Posting in the right forum this time.
In my opinion, the bard has always played fairly well at lower levels, with his mediocre combat ability, second-tier spellcasting and impressive assortment of skills. Others may disagree, but we can all agree that he sucks at higher levels, as his spellcasting and combat ability all lag more and more.
Here, it appears that this has been fixed by giving the bard offensive/debuff abilities that let him crush every mind within 30 feet 1/day/level.
It... definitely works. Some of those abilities are wicked. The save DCs are going to be extremely high (being tied to a skill essentially means +1/level rather than +1/2 levels). The baseline is 35-55 (depending on the d20 roll) at level 20, just accounting for 23 ranks and a beefy CHA score (i.e, not accounting for skill feats, magical enhancements to the perform skill, or miscellanious twinkery)*.
Considering this, I think that a level 20 power that kills everything within 30 feet (again, 1/day/level) might be just a bit much.
Asside for that, this class appears mostly balanced, but I'm still not sure I like it. His roll in the party shifts dramatically from low to high levels, from the handy fifth-wheel at low levels, to a decent buff machine that turns into a brain-toasting psionic superweapon whenever you encounter foes susceptable to/unprotected from bardic music.
I'm a fan of FR-style bards (i.e, how they're depicted in 'Realms fiction). The "heroe's hero"; clever, adaptable, compitent, well-rounded and capable of handling herself in any situation. Some of my favorite fixed include giving him a fighte'rs BAB, elective "bard abilities" (including SA, fighter bonus feats, and all sorts of goodies), or a top-tier spell progression reigned in by the same sharply-limited spell list.
The BAB boost (combined with full martial weapon access kicking in a bit later) was my own quick-and-dirty fix, and it worked out alright. It gives him a nice swash-buckly feel, though I don't think it would improve his actual power much beyond level 10.
But I realize others might like the changes for the same reason I dislike them: they take the focus off of the bard's second-best spellcasting, second-best combat ability and second-best skill proficiency in order to focus on bardic music, the one thing that makes the bard unique. I like my bardic music as a side dish, but YMMV.
Specifics: I dislike Bardic Knowledge because it makes bards better at a field than another person specialized in that field. Even if you're a wizard with Skill Focus (knowledge[arcana]), the bard knows more than you about magic (unless he has been taking half-max-ranks or less). I always thought the point of Bardic Knowledge was bredth of knowledge, not depth.
I like it because it's simple, it isn't vague, and it works.
Does Lore Master let him retry a knowledge check that he has already failed?
I don't know if Inspire Courage scales fast enough at mid/high levels to compare with the bard's powerful enchantment/debuff powers. It's weird the way the scaling slows down.
* 'Nother thread here.
Everyone has been complaining about the death effect and I myself admit that it seems harsh:
But I'm curious how it would work out in actual play.
30 feet is 6 squares. That's *alot of space*. How often are your players actually 30 feet apart from one another? Think about this for a moment. How often are the PC's 30 feet apart. And one of them is going to move away from the group but still keep Mob X within the area of effect and "cast this spell"?
I've not seen it in play (though I would love to) but I think it will more likely work out to being an excellent "oh crap" button (similar to Wail of the Banshee without benefit of abilities to make it only effect enemies). It sounds great on paper but is very difficult to actually pull off in actual game play.
Has anyone actually tested this ability out in several combat sessions with actual people who play the way folks tend to? I'd be curious as to the actual field tests.
(not that I disagree that it needs to be toned down- and the devs have said that it will be.. I'm just not sure it's as powerful as folks make it out to be).
Everyone has been complaining about the death effect and I myself admit that it seems harsh:
[snip]
I've not seen it in play (though I would love to) but I think it will more likely work out to being an excellent "oh crap" button (similar to Wail of the Banshee without benefit of abilities to make it only effect enemies). It sounds great on paper but is very difficult to actually pull off in actual game play.
Which ability are you talking about? Deadly Performance only affects one target (presumably an enemy). Paralyzing Show affects multiple creatures, but it implies that only enemies are affected ("paralyze his enemies", "an enemy must be able to see the bard perform").
Deadly Performance only affects one target (presumably an enemy).
Ahh, I missed that.
This is still an extremely powerful ability, especially considering that auto-kills have otherwise been removed from the game, and that it isn't hard to make the bard's save DC essentially unbeatable.
I dunno about that..
Wizard steps up and casts Greater Dispel or MDJ, death wards gone, opens it up for the bard to step in with a nigh-unbeatable save or die.
Hell, the bard him/herself can cast Greater Dispel and strip buffs away, tho it takes their turn. If they get the Death Ward, it's pretty much lose-lose, either the Monster continually uses their actions to cast Death Ward, or they have to face Bard-Song-of-Doom.
I agree that the 20th level bard song too powerful. Not only that, but pretty much any of the bard songs that are "attacks" on enemies, are too much, including Paralyzing Show, Frightening Tune, Discordant Performance, etc.
