specifically grant back and define what barbarians can do during rage and represent class training for the barbarian.

Lesser Beast Totem lets you grow claws while raging - does that mean that a catfolk shouldn't be able to use their racial claw attacks when in rage? The Knockdown rage power allows to trip opponents during a rage without provoking AoO - does this mean a barbarian shouldn't be able to use the Improved Trip feat while raging? Guarded Stance, Rolling Dodge and Staggering Drunk give you limited dodge bonuses - should a barbarian be unable to benefit from the Dodge feat or other "better and easier" dodge bonuses? You could argue that the -2 AC penalty in the base rage ability indicates that a barbarian isn't supposed to be able to defend themselves properly while raging except as defined/allowed by these specific rage powers.

HoloGnome wrote:
In addition, if you consider how various conditions apply, impact on skills and abilities is very common. For example, consider what happens with various negative conditions like sickened, shaken, frightened, panicked, etc. - they affect both skills and abilities.

They affect skill and ability checks, for example a strength check to open a door or a charisma check to get a charmed person to do something they wouldn't ordinarily do. A supernatural ability is not the same thing as an ability check.

Grand Lodge

Thanks for the interesting reply.

Weirdo wrote:
"...in 3.5 rage and bardic performance were compatible."

Interesting - I did not know that...but didn't really play much 3.5. I'm a relatively new addition to PFS, compared to most here.

I considered various balance factors and understand class dip trade-offs, and also considered that the rage power was limited to 30', rather than in earshot and carried an AC penalty that scaled to all allies. The rage power is also limited for number of rounds per day equal to barbarian rage. One advantage on the rage power side, perhaps, is that it doesn't require a separate stat for the barbarian.

Anyway, I agree that there are balancing discussions that are possible, but at lower levels, maybe even through 7th level, Inspire Courage seems superior (to me), conferring +2 in bonuses without any penalties (other than needing charisma and/or extra performance to make the best use of it), whereas the rage powers provide +2 in bonuses with -2 AC in penalties and a range limitation.

re: Catfolk: No conflict. The rage power actually improves/replaces the Catfolk's claw attacks by doing 1d6 instead of 1d4 damage while raging and does not undercut a class ability. After rage, the catfolk goes back to 1d4 primary claw attacks. Similarly, if you want to rage and use rage powers to inspire, great. If bardic performance is not allowed, it is a fallback while not raging, just like the catfolks normal racial claws.

re: Knockdown: If you have Improved Trip, you would get 1 trip attack per rage that deals strength damage and is +2 on the CMB roll. Using a dedicated combat feat is not one class ability undercutting another and is compatible with rage, just as Power Attack is.

re: Dodge bonuses: No conflict. Dodge bonuses are clearly defined as stacking and are not undercutting anything.

Weirdo wrote:
"You could argue that the -2 AC penalty in the base rage ability indicates that a barbarian isn't supposed to be able to defend themselves properly while raging except as defined/allowed by these specific rage powers."

I see what you're saying, but, again, it's not one class ability superseding or undercutting another. You are comparing against combat feats which are always active and generally compatible with rage as far as I know. The example of Reckless Abandon/Inspire Ferocity is that the barbarian must sacrifice additional AC to get an attack bonus while raging that he shares in an inspirational context with allies. So, if that's what's required for him to be able to focus on the attack bonus while raging "inspirationally," where is the penalty with Inspired Courage while raging? Since there isn't one, it is potentially an example of one class ability undercutting another. Should they stack and should it work during rage? Per current RAW they do, but I'm not sure I agree. However, the 3.5 info is interesting, as above.

re: condition discussion: I am referring to the "condition" of rage (anger) vs. the fear tree. Rage is an (Ex). If fear affects both things, why shouldn't rage? Further, rage powers include supernatural abilities, so it appears that rage powers are required even to use supernatural abilities while raging, which is another reason why Inspire Courage doesn't necessarily deserve a free pass.

Shadow Lodge

HoloGnome wrote:
The rage power is also limited for number of rounds per day equal to barbarian rage.

Yes, but if you're a single-class barbarian you'll have many more rounds of rage than a barbarian X/bard 1 will have rounds of bardic performance.

HoloGnome wrote:
Anyway, I agree that there are balancing discussions that are possible, but at lower levels, maybe even through 7th level, Inspire Courage seems superior (to me), conferring +2 in bonuses without any penalties (other than needing charisma and/or extra performance to make the best use of it), whereas the rage powers provide +2 in bonuses with -2 AC in penalties and a range limitation.

