Post/Author/DateTime	Post
rockchops 12-26-06, 01:32 PM	What would commonly be accepted as a balanced party? What are the minumim requirements to ensure that the party can progress in most types of challenges presented? Can we categorize the types of characters whose role ought to be filled? Such as Tank, Nuker, Healer, etc... What are your thoughts?
Morgen 12-26-06, 01:56 PM	Well really in most LG mods you only need 2 types of characters. Hurty types and Healer types. Healing is a very large important part of most mods because a lot of combats can be very brutal but give you a few days to recover from in travel. That of course means that without magical healing at lower levels you'll end up at the next fight having gained like 2hp from resting. It sucks. So cleric/favored soul is practically demanded unless you want to shell out gold for potions and cure wands that a paladin, bard or ranger can activate. Hurters are characters like rogues, wizards and some fighters. People that can deal damage and end fights as best as they can. The sooner a fight ends the sooner you can get back to role-playing and exploring the adventure. Area of Effect spells are a very important part of that since there are mods where there are a large group of weaker opponents that even with cleave a fighter alone has a tough time with. The classic D&D party works well for LG. Fighter, Rogue, Wizard, Cleric can be very balanced depending on how the Cleric is set up, which spells the wizard has, etc. Add to that a diplomatic type like a bard or paladin and maybe another fighter or cleric and you should be able to easily take down most mods. Arcane, Divine, Light Infantry, Tank
budleiser 12-26-06, 02:34 PM	In the world of 3.5 I don't think associating classes to roles are black and white. Someone taking straight fighter levels really isn't necessarily the damage output if they put their feats into tripping, ranged attacks, and other nifty things that don't increase damage. And how do you qualify someone who is Fighter2,Ranger 1, Beastmaster1,Rogue1 Who knows what the heck their role would be! So just ask. Required role: Damage Output-Doesn't matter what class, just something that can reliable deal moderate amounts of damage. Healer-At lower levels someone who can use a wand of cure light or wand of lesser vigor is often all thats needed. Later on someone who can remove "bad effects" becomes more important. You might not have time to goto town to remove everyones curse, blindness, sickened, shaken effects. Toolkit- Generally filled by Wizard or Rogue. Someone who can create an answer to the problem the mod faces the party with. Doors, traps, hard to reach places, hard to fight monsters. Sometimes the toolkits role is getting above 20's on knoweldge checks. Knowing your gonna need a silver, good aligned, magical weapon ahead of time can be huge! Not required but helpful: Support characters - Their not good enough to be Damage and their not helpful enough to be toolkit. Sometimes they aid others to hit and damage. Or maybe the nerf/tie up an enemy with spells, grapple, trip or area control. Face - Gather Info, Sense Motive, Diplomacy. Alot of mods this wont matter at all. Some mods however are tougher, longer, or could have bad effects if no one in the party has CHA. I wont say which mod, but a diplomacy check DChigh or be thrown in jail and lose TU's. Some mods you might not gain favor X. Scout - The role not necessarily the class. I rarely see this get done in LG mods even if it is possible. But somehow get advance knowledge of area or obstacles before the entire party runs into it. This could be done via diviniation spells, flying over the area, hide and move silently, invisibility, or just good gather info. Tank - Someone with high HP and/or AC. Saves are important too. Often a Tank's job is similiar to a door, let the wizard hide behing you. Regardless of what your built for, you might find yourself filling other roles as needed. My main character is a charger, great damage output but I tend to ride by alot. At DragonCon however The party was myself, 3 clerics and wizard. I had to be damage output AND tank because thats what the party dictated. If we had another non-casting character that could have changed. Allowing me more freedom to charge around just doing damage. So be ready for this. My favourite thing about Klein is how useful he is. Sick damage. Good AC combined with Duck in Saddle and Ride-By tactics I usually never need healing the entire mod. I took a level of Marshal so I'm quite often the face. Somehow I spread myself out pretty well when others would spread themselves thin. But im not a toolkit, so often having a wizard in the party is important to me.
