|
On this one I'm correct. Reread the first sentence of the Bardic Perform ability, "...including himself if desired." It's quite clear.No you are wrong. Please read the rules. If you won't I can't help you
Page 37 PF
Inspire Competence (Su): A bard of 3rd level or higher
can use his performance to help an ally succeed at a task.
That ally must be within 30 feet and be able to hear the
bard. The ally gets a +2 competence bonus on skill checks
with a particular skill as long as she continues to hear
the bard’s performance. This bonus increases by +1 for
every four levels the bard has attained beyond 3rd (+3 at
7th, +4 at 11th, +5 at 15th, and +6 at 19th). Certain uses of
this ability are infeasible, such as Stealth, and may be
disallowed at the GM’s discretion. A bard can’t inspire
competence in himself.
My bold
On this one Zark is correct.
Please read the rules. It says any one. It doesn't say only one.More importantly, the Bard can only have one performance type active on any round. See pg 35 under Bardic Performance, "Each round, the Bard can produce any one of the type of Bardic Performances that he has mastered..." (emphasis mine)
On this one Treantmonk is indeed correct, it's stated on pg. 35 of the core rules, 2nd column at the bottom.
Starting a bardic performance is a standard action, but it can be maintained each round as a free action. Changing a bardic performance from one effect to another requires the bard to stop the previous performance and start a new one as a standard action. A bardic performance cannot be disrupted, but it ends immediately if the bard is killed, paralyzed, stunned, knocked unconcious, or otherwise prevented from taking a free action to maintain it each round. A bard cannot have more than one bardic performance in effect at one time.
emphasis mine
Theres really no need to be snarky, Treantmonk isn't any more perfect than anyone else on these boards and has been exceedingly civil in all of his posts so far.
Edit: Added paragraph from core rules
Treantmonk isn't any more perfect than anyone else on these boards...
Absolutely true.
Part of the reason for doing these Guides to to weed out my own mistakes as well as get the opinions of others.
|
I've been reading through your book and noticed that in the attribute section of your melee bard it has a racial +2 listed for both strength and dexterity. Was this intentional? If so is it supposed to signify the option of choosing between the two?
Yeah, I noticed that too, but he paid the full 3 pts for the 13 Dex, but only paid 5 for the 16 Str, so I'm guessing it's a mistake left over and it's supposed to just be +2 after Str.
It was a remnant of the TWF Bard I couldn't get to work (I tried - the idea of mixing Arcane Strike with TWF was very appealing, but the build just wouldn't work). Fixed.
For Melee Bards I would strongly recommend boosting STR with your racial bonus. Although you can use Weapon Finesse with Dex, you can't get your damage where it needs to be.
The Str based melee Bard can move in and deliver a solid hit, using Str for both to hit and damage.
|
|
After reading the majority of your guide (skipped spell levels 3 on up, its late and I need to sleep soon), I must say I think it will be quite useful to anyone planning on running a bard. Theres still a few grammatical and syntax errors wandering around in there but other than that I can't offer any additional advice to add.
Any idea which class you'll be writing a guide for next?
|
|
Treant Monk, I want to say welcome to the board. Just so you know, there is a guy who was answering questions on the board for Paizo in a limited official capacity. The forum Handle was Nethys, and the reasoning was rather obvious.
I asked him about the perform checks and got a rather simplistic answer.
"When required to make a skill check that versatile performance allows you to substitute, make a perform Y check with all modifiers to that check, in the place of the original skill check."
Since Armor Check penalty doesn't apply to charisma based checks, it effectively allows you to take the uses for those skills and put them squarely under the perform checks. That means you can do acrobatics all day using perform dance.
Also I'm surprised it wasn't brought up before...
In the Versatile Performance bard class feature, add “Sing (Bluff, Sense Motive)” to the list of Perform types in the second paragraph.
Sing: Bluff and Diplomacy: Both strong skills and no instrument required, a good first choice
I thought it would be important to point this out as it was wrong. With the correct information Sing becomes an excellent first choice for versatile performance, as a bluff check can be almost as good as diplomacy that early in the game. If you actually put skill points in diplomacy, you can then jump to Dance as your second type, and your bard is covered for a visual and audible performance type, while being able to keep up with the DCs for tumbling about the battlefield.
I think you got the right ideas, I just need to take time to go through it and find the other errors if I were inclined to do so. From what I read this isn't the guide to becoming a batman wizard, so much as the guide to playing a bard.
And don't mind Zark, he's snarky, and he realizes at times he's just trolling. He's just got a strong sense of personal opinion, and tends to be over the top with how he replies to people who argue his points of views.
Or should I remind Zark about his bards are useless thread where he even admitted that he was saying that without actually saying it.
|
|
Treant Monk, I want to say welcome to the board. Just so you know, there is a guy who was answering questions on the board for Paizo in a limited official capacity. The forum Handle was Nethys, and the reasoning was rather obvious.
[tangent] Wow, I had no idea he was official! I'm pretty sure I disagreed with his proclamations fairly unkindly, a time or two. Awkward... [/tangent]
After reading the majority of your guide (skipped spell levels 3 on up, its late and I need to sleep soon), I must say I think it will be quite useful to anyone planning on running a bard. Theres still a few grammatical and syntax errors wandering around in there but other than that I can't offer any additional advice to add.
Any idea which class you'll be writing a guide for next?
Thanks. Yes, I have no editor to run this through (except you guys). If grammatical errors are pointed out, I'll fix them.
