Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Zepherin 02-15-06, 05:55 AM	Exactly how does bard music work when it comes to concentration and duration? Take inspire courage as an example. It takes a standard action to start and continues for as long as the bard sings + 5 rounds. But does singing count as concentration, requiring a standard action, or can the bard keep singing without taking any additional actions? Hope you can help with this.
Zilvar 02-15-06, 08:37 AM	Exactly how does bard music work when it comes to concentration and duration? Take inspire courage as an example. It takes a standard action to start and continues for as long as the bard sings + 5 rounds. But does singing count as concentration, requiring a standard action, or can the bard keep singing without taking any additional actions? Hope you can help with this.Starting a bardic music effect is a standard action. Some bardic music abilities require concentration, which means the bard must take a standard action each round to maintain the ability. Even while using bardic music that doesn’t require concentration, a bard cannot cast spells, activate magic items by spell completion (such as scrolls), spell trigger (such as wands), or command word. Just as for casting a spell with a verbal component, a deaf bard has a 20% chance to fail when attempting to use bardic music. If he fails, the attempt still counts against his daily limit. In short, yes, additional actions are required.
Milo HoBo 02-15-06, 10:17 AM	Since there seems to be no maximum for how long a song can be sung, wouldn't a bard be able to sing 1 song, and therefore only use 1 bardic music use, from one encounter to the next as long as he maintains concentration? That's kindof screwy. Do you allow this in your games?
Blank_the_Bard 02-15-06, 10:53 AM	In my game, we've just house ruled this aspect of bardic music. It takes a standard action to begin the music and a move action to continue it. This allows the bard to continue his buff and still actually take part in combat, if in a reduced way. As for just continuing the song between encounters, you have to take into account 1) Anyone making even a decent listen check will hear the party coming a few hundred yards away, allowing for more ambushes, and 2) With even a move action to maintain the song, that means that you'll be double moving every round for possibly hours on end. If your DM doesn't outright forbid singing this long, he may insist that you have something like Endurance to pull it off.
Zilvar 02-15-06, 11:52 AM	Technically, the bard who wanted to do that could take the Subsonics feat, and never trip ambushes. I don't think it would be out of whack to modify the drowning rules to come up with outer bounds for how long a bard could maintain his song before becoming fatigued, and then exhausted.
Dark Brandon 02-15-06, 12:12 PM	Since there seems to be no maximum for how long a song can be sung, wouldn't a bard be able to sing 1 song, and therefore only use 1 bardic music use, from one encounter to the next as long as he maintains concentration? That's kindof screwy. Do you allow this in your games? He could but you ever listen to a song, 1 song...for hours on end? There's a reason when the bards were eaten there was much rejoycing. I wouldn't mind a song going on for the duration of combat and maybe a bit afterwords. If they get real bad about it, make the player sing for as long as his bard does. Eventually, everyone will get tired of his singing and tell him to stop.
Shadowfax7 02-15-06, 01:09 PM	In short, yes, additional actions are required. Additional actions, but NOT Standard Actions or Move Actions. Any song not requiring concentration (which would be any song from the PHB other than Fascinate, Inspire Competence or Song of Freedom) doesn't require a Standard Action or Move Action to maintain. It's basically a free action or no action at all. A Bard could sing (songs not requiring concentration), fight and move in the same round, but he couldn't talk, shout, whisper, cast spells, activate magic items by spell completion (such as scrolls), or activate magic items by magic word (such as wands).
Zilvar 02-15-06, 02:31 PM	Additional actions, but NOT Standard Actions or Move Actions. Any song not requiring concentration (which would be any song from the PHB other than Fascinate, Inspire Competence or Song of Freedom) doesn't require a Standard Action or Move Action to maintain. It's basically a free action or no action at all. A Bard could sing (songs not requiring concentration), fight and move in the same round, but he couldn't talk, shout, whisper, cast spells, activate magic items by spell completion (such as scrolls), or activate magic items by magic word (such as wands).OK. That's an interesting take. Let me get this right...if the description of the ability doesn't use the word 'concentration', you argue that it requires no real action to maintain the bardic song. I think this is a relevent quote... 'Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort.'. Maintaining a performance (be it instrumental, song, dance, or oration) over the course of an entire round (or several rounds) is not 'a very small amount of time'. If you can justify this, or support it with FAQ or rules, I'd be very interested in seeing it. My own bard just lost a certain amount of power and funcationity in our running campaign because we determined, based on the rules section quoted in my above post, that bards could not cast spells or attack while maintaining the various bardic musics that needed to be maintained to function.
