Well hello, and all that.
My group are just finishing up with the AoW AP (much fun had by all, I'm pleased to announce) and we're looking at starting Pathfinder's Rise of the Runelords after christmas.
I usually play either the front-line BBN or FTR, or the Rogue. This is mostly because those classes don't have any magic to worry about other than their items. I have this sort of innate terror of the spells section of the PHB because I have a really hard time remembering how all the spells work. Anything to do with magic has to be explained to me over and over again, and I find it quite a headache, tbh. I've tried playing all the core classes (except bard and wizard) and have found that I just can't cope with characters who have lots of magic to use.
Anyway...wanting to do something a little different for this new game, I found myself looking at the bard: it's not magic-heavy, I've never played one before, and the more I think about it, the more I think I could have a really great time playing one.
I'm thinking of playing a female half-elf, who will probably be a bit mischievious and manipulative (although not in a malicious way). She's probably going to be the type who makes hilarious fun out of getting men out of their pants...so she can steal them and see what they've got that's of value. A real 'charmer', essentially.
Anyway...my problem is feats. I can outfit any fighter-type with ass-kicking feats without even referring to the manuals, because I use that character type all the time. But bards don't really strike me as being the type to benefit from that sort of feat choice. For the record, I'm thinking of having her *very* Dex-based, possibly with some two-weapon fighting and weapon finesse feats. I'm not intending to plan my character progression out level-for-level now, but I'd like to have an idea of what's available as good options for a bard. i don't really want her to be a 'ranged' combatant, because I get bored with ranged weapons...of course, she may have to take that role, but I'd like to do what I can to stop that from being a necessity.
And, now I think about it, are there any prestige classes that stick out in your mind as being good for bards? I'm going for 'interesting' as opposed to just powerful.
Of course, I have little-to-no control over my characters once they get into a game, so I could just see what she does and go with it...
Well, any insights (or amusing comments) appreciated.
Sounds like the poster child Varisian (think human Gypsy instead of elf or half-elf). I'd probably take exotic weapon proficiency (bladed scarf)(see the RotRL Players Guide for details) and weapon finesse when you can, followed by combat expertise, improved disarm and improved trip.
Ranks in Perform (dance) for bardic music and you have a decent support character.
A sort of side note, I strongly suggest the variant bard in Monte's Complete Book of Eldritch Might if you are planning on a bard.
Best
Bard feats... well, if you have access to some non-Core books, there's some nice feats available for a melee bard:
Song of the Heart, from Eberron Campaign Setting, adds +1 to most of your bardic music results.
Snowflake Wardance, from Frostburn, lets you burn a bardic music use (which you'll have way too many of after the first few levels) to add your charisma bonus to damage with slashing melee weapons for rounds = perform ranks (ie, the whole fight).
Martial Study (Shadow Hand maneuver) + Martial Stance (Shadow Hand stance) + Shadow Blade, all from Tome of Battle, burns a lot of feats, but nets you some useful per-encounter stuff and dex to damage with several finessable weapons. You could also just take a single level in Swordsage instead of the two Martial feats.
Martial Study (White Raven maneuver) + Martial Stance (White Raven stance) + Song of the White Raven, also from ToB, lets you inspire courage as a swift action and stack bard and warblade/crusader levels for inspire courage. Again, you could take a level in warblade or crusader instead of the Martial feats.
Core only? You're pretty much out of luck for melee bard goodness.
I've only had experience playing a bard once . . . and they lasted only one full session. But, I'm happy to share the experience I had with the character so that you might benefit from it.
The game started off as a high level FR camapign and so Felicia started off at 16th or 17th level.
Now, compared to the rest of the party, he didn't have the most combat skill and so when I looked over what skills and abilities he did have, they were spells and bardic music that either buffed my party or de-buffed our opponents. We fought a Pit Devil to start the campaign off and my ability to hinder the spellcasting capability of the devil really benefited the rest of the group. Sadly, I rolled a nat 1 on a reflex save to avoid a fireball, or else Felicia would still be with us.