Save DCs should *not* be based off of skill checks, period. Never, ever, I don't care what the excuse is, it shouldnt happen. Doing so makes the DC climb by one every level, far better than even the *good* saves on anyone can keep up. Add to that a feat like skill focus preform, which increases the DC by +3!! What bard wouldnt take that? Compare to say, spell focus that enhances only one school of magic, and only adds 1 to the DC, with a second feat available to increase it by another +1.
Also, a circlet of Persuasion (+3 to cha based checks) is *far* cheaper than the equivalent headband of Charisma +6, which would have the same effect on bardic music, allowing Bards DCs to be jacked up another 3 points early in the game.
It's not unreasonable that a 5th level character could afford one of these, and probably would pick one up by 8th level when they get their "attack" songs. A DC for a discordant performance at 8th level might look somehting like this
8 (rank) +3 (class skill) +3 (skill focus) +3(circlet) +4(cha) +1d20 =22-41, with an average DC of around 31.
Consider this sample DC for comparison of an 8th level wizard, his highest level spell.
10(base)+6(int, supposing he might have +2 item) +4 (spell level)+2 (focus twice) =22. This is bard's *minimum* DC, and 9 points less than his average.
Ahem. This... ... is... a... problem.
How about 20th level NPCs?
Also, once someone starts counting out the monsters that are specifically immune to something, and listing ways that another creature [i]might[/] be immune to it ("Hulking hurlers aren't broken, what if they have to fight a ghost? Or.. or.. or someone behind a force wall!"), I usually assume it's broken.
Even if nine foes out of ten happened to enter fights immune to sonic or death effects, the tenth would be an auto-win for the bard. Regardless of the CR of the creature. And the hard truth is that most of the other 9 can be brought down with a combination of dispellling/debuffing and that one bard ability, which is useable twenty times per day.
When a DM has to go out of his way to make every important foe immune to one character's best ability, the game has already been broken. This is an instant death effect with an average save DC in the high 50s, usable virtually at-will.
I'm familiar with the inclination of many gamers to give the system the benefit of the doubt, but in this case at least, please don't argue that this is balanced.
|
By the way, let's compare. 20 Wizard casts time stop. Avg. 3 rounds to play with. Round 1: quickened wall of force, wall of force. Round 2: quickened wall of force, wall of force. Round 3: quickened wall of force, gate to the Elemntal Plane of Water, facing down.No save. You drown. This is just with core. I could break out dozens of ways that any other caster can do better than this ability, even with one spell. Probably of lower level.
It burrows, you've wasted all you high level spells for the day. See it's not broken :)
hmmm. I just had a look at the bard skills. They are pretty cool but the opponent does have to be within 30ft (easy charge range) and able to understand what is going on. Your bard also has to be at least 20th level to use it.
Has anyone here heard of earplugs?
There are so many ways to mess with this starting with command, colour spray, an arrow, a thunderstone on your own party, have your own bard countersinging, heck, just magic missile his lute.
I am agreeing that it could ruin the day of ONE creature.
A 20 th level anything should have some nifty tricks. I think the bard is still going to get whupped by most other classes. 20th level mage casts magic missile however many times he wants and watches bard disintegrate. That's all low level stuff. We aren't even talking about wish spells or time stop.
It is just one trick after all.
hmmm. I just had a look at the bard skills. They are pretty cool but the opponent does have to be within 30ft (easy charge range) and able to understand what is going on. Your bard also has to be at least 20th level to use it.
Has anyone here heard of earplugs?
Note that the 14th level ability Paralyzing Show (for instance) can be done with Perform (Dance) though; no language or sound is necessary.
I think you're missing the point, James Lewis..
Its not that there are no counters to this, there are... But that's not what we're arguing.
There are always counters, and there are always counters to counters, but that's the way the game works, and its fine.
The problem is that the DCs are just too high. Doesn't matter if there are ways to grant yourself immunity to the effect or no, DCs just shouldnt be that high. If my wizard found a way to put his Dcs in the 50s at 20th level, even for just one spell school; we'd have to have a talk about his character...
A DM should not *have* to ensure that all the baddies come fully equipped with perfect countermeasures to all his PCs abilities, in fact he ought to endeavor not to do so unless there is a good in-game reason for that to be the case (like, the party was being scryed on or something).
Cause that's the way balance works, see. If a 20th level party suddenly encounters a Great Wyrm green dragon (CR24), and neither has prepared at all or knew each other was coming, it should be a very hard fight for the PCs, it should be "epic" as the Pathfinder Alpha describes it.
if the bard sings, and rolls a 10, that's a 52 save or die. The Green dragon great wyrm has a +32 fort save, he needs to roll a 20 to live. That is not epic.
This is the way the CR system is supposed to work, something that ends a fight like that so quickly does not integrate well into the system, thus it is as the colloqualism goes "broken".
"Phah, that's not broken! This is broken! And this and this and..."
...
Yea, I think this thread of the debate has played out as far as it is ever really going to.
One of the arguements people use to defend broken game elements is "The dm can negate it." The other one, of course, being "Well other things are broken too!"
I wasn't making the case that monsters with immunities make something broken (that would be a little counter-intuitive). It's just that, as another poster said, everything is ineffective against something, and bringing up deathward or the tarrasque just shows that the "pro" side of a dicussion is grasping at straws. And once they've dug their heels in that far the discussion usually doesn't go anywhere productive (further steps possibly inlcuding "roleplaying restrictions", "balance is subjective so anything goes", or other such fallacies).