Nelyo 02-15-06, 04:53 PM	Look at it this way: The rules define that when you are using a bardic music ability which requires concentration, it takes a standard action each round to maintain. Since the rules don't define an action that a bard needs to take to maintain a bardic music ability which does not require concentration, then you don't need to use an action to maintain said music. The rules then tell you that even if you don't need concentration, there are certain things that you can't do while maintaining a bardic music effect. This list includes many things which are standard actions. They wouldn't need to tell you that you can't do these things while using bardic music if you were already using up your standard actions to maintain the music. Nowhere in the PHB does it say that the bard has to take additional actions to maintain bardic music, except where it specifically says that abilities requiring concentration require a standard action each round. Thus, maintaining bardic music which doesn't require concentration doesn't require a full-round, standard, move, or free action. It is a non-action, like a warlock applying an eldritch essense to his blast or changing which opponent you get a bonus against from the Dodge feat.
Shadowfax7 02-15-06, 07:57 PM	OK. That's an interesting take. It's not an interesting take, it's the rules. The proof you are looking for is the absence of a rule stating that it takes a Standard Action or Move Action to maintain any Bardic Music ability. What you should be looking for is a rule stating that it does, and when you can't find it . . . then you have your answer. OK, so maybe it isn't a Free Action since if it was, it would be stated in the rules. I was trying to make a point that it wasn't a Standard Action or Move Action. It is just an action that doesn't take up a Standard Action, Move Action or Free Action. An unnamed action, if you must call it something. For example, if your Fighter PC likes to sing a battle hymm when he goes into combat . . . would you require him/her to expend a Standard Action, Move Action or Free Action to sing ??
Zilvar 02-15-06, 11:30 PM	In the absence of a line that states "This bardic music ability is immediate and does not require concentration", I am more apt to believe that any sustained bardic ability does, in fact, require concentration to maintain. It is a reasonable reading of the rules. To answer your question, I would err on the side of 'one rule to fit them all'. As speaking more than 'a few sentences' is beyond the scope of a free action, I would assume that singing a hymn would be a standard action (exactly, in fact, what is required for any bardic performance).
eyelessgame 02-15-06, 11:41 PM	OK. That's an interesting take. Let me get this right...if the description of the ability doesn't use the word 'concentration', you argue that it requires no real action to maintain the bardic song. I think this is a relevent quote... 'Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort.'. Maintaining a performance (be it instrumental, song, dance, or oration) over the course of an entire round (or several rounds) is not 'a very small amount of time'. If you can justify this, or support it with FAQ or rules, I'd be very interested in seeing it. My own bard just lost a certain amount of power and funcationity in our running campaign because we determined, based on the rules section quoted in my above post, that bards could not cast spells or attack while maintaining the various bardic musics that needed to be maintained to function. Starting a bardic music effect is a standard action. Some bardic music abilities require concentration, which means the bard must take a standard action each round to maintain the ability. Even while using bardic music that doesn’t require concentration, a bard cannot cast spells, activate magic items by spell completion (such as scrolls), or activate magic items by magic word (such as wands). It distorts the language quite a lot to suggest that bardic music abilities that don't require concentration would still require a standard action. It's not as clean and clear as one might like, because the text does not easily fit itself into the "action" hierarchy (not/immediate/free/swift/move/attack/standard/full/one-round). There is an explicit list of what you cannot do when using bardic music that doesn't require concentration: cast spells, use spell completion items, use spell trigger items, use command words. Continuing to sing (without concentration) does not take an action -- we can tell this because it is textually contrasted with singing with concentration taking an action. Instead, continuing to sing is doing something analogous to using up one of your bard's hands -- it is using up his voice, which is something he has one of, just as he has two hands. You must have your voice in order to cast verbal-component spells or use spell completion items, just as you need a free hand to cast somatic-component spells. It appears not to take an action to continue to sing, any more than it takes an action to continue to hold an item you picked up last round. But it does require continued use of your voice. Since you don't need your voice to attack, continuing to sing does not interfere with attacking. It requires, in my opinion, willful misunderstanding of the RAW to rule it any other way.