Lupo 12-26-06, 02:38 PM	What would commonly be accepted as a balanced party? What are the minumim requirements to ensure that the party can progress in most types of challenges presented? Can we categorize the types of characters whose role ought to be filled? Such as Tank, Nuker, Healer, etc... What are your thoughts? another approach: close up damage: any fighter/barbarian/paladin/melee cleric/wildshape druid/animal companion (might include melee favoured soul/rogue type/hexblade) ranged damage: arcanist/archer (might include certain clerics/druids) battlefield control: spike chain fighter/druid/arcanist area damage: arcanist/druids/whirlwind attack/cleaver skill and special features: monk/mounted combat specialist/druid/rangers/barbarian support spellcasting: arcanist/cleric/druid/bard/favoured soul healing and mishap undoer: cleric/druid/favoured soul/paladin traps and reconnaissance: rogue/scout/ranger/druid face and social interactive: cleric/bard/rogue/sorcerer any good working combination of this features in a party should work fine :) ciao martin m.
vvincent 12-26-06, 04:25 PM	I think you guys are trying to specialize too much. A balanced party should include the following: 1) one warrior-type 2) one divine-type 3) one arcane-type 4) one rogue/expert type 5) one wild-card (can be any of the above, or something else) Now - you can subdivide these into a thousand different sub-specialities, but a party that is essentially comprised of this base should be able to successfully navigate most adventures. All of the various specialities listed here fit into one of these categories. Note that this list is subjective, and requires that you the player know your role. A fighter/wizard/spellsword/bladesinger/spymaster may fall under multiple categories - so you need to know how you fit into this scheme. And your role can change based on party composition. You may be the warrior in one mod, and the wild-card in another. Also - you will note that I list a five-character party. All adventures I write are playtested against this standard. Adding a 6th character impacts the APL, and 4 characters are not fully balanced in my opinion to sufficient test an adventure.
Britt 12-26-06, 04:58 PM	I do it the way Vernon does, but don't don't start thinking that makes him smart or anything. He's not! He's a stupid-head! ;)
vvincent 12-26-06, 05:01 PM	Why don't you make yourself useful and go kick a baby or something. Isn't that what you Circle-types do for recreation? ;) Vernon L. Vincent I do it the way Vernon does, but don't don't start thinking that makes him smart or anything. He's not! He's a stupid-head! ;)
Mommy was an Orc 12-26-06, 05:25 PM	I think there's several roles that need to be filled: Battlefield Control Damage, both closeup and ranged Hold a Position Healing Buffing Face Trapfinding An iconic 4 tends to do all this pretty well - Fighter for Damage/Battlefield/Hold a Position, Rogue for Damage/Face/Trapfinding, Cleric for Healing/Buffing/Face, and Wizard for Battlefield Control/Damage/Buffing. I tried to put that list in the order of how things go wrong. If your party is missing more than or very weak in 1 of the top 4, you are going to be very likely to have significant problems. If you're missing 3 of the 7(which has happened to me), I think that's when TPKs usually start to rear their ugly heads. Also, another area where problems creep up is when builds aren't at the iconic equivalent. A Rogue who ignores Search/Disable Devices without acquiring another role is often a detriment to the party. A Mounted Warrior who can't use or loses his Mount may lose his damage role - and he may not be the Hold a Position guy he could be(etc...)
budleiser 12-26-06, 06:04 PM	I think there's several roles that need to be filled: Battlefield Control Damage, both closeup and ranged Hold a Position Healing Buffing Face Trapfinding An iconic 4 tends to do all this pretty well - Fighter for Damage/Battlefield/Hold a Position, Rogue for Damage/Face/Trapfinding, Cleric for Healing/Buffing/Face, and Wizard for Battlefield Control/Damage/Buffing. I tried to put that list in the order of how things go wrong. If your party is missing more than or very weak in 1 of the top 4, you are going to be very likely to have significant problems. If you're missing 3 of the 7(which has happened to me), I think that's when TPKs usually start to rear their ugly heads. Also, another area where problems creep up is when builds aren't at the iconic equivalent. A Rogue who ignores Search/Disable Devices without acquiring another role is often a detriment to the party. A Mounted Warrior who can't use or loses his Mount may lose his damage role - and he may not be the Hold a Position guy he could be(etc...) I don't think those roles need to be filled. Need means required. I don't think most LG mods require a buffer, a face and a trapfinder. Im confused by the separation of the role battlefield control and hold a position.
Mommy was an Orc 12-26-06, 07:33 PM	I don't think those roles need to be filled. Need means required. I don't think most LG mods require a buffer, a face and a trapfinder. I think they are generally required. People like to think of them as not being required. If you don't have a trapfinder, you're generally going to start fights when you're not ready for them. If you don't have a face in an investigative, you're basically doomed unless your DM softballs the mod. And buffing magic is probably the most powerful of 3.5 magic. When you have a party incapable of buffing, they're often in trouble. If there is one aspect actually of LG that I see a large section of DMs softball mods, it is in the face area. Im confused by the separation of the role battlefield control and hold a position. Battlefield Control - a Wizard who casts Solid Fog is controlling the battlefield. He's not actually holding a position. Hold a Position - a Fighter who bravely steps up to meet the charge of the enemy BDFs and control their ability to get to the backline casters. He's often not performing actual battlefield control, other than holding a position. Both - the stereotypical tripmaster with a spiked chain - he not only causes problems for the BDFs wanting to charge the party, but he doesn't give them a lot of solid options for going around him.
