So I'm looking for a combat focused Bard like character. I've looked at the Bard: Arcane Duelist and it is a step in the right direction, I was hoping for something more combat focused similar to the way the Ninja was more combat than the Rogue.
One idea I had was the Magus: Spiderhawk as an alternative. Thoughts?
NOTE: My campaign is restricted to not allow for multi-classes to be an option.
|
Standard Bards are quite good at combat.
If you want a greater focus, Dawnflower Dervish is a better option than Arcane Duelist in many ways, as is the Skald Class. Both are less good at general party buffing, but quite good at combat.
But really, it depends on what part of Bard you want. Is it the social skills, the party buffing, what?
Anyone can be good at combat, and I'd argue that they all should try to be. It's just a matter of _what_ you want to be _doing_ in combat. Bards usually go for high DEX, ergo, lots of crossbow and rapier stuff. For melee, there's Deadly Agility from Path of War to let you do DEX to damage with two weapons at once. For range, I might go Elf just to get the longbow proficiency. For both, pick up Arcane Strike whenever you can.
I built my Arcane Duelist to get into the thick of it and yet to provide the Inspire Courage. The GM allowed me to have Master Performer and Grand Master Performer. With the bonuses I provide the group (and myself), I am sorely missed when I am out of ear shot for a period of time.
I did once multiclass a Bard with a Magus. And isn't there a Charisma based Magus? You'd short change yourself on Bard abilities and spells, but you would be part bard and part Magus. Maybe take Magus just for the Black Blade for a few levels. Then the rest in Dawnflower?
I did once multiclass a Bard with a Magus. And isn't there a Charisma based Magus? You'd short change yourself on Bard abilities and spells, but you would be part bard and part Magus. Maybe take Magus just for the Black Blade for a few levels. Then the rest in Dawnflower?
NOTE: My campaign is restricted to not allow for multi-classes to be an option.
Loving it! Thanks for the tips so far. Anything else?
There's the magus puppetmaster archetype which leans in a bardic direction. The spiderhawk, while good, isn't a bard in any way.
Anyone can be good at combat, and I'd argue that they all should try to be. It's just a matter of _what_ you want to be _doing_ in combat. Bards usually go for high DEX, ergo, lots of crossbow and rapier stuff. For melee, there's Deadly Agility from Path of War to let you do DEX to damage with two weapons at once. For range, I might go Elf just to get the longbow proficiency. For both, pick up Arcane Strike whenever you can.
I completely agree that everyone should make the attempt to be good at combat, but I'm not simply speaking about taking feats that everyone could take in order to get a specific result, but one which emphasizes the Bards specific class abilities.
For example: Anyone can take Rapier + TWF + Flaming enchantment + Keen and get two attacks at 2d6 w/ a 15 - 20 crit range. (Yes I know the fire damage doesn't multiply with the crit). However this is not really what I'm speaking of. I'm looking for ways to make use of archetypes or an optimization of the Bard's class abilities to become a more combat focused character. I'm open to both melee and ranged options here as I'm trying to get a feel for just how viable in combat is the Bard, beyond their abilities as a party fluffer....er um...BUFFER!!
Is this viable, or should I just scrap this idea and opt for a Magus build which is more stealth focused?
BTW - the Elf longbow idea is a great one, as is Arcane Strike as it allows the bard to make combat use out of spells that frequently would not other wise be combat applicable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Play a Skald?
If your bard is party buffing then there's not much left for you to trade to be better at combat.
You have heroism for long duration +2 to attack rolls.
You have good hope, in combat +2 to attack and damage instead of heroism.
You have your bardsong giving you + to attack and damage.
There are archetypes that make the bard selfish but a better solo fighter.
But being a party buffer means a lot of your effects are tied into the buffs you have.
But with bardsong and the party buffs the bard lays down it becomes a great force as well.
When you say you want the Bard to approach combat like a Ninja does, what do you mean? Constant use of invisibility? Sneak Attacks? Flanking?
@Chess Pwn - you make a good point about the party buffs, however those tactics seem to work better with larger parties. With a 4 man party (Classic: Fighter, Cleric, Mage, Rogue -> Bard) your buffs are coming down to likely only buffing the fighter and either the Bard or Cleric at any given time as the other is likely busy healing, spell casting etc.
Sounds like I need to look more closely as some of the class build guides and see what I can find on tailoring to Bard vs the Magus to get a better fit for my style of combat.
So first off bard >>>>> normal rogue.