As for my next guide, I'll probably be converting my Wizards guide for 3.5 to fit Pathfinder core rules. It will be a big job, since of course the spell lists for Wizards is quite long.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Treant Monk, I want to say welcome to the board. Just so you know, there is a guy who was answering questions on the board for Paizo in a limited official capacity. The forum Handle was Nethys, and the reasoning was rather obvious.[tangent] Wow, I had no idea he was official! I'm pretty sure I disagreed with his proclamations fairly unkindly, a time or two. Awkward... [/tangent]
[tangent continued]Nothing on his profile says that he is. No contributor tag or anything.[/tangent continued]
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Treant Monk, I want to say welcome to the board. Just so you know, there is a guy who was answering questions on the board for Paizo in a limited official capacity. The forum Handle was Nethys, and the reasoning was rather obvious.
Define "limited official capacity". Right now, I think some rules are vague, which makes it harder for players since they continually have to ask GM's for rulings on this or that (or have the rug pulled from under them during gameplay...)
If there is someone who can be pointed out as "official" answering these questions, it's something players can use as backup. However, it needs to be more than "There's a poster at the Paizo site who says..."
Also - as for his answer regarding Versatile Performance. If I play the Piano, and I have a masterwork piano (+2 to skill checks), do I get that bonus when using Versatile Performance to cover diplomacy? By his post, the answer would be yes. If the answer is yes, explain the in-game logistics...
Evil Guard: "You can't go through the gate!"
Bard: *Rolls in piano*
Evil Guard: "What are you doing!?"
Bard: Tinkles away on piano
Evil Guard: "Hmmmm...alright, I'm convinced - you can go through."
In the Versatile Performance bard class feature, add “Sing (Bluff, Sense Motive)” to the list of Perform types in the second paragraph.
There's errata out already? OK, thanks for the headsup, I'll take a look and make any necessary changes.
I thought it would be important to point this out as it was wrong. With the correct information Sing becomes an excellent first choice for versatile performance, as a bluff check can be almost as good as diplomacy that early in the game. If you actually put skill points in diplomacy, you can then jump to Dance as your second type, and your bard is covered for a visual and audible performance type, while being able to keep up with the DCs for tumbling about the battlefield.
I agree. I think either Sing (errated) or Oratory have to be the strongest first choices (based on whether you want visual/audio and preference for Bluff/Diplomacy), and Dance is pretty much my universal favorite second choice.
I read this isn't the guide to becoming a batman wizard, so much as the guide to playing a bard.
I would hope not, or I've named it badly :P
Besides, I'm the "God" wizard guy, not the "Batman" wizard guy. Though I did enjoy the being batman guide.
And don't mind Zark, he's snarky, and he realizes at times he's just trolling. He's just got a strong sense of personal opinion, and tends to be over the top with how he replies to...
Good to know, I was worried I had said something to offend him without realizing it.
|
|
As for my next guide, I'll probably be converting my Wizards guide for 3.5 to fit Pathfinder core rules. It will be a big job, since of course the spell lists for Wizards is quite long.
Ooh, I'm very interested in hearing your thoughts on the various Specialist abilities (of which I tend to think some are strictly better than others), or the nature of the Arcane Bond.
Great stuff, and I'm stoked to see our first Pathfinder guide! And for Bards, of all things. What a crazy world we live in!
On this one Treantmonk is indeed correct, it's stated on pg. 35 of the core rules, 2nd column at the bottom.
More importantly, the Bard can only have one performance type active on any round. See pg 35 under Bardic Performance, "Each round, the Bard can produce any one of the type of Bardic Performances that he has mastered..." (emphasis mine)Please read the rules. It says any one. It doesn't say only one.
Starting a bardic performance is a standard action, but it can be maintained each round as a free action. Changing a bardic performance from one effect to another requires the bard to stop the previous performance and start a new one as a standard action. A bardic performance cannot be disrupted, but it ends immediately if the bard is killed, paralyzed, stunned, knocked unconcious, or otherwise prevented from taking a free action to maintain it each round. A bard cannot have more than one bardic performance in effect at one time.
emphasis mine
First. The rules does not say "the Bard can only have one performance type active on any round" the rules says: "A bard cannot have more than one bardic performance in effect at one time"
The bard ends the first performance as a free action and starts a new on as a swift action. Since he has ended the first performance before the second one he has only "one bardic performance in effect at one time".
1) use Dirge of Doom as a move action
2) cast spell as a standard action
3) end Dirge of Doom as a free action
4) start Inspire Courage as a swift action.
So he did not use Dirge of Doom when he used Inspire Courage and he did not use Inspire Courage when he used Dirge of Doom.
The line: "A bard cannot have more than one bardic performance in effect at one time" is very important. It makes sure you can't start one kind of performance first, maintain it as a free action and then start a new one and maintain that one too as a free action.
You can't activated inspire courage and maintain it as a free action and activate Inspire greatness and maintain that one too as a free action.
But the rules don't say you can't use two performances in the same round. The trick is to end the first one before you start the second one.
So here is some answers and information to you and to Treantmonk.
Pathfinder page 36:
"At 7th level, a bard can start a bardic performance as a
move action instead of a standard action. At 13th level, a
bard can start a bardic performance as a swift action."
So at higher levels the bard get more skilled using/starting a performance At lower levels starting a bardic performance is a standard action. But he does it so often and gain more and more control so at level 7 he can activate it faster. He can now start it as a move action. At level 13 he is now so experienced he can "start a bardic performance as a swift action".
The rules don't say: at level 7 starting a bardic performance is a move action.
