|
Oh, indeed it has been talked about for years.
It's one of the reasons for the smoothing of skills and saves in 4E.
Bards are always portrayed as magical dabblers. They should not be more powerful at magic than a specialised, spell-focused Enchanter/Illusionist. Not while also being better fighters and skill-monkeys.
If you strip them down to d4 hp, poor BAB, all poor saves, and 2 skills/level, that should (almost) balance things.
EDIT: ...and of course, reduce the stupidly long duration of charms, change the Diplomacy rules, force PCs to abide by enemy Diplomacy results (instead of being immune), allow opposed Will saves vs Diplomacy, redefine the definition of making a creature 'friendly', allow constant save re-rolls for charmed creatures....the list goes on.
Please, no more Diplomacy skill! There's a reason this is called a role-playing game.
I think he's implying that if you make the effectively commoners with bardic music, then its about equal to a "baseline" PC class, a sarcastic jab at how far you would have to reduce the rest to make up for the extreme power of some of their abilities.
Me, I like bards, and I havent really seen a problem with their abilities, but I also haven't seen problems with spiked chain wielders, hulking hurlers, or much else; my players don't put a heavy focus on being mechanical powerhouses.
That being said, consider the random factor. Randomness hurts PCs more than monsters, because monsters are expected to be defeated, but PCs aren't. It is their story, afterall.
This is why save or dies are generally considered "no fun" because a 5% random chance exists that your PC is doomed whenever one gets used. 5% chance that superceeds any strength or defense you have short of total immunity.
Your average fighter type will be critted far more often than he will crit, simply because monsters in large numbers or with more attacks than him will be trading blows with him. Wide threat range weapons may shift this paradigm, but overall, it stands.
So bardic music set off of a skill check, especially if we consider combat to be "distracting" means a d20 roll is mandatory. We could easily rule that any other caster must roll a d20 plus mods to set their DCs, rather than take 10. For every natural 20 rolled and setting an incredible DC, there is a natural 1 rolled setting a pathetic one.
It is true, however, that the skill bonus to level equasion (level+3+mods) is certainly off balance relative to the standard DC formula (1/2 level+mods). Perhaps if bardic music abilities that set DCs suffered a penalty equal to the number of ranks required to use it? But then again, if we "nerf" bardic abilities, what does the bard have left that is truly his own, as opposed to empowering the rest of the party? We should also consider that most bardic abilities can not be repeated on the same target, regardless of success, for 24 hours. Almost all other equivalent effects from wizards, clerics, etc, can be repeated as long as the character has uses left.
Hiya.
While I'm no fan of 3.x, I'll chime in with my 2 coppers. :)
I'd go back to a more 1e-style bard. The 'original' bard of AD&D started as a fighter; then had to 'dual class' to thief; then they could move on to the actual Bard class (which was optional, btw, and in the appendix of the PHB; it was also the first incarnation of what is now termed a "prestige class", from my thinking).
Anyway...I'd balance out their BAB to be as a Rogue, but allow them more weapons as a Fighter. I'd then toss out Arcane spell use and give 'em Druidic magic...what's that in 3e? Divine magic with the Animal/Nature/whatever spheres? Now throw in the abilities gained per level as similar to the original 1e Bard.
A bard, IMHO, shouldn't be a "dabbles in magic" kinda guy; they should be based on 'common-man knowledge' (re: items, histories of people/places/items, herbs, etc.)...and not on 'mystical secrets' as they are known to wizards.
But that's me. And that's if I played 3.x. :)
which could be as high as 27 DC with a roll of 20 at lvl 1!
Could. But it's equaly probable that the DC is 8.
A 1st level fighter can hit AC 27, but could fail at AC 9.To spot a 1st level rogue, the DC could be 27, but it could also be 8.
A 1st level ranger could climb hanging on a ceiling with just his hands (CD 25), but also fail to climb a ships rigging (DC 10) and even fall down in unfavorable conditions.
