I know there are people out there that like bards. But, what do they really offer? I have never played in a game where anyone wanted to be one. So for those of you out there that like them, and even if you don’t like them. I suggest that you give me the pros and cons of bards.
Thanks
And this is not meant to offend anyone, I truly want to know about bards, please enlighten my mind:)
I love bards, though often another member of our group playes them as he loves them even more.
What a bard offers to the party is fairly dependant on It's abilities. A strong bard makes a great back up fighter or flanking partner. Expecially after he uses inspire courage and spells to augment his and other combatants power. Once they get access Inspire greatness, and spells like haste they augment the party significantly. Plus any bard that takes a healing spell can cast it spontaneously making them (in my experiance) better healers than most druids. That and they can use tumble to dart inside enemy lines and save a trapped and wounded ally (something even a cleric can't match) Many spells allow them to assume a defensive position as well. After a bard is done buffing he can use Mirror image and start wading into battle abosorbing punishing blows harmlessly. If they dont like the idea of getting a low hit point character in harms way but still want to dish out punishment in a fight the elven bards I've had worked wonders. They used illution magic to hide their locations while raining arrows from a safe distance (rapid shot and haste make a powerful duo). Melee bards should look at the acrane strike feat from the complete warrior for a little extra oomph.
All of the above was assuming that you didn't know what a bard could do in combat. Because their skills are second only to a rogue. They make great party leaders and with their charisma and deceptive skills, (forgery, disguise, bluff, hide, move silently, diplomacy) they make terrific spies or info gatherers. Plus once again their spells can further any cause they undertake combat, espionage, diplomacy, to the point where they can rival any member of the more specialized classes and sometimes even beat them at there own game.
The wizards and sorcerrers may have acssess to the the same and better spells but because they don't have as powerful of a class base they can't benifit from those same spells as well as a bard can. A wiz casting haste helps the front liners alot but he himself can't do much with the extra attack.
Did I mention tht they can cast haste
I'm a DM. I like having a Bard in my group. It gives me a great way to give the party knowledge about my world.
Players like them because they make good solo adventurers if they're ever stuck alone. In battle they really help the group by giving allies bonuses while often giving penalties to the enemy. Roleplaying one can be quite fun.
I used to play one called "The Great Ozaki". He had high charisma, great intelligence, but low wisdom... So I played him a little nutty at times. There was nothing he couldn't do, nothing he hasn't seen, nowhere he hasn't been. I used to even invent imaginary places in advance and talk about them during the game. Sometimes the DM even made those places real!
But I would say, that in a hack and slash campaign, their chances to shine are dreadfully reduced.
Ultradan
But I would say, that in a hack and slash campaign, their chances to shine are dreadfully reduced.Ultradan
Yes-and-no. It is true that a bard does not have the BAB and weapon proficiencies that a fighter-class does. Likewise, the spell availability limits the class - the wizard/sorceror direct damage spells outshine the bard's limited capabilities, and the druid/cleric healing and buffs are far superior.
Since the RP/Diplomacy uses have been covered in an earlier post, I'll focus on Ultradan's statement.
A bard makes the rest of the class better simply by being there. Want to slip past the guards? That bard's <I>fascinate</I> will be quite useful. Need some extra 'ooomph' against the BBEG? This sounds like a job for <I>inspire courage</I> - and it won't wear off in the middle of combat, like so many low-level spells. Both of this abilities are available at 1st level.
A bard makes an excellent second-tier combatant. If he takes Precise Shot, a bard's crossbow or daggers can make mincemeat of the enemies that the tanks are holding off. The whip is a vastly underrated weapon - the damage is minimal, and I hate the nerfing that occurred between 3.0 and 3.5 - because it gives you /range/. Ranged disarms. Ranged trip attacks. Ranged aid another actions. At low-levels, never discount the utility of a +2 bonus to hit or to armor class.
Having a bard with traditional roguish skills also makes it easier for the rogue to do their job. The two can search simultaneously, or just have the bard aid the rogue and give him that +2 bonus.
The bardic knowledge ability allows the DM to give out all that juicy information that is behind every adventure - I've seen numerous times when the information the DM gives the bard allows the party to capitalize on an opponent's hidden weakness.
Spells? Who needs additional healing? How about an extra <I>sleep</I> spell in the combat? The bard can use <I>cure</I> wands just as easily as a cleric, and I've never seen a party that can't use a bit more healing-per-round. While the bard never gets a <I>fireball</I> spell, his mixture of illusions and enchantments, as well as mass buffs at high levels can help a party at any level.
My point is that a bard can be effective. You don't need to tweak the build any more than any other character to be useful. The thing to remember is to use a bard for what he's good for - if you try to charge into combat, you're going to be disappointed. If you rely on a bard as the primary spellcaster of the party, you'll come up short everytime. Remember that they are designed to fill in secondary roles, not primary ones.
My name is Alex, and I'm a bard afficianado. =)
Most of the benefits of a bard have been covered.
Basically they are second best at everything - and back-up every party function. That requires that the person who plays is okay with not being the toughest, the most magical, the best healer. However, because thte bard can use this abilities on himself he is the best all around adventurer. And he can still be tough, mysterious, or whatever. They are the least pigeonholed into a type, they don't have to be like Conan or Merlin they can be what the player wants them to be. Plus they have some unique abilities - the ability to wield music as a tool. I think that makes bards the coolest class.
That said I like to customize them a bit to fit my character vision.
I have had one problem with the bard class. My player had a bard but as he gained more powerful spells (he learned party buffing, healing, and tricky illusion spells) he stopped using his bardic music because it's effects paled in comparison. He would cast a spell and then the next round he would help out in combat and he went on a long streak of never using his music because it was more profitable for the party for him to do something else. The problem compounded the higher level he became. He got inspire courage+2 but it's duration was morbidly short compared to his spells.
So I invented a feat (Spellsong) that allowed him to cast a spell and perform a bardic music effect as a full round action (vocal bardic music only no instruments as his hands needed to be free.)
I'd like to point out that this was not a problem with the classes power, he was aiding the party very well, I just wanted to see him using his class main ability more that all. Not sure if anyone else has seen the same thing.
Creative Director
|
There are feats in Complete Adventurer that can enhance your bard song abilities. Still, the basic bard song ability to grant bonuses to hit and damage and some saves lasts, at a minimum, 6 round (the round you start and the 5 rounds thereafter), which should be plenty long enough for most D&D combats.
There are also plenty of spells out there (most having been compiled into the Compendium) that can enhance bardic music.
One of the interesting things about bards is that they're such strong support characters that the more people (including cohorts and summoned minions) you have in your party, the stronger the bard gets.
I have a feeling that a lot of the bard-hate out there comes from players who try to play bards as wizards or fighters. That won't work; you have to play them as bards! Which means helping other party members and enhancing their abilities, first and foremost. The fact that they aren't the ones doing the most damage each round or casting the flashiest spells goes a long way toward making the class uninteresting to a lot of players.
OH! And if you don't have any healers in the group, a bard makes a pretty good healer. I'd say they're actaully the 2nd best healers in the game, to tell the truth, after clerics, since druids have to prepare their cure wounds spells (and thus won't always have enough handy) and paladins get healing at a much reduced rate.
And for those who enjoy playing the pesky combat trip/disarm character; bards get the whip proficiency for free, which lets them pull these stunts from the safety of a 15 foot reach.