DuctShuiTengu 12-27-06, 04:47 AM	In general, I'd agree with MWaO. That said, there are occasions where, if your party knows what they're doing (and/or gets lucky), you can capitalize upon having an overabundance of one (or a few) areas to avoid needing one or more of the others. For instance, one party that I ended up in consisted of 4 archers (who between them managed a fair number of skills for trapfinding, tracking, and scouting purposes (p.s. I'd add scouting in there as something that it's good to have)), a Marshal/Bard who focused on buffing, and a Wizard. How this stacks up against MWaO's list: No Melee Damage, 4 people who could probably hold a position for about a round each, and our only healing was from wands. However, we tore that mod apart. The Wizard managed to use Battlefield Control spells to keep things at range, and 4 archers getting Hasted and Bard-Songed in the first round ramped up our damage output to the point where we simply shredded enemies. That said, there were several things that contributed to this party working (in this mod). Archers synergized very well with the bard's buffing spells. Everyone understood off the bat that this wasn't the archetypal party, and knew what we were having to work around Our Wizard was good enough at Battlefield Control to allow us the option of staying out of melee Combats took place in open areas (few things screw over Archers like narrow winding tunnels) We had enough scouting going on (and good enough Spot Checks) that combats started at long ranges. Had... just about any of those been missing, we likely would have gotten our :censored: handed to us.
budleiser 12-27-06, 04:56 AM	Perhaps its just because im in the POU but alot of investigation mods have NOT been easier/faster/better with a face. I hate investigative mods because everything is a dead end, we follow all the clues talk to all the right people. What breaks the case wide open? Just some random stupid trigger that has nothing to do with the case or the people you talk to. When you finally give up for lack of clues, or the DM tells you its getting dark and you goto sleep. If I had not played so many investigative mods I would think from an outside perspective they would be awesome. Lots of interaction, great plot twists etc. Players can finally put their CHA and ranks in diplomacy, sense motive to good use. Maybe given the right circumstances someone might even get to use Knowledge Nobility and Royalty! But no they are AWFUL. Nothing is worse than sitting down to a table of 4 and finding out its an investigation mod. Because if you get up and leave those other people can't play. I remember when we had 2 faces! A bard/marshal and my marshal. Did it help? Of course not. You know whats helped in an investigative mod? A mounted Paladin who detected evil, followed the trail of evil from the insanely evil artifact, ignored ANYONE who tried to interupt us, smashed through any door or obstacle that was in the way, jumped down a 40ft well, and killed everyone who glowed. That was the best investigation mod ever. Ask me what I really think of investigation mods sometime.
CrystalBlue 12-27-06, 08:25 AM	I believe in the setup most people have up here. However, when you'll find this kind of thing? Rarely. Most people in my Highfolk group could care less about table balance. I think we only have two healers in LaCrosse, one of which isn't even a 'healer' as he refuses to heal in battle. >.< And all of our arcane? Yeah, most of it's mixed with mystic theurge, so good luck getting anything from them for 8 levels. Don't get me wrong. I like that PrC as much as anyone. But you are hard pressed in the mid-levels of your character to be actually useful. Oh! And don't forget about druids! Those are running rampant in the Vesve as well. Damn tree-huggers. They're always Halflings or Gnomes. Little cheese factories on riding dogs wearing dragon-hide and popping out rapid summons like...well...like a little cheese factory. Mostly, in our groups, we have damage dealers and faces now. And...that's about it. Except for the occasional Cleric of Weejas...that I have to execute, because it's an oxymoron. >.<
LGMoses 12-27-06, 10:38 AM	I remember when we had 2 faces! A bard/marshal and my marshal. Did it help? Of course not. You know whats helped in an investigative mod? A mounted Paladin who detected evil, followed the trail of evil from the insanely evil artifact, ignored ANYONE who tried to interupt us, smashed through any door or obstacle that was in the way, jumped down a 40ft well, and killed everyone who glowed. That was the best investigation mod ever. Ask me what I really think of investigation mods sometime. :rofl: I just want to say, there isn't a laughing smilie that is laughing enough to reflect the hilarity of that story.
Lupo 12-27-06, 11:03 AM	Perhaps its just because im in the POU but alot of investigation mods have NOT been easier/faster/better with a face. I hate investigative mods because everything is a dead end, we follow all the clues talk to all the right people. What breaks the case wide open? Just some random stupid trigger that has nothing to do with the case or the people you talk to. When you finally give up for lack of clues, or the DM tells you its getting dark and you goto sleep. If I had not played so many investigative mods I would think from an outside perspective they would be awesome. Lots of interaction, great plot twists etc. Players can finally put their CHA and ranks in diplomacy, sense motive to good use. Maybe given the right circumstances someone might even get to use Knowledge Nobility and Royalty! But no they are AWFUL. Nothing is worse than sitting down to a table of 4 and finding out its an investigation mod. Because if you get up and leave those other people can't play. I remember when we had 2 faces! A bard/marshal and my marshal. Did it help? Of course not. You know whats helped in an investigative mod? A mounted Paladin who detected evil, followed the trail of evil from the insanely evil artifact, ignored ANYONE who tried to interupt us, smashed through any door or obstacle that was in the way, jumped down a 40ft well, and killed everyone who glowed. That was the best investigation mod ever. Ask me what I really think of investigation mods sometime. the least thing to do is to have rings of mind shielding for evil npcs, and lots of lead foil to wrap around items . . . . some module writers are just ignoring simple powers of a "detect evil", "detect magic" or "locate object". on the other hand, recently i played a module where no one was able to do a "detect magic" at a crucial moment . . . . . and no "spellcraft" to make out a big bonus item . . . . . we nearly failed desperately, due to not having such simple information gadgets. (underpowered APL 4 table, 4 players, no cohorts or even animal companions, without any alternative characters that would have helped to smoothen it up) ciao martin m.
Arinaad 12-27-06, 02:37 PM	I will start by adressing the balanced party issue. Balanced parties are a mix of skills and abilities to successfully complete a balanced module. THIS is LG... Try a great mix of offence, with more offence, and a little healing. So, in LG I propose you need: 2 front line, 1 cleric (or other healer types) and 1 battlefield controlling wizard type (substitute a cleric if you wish). Now for the face/investigation rant From Ket, we have not had a good investigatorial mod (that I have played) since year 4. The only Core mod that I can recall that was investigatorial you could beat by lounging around a bit and waiting until stuff started to happen to you.
trollbill 12-27-06, 03:56 PM	Perhaps its just because im in the POU but alot of investigation mods have NOT been easier/faster/better with a face. I hate investigative mods because everything is a dead end, we follow all the clues talk to all the right people. What breaks the case wide open? Just some random stupid trigger that has nothing to do with the case or the people you talk to. When you finally give up for lack of clues, or the DM tells you its getting dark and you goto sleep. If I had not played so many investigative mods I would think from an outside perspective they would be awesome. Lots of interaction, great plot twists etc. Players can finally put their CHA and ranks in diplomacy, sense motive to good use. Maybe given the right circumstances someone might even get to use Knowledge Nobility and Royalty! But no they are AWFUL. Nothing is worse than sitting down to a table of 4 and finding out its an investigation mod. Because if you get up and leave those other people can't play. I remember when we had 2 faces! A bard/marshal and my marshal. Did it help? Of course not. You know whats helped in an investigative mod? A mounted Paladin who detected evil, followed the trail of evil from the insanely evil artifact, ignored ANYONE who tried to interupt us, smashed through any door or obstacle that was in the way, jumped down a 40ft well, and killed everyone who glowed. That was the best investigation mod ever. Ask me what I really think of investigation mods sometime. 1) I like investigative mods, but only in small doses. I'd rather have sevarl mods where a small part of them are investigative, then entire mods that are mostly investigative. 2) Having a successful party face requires 4 things. A good face player, a flexible DM, a mod that allows flexibility, and a party willing to go along with the face. Failing any one of those can mean the face is useless. If the player doesn't know when and how to use his face abilities, they will fail frequently, no matter the bonuses. If the DM doesn't like players to get an edge or bypass entire encounters by use of face skills, you are unlikely to succeed unless the module specifically says otherwise. If the mod writer likes to railroad, or not make the effort to include diplomacy possibilities, they are often brushed aside. And finally, if you party wants to actually fight the encounter instead of talk your way past it, there isn't much you can do about it. This may be why party face is one of the least sought after jobs. It's of special note that things 2 and 3 above are somewhat of a Catch 22. Module writers often don't include face issues because they can be so varied the DM really should be deciding the results. But without including such things in mods, newbie DMs often won't even consider them as a possibility. 3) A lot of face players only use their face abilities when its obvious. That's a waist of ability. If you are good at being a face, look for ways to use it that aren't obvious. 4) I am quite satisfied with the character I am playing in the PoU who is usually party face. He has had quite a lot of success using face abilities, albeit he favors Bluff+Disguise over Diplomacy. Nothing quite shakes up a room full of murder suspects like walking into the room as the murder victim.
