What makes sense to you? I think you got this wrong.Quite possible, I came in on the end of the beta test, and I've never had a bard in my game, so I'm rusty on this. But I'll answer below.
* no, Inspire Competence does not give you a bonus on attack.
I never said it did, I said it could give you a bonus in combat (perception, etc).
Well let me quote you
I take Inspire Competence to be something that once you hear it is good for your next check (be it attack, skill check, etc).
Obviously the rest of my post was based on this.
As for Inspire Competence on many skill checks per round and more than one ally, here's from the beta (and yes I know it's the beta not the final version)
Inspire Competence (Su): A bard of 3rd level or higher with
3 or more ranks in a Perform skill can use his performance
to help an ally succeed at a task. The ally must be within 30
feet and able to see and hear the bard. The bard must also
be able to see the ally.
The ally gets a +2 competence bonus on skill checks with
a particular skill as long as she continues to hear the bard’s
music.
Lem and 3 friends, A rogue, a Wizard, and a Fighter are in the dungeon. They enter a new chamber, and all four feel weird, so Lem begins to Inspire Competence for his 3 friends.
Unless things have changed from 3.5/Beta, Inspire Competence doesn't work the way you laid it out in your example.
Each activation, Lem chooses the skill it applies to.
In the first round, he activates it and applies it to Perception - the Fighter doesn't get the bonus.
The second round, Lem can maintain Inspire Competence on Perception OR activate it again to change it to Disable Device or Concentration, but not both.
And depending on the level of Lem in this example, he might not get other actions depending on what it takes to activate Inspire Competence.
The way I look at it is that you might lose some rounds of Inspire Courage but you gain quite a few actions since you don't have to worry about maintaining it or resetting it every 5 rounds.You didn't have to worry about maintaining it in 3.5 or the PF beta, so there are no actions to be gained from not having to worry about it now.
It took one round of combat to initiate then you either had to give up the ability to cast spells and use magic or re-up it every 5 rounds. There was definitely a cost to maintaining it in terms of possible character actions.
It's sort of like quicken for bardic performance, so in the first round of combat Lem can Inspire AND cast Haste... that's pretty b@&!!in' IMO.This could already be done in 3.5 and the PF beta, so it's not that big a deal. It saves a few resources, but costs a lot more time (the previous way could be gotten at level 3 with your first feat).
Urm? There was a feat to start and stp bardic performance as a move or swift action?
Just gotta say this. The Bard can be great is certain campaign that don't focus on fights, but this game is a lot about fights.
When you play you want to be able to do damage. That's why the cleric sucked at 1:st ed.
In this game all classes can do damage except the bard (and the monk has it's problems). Paladin has smite, rogues got sneak atack, Rangers got FE, wizards got fireball, MM, etc. Clerics got holy smite, Druids got flame strike and their animal, fighers have their feats and weapon training, Barbarians their range. etc.
Um, Seriously? The idea of a character concept that doesn't do damage is invalid somehow? WTF is that about. I've made some awesome characters that focused on either buffing the party or on nerfing the enemy (rarely doing direct damage). Often a caster can do more damage by enabling others than he would be able to deal damage directly.
What makes sense to you? I think you got this wrong.Quite possible, I came in on the end of the beta test, and I've never had a bard in my game, so I'm rusty on this. But I'll answer below.
* no, Inspire Competence does not give you a bonus on attack.
I never said it did, I said it could give you a bonus in combat (perception, etc).
Well let me quote you
I take Inspire Competence to be something that once you hear it is good for your next check (be it attack, skill check, etc).Obviously the rest of my post was based on this.
Ah! Ok, sorry, my bad then.
As for Inspire Competence on many skill checks per round and more than one ally, here's from the beta (and yes I know it's the beta not the final version)Inspire Competence (Su): A bard of 3rd level or higher with
3 or more ranks in a Perform skill can use his performance
to help an ally succeed at a task. The ally must be within 30
feet and able to see and hear the bard. The bard must also
be able to see the ally.
The ally gets a +2 competence bonus on skill checks with
a particular skill as long as she continues to hear the bard’s
music.
Hmmm,
As I said, never had a Bard in my game. Seems a rather useless power then. I like my version better.
