Class inclusion: Should Bard be in? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Class inclusion: Should Bard be in? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
silenced_shout
04-01-08, 02:16 AM 28. The world is a series of disks, hundreds to thousands of miles across, floating at various levels in space. A river connects all of these disks, flowing from the highest to the lowest in a series of spectacular waterfalls enchanted so that boats can move up and down them. At the higher disks, the river is pure and beautiful. The lower the disk, the more accumulated waste plagues the river, making it practically poisonous at the lowest couple of levels. Beneath the lowest level is the Hell, and it is traditional knowledge that the river begins it's course in heaven.

I'm thinking about maybe GMing a campaign that takes place in such a world as this (the disks being the material plane). The prototype name for this campaign is "Styx", and frankly, I'm having fluff problems as well as crunch problems. The worst of the crunch involve the playable classes.

These are the playable classes (not listed in any particular order)

Druid
Barbarian
Ranger
Fighter
Sorcerer
Artificer (sp?)
Paladin (not w/o retooling. alignment issues. :rant:)
Monk (same as paladin above :nonono:)
Rogue
Beguiler
Totemist (I'm an MoI freak. So sue me :pbbbtt:)
Warlock
Swashbuckler (yes, I have fighter, and I have rogue, but this swashbuckler is mechanically different. [base plan])
Shadowcaster (Like swashie, It'll be worth you're while to have around)

:confused: Notice anything?:confused:

So, is the bard REALLY all that essential to the process? If so, SHOW ME THE LIGHT!

P.S.: Go 'head, ask me where wizard went? In fact, ask me about all of the classes. I work very hard to make them special.
(it's somewhat of a power game, but you have to train for your feats. Much handwaving will proly be done. Overall, it isn't just XP-grabbing.)

Credit:
Orloff: Initial Idea
bkdubs123: Swashbuckler class makeover. Truly inspiring.
Hellsbells
04-01-08, 08:21 PM What happened to the hexblade and the... oh wait barbarian is there never mind. Yah so what happened to the hexblade, I dont care what people say, he in my top 5 man.

Also I note the lack of anything from ToB and two of the ToM classes. Did you have a reason for this or just not like them/not have the sources?

As for your question about the bard, Its basically a rogue with some magical ability and some cool flavor. There are other classes such as the beguiler who do the same thing but with less or more focus on combat or magic and with a different theme/choice of spells. Personally I like it but its really a matter of theme, people could do more or less the same thing with some multi classing
silenced_shout
04-02-08, 03:27 PM Well, I was thinking about a form of hexblade or warlock that wouldn't be dip classes. I didn't want to mess with hexblade, but liked the flavor and fluff of warlock. Even so, If someone wanted to play a hexblade, all they have to do, really, is talk it over with me.
To be brutally honest, I wanted to mesh the two (a sort of mega-hexblade), but I didn't like it. Plus, I had more balanceable ideas for the warlock.
Seriously, a hexblade that also had full (or even halfed) Eldrich blast progression?!?:nonono:
HermitIX
04-03-08, 12:53 PM Ok, I will bite, why don’t you have a wizard?

And I don’t see why you won’t let your players play a bard. It’s not a smack down class but if the players want to play a bard I would let them. In my group I usually have one or two players trying to take Bard. One campaign every one had a bard level or two. (They were a traveling band.)
silenced_shout
04-07-08, 03:11 AM It's not that I am prohibiting the bard class for no good reason. It's just that...while I do see the power of bardic "music" in all of its glorious forms (optimize Perform(oratory or comedy, perhaps even dancing) and see what I mean), is it worth basing a whole class around? A very unique ability, yes, but much harder to apply in battle than, say, spell-casting. Speaking of which...