The rules says: "At 7th level, a bard can start a bardic performance as a move action instead of a standard action" (my bold)
So look at Mr Bard.
A level 12 Bard get's himslef a lesser Metamagic Quicken rod.
1) Start Dirge of Doom as a move action
2) cast Quicken slow (or any level 1 - 3 spell).
3) Hit monster on the head with a stick, or cast spell (as a standard action) or shoot monster with his.
He does this every day until he hit level 13. Are you and Treantmonk telling me he can't do it anymore at level 13 because at level 13 he HAS TO start a bardic performance as swift action?
So the bard could to it from level 7 to 12 but not at level 13 and above? I can't see the point in punishing the bard just because he gets more skilled, experienced, call it what you like.
The way I read the rules is that the bard get better and better at what he does. At level 13 he can chose to start it as a move action or as a swift action.
Theres really no need to be snarky,...
True.
Zark: Obviously you've been personally offended by something I've posted
Creating a guide and don't knowing the rules got me going, but we are only human.
Replying with a knee-jerk reaction does tend to get me upset. Regadless I agree snark remarks are not good.[...] Right now, I think some rules are vague, which makes it harder for players since they continually have to ask GM's for rulings on this or that (or have the rug pulled from under them during gameplay...)
There is a lot of vague rules or sloppy written rules in both the Bestiary and the Patfhinder RPG. I think they will publish a FAQ.
Vague rules or sloppy written rules, they are only humans and they needed to save space.That's why I think you are wrong when you say: "rules are structured in such a way as to tell you what you can do--not what you can't".
If they had to tell us everything that can be done the book would have been twice the size.
The rules doesn't say half-orks have Light Adaptation, but the do.
Another example is Vital Strike. Very vague rules and Jason has explained the rules in maybe three or four different threads.
If there is someone who can be pointed out as "official" answering these questions, it's something players can use as backup. However, it needs to be more than "There's a poster at the Paizo site who says..."
If I find anything I will add a link.
I will post some questions about Versatile Performance and pardic music. Let's hope they give us a reply.
Also - as for his answer regarding Versatile Performance. If I play the Piano, and I have a masterwork piano (+2 to skill checks), do I get that bonus when using Versatile Performance to cover diplomacy? By his post, the answer would be yes. If the answer is yes, explain the in-game logistics...Evil Guard: "You can't go through the gate!"
Bard: *Rolls in piano*
Evil Guard: "What are you doing!?"
Bard: Tinkles away on piano
Evil Guard: "Hmmmm...alright, I'm convinced - you can go through."
LOL.
As for Dazzling Display vs. Dirge of Doom
Dazzling Display (feat)
Activate: a full-round action.
Effect: shaken if you beat a DC
Save or DC: Yes you have the beat the targets DC.
Dirge of Doom (Su):
Activate: Standard avtion or move action on swift action
Effect: shaken
Save or DC: No.
....and Dirge of doom is for frea, Dazzling Display isn't. You have to spend a feat.
If a roll of 11 saves, you have a 50% chance to save. If a roll of 13 saves, you have a 40% chance to save. The difference between 40 and 50 is 10.That 10% is a 20% reduction in chance to save, but it is a difference of 10 in the % chance to save. That is what I meant.
I don't understand you, but I understand I misread you.
My point was Dirge of Doom is very good to use is some situations. For example just before you are about to aim a spell that need a save.You are not going to target a cleric with great will saves with a spell that need a will save.
If you got some ogres that have +3 will save.
You use DoD. 3-2=1.
You reduce their save bonus by 66,6 %. That's very nice. And then you cast glitterdust.
It is very irritating they get 2 saves the first round if you act before them, but that's the rules.
[stuff on perform]
Nor does it say "one or more", which it should, if that were the case. It says you can do one. If you can do two, it needs to say so.
First: it does not say "you can do one" it says any one.
Second: You make it sound like a fact it need to says you can do two. It isn't a fact. It only your opinion, which you are entitled to have.I will post a question to Jason when I got time, lets hope for a reply. Otherwise it's GM's call.
Can you just bold the part that says you get to take 2 swift actions
I didn't say you can. Se my reply to Tilquinith.
Magic items that add enhancement bonuses are treated as "temporary" stat bonuses (see description of Headband of Alluring Charisma).Temporary Charisma Stat Bonuses (as per pg 555) add to: Charisma based skill checks, spell DC's based on Cha, and the DC to resist your chanelled energy.
It will not give your Cha 14 Bard with a +2 headband the ability to cast 6th level spells.
That's why you need an "actual" 16 Charisma with any Bard build by the time 6th level spells become available.
I hope this doesn't screw up any current Bard you have.
Edit: I'm wrong on this last one. I'm checking on the Rules Questions board for the implications of enhancement bonuses being treated as raising the stat for all purposes...
I hope this doesn't screw up any current Bard you have ;-)
Seriously, now you know the headband works you might want to change your guide.The archer bard and the melee bard you have were created from your understanding that "Magic items that add enhancement bonuses are treated as "temporary" stat bonuses". Now you know they don't.
Both bards might just as well start with 13 charsima (or 12 or 14).
As for my next guide, I'll probably be converting my Wizards guide for 3.5 to fit Pathfinder core rules. It will be a big job, since of course the spell lists for Wizards is quite long.
Good news, good news!
As for the continuing rules jousting, I can only hope that a Paizo rules junkie reads this [and many, many other] threads and offers some definitive rulings.
We should all note however that the Paizo staff are probably feverishly beavering away with exciting new projects and will never be able to keep up with spiralling threads like this one.