Bard is probably still better than unchained rogue at "the rogues job"
second, having these party buffs and magic means the party is better at fighting and you're better at fighting then a rogue would be, so party is already at a plus.
third, Just having a 4 man party a bard is buffing enough, because as you say, you're buffing 3 people! If your current plan is needing a cure spell going off every round you need to rethink your fighting styles. Cure spells should be about once a fight as an emergency. So you have 3 hitters all getting boosts from your party buffs. Plus any summons that the cleric or wizard bring in. At lv5 you're able to have about an hour of raiding a place with +4 to hit and +2 damage (heroism on 3 and song). +4 is a REALLY big buff to accuracy it makes you and the cleric as accurate as a fighter would be and the fighter into super accurate.
second B, if you go selfish archetype you still nicely cover the rogue's role (especially if archaeologist with fate's favored trait) and have better combat presence than a rogue (dervish of dawn is the big combat buff archetype) and provide spells to the party, so they are still at a plus over the rogue.
third B, so with a selfish playstyle you have a +2 attack from heroism as soon as lv4, you have a +2 to attack from early levels and a +3 or +4 at lv5. Like a dawnflower dervish at lv5 is at +6 to hit and +4 to damage with those simple buffs. You'll probably be more accurate and hit harder than the fighter.
Hold up one sec...the bard buffs also work on summoned monsters, etc? I had NEVER considered that. Good Lord, for all the years I've played and never caught on to this. Classic example of why I spend time on the forums. Thank you!
Question for you though, with all the buffs that you are describing (disclaimer: I'm definitely not as familiar with the bard as yourself) doesn't this put you in the category of the 15 minute work day? As in once you have blown all of the buffs you are done for the day and have to hold up for the next 23 hours, or resort to using a boat load of magic items to keep up that rotation?
I'm a bit lost on what you mean about the rogue being a sub-standard class. My TWF rogue (Rapier, keen, ghost touch, flaming) at 10th level is hitting for upwards of 7d6 three times a round, plus has a ton of skill points to throw around, and the Rogue talents are pretty sweet. Not to mention access to the feats and magic items like every other class. So I'm not really following where all the bad blood towards rogues comes from.
Disclaimer, I just looked over the Ninja for the first time as a supposedly "rogue alternative class" and I would NEVER argue the two classes are remotely comparable with the spell like Ki powers at the ninjas disposal.
rogues have a bad rap for a few reasons.
1) 3/4 bab class with no in class attack booster
2) rogues need physical stats to fight and wisdom for saving throw and doesn't have let over for int or cha. Also while having 8 skills they have no in class skill boosters.
3) often to take advantage of sneak attack people go TWF which adds more penalties to your no attack boosts.
4) For rogues to do any meaningful damage you need to flank, which isn't always easy to set up, often 1 person needs to move into a dangerous spot and it's often the rogue.
5) Rogues are meant as a melee class but have very little in ways of helping them survive. d8 hit die, light armor, poor fort and will saves which can take you out of a fight.
Now a bard doesn't solve all but it has helpers.
1) inspire courage is an attack and damage boost, not only for you but the entire party. Plus you have spells to help you too.
2) Bards actually leverage their charisma for their class abilities, and because of their versatile performance and bardic knowledge you're getting more effective skill points than the rogue. Plus you have spells that can help boost your skills if you want.
3)HEROISM!!! It's 10 minutes per level, so quite long enough for an adventure day, plus you can always cast it again if it's important. Most expected fights are minutes apart, so it's pretty easy to have it last multiple fights. It gives you bonuses to skills, combat and saves.
4) your damage is static and you're more likely to hit. This means that your DPR is about the same or higher, the deal with rogue's damage is it's lots of misses with some high bursts.
5) archery is just as viable as melee, now while you have the same hit die and armor you have spells. Mirror image is a big helper. You have a good will save progression and heroism and spells to boost your survivability.
so lets look at a lv5 comparison of rogue to bard.
both have bab 3 and can have the same attack stats. so tied there. but the bard is looking at +2 from heroism which is up 50 or 100 minutes a day and +2 from bard song, PLUS +2 to all allies.
rogue has a situational +3d6 sneak attack, or +10.5 damage. Bard has +2 and +2 to all allies.
So using the conversion, which is fairly accurate, that 1 accuracy equals 2 damage. the bard is at +10 damage every fight. the rogue averages +10.5 damage when able to pull off sneak attack. And that's not including the damage that is the bards that others are doing because of the bonuses.
they have comparable reflex saves, but the rogue has -3 base will save to try and match for the bards plus the bard has heroism giving +2 to all of his saves. plus well versed comes up more often then you'd think.
And skills rogue is rocking 40 skill points and just Class skills.
