Bards having to spend two of their skill points on difference Perform skills is patently ridiculous, and it reverses the 3.0 to 3.5 change in bards. Instead of this, I'd recommend:
a) Combining the visual/auditory Perform skills into abilities that don't distinguish between the two. Having different abilities only adds needless complexity to the bard.
b) The bard gets a free skill point per level that is automatically applied to a Perform skill of his choice.
What you see as needless complexity, I see as new options that allow me to do one of three things: go with a specialized non-instrument bard, go with a specialized instrument bard, or spend the points to be both. From my standpoint, this is a good direction for the bard and I don't see this changing.
As an aside, asserting that something is "patently ridiculous" in the first line of your post nearly always turns peoples brains off as they gloss over your hyperbole-ridden statement and find something else to read. Drop the hyperbole and general snark in future posts, please.
While one can go for the "specialized" route, it is [insert ego-friendly synonymous phrase for "patently ridiculous"] that the bard can be made unable to use his own class features because he hasn't put the skill points into two different Perform skills. It would be akin to the rogue being unable to use sneak attack because he hadn't put enough points into Stealth.
Also, I hardly consider "patently ridiculous" to be "snark."
Fact: The 3.0 bard was altered in 3.5 to give the bard class more skill points.
Fact: Forcing the bard to spend skill points on two different Perform skills effectively reverts the bard.
Fact: Downgrading in an attempt to upgrade is counter-intuitive and counter-productive.
Fact: Counter-productivity in an attempt to be more productive is ridiculous. Patently ridiculous, even.
I would appreciate knowing what constitutes "snark" to the Pathfinder moderators, similarly to how another poster wanted to know what the inappropriate phrase was in his post. Unlike that poster, I only hope that you'll provide me with an answer.
Most of the standard bardic abilities that a bard gets can be utilized using any perform ability, and many of the abilities that require a specific perform type are new abilities.
I guess my point is, the bard still gets a number of "upgrades" even if he doesn't diversify his perform skills. I'm not sure that every class should be optimized at everything that can possibly do without investing anything (skills, feats) into the character.
Also, I know other classes don't need a certain rank in a given skill to do something that is a class skill, but one of the things that I like about the 3.5 ruleset is that not every class does play by the exact same rules (well, they do, but they aren't set up the exact same way).
While one can go for the "specialized" route, it is [insert ego-friendly synonymous phrase for "patently ridiculous"] that the bard can be made unable to use his own class features because he hasn't put the skill points into two different Perform skills. It would be akin to the rogue being unable to use sneak attack because he hadn't put enough points into Stealth.
Also, I hardly consider "patently ridiculous" to be "snark."
Fact: The 3.0 bard was altered in 3.5 to give the bard class more skill points.
Fact: Forcing the bard to spend skill points on two different Perform skills effectively reverts the bard.
Fact: Downgrading in an attempt to upgrade is counter-intuitive and counter-productive.
Fact: Counter-productivity in an attempt to be more productive is ridiculous. Patently ridiculous, even.
I would appreciate knowing what constitutes "snark" to the Pathfinder moderators, similarly to how another poster wanted to know what the inappropriate phrase was in his post. Unlike that poster, I only hope that you'll provide me with an answer.
The PRPG bard has new abilities that he never before had. Your argument, in essence, is that you want increased skill points so that you can easily get all of the new abilities without having to sacrifice your skill point expenditure in other avenues. The PRPG bard requires you to make new choices--choices I happen to like.
Your first "fact" is actually a fact. Your second "fact" is an opinion. Your third "fact" is actually an assertion that would only be accurate if the previous "fact" was correct. Your final "fact" might be true if its predecessors were also all true. Your entire "fact" list is snarky.
Snark is the combination of snide and remark--essentially, leave the snide remarks behind and discuss politely. Constantly repeating a phrase that I've just told you is counter-productive is snark. It's also immature.