Just remember that Bardic music is kind of a mis-nomer, it's tied to the preform skill and not all aspects of the preform skill are associated with singing or playing musical instruments. There's also dancing or oration, remembering that might open up other concepts and idea's for you.
Nothing about bards, but spellcasters in general:
Get Spellcards (or, if you play a psionic character, Powercards). The Other Game Company has some.
Those are cards with the complete spell description and all printed on it. You print them out and cut them up, and then take the cards of the spells you have. It works very well, especially if your class doesn't get that many different spells/powers.
Thanks for all the replies, I'm finding them pretty damned useful so far.
I do have access to all the Complete... series, and the majority of the other supplements as well, so finding the right book shouldn't be a problem.
I have to say that the Spellcards look just about perfect for my purposes, so that's something I'll definitely be investing in. Special thanks to KaeYoss for pointing me at those ;)
Weapon Finesse is going to be pretty much a given, since I forsee Str being my dump stat (oh the horror!)...and Zurai's suggestions intrigue me. I shall have to find the books and learn more. The DM probably has them all anyway, compulsive-buyer that he is.
Mmmm...all comments very much appreciated. It's certainly given me something to think about. And I have just this second remembered the Shadowdancer prestige class, which I shall have to read up on.
Thanks again!
I'd keep my strength at 10 so you don't actually take a penalty to damage (weapon finesse will allow you to hit better but won't help with damage). I'd probably avoid TWF as you don't really have many feats and your BAB is subpar.
Beyond that Bards do have spells and their very useful - having to drop a valuable magic weapon just so you can free up a hand to cast a spell is a major pain in the butt. Better to keep a hand free for this sort of thing.
|
Galdar,
I think you may have been playing combatants for too long. I can't help but think that trying to make a bard a really effective combatant misses the point of a bard. Especially as a lot of people on these boards have been relieved to say that RotRL is not as lethal as AoW.
Bard's aren't good in combat situations, but they're really good in a load of other environments.
Build your bard so that you can take the lead/be heavily involved in encounters that involve social interaction, negotiation, performance etc. and you'll have a really cool, fun bard.
Build your bard for combat and you'll just have a secondary fighter who can't cut the mustard when the going gets tough.
So; use your feats for skill focus, casting enhancements and other cool, bard-oriented stuff - leave the clubbing to oafs and shake your rakish, charming, high charisma, bard-ish thang :D
|
There is nothing wrong with playing a bard that can fight. Dont try to tank, but take a supporting combatant role. and never skimp on your social interaction skills, or you loose the point of the bards.
Also, remember that bards have several spells (the ones I'm talking about are pretty simple) that can be used on themselves. You dont have to just buff the party, you can also buff yourself. Heroism, for example, gives you a +2 on everything for several minutes. Be sure to check the spell compendium for combat buff spells. take these, plus a bit of healing, at least one charm spell, and a single nasty debilitator (like Confusion, Soundburst, or Bonefiddle) and thats all you need to worry about as far as casting goes. Distract Assailant is very good in combat (1st level, swift action, subject is flat-footed until their next turn)
You should probably fight more like a rogue than a fighter, tumbling around the feild and flanking. Your BAB is average, and you will be Combat expertising, so milk every flank and FF you can get. Complete Scoundrel's deadly Defense (+1d6 damage, must shift at least 2 points on combat expertise) is good for upping your damage. You might be able to convince your DM to let the Bladed Scarf replace the whip on the bard's Weapon Proficiencies, so you dont have to blow a feat on EWP.
Dont blow money on spellcards if you dont have to: just buy some much cheaper high quality colorfull notecards and write out the spells.
But really I think you should go for something different (Casters are fun to play, trust me). Instead of playing a too-squishy, low Damage-output fighter who can sing, play a less-squishy-than-other-casters caster that specializes in sound effects, charm, illusions, and buffing, can talk fast and be very charming, and can, when cornered, out of spells, or up against mindless creatures, pick up a sword and stab something with reasonable effectiveness. Take Weapon Finesse, but beyond that, stick to spellcasting feats
If you really want a simple, light caster who can fight, I would Suggest (make a will save) Complete Arcane's Warlock. You get infinite, very simple charisma-based spellcasting, and many of the invocations are effectively permanent buffs (they let you walk on walls or fly, forever). Average BAB, d6 HD, light armor and simple weapons. You dont get many skill points, but they do have some very good class skills, and fit well into the setting as fallout from Chelax's devil worship.
