a few questions [Archive] - Wizards Community

a few questions [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
LoricDAHPaladin
08-01-04, 09:58 PM why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers? ( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default )

why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before?

how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds?

why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )?

how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music?

who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are?

is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort?

why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more?

I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints?
gbnogkfs
08-01-04, 11:23 PM Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin
why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers? ( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default )

beacuse part of the Bard class and spirit is that their magic comes from their souls; why should you give magic to all intruments performers? Like you said, they're not all bards

why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before?

you mean with respect to AD&D?
if I remember correctly, bards used to cast druid spells in 1st edition
with regard to the 2nd-3rd edition change (I really can't remember what bards were able to cast), probably they though it best suited the class.

how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds?

because that is one of the features of the Paladin class; if you don't like it, drop it.

why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )?

are you kidding?

how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music?

probably they save some time for something else

who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are?

the authors probably (or some nasty printers)

is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort?

up to you, as for the other classes around.

why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more?

I can't say about fourth edition, since in Italy we are still playing with the previous one...
and in fact I can't say much more about third as well; I have never really liked bards, so maybe it was for them to be more appalling

I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints?

well, i don't like bards, and like clerics, but I recognise it's a matter of flavour much much more than mechanics.
TheDarkestOfAngels
08-01-04, 11:45 PM Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin
why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers? ( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default )
Only bards are bards and only bards gain bardic power. Bardic powers being such as that as their musical abilities and talents.

why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before?
Bard can only cast up to 6th level spells. Therefore, they cannot "cast as much healing" as a cleric in any sense.

how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds?
Being a paladin requires religeous devotion and principal. Being a bard does not.
however, the paladin's multiclass restrictions aren't the same in all campaign worlds. In forgotten realms, for instance, it is possible for paladins to multiclass in certian classes without loosing the ability to level as a paladin again.
For instance, being a paladin of helm means you can multiclass as a fighter without said restriction.

why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )?
Clerics spontaneously cast curing spells, as per the normal PHB rules. They have since the advent of 3e (and they have more curing options available in 3.5 than what they did with 3e, since mass cure spells didn't exist in 3e.)

how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music?
bards are not a "focused" class. They are dabblers in virtually all things. Hense, their bardic lore, musical abilities, prodigeous skill points, an unrivaled skill list, moderate BAB, some maritial proficiencies, and spellcasting ability. They're not necessarily at the top of their game in anything (except musical/performing/charismatic talents and general knowledge) but they can do a little bit of anything.

who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are?
I would presume that the game designers designed them that way. Not that that's a bad thing, after all.

EDIT:
Bards are a skilled class, after all, similar to a rogue or a ranger. THey're not frontliners like the fighter or barbarian, they're not spellcasters like the wizard or cleric, but they're suited to fill the "expert" role in the party -- same as the rogue and ranger. (though the ranger these days is more 1/2 and 1/2 of expert and frontliner.

is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort?
Given a bard's chaotic nature and the inability to be both lawful and a bard at the same time, I do recognise that bards do have colleges, but I doubt that "training" to become a bard is only roughly formalized, at best.

why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more?
I'd be perfectly happy if I never saw a 4th edition. THough it will eventually come, I hope it won't for a long, long time.
In any case, there seems to be nothing indicating that a bard's abilities are there to "pander" bard players.

I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints?
I don't know about anyone else, though I do recognise some general sentiment that the cleric is extremely powerful, but I doubt that most, if any of those claims are true in any sense.
However, if you haven't noticed, I should point out that I haven't seen any threads or posts for a long time regarding any need to power up the bard. If I saw one, I'd likely attempt to shoot it down. The bard has enough overall power backing them up.
BlaineTog
08-02-04, 12:09 AM Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin
why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers?Why does the flimsy excuse that a Cleric's magic comes from his god not prove enough to provide magic for all worshipers of the divine?

( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default )They arn't; most are Experts.

why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before?Multiclassing is very, very weird. How can someone multiclass INTO Barbarian or Sorcerer?, for instance. In any case, Its because they learned how.

And for the record, bards *can't* cast healing anywhere near as well as the Cleric. They lose out on Heal, the single best healing spell in the game (with the possible exception of Mass Heal). That is a major major loss for a healer.

how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds?Because Bards don't have a CoC.

why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )?See Darkest's responce.

how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music?Because they are JoATs, and they don't devote that much time to music. Music practice can probebly be done in between other activities, though.

who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are?The designers. Because Bards are JoATs.

is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort?Its left open ended, as are most classes in this respect. Once again, multiclassing doesn't always hold up to logical scrutiny.

why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more?Because they kinda sucked before and now are balanced.

I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more.Bards do not get anywhere near the combat ability or raw spellcasting power of the cleric. The loss of Heal and 9th level spells alone is a huge loss.

And the players who think the 3.5 bard needs more haven't seen a bard in action. Which is balanced.

Why am I the only one that hates bards this much,IIRC, you stated elsewhere months ago that you dislike liberal arts-types and respect specialization. There's nothing wrong with that, but the Bard is a JoAT, not a specialist at all.