The bard in my Alpha playtest went up to 7th level, although he was created under 3.5, and was converted twice, once at third level for "general" PFRPG ideas (d8 hit dice, unlimited cantrips, skill changes, changes to the half-elf race), and then again at 5th level to the actual Alpha bard.
I post that for full disclosure for what I'm about to say, which is that my player was thrilled with the upgrades that the bard got. He did wish that he could also learn to sing as well as orate and play an instrument, but he wanted to pick up a few other skills that didn't have anything to do with performance or his bardic ability.
I can't claim to say everyone will react this way to the bard, but I know that he was very happy, and didn't see himself as having too few skill points, but rather that he had to make some choices based on the skill points that he already had.
In fact, he actually said that he liked the idea of different perform checks modified various abilities, instead of a single perform check controlling everything across the board.
I also had another player that was leery of the diversification of perform skills, but he was also the player that was sticking with the beguiler for the playtest, opting to play a "standard" 3.5 class with minor PFRPG tweaks to see how it ran along with the rest of the classes.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
The PRPG bard has new abilities that he never before had. Your argument, in essence, is that you want increased skill points so that you can easily get all of the new abilities without having to sacrifice your skill point expenditure in other avenues. The PRPG bard requires you to make new choices--choices I happen to like.
Josh, with all due respect, I think the snark is making you discount a decent argument or perhaps not making your argument as clear as it could be. If two skills are required to use the bard's abilities, the bard effectively has fewer skill points. Is your thought that the bard could, in effect, forgo using those abilities and thus gain an additional 1-2 skill points? So, in effect, you could either be the performance bard and use your skill points to do bardic music or you can forgo your performance abilities and gain skill points instead (thus being more of a jack of all trades). Is that what you mean by saying there is a new choice to make?
It's too bad skill tricks aren't OGL - they would be absolutely perfect for the bard. You could use those to grant the perform-based abilities and make them slightly stronger than other skill trick abilities because perform has very few uses compared to other skills.
One other thing I would note. While I greatly respect the opinions of the Paizo staff and give their views significant weight, I find the recurring theme in these bard discussions of "I like the performance bard, therefore it's what we're going to do" to be off-putting. Maybe it's the toxicity of the playtest boards getting to you guys, but it seems much more unilateral and absolute than what I normally expect from the staff. I can very much see the point that the core identity of the bard is the performance bard, and I can see that there are a lot of good reasons to stick with a single simple core identity, but I think it's much better to explain that identity and why it is valuable rather than make these stark statements of preference. I've never felt like an idea is not being considered by the staff, but that's the impression I am starting to get with regards to the discussion of opening the bard up to a more jack-of-all-trades non-performance based model.
Snark aside, I see the current design of the bard to be pretty decent. He has access to six new abilities, three of which he can use at a time if he doesn't want to sacrifice his other skill-based advantages. If he wants to use all six, then he'll need to focus more on his two perform skills.
I happen to agree, by the way, that skill tricks would be perfect for the bard. They were one of my favorite design ideas in the last year of 3.5 and I used them quite a bit on a rogue I was playing at the time. Alas, not for us. :-)
As for missing the point of an argument because of snark--yup, I'll freely admit that's possible. I can't see the wood for the trees when the trees are screaming "FIRE!" all the time.
~shrugs~ Just say that due to the Bard's intensive musical training, they get either 1 or 2 free skill points that go exclusively to the Perform skill. Or if the DM feels that it must absolutely be that way, houserule it. I personaly opt for 2 extra skill point that must oly be used on perform. IMHO only, however.
Director of Games
|
Hey there everyone,
The design decision to add new powers to the bard were balanced by the fact that most bards (those with only one perform skill) could only use one track of the added abilities. If you see these as mandatory adds then it would indeed cost you two skill points per level. That said, I do not see that as a necessary route for the power level of the bard. There are other issues with the bard, but I do not feel this is necessarily one of them.
That said, as always, I am open to other thoughts...
