Hi, I was reading some material for a 3.5 game that never materialized, and I was reminded of some of the more interesting base classes that weren't part of the OGL. I started thinking about the binder and how it would fit it.
I have this weird idea of having the binder as a bardic archetype, trading spells for binding. The bard having full-on magic struck me as a bit iffy depending on how magic works in the setting, but binding is a source of power that does not require divine blessing, arcane blood or the long, nearly scientific rituals that wizards make. All you need is some obscure, forgotten lore, force of will, and the desire to have a bring back a shade of a legendary hero, villain or creature to the world through yourself. To me, that sounds like the sort of supernatural power that may fit a bard. Well, some bards, at least.
Have you ever tried something like that, and how do you think it could work? I've wondered about simply importing binding as is instead of the bards' current magic system and possibly versatile performance (which they handle via binding rather than performance) but maybe keep the bardic music. Would you consider it balanced or would you remove something else as well?
It's a nice idea. I've always liked the uniqueness of the Binder class, and I think Pathfinder could use something like it.
AS for your suggestion, I agree that bard would be a thematic fit, but I think letting them have both full binding and performance might be a little too powerful. Particularly since a few of the vestiges get access to powers that are close to the equivalent of fairly high-level spells.
Especially that one with Summon Monster spells - but I guess you don't have to include that one, since it's part of an online supplement to the Binder rules anyway (and most agreed that by itself that vestige was enough to lift the Binder a full tier in power)
I was thinking of maybe losing some vestiges. Full performance and binding is quite powerful, but performance is a key feature of the class - and I thought binding wasn't that much more useful than lvl 6 spells. Maybe the jack of all trades specials (versatile performance, lore master, joat) - since the vestiges kinda cover that already?
Zceryl is a problem, though bards can kinda do summoning anyway, and losing access to wands, staffs etc can be a pain. However, if individual vestiges are problematic, maybe they can just be weakened or removed.
Any other comments, please?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
why use a binder, when you can put all your bards in a trapper keeper?
why use a binder, when you can put all your bards in a trapper keeper?
Good one man.
But a bard binder is a fantastic idea. I have a 3rd Party book for pact magic that included such a archetype.
I'll bump this a little with the question - what do people think about pact magic in PF in general? Is the whole 9-level business comparable to 9- or 6- level spellcasting, and are there any particular pitfalls except possibly the endless summon vestige?
why use a binder, when you can put all your bards in a trapper keeper?Good one man.
But a bard binder is a fantastic idea. I have a 3rd Party book for pact magic that included such a archetype.
You wouldn't be referring to the book I wrote, would you? :-P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless there were several books with this archetype, s/he just might :) . How did you approach the issue of trading spells for pact magic, btw?
Unless there were several books with this archetype, s/he just might :) . How did you approach the issue of trading spells for pact magic, btw?
Although simply doing a spell / spellcasting swap is sort of an easy way out, the truth of it is that doing so has its own list of boons and pitfalls for a partial spellcasting class like the bard.
On one hand, spellcasting is much more flexible than pact magic. Even the bard has a small list of abilities that he can use at his leisure, while you're basically stuck with a spirit once you seal a pact with it (you have a little leeway with things like Expel Spirit and the upcoming Reserve Spirit feat, however).
On the other hand, the spirits in PMU,v1 go up to 9th level and as a result, there are some spirits that grant powers that the bard could never have earned as a standard bardic character.
What I ended up doing for many archetypes is trading flexibility for flexibility when possible, because flexibility is the true strength of Pact Magic. For the Soul Muse archetype, as an example, the bard becomes less flexible in his spellcasting via diminished spellcasting, his Bardic Knowledge only applies to pact magic appropriate skills (Knowledge arcana and planes, for example), and he loses versatile performance, loremaster, and well-versed. In their place, the Soul Muse gets powers that work to blend occult power with the bard's themes of performance and spellcasting a little bit better.
Like with any archetype, the end result is going to be a character who is more powerful in their specific specialization. You can argue that a Fighter with the Two-Weapon Warrior archetype makes for a crummy greatsword wielder because you traded away all of the Fighter class features that boost greatswords, but the end result is a character who is really good at a more specific aspect of the game. Finally, in designing the Pact Magic system I will impart upon you one of the greatest truths of the system; Pact Mages are not Wizards. By its very nature, you can't "Nova" as a binder. The system is designed to reward long-term choice over short-term blasty-blast. That by itself is a pretty good reason not to trade away spellcasting for pact magic without other boosts in other places; doing so is a buff to long-term sustainability (you can't be run dry of your resources) but a nerf to short-term potential (you can't use several high-power abilities back to back to explode the world like a Wizard / Sorcerer can).