Post/Author/DateTime	Post
MaximumHavoc 07-25-06, 09:56 PM	Bards and Beguilers have fairly similar spell lists, so I have begun to compare the two classes. Do you think that the Beguiler class, with its 9 levels of spells, is stronger than the Bard class, with its 6 levels of spells? Of course, each class has its own unique features. My question is do you think that one is better than the other.
Seerow 07-25-06, 10:24 PM	It's really more fair to compare the Beguiler to the Rogue than the Bard. The Bard's role is buffing, which the Beguiler doesn't really get much of iirc. I'd call it pretty even. Now compared to a rogue..? Eh, maybe.
MaximumHavoc 07-26-06, 11:47 AM	It's really more fair to compare the Beguiler to the Rogue than the Bard. You might be right, but I really am interested in hearing what people think about Beguilers versus Bards.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 10:31 AM	No one else thinks that Beguilers seem much stronger than Bards?
Vrellum 07-27-06, 10:56 AM	I think they are. Beguilers are much better casters: Beguilers know all the spells on their list. They can add a few wiz/sorc spells to their list, such as shadow conjuration, shades, etc. They get their spells earlier than bards and they can cast them more often. They don't have access to many spells that cause direct damage (but neither does the bard, not meaningful damage anyway) and both classes tend to rely on illusions or enchantments to combat opponents or get away. In this regard the beguiler has a huge advantage (more spells, gets spells sooner, knows more spells and gets higher level spells). Because they get higher level spells and can cast their spells more times per day, they can make better use of metamagic than bards. Beguilers and bards are both good at skills and the bard will probably have an advantage in the social arena, but the beguiler will have the advantage in the recon/rogue area. Plus the beguiler will probably have more skill pts because of their greater reward for higher int (and likewise a lower cha). Beguilers get trapfinding. Combined with high skill points, search, disable device, spot, listen, move silently, hide (and invisibility, silence, disguise self,etc.) they make excellent substitutes for rogues as well. Downsides, poor reflex save and poor BAB vs average BAB and no bardic music and the bard is better at buffing. However, the bard's most useful buff is his music and many of his spell buffs grant morale bonuses so they're not all that useful. One of the best bardic buffs is haste and the beguiler can do it sooner and more often than the bard. Beguilers don't get any healing spells, a small benefit to the bard.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 11:47 AM	I agree. The difference in maximum spell levels (9 vs 6) is the 800 lb gorilla, to me.
Leibel 07-27-06, 12:03 PM	I'd say Beguiler's overall are better than bards - an extra 3 spell level's and Trapfinding are good. Rogue is a good class but the other class's with trapfinding are nice because it used to be that you had to have a rogue in the group and now you have other options.
LordPendragon 07-27-06, 12:19 PM	IM(extremely biased)O, I think Bards are better. From a numerical standpoint, Beguilers own Bards in almost every way. But from a versatility standpoint, Bards are superior. Bards can use most of the most powerful skills in the game. Hide, Move Silently, Listen, Diplomacy, Bluff, Sense Motive. That set alone allows the Bard to sneak reliably, detect enemies reliably, handle social situations masterfully, and even combat intelligent enemies using Improved Feint. Not to mention that Bardic Music and Extend Music allows him to use a single Music use, and basically turn himself into a Fighter for 10 rounds (and really help out his other physical combatants). Make that 2 Music uses at the start of a battle in later levels, and everyone gets a nice +4 to saves and AC on top of the other boni. It's true that the Bard's spellcasting does leave something to be desired, but I'm okay with that... Glibness is one of the greatest spells ever :D I realize Beguilers get a very nice set of abilities and spells (illusions are fun), but the 1/2 BAB really hinders them when compared to the versatility of a Bard. Also, two words... Bardic Knowledge.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 12:39 PM	Bards can use most of the most powerful skills in the game. Hide, Move Silently, Listen, Diplomacy, Bluff, Sense Motive. You do realize that Beguilers get all of these skills, right? Also, two words... Bardic Knowledge. I prefer Bardic Knack, better all-around use, imho. Bardic Music is the class' strongest distinguishing quality, but there is just something about 9th level spells, when Bards are only casting 6th level spells, that I find hard to get past.
