So my RotR group is going to hit 13th level soon. The bard is happy because he believes he can start two performances in one round with Virtuoso Performance: start first performance as a swift action, cast virtuoso performance as a standard action, start second performance as a move action.
The bardic ability says: 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.
I have no problem believing that a bard could still start a bardic performance as a move or standard action after 13th level. If the bard wanted to start a performance the round after using an immediate action, and hence didn't have a swift action, I see no problem with starting that performance being either a move or standard action. If the bard had quicken spell and wanted to start a performance while casting a quickened spell and standard action spell, I have no problem with starting the performance being a move action.
I'm having problems with the concept of starting two performances the same round, whether it's a swift, move or standard action. I've noted there are other threads discussing the same topic in terms of a Paladin's lay on hands to heal himself.
Virtuoso Performance seems to support the idea that you can't start both performances in the same round. The text says:" While this spell is active, you may start a second bardic performance while MAINTAINING another."
So.... what does everyone else think about this?
My opinion is that I'll allow it, but I don't have much in terms of rules to support what counts as gut-feeling.
To me, once you've started the first BP, it's counted as being maintained for your 2nd BP. Sorry, I really don't know how to explain it :p
"Can" is not "must". At 13th level you can start your Performance as a Swift, Move, or Standard action at your option.
So yeah, that works fine. It's all he can do that turn, but it works.
Just be lucky he hasn't found Shadowbard. Swift+Standard = Two Performances simultaneously.
But it says maintaining. The round you start it you aren't maintaining it. Is there actually any rule support for the position that's okay to start two performances the same round? And if he can start two performances the same round, what's to stop the paladin from doing two or three lay on hands the same round?
Kadzuk, Conveyor of Inspiration wrote: Just be lucky he hasn't found Shadowbard. Swift+Standard = Two Performances simultaneously. Shadowbard + Virtuoso Performance = three performancecs simultaneously? Shenanegans.
TyrKnight wrote: But it says maintaining. The round you start it you aren't maintaining it. Is there actually any rule support for the position that's okay to start two performances the same round? And if he can start two performances the same round, what's to stop the paladin from doing two or three lay on hands the same round? This is actually a great question. Just like Bardic Performance, there's nothing in the Lay on Hands description that indicates how frequently it can be used. The limiting factor is what action must be used. When that changes to a lesser frequency, usage could reasonably go up.
If the Paladin LoH twice in one round, the Paladin is forfeiting a full round of attacks. That's a pretty big trade off.
Why do the rules have to specifically state that you CAN do something? That requires an awfully rigorous rule construction. Why can't the rules just provide some structure, outline the prohibitions, and then let uncovered stuff be OK unless the DM considers it broken?
I thought this was a pretty eloquent argument:
TyrKnight wrote: I don't see it as broken to allow a paladin to use it twice on himself in the same round. I probably wouldn't let him use it as a move action -- but swift and standard is okay by me.
MrNormal wrote: Kadzuk, Conveyor of Inspiration wrote: Just be lucky he hasn't found Shadowbard. Swift+Standard = Two Performances simultaneously. Shadowbard + Virtuoso Performance = three performancecs simultaneously? Shenanegans. If only.
Virtuoso Performance wrote: Virtuoso performance does not stack with any other method of maintaining simultaneous bardic performances.
TyrKnight wrote: But it says maintaining. The round you start it you aren't maintaining it. Is there actually any rule support for the position that's okay to start two performances the same round? And if he can start two performances the same round, what's to stop the paladin from doing two or three lay on hands the same round? You are right that is says "maintaining" and if you want to argue about it with your players, you can do it.
However, I found that people have a tendency to rule lawyer rules likes that outside of context and RAI based on what they want....which I guess is understandable.
Personally, I try to see the RAI behind it. Don't forget that Law books or Tax books are 1 foot thick because they tried to cover all possible interpretation. Paizo doesn't want that (thank god) so they hope that people will get the RAI behind it....
Now regarding this specific issue, you have to compare what the spell allows you to do with what a bard can normally do:
CRB says (p. 35) :
A bard cannot have more than one bardic performance in effect
So, My interpretation, based on what I think is RAI, is that you can start a second performance while maintaining another, "maintaining" meaning (to me) that when you start the second performance, it doesn't stop the first one, you still maintain it.
I guess that most arguments will come from the interpretation of maintaining....choose yours....hope this help.
That helps. It doesn't seem like anyone has any rule against it which is hard and fast. But I am worried about balance more than anything else. Especially if I take this campaign where I want to take it afterwards.
I understand...
However, my bard is 14th and we are playing RotR and balance is very good...having 2 bardic performance in effect is good...but there are far worst thing that could unbalance the game...
your bard could cast a bunch of spells to debuff and give conditions to his opponents (such as mass cacophonous call, mass daze, slow, a concussive soundburst, etc)...which I believe could be worst than having 2 performances...
Now it depends what you have in mind for your next game, but I would recommend to don't be too worried...
Stunning Finale spell is great
Deafening Song Bolt cannot be reduced via save and is not subject to spell resistance
I originally went the way of Virtuoso Performance but I swapped it for another spell as I found it impractical (waste 1st round standard action to cast Virtuoso Performance was the main downer, then found out starting / maintaining 2 performances plus casting a spell is just over the top and to be honest, beyond Inspire Courage, there's little point maintaining another performance)
Agree with all your spells...great choice...took them myself..although found that mass cacophonous call was better than stunning finale , but still....
Dirge of doom is a good debuff as a second performance...I use it mostly to reduce the opponents' save
paranoia got the better of me and I found myself hovering between countersong and inspire greatness for my 2nd performance... (players enjoy inspire greatness, but sometimes they just shrug when you buff'em... it's not a particularly "sexy" / "spectacular" buff...)
hence dropping virtuoso perf.... a lot of buffing to get to a pretty lukewarm 2nd round...
The paladin in my group already has Cornugan smash. So dirge of doom isn't much of an issue for me, if that's the second performance. I hate slow though. I agree with that. The sorcerer spamming slow is a gain pain in the ass.
Well, if you hate slow, wait until either your bard or the cleric (if there is one)or the sorcerer cast waves of Ecstasy. This is insanely good. Kind of a big slow that can stun on the first round.....and if they save, still staggered on the first round!!!!
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