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Snark aside, I see the current design of the bard to be pretty decent. He has access to six new abilities, three of which he can use at a time if he doesn't want to sacrifice his other skill-based advantages. If he wants to use all six, then he'll need to focus more on his two perform skills.
I happen to agree, by the way, that skill tricks would be perfect for the bard. They were one of my favorite design ideas in the last year of 3.5 and I used them quite a bit on a rogue I was playing at the time. Alas, not for us. :-)
As for missing the point of an argument because of snark--yup, I'll freely admit that's possible. I can't see the wood for the trees when the trees are screaming "FIRE!" all the time.
Okay, looking at it that way, and cross referencing the beta with the SRD, the new bardic music abilities each have a specific perform type cost, unlike the Bardic Music ability in the 3.5 SRD, which is a deliberate choice. All of the 3.5 SRD bardic music effects allow any type of performance, except for Song of Freedom, which seems like a nerf, but the only real change to 3.5 SRD bardic music. Any particular reason for this particular change, as it is the lone standout here?
Thanks!
|
Creative Director
|
Jason makes a good point; the variant powers for different types of perform assume that the bard only really focuses on one kind of performance. When we were building this bard, we were looking at the various types of performance in a light similar to cleric domains or arcane schools; they are several similar categories by which a player can personalize his bard character. The assumption was that players were cool with clerics not having access to all domains, or specialist wizards not having access to all arcane schools; therefore, a bard character would be cool with not having access to every kind of bardic performance. That it's a skill means that a bard COULD opt to go full out for all the various performances, which is an option not really available to a cleric's domains or a specialist wizards's arcane schools.
The thought is that a bard who has max ranks in one Perform skill is balanced and fun to play. If this isn't the case, then we can certainly look at changing the way things work; either by stripping out the variant perform powers (which would break MY heart) or giving bards some sort of ability, perhaps once every 5 levels, to add a "virtual" perform skill onto an established perform skill. So that at 1st level, you have max ranks in Perform (dance), then at 5th level, you could have max ranks in Perform (dance and song), with song being a virtual skill whose ranks are set by the total ranks you have in Perform. That might even be a cool feat for bards.
|
Creative Director
|
If the idea is that most bards will only have one track of the new abilities, then I think that bards as a class are still really far behind the power curve when compared to other classes such as wizards, clerics, fighters, etc. and still need some other form of boost then.
That's why I'm really looking forward to some actual bard playtests. It's important to remember too that if you play a bard as a cleric or a wizard or a fighter... of course he'll feel "underpowered." Bards have a pretty unique role in a game, one that's relatively easy for the GM to ruin, to be frank. After all, if you play a fighter and the GM runs a lot of adventures where fighting is illegal and you spend most of your time in political machinations or stealth operations, suddenly the fighter is underpowered. Since the basic guts of the game are built to focus and expect fighting, with social encounters (the bard's forte) generally taking a back seat... that's probably got more to do with the perception of the bard being underpowered than anything else.
Or maybe not. In any case, playtest them bards and let us know if they DO still feel week and no fun to play.
I'd much rather the bard had to choose which abilities to have access to as part of a bardic music progression tree.
Bards have a pretty unique role in a game, one that's relatively easy for the GM to ruin, to be frank. After all, if you play a fighter and the GM runs a lot of adventures where fighting is illegal and you spend most of your time in political machinations or stealth operations, suddenly the fighter is underpowered. Since the basic guts of the game are built to focus and expect fighting, with social encounters (the bard's forte) generally taking a back seat... that's probably got more to do with the perception of the bard being underpowered than anything else.
That reminds me... what IS the bard's intended role, anyways? Because if their intended role is a social character... Rogues are much better at it, due to having 8+Int skill points/lvl, access to Intimidate as a class skill, and not having to take two skills that don't do anything. In fact, my own 3.5 experience playing two forms of Bard extensively showed that my Wizard/Virtuoso was a much stronger social character than a Bard could be, due to a larger number of skill points.