:rant:[Rant on and on and on...]:rant:
what is that, 2/3 Spellcasting progression? (bard final level is 6 and gains new spell level about every 3 levels, while wizards' final is 9 and gain new spell levels once every 2 levels) So is s/he or isn't s/he some sort of caster? Like, I'm not saying all or nothing for spellcasting abilities: I'm totally for the Idea of half spellcasting progression (like ranger or paladin) and even a few SLAs as part of a PrC's bag o' perks.
It just suggest to me that that the creators of the v3.x bard class had to accompany the bardic music ability with 2/3 spell progression accentuates the hard time they probably had with just the ability on its own. Or, maybe it goes back to the AD&D days, I dunno.
In the meantime while I look that up, give me a reason why, rather than having to take a level or 2 of bard, simply find other ways to role play your musical career.
[Rant off]

As for why no wizard...
While there are 14 adventuring classes, adventurers as a whole are rare. The majority of the land comprises of NPC-type classes

Civilian (city laborer)
Survivalist (otherwise unskilled laborer)
Magewright (fans of szatany's work may recognize this class, int-based adept)
<name unknown> (adept with slight druidic undertones. based off the gleaner (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/gk7uKJeF296jRcx1NJw.html))
Aristocrat
Warrior

Rarer still are the unlisted classes. While they may exist in the game world with my consent, they won't have a society to call their own. The 14 listed classes have deep histories (much fluff) behind them. At best the wizard would be a dying breed, possibly the last of their kind.

Why the wizard is gone is simple: they were simply outshone and replaced by these artificers.:P Call blasphemy if you wish, but these are not your standard eberron artificers. In fact, all of the classes seem a tad bit tweaked, or bottom-heavy under normal circumstance. But there is one DIRE thing you must know about my world.

Ever notice that as you level up, so do the monsters? "Why are there a whole mess of tarrasque around :eek::confused::weep:" you whimper inquisitively as the DM fetches his big brick-o-dice. Well, that's not a problem in the land of Styx. Moderately static areas. But that also means more traveling for XP. On top of that, this game will end up on the roleplay-ish side as far as time spent in battle as opposed to time spent OOB & IC.
In short, level 20 is a thousand-mile journey indeed. Not the mention the feat mechanic...tough nuggets.

Just as well, it's gonna take me some 2-3 YEARS to fully realize this game. I want to see what 4.0 does: I'm planning to make this a Hybrid 3.5/4.0 (3.75:confused: ) game, but may shift towards either version as far as how it plays dependent on how much I like the new version. (the computerized stuff will come handy. If I can hack and change the preset races to my liking, it may be like 4.0.)

But yeah, the artificers are the new wizard. :plotting:I'm trying out a new non-vancian magic system:plotting:, and want artificers to be the only PC class that still uses the vancian (wizard) magic system. Metamagic feats will have to include non-vancian rules for how to handle enhanced magic. On the plus side...MAGIC MISSILES FOR ALL!!!!!!!!:evillaugh
silenced_shout
04-07-08, 03:23 AM Also, a quickie...(and a dublpost, sry)...does anyone ever want to be a cleric? In a game where they don't monopolize healing and zombie-turning, does anyine truely still want to play as a cleric?
Consider this before while you read my class list a third time, looking for your favorite heal-b****. It's not there.
silenced_shout
07-09-08, 05:04 PM No one's posting and even I'm starting to hate it. Just do all of the forum lurkers and account-users a favor and please delete this thread. Please??? kthanxbai!:D
elondir
07-09-08, 05:22 PM The bard excels at enchantments while also having a rogue skill set. Dominate person has a duration of days and requires only a single failed save. Diplomacy checks don't even get saving throws; if the bard can make all the enemy combatants go from hostile to unfriendly it's a successful encounter, without any bloodshed. And don't forget the glibness spell grants +30 to bluff checks. Bards can cure x wounds as well. So if your campaign is going to have lots of social encounters and not as much combat, definitely include it. The bard is really weak at dungeon delving.

Personally, I double the spells known for sorcerers and bards and give bards the wizard spell list (like they had in 2e) on top of the existing 3e bard list. It downplays the minstrel aspect and emphasizes the jack-of-all-trades aspect.
Moe
07-16-08, 08:14 AM You have added quite a lot of "specialized" classes (Beguiler and such), so that seems to be a focus of yours. The bard is always described as the opposite, so I think thats why you dont like it.
MinusInnocence
07-19-08, 02:44 PM I would posit that no class is really "essential to the whole process" of the way a campaign setting works. Even though your proposal is obviously a highly magical plane, the initial enchantment of the river and whatever maintenance it requires could be done by dragons, fey, outsiders, undead or any other innately magical creatures.