It really has, on the whole, been a fascinating look at one of the most misunderstood classes ever. I've really learned a lot from this thread, although I'm still wishing for those official rulings...
Anybody else have their posts eaten? Gak!
stuart haffenden/Set: Thanks! After some thought I'm considering doing a Ranger Guide first. I'm admittedly a bit nervous how a Guide for Wizards called "Being a God" is going to be taken on these boards...besides, I have some ideas for Rangers. ;)
I'll be at home most of this week (My wife and I are working 1/2 days this week, as my daughter either has Flu or H1N1 and needs to stay home this week), so I'll be looking for "keep busy" projects...
Zark: Thanks, I'm feeling much less defensive after these posts.
I had this point by point reply, that got eaten by the boards, so here's the quick version:
1) I agree with 13th lvl Bards having the option to use move or standard actions to start a performance. I think I misread your original post on the matter, and thought you wanted to do two swift actions.
2) The words about what the rules say weren't mine, they were Caelic's, he's the author of the 10 commandments of practical optimization, which recommends conservative views on rule ambiguities when optimizing.
3) I agree that the rules may mean, "one at a time", but they may also mean "one per round", until we get that clarified, I need to take the more conservative view. Of course players should check with their DM's. I think your strategy is excellent, but I'm not 100% sure it's legal.
4) The strategy with the quicken rod is also good, and in my opinion, clearly legal. I will make a notation in the Guide (and give you credit) if you give permission to do so.
5) LOL - yes, my Bard DID get screwed up! (Not really, a 14 CHA is still good to have). Changes will be made in the Guide to reflect the option of starting with 12 or the cost efficient 13 in CHA.
I think that's pretty much it for now.
The changes in the Guide will be made later tonight (after my daughter goes to bed.)
Treantmonk:
Hah! The messageboard bug got a reply I had for your post regarding the bad rolling a piano upto the gates, too. If it's an important or lengthy reply, it's worth copying it to the clipboard or composing it in Word and importing it in wholesale via the clipboard, before trying to post it....I am likely to be away for several days whilst I take a break after some recent stresses. Have fun on here, in the meantime!
Hopefully somewhere with a beach, drinks, and thong bikinis.
If not, just close your eyes and pretend [and turn off your phone!]...
Have a good time!
Zark: Thanks, I'm feeling much less defensive after these posts.
Nice :-)
1) I agree with 13th lvl Bards having the option to use move or standard actions to start a performance. I think I misread your original post on the matter, and thought you wanted to do two swift actions.
I'm glad you unerstand me now. (I didn't wanted to make two swift actions.)
2) The words about what the rules say weren't mine, they were Caelic's, he's the author of the 10 commandments of practical optimization, which recommends conservative views on rule ambiguities when optimizing.
OK. But I don't agree with Caelic's. The rules are vague from time to time and sometime you just got to use common sence or your DM/GM. Paizo will add a FAQ, but it will take som time.
3) I agree that the rules may mean, "one at a time", but they may also mean "one per round", until we get that clarified, I need to take the more conservative view. Of course players should check with their DM's. I think your strategy is excellent, but I'm not 100% sure it's legal.
I've posten some questions. My english is not so good, but I hope they understand me. The thread can be found here. Perhaps you can add some questions or clearify mine to make it clear.
4) The strategy with the quicken rod is also good, and in my opinion, clearly legal. I will make a notation in the Guide (and give you credit) if you give permission to do so.
Yes, sure. Go ahead
5) LOL - yes, my Bard DID get screwed up! (Not really, a 14 CHA is still good to have). Changes will be made in the Guide to reflect the option of starting with 12 or the cost efficient 13 in CHA.
I agree 14 charsima is good to have. They are bards, not fighters or rangers. And having a level 2 bonus spell at level 4 is nice. Also at level 7 you can probably only aford a headband +2 and you want 16 char to get a bonus level 3 spell. Stuff like haste and good hope or are really nice
I'm off to bed. See you.
Treantmonk: Just thought I'd comment on your handbook:
As I had said before, Char Op isn't my cup of tea, but I do like the idea of handbooks. This one presented here is what I had expected after reading your initial thread on the idea of creating a Char Op forum. I do like it and it is a very interesting read. I'd point my players, especially new ones, toward your handbook as a starting point in character creation and where players are at a loss for inspiration.
One small contribution:
I'd consider mentioning the use of bardic music as an ability that must be used judiciously at the most opportune moment, even at low levels. With the new rounds per day mechanic , it may be useful to add mention of when to use this ability to best effect. Although it may not be the best opening standard action on the 1st round of a combat, (referencing the posts between you and Zurai), oftentimes it will be, or will be a good move in later rounds. It would be a featured ability when the bard has several allies to benefit, for instance.
|
|
Well, I very much enjoyed your guide and look forward to seeing what you do for the Wizard. It was pretty informative and useful, and I for one can definitely appreciate that you didn't delve into any of the munchkinism that is normally associated with the word "optimization" by myself and others.
Keep it up with the same tone and I think you'll be able to, at the very least, make this forum a friendlier place for your brand of optimization.
|
|
Bonjour Treantmonk !
You seem to be well known in the D&D world. For me I'll remember you with this great guide. and I REALLY want to thank you a 1000 times for this. "MERCI !"
I sent this guide to my players for a help on how to optimize their bards. We are far from min/maxers.
Although I have to say my disbelief of the apparent lack of usefulness of Inspire Courage which was up to now one of the most important features of the bard.