As for the original poster's thought... check out the Five Relevant Bard Issues thread. I've already spelled out what the original poster is thinking in much detail.
-Matt
|
Creative Director
|
That reminds me... what IS the bard's intended role, anyways? Because if their intended role is a social character... Rogues are much better at it, due to having 8+Int skill points/lvl, access to Intimidate as a class skill, and not having to take two skills that don't do anything. In fact, my own 3.5 experience playing two forms of Bard extensively showed that my Wizard/Virtuoso was a much stronger social character than a Bard could be, due to a larger number of skill points.
I've played plenty of bards, and generally, my thought is that the bard's intended role is variously party leader, back-up healer, support character, loremaster, and trickster. The weird thing about bards is that a lot of their powers become even more potent with more party members; they work particularly well with conjurers and druids. They can't really do as much in combat as the rogue with sneak attack, but they make up for that by being able to throw around a fair amount of charm and illusion effects, and the bardic performance bonuses. Also... with a GM that's easy going with the bardic knowledge stuff, a bard can also often serve as the party's info source. He's the one identifying magic items and the one that gives the GM a window to impart the party with all the background material he needs for the adventure.
From my perspective, tying a character class's major unique abilities to investment in a particular skill was never a good idea. I thought it was a great idea to remove animal empathy from the skill list, and although I would never have wanted to remove perform from the skill list, I never though it right to require the bard to buy it up in order to be able to access his own class's abilities.
It basically meant that the bard, if it was being played to make any decent use of the bardic performance abilities, was really 1 skill point lower than spec and that really defeated the point of having 6 skill points instead of 5.
I think the bard should get one perform for free and get the performance abilities based on that performance type based on level alone, assuming that the ability always has max ranks. If said bard character wanted to invest in more performances, fine, they could knock themselves out and have 2 ways of accessing the bardic powers (which might be a prudent move if a bard specializing in performance (keyboard) is without his harpsichord for an adventure).
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I've played plenty of bards, and generally, my thought is that the bard's intended role is variously party leader, back-up healer, support character, loremaster, and trickster. The weird thing about bards is that a lot of their powers become even more potent with more party members; they work particularly well with conjurers and druids. They can't really do as much in combat as the rogue with sneak attack, but they make up for that by being able to throw around a fair amount of charm and illusion effects, and the bardic performance bonuses. Also... with a GM that's easy going with the bardic knowledge stuff, a bard can also often serve as the party's info source. He's the one identifying magic items and the one that gives the GM a window to impart the party with all the background material he needs for the adventure.
Wow. For the first time in my gaming life, I'm tempted to play a bard.
|
I've played plenty of bards, and generally, my thought is that the bard's intended role is variously party leader, back-up healer, support character, loremaster, and trickster. The weird thing about bards is that a lot of their powers become even more potent with more party members; they work particularly well with conjurers and druids. They can't really do as much in combat as the rogue with sneak attack, but they make up for that by being able to throw around a fair amount of charm and illusion effects, and the bardic performance bonuses. Also... with a GM that's easy going with the bardic knowledge stuff, a bard can also often serve as the party's info source. He's the one identifying magic items and the one that gives the GM a window to impart the party with all the background material he needs for the adventure.Wow. For the first time in my gaming life, I'm tempted to play a bard.
I think, with the right dungeonmaster, that would be far flippin' out.
What it needs, is pregenerated bardic songs and poems and little historical anecdotes that you can drop on the bard as foreshadowing, then later in the game lay the item on them.
The bard is not underpowered because he only chooses one Perform skill. If he chooses BOTH, he's not down skill points from 3.5, because HE GETS A FREE KNOWLEDGE SKILL. So that bard converted from 3.5, (assuming of course he had a knowledge skill, a what bard worth his salt doesn't?) gets an ADDITIONAL skill, which, if he likes, he can spend on Perform to get that extra tree of options. The problem with the bard (as I assert on another post) is not options for bardic performance, but limited uses per day of the options he DOES have.