I don't really see such a great difference when it comes to bard. There's a variant rule that the DC for all spells is rolled with a d20 instead of a fixed base of 10. The same goes for AC. It's just made that way to make it quicker.
But as perform is a skill and does not come up THAT often, making a roll instead of taking 10 seems a good idea to me.
which could be as high as 27 DC with a roll of 20 at lvl 1!Could. But it's equaly probable that the DC is 8.
A 1st level fighter can hit AC 27, but could fail at AC 9.
To spot a 1st level rogue, the DC could be 27, but it could also be 8.
A 1st level ranger could climb hanging on a ceiling with just his hands (CD 25), but also fail to climb a ships rigging (DC 10) and even fall down in unfavorable conditions.I don't really see such a great difference when it comes to bard. There's a variant rule that the DC for all spells is rolled with a d20 instead of a fixed base of 10. The same goes for AC. It's just made that way to make it quicker.
But as perform is a skill and does not come up THAT often, making a roll instead of taking 10 seems a good idea to me.
I dont' think rolling is a bad idea.
I do think that tying it to a skill (which will progress at least twice as fast as a save DC normally would) is a bad idea.
Making it equal half his perform check result would be more balanced. At 1st level, for fascinate, this will typically be around DC 9.
From there it will progress as +1/2 level just from skill increases, with charisma boosts and skill feats/masterwork instruments adding further to it.
Considering that the higher level bard abilities affect every foe within 30 feet, and are usable 1/day/level, this still wouldn't be bad.
has this been talked about before???
Yes; a day or so after Alpha 3 came out, many people pointed out that it's not a very good idea to set save DC = skill check result (since it's much, much easier to boost a skill check than a spell DC, for instance). Jason agreed; I bet he changed it in the Beta rules.
This is my first post, looked at a lot of posts and other comments. I think that the DC seems a bit high,but on the other hand maybe not that much. Theres always some item, some feat or skill that will prepare you or help you overcome a fireball. What prepares you for a song that goes into your soul and effects you so greatly you collapse/die? Not much.I realize I don't have much to contribute in terms of numbers (coming up with such things does not work for me) and I also to think of the bard as a support character first and foremost. But also while the bard's 20th level wizard buddies are destroying physics he spent his life in music and finally something other than the free room and food at the inn is his reward.
In short needs to be lowered but not that much. but cant do the math to do it myself
Yes, there are specific defenses against the kinds of things a bard can do. It's good to keep that in mind. However, saves usually exist as a second line of defense for characters/creatures who don't have those specific defenses (because "save or sink" is better than just "sink"), and in the case of a high level bard, the save isn't very meaningful (in otherwords, it's a "just sink" scenerio).
I suggested "half his perform" result above; that was kind of harsh.
"10 + half his perform check result" is a high DC. Because of the d20 roll (which is cut in half), it averages to about 15 + half his perform skill.
"5 + half his perform check result" or just "10 + half his perform modifier" would be most fair. It will usually be about the same as a sorcerer spell of the same level.
The reason I was so harsh the first time (half perform check) is because, come mid level, a +10 skill item is dirt cheap and nets him a +5 to his DC under any such system. This bonus should be assumed and compensated for.
And before I forget, welcome to the boards!
As I mention in this post (Bard Save DCs), tying save things like save DCs or even attack rolls (though I don't think I've seen anything like that) to skill checks is a bad idea IMO on many levels. I'm glad to hear that it is likely to be changed. Like others have said, it's nothing to pump the heck out of a skill check (Let's see...your level x ranks +3, + skill focus, + ability mod, +5 from a cheap magic item, +2 from masterwork tool, then toss on circumstance, racial, aid another, or whatever) than it is to pump anything else.
I personally believe most save DCs should be based on the same formula used for creatures and such (that is, 10 + 1/2 HD or Level + ability + feats + racial bonuses). It tends to scale well from what I've seen in in my games, and would work wonderfully for bardic music and many other abilities (I've toyed with the idea of tinkering with spellcasting which relies on this mechanic, but I've been busy with work).