Leibel 07-27-06, 12:43 PM	Three extra spell levels mean a lot as in A LOT. Dnd version 3.0 and/or 3.5 is biased toward's spell caster's so those extra spell levels are a major advantage(which is not to say the Bard is useless).
Pyke_Moonshadow 07-27-06, 12:46 PM	I would say that a Beguiler is a more powerful spellcasting class than a Bard. One of the reasons I hate the class actually. I also agree with whoever said that the Bard is more versitile though.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 02:08 PM	I know that the Beguiler class is intended to be a full caster class, so it would be unfair merely to compare that class as a caster to the bard class, which is intended to be a hybrid caster. I mean to compare the two classes as a whole. In that fashion, I still the that the beguiler class clearly is the stronger class, overall.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 02:10 PM	I wonder whether giving the bard class d8 or d8 plus full BAB would be good a good idea.
-Defiler of Souls- 07-27-06, 02:41 PM	bards are far far more versatile then beguilers... bard gets medium BaB, beguiler gets low Bards can heal, beguilers can't in general, since the bard's spell list is greater the bard can have a greater variety of types of spells...also, the bard's spell list is growing ever larger with new spells printed in supplements, whereas the beguiler has few of past supplement's new spell, and will be unlikely to get many in the future(with the exception of the small number of wizard spells the aquire, which arelimited to enchantment or illusion anyway) bards have bardic music(which is especially useful when you take into account the feats bardsmay take for extra types of music like snowflake dance)...also remember that bards can do more then just buff with bardic music. Also significant is that due to thier higher BaB the arcane strike feat is far more useful to the bard then to the beguiler and by the way, I'm not saying the bard is better, merely that it is not inferior. Both classes are viable and how powerful they are is ultimately a factor of how well the character is built and played. But in the end I don't see why your making such a comparison, the beguiler has more in common with the sorcerer or the rogue then with the bard. it's effectively a double school ultra-specialized spellcaster with a rogue spell list. it trades spells of other schools for better skills and abilities that put it into a rogue/wizard flavor. The bard is no such class, but rather more of a hybrid archtype then a simple modification that is effectively a sub-species of spellcaster.
Vrellum 07-27-06, 03:06 PM	Its difficult to say that bards are more versatile than beguilers. For example, both get UMD as a class skill. That makes both of them very versatile, provided they can obtain the correct equipment. Thus it would be pretty trivial for anything above a low level beguiler to heal between encounters using a wand of cure light wounds. Bards get medium BAB and some decent protection spells, such as mirror image and displacement. So they can melee in a pinch, they're not good at it, but they're not horrible. Coupled with their d6 hp, typically low str and/or AC and I don't think this is too much of a selling point. Bards get bardic music which is great at buffing the party and bardic knowledge (and a good reflex save--no evasion though). How do those abilities stack up against the beguiler getting disable device and knowing all the spells on their spell list as well as getting more spells, getting them sooner and getting higher level spells? Personally, I don't think it compares all that favorably unless your game has a lot of allies that are effective in combat for you to buff. I don't think arcane strike is more advantageous to bards than beguilers. Bards don't get many spells per day and their spells are lower level. At 7th level a bard gets 1 3rd level spell (provided 16 or higher cha) a beguiler gets 5 3rd level spells (provided int 16 or higher). A bard either has to decide to get a mediocre bonus to his attack for one round at the expense of not getting to use his 3rd-level spell or use one of his 3 2nd level spells. If his spells are any good, he's probably better off casting a spell than trying to melee. Since the beguiler gets a lot of spells he isn't hurt so much by using a few to power arcane strikes. Things don't get anybetter as they go up levels either, at 14 level bards get 2 5th level spells and beguilers get 7 5th level, 5 6th level and 3 7th level. And finally at 20th level bards get 4 6th level spells while beguilers get 6 6th level, 6 7th level, 6 8th level and 5 9th level. Also bards top out at 4 spells per day at a specific level and beguilers top out at 6.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 03:17 PM	But in the end I don't see why your making such a comparison, the beguiler has more in common with the sorcerer or the rogue then with the bard. I am comparing the beguiler class to the bard class because of a few reasons. The two classes share the majority of their respective skills. Most of the spells on the beguiler spell list also are on the bard spell list. Both classes enjoy no arcane spell failure in light armor. Their weapon proficiencies are somewhat similar. These are reasons enough for me to want to compare them.