Your first "fact" is actually a fact. Your second "fact" is an opinion. Your third "fact" is actually an assertion that would only be accurate if the previous "fact" was correct. Your final "fact" might be true if its predecessors were also all true. Your entire "fact" list is snarky.
Your "fact" list seems snarky to me, too. So does the phrase "patently ridiculous". That, however, is just my opinion, which only matters for opinion's sake, because I don't work for the company...
|
I agree on one point. Of all the classes, this is the only one that needs to spend skill points to access class abilities. Thus, I agree with streamlining it. Either give the bard free max ranks in one Perform of his choice without having to spend skill points, or go the other route. Lower their skill points to 4+Int and give them max ranks in two Performs.
Really though, the latter is basically what happens anyways. Why not just streamline it further? Instead of 'forcing' a player to spend skill points on a class ability, why not just give them the max power with said ability and cut the skill points our for them? The first suggestion would effectively give them 7+int, but I think that's fair. Of all the classes, Bards should have at least one free maxed Perform.
Therefore, the 3.0 bard had an effective 3 skill points/level, and the 3.5 bard had an effective 5 skill points/level.
4. The Pathfinder bard has 6 skill points per level. This is reduced to 4 skill points per level because he must put points into two Perform skills to access all his class features.
I have to ask, did you even read the very insightful posts be both Jason and James on this exact subject? Your post makes me believe you did not.
My initial reaction was similar to yours but I've revised it based on the comments above.
|
Therefore, the 3.0 bard had an effective 3 skill points/level, and the 3.5 bard had an effective 5 skill points/level.
4. The Pathfinder bard has 6 skill points per level. This is reduced to 4 skill points per level because he must put points into two Perform skills to access all his class features.
How do the combined skills fit into that equation? Spot and listen and search are all on skill now. Decipher script and linguistics. Balance jump and tumble. Hide and move silently.
Even if the bard is 'downgraded' to 3.0 status, its skill points have a much greater purchasing power.
As a player I'd be happy to get access to the consolidated skill list at the cost of a skill point on another perform skill, even without the delicious new bardic powers frosting.
Josh, with all due respect, I think the snark is making you discount a decent argument or perhaps not making your argument as clear as it could be.
Which only proves his point: If you start with snark, people won't take you seriously any more. And whose fault is that?
If you thought "the guy who sees the snark and dismisses the rest of the post", you won a nice consolation prize: A pony ride through the Grand Canyon (Grand Canyon provided, BYOP) :P
That's why I'm really looking forward to some actual bard playtests.
I think I can help there after a fashion: I'll probably be playing a bard in a RotRL campaign - but it's 3.5, with only the PF bard added (for balance reasons). Everything except the class write-up itself (i.e. spells, skills, feats, even the way cantrips work) will remain 3.5. Still, it's going to be interesting.
Also, in the CotCT game (Beta) I run, I run an abadan (abadarian? abadite?) priestress who is built as mainly a support character (even gave her healing as a domain) and party healer. If it should turn out that she won't be necessary and the party paladin (updated rules from the boards) can handle the healing part with only a bard as support (instead of a full-fledged cleric), I'll exchange that character, giving them a bard companion. In that case, I'll report back in my playtest thread.
Placing values-statements on my posts and describing my behavior as immature is counter-productive to thoughtful conversation. It encourages emotionally-charged posting. I am attempting to engage in logical discourse with the Pathfinder community. Please refrain from hindering our discussion in the future.
Thank you for your compliance.
You missed me, didn't you?
But, seriously, could someone just convert a bard from 3.5 to PRPG so that we can test this theory that the bard has had an effective reduction in skill points?
I think Hawkshaw's right and you will find the bard has had an effective increase due to skill consolidation but let's see.
Which only proves his point: If you start with snark, people won't take you seriously any more. And whose fault is that?