Though I myself don't play bards, as they have never appealed to me, I must admit their usefulness in a party. The first party I ever gamed with had a bard in it and I'm glad for it. It did make things so much easier in every aspect. Whether we were in a battle or just doing things around a city. I would suggest that if you have never played a bard, or if you are a DM who has never had a bard in your party, that one should be played just for the experience.
A bit from my Hoarde
Singing "everyone gets plus one to their attack...hlak!" arrow to the throat..
The only person I've seen play a bard would have his lute strings cut upon performing. I've never seen someone play one well, so I would reserve bards as a heavy roleplaying class, rather than rely on dice to make their presence felt as the more combative classes do.
Ah the can of worms... It beckons me so.
Well, it's been a year. I guess I could try again.
The following are some choice excepts from a previous dialogue I had on the topic of bards. Please note that this has nothing to do with game mechanics, or how kewl your bards ticked out fighting stats are above the fact that one of the marks of a good Role-playing game is the fact that the mechanics are trasparent allowing the player to live the role of their character without breaking the barriers of disbelief. I can think of several kewl builds for the bard within the current set of rules like a swashbuckling rake sort of bard (maybe with a whip), but the rules go a ways toward detracting from them as explained below.
Begin the annoted excerpts:
A friend of mine summed it up best in an email discussion we had just yesterday.
"I have to agree on the way having the bard whip out a harp in battle totally ends my suspension of disbelief. Get a sword and get in here, you ninny. People are dying. Even the very best song only inspires me to hit you for not being here in the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune with me."
Now I love my Middle Earth/Rolemaster bards. I like Fflewddur Fflamm ("A Fflamm is ever faithful") in the Taran series by Lloyd Alexander but no bard in any fantasy story I have ever read (nor would want to) whips out a tuba, triangle, lap harp or musical saw in the middle of a dungeon combat encounter and begins to play. I take that back. In the first installment of Downer one tried and he got killed for it (kudos to Kyle). Bards can inspire troops in times of war and individuals in times of need, they can make good detectives or courtiers, and are built to fit most niches but I think trying to listen to some fop's inspiring oration during a fast paced fight involving a horde of charging orcs is just plain dumb.
Sorry for the tirade but it needed to be said (again).
To which someone replied: That the rules state that bards can just hum a few bars and fake it for several rounds or use other types of performance to get their inspiring presence across.
To which I very rudely replied:
Perhaps interpretive dance?
I recently had a bard in the group who would play his horn for one round (SIX SECONDS!) at the beginning of a fight. Six seconds of anything that he could play/sing/shout this side of "Avengers Assemble!" (or “Yo Joe!”) is not (in my not-so humble opinion) going to be particularly inspiring to anyone faced with the afore mentioned orcs. I mean how many movies or books feature a six second pep talk? Now in the heat of battle I can see a occasional “Once more unto the breach my friends.” But the fact that they will undoubtedly do or say something similar every time the party gets into a fight or tight situation (say maybe 13 times per level, times twenty levels or 260 six-second haikus) - well let's just say that the "once there was a man from Nantucket...." line will make me want to kill the bard as badly as the orcs do. Worse still there is absolutely no game mechanic reason that he/she shouldn't pull out their oboe or hand spoons and play a six second waltz/rock anthem and nothing more. In fact it is encouraged in most situations this side of in-game funerals or when the characters are trying to be sneaky.
"Yo bard can you inspire us to be quieter! We don't want the monsters to hear us!" said the klazomaniac in the group.
“No the rules specifically say I can’t do that.”
“Well can you dance a little jig that will help me open this lock?”
“Sure.”
“Don’t forget to use your Search song when you're done!”
I imagine fantasy worlds where six-second concertos, operas and stage plays are the norm. It would make the pace of speed metal seem slow in comparison.
Anyhow I love bards just not the way they inspire people in the game and trust me I've tried as both DM and player but the rules don't support what should be in most cases a serious class feature.
At which point someone chimes in with the kewl bow-fighting bard who Inspires people by singing (after apparently not having read the previous posts).
To which I (once again very rudely) replied something like:
If there was a Bardic ability like say:
SUMMON BARBERSHOP QUARTET (Sp): Once per day a bard can attempt to pull 4 pit fiends from his butt with a 75% chance of success. All pit fiends so summoned have handlebar mustaches and a +23 bonus to Perform (sing) and Perform (tap-dance) checks. This ability is the equivalent of a 10th-level (epic) spell.
It would be a pretty useful ability right?
Now the point is that just because a class has a useful ability (like Inspire) doesn't make it not silly or destroy suspension of disbelief during a game. That's the argument. Anyone with a bucket of bow feats, a bow and a quiver is useful in a fight. Heck, anyone with a movement rate and hit points is "useful" in a fight.
I imagine Alan Adale from Robin Hood is probably the basis for the D&D bard in much the same way that Aragorn is THE ranger. I can't recall a story or movie in which Alan used inspiration the way it works in D&D. Usually he and fellow bardic icon Fflewddur Fflam where in the thick of it with their swords and as I recall gave a good accounting of themselves without ever resorting to song or tap-dancing to inspire their fellows during the fight. Both played instruments, but didn't stand on the sidelines cheering their boys on. "Go get 'em Rob! You got 'im now Rob! Throw dirt in his eye Rob!" That's called "aiding another."
Then there is that twinkie "singing/oration" rule that penalizes bards that want to play an instrument - puh-lease. What self-respecting half-intelligent bard would do anything but hum loudly while swinging her sword or plinking people with her bow. A friend of mine in the RPGA reports to me that singing bards are the norm. Bards with instruments are a rarity in the RPGA 'cause you can't fight and play the fiddle at the same time. The rules support the idea that the character the class is BASED on, namely Alan, who played a lute was an idiot for doing so. Rangers have Aragorn, Barbarians have Conan, but the bardic icon doesn’t seem to fit the rules - This if nothing else makes it a mockable class. I say the class (in particular inspiration) needs to be fixed so that it falls more in line with the things that make bards bards and not the spare party member by way of abstract game mechanics. (Once again) Don't get me wrong I love the bard arch-type just not the mechanics for it in this game.
The ever INSPIRING (and apparently somewhat rude),
Do, Re, Me, Fa, So, La, Te, Do, Ge, Ge, Ge
Singing "everyone gets plus one to their attack...hlak!" arrow to the throat..
The only person I've seen play a bard would have his lute strings cut upon performing. I've never seen someone play one well, so I would reserve bards as a heavy roleplaying class, rather than rely on dice to make their presence felt as the more combative classes do.
Hear, hear!
Alasanii, bards are really cool for many of reasons listed above, but assuming you don't want to get dragged into a meta-game environment you might want someone experienced to play one.
GGG
...what do they really offer? ...
They can support others. They can also offer support. Oh yeah, there's support, too.
Don't get me wrong, they're a cool class, but you never have to worry about stealing another player's glory -- Bards have absolutley no task exclusive to themselves, a unique and dubious distinction.
It's not necessarily bad, but I think players need to recognize it as a second-string role.
My two cents :)
Jack
who always wants to play a Bard, but can never quite follow through
|
"I have to agree on the way having the bard whip out a harp in battle totally ends my suspension of disbelief. Get a sword and get in here, you ninny. People are dying. Even the very best song only inspires me to hit you for not being here in the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune with me."
