|
The illusionist is far better than bard for being an illusionist for a number of reasons:
[...] The bard is not great there, and being spontanious instead of prepared is a bit of a problem because illusion casting comes in many forms.
I'd argue the inverse is true here. Good illusion use more often than not comes from circumstance and environment. Being able to pull something out to take advantage of the current situation really lends itself to spontaneousness (pun intended) and you can leverage even low level spells to great advantage.
Trying to plan ahead means you might miss out on emergent situations you just didn't anticipate.
But the obvious reason the wizard is a better illusionist is that Silent spell is much, much better than melodious spell. The versatility of having no one notice you while you are casting your spell vs, no one noticing that you are casting a spell while having to be often literally make a fool of yourself, or at least draw everyone's attention with a performance, is pretty big, and you can never cast spells when silenced as a bard.
They are just different feats, with different intended purposes, that happen to have overlapping component replacement. There are situations where Melodious spell is much more powerful, and others where Silent spell is.
However, as far as I am aware, there is nothing stopping you using Perform: Dance to cast silently. Even though you would still be observed, you can replace the sound with move and visual traits instead.
That said, pretty sure everyone is jelly of Blood Component Substitution. I'd trade an additional action for some damage in a heartbeat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The illusionist is far better than bard for being an illusionist for a number of reasons:
[...] The bard is not great there, and being spontanious instead of prepared is a bit of a problem because illusion casting comes in many forms.
I'd argue the inverse is true here. Good illusion use more often than not comes from circumstance and environment. Being able to pull something out to take advantage of the current situation really lends itself to spontaneousness (pun intended) and you can leverage even low level spells to great advantage.
Trying to plan ahead means you might miss out on emergent situations you just didn't anticipate.
I think you misunderstand me. The illusionist is required to have at least 1 illusion spell memorized in every level, so they should have plenty of versatile spells memorized for pulling whatever rabbit they need out of their hat. The will even be able to repeat the trick on the fly if needed by draining their bonded item. But the Bard is probably not going to have Magic aura nondection, ventriloquism, illusory creature, and illusory object in their repertoire and certainly not at multiple levels, nor would they want to. That is way too much space for situational spells. So they can buy scrolls of these spells, and they should, but they have to keep buying new ones as they level up or else accept that detect magic is going to obliterate their plans and all of that ends up getting unnecessarily costly and take way more time to track down than an overnight rest
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That said, pretty sure everyone is jelly of Blood Component Substitution. I'd trade an additional action for some damage in a heartbeat.
Blood substitution doesn't disguise the casting though. A kind GM might let you use deception to make it seem like you are casting a different spell, but that will probably take an action anyway, so it is damage and an action.
|
|
Blood substitution doesn't disguise the casting though. A kind GM might let you use deception to make it seem like you are casting a different spell, but that will probably take an action anyway, so it is damage and an action.
That said, pretty sure everyone is jelly of Blood Component Substitution. I'd trade an additional action for some damage in a heartbeat.
I was talking about casting spells without their associated components. BCS hits all components at once without needing to spend an action to do so.
It’s higher level, of course, but covers most of things you need from most component replacement effects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A sorcerer can get conceal spell, but I don't think that really synergizes well with Blood Component substitution, seeing as you start glowing the same color as your blood. That is a cool effect, but not really contributing to making you the subtle master of illusion magic.
Melodious spell, on the other hand, beyond having the word Melodious in the title, doesn't say anything about replacing the components of a spell, just disguising them. Thus verbal components are still required, they are just disguised into whatever performance is being done. I don't think there is anyway to do a stealthy performance and the two skills are largely counter to each other's purpose. Bards have plenty of opportunities to use Melodious spell in interesting ways, but not to avoid notice and cast a spell at the same time.
Silent spell is a really strong narrative wizard feat with some mechanical benefit as well, and it makes the wizard illusionist stand out in a class of their own for being the best secret spell spell caster. It is really good for diviners and enchanters as well all wizards who ever want to cast those spells without broadcasting that they are doing so. You can also pair it with invisibility (or the illusionist's invisibility cloak), to have all kinds of fun. Then add in ventriloquism. It is one of the most vibrant and flavorful spell caster builds in the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The illusionist is far better than bard for being an illusionist for a number of reasons:
Being an illusionist means needing to be able to cast spells from spell slots often. The bard is not great there, and being spontanious instead of prepared is a bit of a problem because illusion casting comes in many forms. A bard dedicated to it is doing nothing else with their spells. An illusionist can still pick up most of the essential spells and heighten them as needed without needing to spend as much thought planning out how to get ventriloquism as a level 2 spell, heightening magic aura, heightening illusory object, heightening illusory creature, etc.