Why do you think you hate bards so much? [/cheap Pycology trick]

and why does no one else recognize my complaints?Because you claim that the Bard is too powerful when its really not.
LoricDAHPaladin
08-02-04, 07:22 PM Bravo Blaine, and I mean that. You have lucidly and effectively countered every question, and without animosity. I applaud you. You are right...bards are NOT the only class that does not hold up to logical scrutiny.

~Tips hat~
gbnogkfs
08-02-04, 07:58 PM I don't think i quite like such behavior... on the verge of trollness
LoricDAHPaladin
08-02-04, 11:14 PM I was and am quite genuine in my praise of Blaine, though I still think that bards should not have healing. If you refer to the original questions, you could report the post or see if the moderators will chastise me. It will not change the way I post, but it might get me banned sooner, rather than later.

By the by, my queries were rather genuine, and Blaine made some good points. I do not like bards any the better, but having a fresh perspective is enlightening.
Ranger REG
08-03-04, 04:35 AM Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin

I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints?
For some, a bard is a storyteller, an orator, even a cheerleader. For others, they're jack-of-all-trade, but master-of-none. One can understand why they dabble in the most basic yet limited features of the other classes. Unlike a cleric, bard cannot raise the dead nor resurrect. Unlike a fighter, bard cannot be proficient with many weapons nor can they specialize, even attack as well as fighters (BAB). Unlike a thief, he can't pick lock or find possible trap, he can't even sneak attack.

And yet, in all my experience, not many gamers wish to play a bard. In fact, I've seen only 3 bard PC's. You may think it is overpowering, but even that is not enough to appeal gamers.
BlaineTog
08-03-04, 04:50 AM Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin
You have lucidly and effectively countered every question, and without animosity. I applaud you.We try. :DYou are right...bards are NOT the only class that does not hold up to logical scrutiny.Well, at least when multiclassing comes into play. Strictly speaking, multiclassing for virtually every class makes so little sense as to not even be funny; how can one just pick up how to be a wizard when it takes other years of intense study to even learn a 1d4+1 magic missile? How can you just suddenly gain knowldge of all martial and simple weapons in addition to all types of armor when you've only been using one or two of each?