But really I think you should go for something different (Casters are fun to play, trust me). Instead of playing a too-squishy, low Damage-output fighter who can sing, play a less-squishy-than-other-casters caster that specializes in sound effects, charm, illusions, and buffing, can talk fast and be very charming, and can, when cornered, out of spells, or up against mindless creatures, pick up a sword and stab something with reasonable effectiveness. Take Weapon Finesse, but beyond that, stick to spellcasting feats.
I'd also like to suggest playing a Beguiler (PHB II), if you're willing to give up the bard's performance and party-buff aspects. It's sort of a hybrid rogue & sorcerer, with a casting-based "sneak attack"-like ability and a focus on enchantments & illusions. You still get many of the same weapon and armor proficiencies as a bard (no shield though, you'll need that off-hand for casting). Also, no healing spells, sad to say. But for social interaction and manipulation, Beguilers are full of win. *grin*
I can't help but think that trying to make a bard a really effective combatant misses the point of a bard.
Bard's aren't good in combat situations...
...
Build your bard for combat and you'll just have a secondary fighter who can't cut the mustard when the going gets tough.
Sorry, that's total bullshit. A melee bard is a rogue with a higher chance of hitting for lower damage, the ability to heal and buff with magic, and the ability to dramatically boost his or her party's damage output.
If bards shouldn't melee, then neither should rogues. They have the same BAB and hit die. Bards will almost always hit more often due to inspire courage; rogues will do more damage IF they can flank AND IF the monster isn't immune to crits - and there are a lot of monsters that are immune to crits in RotRL so far.
And that's ignoring bardic spells. Bards get spells that add sonic (virtually unresistable) damage to their weapons, let them daze with their weapons, add luck bonuses to attack rolls (which basically stack with everything - how often do you see luck bonuses to attack?), add circumstance bonuses to attack rolls (and circumstance always stacks), heal themselves or their companions... and that's just 1st and 2nd level spells.
And, if you have access to the Tome of Battle, melee bards are crazy good. Start with Crusader so you have level 1 access to Weapon Finesse (and EWP, if you so choose). Grab a White Raven stance and whatever maneuvers you want. Then take levels in bard as desired, mixing in another crusader level whenever you're starting to feel too fragile. At level 3, get Song of the White Raven, which lets you activate inspire courage as a swift action, and stacks your bard and crusader levels for inspire courage. At level 6, pick up Song of the Heart to add +1 to your inspire courage (and several other bardic music uses, too). The 1st level spell inspirational boost adds another +1 to inspire courage. That's +3 inspire courage at level 6; you could actually have it at level 3 if you took Song of the Heart before Song of the White Raven. At level 8, assuming you only have bard and crusader levels, it'll be +4.
A crusader 1/bard 7 with that build would have a +10 to hit before even figuring in stat bonuses; a level 8 rogue would have +5 to hit before bonuses and deal 4 less average damage on non-sneak-attacks (but 10 more average damage on sneak attacks). The bard/crusader's damage output would be fine, though, thanks to crusader maneuvers; sacrificing the occasional level of bard for more levels of crusader adds to this. Don't forget that bard levels count as 1/2 initiator level for qualifying for maneuvers, so you get a ton of punch out of an every-3rd-level or every-5th-level crusader level. Your second level of crusader gets you charisma to will saves (incredibly synergistic with bards) and a new stance, while your third gets you a 1/day save reroll plus a new maneuver. If you have at least 4 bard levels by the 3rd crusader level, you can pick 3rd level maneuvers instead of a normal level 3 crusader's 2nd level one.
|
|
Sorry, that's total b*!*@&%&. A melee bard is a rogue with a higher chance of hitting for lower damage, the ability to heal and buff with magic, and the ability to dramatically boost his or her party's damage output.