Support whatever classes you're comfortable and familiar with. What is good for the goose is good for the gander, and all that: players will be frustrated if you offer myriad classes and PrCs to NPCs but not to them. Aside from that, just try and have a good time. It sounds like a pretty cool setting, I recommend reading about the Ganges in India.
silenced_shout
08-26-08, 12:36 AM You have added quite a lot of "specialized" classes (Beguiler and such), so that seems to be a focus of yours. The bard is always described as the opposite, so I think thats why you dont like it.

...I'll give you that. I'm not a "Jack of all trades" kind of guy. It's just seems like a class with 3/4 BAB and spellcasting (Even if the spell list is minute to say the least) AND special abilities is just a little too much for me. May I note that I'm not to strict on "splatbook usage." (OHO! the truth comes out) The "Improvements" elondir advised just scare me. Especially since Glibness alone can derail any GM that isn't willing to slink down to the depths of "GM fiat". I'm such a GM, so you see my worry.

To MinusInnocence: you get my idea! Thank you! And I acknowledge your suggestion. The Ganges is such a great comparison to this trans-planar river; I think the research would be nothing short of a boon to me. Of course, It would have to take a backseat to my more scholastic preoccupations. (i.e. college homework)

in all honesty, I had abandoned this thread, thinking i had sullied it with my redonkulous [sic] doublepost. Moe, elondir, MinusInnocence...I thank you for re-kindling this old and worn-out subject. :)

In actuality, I thought about how to introduce the non-traditional specialist classes into the world. The first runthroughs with the world are short campaigns done with the traditional 11 classes. One by one (starting with warlock), the new classes are introduced and the traditionals not listed are eradicated. The way this happens depends on the way the sessions go. Once I have good bearings on how I think the new world will be run, I'll just go to my big adventure. (filliing in the unfilled plotholes with stories or origin/demise.)

the bard college is destroyed, so that's how bard class goes away. the god wars put an end to the cleric later in history (no cleric can adventure at the beheast of their god. This is because the god doesn't want their disciple to be competition later down the road) This is what I have planned out, but will ultimately be dictated by the players if I get this far. Bard would be the last of the traditional classes slashed. Also, bard kind of conflicts with beguiler, swashbuckler and (to some extent) sorcerer. to some extent. And by conflict, I mean that the listed classes can be made through the bard class easily: the listed class - my chosen classes that I like - are in turn pointless.