My two cents, too:
As some people already mentioned: bards are predestined for supportive roles: they do a bit of everything, but do not outshine other characters in any ability.For that reason I do not expect a bard to be an expert sword fighter. And with reference to his "inspirational skills": consider it to be some kind of "non magical supportive spell". Yes, if you fight your 12 to 14 fights per level and win each time when the bard shouts the same few words, then you might feel inspired by his words - even though they stay the same.
Playing an instrument in mid battle *is* silly and hard to imagine - but this is a role playing and not a rules issue.
Imagine e.g. a bard staying in the back ground and supporting his fellows by his performance (and some spells)...
The question is always how you play a class... the rules leave a lot of room... It is up to you how you interprete the classes. Maybe the increasing number of classes and PrC block the view at the original meaning of what I perceive classes to be (-> another discussion): templates which have to be filled with life by your fellow players.
Have a look at his diplomacy and performing skills and you see that this is a real *role playing* class. It does not offer much "crunch" that can be summed up in a number, but it offers a plethora of role playing chances.
And anyway, I experienced similar situations like you:
A player who loved to play a bard fiddling in combat found out how short lived his adventure life could be... another one played an extraordinarily cowardly bard: he was excluded from group - not by the DM... bards who play out their versatility and do not mistake social skills for an invitation to an ego trip make discussions like this one superfluous, though... ;-)
More than just 2 cents spent... :p
Guenther
P.S.
Yes, bards are my favourite class, too. Despite the image of bards playing instruments in mid battle...
Is anybody here familiar with the variant bard presented in Monte Cook's Complete Book of Eldritch Might? I'm not. But I've been thinking about buying the book, and I'd love to hear thoughts on the variant bard from anyone in the know.
|
|
Is anybody here familiar with the variant bard presented in Monte Cook's Complete Book of Eldritch Might? I'm not. But I've been thinking about buying the book, and I'd love to hear thoughts on the variant bard from anyone in the know.
I own the book but did not play/ experience anyone play this variant base class.
The most obvious change to me: "Eldritch Bards" do not cast spells but perform spell songs. There are three differnt kinds of spell songs:
1) Spell Notes (which can be cast as a move action, starting at bard level 5)
2) Spell Chords (drawn out combinations of Spell Notes, requires a standard action, starting at bard level 12)
3) Spell Melodies (takes one full round, starting at bard level 20).
I could not compare the spell song list with the standard spell list.
Spell Notes can be combined to Spell Chords, and Spell Chords to Spell Melodies. Song Slots can be used accordingly...
Obviously the power of spell songs is like this: Notes < Chords < Melodies.
One nice element that caught my eye, though: areas of magical silence are to "Eldritch Bards", what antimagical areas are to spell casters.
If anything, the Bard from the BoEM is more heavily centred on music: music gives him his magic like powers, increases his diplomacy skills etc.
Btw.: Of course one of the chords is "Inspire Courage" providing a +1 bonus on attack and damage roles of allies... ;-)
I hope that glimpse is some aid to you...
Guenther
I have a feeling that a lot of the bard-hate out there comes from players who try to play bards as wizards or fighters. That won't work; you have to play them as bards! Which means helping other party members and enhancing their abilities, first and foremost. The fact that they aren't the ones doing the most damage each round or casting the flashiest spells goes a long way toward making the class uninteresting to a lot of players.
Hear! Hear!
Why I like bards: I get to play a spellcaster who is capable of contributing -- but who is not necessarily crucial to every melee; while at the same time capable of casting a set of spells that are usually different from what the average wizard/sorcerer is likely to choose. (The Spell Compendium really adds some neat spells to the mix).
(The melee-spellcasting combination is why I also favor clerics.)
More to the point, it's a class that utilizes a high charisma. That ability is a challenge to role-play, and I enjoy a challenge. It means the character is free to be (your choice, depending on the archetypical build), flamboyant, a leader, a flirt, a seductress, a charmer, the center of attention, a glad-handler or compelling in other ways. (Someone has to point the tanks in the right direction.) It's great to live vicariously through a player who commands the attention of others.
While I generally don't like to play the bard as the master of ancient lore, I have DM'd for players who have played that kind of bard effectively -- and they have been a real boon to the party.
I know these are more subjective reasons to like bards. But James has already effectively spelled out the tactical advantages built into the class.
|
Playing an instrument in mid battle *is* silly and hard to imagine ...
...but what about the wizard rummaging in her pockets to get this tiny ball of bat guano she needs to throw her fire ball?
:o)I prefer to play an instrument and keep my fingers clean.;)
I like the bard as I like the other supportive classes since they are a strong source for inter-party roleplaying. And i like the bard particularly because I like to be a jack-of-all-trades.
Bardic music is only *silly* if the DM cant pull it off right.
The bard is not strumming three seconds off a song or sputing a ballad. (though I do agree this gets stretched if you use other performs, such as dance, or an oration, so I don't allow them. a bardic music effect only works if MUSIC is used in my campaigns)
I describe bardic music as a single pure note started by the bard that rolls into a powerful musical ambiance that hangs over the battlefeild infecting all the bard targets with new resolve and a drive to crush the opposition
Remember, bardic music is magic and does things normal music cannot do. This is why it is a class ability instead of a perform check open to anyone with the skill
I have often caught myself trying to accelerate while driving if a fast paced song comes on the radio. So I can see how music can affect the drive of others magical or not. Try taking the music out of your favorite movie and see how exciting the fight scenes are.
Secondly I am sad that so many people agree that a bard has no primary role. DIPLOMACY! The bard has tons of skills, ALL of diplomacy based skills and access to sugestions and charms. Bards have a charisma rivaled only by sorcerers. Plus a good performance can make them celebrities without having to save anyone from anything.
All just My bard loving opinion
Secondly I am sad that so many people agree that a bard has no primary role. DIPLOMACY! The bard has tons of skills, ALL of diplomacy based skills and access to sugestions and charms. Bards have a charisma rivaled only by sorcerers. Plus a good performance can make them celebrities without having to save anyone from anything.
Good points.
Bards are not just people who play instruments in the middle of a sword fight. They are the diplomats, heralds, spies, con men, actors, clowns, skilled artisans, performers. I see the bard as the observers and artists, experienceing their story and writing their own tales through their participation in the adventure.
Granted, Bards may be the odd man out of the standard D&D archetypes, but they are also based closest to reality, in a metagame way of thinking . . . Homer, Shakespeare, Tolkien, Orson Wells, The Beatles, WETA, Skywalker Sound, Neil Gaiman, Insane Clown Posse, Norman Rockwell. . . these guys are real-life bards. Heck, Gary Gygax is a bard, as well as anyone else who composes a tale of heroism and villainy through D&D or any other medium. It's intersting that they supply most of the fodder for every other heroic archetype that we use for the game, but rarely leave room for characters like themselves.
James Bond, Buckaroo Banzai, Baron Munchausen, Buddy (from Six-String Samurai), Vizzini (from the Princess Bride), The Mask, Barbarella, Wormtongue, Tom Bombadil, Willie Wonka, every single speaking part in the Dark Crystal, the countless characters that get mad love in the Final Fantasy game series, every pilgrim in the Canterbury Tales, The Celtic God Lugh, the 9 Muses, Dream (from the Sandman comics), the wizard Akiro from Conan the Barbarian (he says he’s a wizard . . . but he’s really a Bard), the sorcerer Chan from Big Trouble in Little China (he says he’s a sorcerer, but he’s really a bard), the 3 leads in King Kong. . . etc. These are all examples of bards, in my opinion.