Woah there, Mr Sweary - If you were actually sorry for swearing at me then you wouldn't have done it.
If bards shouldn't melee, then neither should rogues. They have the same BAB and hit die. Bards will almost always hit more often due to inspire courage; rogues will do more damage IF they can flank AND IF the monster isn't immune to crits - and there are a lot of monsters that are immune to crits in RotRL so far.
You've quoted me out of context. But I actually think it's counter-productive to build a combat-focused bard, and I also think it's counter-productive to build a combat-focused rogue. You've blown what I said out of all proportion, and then countered based on an assumption I actually disagree with. If you're going to play a bard, make one that's really good at bard stuff and have fun doing that, same with rogues, same with fighters, same with clerics etc etc.
And that's ignoring bardic spells. Bards get spells that add sonic (virtually unresistable) damage to their weapons, let them daze with their weapons, add luck bonuses to attack rolls (which basically stack with everything - how often do you see luck bonuses to attack?), add circumstance bonuses to attack rolls (and circumstance always stacks), heal themselves or their companions... and that's just 1st and 2nd level spells.
Bards get a whole bunch of interesting spells, and yes, some of them are combat spells; but that doesn't mean they can go toe-to-toe as a replacement for a barbarian, fighter, paladin, or warblade.
And, if you have access to the Tome of Battle, melee bards are crazy good. Start with Crusader so you have level 1 access to Weapon Finesse (and EWP, if you so choose). Grab a White Raven stance and whatever maneuvers you want. Then take levels in bard as desired, mixing in another crusader level whenever you're starting to feel too fragile. At level 3, get Song of the White Raven, which lets you activate inspire courage as a swift action, and stacks your bard and crusader levels for inspire courage. At level 6, pick up Song of the Heart to add +1 to your inspire courage (and several other bardic music uses, too). The 1st level spell inspirational boost adds another +1 to inspire courage. That's +3 inspire courage at level 6; you...
Oh, so if you find a munchkin-tastic bunch of tricks using an unpopular splatbook and multi-class out of bard you can make a combat bard. But we were talking about bards, not power-gaming multiclass superbards.
Zurai, if you respond to this, would you please keep a civil tongue in your head?
Woah there, Mr Sweary - If you were actually sorry for swearing at me then you wouldn't have done it.
I didn't swear at you. I said the idea that a melee bard couldn't perform in combat was a load of bull. Swearing at you would be saying you were full of bull, which isn't even close to what I said. I sincerely apologize if you felt I was swearing at you; I assure you, it's merely the counter-productive and IMO and IME untrue argument that you were making that drew my ire.
You've quoted me out of context. But I actually think it's counter-productive to build a combat-focused bard, and I also think it's counter-productive to build a combat-focused rogue. You've blown what I said out of all proportion, and then countered based on an assumption I actually disagree with. If you're going to play a bard, make one that's really good at bard stuff and have fun doing that, same with rogues, same with fighters, same with clerics etc etc.
How did I quote you out of context? The mission statement of your post was, and I quote, "Bard's aren't good in combat situations", which is total bull hockey. Bards are just fine in combat situations. And, seriously, you think that Rogues, a class which can do 66d6 bonus damage every single round of every single day, should shy away from combat?
Bards get a whole bunch of interesting spells, and yes, some of them are combat spells; but that doesn't mean they can go toe-to-toe as a replacement for a barbarian, fighter, paladin, or warblade.
Now who's misquoting who? No one in this entire thread, including the original poster, said ANYTHING AT ALL about replacing a front line tank fighter with a bard.
Oh, so if you find a munchkin-tastic bunch of tricks using an unpopular splatbook and multi-class out of bard you can make a combat bard. But we were talking about bards, not power-gaming multiclass superbards.
1. Tome of Battle is one of the most popular books WotC has ever published. It's more popular by sales figures than most of the Complete series combined.
2. Actually, we were talking about multiclassing. I mentioned ToB in the third reply in this thread, twice, and the OP specifically called out my suggestions as interesting and said he was going to follow up on them.3. If you think Tome of Battle is powergaming munchkinism, you need to actually try it. There are no legal ToB builds that outdamage a simple leap attacking power attacking raging barbarian, let alone outperform a spellcaster.