Bard has 30, but is using his perform to cover 2 other useful skills, meaning his wisdom based skills get a slight boost from being based on cha. so that puts hit to 35 skill points worth of skill points. and +2 to all knowledges, which is quite a bit of skill points. And has Heightened Awareness and Heroism giving him even more bonuses to his skills. Not to mention other spells he might have for specific stuff.
what about the 15 minute adventure day? Well a bard will easily have enough rounds of performance to use it for every round of every fight most days. So that's not really limiting you. And heroism lasts 40 minimum per cast and you'll have at least 2 castings of it per day. That's long enough to use at the front door or cave entrance or whatnot and last long enough to leave with it.
but maybe you want a more rogue bard, archaeologist is a rogue that instead of sneak attacks gets a swift action self buff, a good will save, and spells. They get trapfinding, trap sense, and rogue talents.
While I hear what you are saying about the rogue, all characters have weaknesses, but the vast majority of which can be overcome by simply working with your party.
Example: Tank / Rogue combo
Rogue: High dex + imp initiative
Surprise round - opening shot ranged sneak attack
Round 1 - beat initiative = bad guys are still flat footed = sneak attack shot
Tank charges in to the second rank of bad guys (mobility feat). Bad guys close in around him.
2nd round - Rogue drops bow and charges in gaining the + 2 attack, + 2 flanking & target looses dex to AC for whomever is between the rogue and the tank. Assuming a single weapon attack (standard action) and the rogue with a decent sneak attack roll will likely kill whomever just got squashed via sneak attack.
Cleric / Rogue:
Spiritual Ally to summon a flank for the rogue = sneak attack with every attack + flanking bonus + loss of dex to AC for victim = attack rolls are hitting regularly
Arcane caster / Rogue: Greater Invisibility cast on the rogue = flatfooted AC for foes & sneak attack on every hit
Arcane Caster / Rogue: Glitterdust foes to make them blind, see above.
Additionally while I personally love the use of TWF, I'd be the first to admit that it's usage is situational and definitely not good for every fight. Frequently I'd use a 2h grip on my weapon instead.
Also power attack works great with sneak attack and feats like vital strike, and nothing stops a strength based rogue from using a weapon like a dwarven waraxe. FYI - per RAW Power Attack and Weapons Finesse work together (please don't ask why, that was apparently a carry over from 3.x)
The one area that I'll absolutely concede to is a rogues weak stats against will & fort saves, but then that is why you have casters buffing before the fight starts isn't it? Personally I've always used about 1/2 my WBL budget to help fill some of those holes with both magic and alchemical goodies like a ring with a + 2 Fort save, plus a feat for a second + 2 and things start shaping up pretty quick.
As for the D8 HP, and the 3/4 bab that still puts you on par with every class which is not a core melee tank (comparable to the cleric, bard, etc). Cleric obviously having a slightly higher AC by about 2 points on average from better armor. Of course nothing stops the rogue from taking dodge (lots of feats use it as a pre-req anyway) to help close that gap.
/shrug Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be all difficult or anything, and I certainly see where your example of the Bard makes them much more attractive than I'd previously realized. On the other hand, I'm still sorta missing the whole "rogues are less good" argument.
All that said, I don't want to over look the fact that you make a VERY strong argument for the bards effectiveness and I'll certainly be taking a much closer look into them during future campaigns!
Rogues are less good because the bard is better. Yes, all of those help the rogue get sneak attack off, but even with that Chess Pwn has shown you that the rogue's only equal to the bard in damage, and worse in skills, spells, survivability, assistance to the party... and if the party didn't need to provide that help many of them would be doing something else. OK, glitterdust is a good move regardless. If they did do the same things then a bard would benefit from them too, relatively less than the rogue would but still leaving them ahead of said rogue.
A strength based rogue has the problem that light armor, d8 HD, so-so dex and little in-class defence (unchained rogue gets effectively +2 AC at level 4 with their debilitating strike) is not a good recipe for survival in melee.
|
Also a Dawnflower Dervish can potentially outdamage, outsurvive, oututility and outskill a Rogue simultaneously, though an Unchained Rogue does have some neat tricks, I guess (1.5 DEX to damage, debilitating strike, skill unlocks) but a regular Chained Rogue is pretty much strictly worse than a Bard except in a few select situations. In those situations, Rogues are great, but they can take effort to set up. And that's not even going near the Slayer (d10 hit dice, full BAB plus sneak attack, rogue talents and better feats. I think they have better saves too, but a could be wrong). Reduced sneak attack isn't a big deal when you survive far longer and hit much more often, meaning you end up outdamaging the Rogue anyway.