But the obvious reason the wizard is a better illusionist is that Silent spell is much, much better than melodious spell. The versatility of having no one notice you while you are casting your spell vs, no one noticing that you are casting a spell while having to be often literally make a fool of yourself, or at least draw everyone's attention with a performance, is pretty big, and you can never cast spells when silenced as a bard.
The illusionist should be trained in deception and get it to expert by level 6, but stealth is the far more important skill for them to focus on, and since illusions mostly all require actions to interact with, before they can be disbelieved, Starting with a 16 INT, 16 Dex and 14 (or even 16 CHA), is a pretty reasonable stat array, especially once you pick up convincing illusion. The feat support for the illusionist is the strongest in the wizard game. It is the one built that wishes they could get more wizard feats than possible. Level 12 is pretty much the only level with out a feat that is a must choose and by then you might very well want to go back and pick up spell penetration or bond conservation/Advanced School spell. The illusionist is so desperate for wizard feats that the metamagic thesis actually looks pretty good on them, although so does spell substitution.
Also, diviner was left off the list, and the wizard,...
Did you see the House of Imaginary Walls? It's a little illusion for battlefield control he can use every battle.
Occult list has good illusion spells. And as a spontaneous caster he can cast the same illusion spell over and over again in the same slot whereas the wizard might only have one or two casting memorized. If the bard makes illusion signature spells, then he can use even more slots to cast them.
The bard can use performance and deception to enhance illusions with his maxed out charisma, so that when an illusion has to talk or interact he can make it sound very good, very good. He can set up illusions with fascinating performance and the like incorporating acting or singing or whatever skill is needed to make the creature look good.
The bard is also going to be better at disguise with charisma as his main stat allowing him to use illusions better for infiltration.
The bard is easier to build as a good illusionist. Try it sometime. You will be pleasantly surprised at how well the bard can use illusion magic combined with charisma skills to do all types of things without bothering with combat.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did you see the House of Imaginary Walls? It's a little illusion for battlefield control he can use every battle.
Occult list has good illusion spells. And as a spontaneous caster he can cast the same illusion spell over and over again in the same slot whereas the wizard might only have one or two casting memorized. If the bard makes illusion signature spells, then he can use even more slots to cast them.
The bard can use performance and deception to enhance illusions with his maxed out charisma, so that when an illusion has to talk or interact he can make it sound very good, very good. He can set up illusions with fascinating performance and the like incorporating acting or singing or whatever skill is needed to make the creature look good.
The bard is also going to be better at disguise with charisma as his main stat allowing him to use illusions better for infiltration.
The bard is easier to build as a good illusionist. Try it sometime. You will be pleasantly surprised at how well the bard can use illusion magic combined with charisma skills to do all types of things without bothering with combat.
My PFS bard does run mostly with illusion spells. House of imaginary walls is a level 10 feat that is a pure combat battle field control spell. It doesn't really do any of what I want out of an illusionist, and the wizard illusionist is turning themselves invisible every combat by level 10. By level 11, they can be invisible for 10 minutes every 10 minutes. By level 15 they are, for all intents and purposes, permanently invisible, with the ability to cast spells silently. That allows for battle field control that can't be beat.
The bard being better than the illusionist at the deception skill is going to become decreasingly true, and only needs to start with a 1 or 2 point difference. Plus the illusionist can get access to transmutation spells like pest form, that allow for their illusions to not always have to be illusions.
I am not saying that you can't have fun with a bard casting illusion spells. I am saying that there is not a better illusionist in the game than the dedicated wizard. Silent spell and Convincing Illusion + near permanent invisibility makes a punishingly powerful
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... your character takes zero hostile actions in combat?
An illusionist probably is taking 0 hostile actions in combat, until she is completely ready to. And is probably "beating" many encounters without even entering into combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, let us begin yet another discussion on what constitutes a hostile action....
If only they made some kind of place where they could answer such frequently asked questions...
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So... your character takes zero hostile actions in combat?An illusionist probably is taking 0 hostile actions in combat, until she is completely ready to. And is probably "beating" many encounters without even entering into combat.