:twocents:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
silenced_shout 04-01-08, 02:16 AM	28. The world is a series of disks, hundreds to thousands of miles across, floating at various levels in space. A river connects all of these disks, flowing from the highest to the lowest in a series of spectacular waterfalls enchanted so that boats can move up and down them. At the higher disks, the river is pure and beautiful. The lower the disk, the more accumulated waste plagues the river, making it practically poisonous at the lowest couple of levels. Beneath the lowest level is the Hell, and it is traditional knowledge that the river begins it's course in heaven. I'm thinking about maybe GMing a campaign that takes place in such a world as this (the disks being the material plane). The prototype name for this campaign is "Styx", and frankly, I'm having fluff problems as well as crunch problems. The worst of the crunch involve the playable classes. These are the playable classes (not listed in any particular order) Druid Barbarian Ranger Fighter Sorcerer Artificer (sp?) Paladin (not w/o retooling. alignment issues. :rant:) Monk (same as paladin above :nonono:) Rogue Beguiler Totemist (I'm an MoI freak. So sue me :pbbbtt:) Warlock Swashbuckler (yes, I have fighter, and I have rogue, but this swashbuckler is mechanically different. [base plan]) Shadowcaster (Like swashie, It'll be worth you're while to have around) :confused: Notice anything?:confused: So, is the bard REALLY all that essential to the process? If so, SHOW ME THE LIGHT! P.S.: Go 'head, ask me where wizard went? In fact, ask me about all of the classes. I work very hard to make them special. (it's somewhat of a power game, but you have to train for your feats. Much handwaving will proly be done. Overall, it isn't just XP-grabbing.) Credit: Orloff: Initial Idea bkdubs123: Swashbuckler class makeover. Truly inspiring.
Hellsbells 04-01-08, 08:21 PM	What happened to the hexblade and the... oh wait barbarian is there never mind. Yah so what happened to the hexblade, I dont care what people say, he in my top 5 man. Also I note the lack of anything from ToB and two of the ToM classes. Did you have a reason for this or just not like them/not have the sources? As for your question about the bard, Its basically a rogue with some magical ability and some cool flavor. There are other classes such as the beguiler who do the same thing but with less or more focus on combat or magic and with a different theme/choice of spells. Personally I like it but its really a matter of theme, people could do more or less the same thing with some multi classing
silenced_shout 04-02-08, 03:27 PM	Well, I was thinking about a form of hexblade or warlock that wouldn't be dip classes. I didn't want to mess with hexblade, but liked the flavor and fluff of warlock. Even so, If someone wanted to play a hexblade, all they have to do, really, is talk it over with me. To be brutally honest, I wanted to mesh the two (a sort of mega-hexblade), but I didn't like it. Plus, I had more balanceable ideas for the warlock. Seriously, a hexblade that also had full (or even halfed) Eldrich blast progression?!?:nonono:
HermitIX 04-03-08, 12:53 PM	Ok, I will bite, why don’t you have a wizard? And I don’t see why you won’t let your players play a bard. It’s not a smack down class but if the players want to play a bard I would let them. In my group I usually have one or two players trying to take Bard. One campaign every one had a bard level or two. (They were a traveling band.)
silenced_shout 04-07-08, 03:11 AM	It's not that I am prohibiting the bard class for no good reason. It's just that...while I do see the power of bardic "music" in all of its glorious forms (optimize Perform(oratory or comedy, perhaps even dancing) and see what I mean), is it worth basing a whole class around? A very unique ability, yes, but much harder to apply in battle than, say, spell-casting. Speaking of which... :rant:[Rant on and on and on...]:rant: what is that, 2/3 Spellcasting progression? (bard final level is 6 and gains new spell level about every 3 levels, while wizards' final is 9 and gain new spell levels once every 2 levels) So is s/he or isn't s/he some sort of caster? Like, I'm not saying all or nothing for spellcasting abilities: I'm totally for the Idea of half spellcasting progression (like ranger or paladin) and even a few SLAs as part of a PrC's bag o' perks. It just suggest to me that that the creators of the v3.x bard class had to accompany the bardic music ability with 2/3 spell progression accentuates the hard time they probably had with just the ability on its own. Or, maybe it goes back to the AD&D days, I dunno. In the meantime while I look that up, give me a reason why, rather than having to take a level or 2 of bard, simply find other ways to role play your musical career. [Rant off] As for why no wizard... While there are 14 adventuring classes, adventurers as a whole are rare. The majority of the land comprises of NPC-type classes Civilian (city laborer) Survivalist (otherwise unskilled laborer) Magewright (fans of szatany's work may recognize this class, int-based adept) <name unknown> (adept with slight druidic undertones. based off the gleaner (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/gk7uKJeF296jRcx1NJw.html)) Aristocrat Warrior Rarer still are the unlisted classes. While they may exist in the game world with my consent, they won't have a society to call their own. The 14 listed classes have deep histories (much fluff) behind them. At best the wizard would be a dying breed, possibly the last of their kind. Why the wizard is gone is simple: they were simply outshone and replaced by these artificers.:P Call blasphemy if you wish, but these are not your standard eberron artificers. In fact, all of the classes seem a tad bit tweaked, or bottom-heavy under normal circumstance. But there is one DIRE thing you must know about my world. Ever notice that as you level up, so do the monsters? "Why are there a