On the other hand... the "snarky" poster is gaining much more traffic, and much more designer feedback, than the thought-out, non-snarky version.
-Matt
|
|
Which only proves his point: If you start with snark, people won't take you seriously any more. And whose fault is that?On the other hand... the "snarky" poster is gaining much more traffic, and much more designer feedback, than the thought-out, non-snarky version.
-Matt
Yes, but which has the better chance of convincing people. You'll note that most of the designer feedback has not been positive or supportive of the ideas or their expression.
|
|
But, seriously, could someone just convert a bard from 3.5 to PRPG so that we can test this theory that the bard has had an effective reduction in skill points?
I think Hawkshaw's right and you will find the bard has had an effective increase due to skill consolidation but let's see.
I actually converted the 2nd-level halfling bard Edgrin Galesong from D1 Crown of thee Kobold King to Pathfinder.
He went from this (in 3.5):
Balance +5, Bluff +4, Climb +4, Concentration +2, Diplomacy +5, Escape Artist +5, Hide +8, Jump +4, Listen +5, Move Silently +6, Perform (sing) +7, Perform (strings) +7
To this (in Pathfinder):
Acrobatics +8, Appraise +5, Bluff +7, Climb +5, Diplomacy +8, Escape Artist +6, Knowledge (local) +7, Knowledge (all) +2, Perception +5 (+7 sound), Perform (sing) +8, Perform (strings) +8, Spellcraft +5, Stealth +10
Note that some of the increase in total bonus (+1 to all Cha-based skills) is due to the Pathfinder halfling’s +2 increase to Charisma.
It breaks down like this (in 3.5):
Balance +5
Bluff +4
Climb +4
Concentration +2
Diplomacy +5
Escape Artist +5
Hide +8
Jump +4
Listen +5
Move Silently +6
Perform (sing) +7
Perform (strings) +7
And in Pathfinder:
Acrobatics +8
Appraise +5
Bluff +7
Climb +5
Diplomacy +8
Escape Artist +6
Knowledge (local) +7
Knowledge (all) +2
Perception +5 (+7 sound)
Perform (sing) +8
Perform (strings) +8
Spellcraft +5
Stealth +10
What can we learn from this? From skill consolidation, the bard has 11 extra 3.5 skill points from Balance, Concentration, Hide, Jump, Move Silently. This allows the Pathfinder bard 3+ new skills: Appraise, Knowledge (local), plus Knowledge (all), and all skill bonuses have increased.
So from this conversion at least, it doesn’t look like the bard is losing any skill points, AND he has 2 Perform skills.
So from this conversion at least, it doesn’t look like the bard is losing any skill points...
That argument is invalid, because all classes benefit from skill consolidation. Try converting a Rogue and see how many skill points he gains.
What we have managed to establish here is that the designers' statement of assuming a Bard will access one "line" of bardic music is incorrect. They're class features, and unless the "choice" is a one/other decision, the baseline PC will take all possible class features.
Is it good design to force the Bard player to spend skill points on a meaningless skill just to access his class features? No, it's not. No other class needs to, why should the Bard?
-Matt
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
So from this conversion at least, it doesn’t look like the bard is losing any skill points...That argument is invalid, because all classes benefit from skill consolidation. Try converting a Rogue and see how many skill points he gains.
And the cleric? How is skill consolidation helping her?
1 point in spellcraft instead of 1 point in spellcraft 1 in concentration. Gives the cleric back 1 point. Linguistics consoladation also can benefit a cleric (it is a class skill) if they want all the options it covers.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
1 point in spellcraft instead of 1 point in spellcraft 1 in concentration. Gives the cleric back 1 point. Linguistics consoladation also can benefit a cleric (it is a class skill) if they want all the options it covers.
So the more skill-based classes are benefitting the most from this. The argument is not invalid.
You asked how the cleric benefits from this. I answered. Everyone benefits from it.