I am not saying it's bad, you have been hitting hard one of the canons on bards giving support only....
Your point of View is interesting : bards can be far more than buffers, they will actually MAKE things and hit hard.
Once again thanks a lot
Au revoir !
When you rate rage that poorly, did you consider that it can be used as opponent's casters debuff, will or enter rage and can cast (specially against arcanists), wich happens to give a rerks to your meeles if you want?
My DM become became quite frusteted when I used it in my animal companion, the the fighter and the enemy party's wizard.
Humbly,
Yawar
OK. But I don't agree with Caelic's. The rules are vague from time to time and sometime you just got to use common sence or your DM/GM. Paizo will add a FAQ, but it will take som time.
2) The words about what the rules say weren't mine, they were Caelic's, he's the author of the 10 commandments of practical optimization, which recommends conservative views on rule ambiguities when optimizing.
If there are vague rules then it's even more important for a guide like this to be conservative. It's better for a guide to show tactics which will be usable at every table than to have tactics which only work if the GM feels a certain way about the rules.
Maybe an appendix could be included which includes rules which can be read multiple ways. A sort of no holds barred build.
Anybody else have their posts eaten? Gak!
I had this point by point reply, that got eaten by the boards, so here's the quick version:
I always "copy" my replies into Word if they are long-ish!
Too many eaten posts in the past!
For the record, "eaten" posts are caused by one of two things:
First, these boards aren't incredibly stable. At times, they'll stutter and close down for a few minutes then reboot. If you're trying to post during one of those times, your post will get devoured.
Second, if you take longer than about 15 minutes between page loads in the forum while posting (ie, if you're not browsing the forum while posting or constantly hitting Preview on your post), the forum decides you're taking too long and eats your post when you finally post it.
The solution to both is to click the text box of the post and control-A, control-C (select all, copy) before you hit the Post or Preview buttons. Alternately, write your posts in a text editor then copy and paste them.
Zark: I've clicked the link and added a response on the rules questions thread. Hopefully there is some kind of official response at some point. (Though from James reply earlier in the thread, it may not happen soon)
Guide changes have been made in the areas discussed. Check them out and let me know if I messed anything up.
Anthony Valente: Thanks, and yes, I will put more emphasis on that in the Guide. Changes should be there in the next few minutes. It was something I was definitely thinking when I wrote it, but it obviously didn't make the actual page. Glad to have a convert! (you optimizing Min/Maxer you...)
w0nkothesane: Thanks for your support, glad to have another convert. I would advise caution with the term "munchkin", which is considered offensive by some. Usually when that term would apply, the term "Power-gamer" will also apply, and is usually considered less offensive. Personally, I don't really care, but I'm anti-P.C. most of the time anyways.
Farabor: For each point:
1) Agreed. You can make a better dedicated archer than the Bard Archer with a Fighter build, but not much better, and the Bard is likely better overall. As you mention, the point is to be able to cover that role sufficiently, and add all kinds of flexibility. Versatility is a kind of power, because you can add support when others might not be able to.
2) I agree with your common sense ruling, though often rules don't always follow common sense - especially versatile performance. (You aren't diplomatic at all, then, the next day, you are a master becuase suddenly your singing covers the skill?). However, I'm hoping for some official ruling, either way, just so we can settle it.
3) I have changed my wording towards Inspire Courage in the Guide (just in case anyone thinks I've been unmoved by the discussion). In the end, I think it's a decent ability, though more useful once you don't have to give up standard actions to activate it. When you have to use a standard action, the use will be largely based on the party makeup and the circumstances.
4) Yes, there are no absolute tactics in Pathfinder. You must evaluate your circumstance and determine your best course of action based on that. I totally agree with you. Tactical advice in the Guide is intended to be "general".
5) Yes, +1 damage is significant at low levels.
Chewbacca: RWAAAAAAAR!
Sorry, it's just wrong to see your screen handle and then see you say, "Merci"!
Thanks for your support. Much appreciated. I hope your players find the guide useful. They can post here if they have any questions or comments.
Crosswind: Thanks! Some of that criticism was deserved, and some helped me improve the guide, so shutting down communication is never good when it can be avoided.
Dennis da ogre: Great screen name by the way, and yes, I couldn't have said it better myself. I don't think interpreting the rule in question either way breaks the game at all, but I think a lot of DM's will judge it the other way as well. Zark and I are hoping for an official ruling on the matter...either way.
Zurai: Thanks for the tip...I'll make sure to copy text for any longer post (including this one) ;)
One more suggestion about lost posts (my only real gripe about this board is lost posts). There is a firefox plugin called Lazarus which will rescue lost posts. It has saved me tons of frustration on this board. Unfortunately, it's only of Firefox so if you don't use FF you are SOL.
FWIW since we're spreading the love Treantmonk is a great alias also.
One more suggestion about lost posts (my only real gripe about this board is lost posts). There is a firefox plugin called Lazarus which will rescue lost posts. It has saved me tons of frustration on this board. Unfortunately, it's only of Firefox so if you don't use FF you are SOL.
FWIW since we're spreading the love Treantmonk is a great alias also.
LOL, it was an inside joke with a friend. When 3.0 first came out, we had a good laugh at some options when we discovered you could now give creatures "class levels". Our favorite was to give a Treant Monk levels and have it do flying kicks.
Now it's a staple in our group, any Monks WILL get polymorphed into Treants regularly, and if any Treants are encountered, we discuss how many levels in Monk we think they are likely to have.