whole mess of tarrasque around :eek::confused::weep:" you whimper inquisitively as the DM fetches his big brick-o-dice. Well, that's not a problem in the land of Styx. Moderately static areas. But that also means more traveling for XP. On top of that, this game will end up on the roleplay-ish side as far as time spent in battle as opposed to time spent OOB & IC. In short, level 20 is a thousand-mile journey indeed. Not the mention the feat mechanic...tough nuggets. Just as well, it's gonna take me some 2-3 YEARS to fully realize this game. I want to see what 4.0 does: I'm planning to make this a Hybrid 3.5/4.0 (3.75:confused: ) game, but may shift towards either version as far as how it plays dependent on how much I like the new version. (the computerized stuff will come handy. If I can hack and change the preset races to my liking, it may be like 4.0.) But yeah, the artificers are the new wizard. :plotting:I'm trying out a new non-vancian magic system:plotting:, and want artificers to be the only PC class that still uses the vancian (wizard) magic system. Metamagic feats will have to include non-vancian rules for how to handle enhanced magic. On the plus side...MAGIC MISSILES FOR ALL!!!!!!!!:evillaugh
silenced_shout 04-07-08, 03:23 AM	Also, a quickie...(and a dublpost, sry)...does anyone ever want to be a cleric? In a game where they don't monopolize healing and zombie-turning, does anyine truely still want to play as a cleric? Consider this before while you read my class list a third time, looking for your favorite heal-b****. It's not there.
silenced_shout 07-09-08, 05:04 PM	No one's posting and even I'm starting to hate it. Just do all of the forum lurkers and account-users a favor and please delete this thread. Please??? kthanxbai!:D
elondir 07-09-08, 05:22 PM	The bard excels at enchantments while also having a rogue skill set. Dominate person has a duration of days and requires only a single failed save. Diplomacy checks don't even get saving throws; if the bard can make all the enemy combatants go from hostile to unfriendly it's a successful encounter, without any bloodshed. And don't forget the glibness spell grants +30 to bluff checks. Bards can cure x wounds as well. So if your campaign is going to have lots of social encounters and not as much combat, definitely include it. The bard is really weak at dungeon delving. Personally, I double the spells known for sorcerers and bards and give bards the wizard spell list (like they had in 2e) on top of the existing 3e bard list. It downplays the minstrel aspect and emphasizes the jack-of-all-trades aspect.
Moe 07-16-08, 08:14 AM	You have added quite a lot of "specialized" classes (Beguiler and such), so that seems to be a focus of yours. The bard is always described as the opposite, so I think thats why you dont like it.
MinusInnocence 07-19-08, 02:44 PM	I would posit that no class is really "essential to the whole process" of the way a campaign setting works. Even though your proposal is obviously a highly magical plane, the initial enchantment of the river and whatever maintenance it requires could be done by dragons, fey, outsiders, undead or any other innately magical creatures. Support whatever classes you're comfortable and familiar with. What is good for the goose is good for the gander, and all that: players will be frustrated if you offer myriad classes and PrCs to NPCs but not to them. Aside from that, just try and have a good time. It sounds like a pretty cool setting, I recommend reading about the Ganges in India.
silenced_shout 08-26-08, 12:36 AM	You have added quite a lot of "specialized" classes (Beguiler and such), so that seems to be a focus of yours. The bard is always described as the opposite, so I think thats why you dont like it. ...I'll give you that. I'm not a "Jack of all trades" kind of guy. It's just seems like a class with 3/4 BAB and spellcasting (Even if the spell list is minute to say the least) AND special abilities is just a little too much for me. May I note that I'm not to strict on "splatbook usage." (OHO! the truth comes out) The "Improvements" elondir advised just scare me. Especially since Glibness alone can derail any GM that isn't willing to slink down to the depths of "GM fiat". I'm such a GM, so you see my worry. To MinusInnocence: you get my idea! Thank you! And I acknowledge your suggestion. The Ganges is such a great comparison to this trans-planar river; I think the research would be nothing short of a boon to me. Of course, It would have to take a backseat to my more scholastic preoccupations. (i.e. college homework) in all honesty, I had abandoned this thread, thinking i had sullied it with my redonkulous [sic] doublepost. Moe, elondir, MinusInnocence...I thank you for re-kindling this old and worn-out subject. :) In actuality, I thought about how to introduce the non-traditional specialist classes into the world. The first runthroughs with the world are short campaigns done with the traditional 11 classes. One by one (starting with warlock), the new classes are introduced and the traditionals not listed are eradicated. The way this happens depends on the way the sessions go. Once I have good bearings on how I think the new world will be run, I'll just go to my big adventure. (filliing in the unfilled plotholes with stories or origin/demise.) the bard college is destroyed, so that's how bard class goes away. the god wars put an end to the cleric later in history (no cleric can adventure at the beheast of their god. This is because the god doesn't want their disciple to be competition later down the road) This is what I have planned out, but will ultimately be dictated by the players if I get this far. Bard would be the last of the traditional classes slashed. Also, bard kind of conflicts with beguiler, swashbuckler and (to some extent) sorcerer. to some extent. And by conflict, I mean that the listed classes can be made through the bard class easily: the listed class - my chosen classes that I like - are in turn pointless. :twocents: