I think a lot of people look at classes from purely a mechanical point of view. That's very reasonable in a game where mechanics are everything. It is not, however, the only possible viewpoint.
The folks in my group aren't big character optimizers. They take stuff they want to take because it fits their idea of what their character is all about...not necessarily because that particular feat completes some sort of value chain. They often make characters that wouldn't stand up in a fair fight against a good percentage of other players' characters - in fact they often don't stand up all that well against enemies as written in published modules.
I don't think they're playing "wrong", though, and I modify my DMing to work with them. When I'm playing I don't try to optimize my own characters (I'm actually not very good at that either). We still have fun. A bard character would do just fine in our group, though no one has played one during my time there.
Hmmm. Maybe I'll try it next time. I suppose it'd be a bit jarring, though, if my dude starts rocking some Zep when combat opens?
M
I think the question is relevant only in context of the type of game you play. In my games, a bard is often more likely to survive than other characters because if the groups answer to every encounter is "let's run in and kill it!" then they die quickly. Combat is about 25%, maybe 33%, of my games. The rest is RP, diplomacy, problem solving, etc. and the Bard excels at all of these. If you want to see how valuable a Bard is, play in a game that isn't 75% or more combat focused (as it seems many games are).
|
Dirge of Doom + Dazzling Display is a great combo ...
edit: just to clarify ... from page 563 ... Fear effects are cumulative. A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.
A bard really isn't that better at social situations than a sorcerer or a rogue.
I think the perception that they are stems frm the fact that bards tend to be played differently. After all, a sorcerer or a rogue has teeth as well; a bard, less so.
A bard really isn't that better at social situations than a sorcerer or a rogue.
I think the perception that they are stems frm the fact that bards tend to be played differently. After all, a sorcerer or a rogue has teeth; a bard, less so.
High Cha plus high Int, combined with better a better skill list than the sorcerer and more knowledge than the rogue makes the Bard far superior (in my games at least) to either of these classes in social situations. Again, however, I know this depends on how ones games are set up. I, for instance, allow successful Knowledge checks to influence all sorts of other game mechanics and the Bard is definitely a master in this area.
|
|
A bard really isn't that better at social situations than a sorcerer or a rogue.
I think the perception that they are stems frm the fact that bards tend to be played differently. After all, a sorcerer or a rogue has teeth as well; a bard, less so.
Bard: 6+INT modifier, high CHA class, many class skills
Sorc: 2+INT modifier, high CHA class, few class skillsRogie: 8+INT modifier, high DEX class, many class skills
I don't know how you can say that Bard's aren't uniquely good in social situations ...
See, this is what I love about the bard class in 3.5/PFS. Versatility. And without all that multi-classing.Where did you find the Attractive trait?
If you look under your downloads there is the character traits download. It is available for use with Pathfinder Society, and is used in several of the adventure paths that paizo puts out.
A bard really isn't that better at social situations than a sorcerer or a rogue.
I think the perception that they are stems frm the fact that bards tend to be played differently. After all, a sorcerer or a rogue has teeth as well; a bard, less so.
Bard: 6+INT modifier, high CHA class, many class skills
Sorc: 2+INT modifier, high CHA class, few class skills
Rogie: 8+INT modifier, high DEX class, many class skillsI don't know how you can say that Bard's aren't uniquely good in social situations ...
A rogue who wants to take social skills will usually put at least a middling score in CHA. They also have enough skill points to put ranks in peripherals like disguise or linguistics.
Bards, in turn, don't usually crank CHA in my experience. They tend to spread their scores out more than many characters (though an average bard certainly has a better charisma than an average rogue).
Sorcerers DO crank CHA, and continue to support that stat with items and level-up boosts to a greater degree than the jack-of-all bard. But, on the other hand, they're not as skilled (in fact, the only social skill they get is bluff; for some reason I was under the impression that they got diplomacy).
Bards get a variety of spells which can help in social situations, which rogues don't. This, however, is even more true of the sorcerer than of the bard.