You know what? I think Gandalf is a bard. A controversial statement to be sure, but if you think about it. . .
Anyway, my two pieces of rambling electrum. I like Bards.
TO THOSE WHO HATE MUSIC IN COMBAT
Its been touched on but please, people can accept elves, walking trees, teleport spells, fighting that does involve fatigue, pain, slowing down, damage to specific limbs, dragon blooded men with breath weapons - but can't accept that magic manifests in some individuals as music rather than spells? Thats sad. There are lots of different models for magic, drawing on the weave, knowing true names, stealing mana, knowinng the right magic words and wrist twists, having the right bits and bobs, and ESPECIALLY song - In the Kalevala, Vainamoinen (the Finnish national Epic - and the source of MUCH of D&D, LotR, material as well as almost all of the Song of Hiawatha) sings his spells, as do the gods, voodoo one of the forms of magic actually believed in today is strongly music based, norse mythology references singing spells, as do most other mythologies for that manner.
Beyond mythology look at real life, soldiers sing cadences to improve their ability to run together, thai boxers train and fight to music, gym rats use music to get more out of their workouts, hell look at what happens at a concert or to a girl when you serenade her. Music is in many ways as close as the real world gets to magic, if not arcana.
Now arguments can be made whether a bards abilities make sense mechanically, but being able to access a spell like ability through the singing of a few notes or a few inspirational words, makes at least as much sense as a 6 second prayer spell, or the arcane buff spell of your choice.
Does it makes since to pull out your instrument in combat - maybe maybe not - bagpipers played in combat, and their music was greatly feared by their enemies.
As has been said a bard is not a fighter or a mage or a cleric, that is the point. And no they probably aren't the based hack and slash characters. I play bards to me it seems thatmechanically they are pretty well balanced. Though their are certain abilites that seem out of place or underpowered for how I imagine bards. Personally I would prefer that their was a laundry list of Bardic Music abilities they could mix and match from rather than the progression laid out - maybe thats a query letter in the near future - but the idea of music in fantasy is CORE. Elves kidnapping people and dancing them to death, hypnotizing with music, people so spell bound by song decades pass, songs of creation, okay - most contemporary hack and slash fantasy novels don't address bard types, but their are many fantasy novels that do. Mercedes Lackey, for one Tolkien for another - it could be argued pretty effectively that though Aragorn was called a ranger by others many of his abilities were quite bardlike - in the movie as well - particularly the inspirational talk at the end.
Folklore, Mythology, Popular Fantasy Writing, Real Life Soldiers and Fighters, Voodoo Priests all seem able to find a place for the incorporation of music into both their models of magic, personal enhancement, and combat.
If it doesn't make sense to you - don't play them.
Bardic music is only *silly* if the DM cant pull it off right.
The bard is not strumming three seconds off a song or sputing a ballad. (though I do agree this gets stretched if you use other performs, such as dance, or an oration, so I don't allow them. a bardic music effect only works if MUSIC is used in my campaigns)
I describe bardic music as a single pure note started by the bard that rolls into a powerful musical ambiance that hangs over the battlefeild infecting all the bard targets with new resolve and a drive to crush the opposition.
I disagree - players have a lot resposibility in RPGs as well. Unless of course the DM hogs all the discription. If you play by the rules as outlined in the Player's Handbook it can be that silly without even trying.
Remember, bardic music is magic and does things normal music cannot do. This is why it is a class ability instead of a perform check open to anyone with the skill.
Yes, but what if the skill was slapstick, or poetics, or chanting, or precussion, or bass sax (well okay, I'll give you bass sax). These are by the rules (the thing I have the most problem with) okay to use your "Bardic Music" with. Why don't they instead have effects based on the type of performance. That way you could open it up to non-aural performance too. Slapstick demoralizes foes, or maybe puts them in stitches; dancers get dervish-like movements, etc... How would a mime use countersong I wonder?
I have often caught myself trying to accelerate while driving if a fast paced song comes on the radio. So I can see how music can affect the drive of others magical or not. Try taking the music out of your favorite movie and see how exciting the fight scenes are.
No argument there and I have the tickets to prove it.
Secondly I am sad that so many people agree that a bard has no primary role. DIPLOMACY! The bard has tons of skills, ALL of diplomacy based skills and access to sugestions and charms. Bards have a charisma rivaled only by sorcerers. Plus a good performance can make them celebrities without having to save anyone from anything.
Well there are rogues, paladins and swashbucklers. Rogues have access to the same diplomatic and performance skills and actually get more skill points on average. A social rogue has the edge in social situations that might frown on magic use. And if you do need some mindbending there are always wizards. Bards are predisposed to social encounters (being performers and all), but I don't think they corner the market on it anymore than barbarians corner the fighting market.
All just My bard loving opinion
Me too.
GGG
There are lots of different models for magic, drawing on the weave, knowing true names, stealing mana, knowinng the right magic words and wrist twists, having the right bits and bobs, and ESPECIALLY song - In the Kalevala, Vainamoinen (the Finnish national Epic - and the source of MUCH of D&D, LotR, material as well as almost all of the Song of Hiawatha) sings his spells, as do the gods, voodoo one of the forms of magic actually believed in today is strongly music based, norse mythology references singing spells, as do most other mythologies for that manner.
If only this was used better.
Now arguments can be made whether a bards abilities make sense mechanically, but being able to access a spell like ability through the singing of a few notes or a few inspirational words, makes at least as much sense as a 6 second prayer spell, or the arcane buff spell of your choice.
Dude, don't even get me started on clerics and wizards. ;)
Does it makes since to pull out your instrument in combat - maybe maybe not - bagpipers played in combat, and their music was greatly feared by their enemies.
What do you mean was?
As has been said a bard is not a fighter or a mage or a cleric, that is the point. And no they probably aren't the based hack and slash characters. I play bards to me it seems thatmechanically they are pretty well balanced. Though their are certain abilites that seem out of place or underpowered for how I imagine bards. ...
No argument there.
GGG
Just lost a longer post due to being timed out, so I'll briefly summarize what I was trying to say once again, IRT GGG's dislike of the bardic music mechanics in combat.
Obviously, to some extent the rules were crafted for game balance while bending "realism"--but a creative DM or bard player can come up with all kinds of ways to describe the effects of "inspire courage" without straying too far from game mechanics.
The point of "inspire courage" is not artistic originality, but the deployment of familiar sonic or somatic "signals" that trigger an emotional response among the party members. What signals are used depends on the bard's specific perform skills. Oral-based performances are easiest to envision: e.g. as battle is joined, the bard gives a familiar battle cry, perhaps a sung line from a familiar epic. He continues to recite lines from the epic between sword thrusts. The PCs have heard the bard sing the epic before, so they know that "this is the part where Beowulf rips Grendel's arm off" or "this is where Bishop Turpin lays out a dozen Saracens with his mace," or "this is where Finrod kills the werewolf to protect Beren." Since they know the story, a few seconds of speech or song triggers a memory that inspires them to fight like the heroes in the story.
Alternatively, the bard can reel off one liners like Indiana Jones or D'Artagnan in between thrusts and parries with his rapier, making his comrades laugh in the face of death instead of crapping their pants in fear. Or he could shout outrageous taunts, showing his disdain for the enemy and making his party-mates feel like they can handle this guy no sweat.