LOL, it was an inside joke with a friend. When 3.0 first came out, we had a good laugh at some options when we discovered you could now give creatures "class levels". Our favorite was to give a Treant Monk levels and have it do flying kicks.
Now it's a staple in our group, any Monks WILL get polymorphed into Treants regularly, and if any Treants are encountered, we discuss how many levels in Monk we think they are likely to have.
That's pretty cool. My name isn't nearly as flavorful. I mountain bike and adopted the name "Ogre" for my cycling web site. It was far less common in the cycling community than around here. Heck I even have a custom paint job and sticker set on my bike to go with the Ogre theme. Now half the people I know call me Ogre.
Great post. I agree with virtually everything said here, and I've played bards quite a bit.
In fact, oddly enough, the only thing I can find to disagree with is your assessment of the lowly ventriloquism spell.
The key issue with this spell is that it throws your voice to a different location within range. This "vocal throwing" can also throw verbal components of spells and vocal bardic music. In combination with invisibility, you can produce bardic music effects and cast spells while preventing your enemies from ever knowing your true location. Even if the enemies save and recognize the effect as illusory, they still hear your voice come from the location you've selected. I'll be the first to admit that this takes some effort to setup, but it can be an effective way to avoid detection by sound.
Also, you can cast verbal components from inside a silence field; simply throw your verbal components outside the silence area. A DM should probably rule you as being deafened when casting spells in this manner (since you're effectively deaf in a field of silence), but a 20% chance of failure is better than a 100% chance.
Just a couple of possible uses, but I'm sure there are more. . .
Great post. I agree with virtually everything said here, and I've played bards quite a bit.
In fact, oddly enough, the only thing I can find to disagree with is your assessment of the lowly ventriloquism spell.
The key issue with this spell is that it throws your voice to a different location within range. This "vocal throwing" can also throw verbal components of spells and vocal bardic music. In combination with invisibility, you can produce bardic music effects and cast spells while preventing your enemies from ever knowing your true location. Even if the enemies save and recognize the effect as illusory, they still hear your voice come from the location you've selected. I'll be the first to admit that this takes some effort to setup, but it can be an effective way to avoid detection by sound.
Also, you can cast verbal components from inside a silence field; simply throw your verbal components outside the silence area. A DM should probably rule you as being deafened when casting spells in this manner (since you're effectively deaf in a field of silence), but a 20% chance of failure is better than a 100% chance.
Just a couple of possible uses, but I'm sure there are more. . .
For verbal components when invisible, yes that would work (assuming that a save to "disbelieve" does not allow you to know where the voice originated - and it doesn't seem to according to the description).
However, I would point out that using Ghost Sound to create the sound of 4-40 Humans (depending on level) all shouting those same verbal components in other various locations around the room might also make it hard to pinpoint where you are?
My main issue with ventriloquism isn't that I can't think of any good uses for it, but since I have unlimited uses of Ghost Sound, my real issue is I can't think of many good uses that I can't at least acceptably duplicate with Ghost Sound.
As for dealing with a Silence Field - that is an interesting idea, but how are you casting ventriloquism when silenced? The duration isn't so good you can have it up all the time, and usually when you get silenced, you don't know exactly when it's coming...
If you can give me a few good uses of ventriloquism which aren't effectively replaced by uses of ghost sound, and should be helpful and work in actual gameplay, I'll reconsider my rating. (In other words, convince me my rating - based on ventriloquism being largely redundant with Ghost Sound, is wrong)
My main issue with ventriloquism isn't that I can't think of any good uses for it, but since I have unlimited uses of Ghost Sound, my real issue is I can't think of many good uses that I can't at least acceptably duplicate with Ghost Sound.
The main problem with ghost sound is that you can't replicate speech with it. Since ghost sound is a figment, it would have to say explicitly in the description that you can use intelligible speech with it.
A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can.
I believe Persistent Image is the second figment spell (a 5th level spell) that lets you make intelligible speech after ventriloquism. . . I know silent/minor/major image don't -- illusory wall obviously doesn't.
My main issue with ventriloquism isn't that I can't think of any good uses for it, but since I have unlimited uses of Ghost Sound, my real issue is I can't think of many good uses that I can't at least acceptably duplicate with Ghost Sound.The main problem with ghost sound is that you can't replicate speech with it. Since ghost sound is a figment, it would have to say explicitly in the description that you can use intelligible speech with it.
It says it produces the noise of 4 normal humans per caster level...
"talking, singing, shouting, walking, marching, or running sounds can be created."
However, I agree there is a difference between "talking sounds" and actual decipherable speech.
However, for the purpose of the circumstance given - I think it would still fit the same purpose (keep the verbal components of a spell from giving away the position of an invisible Bard) without using up a valuable casting...basically, in this situation, itellegible speech isn't required.
We agree on what it does, and what the difference between ventriloquism and ghost sound is, now can you convince me how ventriloquism is a good choice for my Bard in actual gameplay?
We agree on what it does, and what the difference between ventriloquism and ghost sound is, now can you convince me how ventriloquism is a good choice for my Bard in actual gameplay?
Ahh, there's the rub (-;
It's not a top-tier spell, that's for sure. It's not a good pick in the early levels. Maybe after levels render a spell useless -- perhaps as a trade-out for sleep/charm person/hideous laughter -- would this spell be solid.
I'd give it at least 2 stars (:
Lordy, got contentious there.
Anyway, I do want to take issue with the deprecation of Inspire Courage - buffs in general are very useful. There are various factors that affect this...
1. If you have a large party. Inspire Courage on you and one other guy isn't so neat, but on a large party with followers, summons, etc. it's quite a force multiplier.