I think the convergence of factors does favor bards overall, but not dramatically so. Either a rogue or a sorcerer can be almost as good.
With Versatile Performance, the Bard is now the new skill monkey. Even the Rogue won't be able to match him after a little while.
Dirge of Doom + Dazzling Display is a great combo ...
edit: just to clarify ... from page 563 ... Fear effects are cumulative. A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.
We may need clarification on that as Dirge of Doom specifically says "This performance cannot cause a creature to become frightened or panicked, even if the targets are already shaken from another effect." The question is does Dirge of Dooms shaken condition stack with other shaken effects applied after it, or does it overlap?
Clearly if you used Dazzling Display first and Dirge of Doom second the target wouldn't become frightened. It is odd that the reverse would work...
|
|
We may need clarification on that as Dirge of Doom specifically says "This performance cannot cause a creature to become frightened or panicked, even if the targets are already shaken from another effect." The question is does Dirge of Dooms shaken condition stack with other shaken effects applied after it, or does it overlap?
Clearly if you used Dazzling Display first and Dirge of Doom second the target wouldn't become frightened. It is odd that the reverse would work...
I knew I had read that somewhere ... glad to know it was under Dirge ... and I agree it seems strange to work one way and not the other ... more clarification would be good.
I'm not sure if you're having the same conversation as the rest of us.However no one has shown me why they should work one off examples are poor at best i can give hundreds of examples where they dont work.
its my converstion
so unless im a split personality i must be lol
I hope
To be frank, Boggle, I'm not sure if it's your intent, or if it's your writing skills/style, but your reactions to people's replies have me wondering if you're simply trolling for a flame-war.
With that said, there's one very good reason why I would pick a bard over any other class. With a cleric, wizard, rogue, or fighter, I am choosing a superior level of access to a relatively narrow array of abilities. The reason I play a bard is so that I can enjoy having a competent level of access to many different abilities.
A bard's primary role in the party may be diplomat and buffer, however, they can also do something that few other classes can do: FILL-IN
* If the cleric falls, they can fill-in as a healer or perhaps activate an item with raise dead on it.
* If the wizard falls, their UMD allows them to take over in a pinch.
* If the tank falls, they plug the hole temporarily with defensive fighting so that the cleric can tend to the fighter.
* They are most likely stealthy enough to go on covert missions with the ranger and rogue or even fill-in for them as a scout if need be.
If that doesn't answer your question then perhaps you'll have to use clearer language to clarify your inquiry.
OR
If you are simply looking for people to agree with your seeming prejudice against bards then have fun with the Two Minute Hate.
The OP mentioned that he only has a party of four, and in a party that small it is difficult to justify sacrificing one of the four classic roles (fighter, cleric, wizard, rogue) for a bard. He does make an excellent 5th character, however, filling in any gaps that the other players have left. Bards are extremely useful characters to have. He can heal when the cleric is busy, he can confound opponents alongside the wizard, he can be a rogue's buddy by performing distractions, accompanying him in stealth, and he can fight alongside the fighter.
One thing that I think the bard does better than any other class is when it comes to knowledge and information, there is no beating the bard.
The wizard has all knowledge skills as class skills, but not gather info. The rogue has gather info, but not all of the knowledge skills.
The bard has both, AND he has bardic knowledge, that adds half his bard level to knowledge skills, and also allows him to make knowledge checks untrained. Eventually he can make any skill check untrained. ANY.
|
The folks in my group aren't big character optimizers. They take stuff they want to take because it fits their idea of what their character is all about...not necessarily because that particular feat completes some sort of value chain. They often make characters that wouldn't stand up in a fair fight against a good percentage of other players' characters - in fact they often don't stand up all that well against enemies as written in published modules.
I wish I had a group like this - LONG LIVE THE BARD!!!
Dirge of Doom + Dazzling Display = awesome sauce.
|
Although I am getting a little tired of praising his long spear build and need to come up with another powerful Pathfinder bard to show more viable options.
