Bardic Music Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Bardic Music Question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Sword_of_Spirit
03-17-07, 09:14 PM Okay, so the Perform skill in 3.5 is still broken, just broken in a different way than it was in 3.0. The big problem now is that bard's are crippled by the new perform system. In order for a bard to be reasonably well-versed in his bardic art, he has to take multiple perform skills--but that's just unrealistic from a game stance. He should only need one perform skill.

Here's where it gets interesting. The description of bardic music says that the bard must possess the minimum number of ranks in "a" perform skill to use the bardic music abilities that require that rank. It's very ambiguous, and it looks to me as if it might even be saying that a bard can use his ranks in his highest perform skill, regardless of what he is actually doing when he uses the bardic music.

If that interpretation is correct, the ranks in perform essentially "unlock" the musical magic, but it's not necessary to use the "right" perform skill ranks on, say, a countersong, to get the best effect. Therefore, at least a bard could settle for maxing out one perform skill that he can use to entertain people, while using whatever form of performance makes sense for the situation for his actual bardic music abilities.

If that interpretation is not correct (and hence the bard only uses his ranks in perform in the actual perform skill he is using), then the bard is reasonably going to be limited to his highest ranking perform skill (and rules-channeled into only taking one perform skill, so as not to detract from other needed skills). Which means that no bard in his right mind (from a rules standpoint) is ever going to take a perform skill that isn't purely vocal. Who wants to put away his sword and whip out a flute in the middle of combat? I suppose you could have a "Kicking Piper" who runs around kicking his enemies while using his flute to inspire courage, but it's rather silly.

An interesting ambiguity is that the bardic music description lists as examples whistling and playing an instrument in combo with vocal performance--neither of which are listed as components of a standard perform skill. This could be interpreted as saying that the bard isn't actually using a perform skill (in harmony with the first, more favorable interpretation) in his bardic music, just using his overall bardic mojo (represented by his highest perform skill) to empower his music. This contrasts with the seemingly unstated premise that the appropriate perform skill would have to be used. However, since the rules are notorious for the official interpretation being the most literal, it appears quite likely that the first interpretation is the correct one.

Does anyone know the official ruling on this?
CaoSlayer
03-18-07, 06:44 AM Nothing stops you from using a perform check (sing) untrained.

Well, if you thinks about is barely a nerf to the bard because in 3.0 they only had 4 sp/level, so if you spend 3 skill points in diferent types of perform you will end knowing to play way more instruments than a previous bard at level 1 (remember that every perform skill is a type of instrument, with percusion, strings and wind instruments you are covering 90% of them).

Also did little to zero sense that a 3.0 bard could be a real virtuoso at the flute but being totally inept with any other string instrument. Also was weird to be forced to learn a new instrument each level ever if the player never have touched or saw one in the whole campaign, also now you can make a 100% non-musical bard with Oratory.

Sorry but the current rules makes way more sense in several ways, althrough I regonize that a bard could help himself by using two performs types by the rules the closest thing would be an aid another check of the skill so the bard would get a +2 to the perform.

If you wants to be proficient with more than a type of instrument without spending skill points there is a feat name versatile performer that allows you to master as many instrument types as your inteligence mod.
olshanski_home
03-18-07, 08:27 AM Also did little to zero sense that a 3.0 bard could be a real virtuoso at the flute but being totally inept with any other string instrument.
Not that wierd, since a flute isn't a string instrument.

