|
Hmm. You're right. I could have sworn the class was called "fighting man." Maybe that was OD&D?Still broken. There was no class called fighter in first edition AD&D.Might be because bards were originally fighter/Thief/druid, perhaps. Either way, doesn't really matter.FTFYUm...wasn't it...Fighter (sub-classes Paladin and Ranger), Cleric (subclass Druid), Magic-User, Thief (subclass Assassin)...and Bard at the back of the PHB right next to Psionics?
That was Chainmail, by the time of AD+D 1st edition, that had become "Fighter".
Bards casting cure spells doesn't feel out of place to me. And besides, while healing is primarily the domain of divine spellcasters, it would be corny if literally every adventuring party was required to have a divine spellcaster. I'm all for tradition, but there are some things I'm happy to leave behind.
Not to mention a wand of hex vulnerability serves double duty on a witch with the Healing hex.Expect table variation on that. Many DM's including me, will not allow the hex to work on healing/restorative spells.
Sure, and I've even banned it at my table, but RAW it works. I can't speak for every table, just what's actually there.
|
A lot of it also probably has to do with the fact that it's always been very difficult to get someone to play the Cleric, and half the time when they do, they make a non-healer focused Cleric. Even back in the early 3 days when Bards where a bit substandard and Clerics where a tad overpowered, (something that was done to try to get more people to play Clerics), it was such a problem that it's become a troupe.
Bards did have a history of having some minor healing because of the Druid mix, so there is that as well, but I'd wager it's mostly because no one wants to play the Cleric and for a long while that was one of the few options for healing.
Sure, and I've even banned it at my table, but RAW it works. I can't speak for every table, just what's actually there.Not to mention a wand of hex vulnerability serves double duty on a witch with the Healing hex.Expect table variation on that. Many DM's including me, will not allow the hex to work on healing/restorative spells.
It is cheaper than a Wand of Cure Moderate Wounds for sure, but by the wording you need a CL 2 wand for you to have enough standard actions to use both the wand and the hex. Compared to a Wand of Infernal Healing it is only slightly more expensive and compared to a Wand of Cure Light Wounds it is slightly cheaper. It is in the conversation for cheapest healing, but it isn't some huge game changer.
It basically just creates an out of combat CMW wand and also can be used to re-up the Fortune hex for skill stuff. You can also have another party member besides the witch/shaman with UMD use it on the damaged player with a CL1 wand without any issues. And no, it's not that big a deal in terms of healing. The luck part is the real tasty bit, and the fact that the wand can do both for the cost of one is nice. I had a shaman use one in a campaign of mine and it was just a solid investment. Burnt through them quick.
You can also have another party member besides the witch/shaman with UMD use it on the damaged player with a CL1 wand without any issues.
If only it worked that way it would be awesome. But it only makes the target vulnerable to the caster's hexes, not everyone's hexes. Hence why you need a CL 2 version, you have to waste the first round of the duration appyling the spell yourself or it will make them vulnerable to whoever used the wand's hexes.
Couldn't you cast and heal in 1 round using the deliver touch spells feature from the witch's familiar by getting the familiar to hold the charge on a healing hex.
I don't know if this actually works, btw. I am kind of unclear on how that feature is supposed to function.
|
|
Couldn't you cast and heal in 1 round using the deliver touch spells feature from the witch's familiar by getting the familiar to hold the charge on a healing hex.
I don't know if this actually works, btw. I am kind of unclear on how that feature is supposed to function.
For these purposes, a familliar holding a spell charge is simply an extension of you doing it. The moment you cast another spell, the hard charge is dissipated no matter who's holding it.
For these purposes, a familliar holding a spell charge is simply an extension of you doing it. The moment you cast another spell, the hard charge is dissipated no matter who's holding it.Couldn't you cast and heal in 1 round using the deliver touch spells feature from the witch's familiar by getting the familiar to hold the charge on a healing hex.
I don't know if this actually works, btw. I am kind of unclear on how that feature is supposed to function.
A healing hex isn't a spell, or even a spell-like ability. (It's a supernatural ability.) So that shouldn't be an issue. What I find more troublesome is the idea that a hex can be "held."
Have no idea why bards get cure light wounds.
But glade that they do....
There spell list is perfect.... for playing an Tolkien Elfin Caster.
.... For that matter, there spell list is perfect for playing any Elf character. ... it just scream " Elf ", in the core book, with the spell selection you get :)
Right mix of Fighter/Rogue/Cleric/Wizard... To fill in for any role, that the class is missing, while at the same time, missing just enough of each core class ability, that you would rather have the core class instead, if given a chance. (( ok, they make better Rogue, but 3 out of 4 is not bad, and who needs rogue anyway :))
I'd say the bard became arcane because in second ed he could cast wizard spells if he found them.
This became ironic because due to the xp curve... Bards cast higher level spells sooner than wizards.
Because bards.
Bards in 2E were the best. . with the epic advancement you get could bards to 8th level spells and cast stuff like Demiplane Seed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing I don't get about Bards is why they get Healing Spells on their spell list.
There are several legends from many cultures and not a few fantasy tails from the last 90 years as well where magic music was able to soothe or heal wounds. Also the D&D bard has always been a bit of a jack of all trades and as such their spell list has a little something of everything in it.
Bards in 2E were the best. . with the epic advancement you get could bards to 8th level spells and cast stuff like Demiplane Seed.
Thought the Epic Level Handbook was a 3.X product?
In D&D heal spell waswizardmagic-user spell.
Not unless that was in the basic D&D series of games. In AD&D/2.0/3.X/Pathfinder Healing has NEVER been on the Magic User list EVER.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
One thing I don't get about Bards is why they get Healing Spells on their spell list.There are several legends from many cultures and not a few fantasy tails from the last 90 years as well where magic music was able to soothe or heal wounds. Also the D&D bard has always been a bit of a jack of all trades and as such their spell list has a little something of everything in it.
Bards in 2E were the best. . with the epic advancement you get could bards to 8th level spells and cast stuff like Demiplane Seed.Thought the Epic Level Handbook was a 3.X product?
In D&D heal spell wasNot unless that was in the basic D&D series of games. In AD&D/2.0/3.X/Pathfinder Healing has NEVER been on the Magic User list EVER.wizardmagic-user spell.
2e had a High Level Campaigns book, which had material to go up to level 30, which was a hard cap.
My recollections are hazy, but I think in BECMI magic-users had access to heal as a 9th level spell in the Master's box set. I think.
Yes, sorry-- Player's Option: High Level Campaigns.
Gave bards 7th level spells at 21 and 8th level at 29 (went to 30)