4. I'll be "civil" if you will. Walking into a thread where someone's asking for (and receiving) help on a character concept and saying "your concept is worthless, you should make a completely 180 degree different character" is rude in the first place. Then, you indirectly accuse me of being a munchkin powergamer, with all the implications those loaded words bring to the table.
Woah...ok, I SO didn't come here to start a fight.
Perhaps I should clarify a little (as I often make these posts while tired or distracted, or both.)
At the time of my original post, we were looking like having four or five players for this game. As of today, it's looking more like three. So, I'm going to have to prepare for the fact that I may well have to take on a more front line combat role. NOT the party tank, but at least a capable fighter (imagine the fighter tied up battling three orcs, while two more try and sneak up on the wizard...I'll be the wizard's bard-yguard whilst still aiding the fighter from afar).
Whether this comes about or not, I'm only looking into The Options That Are AVAILABLE for Bards. So, if I want to be focused on the spells and skills and social bits of being a bard, then I have an idea of What's Available for me to go about it. Similarly, if I want to have a decent support fighter who can kick out some useful buffs on the fly, then I have an idea how to go in that direction as well.
I will agree that I have been the party tank for too long. The last four years has seen me with combined AC/Attack bonuses higher than the boss monster's hit points. That's the reason I want to step back and do something else. I am fully intending to be the party spokesperson and social butterfly that a bard should be, because that's what I'm playing the class specifically to do. However, regardless of how many people we end up with, my character conception is that she's a bit of a tough cookie and can look after herself. Again, NOT the party tank, but someone...versatile.
"Oh look, he wizard's flanked again"
"Never fear *tumble, flip, flank, stab* I shall rescue the wizard!"
"Oh crap, the dragon's going to eat us!"
"You know, dragon, you're the most impressive of your race I've ever seen. We were just so surprised by your awsomeness we thought you were going to eat us, but now I see you merely wanted to show us how utterly fabulous you are."
And so on... (for the record, I realise even the LG dragon would eat us if I actually said that, but you get the idea.)
I think the party is likely to consist of (bard, obviously), a paladin (or cleric) and a tank fighter. The DM is sensible (and nice) enough to adjust the encounters slightly to fit our needs (so, not too many traps we can't get around, for example).
My very vague understanding of the bard is that, at it's core, it's a jack-of-all-trades class. To make it a specialist in anything you have to devote time and effort in taking it down a particular 'path'. Yes, the same can be said of the fighter, but at its core, the fighter is always the combat-guy, it's what he does and he does it well. The bard, OTOH, can do a lot of things, and be inspiring at the same time, but he's only really 'good' at something he takes the time to develop over all else. For example, he can fight and cast spells, but to be really good at one he has to let the other be sub-par.
Of course, I could have gotten it all completely bass-ackwards, as I sometimes do.
Combat keeps being highlighted all the way through this thread, and I know why. Combat is a HUGE part of the game and everyone wants to be good at it. The exceptions are the heavy spellcasters (sorcerers, wizards, warlocks, etc) who can remove themselves relatively easily from harms way while they blast off a few destructive spells. But that's kind of the point of a heavy spellcaster; them d4's ain't gonna stand for a lot of abuse, so get out the way and abuse everyone else's HD. As far as I know, bards are more a utility spellcaster, so their job is buffing, distracting, immobilizing, etc. If I'm not completely misguided (possible), they also get Use Magic Device, so they can convince scrolls (or whatever) that they know what they're doing, and get off a selection of the spells that make the wizard go "Muahahahahaaaaa!".
On a personal note, I quite like multiclassing/prestige classes. I never go overboard, and I don't always do it, but sometimes it's good to be able to do. There's no need to have as much class as background, but sometimes the most effective way to get at what you really want your character to be is to multiclass a little. I personally think that class/class/prestige is starting to extract the wee-wee, and any more than that is a needless waste of time, but class/class or class/prestige is perfectly acceptable and can enhance a character in just the right ways. Of course, that's something that has the potential to start more arguments, so moving swiftly on...