budleiser 12-27-06, 05:56 PM	Oh I understand your points Trollbill they are all valid and correct. However, no amount of face power will overcome anything if the trigger to solving the mystery is "goto sleep". And quite frankly thats what we constantly keep running into. I understand its hard to write a LG investigation mod because of time constraints and other LG issues. But if the trigger for events is "goto sleep" or "After the PC's spend 4 hours talking this occurs" then nothing we as players do matters except in combat. Which makes investigation mods not only worthless to play, but infuriating to play.
trollbill 12-27-06, 08:48 PM	Oh I understand your points Trollbill they are all valid and correct. However, no amount of face power will overcome anything if the trigger to solving the mystery is "goto sleep". And quite frankly thats what we constantly keep running into. I understand its hard to write a LG investigation mod because of time constraints and other LG issues. But if the trigger for events is "goto sleep" or "After the PC's spend 4 hours talking this occurs" then nothing we as players do matters except in combat. Which makes investigation mods not only worthless to play, but infuriating to play. That would go to part three of number two. Not enough flexibility in the mod. I know it's almost required that investigative mods have an auto-timed event. The reason being that if you get a party that isn't very good at investigating, the mod stops right there if there isn't some sort of auto continuation, which is even more frustrating than the other option. This can sometimes mean the face seems useless if you know all you have to do is wait. What I would like to see is investigative mods that reward players for moving the mystery forward before the auto-timed event.
LGMoses 12-28-06, 01:05 AM	From this testimony rogues/trapfinders seem unimportant. Surge up the deadly traps modwriters :schemes:
Cynric 12-28-06, 05:10 AM	From this testimony rogues/trapfinders seem unimportant. Surge up the deadly traps modwriters :schemes: I would agree with this. Which is why I am making a rogue now. To fix that problem so people do not expect my druids animal companion to trapfind the hard way.
Iswald 12-28-06, 09:52 AM	I believe in the setup most people have up here. However, when you'll find this kind of thing? Rarely. Most people in my Highfolk group could care less about table balance. I think we only have two healers in LaCrosse, one of which isn't even a 'healer' as he refuses to heal in battle. >.< Well, if your cleric spent more time healing in combat, wouldn't that make two healers in the area? ;) But, I don't think it's that bad. There are some players who have heavily multiclassed their characters. Usually, though, they have focused on one particular area and do fall into one or two of the listed categories.Tables will usually have two fighter types, a healer and some kind of utility character. The last two slots will be filled with whomever can make it to the game.
Britt 12-28-06, 10:45 AM	From this testimony rogues/trapfinders seem unimportant. Surge up the deadly traps modwriters :schemes: Ask players in the BK; I'm sure they'll disagree with you :devil:
budleiser 12-28-06, 02:16 PM	Ask players in the BK; I'm sure they'll disagree with you :devil: So write us some core mods with hardcore traps.
rockchops 12-28-06, 07:48 PM	These are all wonderfully insightful ideas about balanced parties. Thanks to everyone who contributed / is contributing. I have a more specific question. I'm DM-ing a couple of 1st level adventures this weekend and we only have four PCs in the group. What are the absolute minimum roles that you think they need to cover in order to survive?
budleiser 12-28-06, 10:40 PM	These are all wonderfully insightful ideas about balanced parties. Thanks to everyone who contributed / is contributing. I have a more specific question. I'm DM-ing a couple of 1st level adventures this weekend and we only have four PCs in the group. What are the absolute minimum roles that you think they need to cover in order to survive? Read everything above. Fighters Healers Toolbox or Arcane
Iswald 12-28-06, 10:57 PM	These are all wonderfully insightful ideas about balanced parties. Thanks to everyone who contributed / is contributing. I have a more specific question. I'm DM-ing a couple of 1st level adventures this weekend and we only have four PCs in the group. What are the absolute minimum roles that you think they need to cover in order to survive? An absolute minimum if you only have four players? It depends upon the experience of the players. Generally, two fighter types, one healer and either a skillful character (such as a rogue) or an arcane caster for battlefield control (at first level, that'd likely be casting grease).