-Defiler of Souls- 07-27-06, 04:42 PM	First off(and out of context with the rest of this post :D ), Vrellum, your last post was IMHO very well composed, your points were well put and in most cases(even in my opinion, which is quite contrary to your's) good ones. That aside however, i think it is best for a discussion such as this that magic items aren't considered. Magic items throw any discussion of balance and relative power out of proportion, and tend to create an easy solution to any argument for people on botjh sides of a debate. secondly, I think that way to much attention is(as aloways) being paid to the end game. Whenever people compare classes they always seem to make allcomparisons at level 20. 1st through 5th level the bard has the same level of spells as the beguiler, 6th-11th level and at 13th level the bard is but 1 spell level behind, 12th level and 13-16th level the bard is 2 behind, and only for the last 3 levels is the bard 3 spell levels behind. out of 20 levels 12 (60%) of alllevels the bard is within 1 spell level of the beguiler and for only only 4 levels (20%) does the beguiler have 3 extra spell levels. And all the while does the bard retain his advantages(though for the first few levels the BaB difference isn't so great) thirdly, my view on "versatility" is as follow(and may differ from other peoples'): Versatility alls into twocatagories: pre-game versatility and in- game versatility. Pregame being options open while creating the character(this is probably the less significant of the two) and in-game being the chracter's ability to be versatile in game. Where pre-game versatility is concerned, you can reletively easily build the bard to specialize in just about any role(for example, a TWF bard with snowflake dance and arcane strike has a considerable damage output, especially if you throw in a few buffs and/or oversized TWF+power attack) This kind of versitility is more of a representation of the adaptability of a class, demonstrated by the variety of ways of playing the class. In-game versatility is more akin to the definition most people associate with the word "Versatility" on these boards; that is to say, the ability to adapt on the fly in order to best react to the current situation. This type of versatility is almost a direct product of what the character is capable of doing to some extent. out of these two definitions I would say that the bard surpasses the Beguiler in both the former and latter. In the former, the bard can be built into far more variations then the beguiler(thbeguiler does 2 thing, and does them very well: impedes/confuses/disables/disrupts enemies and contributes the important "rogue skills" to the party). The bard on the other hand can be built into a competent meleer, either of the two roles the beguiler fills(though the beguiler will at later levels do these significantly better then the bard), several varieties of support character, or with a bit of planning a variety of other archetypes such as a spellswordish character, an archer,or even a tank. In the latter, Regardless of his build the bard is capable of meleeing, healing, buffing, disrupting enemies, using offensive magic on enemies, using mostof the rogue skills, or summoning monster adaquately(granted they don't do most of these as well as the normal classes meant for these jobs unless the job is the focus of thier build, but they do it well enough to make a difference or fill in for a fallen or disabled party member in a pinch) So balance aside, I'm certain that if nothing else the bard is more versatile(at least in my 2 definitions of the words) then the beguiler.
K 07-27-06, 04:54 PM	The 9th level spells is usually not a big deal. Most people don't play 18th level characters under any circumstances, so what it is that they're doing at that point is largely conjecture for any of us. The big deal is that Beguilers get to use any 1st level spell 4 times per day at 1st level. That's immensely versatile and horrendously powerful. On the Shadowcasters discussion, the Wizard was rolling over opposition simply on the fact that he had 2 color sprays prepared. Now imagine exactly that, but doing it in Studded Leather, spontaneously, 4 times a day. Beguilers own Bards. They own Wizards too nless those Wizards are going to go deep into Conjuration and Necromancy. The Beguiler has level appropriate Divinations, Illusions, Enchantments, and Battlefield Control. And really, that's 90% of why you have any Arcane Spellcaster at any level. Beguilers are amazing, and if they are allowed in your game, will rapidly find themselves being the star of virtually any situation.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 04:55 PM	Okay, so bards win the verstility contest. Let's try a somewhat different question: 10 bards battle 10 beguilers, arena style. Which group do you think is likely to win, and why do you think so? I know this can be a tough question, what with all of the illusion and enchantment magics flying about. But, give it a try. What do you think?