It sounds like you either just don’t contribute to combat in any meaningful way, or you have a crazy permissive GM with a high threshold for shenanigans.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... your character takes zero hostile actions in combat?An illusionist probably is taking 0 hostile actions in combat, until she is completely ready to. And is probably "beating" many encounters without even entering into combat.
So you do no damage in most combats? You don't have Inspire Courage or Inspire Defense as invisible bards can truly help a party while being completely invisible.
What do your rounds look like that are more effective than a bard?
I can for example enhance the party while maintaining an illusory foe providing flanking, a little damage, and a party boost with Inspire Courage.
What are you doing that so effective as an illusionist, while staying invisible?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The point isn't to be invisible all combat, it is to be invisible when you don't need to be visible. That is an expensive thing for most casters to do, encounter after encounter, and more specifically, in the lead up to the encounter; for the illusionist it is not. The creative illusionist, and more specifically, the party build to exploit the fact that, as a team, they will be shaping how the world around them perceives its own reality, multiple times a day, is going to be able to successfully bypass a lot of encounters that otherwise would turn into combat encounters. As just one character, that style of play can be disruptive and un welcome. It can be a contribution to the party that is hard to exactly quantify and always going to be GM dependent. SO I wouldn't argue that it is a style of play everyone should try. I am just saying that the wizard is a lot better at it then they are getting credit for here.
It is also a lot of fun, when the whole party wants to play that way, and dismissing it out of hand because it doesn't factor into a mathematical formula is an unfortunate choice to make when considering what kind of caster could be fun to play, especially if your here on the forums to essentially complain that it is impossible to play a fun, thematic wizard. (This is not a comment directed at any one poster, but a reminder for all of us, myself included, to think about what value to our lives we get from participating in these discussions. Is our goal to increase the amount of fun we can possibly get out the game, or tell others that they are not actually having the fun that they think they are having.)
Lastly, Melodious spell is good, but if your GM is letting your bard pull off casting spells without drawing attention to yourself because you are "performing" by "acting normal" I can promise you that you are going to be able to pull off way bigger shenanigans with an illusionist wizard than with a bard.
Melodious spell lets you disguise the different components of casting into some kind of performance. Your GM is massively bending the intention of the rules if they let you cast spells with a verbal component while doing your one-act mime routine of "bystander avoids notice."
"Someone tell that clown to stop dancing in the middle of this court room, a trial is going on!" is a very reasonable NPC response to untimely, overwrought, unending performances.
|
|
Melodious spell lets you disguise the different components of casting into some kind of performance. Your GM is massively bending the intention of the rules if they let you cast spells with a verbal component while doing your one-act mime routine of "bystander avoids notice."
"Someone tell that clown to stop dancing in the middle of this court room, a trial is going on!" is a very reasonable NPC response to untimely, overwrought, unending performances.
Performances, and performance types, have traits tied to them.
Act or perform comedy: auditory, linguistic, and visual
Dance: move and visual
Play an instrument: Auditory and manipulate
Orate or sing: Auditory and linguisticThe GM might change these depending on the circumstances, but the most common performance-based traits are listed below.
So if you are using Melodious Spell, if you were to cast a spell that had somatic & verbal components, you hide those components within a performance action that has the move and visual traits.
So while you still wouldn't be able cast spells while under the effects of Silence, since the spell still has the verbal trait, anyone who is observing a successful Performance (dance) check won't notice the verbal components.
And if they don't notice them, its as good as them not being there, from a stealth point of view.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So if you are using Melodious Spell, if you were to cast a spell that had somatic & verbal components, you hide those components within a performance action that has the move and visual traits.So while you still wouldn't be able cast spells while under the effects of Silence, since the spell still has the verbal trait, anyone who is observing a successful Performance (dance) check won't notice the verbal components.
And if they don't notice them, its as good as them not being there, from a stealth point of view.
I agree with the way you are reading the feat.
I disagree that not noticing someone is casting a spell, but seeing that someone is there actively drawing attention with a performance is just as good from a stealth point of view.
The perform skill specifies that it is an action taken to "You are skilled at a form of performance, using your talents to impress a crowd or make a living." Melodious spell says, "You hide all of these as part of an ordinary performance."
