Mechanically speaking? By mid-levels it's very, very good at bluffing, but it's lost a lot of the general skill ability of the bard to a significant net loss IMO. At high levels the shadow spells bring it back up.
|
Mechanically speaking? By mid-levels it's very, very good at bluffing, but it's lost a lot of the general skill ability of the bard to a significant net loss IMO. At high levels the shadow spells bring it back up.
It is utterly trivial to make a bog standard bard ridiculously good at bluffing by level 4 or so and absurdly good by level 7. So good that the GM has the option of letting the character run roughshod over their campaign or just arbitarily shutting down the bluffer by claiming that the lies are impossible. Or inventing their own rules (I'm not sure but I think that some of the rules in Ultimate Intrigue may make things a little harder on the bluffer)
So, things that add to bluff are actually fairly weak in most campaigns. You just reach the point of destroying the campaign a little earlier.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was looking on d20pfsrd and just found the Brazen Deceiver archetype and I was about to make a post about it, but then found this. Let's continue the discussion. Here is my take on it:
Brazen Deceiver is perfection. It is a straight upgrade to Bard. It is... the chosen one. In combination with Pageant of the Peacock anyway (which I consider to be to Bard as Power Attack is to any melee fighter). Okay so...
1. You lose some worthless abilities no one cares about to get less penalties for obscene lies. Though this varies by DM, as no one plays Bluff as written really, but actually having a class feature that says "no, it really is that much more believable coming from me" tends to give you a lot more leeway with a lot of DMs. Regardless, you lose two waste of written space abilities to get it, so either you gain a great boon or it is a wash.
2. Lose Well Versed (i.e. an ability I don't even write down on my character sheet when I make a Bard) for a feat that gives you stealth casting and performances. Yes!
3. Shameless Scoundrel - +1/2 level to stealth, disguise, and bluff instead of Bardic Knowledge. Downgrade or sidegrade depending on what you want to do with your build? No. This is beyond upgrade. Pageant of the Peacock, yo.
4. Invoke the Blood... these spells are added to spells KNOWN, not as spells that you may select from, as per many other archetypes. Now, the spells aren't great, but they do bring a ton of versatility. But is loses Versatile Performance you say... I agree that looks bad, but you need to see the whole picture.
5. Devil's Tongue. Remember Pageant of the Peacock? Bluff IS all intelligence skills AND checks now. Gaining Lore Master to Bluff only is again a straight upgrade.
With Pageant of the Peacock taken into account, this archetype essentially gives you +1/2 level to all intelligence skills and checks, bluff, stealth, disguise; the ability to take 10 (or 20 sometimes per day) on bluff and all intelligence skills/checks; a bunch of automatically known spells (some of dubious use, but the shadowy spells do have a lot of potential versatility). You do lose some skill power with the loss of Versatile Performance, but in comparison to the gains is it worth getting upset about?
Overall, the only issue with Brazen Deceiver is that you can't take it with Dirge Bard, Diva, or one of the other cool niche archetypes (i.e. opportunity cost), but if you want to be a "standard" bard, i.e. a know it all skill monkey social skill master with performance and support spells, well, Brazen Deceiver is straight profit.
|
|
I was looking on d20pfsrd and just found the Brazen Deceiver archetype and I was about to make a post about it, but then found this. Let's continue the discussion. Here is my take on it:
Brazen Deceiver is perfection. It is a straight upgrade to Bard. It is... the chosen one. In combination with Pageant of the Peacock anyway (which I consider to be to Bard as Power Attack is to any melee fighter). Okay so...
1. You lose some worthless abilities no one cares about to get less penalties for obscene lies. Though this varies by DM, as no one plays Bluff as written really, but actually having a class feature that says "no, it really is that much more believable coming from me" tends to give you a lot more leeway with a lot of DMs. Regardless, you lose two waste of written space abilities to get it, so either you gain a great boon or it is a wash.
2. Lose Well Versed (i.e. an ability I don't even write down on my character sheet when I make a Bard) for a feat that gives you stealth casting and performances. Yes!
3. Shameless Scoundrel - +1/2 level to stealth, disguise, and bluff instead of Bardic Knowledge. Downgrade or sidegrade depending on what you want to do with your build? No. This is beyond upgrade. Pageant of the Peacock, yo.