K 07-27-06, 05:37 PM	Okay, so bards win the verstility contest. Not even close. You can claim that maybe the bard class is more versatile than the Beguiler class, but any particular Bard isn't even close to the versatility of a particular beguiler. A Bard knows 4 cantrips at first level, and he can cast them spontaneously a total of 2 times a day. Also he has 1 use of Bardic Music, which is frankly about a 1st level effect. A Beguiler, on the other hand, has 14 first level spells at first level. He can cast them spontaneously, and has 4 uses per day. So the Beguiler has more effects, he has more powerful effects, and he can use them more interchangeably and more often. He is astoundingly more versatile. It's not even close. Now, a bard might go off and do healing or direct damage, or any of a number of other things that Bardic magic can do if you select those spells known. But The no matter which options the bard chooses, those options are fixed. The Beguiler has more options available to him, and they are better options in most cases. Compare color spray and sleep to daze and flare. Really, those are the attack spells that a Beguiler and a Bard have respectively at first level. The comparison is no comparison at all.
CaoSlayer 07-27-06, 07:20 PM	Okay, so bards win the verstility contest. Let's try a somewhat different question: 10 bards battle 10 beguilers, arena style. Which group do you think is likely to win, and why do you think so? I know this can be a tough question, what with all of the illusion and enchantment magics flying about. But, give it a try. What do you think? Bards will cast silence on themselves and beat the crap of the muted beguilers... Or everyone will use invisibility or improved invisibilty so nobody knows which it is a bard or which it is a beguiller.
MaximumHavoc 07-27-06, 07:32 PM	Bards will cast silence on themselves and beat the crap of the muted beguilers... Or everyone will use invisibility or improved invisibilty so nobody knows which it is a bard or which it is a beguiller. LOL, too funny.
psionichamster 07-27-06, 07:59 PM	hmm...tough question... just had my beguiler almost killed the other night, so it got me thinking about what to replace him with in the group. only 2 real options: rogue, or bard. rogue gets me the same skills i've been using, Bard gets the illusion spells (and a little CLW, to salt the meat) that being said, i don't really think there's a fair comparison to a Bard with ANY of the other classes. really. i mean, social skills, 3/4 bab, 2 good saves, bardic knowledge, & bardic music? all of those things could make a solid class, but then you throw in a good spell list and spontaneous casting? :drool: me likey bards.... it was the trapfinding/disable device that sold me on the beguiler, though. and Dip, my gnomish beguiler 3, really uses those skills to the utmost. so, what i think it boils down to is: the beguiler can't "replace" a bard in the party, any more than a rogue or sorcerer could. sure, they can get some of the same abilities, and even surpass them in some areas, but they can't do all of them by the same token, a bard in the party will not prevent you from that poison trap, or have all those nice illusions to be throwing around...hell, just having ALL those spells is a nice class feature. namaste' the hamster
-Defiler of Souls- 07-27-06, 10:00 PM	Not even close. You can claim that maybe the bard class is more versatile than the Beguiler class, but any particular Bard isn't even close to the versatility of a particular beguiler. A Bard knows 4 cantrips at first level, and he can cast them spontaneously a total of 2 times a day. Also he has 1 use of Bardic Music, which is frankly about a 1st level effect. A Beguiler, on the other hand, has 14 first level spells at first level. He can cast them spontaneously, and has 4 uses per day. So the Beguiler has more effects, he has more powerful effects, and he can use them more interchangeably and more often. He is astoundingly more versatile. It's not even close. Now, a bard might go off and do healing or direct damage, or any of a number of other things that Bardic magic can do if you select those spells known. But The no matter which options the bard chooses, those options are fixed. The Beguiler has more options available to him, and they are better options in most cases. Compare color spray and sleep to daze and flare. Really, those are the attack spells that a Beguiler and a Bard have respectively at first level. The comparison is no comparison at all. we're talking about class versatiluity not spell versatility. Class versatility is a far more globalized broad category, what basic action/role can you accomplish. Spellcasting is one such action, and what your pointing out is the versatility of bards' and beguilers' spells know/spell list. Also keep in mind that power and quantity doesn't directly corilate with versatility. even spells known doesn't entirely contribute to versatility much when, like the beguiler, all the spells known do the same GENERAL type of thing. so even in the specific catagory of spellcasting versatility the bard contends with the beguiler in versatility(as thier spells are able to DO more typesof things). And even if the beguiler's spells are more versatile, it's not by much and the other aspects of the bard put it far ahead of the beguiler in all over class versatility.