Yet again, I'm not looking to be the main combatant, or spellcaster, or sneaky trapfinder, or anything like that, and player numbers are likely to fluctuate a little before we get to The Big Day. What I'm doing now is looking at the options so, when The Big Day comes and everyone gets to the table and says, "I'm a fighter", and then people have to start re-thinking, I can just go get another drink from the bar because I know their discussion and change of characters is not going to affect my class choice.
I'll be focusing on being a bard...casting, performing, being the charismatic party leader, and all that happy jollity, BUT I'm also curious as to how to get a relatively effective combat character in a few easy steps for when all those other skills are voided. Even if all I do is hold the monsters off while the damage machine makes his way over to help out.
Quite honestly, any discussion with bards at the core is useful to me, because I like to find out what experiences others have had with them and how they think they worked out, so I can understand the capabilities of the class better. I mean, I can choose a fighter build easily enough, as I've said, because I've read the relevant material and had the experience. I'm now looking for the right material to check out and other people's experiences to help me do the same for something I know little about. Honestly, I don't think I've ever been in a party that contained a bard. Apart from back in 2nd Ed, but that's a whole 'nother discussion.
In conclusion, I talk FAR too much, and ALL suggestions/opinions are welcome, as far as I'm concerned.
I think you two, Vurai and GeraintElberion, should kiss and make up ;)
Oh, as a not-really-relevent aside, the spellcards, or something similar, are something I really do need, and not just for my bard. I'll need them for speeding up my DMing as well (too many times I've brought the game to a complete halt because I can't figure out what I'm supposed to do. Flipping through the PHB EVERY time is SO frustrating and makes me feel like a moron). However, I did notice the free downloadable blank cards. That'd be enough for my needs. I have a real serious mental block with spells. It's like the equivalent of dyslexia.
|
|
Well, Zurai seems to have leapt in all offended that I might suggest that bards are not-optimal combat characters.
I probably should have ignored it, rather than responding to his aggression (especially as, apparently, telling somebody that there opinion is bullshit is no longer rude?!) If he'd begun; "That's an interesting view, but actually I disagree with quite a lot of it..." do you really think there'd have been any argument?
Now he's just arguing with semantics, ie; I meant good as in Highly Effective, not as in fine, passable, whatever... you can choose to read that differently though - if you want to start a quarrel. I also meant to imply something like, "satisfying", but maybe didn't get that across.
Bards get a whole bunch of interesting spells, and yes, some of them are combat spells; but that doesn't mean they can go toe-to-toe as a replacement for a barbarian, fighter, paladin, or warblade. Now who's misquoting who? No one in this entire thread, including the original poster, said ANYTHING AT ALL about replacing a front line tank fighter with a bard. But that was the point/spirit/whatever of my original post, that it might be more fun to accept that the bard isn't much of a melee combatant - so running just to stand still next to a combat class is counter-productive. I never claimed that bards are completely useless in battle, just not "good".I quote, "Bard's aren't good in combat situations", which is total bull hockey. Bards are just fine in combat situations.
As for TOB - I really like it, I'm playing a swordsage at the moment, but you can't deny the amount of people (especially on rpg forums such as this) who dislike it, and who often quote it's use in multi-classing power builds as the root of their dislike. There are DMs on the paizo boards who have banned it, or said that they'd never allow it again (same difference).
Perhaps I'm thinking too much like a DM, but if I was beginning a campaign and my players produced a fighter, a combat-optimised rogue, a combat-optimised wizard, a combat-optimised cleric and a combat-optimised bard my heart would just sink. I don't know how you get to do 66d6 damage, but I do know that it's really harsh on the party fighter if he's almost a spectator in melee.
My initial post was honestly meant in a positive spirit - trying to encourage a fellow gamer to approach a change in class as an opportunity to roleplay differently, rather than any attempt to belittle a character class or undermine anybody else's ideas on this thread.
If there's only three of you now might be the time to try out gestalt gaming - that way you can fill all of the classic party roles and still have lots of combat oomph.