Instruments in battle are a bit of a stretch--especially stringed instruments (unless you have the iconic Gimble's +3 cordless-electric Yakkety Axe, which can be used Pete Townsend-style to smash orc skulls in between strumming Dio-esque power cords). But, think about how bugles and hunting horns are used--a brief call--"dah-ta-ta-ta-ta-tah, charge"--creates an almost reflexive response in one's teammates, and it can be blown periodically with one hand while wielding a weapon in the other. Pan-pipes, tambourines, castanets, and various other one-handed instruments could be used creatively in this way as well, though it takes a little more imagination.
Dancing (or similar choreographed movements) could do the trick as well. Especially useful are movements that demonstrate martial prowess and/or disdain for the enemy--spinning your sword like a baton, or those fancy demonstrations of "gongfu" that the Hong Kong martial arts actors use before joining battle (and are, incidentally, replicated in Peking Opera, making the bardic connection a little clearer). Even juggling could be used in this fashion--there's the old story of William the Conqueror's minstrel tossing his sword in the air and singing the song of Roland as the Normans charged into battle at Hastings, you know.
In short--you just have to be creative and draw on a broad range of literary and real life examples, and you can make bardic music work well with the game mechanics.
I have a feeling that a lot of the bard-hate out there comes from players who try to play bards as wizards or fighters. That won't work; you have to play them as bards! Which means helping other party members and enhancing their abilities, first and foremost. The fact that they aren't the ones doing the most damage each round or casting the flashiest spells goes a long way toward making the class uninteresting to a lot of players.Hear! Hear!
Why I like bards: I get to play a spellcaster who is capable of contributing -- but who is not necessarily crucial to every melee; while at the same time capable of casting a set of spells that are usually different from what the average wizard/sorcerer is likely to choose. (The Spell Compendium really adds some neat spells to the mix).
(The melee-spellcasting combination is why I also favor clerics.)
More to the point, it's a class that utilizes a high charisma. That ability is a challenge to role-play, and I enjoy a challenge. It means the character is free to be (your choice, depending on the archetypical build), flamboyant, a leader, a flirt, a seductress, a charmer, the center of attention, a glad-handler or compelling in other ways. (Someone has to point the tanks in the right direction.) It's great to live vicariously through a player who commands the attention of others.
While I generally don't like to play the bard as the master of ancient lore, I have DM'd for players who have played that kind of bard effectively -- and they have been a real boon to the party.
I know these are more subjective reasons to like bards. But James has already effectively spelled out the tactical advantages built into the class.
I love all of your reasons, subjective or not.
GGG
Anyway, my two pieces of rambling electrum. I like Bards.
Me too, just in another game system.
The triangle-playin'
GGG
Well just consider me enlightened. I thank you all for the great advice and now I can look at the bard in a completely new light. I am actually considering playing one now.
Though the only thing I can think of is that back in second edition didn’t they have something to the extent of a Skald? It was a bard but was more combat-oriented. Though, they are not quite up there with front line fighters, but they do fight with two weapons. Any thoughts and opinions on that one?
Thanks
Well just consider me enlightened. I thank you all for the great advice and now I can look at the bard in a completely new light. I am actually considering playing one now.
Though the only thing I can think of is that back in second edition didn’t they have something to the extent of a Skald? It was a bard but was more combat-oriented. Though, they are not quite up there with front line fighters, but they do fight with two weapons. Any thoughts and opinions on that one?Thanks
Unearthed Arcana offers the skald, and one or two more interesting twists on the bard. This book should be called Core Book IV.
GGG
I disagree - players have a lot resposibility in RPGs as well. Unless of course the DM hogs all the discription. If you play by the rules as outlined in the Player's Handbook it can be that silly without even trying.Bardic music is only *silly* if the DM cant pull it off right.
The bard is not strumming three seconds off a song or sputing a ballad. (though I do agree this gets stretched if you use other performs, such as dance, or an oration, so I don't allow them. a bardic music effect only works if MUSIC is used in my campaigns)
I describe bardic music as a single pure note started by the bard that rolls into a powerful musical ambiance that hangs over the battlefeild infecting all the bard targets with new resolve and a drive to crush the opposition.
I agree I should have said DM/players can't pull it off right
Remember, bardic music is magic and does things normal music cannot do. This is why it is a class ability instead of a perform check open to anyone with the skill.
countersong[/i] I wonder?
At the risk of being insesitive to the arts I do not allow Bardic music effects to come from non musical performances. And I doubt my characters would choose a silly or unfeasable instrument to use because of the sillyness it injects into the gameplay. I would see the same problem from a fighter that decided to fight with a kickball. But I don't see the problem with precussion though, wardrums have been widely used in real combat and are a staple for good fight music.
Secondly I am sad that so many people agree that a bard has no primary role. DIPLOMACY! The bard has tons of skills,ect
If a rouge has charisma to match a bard and the skill points to spare, yes they can beat a bard diplomatically, but they are at risk of sacraficing their own classes to do so, they might not have enough skills left over for "rouge" skills Hide, move silently, search, open lock, disable device, tumble, even with 8 skill points thats hard to cover
GRRMF#%(@#&(! (Silly messageboards ate my post again...)
Uhm, anyway, the sum of the Post that is No More was that if I had a bard, I would allow the use of other Perform skills besides singing or musical instruments to use their Bardic Song ability. IMHO, reciting a stirring passage from an epic poem can be just as inspiring as singing or playing a tune. I'd like to see a bard use Perform: Kabuki as a way to inspire, distract, or fascinate someone.
The bardic music definition specifies that the performance must be "song or poetics," rather than limiting it to specifically musical performances. However, I am inclined to expand or contract the kinds of performance needed for various uses of bardic music to fit the circumstances. To me, it seems perfectly logical that once can use just about any type of performance to "fascinate" an audience (this is why we say "the orator held him spellbound" etc.) Dancing should work too (remember the heroine in Ali Baba and the forty thieves who fascinates the bandit leader with her seductive dancing, then whips out a knife and stabs him in the heart?)
Some of the other bardic music uses seem to be more limited logically--Countersong would seem to require the bard to make sound himself to counter another sonic effect for example, while Suggestion would seem to require the bard to be free to interject words (sung or spoken) into the performance.
In short, players and DMs ought to be creative and open to possibilities in applying this ability, and should not interpret the rules too strictly. But they should stay within the bounds of logic, nonetheless.
I like how you think Peruhain. I like the way you think.
It's interesting that GGG is so adamantly opposed to bardic music. It makes me thinks he's a low-magic gamer the way he carries on. I always thought he was more open-minded about the game. By the way, what I just wrote was not an insult, but an open-ended observation. I really would like to know what you would replace the bardic music ability with GGG?
It's interesting that GGG is so adamantly opposed to bardic music. It makes me thinks he's a low-magic gamer the way he carries on. I always thought he was more open-minded about the game. By the way, what I just wrote was not an insult, but an open-ended observation. I really would like to know what you would replace the bardic music ability with GGG?
Them's fightin' words!!!
