Yes, I'm looking forward to the addition of bards to 4E. Classically, they've stuck with arcane magic, and I'm sure this is probably what WotC will stick with. Quite honestly, though, I see bards filling the Leader role, and it would be interesting to see them use Music as a new power source (after all, if ki can be a power source, why can't music?), along with some status-causing effects thrown in. The alternative would be as a Controller, specializing in said status effects, with the healing and morale boost things as a secondary focus. And of course, they'd still need the Utility powers based on boosting allies' skill checks, etc.
I like the idea of Music being very important to them. I loved the New Monte Bard that used Chords, Melodies and ect in place of spells.
Still I think Arcane is fine. "Magical music" powers = Arcane music powers
And so, i think they should be created (or recreated) making them able to do everything, just not good as others classes. Their power, maybe, should be centered on the words, not the music. They could be actors, if they want, or poets.
Just thoughts.
Yes they've always been "jacks of all trade" kinda of chars and hopefully 4e won't go too far away from that even though it's set more to give players roles and not make them hybrids that can do a little of everything but not as well. Hopefully they will still get a good set of skills even though they will be "leaders" as apposed to the strikers that get more skills from what we've seen.
They are in the PHB2 which means that have to be arcane
Is that confirmed anywhere? So far it looks like barbarians and druids are back (Primal) but IIRC the GamerRadioZero teaser that there'd only be one class beginning with "B" doesn't inspire confidence.
Is that confirmed anywhere? So far it looks like barbarians and druids are back (Primal) but IIRC the GamerRadioZero teaser that there'd only be one class beginning with "B" doesn't inspire confidence.
A. They admit they made a mistake with saying one class begins with an "R". They have stated that there are 2 Bs
B. Here's a response to a question I had posed to Rich Baker over on the FR Boards
Q:Since we are only getting 2 books on the Realms, where will there be information of adapting new races, classes and the like to the Realms? For example, clearly the Goliath will be a part of the second Players' Handbook. Will info on adapting that race to the Realms appear in the PHB2, in DDi, somewhere else, nowhere at all?
Rich's answer: Well, the FRCG and FRPG actually anticipate the PH2 to some degree -- so there are mentions of bards, druids, gnomes, and barbarians sprinkled throughout the two FR sourcebooks. I expect that we'll have a lot more to say about that on DDi when the PH2 comes out. Likewise, when we do new races or classes in other books (a PH3, perhaps), DDi should be the place to go.
Is that confirmed anywhere? So far it looks like barbarians and druids are back (Primal) but IIRC the GamerRadioZero teaser that there'd only be one class beginning with "B" doesn't inspire confidence.
If you're asking about bards being in PHB2, we don't have confirmation of that yet. If you're asking about the "have to be Arcane" part, then it's somewhat confirmed--the PHB2 cover says "Arcane, Divine, and Primal Heroes," which means it could be Arcane or possibly Primal if it's the PHB2, but there's no Music source that we know of.
If you're asking about bards being in PHB2, we don't have confirmation of that yet. If you're asking about the "have to be Arcane" part, then it's somewhat confirmed--the PHB2 cover says "Arcane, Divine, and Primal Heroes," which means it could be Arcane or possibly Primal if it's the PHB2, but there's no Music source that we know of.
I think Rich's response does sort of confirm the presence of bards
I think Rich's response does sort of confirm the presence of bards
Well, possibly. I took "anticipate" to mean that they started on the FR stuff with the assumption that it would contain particular things, whereas if they knew what would be in the PHB2 he would say it's "previewing" it or something, rather than that it's anticipating it "to some degree." You could be right; I just don't want to jump to conclusions yet, as it has not yet been confirmed.
If you're asking about bards being in PHB2, we don't have confirmation of that yet. If you're asking about the "have to be Arcane" part, then it's somewhat confirmed--the PHB2 cover says "Arcane, Divine, and Primal Heroes," which means it could be Arcane or possibly Primal if it's the PHB2, but there's no Music source that we know of.
Sorry but I have to ask... where has it been confirmed that PHB2 was Arcane, Divine, and Primal when arcane and divine has been done in PGB1 and maybe a future splatbook?
Sorry but I have to ask... where has it been confirmed that PHB2 was Arcane, Divine, and Primal when arcane and divine has been done in PGB1 and maybe a future splatbook?
Its on the cover which is here
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dndacc/9780786950164
It clearly states that those are the 3 power sources covered
-Topher
Good list of sources: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?p=4175050
Regarding bard flavor, they are not strictly musical.