Using the feat outside of the context of engaging in some kind of attention drawing performance is pretty clearly bending the intention of the feat.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, my GM ruling for melodious spell would be;
You're attempting to disguise what is normally very obvious sound and visual effects with a performance. To do this, your performance would have to have both visual and auditory elements. So if someone would normally be able to perceive your spell being cast, they are still able to perceive your performance. If their perception DC is lower than your performance check, they'll believe they just witnessed a regular performance as opposed to a spell being cast. The feat does not allow you to remove the sensory manifestations, just hide them - which would necessitate the performance itself being equally noticeable or more so than the spell being cast.
I would certainly not allow a player to mime a spell into existence while invisible - that's not what the feat does and it's also pretty flimsy as a RAW reading imo.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're trying to figure out "who did the magical thing" the finger is going to get pointed at "the stranger who is over in the corner singing a song and playing the tambourine" well before it gets pointed at "the person no one is aware is even in the room."
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you read the perform skill though, it is not just acting or telling a joke, it is putting on a performance. Pretending to be someone you are not is not the perform skill in PF2, it is the deception skill.
Very few reasonable GMs are going to let you get away with standing in the corner, whispering a joke to the wall and passing that off as a performance check to disguise a spell. If it was that easy, then the conceal spell feat shouldn't really need to exist, because any spell should be relatively easy to cast without notice.
But that is not how casting in PF2 works. It is clear, loud verbal components and active somatic components that are unmistakable for anything other than spell casting, without dedicated character resources. quietly humming a tune to yourself does not make you a musician or a performer.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're still going to point the finger at someone who is obviously in the room before you point the finger at someone you don't know is in the room. This is borderline tautological.
Melodious spell is *for* "you are performing, and you want to slip a spell in there", performance *requires* an audience that is or should be paying attention to you. You can make it seem like you're not doing anything except playing the flute when you use melodious spell, but people are going to know that you're there and that you're doing something.
tl;dr
Are we really judging the entire class on an ability it does/not get at level 18+? Seems ridiculous to me
Not really, but it certainly doesn't help any, either.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems kind of absurd to me to claim that Melodious and Silent Spell are in any way equitable. Melodious has its uses, for sure, but its only useful against creatures that you're comfortable with being aware of your presence. Silent Spell is still useful in that case, but is also useful against creatures who would be immediately hostile to your presence whether you were caught casting a spell at them or not.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems kind of absurd to me to claim that Melodious and Silent Spell are in any way equitable. Melodious has its uses, for sure, but its only useful against creatures that you're comfortable with being aware of your presence. Silent Spell is still useful in that case, but is also useful against creatures who would be immediately hostile to your presence whether you were caught casting a spell at them or not.
They really are just different feats that do different things, their similarities are pretty surface level.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM I'm just going to hold a hard line on "any time you make a performance check, you are actively attempting to attract attention."
Which is fine, since there are times when you want that but "being sneaky" isn't one of them.
The point isn't to be invisible all combat, it is to be invisible when you don't need to be visible. That is an expensive thing for most casters to do, encounter after encounter, and more specifically, in the lead up to the encounter; for the illusionist it is not. The creative illusionist, and more specifically, the party build to exploit the fact that, as a team, they will be shaping how the world around them perceives its own reality, multiple times a day, is going to be able to successfully bypass a lot of encounters that otherwise would turn into combat encounters. As just one character, that style of play can be disruptive and un welcome. It can be a contribution to the party that is hard to exactly quantify and always going to be GM dependent. SO I wouldn't argue that it is a style of play everyone should try. I am just saying that the wizard is a lot better at it then they are getting credit for here.
It is also a lot of fun, when the whole party wants to play that way, and dismissing it out of hand because it doesn't factor into a mathematical formula is an unfortunate choice to make when considering what kind of caster could be fun to play, especially if your here on the forums to essentially complain that it is impossible to play a fun, thematic wizard. (This is not a comment directed at any one poster, but a reminder for all of us, myself included, to think about what value to our lives we get from participating in these discussions. Is our goal to increase the amount of fun we can possibly get out the game, or tell others that they are not actually having the fun that they think they are having.)
Lastly, Melodious spell is good, but if your GM is letting your bard pull off casting spells without drawing attention to yourself because you are "performing" by "acting normal" I can promise you that you are going to be able to pull off way bigger shenanigans with an illusionist wizard than with a bard.
Melodious spell lets you disguise the different components of casting into some kind...