Truthfully the new skill system benefits the classes with a lot of cross class skills more than the classes with a lot of skill points because:
1. The few skill points are spent to greater effect.
2. They don't have to spend 2 points for 1 rank netting a bigger bonus at later levels than the old system would let them have (+20 [1 per level] instead of + 11 [ 1/2 of level + 3]).
So the more skill-based classes are benefitting the most from this. The argument is not invalid.
Is it good design to give the Bard less skill points than the Ranger? As many as the Druid? Are you proposing that the Bard has too many skill points, even though the Rogue gets four more per level?
-Matt
|
|
So from this conversion at least, it doesn’t look like the bard is losing any skill points...That argument is invalid, because all classes benefit from skill consolidation. Try converting a Rogue and see how many skill points he gains.
What we have managed to establish here is that the designers' statement of assuming a Bard will access one "line" of bardic music is incorrect. They're class features, and unless the "choice" is a one/other decision, the baseline PC will take all possible class features.
Is it good design to force the Bard player to spend skill points on a meaningless skill just to access his class features? No, it's not. No other class needs to, why should the Bard?
-Matt
We have not established it is incorrect in the slightest. My Bards would tend to follow one of those paths rather than both as it makes no sense for my hard-bitten ex-military bard to have Perform (Sing) but Perform (Oratory) for the eve of battle speech? Hell yes. Equally, it makes no sense for the circus acrobat to sing, and how could she counter sonic attacks with acrobatic dances?
You do not agree. But that is not proven by any stretch of the imagination. This is not bad design as it makes logical sense. f you want to, your bard can gain more powers but it costs him in having less skill. That is a choice. This is a good thing, not a drawback.
The Bard is also the only class that gains a free skill point and the equivalent of 10 free skill points every two levels. If you want to complain about the skill tax, don't forget the skill rebate the Bard gets.
If you see these as mandatory adds then it would indeed cost you two skill points per level. That said, I do not see that as a necessary route for the power level of the bard. There are other issues with the bard, but I do not feel this is necessarily one of them.
That said, as always, I am open to other thoughts...
I've been playing a bard/fighter multiclass character in a 3.5 game that we've partially transitioned to PFRPG rules. The bard class we're using pretty much wholesale, with one house-ruled variation for bardic music save DCs.
I like the new bardic music abilities, and I do more or less see two perform skills as mandatory in order to have the kind of versatility with bardic music that I want to have, which means sacrificing other skills to the Perform skill. I didn't mind doing that under the Alpha rules, where the perform check set the save DC for bardic music effects, though my DM and I both agreed that mechanic was overpowered. However, I really hated the fact that the Beta rules divorced the perform check from the bardic music save DCs entirely. It would have felt like a severe nerf to have to devote so many ranks to a skill to meet bardic music prerequisites, when the skill itself served no purpose beyond occasionally picking up some spare change by busking.
So we worked out the following house rule: Bardic music save DCs are 10 + 1/2 bard level + a modifier based on the result of a perform check.
Perform check 15= +1; 20= +2; 25= +3; 30= +4; 40= +5; 50= +6; etc.
It doesn't work perfectly, but we've found that this lets the performance skill stay relevant to bardic music abilities while not setting the save DCs inordinately high. It's been working very nicely for us as a house rule, and I see it as a solution to the one major problem I had with the PFRPG Beta bard.
Free points that can only be used on one type of skill, that is supposed to substitute for yet another class ability. So that's not a skill rebate it's a class feature.
So you are saying that the rogue should have to choose between his rogue talents and his sneak attack? That would be a choice not a drawback. Same with rangers and favored enemy and combat style.
Either group of performance are not good enough on their own and there are not enough choices on types of performances available at enough levels to make these "choices" comparable to the rogues talents or rangers bonus feats. You either take two perform skills or you lose out on half of what makes you special and unique among the other classes.
|
|
So from this conversion at least, it doesn’t look like the bard is losing any skill points...That argument is invalid, because all classes benefit from skill consolidation. Try converting a Rogue and see how many skill points he gains.
