Captain Morgan wrote:tivadar27 wrote:
I like the new bard for what it is: a spellcasting class that can also buff the entire party at the same time. I dislike the bard for what it isn't anymore: A class that can hang in there with some of the fighting types while also doing a bit of spellcasting and being good at a variety of skills.
I don't think the new bard is a bad class, but it should be viewed similar to "enchanter" in a lot of other games, and not be viewed through the lens of what it was/is in other editions. Something was lost, and I miss it, but I don't poo-poo the 2e bard either.
Yeah, you said that 9 months ago and it didn't make any sense then, and it doesn't make any sense now. PF2 bards are closer in accuracy to PF2 martials than PF1 bards were to PF1 martials. And multiclassing is now a viable option for casters unlike PF1. Go Champion and you can get heavy armor proficiency without worrying about arcane spell failure, plus some other sweet defensive boons like Lay on Hands.
As for skills, the bard gets more skills trained than anyone but the rogue (and probably the Investigator in a few months) and have a variety of muses and class feats to further buff those skills. Versatile Performance alone lets you effectively get the benefits of 3 legendary skills at the price of 1.
They are better at "hanging in there with some of the fighting types" and are still plenty good at a variety of skills.
The two people above you seem to disagree with you... And given the new bounded accuracy, what you're saying isn't really true. Sure, a bard is only 3 less to hit than a ranger, and 5 than a fighter, but that's also true for a wizard... Bards are no better martials than any of the pure caster classes in this edition.
Yes, I said this 9 months ago. Nothing's changed... It's possible that the APG adds a subclass for bards that focuses on the martial aspects (skald or the like), but for now, what I said remains true.
Except the bard does get better proficiencies than say wizard and sorcerer. That said, I think you do have a point with the tighter math at the moment that the decrease in accuracy makes a bigger difference. Of course, that will likely change a bit over time, but that's an entirely different issue.
I think that tthe bard is likely to have a bigger issue with bulk than anything unless they really plan for it from the start. They can of course pump Str, but that's then likely to be at the expense of dex which makes all those skills a little less effective too.
Honestly though, I don't see this as a huge problem. The fact that there are things that any given bard can't do well isn't a problem. That's the way it should be. Same for every other class. A class should have its strengths and its weaknesses. The "knock" in my opinion, with bards is that a lot of what they do really focuses around buffing and debuffing, which while quite effective, isn't always the most entertaining style of play for a player. But then I've got a player I've played with for 20 years now and he's never played any kind of caster, so there's always certain aspects of any class that won't appeal to some people.
To me, the trick to enjoying the bard, as mentioned by others, is to figure out what your goal is and then build toward that goal. Knowing your goal will point you to the proper class selections.