Are you comparing a 7th level bard to a 7th level barbarian? Because you don't get a +2 bonus from Inspire Courage with just a dip in bard. And the relevant comparison here isn't a single-classes bard with a single-classed barbarian that took Inspire Ferocity, it's a multiclassed bardarian with a single-classed barbarian that took Inspire Ferocity. Obviously a full bard is going to be superior at inspiring. They question is whether multiclassing is unbalanced, and the lack of scaling on Inspire Courage is the reason it's not.

HoloGnome wrote:
re: condition discussion: I am referring to the "condition" of rage (anger) vs. the fear tree. Rage is an (Ex). If fear affects both things, why shouldn't rage?

But fear doesn't affect supernatural abilities. It affects ability checks. You want to say that a barbarian can't make a Charisma check to influence a charmed person while raging, fine, makes sense, but saying that they can't use a supernatural ability that references the charisma stat is something else entirely.

HoloGnome wrote:
Further, rage powers include supernatural abilities, so it appears that rage powers are required even to use supernatural abilities while raging, which is another reason why Inspire Courage doesn't necessarily deserve a free pass.

No, that doesn't follow at all. This argument would also "prove" that a barbarian can't use dodge bonuses while raging. "Rage powers include dodge bonuses, so it appears that rage powers are required even to use dodge powers while raging."

Grand Lodge

re: rounds of bardic performance: It depends on the build and on feats selected, such as Extra Performance - whatever. The Bard-barian would get 9 rounds with charisma 10 + EP, which is plenty for 2 fights in PFS.

Also, the earliest a barbarian could use the ability to Inspire Ferocity in allies would be 4th. There's an obvious class progression threshold there that is part of the class design.

re: 7th level: My point here was that at 7th level, the bonus/penalty from Reckless Abandon is +2 to hit/-2 AC with a 30' range limitation. The 1st level bonus from Inspire Courage is +1 to hit/+1 damage (a total of +2 in bonuses) without penalties or a 30' range. So, from a balance point, I disagree that Inspire Courage pales in comparison even vs. upper-middle levels of barbarian.

re: conditions The intent of my comment is to look generally at things that affect both skills and abilities and to ask the question of whether or not rage/anger is similar to fear (which affects skills and abilities), putting aside the fact that Inspire Courage doesn't specifically require a check, but is a charisma-based ability. I understand that the fear tree conditions specify ability checks and IC doesn't require one. But, should rage affect charisma-based abilities more generally, disallowing IC? That is the question vs. the current (and very gray and confusing) "patience" fluff in the rage description. For example, if the rage description were to say something concrete like: "cannot use charisma-based abilities(, except...)" Inspire Courage would be out. Or, if it said something clear like "but can use supernatural charisma-based abilities" or "but can use charisma-based abilities that do not require checks" or etc., it would be in.

re: dodge You specified the dodge feat and, further, dodge bonuses are clearly specified to stack. Otherwise, the conceptual point of the supernatural comment was to say that, considering that rage powers include supernatural abilities and where rage powers are the definition of the special class abilities that a barbarian can use while raging, and where Inspire Courage seems like a conflicting class ability for all the reasons previously stated, the fact that Inspire Courage is a supernatural ability still doesn't (for me) override that potential class ability conflict.

It's not a rage power, doesn't come from a class that has rage, and seems to undercut the similar ability that is defined based on rage power class ability. So, besides the fact that RAW rules parsing allows it, should it really be allowed?

I look forward to the FAQ that resolves all these questions and clarifies the interaction via rule and/or example among bard, barbarian, rage, and rage powers and possible class conflicts, if any are deemed to exist.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
HoloGnome wrote:
I considered various balance factors and understand class dip trade-offs,

What you fail to consider is that both a level dip into Bard and Inspire Courage are [u]crap[/u]! It doesn't matter which one of two turds smells worse.

HoloGnome wrote:
where is the penalty with Inspired Courage while raging?

LOSING YOUR F~*$ING STANDARD ACTION! Plus the mentions downsides of a dip and needing an extra feat to have it even aviable for more than one combat per day.

Ok, let me explains again in perfectly clear english: I wants flies in ons a dragons, ok? The comparison of of Bardic Performance to Inspiring Ferocity is completly 100% irrelevant because balancing. Does. Not. Work. That. Way!