2. If you're out of spells. As a low level bard, you eventually drop your two Greases and it's time for something else.
3. If you are facing multiple opponents. Grease is great for party on "one big opponent." It is awful if you're fighting a dozen goblins.
4. If you're fighting people very hard to hit. That 5% bump has to be interpreted relatively too. If you've got an attack bonus of +2 but the bad guy is AC 22, then a +1 bonus doubles your expected damage output against them.
Anyway, buffs in general - Inspire Courage, Bless, etc. are very effective in a number of scenarios.
We agree on what it does, and what the difference between ventriloquism and ghost sound is, now can you convince me how ventriloquism is a good choice for my Bard in actual gameplay?Ahh, there's the rub (-;
It's not a top-tier spell, that's for sure. It's not a good pick in the early levels. Maybe after levels render a spell useless -- perhaps as a trade-out for sleep/charm person/hideous laughter -- would this spell be solid.
I'd give it at least 2 stars (:
Would you? That means you can think of some circumstances where you would be glad your Bard had ventriloquism instead of lowly ghost sound.
Tell us about those circumstances.
If you can't (because you can't think of any), then why 2 stars?
Remember, the star rating isn't a power rating, it's a recommendation rating. If you are going to give ventriloquism a moderate rating, then why? What use are you recommending it for?
I expect you could name any spell that I rated from 2 to 4 and I could name at least a couple possible circumstances where you would be glad that your Bard selected that spell.
I can't in good conscience give ventriloquism such a rating when between the two of us we can't come up with a couple somewhat likely circumstances where it will perform significantly differently than a cantrip...
I have only 1 thing to say concerning this guide, and it's got nothing to do with TM himself...
I miss the smileys, especially the turkey :(
I miss the maniacal laughter smiley most. :(
And for the record - those smileys are gone at WOTC as well since they changed the boards...
Great post Crosswind...
1.) I think you over-rate half-elves, or under-rate humans....
I'm not sure I understand, I've already rated Humans better than half-elves (I recommend human for all 3 builds, recommend half-elf for only 2)
Is it unclear because my recommended races are in no particular order? Is that something I need to make more clear?
As for +1 skill point vs. Low Light Vision and +2 perception, I don't think it's a runaway by any means...depends on your priorities.
For most people, if deciding between the two, I would recommend trying the half-elf build, then decide what their extra skill would be if they were human, and decide whether it would be worth giving up the half-elven bonuses for.
2.) Your controller build doesn't have 13 int. It can't take combat expertise, or improved trip. Which brings me to my main problem with the idea of being a maneuver specialist: MAD. You're dumping points in strength and intelligence for very little gain.
Good call. Fixed.
As for your point, I concede that MAD really hurts, especially with the Controller Bard build.
I should make the admission that the Controller Bard build is very much a brainstorm on my part. Archery and Melee Bards, we've all seen variations of those, but the Controller Bard was a personal pet project where I thought, "This could work pretty well".
I think I'll add a warning in the build description that I haven't actually tested the build...in fact, I just did.
But, really, do you need to do anything other than Net/Dazzling/Obvious feats? As a bard, you're going to want Skill Focus, Improved Init and Leadership by level 10 anyways.
I think it's pretty nice to have options. Dazzling display is nice, and Net works on pretty much everything, but I still think tripping is a good standby. It's certainly not a "must" for the build, nor was it ever intended as a "must", but it is an option - and situationally, can be better than Net or Dazzling Display. Basically you can have your option of the status to inflict non-magically: Entangled, Shaken or Prone.
As for Skill Focus, Improved Init and Leadership, well, everyone wants leadership (or they should if they don't now). However, DM's tend to restrict this feat. Pathfinder has put it in the core book with the rest of the feats, which seems like a strange idea to me, but I'm reasonably certain few DM's are going to allow a full party of Leaders.
Improved Intiative is great for any character, I wouldn't call it a "must have" though, it's a really nice to have.
Skill Focus with a Bard is definitely a good deal because you really get "3 for 1". I'm not sure I know what level you "need" it by, or whether you "need" it at all, but I certainly agree it's good for any Bard to have - earlier the better.
3.) Dazzling Display is a full round action - not yet reflected in the guide (says Standard).
Where does it say that? Can't find it. (The Dazzling display entry itself just says it can last multiple rounds if you roll well.)
4.) Spells
a.) Charm Person - This isn't a 3-star spell. It's only usable on humanoids, and things get a +5 bonus against it if you use it on them in combat. Relatively useless out of combat as well, as you could use diplomacy to achieve similar/better effects with way less risk.
b.) Sleep deserves 3 stars for how kickass it is. You're going to do a spell-swap at 5. It should be sleep.
c.) Blur is far too circumstanstial to be a 3-star spell - its only utility is in negating sneak attack.
d.) Hold Person is at least a 3-star spell. If you do it right, there will be no second save - the target will be CdG'd before it gets its turn. It's the first true save-or-die, and, as a plus, it targets will.
e.) Silence is a 4 star spell, and arguably the best spell at 2nd level. Spellcasters in 3.x are terrifying. Putting this on a grappling monk, a fighter in close quarters, or a summoned creature that you have instructed to follow the wizard around basically just destroys spellcasters, and doesn't even allow a save. If you don't want to use the follow-around tactic, you can battlefield control with it, forcing spellcasters to move to part of the terrain.