It took one round of combat to initiate then you either had to give up the ability to cast spells and use magic or re-up it every 5 rounds. There was definitely a cost to maintaining it in terms of possible character actions.
Not if you took the right feats or prestige classes. Song of the White Raven allows Inspire Courage as a swift action and Melodic Casting let you cast spells and activate magic items while performing (and let you use Perform instead of Concentration). There are also PrCs that let you do similar things, and Lingering Song that doubled the lingering time for inspirations.
Urm? There was a feat to start and stp bardic performance as a move or swift action?
Yep. Song of the White Raven, from the Book of Nine Swords, lets you activate Inspire Courage as a swift action and stacks Warblade and Crusader levels with Bard levels for bardic music. Admittedly, it doesn't allow Inspire Heroics et al or the new Pathfinder abilities, but it was much more quickly available than swift action inspiration in Pathfinder. SotWR requires you to know (and be in) a White Raven stance, so either a level of Warblade or Crusader was required, or you had to spend several feats on Martial Maneuver and Martial Stance. Even going the feat route (4 feats required, so you could get it at level 5 as a human or 7 as anything else) you'd still get there ahead of Pathfinder's move action, let alone is swift action.
Stopping performances has always been a free action. Maybe even not an action at all -- it's not defined as any kind of action, that's for sure.
Again, there's really very little gain in either of those changes. You gain a couple feats back, OK. On the other hand, your speed at getting those abilities is greatly slowed, and you get 3 more feats in Pathfinder regardless.
So to do the same thing the core pathfinder bard does..I did like 2 or 3 feats from one of the most hated books in 3.5...but thats not an improvement?
So I burn 2 or 3 feats from a book that might not be allowed?
Sorry man thats an often Banned book so it really does not help
So to do the same thing the core pathfinder bard does..I did like 2 or 3 feats from one of the most hated books in 3.5...but thats not an improvement?
So I burn 2 or 3 feats from a book that might not be allowed?
Sorry man thats an often Banned book so it really does not help
The most hated (and most broken) books in 3.5 are the Book of Vile Darkness and Book of Exalted Deeds. Bo9S is the least understood (except, perhaps, for the psionics books), not the most hated. Also, it's 1 feat needed. And, frankly, I don't give a damn if your closed-minded DM banned it at your table or not -- the Ogre asked if there was a feat that allowed bardic performances as move or swift actions in 3.5, and there is.
I would be the close minded DM that banned it yes. I have a whole list the 2 brought up are one it as well.As well as the spell compendium and who boy a slew of others
So yeah feat vs an built in ability I'll take the built in ability. Although it works as a feat but I'll take the new bard.
Note: Also tone down the hostility man not like I was attacking ya or anything
The most hated (and most broken) books in 3.5 are the Book of Vile Darkness and Book of Exalted Deeds. Bo9S is the least understood (except, perhaps, for the psionics books), not the most hated. Also, it's 1 feat needed. And, frankly, I don't give a damn if your closed-minded DM banned it at your table or not -- the Ogre asked if there was a feat that allowed bardic performances as move or swift actions in 3.5, and there is.So to do the same thing the core pathfinder bard does..I did like 2 or 3 feats from one of the most hated books in 3.5...but thats not an improvement?
So I burn 2 or 3 feats from a book that might not be allowed?
Sorry man thats an often Banned book so it really does not help
I have no particular like or dislike of BO9S, to be honest I stick pretty close to core. There are a ton of things you can do with a giant stack of supplemental books but I don't have the money or the desire to delve into all of them.
What you suggest is multi classing into a second class then taking a feat which is made available by that class? IMO this solution loses big points on the elegance of simplicity.
Most of my players are fairly new to the game, in fact I've introduced almost all of them to the game. Telling them "Oh you need to buy this book, take this other class, and this feat to be able to do that" seems a little weak. Maybe I'm reading what you said wrong but that's how I interpret it.
One of my big disappointments is that Paizo chose to add complexity to the rules system in many places, in this case it's a pretty clear win for Paizo.
If I ever get a chance to be a player again and not a DM I am definitely making an Elven Bard with Performance (Dance) and a longsword. Finally a Bladedancer core class :D
See this ability, is broken because it comes from this splatbook. No, I won't consider it, anything from that splatbook is broken. I don't care if you have to spend a feat or something.