Oddly enough I would give them more magic. I think I would handle bards a bit more like the way MERP (ICE's Middle-Earth Role-Playing) did it, and eliminate the inspire class feature as it is now and instead give them a little more class-personalized magic that duplicate the effects of inspire. Also I think I might create more bard-like Feats based off of the various types of Performance one might numerous ranks in. As for non-magical inspiration there are a few options. The one that keeps popping up in my head is the idea that the bard can spend an hour or half-hour (like a wizard or cleric) each day socializing with other party members (or anyone he wants to inspire) and then that person or persons recieve some sort of bonus on things for the rest of the day or the very next encounter that pretains to whatever it was that the bard was talking/singing about (there would be a general list of some sort). Doing these things eliminates the bard whipping out his baby grand to help someone Tumble better or singing the first few bars of the "Love Boat" theme while his or her companions are fighting for their lives infront of him, both of which look pretty silly. I mean really, who can hear over all the screaming, clashing platemail, and praying for divine intervention?
One thing I've always disliked about the D&D system is how it handles magic and saddles some people with "dubious party/class roles." Once the party fighter figures out that a cleric can heal him of his wounds and bard can instill in him a fighting spirit there is suddenly no reason why she shouldn't ask for it ever single fight. But realistically bards can only give so many pep talks ("Yer a bum Rock!") and the cleric's god has got to be tired of healing up these jerks who might not even share any of its views on how the world should run. Hence "support classes" and lack of verisimilitude. Remember that a RPG system is an abstract set of rules meant to simulate "real life" (i.e. there's gravity, and space and running speeds and the need for sleep, and food, etc....). Sure there's magic and elves and talking trees but they are usually given some grounding element that allows us humans to relate to them (i.e. human personalities, understandable/preceivable effects, etc...). My problem with the bard is simply that the rules for inspire bear little resemblence to reality and infact shoot so far a field in some cases (and so hazy in others) as to make me not "believe" thereby ejecting me from the RP experience. You wouldn't have a cybernetically-enhanced 50-foot-tall, flumph ninja riding on a pin galaxy shaped like Bea Arthur in your game because for most people it's just to unbelievable. The same way inspiration seems unbelievable to me.
There I gave you a Class Acts article (and maybe even a critical threat). Happy?
;)
GGG
Them's fightin' words!!!
I certianly agree on the need to redesign the bard so as to avoid him playing power cords at the Orcs. One option that might make for a simple and quick fix (at the expence of having more specialized Bards) is to give out more skill points.
One might also consider the thief/bard thing from Monte Cooks's Arcana Evolved as that was a very interesting class. Some kind of synthisis with the present bard could be interesting.
I mean really, who can hear over all the screaming, clashing platemail, and praying for divine intervention?
One thing I've always disliked about the D&D system is how it handles magic and saddles some people with "dubious party/class roles." Once the party fighter figures out that a cleric can heal him of his wounds and bard can instill in him a fighting spirit there is suddenly no reason why she shouldn't ask for it ever single fight.
I would say that all verbal compultion spells suggestion common ect have the same problem. The answer is that the effects are magical and unerringly adhear to the chosen targets. In my campaigns the bardic music is more like casting a spell using an instrument as a focus (look through the spell list at what the Wiz has to whip out In a fight). It is not silly or ridiculous to us so (not trying to offend) maybe you could change the way you describe bards and they may seem more plausable.
As to the supplemental thing, all classes rely on one another. A cleric will gladly heal the warriors wounds over and over so long as the fighter attacks the strongest thing on the battlefeild head on over and over. If the Gods have a problem with it the cleric should leave the party to pursue more pious goals. But the party is supposed to be together for a reason and if there is a cleric in the party yes his diety should have an intrest in the party succeding or else he should not be there.
I think a bards abilities match his job. He is a performer that can instill magical effects in his listeners. The bigger his audience the more powerful his effects become that makes pefect sense to me.
All just my Bardic opinion
Most of you probably know these already, but for an humorous depiction of a bard using his "inspire competence" ability, you can check some of the comics by Rich Burlew ("Order of the Stick").
One of the latest strips has a situation which nicely echoes the ealiest post by our GGG:
http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=262
Bocklin
Elan! I love that character. I find him so funny and very naive. Quite the opposite for what a bard should be, at least that is what I think. It is also one of the reasons I made the post. he actually doesn't seem to do anything.
So far i must say that I have now thought of creating a bard, and as soon as I get back to the "Great White North" I will be looking into Unearthed Arcana for the Skald.
later
and thanks for the info and opinions.
I would say that all verbal compultion spells suggestion common ect have the same problem.I mean really, who can hear over all the screaming, clashing platemail, and praying for divine intervention?
One thing I've always disliked about the D&D system is how it handles magic and saddles some people with "dubious party/class roles." Once the party fighter figures out that a cleric can heal him of his wounds and bard can instill in him a fighting spirit there is suddenly no reason why she shouldn't ask for it ever single fight.
Yep, part of the reason most don't work that well in a fight.
The answer is that the effects are magical and unerringly adhear to the chosen targets.
Note: I did say that they should be made actual magical effects, rather than tuba playing, or giving a dramatic recital (six seconds or not).
In my campaigns the bardic music is more like casting a spell using an instrument as a focus (look through the spell list at what the Wiz has to whip out In a fight).
I would still say it looks cooler and more proactive to be whiping out diamond dust and live spiders that usually have a visible effect than it is to be reciting poetry or singing the Escape Artist song. Worse still with abilities named "Inspire Competence" you wonder what sort of losers need a D&D bard. And exactly what do bards think about their fellow party members? Not directed at anyone, it just sounds funny to me.
It is not silly or ridiculous to us so (not trying to offend) maybe you could change the way you describe bards and they may seem more plausable.
Once again, I am not always the one discribing the effect. As the regular DM I at least think that I do a fair job at discribing their powers dramatically and appropriately for the story at hand, but even in that capacity I have little direct power over the how others portray their performance skills except via death, silence, DM fait, and excommunication. Obviously I can nix stuff like the Move Silently scenario but the rules are a bit nebulus after that, and bards really only should do their thing when its dramatic (they are bards after all). That and it can be difficult for people to come up with something "stirring" to say/sing each time (I am the sort of DM who encourages his clerics' players to "pray", and wizards to have "actual" somatics and components - Chick, eat you heart out). Yes, you could just say it's his supernatual bardlyness, but then why all the silly-looking dramatics and public speaking? The Care Bear Stare just doesn't work in any believable fashion so why not make them longer lasting and longer casting spells (not supernatural) perhaps with musical/performance-based foci and invite the attack of opportunity. People might actually use instruments, and you could get the magical aspects away from the battlefield (except of course during large battles where the bards pump up their spear-rattling side before combat begins; at which point they drop the war drums and pick up the nearest greatsword.
As to the supplemental thing, all classes rely on one another. A cleric will gladly heal the warriors wounds over and over so long as the fighter attacks the strongest thing on the battlefeild head on over and over. If the Gods have a problem with it the cleric should leave the party to pursue more pious goals. But the party is supposed to be together for a reason and if there is a cleric in the party yes his diety should have an intrest in the party succeding or else he should not be there.
I'm not going to get into clerics on this thread other than to say the rules make them a necessary evil, someone in a party almost always has to play one (or God forbid be stuck with the bard;).
I think a bards abilities match his job. He is a performer that can instill magical effects in his listeners. The bigger his audience the more powerful his effects become that makes pefect sense to me.
All just my Bardic opinion
Mine too I'm afraid.
The Skald-lovin'
Great Green God
PS To the drum-playing bard next to me: "Could you take it outside for God's sakes I'm trying to write here."
Bard to me: "Yes, isn't it inspiring!"
Me: "No."
eliminate the inspire class feature as it is now and instead give them a little more class-personalized magic that duplicate the effects of inspire.