K 07-27-06, 10:20 PM	Bards will cast silence on themselves and beat the crap of the muted beguilers... Beguilers can cast spontaneously in silence from level 5 on. Bards, on the other hand, can't do jack in a silence field. The Beguilers would pay good money for the Bards to try that.
CaoSlayer 07-28-06, 03:44 AM	A level 1 bard spell allows to negate silence... I cant remember the name... Anyway it is a very pointless fight since both are focused on will save spells and both have good will saves.
Pyke_Moonshadow 07-28-06, 07:42 AM	A level 1 bard spell allows to negate silence... I cant remember the name... Anyway it is a very pointless fight since both are focused on will save spells and both have good will saves. Joyous Noise I think.
MaximumHavoc 07-28-06, 10:53 AM	Also keep in mind that versatility is only one aspect of what makes a class good. Sheer power is another. And there are other aspects, too. It is hard for any class to go up against the bards in a comparison of versatility only. But, my question is which is the better class . . . overall. Okay, let me try one more way of framing this debate: if you were to impose a favored class upon humans, and you could only choose between bards and beguilers, which would you pick, and why? I think his might provide the most honest sentiment of which of those classes is regarded as better, if any . . . maybe. :)
LordPendragon 07-28-06, 11:19 AM	On the question of Bards vs Beguilers in an arena type of setting, I think it would go like this... Both sides rely on Will save spells, and both sides have high Will saves. Many many spells are going to be saved against and wasted. Both sides will have Invisibility and Greater Invisibility. Unless we assume that each side also has some sort of ability to see invisible enemies, this is going nowhere; so it is assumed. If the Bards plan their strategy well, they will have 2 or 3 "flagbearers" using Bardic Music, pumping out the uses every 10 rounds to keep the 3 main effects on the whole team (that gets a +6 to attack, +4 to damage, AC, and all saves, and +2d10 temporary hp). Add in a healer or 2, and you've got an effective unit. The Beguilers will most likely have a strategy opposite to the Bards... split up, try to remain unnoticed, and bomb their enemy with spells. The main problem is that the Bards will be making most of their saves; let's assume DC 30 spells from the Beguilers, since they specialized in illusions. Bards would have a Will save around 20, 24 after being Music-ed. That means most Bards are going to fall to save-or-die spells (like Wierd). Played effectively, I think the Bards can win, but Beguilers are at an advantage because of their more devastating spells. If I were to choose a favoured class for Humans, it would be Beguiler, because Bard is already covered by Gnomes. If Bard weren't already taken, I would choose Bard, since Beguiler is more suited to Gnomes anyways.
MaximumHavoc 07-28-06, 11:31 AM	Personally, I feel that Beguiler should be the favored class for gnomes (for obvious reasons), and Bard should be the favored class for elves (enchantments, charisma-based, music, singing, performing arts, knowledgeable, rapier/longsword).
LordPendragon 07-28-06, 11:37 AM	As compelling as your points are, I hate Elves and want them nowhere near my Bard. They already get credit for just about everything in the D&D multiverse anyways (and somehow have offshoot races that are just as strong as Half-Orcs, but with some other useful abilities and only half the drawbacks).