Quote:
Further, rage powers include supernatural abilities, so it appears that rage powers are required even to use supernatural abilities while raging

It's like you have that monk class ability that lets you jump as far as you want, only with you, it applies to conclusions.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

If your Bardbarian is taking Extra Performance feats, he's not spending them on things like Iron Will or Toughness or Raging Vitality or Reckless Rage, or other really good feats that he should be taking; just so he can have a few more rounds of performance and inspiring ferocity, which requires him wasting a round of doing absolutely nothing except buffing him and his fellow comrades?

That's not even taking into consideration that he gave up his capstone (not exactly relevant, but when it is, it severely outweighs whatever benefit that Inspire Courage provides), has a reduced BAB, became MAD like a Monk or Paladin, and delayed his Barbarian progression, just so he can provide a +1 to hit and damage to him and his fellow buddies after wasting a round of not pummeling a big bad to the ground.

Calling that overpowered is just plain stupid in comparison to what he could be doing. If anything, I kind of like that sort of variance, because you're not a cookie-cutter Barbarian that just yells "HULK SMASH!"

Again, if Rage was designed to not allow abilities keyed off of mental statistics, it would say so. You keep putting things into the Rage ability that are only there because you either think they were there (in which case we've proven you wrong, as it's not there), or you believe it should be there (in which case, the developers disagree with you, as it's still not there).

@Derklord: Whys yous gots to copies mes alls the times?

Shadow Lodge

HoloGnome wrote:
re: conditions The intent of my comment is to look generally at things that affect both skills and abilities and to ask the question of whether or not rage/anger is similar to fear (which affects skills and abilities),

No, fear affects ability checks. An ability check is not the same as an ability any more than a sea lion is the same thing as a lion.

Shaken wrote:
A shaken character takes a –2 penalty on attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks.
Frightened wrote:
A frightened creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, and ability checks. A frightened creature can use special abilities, including spells, to flee; indeed, the creature must use such means if they are the only way to escape.

Note that the frightened condition addresses "ability checks" and "special abilities" separately. If the restriction on "ability checks" also applied to "special abilities" then it would not be necessary to specify that you can use special abilities when frightened - the description of how ability checks are affected would have been sufficient.

HoloGnome wrote:
re: dodge You specified the dodge feat and, further, dodge bonuses are clearly specified to stack. Otherwise, the conceptual point of the supernatural comment was to say that, considering that rage powers include supernatural abilities and where rage powers are the definition of the special class abilities that a barbarian can use while raging, and where Inspire Courage seems like a conflicting class ability for all the reasons previously stated, the fact that Inspire Courage is a supernatural ability still doesn't (for me) override that potential class ability conflict.

"Rage powers are abilities that can only be used in rage" =/= "The only abilities that can be used in rage are rage powers."

"Humans are animals that can only breathe in air" =/= "The only animals that can breathe in air are humans."

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

There's already a pretty simple way of figuring out whether things stack, which is looking at the type of bonus they provide and what they are providing the bonus to, i.e. on morale bonus to damage rolls doesn't stack with other morale bonus's to damage rolls. Outside of that there's a lot of abilities that do very similar things with varying degrees of efficacy. Should smite and challenge work together? What about favored enemy, or studied target or studied combat? Should we allow those to stack? What about sneak attack and swashbuckler's precise strike deed? Should a character be able to get the increased damage dice that warpriest's and brawlers and benefit from the fighter's weapon training? These are all ways to improve the damage on the skill axis or "the ability to discern weaknesses in your foe" axis.

Now if you're GMing a non-PFS game, you could go through all the various abilities and bonus's in each class and make up a chart indicating which abilities contradict or "undercut" another class ability and not allow them to stack. For example, you could decide that sneak attack doesn't stack with favored enemy, because both rely on understanding where the most vulnerable parts of an enemy are and how to strike them for increased damage, and sneak attack is "undercutting" the ranger's ability because it deals more damage without the restriction of being limited to one type of creature. Or you could decide that the untyped bonus/penalty from reckless abandon doesn't stack with the competence bonus granted by inspire courage. It's not how it works by RAW, but it'd be your game. So sure, why not? Different strokes for different folks.

Grand Lodge

Derklord/Darksol: I'm with on the fact that it's not a great build choice, and am aware of the ill-advised action economy trade-offs (at least for a high DPS barbarian). But, because people want to do it and because there is some debate, it seems like a worthy question.