AS I said in a previous post - music is used to inspire in combat, - That IS the real world. If you don't like the that meshes with your version of reality. I think you need to look more at reality. If you don't like the way it meshes with you fantasy thats a question of taste, but music as a way of producing magical has a long history in mythology, folklore, voodoo, native american ritual music and dances, and even christian/jewish/muslim/ religious music are used to produce altered mental and spiritual states. But just so you know bardic music in not a non-magical effect - it is specifically as a type of magic. It makes just as much sense for a magical effect to last as long as its creater keeps putting effort into it as a random duration. Why do you think activating a magical effect with music is more cheesy than than flinging a bat guana booger, or swallowing a live spider. If you are looking for verisimilitude the use of music to create magical effects of the type describe for bards is much more universal than the stuff laid out for other arcanists.
Doing these things eliminates the bard whipping out his baby grand to help someone Tumble better
Picking your performance type is important, as is spell selection for casters, feat selection or fighters, skills fro rogues. If somebody picks a grand piano as an adventurer that isn't a reflection on bards, that a reflection on the DM and the player. As for helping with Tumble, well you may notice that gymnasts perfom to music, as do dancers, there is reason for that.
singing the first few bars of the "Love Boat" theme while his or her companions are fighting for their lives infront of him, both of which look pretty silly.
Again it it is what activates and keeps active a magical effect. Thats pretty clear from the rules. Traditions of warrior poets in history and lore is pretty strong - though not surprisingly weak in the D&D books, which cater to a hack and slash mind set. Thats not a slam, I like a bit of that once in a while - but they are way at the low end of characters and worlds with the verisimilitude you seem to be looking for.
I mean really, who can hear over all the screaming, clashing platemail, and praying for divine intervention?
Well I can't claim to have worn platemail, but I was in a few combat simulations in the army, and being able to make yourself heard over the din is part of the job. In most of the game I have played in the distances are pretty small - and most bardic music effects are limited to a radius of 30 feet.
30 feet is pretty close, its not that hard to be heard, even with explosives going. Maybe a better example is a karate studion and can make all of the student hear me as the spar, drill, whatever - and I would like to think I am able to motivate them and push them beyond their normal limits effectively (if not magically).Don't get me wrong if you don't like bards thats cool - there are lots of things in the game I don't care for. And depending on how strongly I feel about them I don;t allow them, discourage them, or mock those who take them. Thats part of the game too. Similarly their are lots of ways to improve classes, races, combat - but that is more a function of taste, than anything wrong the mechanics or concepts.
If I was to write the bard from scratch there are things I would change. Unfortunately I wasn't asked. However the concept of the bard as written is probably better rooted in history, and lore, and fantasy literature than any other class.
And the function of their abilities more logical. You don't have to have an instrument to produce the magical effects of bardic music. Maybe the class would make more sense to those who feel the class is silly if people were more familiar with the rules and class description.
Just when I thought it was safe to leave the messageboards...
You would think I was beating up on Wil Wheaton or something (something I am not encouraging by the way).
eliminate the inspire class feature as it is now and instead give them a little more class-personalized magic that duplicate the effects of inspire.AS I said in a previous post - music is used to inspire in combat, - That IS the real world. If you don't like the that meshes with your version of reality.
Likewise, I have the tickets to prove your point....
I think you need to look more at reality. If you don't like the way it meshes with you fantasy thats a question of taste, but music as a way of producing magical has a long history in mythology, folklore, voodoo, native american ritual music and dances, and even christian/jewish/muslim/ religious music are used to produce altered mental and spiritual states.
In six seconds?
But just so you know bardic music in not a non-magical effect - it is specifically as a type of magic. It makes just as much sense for a magical effect to last as long as its creater keeps putting effort into it as a random duration. Why do you think activating a magical effect with music is more cheesy than than flinging a bat guana booger, or swallowing a live spider.
Explained in the previous post.
If you are looking for verisimilitude the use of music to create magical effects of the type describe for bards is much more universal than the stuff laid out for other arcanists.
Correct, usually as a formalized ritual.
Doing these things eliminates the bard whipping out his baby grand to help someone Tumble betterPicking your performance type is important, as is spell selection for casters, feat selection or fighters, skills fro rogues. If somebody picks a grand piano as an adventurer that isn't a reflection on bards, that a reflection on the DM and the player. As for helping with Tumble, well you may notice that gymnasts perfom to music, as do dancers, there is reason for that.
I disagree. It's hard to screw up a fighter or rogue (you'll still have a BAB and lots of skills). I am merely pointing out that the rules (those things that are supposed to foster good RP experiences) seem to be lacking when it comes to the bard.
singing the first few bars of the "Love Boat" theme while his or her companions are fighting for their lives infront of him, both of which look pretty silly.Again it it is what activates and keeps active a magical effect. Thats pretty clear from the rules.
And again it's pretty silly. Also noted above.
Traditions of warrior poets in history and lore is pretty strong - though not surprisingly weak in the D&D books, which cater to a hack and slash mind set. Thats not a slam, I like a bit of that once in a while - but they are way at the low end of characters and worlds with the verisimilitude you seem to be looking for.
Once again, no arguements.
I mean really, who can hear over all the screaming, clashing platemail, and praying for divine intervention?Well I can't claim to have worn platemail, but I was in a few combat simulations in the army, and being able to make yourself heard over the din is part of the job.
Yes, but what's more inspiring in that situation. Not seeing the bard but hearing him yell "Go get 'em." or watching as he wades into combat at your side? And if it's magical why not make it a spell?
Don't get me wrong if you don't like bards thats cool - there are lots of things in the game I don't care for. And depending on how strongly I feel about them I don;t allow them, discourage them, or mock those who take them. Thats part of the game too. Similarly their are lots of ways to improve classes, races, combat - but that is more a function of taste, than anything wrong the mechanics or concepts.
Again, I love bards. I just don't like the way D&D treats them.
It could be argued that "concepts" and "mechanics" are the heart of an RPG, and that "taste" only applies to picking out the set of rules you want to use.If I was to write the bard from scratch there are things I would change. Unfortunately I wasn't asked.
Ditto. Maybe next time. :)
However the concept of the bard as written is probably better rooted in history, and lore, and fantasy literature than any other class.
Maybe, though the execution was poor in my opinion.
.... the function of their abilities more logical.
Debatable as you can tell.
You don't have to have an instrument to produce the magical effects of bardic music.
Noted. It's something I don't like actually. It penalizes those bards who what to use an instrument like Fflewdur and Alan Adale.
Maybe the class would make more sense to those who feel the class is silly if people were more familiar with the rules and class description.
True, they are right in front of me.
TTFN,
GGG
PS Why is it your icon always looks like it's shouting? ;)
PPS No Wils where hurt during this post.
This debate seems to be getting pretty heated, so let me just begin by saying, "I come in peace!" :) 3G, it seems to me that your complaint is that the way the rules describe a bard's actions, and the way most players and DMs describe them, don't seem to make sense in a combat setting. I agree; someone stopping everything they're doing and playing angrily at the orcs is kind of humorous, more than would be wanted by many DMs and players in many situations.
To this, I offer trying this. Use a bard as an NPC, either villain for a friend accompanying the party, and describe his actions in such a way:
"He stops what he is doing to concentrate and play just a few notes on his lute, then takes his sword back in hand and looks menacingly at his foes. The music continues to play across the field of battle, even though he no longer strums the instrument. Its effects carry a weight that no normal music could match."