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
LoricDAHPaladin 08-01-04, 09:58 PM	why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers? ( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default ) why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before? how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds? why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )? how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music? who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are? is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort? why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more? I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints?
gbnogkfs 08-01-04, 11:23 PM	Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers? ( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default ) beacuse part of the Bard class and spirit is that their magic comes from their souls; why should you give magic to all intruments performers? Like you said, they're not all bards why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before? you mean with respect to AD&D? if I remember correctly, bards used to cast druid spells in 1st edition with regard to the 2nd-3rd edition change (I really can't remember what bards were able to cast), probably they though it best suited the class. how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds? because that is one of the features of the Paladin class; if you don't like it, drop it. why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )? are you kidding? how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music? probably they save some time for something else who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are? the authors probably (or some nasty printers) is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort? up to you, as for the other classes around. why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more? I can't say about fourth edition, since in Italy we are still playing with the previous one... and in fact I can't say much more about third as well; I have never really liked bards, so maybe it was for them to be more appalling I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints? well, i don't like bards, and like clerics, but I recognise it's a matter of flavour much much more than mechanics.
TheDarkestOfAngels 08-01-04, 11:45 PM	Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers? ( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default ) Only bards are bards and only bards gain bardic power. Bardic powers being such as that as their musical abilities and talents. why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before? Bard can only cast up to 6th level spells. Therefore, they cannot "cast as much healing" as a cleric in any sense. how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds? Being a paladin requires religeous devotion and principal. Being a bard does not. however, the paladin's multiclass restrictions aren't the same in all campaign worlds. In forgotten realms, for instance, it is possible for paladins to multiclass in certian classes without loosing the ability to level as a paladin again. For instance, being a paladin of helm means you can multiclass as a fighter without said restriction. why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )? Clerics spontaneously cast curing spells, as per the normal PHB rules. They have since the advent of 3e (and they have more curing options available in 3.5 than what they did with 3e, since mass cure spells didn't exist in 3e.) how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music? bards are not a "focused" class. They are dabblers in virtually all things. Hense, their bardic lore, musical abilities, prodigeous skill points, an unrivaled skill list, moderate BAB, some maritial proficiencies, and spellcasting ability. They're not necessarily at the top of their game in anything (except musical/performing/charismatic talents and general knowledge) but they can do a little bit of anything. who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are? I would presume that the game designers designed them that way. Not that that's a bad thing, after all. EDIT: Bards are a skilled class, after all, similar to a rogue or a ranger. THey're not frontliners like the fighter or barbarian, they're not spellcasters like the wizard or cleric, but they're suited to fill the "expert" role in the party -- same as the rogue and ranger. (though the ranger these days is more 1/2 and 1/2 of expert and frontliner. is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort? Given a bard's chaotic nature and the inability to be both lawful and a bard at the same time, I do recognise that bards do have colleges, but I doubt that "training" to become a bard is only roughly formalized, at best. why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more? I'd be perfectly happy if I never saw a 4th edition. THough it will eventually come, I hope it won't for a long, long time. In any case, there seems to be nothing indicating that a bard's abilities are there to "pander" bard players. I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints? I don't know about anyone else, though I do recognise some general sentiment that the cleric is extremely powerful, but I doubt that most, if any of those claims are true in any sense. However, if you haven't noticed, I should point out that I haven't seen any threads or posts for a long time regarding any need to power up the bard. If I saw one, I'd likely attempt to shoot it down. The bard has enough overall power backing them up.
BlaineTog 08-02-04, 12:09 AM	Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin why does the flimsy excuse that a bard's magic comes from his soul not prove enough to provide magic for all instrument performers?Why does the flimsy excuse that a Cleric's magic comes from his god not prove enough to provide magic for all worshipers of the divine? ( I am not buying that all performers of instruments are bards by default )They arn't; most are Experts. why are bards able to to cast almost as much healing as a cleric when they were NEVER able to do so at all before?Multiclassing is very, very weird. How can someone multiclass INTO Barbarian or Sorcerer?, for instance. In any case, Its because they learned how. And for the record, bards can't cast healing anywhere near as well as the Cleric. They lose out on Heal, the single best healing spell in the game (with the possible exception of Mass Heal). That is a major major loss for a healer. how is it that one can multiclass with bard and continue to gain levels in it, but as a Paladin this is not permissible in all worlds?Because Bards don't have a CoC. why are bards able to to cast healing ( at all ) spontaneously, but clerics are not ( prior to UArcana rules )?See Darkest's responce. how is it that bards are able to learn any martial skills when so much time is devoted to music?Because they are JoATs, and they don't devote that much time to music. Music practice can probebly be done in between other activities, though. who decided that bards should be quite as proficient with the enormous plethora of skills bestowed upon them as they are?The designers. Because Bards are JoATs. is bard training formalized, or does one arbitrarily decide to take the occupation of endeavoring to learn everything with his soul being the engine behind the effort?Its left open ended, as are most classes in this respect. Once again, multiclassing doesn't always hold up to logical scrutiny. why have the third and especially fourth editions pandered to the desire of bard players to have more, more and more?Because they kinda sucked before and now are balanced. I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more.Bards do not get anywhere near the combat ability or raw spellcasting power of the cleric. The loss of Heal and 9th level spells alone is a huge loss. And the players who think the 3.5 bard needs more haven't seen a bard in action. Which is balanced. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much,IIRC, you stated elsewhere months ago that you dislike liberal arts-types and respect specialization. There's nothing wrong with that, but the Bard is a JoAT, not a specialist at all. Why do you think you hate bards so much? [/cheap Pycology trick] and why does no one else recognize my complaints?Because you claim that the Bard is too powerful when its really not.
LoricDAHPaladin 08-02-04, 07:22 PM	Bravo Blaine, and I mean that. You have lucidly and effectively countered every question, and without animosity. I applaud you. You are right...bards are NOT the only class that does not hold up to logical scrutiny. ~Tips hat~
gbnogkfs 08-02-04, 07:58 PM	I don't think i quite like such behavior... on the verge of trollness
LoricDAHPaladin 08-02-04, 11:14 PM	I was and am quite genuine in my praise of Blaine, though I still think that bards should not have healing. If you refer to the original questions, you could report the post or see if the moderators will chastise me. It will not change the way I post, but it might get me banned sooner, rather than later. By the by, my queries were rather genuine, and Blaine made some good points. I do not like bards any the better, but having a fresh perspective is enlightening.
Ranger REG 08-03-04, 04:35 AM	Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin I really wish to know how people think that clerics are too powerful when bards get so much, and yet some players seem to think bards need more. Why am I the only one that hates bards this much, and why does no one else recognize my complaints? For some, a bard is a storyteller, an orator, even a cheerleader. For others, they're jack-of-all-trade, but master-of-none. One can understand why they dabble in the most basic yet limited features of the other classes. Unlike a cleric, bard cannot raise the dead nor resurrect. Unlike a fighter, bard cannot be proficient with many weapons nor can they specialize, even attack as well as fighters (BAB). Unlike a thief, he can't pick lock or find possible trap, he can't even sneak attack. And yet, in all my experience, not many gamers wish to play a bard. In fact, I've seen only 3 bard PC's. You may think it is overpowering, but even that is not enough to appeal gamers.
BlaineTog 08-03-04, 04:50 AM	Originally posted by LoricDAHPaladin You have lucidly and effectively countered every question, and without animosity. I applaud you.We try. :DYou are right...bards are NOT the only class that does not hold up to logical scrutiny.Well, at least when multiclassing comes into play. Strictly speaking, multiclassing for virtually every class makes so little sense as to not even be funny; how can one just pick up how to be a wizard when it takes other years of intense study to even learn a 1d4+1 magic missile? How can you just suddenly gain knowldge of all martial and simple weapons in addition to all types of armor when you've only been using one or two of each?