Bard archer (human level 1)
dex 18,chr 16, all other stats 10.feats: precise shot and point blank shot
3- rapid shot
5- deadly aim
7- arcane strike
9- many shot
you can juggle the order of feats as you like. The point is that by 10th level, you've got a 20 dex w/o any magic items. realistically, you have a 24 or so. That sets you at +15/+10 within 30feet doing d6+7. With rapid fire, you're +13/+13/+8 shooting into melee, while using music or spells as needed. You can apply your 21 +3d6 dmg (plus whatever bow enhancements you choose) wherever needed, while buffing. And you take full attack options from round one, as you just stay stationary behind the front line if possible.
Edit: switch the race to elf or half elf and prestige out into arcane archer at 9th level (bard 8, arcane archer1) for even more shooty insanity!
Barchers are great!
I'd also like to add that there is absolutely NO CLASS other than the Bard that can fill in for ANY other class if it is missing nor is there a class that can add to a specific role if one is needed. Add in the buffing and the awesome new Pathfinder Bardic Music abilities and you are looking at a fantastic character who would be welcome at any table that uses the full spectrum of the rules to enhance their game.
If you're just rolling into town, getting a mission from a dude at the bar, and running into the local deep, dark hole to kick down doors, the Bard is probably not going to shine for you.
I love bards, straight up. I'm not very happy about the changes that PFRPG brought to my minstrel class, but I understand them and I accept them. But really, I always saw bard as one of the classes that got the MOST benefit from splat books (ignoring Druid). If you had splat books available, you could play bard 1 to 20 with a series of feats that had you out-damaging every melee character in the party. Well, you *would* be if you weren't actually giving them the bonuses as well.
With a feat from Ebberon (HEartfire Song, I think), Words of Creation from the BoED, Dragonfire Inspiration from Dragon Magic, the 1st level spell Inspirational Boost, a Horn (+1 attack/damage, no bonus vs. fear), and lingering song you could spend your first standard action in combat and grant everyone that could hear you a bonus to attack and damage equal to 14 (or 11, depending on how your DM interpreted Words of Creation). You could then boost them all again, changing it to 14d6 fire damage on every hit.
Seriously, that's an empowered fireball on every single attack.
Add in Snowflake Wardance and Battle Dancer and you're sporting a bonus to all your attack rolls equal to your charisma + 2.
So yes, bards are awesome. Bards are easily cheesed, too. I took a bard with this build to a newbie DM's table (after getting his ok on each feat separately) and he nearly had a heart attack when I slapped my buff card on the table.
Needless to say, a +14 to attack and plus 14d6+14 to damage is gonna break a game in two.
Bardic Knowledge has always been a way out of seemingly unwinable situations. If your characters already know the abilities and immunities of everything they face, then I would say you are doing it wrong, or they are. If mysterious abilities are more prevalent than players will be more interested in playing a class that knows about them. If there are no mysteries in a game, then I suppose this ability would be useless.
Skills can be a big deal in combat, if you want them to be. Most games that I've run have people fighting in places they'd rather not be. A warrior who can't tumble to flank, or make a balance check, is going to be a worse warrior than any class that can if you are fighting a powerful opponent on a narrow stairway.
In short, if you are running a game where skills and knowledge are important to your characters, playing a bard is practically power gaming, if you aren't, then you are playing a game that makes bards less useful. Don't blame the bard.
Maybe this has changed in PAthfinder, but I somehow doubt that.
|
What are the Bard's conceptual niche's?
1. Minstrel/poet/singer/musician
2. Jester/comedian/actor/dancer
3. Loremaster/historian/chronicler/sage
4. Gallant/swashbuckler/hero/fencer
5. Diplomat/leader/orator/commander
These are probably the five general areas that the bard fits into when a player think of how they will roleplay them. Some of them are possible with the RAW and others are not so much. The bard should not fill all 5 of the above role playing roles at once they should have ways to differentiate themselves. For instance I don't see a jester as a loremaster and I don't see the diplomat being a musician but I see all of them being part of the conceptual niche of the bard.
Mechanically, they only fill one role well (buffer). I personally feel they should fill many mechanical builds similar to the cleric. The cleric can be designed as a melee, ranged, summoner, blaster (weak), party buffer, etc. The bard should too.
Have you taken time to build out a Ranged or Melee bard. Like the conceptual roleplay niches you give you can also break a Bard down mechanically based on feat selections into very defined builds that are distinct.
Finesse Melee Bard: focus on Dex over Cha, either build to TWF or Spring Attack. self-buffing like any good gish.
Ranged Bard: again focus on Dex over Cha, new PF line archery feats backed by more gish self-buffing, plus battle filed control magic to delay or escape melee targets.
Caster Bard: focus on Cha, feats to boost saves, possible item creation.
====
Combine these with skill breakdowns
Physical Performance Stealth: fewer social skills, physical non-auditory performs, perception and stealth skills, acrobatics, throw in disable device for mechanical trap's .
Audio Perform Social: More social skills, auditory performances, weaker combat related skills.
Knowledge: More knowledge skills, good for Stealth bard and good for Social Bard
====
In the skill break down you can almost get away with mastering 2 of the 3 lines over your career. At the very least you can gain many of the aspects of an Audio Perform Social bard with Versatile Performance at higher levels and can be tacked on to either Knowledge or Stealth.
====
My new favorite that I'm slowly working on is the "I can kill you with the orchestra pit" bard. Using Catch Off-Guard and Improved Weapon Mastery a Bard is always armed even if they play an instrument. Combat Cellist anyone?
Why a bard class? Because you can do anything...
Imo, the bard is the king and leader of every out of combat situation.
During roleplaying nobody can match him!
we have bards cuz its a role-playing game, not a maximum stat game.
Hell yea! Not to start a sentance with back in my day..... but back in my day I don't remember everyone worrying about juggling their stats into some undefeatable wall of pluses and buffs and whatever.
Yes back in my old realms campaign the bard didn't go toe to toe with every menace that threatened the party. He didn't yell, "I'll hold the hallway. You guys escape!" What he did was went into town, found the local tavern, billed himself as the best act in whatever was the next town over, and started singing faked epics embelishing our parties activities. Then he'd gush all over the party pretending he didn't realize they were in the audience. Certainly helped the group negotiate rates when they were trying to find a job and it was more exciting than listening to the fighter calculate his attack modifiers.
I don't think everyone should be worried about +this and range that.
as a dm, I think its part of my responsibility to tailor the campaign to the classes present. If the bard couldn't hold the hallway and deal out max damage to the big baddie, I'd have opponents more his size circle around from behind and harrow him while the more useful combat classes were swamped up front. I'd present role playing opportunities that were targeted at his skill set. The Gate of Blah Blah can only be opened with a certain ancient melody.....
why have a bard class? Because some people enjoy playing a bard.
|
|
Why play a bard?
Because it's fun.... Because you like the flavor of the class... Because you want to play a swashbuckling, rock-star, skill monkey with arcane spells that acts as the party's "face", charms the girls, and looks good no matter what he does (or some other character concept that the class easily supports)....
But, ultimately, because it's fun.
|
|
Brave
what do you think a bard can do that makes them special.
I think the whole point is that you don't want to be special!
Bards can identify everything so you know how to combat it.
Bards can buff the party in a number of ways.
Bards have some useful spells.There isn't anything wrong in not wanting to excel at one particular thing, imo.
Great
however buffing is incredibly boring and a wizard or bard can do that better.
Knowing your enemy isn't all its cracked up to be you still need to be able to hit it with either clever spells or simply laying damage on it.
Please tell me the useful spells?
Haste? Cures? Grease? Charm Monster
Grease is great since anything using the balance aspect of acrobatics loses their DEX bonus...
Yes, clerics and wizards both buff better...but do you want your healer and nuker buffing?
If you don't like bards, don't play them...
I LIKE bards becasue I'm more of a role-player, I don't create characters that have an 18 at the cost of a 7 in a "DUMP" stat...I generally have 1 16 and 12s or maybe a 10...I'm not a min/maxer...even if I was gon to play a barbarian, I wouldn't start with the 18 STR, I would maybe have a 14, and a 14 Dex...
I like to role-play....not ROLL-play, when I wanna do that I'll play DDM or WHFB.
Also, Who better to take Dazzling Display than a bard?
EDIT: In addition...Bards are spontaneous casters...very versatile yes?
Why have a bard class?
Why not?
The class rocks. The class has history. The class belongs in the game.
Don't like it? Don't play it.
The bard thing has always been kind of a sticky issue. I agree with ALL prior posts about the Bard being an amazing addition to the game in terms of roleplay but I think it points to a couple of GLARING deficiencies in the way we're all viewing the game...
First, Roleplay seldom comes first. The game is geared HEAVILY towards combat. 75% of all printed material is based around combat in some way shape or form, and almost all of the modules are printed around combat encounters, in which case the bard is kind of hard to validate. You know there's another class that can kind of do anything and fill all roles pretty well....Cleric. Giving bards d8's for HD was a great start, but how about something more akin to the old Blade alternate class from 2nd addition...maybe something similar to the ranger paths where you could specailize a little more towards
Second, all those amazing roleplay opportunities? Wasted in a system where having a high roll = success at everything RP related. Bardic Lore is great BUT....The knowledge roll system seems kind of broken to me as well, unless you really jack up the DC's needed on most of the rolls it cuts all initiative to EARN the knowledge.
In short: if the bard is such a GREAT roleplay class, then why does it have all the necessary skills to avoid any and all real roleplaying situations? You never need to make any honest attempts at believable lies once your bluff is high enough, and research becomes something of a joke for that matter unless you play it down as "you know where to find the information" instead of "you know this". Roleplaying well has NOTHING to do with a bluff or gather information roll, OR a specific class, but every character concept you can pull off with a bard can really be done by another class equally or better.
I'm playing devils advocate here, I'd never EVER want to get rid of the bard. I like them, they've been around forever. I think a better way to go with bard would have been to have added the Heroic Surge and Dark One's Own Luck feats from the wheel of time d20 setting to it as class features. Once a day personal re-roll from level one? That's pretty bard-y. Once a day / 4 levels I get an extra standard action? With a Bard that's not too broken and allows for more swash buckling goodness.
It sounds to me like your players have a strong bent towards specialization, in which case a "jack-of-all trades yet master of none" class is very clearly not something they are going to find useful.
The Bard fills the role of a secondary combat class, secondary caster, secondary rogue, secondary healer - in fact, basically secondary anything you can think of. Having a Bard around is basically a free +2 to any skill check if there's enough time for Aid Another, and he's a better buffmachine than anything else for decently sized parties.
The trick is finding the right group. In a four-man, there is absolutely no room for a generalist. Five-man, you're usually better off with a second fighter-type or arcane caster, but if the other characters can pull their own weight a Bard can lend good support. Beyond that ... I'd take a Bard as the sixth man any day.
|
|
As one of the first four characters of a party, I'd probably not play a bard - as Boggle has noted several times, someone else is probably better at a specific role and, for those first four seats at the table, we're still filling specific roles.
As the fifth PC, I'd play a Bard every time.
The Bard is, IMNSHO, the most flexible class available in the game. They can serve as the backup for nearly any role when the primary person in that role is busy.
Fighter tied up with a big monster and you need someone to get over and flank with the Rogue? Send the Bard.
Rogue needs someone to sneak with them into the Castle? Send the Bard. Rogue didn't have the skill points to be both the sneak and the face of the party, guess who covers that?
Cleric running low on healing magic and you're in a undead-heavy crypt(requiring that he save his channel energy)? Send the Bard.
Wizard didn't memorize Dimension Door today? Send the Bard.
And what about when they're not acting as backup for role X? Why, they're buffing the whole party, allowing the party to get on with whatever they do best - The economic law of comparative advantage comes into play here: Sure, the Cleric could be casting Bless, Aid, or other spells, but I'd rather they were healing.
That's why I'd have a Bard class.
I like bards, i really like bards.
Here is why. I can cast magic, I can fight, I can socialise, I can heal, I can provide mission critical data easily. In short, i can do everything at a pinch.
My group favours a split party approach, with a heavy focus on urban adventures and roleplaying heavy scenarios. This means that occationally, i will have to fight an encounter alone, or with one other person, because who events need to take place in two different places at the same time. Playing a bard means that i have the versitility to survive such encounters. I can fight of thugs in a back ally, keeping them away from the wizard while he finds away of the the alley. I can heal and buff the fighter while he chops up wererats. I can identify the duke of malbary from my position in the clock tower with the rogue, who then snipes him dead, i can then fasciliate our escape with magic and skills. I can keep the rightously angry cleric from making a faux pas at the wedding of the lord mayor's daughter, where we are hunting a death cultist killer.
Sure, any other class can do one of these things better, but no other class can do all of these things. A fighter on his own is dead as a door nail. A wizard on his own is a meal waiting to happen. A bard on his own...is some one who might just survive to see the dawn.
I like bards, i really like bards.
Here is why. I can cast magic, I can fight, I can socialise, I can heal, I can provide mission critical data easily. In short, i can do everything at a pinch.
My group favours a split party approach, with a heavy focus on urban adventures and roleplaying heavy scenarios. This means that occationally, i will have to fight an encounter alone, or with one other person, because who events need to take place in two different places at the same time. Playing a bard means that i have the versitility to survive such encounters. I can fight of thugs in a back ally, keeping them away from the wizard while he finds away of the the alley. I can heal and buff the fighter while he chops up wererats. I can identify the duke of malbary from my position in the clock tower with the rogue, who then snipes him dead, i can then fasciliate our escape with magic and skills. I can keep the rightously angry cleric from making a faux pas at the wedding of the lord mayor's daughter, where we are hunting a death cultist killer.
Sure, any other class can do one of these things better, but no other class can do all of these things. A fighter on his own is dead as a door nail. A wizard on his own is a meal waiting to happen. A bard on his own...is some one who might just survive to see the dawn.
Actually a rogue can do all of those things, with the right skill selection and use magic item...and he or she can do them all just as well or better then a bard. No innate spells (without the talents), but a couple of wands/scrolls/potions and BAM magic is covered. Sneak attack, tumble, etc. make the rogue far more viable in combat and a decent charisma paired with the social skills makes a thief as good of a socialite. That's not even looking at multiclassing.
I don't think there's any good rationale for the bard game mechanics wise...Again, read my prior post, I'm all for the bard, but the only real reason to play one is because you like to play one.
Where is the rogue getting all his ability points from?
The way you talk about it, it sounds as if said rogue has decent physical stats, a ridiculously high intelligence to get enough skill points to cover the social skills, knowledge skills and UMD as well as the rogue stuff, and a solid charisma as well.
A Bard can cover the same without requiring a 40-point buy.
I like bards, i really like bards.
Here is why. I can cast magic, I can fight, I can socialise, I can heal, I can provide mission critical data easily. In short, i can do everything at a pinch.
My group favours a split party approach, with a heavy focus on urban adventures and roleplaying heavy scenarios. This means that occationally, i will have to fight an encounter alone, or with one other person, because who events need to take place in two different places at the same time. Playing a bard means that i have the versitility to survive such encounters. I can fight of thugs in a back ally, keeping them away from the wizard while he finds away of the the alley. I can heal and buff the fighter while he chops up wererats. I can identify the duke of malbary from my position in the clock tower with the rogue, who then snipes him dead, i can then fasciliate our escape with magic and skills. I can keep the rightously angry cleric from making a faux pas at the wedding of the lord mayor's daughter, where we are hunting a death cultist killer.