4. Invoke the Blood... these spells are added to spells KNOWN, not as spells that you may select from, as per many other archetypes. Now, the spells aren't great, but they do bring a ton of versatility. But is loses Versatile Performance you say... I agree that looks bad, but you need to see the whole picture.
5. Devil's Tongue. Remember Pageant of the Peacock? Bluff IS all intelligence skills AND checks now. Gaining Lore Master to Bluff only is again a straight upgrade.
With Pageant of the Peacock taken into account, this archetype essentially gives you +1/2 level to all intelligence skills and checks, bluff, stealth, disguise; the ability to take 10 (or 20 sometimes per day) on bluff and all intelligence skills/checks; a bunch of automatically known spells (some...
Honestly Your entire endorsement, seems to revolve around the notion that Pageant of the Peacock will be allowed, which not only isn't PFS legal, most DM's would never let it pass once they realized what it does.
That doesn't mean there aren't other options
Here's what I've been thinking,
Play half elf, Grab eldritch heritage, get Rakshasa bloodline.
Congratulations, you are the ultimate b$@%*#~$ter.
Also you get spells that no bard has any right to have and if you somehow make it to level 18 can shadow cast with the best of sorcerers, take advantage of that. Also make good use of Dirge of doom, that will soften them up quite nicely for your illusion spells.
Yeah, you are 100% correct, Pageant of the Peacock is a huge part of my endorsement of Brazen Deceiver. You can't dispute that these two published options together are badass. Both are legit things, so they can happen together. That's really the only way to judge it I think as table variance is always a thing and PFS is its own set of houserules. This archetype with a certain supporting option is the bee's knees (or "cray" as the children in my household used to say) unless a DM introduces a houserule against it. Without Pageant of the Peacock, I think it is a very specialized archetype, but still one that excels at what it does. It definitely wouldn't be "the one true bard archetype" in that situation though.
Perhaps I am underrating the Shadowy spells though. While I can admit they have a ton of utility, the disbelieving aspect never really did it for me. Maybe if I got them for free with the rest of my archetype I would find them more useful than I did on something like Wizard :p
|
|
Yeah, you are 100% correct, Pageant of the Peacock is a huge part of my endorsement of Brazen Deceiver. You can't dispute that these two published options together are badass. Both are legit things, so they can happen together. That's really the only way to judge it I think as table variance is always a thing and PFS is its own set of houserules. This archetype with a certain supporting option is the bee's knees (or "cray" as the children in my household used to say) unless a DM introduces a houserule against it. Without Pageant of the Peacock, I think it is a very specialized archetype, but still one that excels at what it does. It definitely wouldn't be "the one true bard archetype" in that situation though.
Perhaps I am underrating the Shadowy spells though. While I can admit they have a ton of utility, the disbelieving aspect never really did it for me. Maybe if I got them for free with the rest of my archetype I would find them more useful than I did on something like Wizard :p
Uh you do....remember that it doesn't add them to the list of spells you CAN learn, it adds them to the list of spells you ALREADY know.
As for the rest of it, I won't lie that it basically makes getting spell focus Illusion a practical requirement. But since you're a bard, your best spells are Enchantment, Illusion and Sonic based spells anyway. Meaning that bards are for the most part save or suck by default. My suggestion, focus on making them into a skill based shadowcaster with an emphasis on subterfuge. Having an infiltrator who can hold their own in a fight is never unwelcome.
Sorry, it is late and I wasn't clear. I meant that I never really considered the Shadowy spells as an option when I played classes that could take them, because while cool, I figured there were better things, but since it is a free option for Brazen Deceiver, hey why not.
As for spells on Bards, I always tended to go the support route with very little save based offensive spells: I always tended to have a more spread out stat array than full casters, so lower base DCs. Assuming you were a high level Brazen Deceiver though, perhaps a more caster style array would be better.
|
|
Sorry, it is late and I wasn't clear. I meant that I never really considered the Shadowy spells as an option when I played classes that could take them, because while cool, I figured there were better things, but since it is a free option for Brazen Deceiver, hey why not.
As for spells on Bards, I always tended to go the support route with very little save based offensive spells: I always tended to have a more spread out stat array than full casters, so lower base DCs. Assuming you were a high level Brazen Deceiver though, perhaps a more caster style array would be better.
I honestly found pure support bards to be boring. So Debuff bards or just bards that can take care of themselves are what i like making this very good in my eyes. But that's just me.