Now a bard that could blay violin but not fiddle, viola, or cello.... that's strange.
CaoSlayer
03-18-07, 09:11 AM sorry, I meant wind of course.
CharlieRock
03-18-07, 11:38 AM I don't regulate Perform as much regarding Berdic magic. If you got a perform high enough to activate it; okay. I don't care if it's Dance or whathaveyou. Why? Because the music itself is magical... :mymy:
BaldTune
03-18-07, 01:30 PM At the risk of being the "I do this for a living" guy, a bard that could play one instrument but not similar instruments wouldn't be that odd. I'm a classically-trained bassist. I can't play violin, viola or 'cello. They are tuned differently and use different fingerings, scales (not major/minor but rather the size of the neck of the instrument is differently sized on these instruments), and the physical mechanics of the instruments are different. You could in theory offer some sort of synergy bonus for perform skills on related instruments, but knowing the flute doesn't mean you know the bassoon. This is why all the Broadway cats who double make the medium-to-fairly-large bucks. (relatively speaking.)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sword_of_Spirit 03-17-07, 09:14 PM	Okay, so the Perform skill in 3.5 is still broken, just broken in a different way than it was in 3.0. The big problem now is that bard's are crippled by the new perform system. In order for a bard to be reasonably well-versed in his bardic art, he has to take multiple perform skills--but that's just unrealistic from a game stance. He should only need one perform skill. Here's where it gets interesting. The description of bardic music says that the bard must possess the minimum number of ranks in "a" perform skill to use the bardic music abilities that require that rank. It's very ambiguous, and it looks to me as if it might even be saying that a bard can use his ranks in his highest perform skill, regardless of what he is actually doing when he uses the bardic music. If that interpretation is correct, the ranks in perform essentially "unlock" the musical magic, but it's not necessary to use the "right" perform skill ranks on, say, a countersong, to get the best effect. Therefore, at least a bard could settle for maxing out one perform skill that he can use to entertain people, while using whatever form of performance makes sense for the situation for his actual bardic music abilities. If that interpretation is not correct (and hence the bard only uses his ranks in perform in the actual perform skill he is using), then the bard is reasonably going to be limited to his highest ranking perform skill (and rules-channeled into only taking one perform skill, so as not to detract from other needed skills). Which means that no bard in his right mind (from a rules standpoint) is ever going to take a perform skill that isn't purely vocal. Who wants to put away his sword and whip out a flute in the middle of combat? I suppose you could have a "Kicking Piper" who runs around kicking his enemies while using his flute to inspire courage, but it's rather silly. An interesting ambiguity is that the bardic music description lists as examples whistling and playing an instrument in combo with vocal performance--neither of which are listed as components of a standard perform skill. This could be interpreted as saying that the bard isn't actually using a perform skill (in harmony with the first, more favorable interpretation) in his bardic music, just using his overall bardic mojo (represented by his highest perform skill) to empower his music. This contrasts with the seemingly unstated premise that the appropriate perform skill would have to be used. However, since the rules are notorious for the official interpretation being the most literal, it appears quite likely that the first interpretation is the correct one. Does anyone know the official ruling on this?
CaoSlayer 03-18-07, 06:44 AM	Nothing stops you from using a perform check (sing) untrained. Well, if you thinks about is barely a nerf to the bard because in 3.0 they only had 4 sp/level, so if you spend 3 skill points in diferent types of perform you will end knowing to play way more instruments than a previous bard at level 1 (remember that every perform skill is a type of instrument, with percusion, strings and wind instruments you are covering 90% of them). Also did little to zero sense that a 3.0 bard could be a real virtuoso at the flute but being totally inept with any other string instrument. Also was weird to be forced to learn a new instrument each level ever if the player never have touched or saw one in the whole campaign, also now you can make a 100% non-musical bard with Oratory. Sorry but the current rules makes way more sense in several ways, althrough I regonize that a bard could help himself by using two performs types by the rules the closest thing would be an aid another check of the skill so the bard would get a +2 to the perform. If you wants to be proficient with more than a type of instrument without spending skill points there is a feat name versatile performer that allows you to master as many instrument types as your inteligence mod.
olshanski_home 03-18-07, 08:27 AM	Also did little to zero sense that a 3.0 bard could be a real virtuoso at the flute but being totally inept with any other string instrument. Not that wierd, since a flute isn't a string instrument. Now a bard that could blay violin but not fiddle, viola, or cello.... that's strange.
CaoSlayer 03-18-07, 09:11 AM	sorry, I meant wind of course.
CharlieRock 03-18-07, 11:38 AM	I don't regulate Perform as much regarding Berdic magic. If you got a perform high enough to activate it; okay. I don't care if it's Dance or whathaveyou. Why? Because the music itself is magical... :mymy:
BaldTune 03-18-07, 01:30 PM	At the risk of being the "I do this for a living" guy, a bard that could play one instrument but not similar instruments wouldn't be that odd. I'm a classically-trained bassist. I can't play violin, viola or 'cello. They are tuned differently and use different fingerings, scales (not major/minor but rather the size of the neck of the instrument is differently sized on these instruments), and the physical mechanics of the instruments are different. You could in theory offer some sort of synergy bonus for perform skills on related instruments, but knowing the flute doesn't mean you know the bassoon. This is why all the Broadway cats who double make the medium-to-fairly-large bucks. (relatively speaking.)