Sure, any other class can do one of these things better, but no other class can do all of these things. A fighter on his own is dead as a door nail. A wizard on his own is a meal waiting to happen. A bard on his own...is some one who might just survive to see the dawn.
Actually a rogue can do all of those things, with the right skill selection and use magic item...and he or she can do them all just as well or better then a bard. No innate spells (without the talents), but a couple of wands/scrolls/potions and BAM magic is covered. Sneak attack, tumble, etc. make the rogue far more viable in combat and a decent charisma paired with the social skills makes a thief as good of a socialite. That's not even looking at multiclassing.
I don't think there's any good rationale for the bard game mechanics wise...Again, read my prior post, I'm all for the bard, but the only real reason to play one is because you like to play one.
So what your saying is that a rogue with great stats, who has spent several thosand GP on wands, scrolls and other equipment is as good as, or perhapes a slightly better than, an average bard who hasn't purchased any magic items, when it comes to being a generalist...I am shocked.
Where is the rogue getting all his ability points from?
The way you talk about it, it sounds as if said rogue has decent physical stats, a ridiculously high intelligence to get enough skill points to cover the social skills, knowledge skills and UMD as well as the rogue stuff, and a solid charisma as well.
A Bard can cover the same without requiring a 40-point buy.
You're also not going to get a DECENT melee bard for the same point spread. The only way to play a bard and be effective has - and will always be due to his hybrid nature - been to focus on a one or two aspects of his abilities. You can't truly BE a jack of all trades as a bard even because you need to spec. Caster/socialite? Cha/Int/Dex. Fighter/Socialite? Str or Dex/Cha/Int? I don't think the fact that the bard is lukewarm on everything necessarily makes him viable in EVERY situation.
I don't see where a rogue couldn't be just as viable.
Besides, Bard and thief were always rogue subclasses....Thief being more combat, bard being more cast. I just don't see bard being a viable combatant. Jack of all trades? You're not even OK at everything, you're poor at most things. The only thing the character excels at is dice rolling based roleplay. He can't, for a SECOND, stand in for combat for anybody other than a wizard or sorceror. He can't cast better then anyone other then a ranger or paladin. Technically, the majority of his spells are available to any rogue with the money to purchase scrolls/spells/wands and the good sense to take Use Magic Item.
and fun has NOTHING to do with anything, you could roleplay the rogue the EXACT same way.
Bard, mechanics wise, is kind of a lame duck.
When you come up with a rogue build that can buff like a bard, let me know.
To be honest in my group that has been running for other twenty five years
no one ever plays the bard.
even thou the new rules give it a bit more it just has never worked as the jack of all trades.
I think it still is way off in terms of effectiveness and what it can do.
Can anyone please tell me if you would play one why?
The Bard is the strongest class, when it comes to influencing large groups of people and making them do what he/she wants them to.
This is the class which can get the the party safely through situations where you really don't want to slaughter that crazy misguided mob that's howling for your blood.
The Bard is the best detective/con artist/negotiator there is.
But, the class has been too weak up to and including 3.5, but now it rocks.
Of course, the Bard rocks a lot less, if there is no research/negotiation/persuasion in the campaign.
GRU
|
|
Abraham reminded me of the one special thing besides bardic music, and that is the Cure X Wounds spells. They are the only arcane caster that gets access to them from the start.Thats a crazy point to be honest play a cleric they are better at healing now especially with healing surges.
So who cares again its a buff for someone else its good to have not great and certainly not a primary reason to take one.
Healing surges? You do realize that is a 4E term, right? You won't find any healing surges in 3.5 or Pathfinder. Maybe you mean channel energy. Anyway, even if many people don't play bards, enough do that it should remain a base class. A wizard and cleric can do many bard things better, but neither one can inspire courage, cast haste, cast cure spells, and be very good at social and knowledge skills. Only a bard can do all of these without multiclassing enough to be seriously hampered as a character. Inspire courage, by itself can make a huge difference in many encounters. Bards are by no means my favorite class, but there are people that do like them, and I'm glad they have the choice to play them if they want.