Lupo 12-29-06, 07:57 AM	These are all wonderfully insightful ideas about balanced parties. Thanks to everyone who contributed / is contributing. I have a more specific question. I'm DM-ing a couple of 1st level adventures this weekend and we only have four PCs in the group. What are the absolute minimum roles that you think they need to cover in order to survive? highly depends on the experience degree of the players. one heavy hitter is a must; fighter or barbarian (ranger or paladin to a lesser degree) one divine caster; for a four player table a druid might be even better than a cleric one bard :D: can be skill/knowledge monkey and add some damage via bardsong (most probably more than a single magic missile of a level one arcanist would do). last seat can be anything from arcanist to rogue, scout, light infantry or second heavy hitter it also depends on the module in question ciao martin m.
budleiser 12-29-06, 08:49 AM	one bard :D: can be skill/knowledge monkey and add some damage via bardsong (most probably more than a single magic missile of a level one arcanist would do). martin m. The important thing is that Bards should always be 2 levels above the APL that they play. Wow you put Bard as a required role.
Lupo 12-29-06, 09:55 AM	The important thing is that Bards should always be 2 levels above the APL that they play. Wow you put Bard as a required role. how do you get bards into play with this prerequisite???:thinks: honestly, the impact of one more point of damage and one more point to-hit is especially significant at low levels. ciao martin m.
budleiser 12-29-06, 10:06 AM	how do you get bards into play with this prerequisite???:thinks: honestly, the impact of one more point of damage and one more point to-hit is especially significant at low levels. ciao martin m. I agree it is, but not a necessary requirement. 5% greater chance to hit does not warrant auto inclusion. I think Bard can be a good class, but I certainly count it as a support role not as the meat and potatoes. At low apl the min you need is Warrior, Healer, Toolbox And Bard can be the toolbox, but it doesn't HAVE to be a Bard. More often I would see the role filled by Arcane, Ranger, or Rogue.
Japangirl 12-29-06, 04:40 PM	On level bards are fine, especially with Inspirational Boost now being a Core spell (extra +1 on bard song, so at level 3 a bard does +2/+2 hit and damage). However, I think bards make great fifth wheels. In a party of four, I'd rather have a fighter/barb, a healer, an arcanist, and a rogue/scout type than a bard. Let the rogue/scout be the party skills monkey.
UMiskatonic 01-01-07, 11:50 AM	A well-played bard is the best support character that you could ever want. The difficulty is that most people are terrible at playing bards, and don't do it very well. I think it's because a good bard is the opposite of most other characters. Instead of doing something great, and putting yourself into the spotlight for a time, a good bard will arrange for others to be in the spotlight. That said, one of the aspects of a balanced party is communication. In my experience, poor communication leads to poor balance, no matter who's actually sitting there.
Mommy was an Orc 01-01-07, 12:17 PM	A well-played bard is the best support character that you could ever want. The difficulty is that most people are terrible at playing bards, and don't do it very well. I think it's because a good bard is the opposite of most other characters. Instead of doing something great, and putting yourself into the spotlight for a time, a good bard will arrange for others to be in the spotlight. I think it more has to do with being tactically boring, while the class is flavorful. A well-played Bard does the exact same thing in 99% of combats - Inspire Courage no matter how much better some other options might seem to be. That results in the problem - lots of new players who want to 'roleplay' see the Bard as a great option. Players who know their tactics find them boring. So you end up with a bunch of really bad tactical players making the Bard look horrid. I've seriously seen a Bard only do Inspire Courage once in an essentially 2 round mod - instead, he was throwing acid flasks and missing.
Japangirl 01-01-07, 01:21 PM	I've seriously seen a Bard only do Inspire Courage once in an essentially 2 round mod - instead, he was throwing acid flasks and missing. Well, I don't know a lot of other bards. There are two that I see other than my own, a level 10-13ish one and a level 5 bard that a friend plays. We all try to give the bards some character and roleplay them, but when combat comes the first thing that happens is an Inspirationally Boosted bard song. I do know other first level spells. I just hardly ever get to use them. However, I have started a song, then used a spell while counting down the rounds left on the lingering effects. Maybe people who don't understand bards tend to be attracted to them, I don't know. I do know that when I (except when playing my bard) sit down to a table and there is a bard there, I am happy about it. I haven't seen a bad bard yet, but then I haven't seen very many bards at all.