Weirdo: I understand the distinction regarding abilities and checks. I tried to address it previously.

Weirdo wrote:

"Rage powers are abilities that can only be used in rage" =/= "The only abilities that can be used in rage are rage powers."

"Humans are animals that can only breathe in air" =/= "The only animals that can breathe in air are humans."

I don't think this comparison quite works and/or is not related. I have tried to address my thoughts about potential scoping restrictions of rage powers (as I see them) in my earlier replies.

Badblood: I understand stacking and bonus types, have to resolve them all the time in my games, and generally agree with your comments about PFS vs. home games. In this case, however, the debate has gone on for many years.

Because of ambiguous rage class text (+ fluff like "patience"), it may be that reasonable questions about the overall concept of how rage should work with other things (and what counts as undercutting -- as addressed in the other FAQs I mentioned) might benefit from additional developer commentary/FAQ treatment. Is there anyone among us who wouldn't appreciate the extra clarity?

I understand that FAQs are not always possible or warranted, and I'm sure we all realize that there is never going to be enough clarity for everyone's liking. In those instances, it falls to RAW. But, in this case, it seems like an easy (and worthy) matter to resolve. I accept the rules as they are, but I don't see that as limiting the discussion. I also don't see this question as resulting in unholy FAQ chaos.

We are all in agreement on RAW, but it should also be OK to ask the question or ask for developer clarification, especially since the RAW interpretation feels like dancing through extra-planar hoops, which may, in fact, require a supernatural inter-dimensional performance ability that is not compatible with rage. ^_^


HoloGnome I think that you are over-thinking this. You need to clear your mind and go back to basics.

Bard abilities are not rage abilities - do not compare them for balance or effectiveness. They are fundamentally different percentages of each classes abilities. Inspire Courage is a significant bard ability. A rage power is just one of many options.

Rage prevents a very specific list of things. Bardic performance does not appear on that list unless it requires a skill check.

It really is that simple.


There are only hoops to dance through because your mind is preconceiving them being there, when in reality they're not. In fact, that's the only reason this discussion is going on as long as it is, and that's about as valid an argument as "I don't like it." Which is fine if you want to ban something for your home games because you want a specific feeling for your table. But it's not a valid rules argument.

I'd suggest you Take 20 to disbelieve that illusion spell you're affected by that gives you the concept that Bardic Performances and Rage cannot work together. The RAW is about as RAI as it gets, especially when it's clearly spelled out as to what it is that Rage disallows while it's active; mental skill checks (sans Intimidate), patience, and concentration. That's it. If there is anything else outside of those things (or those things mentioned are not involved in the subject in question), then they're fair game for use.

I'll tell you what, how about you ask Mark Seifter or one of the other developers on their respective Ask threads about this issue; they'll usually answer within a timely manner in regards to how they, as developers, feel such-and-such is ran. I mean, besides a FAQ, that's about as official as it gets, and if they do agree with us, it will only be icing on our already delicious cake that we're eating. (Though you might think we're having it too, so...)

Grand Lodge

Thanks guys - I just see it as discussion and it seems like a reasonable question (again, to me). I'm not sure that RAW = RAI here, but I may be the only hold-out hiding behind a cardboard standup western barbarian - not sure.

However, I also understand that the rules are defensible for certain other reasons (mechanics, stacking, etc.), as various people have indicated. Anyway - all good. Thanks for the willingness to talk about it as a friendly exchange.

The first post is dedicated as the FAQ post and it seems to have reasonable support for some kind of formal reply. So, I'm happy to wait for that miraculous cake-filled day to arrive, if ever, and otherwise go with RAW as we all usually do. I will ping a developer and maybe that will help the cause. Thanks again.


A raging barbarian using inspire courage as he fights? Singing as he slays and inspires the others fighting around him? Aw, Hell YEAH!! Eomer, here we come!

Shadow Lodge

You know, much as I think that bardic performance is supposed to work with rage, I wouldn't be shocked if the devs decided otherwise.

I do think however it's way more likely that it'd be because "Yes, it counts as a use of a Perform check, an exception to the usual rule that using a skill requires a check" rather than because it's a supernatural ability that uses the charisma stat or because it makes Inspire Ferocity irrelevant.

51 to 77 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can a bard / barbarian maintain Inspire Courage while Raging? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.