<months later>
You get this ability for free as part of the revamp of the class. Yeah, I know it is the same ability that was broken because it came from that splatbook, even though you had to spend a feat on it. But see, now it is in the new base class, ergo it is not broken.
What you suggest is multi classing into a second class then taking a feat which is made available by that class?
No. Multiclassing was the quickest way, but not the only way. You could also get everything needed through feats.
And, again, I wasn't suggesting anything. You implied that it was impossible for a 3.5 bard to inspire as anything but a standard action. That is false. You implied that it was impossible for a 3.5 to cast spells or activate magic items while performing. That is false.
Given that those are both false, the vast leaps forward you claim the bard is making in PF are not, in fact, vast leaps. They're steps forward, to be sure, since they're incorporated into the base class, but since the class is making other steps backwards (some of them in the same abilities that are making steps forwards!), I'm not inclined to be throwing parties over it.
See this ability, is broken because it comes from this splatbook. No, I won't consider it, anything from that splatbook is broken. I don't care if you have to spend a feat or something.
<months later>
You get this ability for free as part of the revamp of the class. Yeah, I know it is the same ability that was broken because it came from that splatbook, even though you had to spend a feat on it. But see, now it is in the new base class, ergo it is not broken.
I don't recall saying it was broken, nor do I think I disparaged splatbooks. What I said was that I prefer to keep my game system fairly close to core and that having to use complex combinations (in this case actually taking a second class and a feat) in order to make a class playable is a good sign there is a problem with the class. Suggesting that "Oh the 3.5 bard isn't broken because you can use feat XXX out of book YYY which is only owned by a small percentage of folks says nothing the core class.
In my eyes the question is "Is the PfRPG Bard more fun and interesting to play that the 3.5 core bard?" The answer is IMO yes. The second question is "Is the PfRPG bard roughly in line power wise with the other classes?" I'm not entirely sure about that, but the bard does have lots of cool things he can do, and for the core bard anyways, bardic performance is easier and takes fewer rounds to deal with which means the bard can do more stuff during combat than he could previously.
The more I hear comments about this the more it sounds like folks are complaining about corner cases that use special multi-class optimized builds and not the core bard at all.
What you suggest is multi classing into a second class then taking a feat which is made available by that class?No. Multiclassing was the quickest way, but not the only way. You could also get everything needed through feats.
Ok, take a step back here, I don't think there is anything terrible or broken about what you are suggesting, only that it is complicated and requires non-core materials, IMO the gaming system shouldn't have to be played or optimized in order to be fun. I do think there is a place for optimization but using it to make a core class fun is not that place.
Your solution to get the bard swift song involved non-core books, and multi classing. Now you suggest this can be done with a series of feats from non-core books. Why not just use use those feats to get additional rounds of bardic performance which is ultimately what you are after?
You are looking at it from your perspective as a long term player who has probably 40-50+ source books. My perspective is as a DM with players who have never played the game. I don't see anything wrong with your POV, I just don't think it's valid for the vast majority of players who aren't interested in hanging around the character optimization forums for the solution to what ultimately belongs in the core class.
Lem and 3 friends, A rogue, a Wizard, and a Fighter are in the dungeon. They enter a new chamber, and all four feel weird, so Lem begins to Inspire Competence for his 3 friends.
Hmmm,
As I said, never had a Bard in my game. Seems a rather useless power then. I like my version better.
I do too! That was an awesome (worthwhile!) version! :)
Why not just use use those feats to get additional rounds of bardic performance which is ultimately what you are after?
Because you have to take Extra Music four times to get the same minimum benefit that taking it once in 3.5 does? In 3.5, Extra Music is +4 uses/day. In Pathfinder, it's +6 rounds/day.
I think that, at the absolute minimum, I'm going to houserule Extra Music to "+6 rounds per day, +2/level". That way the Bard doesn't have an insanely heavy feat tax just to do exactly what they could in 3.5.
I think that, at the absolute minimum, I'm going to houserule Extra Music to "+6 rounds per day, +2/level". That way the Bard doesn't have an insanely heavy feat tax just to do exactly what they could in 3.5.
But... but.. don't they have the same "four feat tax" in 3.5 to do what the Pathfinder Bard does for free?