Genghis Cohen 01-01-07, 01:37 PM	Everyone is going to have a different definition of a balanced party based both on personal biases and experiential influences (like home region.) In my home region, rogues are not as necessary as they are in the Gran March. That said, I normally wouldn't want to be adventuring without one. My choice for a core four in a balanced party, without knowing what awaits us, are: 1) Barbarian/Fighter tank with either bastard sword/ dwarven waraxe uncanny blow route, or spike chain route because you have to deal damage. 2) Radiant Servant of Whatever with Divine Metacheese Quicken and Close Wounds 3) Generalist Wizard with an HHH full of a wide assortment of scribed scrolls 4) Rogue that's tricked out for creative locksmithing and fancy talking Expanding to a party of 6, I'd add a summoning Druid (with his corked tank companion) and an Archer. If the wizard can replace the locksmithing of a rogue, then I'd replace the rogue with a Marshall 3 (charisma and dexterity)/ Bard X/ Warchanter
budleiser 01-01-07, 01:54 PM	Heidi plays the best bard. No seriously people out of state think so too. Ask anyone who attended wiPOU. She can write limewricks involving characters, events and mod plot after every combat. She is a BardX/Marshal3 Halfling. Her Tactics: Motivate (Dex) Initiative. Then when it comes to her turn she will move to flank the party's biggest fighter. Roll to aid anothers attack, improved Bardsong, motivate flanking, major aura +1 saves, attack with mount (riding dog) and hope to trip. So at the very least you can expect +5 initiative, +6 to hit, +7 to damage and your target might be prone.
draxynnic 01-01-07, 07:43 PM	One principle that's started floating around in my local area, generally credited to Puggle Halfwine, is that at least one out of every four of a player's characters should be able to fill the primary healer role, one way or another. To this, we've added one out of four primary tanks, one out of six primary arcane, and one out of six trapsmiths (for the odd module where lacking that capability IS going to get you killed). I'd probably be inclined to add one out of six that can act as a face. Naturally, some of those roles may overlap in one character, which is where you could get the chance to make something a little weird that does something different (just make sure such a character does do something useful). On the whole, however, I think that's a good indication of what's needed - in most modules you're at a significant (although not insurmountable, if the right synergies come into play with what you do have) disadvantage if you don't have a primary healer or primary tank, so you want enough of those around that you can be fairly confident of one being on any 4-person table. Trapsmiths, arcanists, and faces you can often get away with, but at the risk of occasionally hitting something that is significantly harder or unbeatable without one (arcanists, for instance, become significantly more important at higher levels, when module writers start assuming access to things like flying magics and disintegrate). One thing from a build perspective, though, is that characters in the face or trapsmith role should be able to do something when the chips hit the floor - because there are modules out there that don't need a face or a trapsmith, and you'll feel pretty useless in such a module if that's all you can do. Just remember to keep your limitations in mind.
Reylance 01-02-07, 11:41 AM	She is a BardX/Marshal3 Halfling. Gnome, not halfling
budleiser 01-02-07, 12:03 PM	Gnome, not halfling oh well then never mind her character sucks.
clannagh 01-03-07, 12:43 AM	There is a tendency to underestimate the effect bards have. Counting exactly how much extra damage the party does with bard song can be rather interesting, especially if you have a lot of archers and TWFs. Even a +1 hit/damage over a lot of attacks adds up. But the bard damage really ramps up if you count in that 68 damage barbarian power attack that would have missed by one without the bard singing.
jstorrie 01-03-07, 01:12 AM	But then that is counteracted by all of the 68 damage barbarian power attacks that just barely made the to-hit, and thus didn't need the bardsong in the first place. You're misinterpreting the statistics. Bard song is good, and at a table with 3-4 characters making attack rolls it is a significant boost, but if all the character really does is bard song and diplomacy rolls it's not pulling full weight.
LGMoses 01-03-07, 01:36 AM	yes but if he's: giving 5% increase to chances to hit and adds 5% damage, being the "face" of the party, passing knowledge checks to gain extra info to assist the party and identify creatures, being the only person to possess several crucial skills in the party, disarming/tripping/flanking the enemy, and being able to be supplemental to everyone by casting arcane spells and curing spells then the bard is pulling his weight. The bard is a great class because of its flexability. A bard is a "jack of all trades." They're great for filling that missing role in the party.
frupton 01-03-07, 01:44 AM	I've seriously seen a Bard only do Inspire Courage once in an essentially 2 round mod - instead, he was throwing acid flasks and missing.Tell him he should play an aristocrat. Same BAB, same combat effectiveness, and better starting gold.
ranagrande 01-03-07, 05:00 AM	If aristocrat was a playable class in Living Greyhawk, that might be a good option.