f.) Suggestion is a 4-star spell. You can only use bardic music suggestion after fascination (so the out-of-combat target gets 2 saves. Great, why didn't I use diplomacy again?). Suggestion, if you use it right, is a save-or-screwed spell which the enemy takes a penalty on saves with. And it's useful both in and out of combat. And you actually get this before a wizard or a sorceror does (4th level to a wizard's 5th), thanks to early entry. And it's -extremely flexible-. Why do you hate on Suggestion!?! =D
g.) Glibness is 3-stars, at least. It's not Haste, but it's long-duration and auto-succeeds your bluff. This is incredibly useful for bards.
h.) Major Image - 2 stars. Silent Image is amazing because you have to study it carefully (not something somebody is going to do in combat), and because you can add detail with Ghost Sound. Adding taste/smell/touch isn't that useful, because using those senses generally involves interacting carefully with things, thus getting a save. Bard save DCs suck. =)
i.) Phantom Steed - 3 stars, at best. Situationally useful. At the level you get it, your party wizard can almost teleport you, your party cleric can almost wind-walk you...I'm not enamored of this spell. I'd probably put it at 2 stars, left to myself.
j.) Sculpt Sound - 3 stars. It's selective, it can work as a party buff (make no noise), disguise (have people talk different languages that you know), mass spellcaster-killer. It isn't four stars, but its flexibility makes it a great spell for a spontaneous caster. You're not taking this before haste and either confusion or slow, but you might take it as a 4th or 5th 3rd-level.
k.) Mind Fog isn't 4 stars, no matter how you read it. You already have an AOE Will-Save-Or-Screwed in Confusion, 6 levels earlier. Mind Fog is just an AOE Will-Save-Or-Next-Time-I-Cast-You're-Screwed. 2 star spell here.
j.) Suggestion, Mass. 3 stars, same arguments as Suggestion above.
l.) Hero's Feast. 2 stars. Admit it, you got to here and, having not seen a single really good bard spell in like 2 levels, this one started to look better than it is. You are cured of poisons and diseases. You get a tiny bonus on attacks (which won't stack with Good Hope + other morale bonuses), a tiny bonus on hit points, and +4 against fear and poison. Weak.
m.) Irresistible Dance is genuinely good. Even if the target saves, he loses a turn. That's worth 4 stars - it's the best combat spell we've seen in 2 spell levels.
Whew! Excellent feedback. One at a time:
a) Opponents only get a +5 to save if being attacked or threatened by you or your allies. If you win initiative, you can cast this on round 1 and shouldn't have a problem. As for the restriction to humanoids - yes, that does restrict things - however, note that this has a great duration with no HD limit, so it's good forever.
Charm Person is a great precursor to diplomacy. Charm moves their attitude to friendly, which averts combat and gives you the opportunity to use diplomacy to raise their attitude to helpful. Get them to help you during the day, and when they go to sleep...well, I guess it depends how flexible your moral code is...
b) Sleep at level 1 is kickass. At level 2, it's OK, by level 4, it's pretty much useless. However, you are right, it's an excellent choice for a later swap...hmmmm...I was waffling between 2 and 3 stars for Sleep, as I have won many level 1 combats with that spell. OK - you convinced me, I'll make the change, with a warning that the spell should be taken at level 1, and by level 5 it's a 1 star spell, so should be swapped.
c) Is protecting from sneak attack the only side benifit I listed? Check again - I've added something I forgot to mention. Bigger Blur fan now?
d) Hold Person of course has the same limitation you mentioned to Charm Person (humanoid only), and on round 1 (when I recommend casting generally), Charm Person is the better spell since you won't usually have allies adjacent to the enemy to deliver the Coup de Gras on the same round. With Charm Person, coup de gras him in his sleep that night...
e) Hmmmm...I guess I'm too used to actually playing the Wizard, I usually have defenses against silence (My current wizard has written right on the character sheet that his Rod of Silent Spell is normally carried in his left hand). The strategy you mentioned obviously I'm aware of, as I did list it in the spell description. We aren't that far apart on this spell though. I did give it a pretty high recommendation (3 out of 4)
f) Give me some circumstances on how you would use suggestion to good effect in combat (with a reasonable suggestion that might give a penalty to save). Do so and I'll consider changing the rating. For the record, I don't hate suggestion (or it would have gotten a 1 star rating!)
g) I'm not sure of the point of comparing Glibness and Haste, but a 3rd level spell to give a big skill bonus to one skill sounds OK to me, but not amazing. Bluff is a really good skill, but you are pretty good at it already. What am I missing?
h) That's a very interesting point. I guess you are pretty much always "interacting" with a major image. Didn't think of that at the time. I'll lower the rating and put that warning in the description.
i) Sorry, but I have extensive personal experience with Phantom Steed and it is a fantastic spell. No other spell in the game gives you the consistant manouverability of Phantom Steed. I pretty much consider it a "must have" for any spellcaster who can get it. For those who can't get it, beg the party wizard for one - you'll thank me later. Once again, I speak from experience. Phantom steed basically means you can put your figure anywhere on the map every turn without using even a move action.
The rest of your points will be addressed soon - but my daughter needs me at the moment...
|
|
@TreantMonk: I don't think you will have time to create another handbook, you'll be too busy answering questions/defending the decisions you made on this one :) Aside from that, good handbook. Gives some ideas and helpful tips. Even if some of the rules are up for interpretation, you explained why you chose to make the judgement calls you did. Which means that players should be able to extrapolate your reasons to other choices and adjust based on errata and rules clarifications. Really the most important thing is to get people thinking about the class in different ways and then let them go on and make decisions as they see fit given their dm and personal play style.