See this ability, is broken because it comes from this splatbook. No, I won't consider it, anything from that splatbook is broken. I don't care if you have to spend a feat or something.
<months later>
You get this ability for free as part of the revamp of the class. Yeah, I know it is the same ability that was broken because it came from that splatbook, even though you had to spend a feat on it. But see, now it is in the new base class, ergo it is not broken.
I gotta give you total props for this pres man - I've often considered my acceptance of certain changes from Paizo that I'd opposed before. I do think this particular case *is* more balanced, with the rounds of expenditure making the choice to use that swift action less automatic, and getting the ability scaled in at higher levels. But in some ways, you're totally correct.
But... but.. don't they have the same "four feat tax" in 3.5 to do what the Pathfinder Bard does for free?
No. Melodic Performance and Song of the White Raven are two feats, and honestly Melodic Performance isn't really needed unless you're going for Lyric Thaumaturge, given that the 3.5 bard's inspirations linger for 5 rounds. The ability to cast spells and activate items is required for the Pathfinder bard because their inspirations end the instant they stop performing. That's an instance of Pathfinder "fixing" something that wasn't broken and winding up with a net of zero-fractional.
In order to get the same swift action inspiration that Song of the White Raven can get you at level 3, you have to be level 13 as a Pathfinder bard. Need I remind you that most campaigns end around level 10-12? Pathfinder is hoping to change that, but it's still 10 levels delayed.
Why not just use use those feats to get additional rounds of bardic performance which is ultimately what you are after?Because you have to take Extra Music four times to get the same minimum benefit that taking it once in 3.5 does? In 3.5, Extra Music is +4 uses/day. In Pathfinder, it's +6 rounds/day.
Except I wasn't comparing it to the Extra Music Feat, I was suggesting that you could use Extra music instead of all the non-core stuff you are bringing into the conversation to get the 3.5 bard to do what the core Pathfinder Bard does.
For you and like minded folks the older bard may have been better (though the Pathfinder Bard hasn't been put through the Charopt mill yet so that may not be the case in the long run). For me and my players the new bard is better because it is complete in itself.
So hey, all optimizers flock to the defense of the 3.5 bard... meanwhile folks who just want to play the bard and have fun have the new pathfinder bard.
Incidentally, one of the beauties of PfRPG is you are free to use the 3.5 bard and all it's associated source material with it with very little modification. You haven't 'lost' the old bard, you just have a new version which you can use in parallel. Obviously that doesn't apply to tournament play but then none of your optimization tricks will work in tournament play either.
Except I wasn't comparing it to the Extra Music Feat, I was suggesting that you could use Extra music instead of all the non-core stuff you are bringing into the conversation.
My point seems to have gone miles above your head. Extra Music doesn't even come close to making up for the uses per day that the Pathfinder bard gives up. It was pretty much a required feat early on in 3.5 (though if your DM allowed it, it's a prime candidate for trading out later) and it's still a required feat in PF, except that it's dramatically less useful in PF.
For you and like minded folks the older bard may have been better (though the Pathfinder Bard hasn't been put through the Charopt mill yet so that may not be the case in the long run). For me and my players the new bard is better because it is complete in itself.
So hey, all optimizers flock to the defense of the 3.5 bard... meanwhile folks who just want to play the bard and have fun have the new pathfinder bard.
Again you miss the point. Almost everyone, including the PF staff, said that the bard was too weak in 3.5 and much better, but still too weak, in the beta. So, what do they do to the bard between beta and release? Nerf it.
My point seems to have gone miles above your head. Extra Music doesn't even come close to making up for the uses per day that the Pathfinder bard gives up. It was pretty much a required feat early on in 3.5 (though if your DM allowed it, it's a prime candidate for trading out later) and it's still a required feat in PF, except that it's dramatically less useful in PF.
Except I wasn't comparing it to the Extra Music Feat, I was suggesting that you could use Extra music instead of all the non-core stuff you are bringing into the conversation.
No I got your point... BUT I"M NOT COMPARING THOSE TWO FEATS.
I was suggesting that instead of chasing after wind song you spend the feats you would have spent on Extra Music.
Again you miss the point. Almost everyone, including the PF staff, said that the bard was too weak in 3.5 and much better, but still too weak, in the beta. So, what do they do to the bard between beta and release? Nerf it.