An Archaeologist Bard is literally a bard archetype that gives Bards rogue class features. Take Extra Performance and bam, combat ready Bard.
How is the target losing there dex to AC when flanked by the fighter and the rogue? I think you're reading a rule wrong. The rogue gets sneak attack if the target is denied their dex OR flanking. Not that if the rogue is flanking the target is denied their dex. This houserule GREATLY buffs the rogue as it's giving a free + a good amount to the rogues accuracy, which is it's weak point.
Yes power attack works, but it works better for a class that has accuracy. Due to your houserule of denying dex accuracy has been less of an issue than is should have been.
greater invis is a high level spell, so not available for along time. Only works until enemies can regularly see invis. And requires the wizards top level slot when available.
Glitterdust is a lv2 spell save. Sure blinded is great, but unless really focusing on it the DC isn't super great.
Also if you're getting custom and affordable magical gear that gives +2 fort save on a ring you again have another houserule that greatly helps the rogue out.
If you're lv10, twf with rapiers (-4 to hit) that somehow is affording 2 +4 weapons (your keen flaming ghost touch is a +1 right?) and still getting their save boosters and AC boosters and not getting flat + upgrades and not having serious problems hitting then there are serious houserules at work.
part of the deal is that a rogue "demands" support from the other players. If the party isn't wanting to focus on letting the rogue feel useful then the rogue is lots less useful in combat.
*It's been the experience of the boards that most stories of "successful rogues" involves either houserules or mistakes that help them, or weren't dependent on being a rogue class.
|
|
There is a new Advanced Versatile Performance option in Blood of the Beast which allows bards to give up one of their versatile performances in exhcange for weapon proficiency / focus and some access to feats normally requiring fighter levels. That could significantly expand the range of combat options available to many non-multiclass bards.
An Archaeologist Bard is literally a bard archetype that gives Bards rogue class features. Take Extra Performance and bam, combat ready Bard.Lingering Performance is a better Feat for the Archaeologist than Extra Performance.
I had forgotten about that. Still, you probably want Extra Performance at least once since Archaeologist's Luck doesn't gain more rounds like Bardic Performance does.
|
|
I'll be honest, when considering the idea of a combat bard, I feel that the
Arrowsong Minstrel might be the most interesting choice if perhaps not the most powerful.
How is the target losing there dex to AC when flanked by the fighter and the rogue? I think you're reading a rule wrong. The rogue gets sneak attack if the target is denied their dex OR flanking. Not that if the rogue is flanking the target is denied their dex. This houserule GREATLY buffs the rogue as it's giving a free + a good amount to the rogues accuracy, which is it's weak point.
You are correct! I just reread that line, and have to admit that I've been reading incorrectly. I'm wondering if that was something which had in fact been a rule in previous editions because I've never questioned it until you mentioned it. Thanks for drawing it to my attention.
I know some get all upset with these discussions, personally I just see them as an opportunity to better understand the strengths and weaknesses of a given class or build. For which I thank all of you for adding to that discussion! BTW - I am loving the optimization ideas for the Bard. I've never really played one and it has become something of a personal challenge to attempt one in the near future simply because I've never done so.
So now the question is, is your group going to change and follow the rule or make this mistake a houserule for the group.
But like I said, you've been lucky that the deck has been stacked in the rogues favor for your particular group so far, so the weakness of the rogue class aren't so glaring.
Now if you're wanting buffing but more combat there are classes, they just aren't as good at the skills.
Like exemplar Brawler, it gets bardic performance. Or martyr paladin. Now since you're trying to cover the "rogue" role, these probably aren't good fits.
If you want to fill "rogue" role there are actually lots of options. Urban rangers, urban druids, wizards, sorcerers, alchemist, an alchemist archetype, investigator, etc. So if you're wanting all you need to do is say what you want to be able to do with your character and there's a class for it.
In answer to your question about house ruling the loss of dex when flanked, yes that one was an instant house rule for our table because we hand always done it that way anyway and had been pleased with the additional balance it added to off set some of the rogue short comings. It was in fact part of why I was originally asking the question about why everyone was saying they were so underpowered, because we were not feeling that level of difference.
As for the other ways to basically build a rogue, without it actually being a rogue, I'm aware that there are likewise plenty of those but that is not the objective for the campaign we are currently working with.
Please feel free to join us on the new thread which is picking up where this one needs to be going next: Rogue Rebalancing - what house rules do you use?
Thank you to everyone who had contributed to this thread, it has been VERY educational and I for one have thoroughly enjoyed it!