EvilVegan 07-28-06, 12:03 PM	Skill Monkey : Goes to beguiler, due to 6 + int skill points per level AND int-based casting (with no MAD), also a better skill set AND it still has everything a bard has. Trapfinding : Bard can't do this without a dip into rogue, which would reduce their effectiveness as a bard, plus disable device is CC. PrC availability : Beguiler can go into archmage with no problem and shadowcraft mage with proper prc / spell selection (Beguiler 9/mindbender 1/shadowcraft mage 5/archmage 5 is IMO better than any bard combo I've seen, I mean arcane fire and mastery of shaping with shadow evocation is wicked) Buffs/heals : Both of these categories go to bard, obviously. Good thing Beguiler never claimed to be a buffer or a healer, whereas a bard claims to be an enchanter/illusionist. Party Face : Either can do fine as party face, bard has higher charisma (typically) but other than that they're equally matched with spells and skills (including speak language, which is important). Enchanting: Fascinate is very useful if you can get the drop on your enemy and can allow a bard to solo defeat things several CRs higher than him, but once combat begins a beguiler will come out on top due to his higher save DCs (higher level spells + single ability dependency+abilities to increase save DC even further VS bard's MAD+lower level spells) Combat: A bard has average BAB and a beguiler has poor and the bard can buff better. This means that at 20th level a bard has +5 over the beguiler, + bardic music, + spells (if he spends/wastes his spells known on the buffs). + bard can heal. Good thing a beguiler isn't supposed to be in combat and would probably just go invis and cast save-or-be-my-friends til the bard failed a save (which wouldn't take too long if the beguiler were properly built) or he'd cast save-o-b-m-fs on the bard's beefy barbarian/fighter friend and have him do the combat. Combat comparisons between a bard and beguiler are pointless, but the bard would win (as would any other class, beguilers are distinctly non-combative). Versatility: A bard may be able to win with versatility, but in doing so they subdue their ability to match a beguiler in every other category, since they have to sacrifice their spells known to become versatile (they COULD be a healer/buffer/off-tank, but then they'd be worse at enchanting/illusions, and really they shouldn't try to out-enchant/illusion a beguiler anyway). And really it all depends on what you consider versatile. When talking casters it is whoever can cast the more useful spells at the required time, when talking bard however it opens up into who can fill more party roles more easily. A bard can be third-rate healer, third-rate combatant, first-rate buffer, and first-rate party face, typically without much trouble. A beguiler can charm, dominate, confuse, and create illusions much better without even picking a feat or worrying about spell selection. (They aren't supposed to be versatile.) But all in all there isn't much comparing. If you are comparing for the things that a beguiler is supposed to be used for they come out several magnitudes better. If you compare it on the things a bard can do that a beguiler isn't even remotely supposed to be doing then yes obviously a bard is going to win in those categories. I mean, a fighter is going to be better at fighting than a beguiler. A cleric will be better at healing (and everything else). A druid will be better at growing an herb garden. WTF is the point of comparing them? A bard is better at healing than a fighter, does that make him a better class?
eggplantm 07-28-06, 12:06 PM	Comparing the bard to the beguiler can be tricky as they are both designed around very different ideas. The bard is a jack of all trades. He has the BAB, skills, spells, armor and weapon proficiencies and abilities to fill almost any class role to some extent. He can cover for anyone in a pinch and his main focus is working with the team. He has lots of buffing & helpful spells including healing and his bardic music is designed to make his party stronger or make things easier by removing targets by fascinating them. He is a team player and can help in any situation. The beguiler was not meant to be a jack of all trades but he is still pretty versatile. He is meant to be the sneaky trickster/spellcaster. The beguiler can fill in for the rogue or the wizard (barely) but that is all. He is a full spellcaster with all of the benefits who specializing in being smarter, trickier and better informed than everyone else. In this last area, the beguiler and bard overlap a little. The beguiler overlaps with the wizard in a weird way. He cannot cast any really damaging spells and he cannot really buff but if he is sneaky (and why would he not be) his spells are hard to resist so the beguiler can usually defeat some foes with one spell that might have taken a lot more effort or attempts. The beguiler is also not a team player. He can be quite social and help out in those areas but he has little to contribute to team play over a regular wizard. A beguiler can do well on his own and will often choose to like the rogue, but who doesn't play with a team for most of the time. I'll look at it another way. If I had the standard party of Wizard, fighter, rogue and cleric and I was told I had to replace one of them with the choice a bard or beguiler I would accept the bard for any of them but the beguiler for maybe the rogue or wizard only and I would still rather see a bard as he helps out everyone else.
jaelis 07-28-06, 12:21 PM	Beguiler is a very strong class, and probably a lot easier to play than bard. But don't underrate the bardic music ability. Besides the nice buffs, the fascinate/suggestion abilities are very very strong. I have no problem equating the mass suggestion ability with a 9th level spell. It is limited by the mind-affecting, language-dependent features, and it's no good if the bad guys get the drop on you. But otherwise, it basically wins any fight: at high levels, fascinate might as well not have a save, and you can keep attempting suggestions until they work.