Then why not compare teh 3.5 bard to the Pathfinder bard? Why bring all the non-core stuff in? That's exactly what I was suggesting, that the pathfinder bard is better than the 3.5 bard.... In order to prove me wrong you dragged a bunch of non-core stuff into the picture.
The Pathfinder Bard is BETTER than the core 3.5 bard. If you want to talk about that then we'll be on the same page. I'm not really concerned whether it's better than what you can drag out of all 50+ associated non-core source books.
See this ability, is broken because it comes from this splatbook. No, I won't consider it, anything from that splatbook is broken. I don't care if you have to spend a feat or something.
<months later>
You get this ability for free as part of the revamp of the class. Yeah, I know it is the same ability that was broken because it came from that splatbook, even though you had to spend a feat on it. But see, now it is in the new base class, ergo it is not broken.
This may have been aimed at me if it wasn't over look this. I Banned the whole book mostly there were a few good things in it. However when I find 6 out of 8 things not my liking, over powered or to magicky for fighters I just BAN the book. No point in keeping it for 2 pages of stuff.
I stick close to core and much on my list clashes with core. I am not gonna buy or keep a 200 page book then go though it page by page plucking out the 2 or 3 useful things in it. I just don't have money to waste doing that
On bardic music sure you had "60" rounds at level 10 and if like every bard I ever seen wasted about 40 of em. I use bardic music..fight done in 4 rounds. In 2 rounds, 3 rounds...3 rounds....3 rounds....5 rounds and so one ya waste your rounds. In the above you wasted 14 rounds you used 60% of your daily and a total of 20 rounds. Sure long fights happen but not every fight and it's not like the poor bard can do nothing else I know mine sure as hell does more then that
See this ability, is broken because it comes from this splatbook. No, I won't consider it, anything from that splatbook is broken. I don't care if you have to spend a feat or something.
<months later>
You get this ability for free as part of the revamp of the class. Yeah, I know it is the same ability that was broken because it came from that splatbook, even though you had to spend a feat on it. But see, now it is in the new base class, ergo it is not broken.
Hm. The people who LIKED that old splat-book stuff think the Pathfinder version doesn't measure up, because it comes many levels later and still isn't as powerful. I.e. they don't think it's the "same ability".
The people who thought the splat-book stuff was OVER-powered are happy with the over-all changes to the Bard, offering some of what "splat books" did in 3.5, but toned-down/level-limited, while broadening the Bard's over-all scope of action & not being reliant on optimizing around a select few non-Core Feats.
Is that really such a conflict in your eyes?
No I got your point... BUT I"M NOT COMPARING THOSE TWO FEATS.
I was suggesting that instead of chasing after wind song you spend the feats you would have spent on Extra Music.
No, you suggested that spending 1 feat on PF Extra Music entirely makes up for the deficiencies introduced by Pathfinder. This is false to start with, but it's especially false when you consider that most bards, in my experience, take Extra Music at level 1 anyway.
Then why not compare teh 3.5 bard to the Pathfinder bard? Why bring all the non-core stuff in? That's exactly what I was suggesting, that the pathfinder bard is better than the 3.5 bard.... In order to prove me wrong you dragged a bunch of non-core stuff into the picture.
3.5 and non-core are not mutually exclusive. 3.5 includes core and 3.5 splats. If you mean 3.5 core only, you need to say that, and you were NOT doing so at the point in which I entered this debate. You claimed that it was impossible for a bard to cast spells while performing or inspire as a swift action in 3.5. Those are both false claims.
3.5 and non-core are not mutually exclusive. 3.5 includes core and 3.5 splats. If you mean 3.5 core only, you need to say that, and you were NOT doing so at the point in which I entered this debate. You claimed that it was impossible for a bard to cast spells while performing or inspire as a swift action in 3.5. Those are both false claims.
Not to pick on ya or anything but if every bard can not do it, then yeah it is imposable in some games. Some GM's and groups do not own 100+ books to cherry pick from nor do GM always allow every book. I myself set lists of books per game to limit me having to know 100+ books and having 35 books at the table to check.
So yes it is Imposable unless you use book x.
3.5 and non-core are not mutually exclusive. 3.5 includes core and 3.5 splats. If you mean 3.5 core only, you need to say that, and you were NOT doing so at the point in which I entered this debate. You claimed that it was impossible for a bard to cast spells while performing or inspire as a swift action in 3.5. Those are both false claims.
Not to pick on ya or anything but if every bard can not do it, then yeah it is imposable in some games. Some GM's and groups do not own 100+ books to cherry pick from nor do GM always allow every book. I myself set lists of books per game to limit me having to know 100+ books and having 35 books at the table to check.
So yes it is Imposable unless you use book x.
Are you incapable of reading? His claim wasn't "it's impossible for some bards", it was "it's impossible for any bards".
Are you incapable of not being a jerk? just wondering is all
Blah blah blah
dude... read whatever you want into what I said.
You clearly don't want to discuss the points I've brought up so whatever.
The bard... is the class that's presented in the 3.5PHB. As I've said multiple times if there is other stuff out there that changes that then you are welcome to it. For the rest of us there is the PfRPG bard which is better and conveniently in one book.
Plus the new bard can still use the stuff the old bard could, and doesn't need a few of the feats...
Blah blah blahdude... read whatever you want into what I said.
You clearly don't want to discuss the points I've brought up so whatever.
The bard... is the class that's presented in the 3.5PHB. As I've said multiple times if there is other stuff out there that changes that then you are welcome to it. For the rest of us there is the PfRPG bard which is better and conveniently in one book.
I don't want to discuss it? You're the one that keeps changing your claims. First you said that in 3.5, bards couldn't do suchandso. Now you're claiming that in tournament play, 3.5 couldn't do suchandso, and anyone who uses non-core books is a filthy optimizer who doesn't deserve to share your space.
Yeah, that's hyperbole, but it really is how you're coming off.
I've engaged every one of your points directly, and yet you refuse to respond to my responses with anything more than "I wasn't talking about that".
And, finally, the PF bard is only better in some aspects, as I've pointed out before, and you've not responded to. 2 rounds/level is clearly inferior to 1 use/level unless your combats average less than 2 rounds each. No lingering effects is clearly inferior to 5 rounds of lingering effects. 6 rounds/day is clearly inferior to 4 uses/day. Depending on how your DM used it, bonuses to knowledge checks is inferior to 3.5 bardic knowledge (note, here, that I actually like the new version better -- I'm just listing this for completeness's sake).
The things that are better are: slightly improved spells per day (1 more per level at most if the 0 per day is the only thing that changed), versatile performance, +1 average hit point, jack of all trades, and bigger selection of performances. The spells per day looks and sounds like a minor change. All told, versatile performance is pretty minor, too, as is the hit point bonus (though welcome!) and JOAT. The extra performances are the big draw of the PF bard, and honestly I don't know if they make up for the nerfs the bard got. I'll have to wait and see what the release document has to say about them. I suspect that, at best, they'll break even until very late in the bard's career when they get the topper songs.
Yeah, that's hyperbole, but it really is how you're coming off.
I've engaged every one of your points directly, and yet you refuse to respond to my responses with anything more than "I wasn't talking about that".
It seems to me like you are all about some sort of internet pissing match. Everything you say and do is confrontational and full of hyperbole. You have not engaged my points directly, you blatently ignored the major points I made on posts multiple times whining about some detail which I'd already conceded. Even now you just barely look at the issues I brought up. You want to argue about stuff I don't disagree with (bardic music duration) and rail about claims I didn't make.
What I said was quite simple and still true.
#1 The new bard starts bardic performance and doesn't have to worry about either resetting it in 5 rounds or not, it's just there. No more actions lost resetting bardic performance, no more bards running around unable to cast spells due to their performing.
#2 As part of the CORE class (no supplemental library required) starting performances is a move action at 7th level. No feats spent, it's just there. Clearly better than the 3.5 version. Swift action at level 13... Freeing up a standard action.
The performances/ day versus rounds per day math is strange but clearly favors the 3.5 bard past 3rd level and up until probably 10th level. So it works out to a trade off. The bard gets fewer rounds of performance but the cost of using those performances is significantly lower. As I suggested, it's similar to quicken where you sacrifice power for more actions.
It seems likely that most bards will take extra performances at least once which is not a good sign.
I never even talked about versatile performance or the bonus spells.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I read this over at classicbattletech.
It seems to apply here. Is pathfinder bardic music different than core 3.x bard? Yes. Is it worse? No. Does it require a change in tactics? Yes.
I do too! That was an awesome (worthwhile!) version! :)Lem and 3 friends, A rogue, a Wizard, and a Fighter are in the dungeon. They enter a new chamber, and all four feel weird, so Lem begins to Inspire Competence for his 3 friends.
Hmmm,
As I said, never had a Bard in my game. Seems a rather useless power then. I like my version better.
Feel free to steal it for houserules, I'll probably do that myself.
Feel free to steal it for houserules, I'll probably do that myself.I do too! That was an awesome (worthwhile!) version! :)Lem and 3 friends, A rogue, a Wizard, and a Fighter are in the dungeon. They enter a new chamber, and all four feel weird, so Lem begins to Inspire Competence for his 3 friends.
Hmmm,
As I said, never had a Bard in my game. Seems a rather useless power then. I like my version better.
You know.. I might do that as well, the more I read it, the better it seems to me.
I am not a fan of the rounds per day vs the times per day... Especially if the performance ends as soon as you finish and not 5 rounds later like in 3.5. Have we been able to confirm if it lasts 5 rounds or not yet?
I just looked over it and this is what it sounds like to me:
-you start the performance (this is either a standard, move, or swift depending on your level)-each round after you started it you can choose to continue it or end it (requiring a new start action if you later want to start it up again)
-in these later rounds you also can do anything else (cast spells, attack, chat up a hot babe, whatever)
So the effect "lingers" as long as you are willing to continue using up your rounds of performance (you don't get later rounds "free").
|
I'm sure you can keep 'performing' after your rounds are up, they just will cease to grant a magical effect.
That is what I am worried about, to me that is what makes this version inferior, and you will use your rounds up quicker in this version then you would use up your times per day in the old version.
This version seems to want to make my bard horde the performances more.
if it is true... it does not seem to say either way in the description.
|
I think it will be quite the opposite. If anything, it will free up the uses and they will appear more often in battles.
This happened with both my Barbarian or Bard players. Early on, they would horde their '1/day' abilities until they thought the boss fight was about to happen, or until the end of the day. Now? Now they can use a couple rounds here and there, throughout the day. They are no longer limited by that '1/day' use, which, while it CAN go a long time for the Bard (if they keep singing or whatever, which can kill Stealth in a dungeon) can just as easily only be useful for a round or two.
It's a tradeoff. All I know is every one of my players loves the Round changes now, and I'll be happy to see the Barbarians and Bards finally make use of their class abilities early on.
Yeah, that's hyperbole, but it really is how you're coming off.
I've engaged every one of your points directly, and yet you refuse to respond to my responses with anything more than "I wasn't talking about that".
It seems to me like you are all about some sort of internet pissing match. Everything you say and do is confrontational and full of hyperbole. You have not engaged my points directly, you blatently ignored the major points I made on posts multiple times whining about some detail which I'd already conceded. Even now you just barely look at the issues I brought up. You want to argue about stuff I don't disagree with (bardic music duration) and rail about claims I didn't make.
What I said was quite simple and still true.
#1 The new bard starts bardic performance and doesn't have to worry about either resetting it in 5 rounds or not, it's just there. No more actions lost resetting bardic performance, no more bards running around unable to cast spells due to their performing.
#2 As part of the CORE class (no supplemental library required) starting performances is a move action at 7th level. No feats spent, it's just there. Clearly better than the 3.5 version. Swift action at level 13... Freeing up a standard action.
The performances/ day versus rounds per day math is strange but clearly favors the 3.5 bard past 3rd level and up until probably 10th level. So it works out to a trade off. The bard gets fewer rounds of performance but the cost of using those performances is significantly lower. As I suggested, it's similar to quicken where you sacrifice power for more actions.
It seems likely that most bards will take extra performances at least once which is not a good sign.
I never even talked about versatile performance or the bonus spells.
Well Dennis I agree with you on most of the stuff you say. The PF bard is better than the 3.5. and I don't like splat-book.
Um, Seriously? The idea of a character concept that doesn't do damage is invalid somehow? WTF is that about. I've made some awesome characters that focused on either buffing the party or on nerfing the enemy (rarely doing direct damage). Often a caster can do more damage by enabling others than he would be able to deal damage directly.Just gotta say this. The Bard can be great is certain campaign that don't focus on fights, but this game is a lot about fights.
When you play you want to be able to do damage. That's why the cleric sucked at 1:st ed.
In this game all classes can do damage except the bard (and the monk has it's problems). Paladin has smite, rogues got sneak atack, Rangers got FE, wizards got fireball, MM, etc. Clerics got holy smite, Druids got flame strike and their animal, fighers have their feats and weapon training, Barbarians their range. etc.
Not invalid. But I still say a 13 lvl cleric or sorcerer is a better buffer if they chose to go all buff (and they can to damage). They can pick some int and have some social skills too.
Heck, I mean the PfRPG bard is not roughly in line 'power wise' with the other classes.And I like the new bard better than the 3.5 and you can hoserule. I guess Extra Performance will be 3 (or 6) plus 1 per bard level. Basically 4 (or 7) at level 1 and then +1 every bard level.
3.5 and non-core are not mutually exclusive. 3.5 includes core and 3.5 splats. If you mean 3.5 core only, you need to say that, and you were NOT doing so at the point in which I entered this debate. You claimed that it was impossible for a bard to cast spells while performing or inspire as a swift action in 3.5. Those are both false claims.
Not to pick on ya or anything but if every bard can not do it, then yeah it is imposable in some games. Some GM's and groups do not own 100+ books to cherry pick from nor do GM always allow every book. I myself set lists of books per game to limit me having to know 100+ books and having 35 books at the table to check.
So yes it is Imposable unless you use book x.
Just to nitpick, but if we were to actually take this standard as absolutely presented here, then you couldn't really discuss anything because some GMs might limit even the material in the core books. That is I could say it is impossible for a bard to sing courage, because some GM some where decided they thought inspire courage was too powerful and thus striked it out.
You have a point. However you look at core vs core first. Then you talk of extra books. The point of the matter is the Pathfinder Bard better then the 3.5 one?
You really can't ever put core anything vs splat as the splat will always be better.
You have a point. However you look at core vs core first. Then you talk of extra books. The point of the matter is the Pathfinder Bard better then the 3.5 one?
You really can't ever put core anything vs splat as the splat will always be better.
Actually, you should be comparing Core Paizo with Splat 3.5, because that is the reason why many of the classes are being beefed up in PFRPG, so that they can compete with the splat books released in 3.5. At least that was the claim.
I never used much splat myself, some but I always limited my books. So why should the opinion of someone who pretty much goes core only be any less important then the splat master's?
I never used much splat myself, some but I always limited my books. So why should the opinion of someone who pretty much goes core only be any less important then the splat master's?
It shouldn't be, but I am just saying, the design goal for why the power level was being increased was to give the base classes better competition with the splat books.
They might do that but your never gonna be better then the splat books there are just to many to comb though and to much that's over powered
Yesterday, my bard and his henchmen (who call themselves "other PCs" but who are they kidding) defended a certain town from a certain assault. Something from a certain 4th part of a certain AP. Bard 10 with Cha 22, meaning I'd have 28 rounds worth of bardic music (34 if I used the feat slot I'd gain from not needing Harmonic Spell for extra music.)
The whole thing was one big fight, but consisted of several squads of attackers, adding up to EL 10, EL 11, EL 12, EL 12 - in other words, at least a whole day's worth of fighting.
Two times I used haste laced with inspire courage, using up 4 uses of bardic music total, and one discordant performance, for 5 uses of bardic music each.
The hastes + inspire courage lasted 10 rounds each ,though we only needed half of the second, and since the bastards almost all made their saves against my discordant performance (and the only victim that didn't at first did so later), I only used up one round there.
That means in 3.5/Beta, this cost me 5 out of 10 uses, and in Final it would have cost 16 out of 28 rounds.
And it was skewed towards 3.5 since all the encounters were right after one another, with no time to wind down in between. Had they been spaced out more evenly, it would probably have cost me a lot more.
I know this isn't representative yet, but it seems the rounds scheme isn't as horrible as many suspect.