Ralphius_Maximus 02-16-06, 03:14 AM	It requires, in my opinion, willful misunderstanding of the RAW to rule it any other way. Nicely put. Personally, I think that the bardic music description is quite clear, and have never even considered reading it any other way, nor has anyone I game with.
FriendlyBiscuit 02-16-06, 03:20 AM	Let's tangle this thread a little more... What if they're playing an instrument with their hands? Then wouldn't it make more sense to allow verbal-only spells, command words, and speaking, while not allowing attacks, somatic spells, or the using of items? Just wondering, since most harpists and drummers don't play their instruments with their mouths or tongue...
CaoSlayer 02-16-06, 04:26 AM	Let's tangle this thread a little more... What if they're playing an instrument with their hands? Then wouldn't it make more sense to allow verbal-only spells, command words, and speaking, while not allowing attacks, somatic spells, or the using of items? Just wondering, since most harpists and drummers don't play their instruments with their mouths or tongue... he could speak perfectly, but cant cast spells or activate items because they need concentration and isnt posible to have both the song and the spell in the mind at the same time. The only exception it is a feat on complete adventurer that actualy allows you to do it disguising the spell in the way.
themissinglynk 02-16-06, 01:12 PM	I had to sign up, just to get my two-cents-worth in on this one. I agree with most of the concensus here. Let's tangle this thread a little more... What if they're playing an instrument with their hands? Then wouldn't it make more sense to allow verbal-only spells, command words, and speaking, while not allowing attacks, somatic spells, or the using of items? Just wondering, since most harpists and drummers don't play their instruments with their mouths or tongue... I think that the "performance" method is a choice that can lead to many play-styles. A bard with sword skills may choose "singing" so that he can keep his hands free for battle. A bard with significant spellcasting may choose "drumming" or "playing the spoons" so that he can use Verbal spells, or "dance" so that he can incorporate somatic and verbal spell components. Each type is going to require specific handicaps. Whether it is tumble or balance rolls in order to continue during a battle, or concentration checks. If the "performance style" is chosen well, then the character should be able to continue - providing they can pass any checks - without using an action. For example, if your Fighter PC likes to sing a battle hymm when he goes into combat . . . would you require him/her to expend a Standard Action, Move Action or Free Action to sing ?? I think that a fighter singing a battle hymn is a great argument for this issue. Anyone can run around singing - it is not a problem, but the fighter is singing for himself, and not trying to bring about magical effects. A bard could sing all he wants to during a battle, but if his singing involves the weaving of magical effects, and he takes a blow to the stomach - he will have to concentrate to continue singing "in a magical manner". Where's that leave me? Well, probably "at GM's Discretion", but considering that each performance method will require some sacrifices, and some level of "check" to ensure that he/she is able to continue the performance without losing the magical abilities he is attaching to it. Whew... pick it apart, friends!
CaoSlayer 02-16-06, 01:28 PM	The thing it is that using bardic music isnt like casting a spell. Using a song it is more easy, a bard never causes an AoO when starting a song and can perfectly perform in heavy armor without troubles. That it is because bardic music it is easier to pull, it is like singing in real life, an artist can perfectly stop a second to take this breath or say something like "I love [insert the local place]" without ruining the song.
Zilvar 02-16-06, 04:16 PM	Using a song it is more easy, a bard never causes an AoO when starting a song and can perfectly perform in heavy armor without troubles.The AoO thing. Is that stated in the bard description? I don't see it in the SRD, but I might have missed it. I'm willing to accept that I'm wrong on the matter, but I've been looking for a better reason than the ones given so far. I just found something that satisfies me (hey..it's a good place to start). Some bardic abilities are Spell-Like. Some are supernatural. The Su abilities are the ones that have been argued as not requiring concentration, which somewhat fits in with the description of what a Su ability is. The Spell Likes, though, should provoke AoO's when used, and would require concentration and whatnot, based on what a spell-like is. Anyway, to most of you..thanks for the input. While it wasn't my thread, I appear to be the only person standing on the left side of the fence. :)
mrpopstar 02-16-06, 05:42 PM	Zilvar: OK. That's an interesting take. Let me get this right...if the description of the ability doesn't use the word 'concentration', you argue that it requires no real action to maintain the bardic song. I think this is a relevent quote... 'Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort.'. Maintaining a performance (be it instrumental, song, dance, or oration) over the course of an entire round (or several rounds) is not 'a very small amount of time'.If the description of a bardic music ability does not stipulate the need for concentration then one is meant to infer that it requires a negligent amount of time to maintain (i.e. a 'free action'). I find it also relevant that the excerpt you quoted went on to state that calling out to your friends (i.e. verbally communicating) is justified as a 'free action'. Bardic music is assumed 'singing' by default, therefore no action is required to maintain its effects. The act of maintaining Inspire Courage while playing an instrument is also considered a free action as a means of balance in terms of bard styles. Instrument playing is already limiting once one takes into consideration the fact that such a bard is denied weapon and shield use. The AoO thing. Is that stated in the bard description? I don't see it in the SRD, but I might have missed it.The fact that the SRD does not stipulate that a bard suffers an attack of opportunity for producing a bardic music effect is blatant evidence that he does not do so. The rules are quite frank. You are reading much too deeply. Some bardic abilities are Spell-Like. Some are supernatural. The Su abilities are the ones that have been argued as not requiring concentration, which somewhat fits in with the description of what a Su ability is. The Spell Likes, though, should provoke AoO's when used, and would require concentration and whatnot, based on what a spell-like is.Page 142 of the Player's Handbook v3.5 should clear all of this up for you.Spell-Like abilities require concentration and provoke an attack of opportunity. Supernatrual abilities do not require concentration and do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Extraordinary abilities do not require concentration and do not provoke attacks of opportunity. Note: It goes without saying that these guidelines should be followed with 'unless stated otherwise in the ability's description' Friendly Biscuit: What if they're playing an instrument with their hands? Then wouldn't it make more sense to allow verbal-only spells, command words, and speaking, while not allowing attacks, somatic spells, or the using of items? Just wondering, since most harpists and drummers don't play their instruments with their mouths or tongue...Using different instruments to produce bardic music effects allows different amounts of versatility. There are instruments that allow the use of spells that contain solely Verbal components to be cast while playing them. The Complete Adventurer explains all of these rules in detail. CaoSlayer: he could speak perfectly, but cant cast spells or activate items because they need concentration and isnt posible to have both the song and the spell in the mind at the same time. The only exception it is a feat on complete adventurer that actualy allows you to do it disguising the spell in the way.The feat Disguise Spell only allows you to cast spells as part of a performance with a chance at hiding the fact that you are doing so. It does not allow you to cast spells with an instrument you happen to be performing with unless that instrument allows you to cast spells while performing with it. In fact, if you are performing with an instrument that allows you to cast spells then you can cast spells freely, it will just be obvious to everyone that you are doing so. themissinglynk: I think that a fighter singing a battle hymn is a great argument for this issue. Anyone can run around singing - it is not a problem, but the fighter is singing for himself, and not trying to bring about magical effects. A bard could sing all he wants to during a battle, but if his singing involves the weaving of magical effects, and he takes a blow to the stomach - he will have to concentrate to continue singing "in a magical manner".I believe that you are confusing the effects of bardic music. For example: a bard using Inspire Courage is not singing in a 'magical manner' (evidenced by that fact that the bonuses derived from hearing such a song cannot be dispelled). The bard is simply singing, yet his words have an effect unlike the words of other men (they are 'supernatural', if you will). When you hear him sing it fills you with the willingness to succeed, the morale to conquer, and the cadence of working in tandem with your fellows. His words inspire you, whereas that singing fighter's words simply fill your ears with sound. Thusly, a bard is simply singing and therefore does not require concentration checks to maintiain such singing. Unless he is working some sort of deeper, intricate, hypnotic effect (i.e. Fascinate), which requires his undivided attention. Let it be stated that this effect is still not 'magical'; though it is described as 'magic-like' due to its unfathomable capability.