I shouldn't be so dismissive. You're right, silence and death ward are significant drawbacks, as is the presence of enemies inherently immune to death effects. This power would be nigh-unstoppable if not for them and they shouldn't be ignored. But without a sane save DC, they aren't enough to make this balanced.
An ability doesn't have to literally insta-kill every single foe that the PCs face to be broken. That would be the "DM's practical joke" threshold; the "broken" threshold is somewhat lower. This is broken, just as it would be if it had the makable save DC but nothing was immune to or could block it.
When you're talking instant death effects the system needs both an active and a passive layer of defense. Those who prepare should be able to block it, and those who don't should at least have a chance. Does that make sense?
What about a 20th level wizard with save DC 40 (let's say, on a cold meteor swarm with energy substitution) (10 base + 11 abil mod + 2 spell focus + 2 cold focus + 4 from items + 9th level spell +2 from energy focus from elemental savant)?
that's 32, not 40, and thats 20 points lower than the bards song's average roll. That also requires some mixing and matching of abilities, whereas everything we used to get the Bard's DC was from the PH or the DMG (for items).
I shouldn't be so dismissive. You're right, silence and death ward are significant drawbacks, as is the presence of enemies inherently immune to death effects.
Note that the Pathfinder version of Death Ward gives a +4 on saves vs. death effects, not immunity.
I'd actually say that Paralyzing Show is more dangerous than Deadly Performance most of the time since:
a) it affects multiple enemies
b) it doesn't require sound (if you use Perform [dance])
Of course, it gives a save each round, but if the DC is high enough enemies will only save on a natural 20.
Note that the Pathfinder version of Death Ward gives a +4 on saves vs. death effects, not immunity.
Thanks, hadn't gotten that far.
I hope it's a second-level spell now.For the record, when I said "high 50's", I was assuming a +10-to-skill item.
As a bard-lover, I'm not fond of all of the changes. For one thing, a lot of the song abilities currently rub me the wrong way just like the de facto dark and creepy flavor of the warlock in Complete Arcane did. Songs that inspire or distract are one thing, but a killer performance seems more appropriate to a performance style that progressively emulates the abilities of a nymph.
Given the level of uproar over the SoD song, I'm just going to trust that Jason has taken care of this in the beta.
In terms of keeping up with other classes as the party enters the high level range, there are a couple things I'd like to see:
* Bards that have better fighting capabilities ala the Swashbuckler from Complete Warrior. A good BAB would help here and I don't think it wouldn't overshadow the fighter, ranger or paladin given the bard's weapon and armor proficiencies and lack of specialized combat feats. Alternatively, the bard could receive a +1 bonus on Attack rolls every few levels. This would be similar to the Swashbuckler having that Grace bonus to Reflex saves or the Epic Prowess feat (i.e. it improves attacks but doesn't increase BAB).
* Bards that have some facility for adding spells outside of the bard list. One thing I loved about 2E bards was that they used Wizard spellbooks. I was happy to see this return Unearthed Arcana's Prestige Bard, but the loss of the healing abilities kind of handicaps things. Perhaps allowing bards to take 10 on UMD checks at higher levels or to cast wizard spells ad hoc as a (dare I borrow the term) "ritual" with a much longer casting time would be desirable. In this way, they wouldn't get any additional combat powers they wouldn't normally have, but out-of-combat, they could open up the cold-conked wizard's spellbook and attempt to teleport the party back to town.
* I agree with the earlier poster who said that Bardic Knowledge should grant breadth of knowledge rather than in-depth knowledge in a specific area. From that standpoint, I like that Bardic Knowledge in Alpha3 gives them ranks in all knowledge skills equal to 1/2 their level. However, the +1 per level to a single knowledge skill doesn't seem appropriate.
* In terms of music, I'd much rather see a list of songs that I can choose from rather than having every bard know exactly the same songs. It's more design work of course, but I think it's needed and desirable. The Alpha3 cleric domain setup might actually be a good starting point for approaching something like this.
* In terms of music, I'd much rather see a list of songs that I can choose from rather than having every bard know exactly the same songs. It's more design work of course, but I think it's needed and desirable. The Alpha3 cleric domain setup might actually be a good starting point for approaching something like this.
Yea. Signed. Sealed.
I think doing "bard domains" would be way too much work, but a list more like the Alpha 3 barbarian abilities would be much appreciated.
It would be ideal if they all fit on the same (scaling) power curve. Some of them seem to now, actually; Inspire Greatness doesn't come until mid-level, at which point your Inspire Courage bbonus is high enough to compare to it, and by the time you get Inspire Heroics your Inspire Greatness is affecting multiple people...
That would be hard to do with the offensive powers, but if not, you can always have multiple ability tiers (i.e. the bardsongs you can take at 15th level are better than the ones you could take at 10th).
The only tweak I would do on the Pathfinder bard is make bardic music a unique kind of bonus. In other words, it stacks with everything except itself.