LordPendragon 07-28-06, 12:24 PM	Don't forget that Green ear and Requiem will let you fascinate/suggest plants and undead, respectively.
Vrellum 07-28-06, 12:25 PM	First off(and out of context with the rest of this post :D ), Vrellum, your last post was IMHO very well composed, your points were well put and in most cases(even in my opinion, which is quite contrary to your's) good ones. That aside however, i think it is best for a discussion such as this that magic items aren't considered. Magic items throw any discussion of balance and relative power out of proportion, and tend to create an easy solution to any argument for people on botjh sides of a debate. secondly, I think that way to much attention is(as aloways) being paid to the end game. Whenever people compare classes they always seem to make allcomparisons at level 20. 1st through 5th level the bard has the same level of spells as the beguiler, 6th-11th level and at 13th level the bard is but 1 spell level behind, 12th level and 13-16th level the bard is 2 behind, and only for the last 3 levels is the bard 3 spell levels behind. out of 20 levels 12 (60%) of alllevels the bard is within 1 spell level of the beguiler and for only only 4 levels (20%) does the beguiler have 3 extra spell levels. And all the while does the bard retain his advantages(though for the first few levels the BaB difference isn't so great) thirdly, my view on "versatility" is as follow(and may differ from other peoples'): Versatility alls into twocatagories: pre-game versatility and in- game versatility. Pregame being options open while creating the character(this is probably the less significant of the two) and in-game being the chracter's ability to be versatile in game. Where pre-game versatility is concerned, you can reletively easily build the bard to specialize in just about any role(for example, a TWF bard with snowflake dance and arcane strike has a considerable damage output, especially if you throw in a few buffs and/or oversized TWF+power attack) This kind of versitility is more of a representation of the adaptability of a class, demonstrated by the variety of ways of playing the class. In-game versatility is more akin to the definition most people associate with the word "Versatility" on these boards; that is to say, the ability to adapt on the fly in order to best react to the current situation. This type of versatility is almost a direct product of what the character is capable of doing to some extent. out of these two definitions I would say that the bard surpasses the Beguiler in both the former and latter. In the former, the bard can be built into far more variations then the beguiler(thbeguiler does 2 thing, and does them very well: impedes/confuses/disables/disrupts enemies and contributes the important "rogue skills" to the party). The bard on the other hand can be built into a competent meleer, either of the two roles the beguiler fills(though the beguiler will at later levels do these significantly better then the bard), several varieties of support character, or with a bit of planning a variety of other archetypes such as a spellswordish character, an archer,or even a tank. In the latter, Regardless of his build the bard is capable of meleeing, healing, buffing, disrupting enemies, using offensive magic on enemies, using mostof the rogue skills, or summoning monster adaquately(granted they don't do most of these as well as the normal classes meant for these jobs unless the job is the focus of thier build, but they do it well enough to make a difference or fill in for a fallen or disabled party member in a pinch) So balance aside, I'm certain that if nothing else the bard is more versatile(at least in my 2 definitions of the words) then the beguiler. Thank you :P However, I think it is reasonable to include equipment in a discussion about what a class can do. DnD assumes characters have access to a great deal of equipment and classes and encounters are based on what characters with equipment can accomplish. And beguilers with equipment can do a lot of stuff-- such as heal via UMD. I wasn't trying to over emphasize the end game (I picked 7th level because that is the level my current campaign is at). At every level beguilers can cast more spells per day than a bard and at 1st level and from 6th level on, beguilers get higher level spells too. Couple this with the beguilers good spell list (against most foes anyway) and the fact he knows every spell on his list and it makes for a very versatile character. I will agree though, that bards are very versatile characters. I just don't think they get a slam dunk win over beguilers. On a different note, I don't think an arena combat would be the best way to determine which is a better class. However, provided the characters were midlevel or higher I think the beguilers would be the ones casting silence, then greater invis and beating up on the bards-primarily through silent spells.