TallGuy 01-03-07, 08:53 AM	The important thing is that Bards should always be 2 levels above the APL that they play. Wow you put Bard as a required role. Bards don't have to be 2 levels above APL. They will contribute on every table that contains at least one melee or ranged damage oriented character, and if you start paying attention, usually do as much damage (though indirectly) as most other characters... That's +1 or +2 damage to every hit (more on a critical hit), and every hit that lands by a 1 or 2 margin is the contribution of the bard. That stacks up, especially at the lower levels. At higher levels, the bonus increases to +3 (by level 8 or so), adding another +4 to +6 to damage (because of the power attack), giving a net +9 to damage, contributed by a single standard action by the bard. Add in his other actions, and a bard contributes just fine, thank you very much. Haste when needed, a well placed glitterdust or other spell, a suggestion to make a bad guy go do something else ("It's hot, and you're sweaty... You'd better go take a bath in that pool over there.") My bard (Bard 10/Paladin 1) contributes just fine, even playing up. He's not overly optimized (con 10 hurts), but he usually adds his piece to just about everything, and will shine in any social situation. Bas Vermeulen
Mommy was an Orc 01-03-07, 09:26 AM	But then that is counteracted by all of the 68 damage barbarian power attacks that just barely made the to-hit, and thus didn't need the bardsong in the first place. You're misinterpreting the statistics. Bard song is good, and at a table with 3-4 characters making attack rolls it is a significant boost, but if all the character really does is bard song and diplomacy rolls it's not pulling full weight. It doesn't work like that. I've gone through a mod where someone went 'oh, no, not a bard' and the DM starting pointing out where my to-hit bonus made the difference. I was responsible for 1/3rd of the hits and maybe about 50% of the damage output of the party(if not for the outlier crit by a power attacking barbarian with a scythe which blew through its target)...just with the +2/2 bardsong. People miss by a little, a lot, especially when their targets have medium high AC or they're doing a lot of Power Attack.
solbergb 01-03-07, 02:11 PM	Yeah....my bard COHORT, often playing FOUR LEVELS below the party APL is a huge contributor, enough so that I actually have started to dislike playing my sorceress without the cohort at the table. The 6th person is rarely as useful for the party, even if level 12, as the 8th level bard is. A bard can do two things as reliable as the sunrise 1. Make marginal noncaster characters as good as iconic. This really helps a lot when you get one of those parties where everyone else's "build" is either in a slow spot or just isn't very good, or when the players have no grasp of tactics or teamwork. A bard effectively raises the offensive potential of all melee/archers by about 2 levels. Even poor builds tend to be ok when "playing down"...a bard can make the at-APL "weak characters" normally effective. 2. Make strong noncaster characters much more effective, to the point where even one at the table can often carry it past difficulties. My bard is also skilled at boosting the power of casters because, you know, she's the cohort of a sorceress. But that usually has more impact on the long term buffs than in combat, barring a key save/die spell like dismissal being cast with both CL/save boosts provided by Harmonize. My cohort, being a cohort isn't the face, she's just a "face-enabler", providing "tongues" to the best diplomat, gather information and disguise for the party and assists on most other diplomatic skills (or inspire competence). It's really very obvious the difference though. Without the bard cohort, the party melees/archers can look forward to +2 GMW weapons, some debuffs on the enemy and sometimes getting in an extra full attack when my sorc has a chance to move them around and occasionally 35-40 points of direct damage from the sorc, or area effect of about 15 damage (no saves) With the bard cohort, they're getting +3 weapons, a +3/+4 bardsong and usually haste as well, plus a bit of extra incombat healing. And all that is sometimes combined with a "Fastball special" where the lighter fighter types are tossed toward the enemy with 9 enchanted arrows via violent thrust, to get a full attack on a damaged target. The sorc damage jumps to 70-80ish, or 20ish area effect, when I choose to do damage. It's just amazing how much difference it makes. Even if clerics are packing rightous wrath of faithful, the cleric is ALSO freed up to do something else useful. My L8 guy is freeing the L12-14 cleric to drop the big boom or powerup and turn into a melee to benefit from all the party buffs she's spraying around. Back on topic though - balanced parties are overrated. You need a way to hurt things, you need a way to recover from damage/effects and you need to be able to absorb a certain amount of punishment (less so if your party is actually good at stealth/scouting and doesn't get surprised as much). That's all. How you go about it varies wildly from party to party, but I'm almost never in a balanced party in the typically expected sense and it never seems to affect our success rate any.