Why would I need to disguise my abilities? I can use a second level invis with Inspire courage and inspire defense harmonized over and over again for many battles.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would I need to disguise my abilities? I can use a second level invis with Inspire courage and inspire defense harmonized over and over again for many battles
There is a good chance that we are talking about very different characters when we talk about being the best with illusion magic if the idea of disguising yourself, your abilities, and your actions isn't immediately apparent. The illusionist, for me, is most fun when the goal of the party is not to just fight everything. Being invisible and having an illusory creature or object that I can force someone to reroll a sucessful save against, is really, really cool. If the rest of the party is good at being the face and stealthing, it can be a fun team dynamic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would I need to disguise my abilities? I can use a second level invis with Inspire courage and inspire defense harmonized over and over again for many battlesThere is a good chance that we are talking about very different characters when we talk about being the best with illusion magic if the idea of disguising yourself, your abilities, and your actions isn't immediately apparent. The illusionist, for me, is most fun when the goal of the party is not to just fight everything. Being invisible and having an illusory creature or object that I can force someone to reroll a sucessful save against, is really, really cool. If the rest of the party is good at being the face and stealthing, it can be a fun team dynamic.
So you want the illusionist for non-combat? Illusory Creature attacking would break invis.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Deriven, I think in order for you to understand Unicore's point, imagine playing in such a way that the PCs use resources and tactics that get around combats or essentially win them without fighting them. Most simply, sneaking past the guards of a fort. Referring to it as "non-combat" is not quite accurate to its purpose.
Temperans, ...umm...sure, yes, technically you are right. And, as we all know, technically correct is the best kind of correct. And as RAW is king in the rules sect...wait..this isn't the rules section. This is the general discussion section where RAW arguments are *shrug* eh...
Also, you are rolling performace, not stealth. Stealth is used to hide someone or something, avoid notice. Are you trying to avoid notice? You should be using stealth.
You are welcome to allow Melodious spell to conceal spellcasting at your tables, but it looks like the majority of people do not see it your way. I encourage you to play how you wish, but your arguments are far from convincing the rest of us.
Deriven, I think in order for you to understand Unicore's point, imagine playing in such a way that the PCs use resources and tactics that get around combats or essentially win them without fighting them. Most simply, sneaking past the guards of a fort. Referring to it as "non-combat" is not quite accurate to its purpose.
Temperans, ...umm...sure, yes, technically you are right. And, as we all know, technically correct is the best kind of correct. And as RAW is king in the rules sect...wait..this isn't the rules section. This is the general discussion section where RAW arguments are *shrug* eh...
Also, you are rolling performace, not stealth. Stealth is used to hide someone or something, avoid notice. Are you trying to avoid notice? You should be using stealth.
You are welcome to allow Melodious spell to conceal spellcasting at your tables, but it looks like the majority of people do not see it your way. I encourage you to play how you wish, but your arguments are far from convincing the rest of us.
So that is how his party plays? A bard is very capable of that. My party wouldn't enjoy it, but they could do it.
I'm not sure that makes a wizard a better illusionist for that type of play. You could easily create such an illusion at range or out of sight and accomplish the same thing. I'm still not sure how that allows the party to bypass the danger that couldn't be accomplished equally by a bard.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, apart from silent spell, what makes imho a wizard better at illusion than a bard is Convincing Illusion. Someone disbelieving an illusion at the wrong time can really wreak your day. Getting a free chance to change that seems crazy powerful to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Melodious spell is not about avoiding notice. Its about hiding your spellcasting. To rule that you cannot hide your spellcasting because you are performing just makes the feat a waste of space.
I don't see anyone disagreeing with this part. There is just a big difference between casting a spell without people noticing that you cast a spell and not having people notice you at all.
quietly humming a tune is about as much of a performance check as jumping to conclusions is an athletics check. The skill description is pretty explicit that you are not performing if there is not an audience present. If it didn't, it wouldn't really be a charisma check, and the entire skill wouldn't be about impressing an audience.
Now wandering out into the crowd, getting everyone's attention and then casting illusory creature behind them, so that you can turn and scream, and attempt to deceive everyone that you are just as scared by the creature as everyone else, that is a great use of melodious spell. Or performing out on the street in general proximity of a suspect the your party wants to interrogate, and then secretly casting spells on the person with out them noticing that it is you casting spells on them, that is a great use of the feat as well. It definitely has its uses and a Melodious spell bard and an illusionist wizard could pair together well in the party of ultimate deception. But you would still probably want the illusionist leading with the actual main illusion, while maybe the bard distracts and deceives, because the illusionist has convincing illusion, and the bard won't be having to sustain the spell.