K 07-28-06, 01:06 PM	Both sides will have Invisibility and Greater Invisibility. Unless we assume that each side also has some sort of ability to see invisible enemies, this is going nowhere; so it is assumed. Well, since every single Beguiler has the ability to see invisible enemies, I guess that's a punch in the face for the Bards, neh? Beguilers have a big spell list that is filled with awesome Divinations and Battlefield Control Conjurations in addition to the Illusions and Enchantments and they can cast any of it spntaneously. There's an answer to almost any problem on the basic Beguiler list, and if it's anywhere on the basic list then any Beguiler can automatically respond appropriately to that problem. Bards have a very tiny number of spells known. Many of them don't have improved invisibility. But every Beguiler has improved invisibility and see invisible. Every. Single. One. Sure, a Beguiler can know Shadowspray, the spell that Tekken Juggles characters to death based on Fort Saves, but they don't need to. A Beguiler has more answers to more problems with their mandatory abilities than any two Bards have no matter what their spells known are. The difference is that stark. Beguilers aren't just better than Bards, they are fully capable of replacing the Rogue and the Wizard at the same time. Bards are not.
Pyke_Moonshadow 07-28-06, 01:13 PM	So, now the Beguiler has jumped to busted in my opinion.
FinnBlacke 07-28-06, 09:01 PM	I like bard song abilities 4TW. That said, the beguiler is obviously a stronger caster compared to the Bard. The beguiler also edges the bard out in the skill list IMO (barely). Beguilers are stealthy casters with high-end control spells. They make up a specialty class. Bards are generalists. I someone asks me which one we should add to the party the first thing I am going to look at is what the party make up already consists of. If it's 5th I am looking for in a balanced party I will choose the bard because he can supplement each other class there and replace any in a pinch. If I need to fill in a core role the beguiler easily would be my preferred choice over a bard for the party scout/trapmonkey and I would only consider the Bard as the party mage over the beguiler depending on his build depending on the makeup of the rest of the party, but If the party needs more healing or better combat support the beguiler doesn't cut it. It seems kinda silly to compare a specialist caster to a generalist just because they can both do some of the same things. Generally a bard does do whatever he has in common with the other classes less efficiently than that other class. It would be pretty poor game design to have a class that can do as much as a bard can and do it better than the other classes. :D My personal preference is for the bard. I like the versatility, the extra healing, buffs, nice skills, a little better combat and some bard songs. And at higher levels those bard songs can carry some smack when necessary. I think part of the issue with this kind of a discussion is we are really comparing apples to oranges. The earlier comments of comparing the beguiler to the rogue are probably more appropriate.
Osedox 07-28-06, 10:28 PM	The Beguiler is a main character, they can almost fully fill either a Rogues or Wizards shoes in most situations, but a Bard can do neither. The bard makes everyone better as they are like the ideal 5th character (also in this category are Dragon Shamans and Marshals). Any party can benifit from the bard, whereas some characters in a party with a Beguiler may feel like their niche is being threatened. I think Bards, Dragon Shamans, and Marshals are supposed to be underpowered, because they suck when they are alone. When you add them into a group with the 4 primary character archetypes (caster, sneak, priest, warrior) they make everyone better. So their individual weaknesses are subsumed by their overall benifit to the party. In that spirit I think it is wrong to even compare the two (its as off as asking "what is more useful a bow or a sword?" neither, until you need the other) Personaly I prefer support type characters because they are fun to play and can sometimes be more satisfying than playing a primary role. Thats no to say that I dont love Beguilers, because they rock socks (Whenever I wish I was a DnD character in real life, this is what I want to be.)
FinnBlacke 07-28-06, 11:39 PM	The Beguiler is a main character, they can almost fully fill either a Rogues or Wizards shoes in most situations, but a Bard can do neither. The bard makes everyone better as they are like the ideal 5th character (also in this category are Dragon Shamans and Marshals). /agree