What we have managed to establish here is that the designers' statement of assuming a Bard will access one "line" of bardic music is incorrect. They're class features, and unless the "choice" is a one/other decision, the baseline PC will take all possible class features.
Is it good design to force the Bard player to spend skill points on a meaningless skill just to access his class features? No, it's not. No other class needs to, why should the Bard?
-Matt
The argument that started this thread wasn't whether the bard's skill points were balanced when compared to other pathfinder classes. It was whether the bard had been downgraded when compared to the 3.5 bard class.
If we are willing to concede that the bard hasn't been downgraded to 3.0 status, then we can move on to comparison to other pathfinder classes. Maybe in your thread? It seems to be right on topic.
I agree on one point. Of all the classes, this is the only one that needs to spend skill points to access class abilities.Strictly read you're right, but what would you think of a wizard who didn't spend points in spellcraft, knowledge arcana.
A cleric who did not spend points in Knowledge religion (I remember at least one Living Greyhawk cleric of that category)
A street rogue who did not make at least some investment in skills like Hide(Stealth) Slieght of Hand, Bluff, Forgery etc.
That statement does beg for a bit of qualification.
I would still think that all of these classes could still perform their core class features. And that's the point. The core class feature of bardic performance requires additional investment and should not.
|
Creative Director
|
The more I think about this thread, the more I think that maybe the right choice is to up the bard to the rogue's 8 skill points/level. I've been VERY resistant to the idea of skill creep (in particular to the fighter, cleric, wizard, sorcerer, and other 2/level classes), but unlike most other classes... the bard really IS about skills. Beyond Perform even. The bard is the scholar and the diplomat and the voice; he's the one that collects lots of lore about stuff and who knows how to look for information and so on. His Class Skill list is quite robust.
Upping the bard to 8 skills/level would help address concerns that he's already "forced" to spend at least 1/level on a Perform, and I don't think it'd really step too much on the rogues toes since the rogue has lots of powers and sneak attack to balance out against the bard's spells and bardic performances.
Basically, that'd give us two variants on the skill-monger class.
The rogue is the skill-monger who's a pretty good combatant (with his sneak attack, evasion, and rogue tricks).
The bard is the skill-monger who's a pretty good spellcaster/party buffer.
They'd have similar amounts of skills (Intelligence being equally important to them), but wouldn't really be stepping on each other's toes because they'd be mostly doing different things with those skills.
Actually, Joshua, allow us to look at this from an objective standpoint.1. The 3.0 bard had 4 skill points per level.
2. The 3.5 bard has 6 skill points per level.
3. The 3e bard must spend skill points on Perform to use their class features, reducing these skill point totals by 1.Therefore, the 3.0 bard had an effective 3 skill points/level, and the 3.5 bard had an effective 5 skill points/level.
4. The Pathfinder bard has 6 skill points per level. This is reduced to 4 skill points per level because he must put points into two Perform skills to access all his class features.
Therefore, one can say that the Pathfinder bard is, effectively, a reversion to the 3.0 bard (although it is more powerful).
...except for the fact that various bard-y skills have been consolidated (Diplomacy + Gather Info, Hide + Move Silently, Spot + Listen + Search). So actually many bards will be ahead on skill points from their 3.5 counterparts. (Not to mention the possible extra skill point for being a favoured class.)
Sometimes it seems like some people won't be happy until every single class gets 10 skill points per level.
|
Creative Director
|
Which only proves his point: If you start with snark, people won't take you seriously any more. And whose fault is that?On the other hand... the "snarky" poster is gaining much more traffic, and much more designer feedback, than the thought-out, non-snarky version.
-Matt
This is a very good point, and one that I've taken to heart. Hopefully the non-snarky parts of this thread are working well to address the points you brought up, Matt? I'll go check your other post anyway to make sure...
I'll spend some of my skill points on perform: kazoo.