I never argued that a bard can't participate in the illusionist play style, or the under cover caster, but the idea that they are better at it than the wizard, especially the illusionist is underselling the great feats wizards get for doing this in a particularly effective way. Also, a prepared spell list is very good for an illusionist because you will not always be wanting to cast each of your illusion spells at either their highest or their lowest level, based upon the situation you are entering into, and the flexibility of being able to heighten your spells to the level you need them without having learned them at that level is a big boon as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Melodious spell is not about avoiding notice. Its about hiding your spellcasting. To rule that you cannot hide your spellcasting because you are performing just makes the feat a waste of space.
Well, from our interpretation, people see you performing, they just don't see you casting. It allows for flexible shenanigans, just much less so than silent casting.
For instance, you're perfoming in front of a noble lord and you're using charm so that he likes you more. Nobody will ever see you cast the spell, nothing out of the ordinary, and still you'll win the grand prize.
Or you're playing the drums and, while everybody's watching you, you cast invisibility on a friend of yours. Or sleep on those guards in the corner, who will suspect you if they're dozing off ?
But none of our GM will ever allow a performance to be discreet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would probably allow a discreet performance as a GM. Though, if nobody can see your performance there isn't really much of a need to make a roll.
Whether it's possible to make discreet performances or not has no bearing on my Melodious Spell ruling. You can't hide an extremely noticeable action behind something extremely discreet, and Melodious Spell does not remove the overtly noticeable aspects of casting a spell, it merely hides them behind a performance.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even as someone invested in the discussion, I think the question about what constitutes a performance is probably a separate rules focused discussion than a continuation of whether the new errata has nerfed the wizard.
If your GM lets you hum quietly and call that a performance, then silent spell is not going to look like as incredible feat as it is, but if you show up to tables expecting for inconspicuous mime acts and quiet whispered songs to fly as performances, you have a good chance of being disappointed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even as someone invested in the discussion, I think the question about what constitutes a performance is probably a separate rules focused discussion than a continuation of whether the new errata has nerfed the wizard.
If your GM lets you hum quietly and call that a performance, then silent spell is not going to look like as incredible feat as it is, but if you show up to tables expecting for inconspicuous mime acts and quiet whispered songs to fly as performances, you have a good chance of being disappointed.
This.
Not to nitpick since it has little bearing on the broader topic, but performance specifically says "You are skilled at a form of performance, using your talents to impress a crowd or make a living."Then, the DC of the task is based on the audience
Untrained audience of commoners
Trained audience of artisans
Expert audience of merchants or minor nobles
Master audience of high nobility or minor royalty
Legendary audience of major royalty or otherworldly beings
This, for most DM, means that performing is trying very hard to get all eyes on you, not the other way round.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ostensibly this thread: "How well balanced is the wizard compared to other classes and monsters?"
Actually this thread: "If a bard casts in the woods, and no one's around to clap, was it a performance?"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Depends on if someone uses Speak with Plants later, I guess.Ostensibly this thread: "How well balanced is the wizard compared to other classes and monsters?"
Actually this thread: "If a bard casts in the woods, and no one's around to clap, was it a performance?"
Doesn't have to speak if they can see: and don't forget the woodlands animals. I'm sure squirrels are curious about what all the miming is about.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Doesn't have to speak if they can see: and don't forget the woodlands animals. I'm sure squirrels are curious about what all the miming is about.Depends on if someone uses Speak with Plants later, I guess.Ostensibly this thread: "How well balanced is the wizard compared to other classes and monsters?"
Actually this thread: "If a bard casts in the woods, and no one's around to clap, was it a performance?"
Maybe the wolf pack living in the forest wouldn't mind a little show before their dinner time, either.
So being a mime is not being a performer now.
What dos a mime have to do with anything?
Might aswell also stop those that are doing card tricks and simple mundane illusions.
Or these? Why would these be treated differently?
On the way someone better tell everyone to stop practicing alone. They need an audience to make any performance.
Where are you required to practice in the game? Is that a downtime activity I missed? ;)