That's quick, but explains how the musical effects can be achieved with just THREE seconds of playing (it's only a standard action, remember, so it would be even less than 6 seconds). Plus, it IS magical, as defined in the rules, which brings me to my second point: You ask, if it is magical, why not make it a spell?
Why not make a dragon's breath a spell? It's magic, too. Every supernatural ability is magical, but they are not spells. The reason that D&D has made a distinction between spell-like and supernatural has mystified me for some time. Obviously, they have mechanical differences, but what in game makes one manipulation of magic different from another? Please, no one respond to that question and derail the thread. I came up with reasons some time ago, most of which now escape my mind, but I understand the distinction and do not need it redefined.
The point is, not every magical effect is a spell. Bardic music is one of them. I hope that helps with your visualization of the ability, and thus helps you to accept D&Ds interpretation of the bard even more. Oh, and IMHO, the fighter is the most historically acurate based class, not the bard. Yes, the fighter can do amazing things, but nothing gets closer to history than a guy hitting something with a big stick. :)
I think a telling question would be "how often do people actually play bards?"
Playing (on and off) since the late 70s, I haven't seen five bards show up in our campaigns -- in any version of the game.
I think the reality is that, while the current version of the class is useful, people rarely follow through and use it (each for his/her own reasons). In our campaigns, only druids have approached the bard in terms of unpopularity.
In my experience -- your mileage may vary :)
Jack
PS is unpopularity a word?!?
This debate seems to be getting pretty heated, so let me just begin by saying, "I come in peace!" ...
I think that was a movie: I Come in Peace. -- a terrible movie. The bad guy would say that, just before blowing up everyone and everything.
So you come in peace, huh? :P
Jack
who's doesn't feel like making a useful contribution to the discussion right now...
Yes, the fighter can do amazing things, but nothing gets closer to history than a guy hitting something with a big stick. :)
So very true.
This debate seems to be getting pretty heated, so let me just begin by saying, "I come in peace!" :) 3G, it seems to me that your complaint is that the way the rules describe a bard's actions, and the way most players and DMs describe them, don't seem to make sense in a combat setting. I agree; someone stopping everything they're doing and playing angrily at the orcs is kind of humorous, more than would be wanted by many DMs and players in many situations.
Yes.
To this, I offer trying this. Use a bard as an NPC, either villain for a friend accompanying the party,....
Done that, both ways.
and describe his actions in such a way:
"He stops what he is doing to concentrate and play just a few notes on his lute, then takes his sword back in hand and looks menacingly at his foes. The music continues to play across the field of battle, even though he no longer strums the instrument. Its effects carry a weight that no normal music could match."
So it's a spell and not a performance. That's fine.
That's quick, but explains how the musical effects can be achieved with just THREE seconds of playing (it's only a standard action, remember, so it would be even less than 6 seconds). Plus, it IS magical, as defined in the rules, which brings me to my second point: You ask, if it is magical, why not make it a spell?
Why not make a dragon's breath a spell? It's magic, too.
Yes, but dragons don't get smacked for breathing in a threatened area (one of the differences between spell-like and supernatural abilities you alluded to). D&D Bards should be smacked (for many reasons:). One, concentrating on a "performance" or a "spell" requires concentration. If you're going to inspire someone (by means mundane or magical) shouldn't you be paying attention? Two, adventuring bards who use lutes - a two handed instrument - are about as dumb as bards who use baby grand pianos in that they can't fight. So every smart (Adventuring PC) bard shouldn't use a lute, but should do something that's strictly vocal so that you can have your whip and rapier or longbow out. Why penalize the guy who wants to play an archtype (bards seem to come with musical instruments more often than not) with a class that doesn't reflect that archtype?
I hope that helps with your visualization of the ability, and thus helps you to accept D&Ds interpretation of the bard even more.
Not really, but seriously... thanks for trying. :)
The thoroughly unrepentant,
Triple G
I think a telling question would be "how often do people actually play bards?"
Playing (on and off) since the late 70s, I haven't seen five bards show up in our campaigns -- in any version of the game.
I think the reality is that, while the current version of the class is useful, people rarely follow through and use it (each for his/her own reasons). In our campaigns, only druids have approached the bard in terms of unpopularity.
In my experience -- your mileage may vary :)
Jack
PS is unpopularity a word?!?
I think there's a picture of Gimble and Devis next to the word in the dictionary. As a DM/Player I have to date played more bards than anyone in my gaming group (size varies, 4-10 players over the last 20 years, 8 currently). I have played them for drama, comedy, as swashbuklers and sages as conmen and kings, and heores and villains. As a player class I have yet to see one work well in D&D.
Druids: I can't use metal unless it's all bendy, and why would I ever not be a huge bear or elemental or something other than a human. Another archtype gone awry, but that's for a different thread. I'm just glad they came close with the ranger this time around (also a different thread).
Once again I've got nothing against the concept - just the execution.
GGG
Well, I just want to point out that a wizard who is dominating someone with Dominate Person need not concentrate to pull off such a powerful magical effect, and that lasts a day per level last time I checked. So, I don't think that a magic song would need more than a standard action, though it is important to note that the option to concentrate and enlongate the duration does exist. Just an observation.
And, the lute playing bard was just what popped into mind first, as you yourself have indicated it is the archetype. However, the same thing could be done with singing as well, and the more important thing is that it is far more likely to be done that way, which would leave them "get smacked" free, since they could still concentrate on the battle around them. If that doesn't seem realistic, you just have to fall back on the old excuse for just about everything that doesn't make sense in the game: "It's magic." (The other one being for when that fails or doesn't apply, which is "It's fantasy.")
A cop out? You bet! :)
Inspire competence keeps comming up as ridiculous, but I don't know why. My bards never played the Escape Artist song before but he has strummed a soothing melody so that the rouges hands would stop shaking as he tried to disarm the trap. I see and describe the song as a soothing melody that takes some of the stress (magically) off the sholders of the attemptee. It is easy to throw bards under the microscope because they are unothadox to modern literature and history. but nt to a campaign world
Yes the discussion has become heated
GGG it sounds like you enjoy at least some of the aspects of a bad or you wouldn't hav played so many, so to you I hope you can find something on here that helps you accept bards in D&D. I have a great affection for them and they never seemed out of place or silly. But admittedly thats one perspective and one campaign
A couple tiny notes on Bards:
1) For game mechanics, anybody remember Gellor from the Gord the Rogue books (by Mr. Gygax)? He hacked people up while rhythmically chanting/taunting them. Not bad. The lyrics were a bit cheesy, but this is doable.
2) The WOC archives have notes on playing a Bard w/ Class or somesuch that one of my players referred to, they are decent, check them out.
3) Like all classes, it all depends upon your player. I've seen some pretty boring (insert class here). A good player can play a very cool bard. In my campaign, the party would be absolutely screwed in any interaction w/o theirs. We have 6 PC's and 4 of them basically maxed out combat abilities, either spells, ranged or melee, leaving me with two PC's who can actually interact effectively w/ NPC's and one of these players, while having a character w/ high charisma, isn't a very good tactician - so their only saving grace when not hacking things up is their bard, the next best diplomat, info gatherer etc is a dwarven fighter.....you get the idea.
All that being said, he does pretty much hit like a pre-school girl in combat, but hey, so do wizards, you need to get good at other stuff - that's what the Dwarven fighter is for anyway.