---
Back to the bardic abilities, specifically fascinate and deadly performance; I must say that I've seen a lot of trouble with the DC in 3.5 games just with fascinate, on both sides of the screen.
As a DM, unless you make sure EVERY encounter is a combat encounter (which can get old fast), the bard uses fascinate and ensnares the NPCs, and then proceeds to make Suggestions with their other ability, or has the entire party jump them if they're enemies, or rob them blind if there is a rogue involved, for example. I'd be cool with this, if it weren't for the fact there is virtually no way to protect against it or save against it - especially for NPCs - when the typical save DC for the level is around 16, and the bard's DC looks more like 19 + 1d20. It's as bad as the Diplo-mancer (Diplomacy, I'm looking at you!! >_<) in lots of ways.
However, it's soooo much worse as a player. NPC bards using it on you feels like your character is getting mind-raped; not cool. True experience in a game; the party wanders up on a group of bards, who apparently have been asked to "distract" the party by a group of would be assassins. Bards come up, and since there's no "combat" going on, proceed to roll their performance checks and ensnare everyone in the party except my *heavily optimized vow of poverty druid =P* who made the save because I rolled a 20 (which still wasn't enough, but since 20 is auto-success on a save), I immediate initiated combat seeing my companions were acting strangely, and called the bards poisonous witches (for lack of a better term), through out an entangle spell and demanded surrender from them.
Shortly after we were attacked by the assailants who wanted the bards to "distract us", who fired a couple of poisonous arrows (dragon bile at level 3? o.O) and fled. While I'll admit the DM was being a jerk saying we would get no XP since we didn't every get to fight the assassins (who took out one party member with STR damage poison; which at this level knocks him out of the game for several in game days), and didn't even want to give XP for the bards (because they were never "fighting" with us), the main issue I had with the bard crap was it was overpowering on every level (and their levels weren't much different than ours). I mean, I was playing a vow of poverty druid (good will save, all kinds of resistances, and wisdom as my prime stat) and if *I* couldn't save on a roll less than 20, the rest of the party was "****ed proper".
I'd really hate to see mechanics like this EVER become part of the Pathfinder RPG (which I'm seriously thinking about switching over to completely, despite enjoying 4E - I feel 4E fails to grasp a lot despite the beautiful base mechanics of the system). In fact, I'd hate to see mechanics like this enter ANY area of 3E D&D beyond the bard (and don't even like it in the 3E bard =P).
------
I'd still recommend the 10 + 1/2 HD or Level + relevant ability modifier for stuff like this. It's simple, and effective. Plus, there's already the Ability Focus feat (in the Monster Manual) which should be applicable to most PC powers with a save DC, which helps specialize in an ability by tacking on a +2 to the DC. So in a perfect world, stuff might look like this...
Gimble uses fascinate to try and gain the complete attention of a couple of orcs who are guarding him, who currently have him bound (but not gagged), by singing or humming a mystical tune. He's level 6 and can affect both of them. He expends one use of his bardic music ability to use his fascinate power. Gimble is level 6, and has a +3 charisma bonus, and took the ability focus [Fascinate] feat, so the will save DC is 18 (10 + 1/2 Gimble level + 3 charisma + 2 feat). The orcs get a will save against the effect; and if they succeed cannot be affected again for 24 hours. If they succeed, Gimble may need to wait a while to try and get out again, but if they fail, he may just use his Suggestion bardic music power to get them to untie him...
Any thoughts? :)
|
|
Oh, yes, much better!
The fact is, there are only a few ways to boost a standard caster's save DCs; stat-boosts, Spell Focus, Greater Sell Focus and an ioun stone (any others?).
Compared to the numerous ways to boost a skill check. A bard with Skill Focus (Perform) increases his save DCs by +3, while a wizard/cleric/sorc/druid, would spend two feats to gain a +2.