Zilvar 02-16-06, 06:18 PM	The fact that the SRD does not stipulate that a bard suffers an attack of opportunity for producing a bardic music effect is blatant evidence that he does not do so. The rules are quite frank. You are reading much too deeply.No, you're ignoring your right hand to spite your left. Unless otherwise stipulated, a spell-like is a spell-like, and follows those rules. Several bardic music abilities are spell-likes, with no other stipulations that I can see. Thank you for demonstrating the differences, which I had already stated.
Shadowfax7 02-16-06, 07:31 PM	A bard could sing all he wants to during a battle, but if his singing involves the weaving of magical effects, and he takes a blow to the stomach - he will have to concentrate to continue singing "in a magical manner". Remember that HP are abstract, thus you aren't taking any "real" damage until you hit 0 HP for non-lethal damage (such as taking a blow to the stomach) or negative HP for lethal damage (in which case you would be unconscious, unless you have Diehard, and that is a whole other story).
Zilvar 02-16-06, 08:07 PM	Remember that HP are abstract, thus you aren't taking any "real" damage until you hit 0 HP for non-lethal damage (such as taking a blow to the stomach) or negative HP for lethal damage (in which case you would be unconscious, unless you have Diehard, and that is a whole other story).Not to derail the thread, but that's trivially easy to disprove given the ruleset. You must make a saving throw vs. poison for every single point of damage by a poisonous animal. If there were no 'real' damage, you wouldn't have to.
mrpopstar 02-17-06, 01:32 AM	Zilvar: No, you're ignoring your right hand to spite your left. Unless otherwise stipulated, a spell-like is a spell-like, and follows those rules. Several bardic music abilities are spell-likes, with no other stipulations that I can see.I have in no way refuted this claim. I find your disregard for what I have previously submitted an exercise in futility. I am well aware of what the rules of this game entail and I have evidenced this understanding above. If you reread my previous submission you will realize that I entered this debate with full comprehension that the bardic music effects carried with them the stipulations associated with 'spell-like' and 'supernatural' abilities. How do you surmise I am ignoring facts in spite of reason? Please evidence my inconsistency. Thank you for demonstrating the differences, which I had already stated.Your post, which contained a fair amount of deliberation, simply mused at the differences between the special ability descriptions and the similarities in regard to how we were all approaching the adjudication of the various bardic music effects. I was supporting the bit of reasoning you offered as a debate point with evidence from the rulebooks (i.e. agreeing with you).
Zilvar 02-17-06, 08:33 AM	I find your disregard for what I have previously submitted an exercise in futility. I am well aware of what the rules of this game entail and I have evidenced this understanding above. If you reread my previous submission you will realize that I entered this debate with full comprehension that the bardic music effects carried with them the stipulations associated with 'spell-like' and 'supernatural' abilities.Your comment: The fact that the SRD does not stipulate that a bard suffers an attack of opportunity for producing a bardic music effect is blatant evidence that he does not do so.is what I referring to. The rules need not stipulate that Fascinate (to pick an example) provokes an attack of opportunity, because it is a spell-like. If it did not provoke, the rules would have to state that as an exception.
mrpopstar 02-17-06, 11:54 AM	Zilvar: need not stipulate that Fascinate (to pick an example) provokes an attack of opportunity, because it is a spell-like. If it did not provoke, the rules would have to state that as an exception.I was under the impression that we were all in common agreement that '(sp)' was considered descriptive text. I considered the inclusion of the '(sp)' descriptor as stipulation in and of itself, dictating that the use of Fascinate (to use your example) did in fact provoke an attack of opportunity. Obviously the statement you quoted was intended for bardic music effects that lacked such stipulation. Your post in no way exemplifies a lack of understanding on my part. You are merely reiterating what I have already submitted to this discussion.
Shadowfax7 02-17-06, 11:58 AM	You must make a saving throw vs. poison for every single point of damage by a poisonous animal. Maybe I am not understanding your sentence . . . but you make a save vs. poison for each attack from a poisonous animal that causes damage, not for every point of damage ??