A master of artistry and social grace, a bard is a leader who wields magic both dramatic and subtle. Harnessing a natural talent for creativity (be it song, painting, dance, or oratory), a bard draws magic from otherworldly patrons that admire the bard's work.
...[A] bard is a storyteller at heart.
2. Ok, give them some ritual abilities and they can use an instrument then. That would satisfy all those players who want to be half elf troubadours (if you every played everquest, you know the sort of person I am talking about).
3. I like the idea of arcane leader//controller hybrid. Ok, let them wave a sword if they want to, maybe wear leather (or, gasp, even chain!) but most of their spells would be low damage sorts of things, but really good for setting up another players attack
That said, bard magic probably works a lot like the Warlord does, where social actions are treated like any other action. I'm pro-this; if someone does an amazing bit of RP to go with a social roll, or any roll, I usually give them a bonus, extra die, or re roll if the roll tanks.
Bard, Arcane Leader, PHBII in March '09, preview on DDI.
Good list of sources: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?p=4175050
Regarding bard flavor, they are not strictly musical.
So, where's this bard preview on D&DI? I can't find anything of the sort.
So, where's this bard preview on D&DI? I can't find anything of the sort.
Woah. My bad, Tiwaz.
The DDI article has been talked about as forthcoming, but is not up presently. I've edited my post above. Sorry for the ambiguous wording!Here are direct links to the snippets referenced on the "collected info" thread regarding the Bard on DDI:
http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=15706632&postcount=3603
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=15867549#post15867549
Oratory can be much more than playing instruments or singing. Our modern day Bards are called Comedians today, but most can't sing a note. Storytellers, Master of Lore, the Old Man by the Fire.
We need Bards that are more than the Pop Stars. I don't want a repeat of the previous edition where it was more like the Monty Python's Holy Grail "Bard" who sang about Brave Sir Robin, and how he Bravely ran away.
Do. Not. Tie. The. Bard. Down. To. Music!!!
Oratory can be much more than playing instruments or singing. Our modern day Bards are called Comedians today, but most can't sing a note. Storytellers, Master of Lore, the Old Man by the Fire.
We need Bards that are more than the Pop Stars. I don't want a repeat of the previous edition where it was more like the Monty Python's Holy Grail "Bard" who sang about Brave Sir Robin, and how he Bravely ran away.
This is why I suggested that musical instruments be implements for the bard. If you DON'T want to use them for your character you don't have to. And since most of the classes have different builds, this shouldn't be a problem. If the implement idea is used, you'll have a lot of ranged attacks, using charisma vs whatever while the other build may be either ranged/melee attacks with a weapon.
This is why I suggested that musical instruments be implements for the bard. If you DON'T want to use them for your character you don't have to. And since most of the classes have different builds, this shouldn't be a problem. If the implement idea is used, you'll have a lot of ranged attacks, using charisma vs whatever while the other build may be either ranged/melee attacks with a weapon.
Bards shouldn't need impliments at all. That is a wizard's thing. Warlocks are wizards with a pact, and sorcerers are wizards for the soul. Bards are inspiring tellers of tales, needing only heart and nerve.
Please let them carry a short sword, not a wand.
Bards shouldn't need impliments at all. That is a wizard's thing. Warlocks are wizards with a pact, and sorcerers are wizards for the soul. Bards are inspiring tellers of tales, needing only heart and nerve.
Please let them carry a short sword, not a wand.
I'm not suggesting a wand, but an instrument as an implement. To many a bard, a well tuned lute is as important to them as a holy symbol is to a cleric. Now what makes a thrilling tale more thrilling? Why the appropriate musical score. Imagine Star Wars or Indiana Jones without the music, while the story could be conveyed without, the music enhances the feel of these sagas.
Now, if you don't believe me that bards should have some musical leanings, listen to these fine (though somewhat dead) people:
Without music life would be a mistake.
He who sings scares away his woes.
Music is the mediator between the spiritual and the sensual life.
Music expresses feeling and thought, without language; it was below and before speech, and it is above and beyond all words.
Music produces a kind of pleasure which human nature cannot do without.
Bards shouldn't need impliments at all. That is a wizard's thing. Warlocks are wizards with a pact, and sorcerers are wizards for the soul. Bards are inspiring tellers of tales, needing only heart and nerve.
Please let them carry a short sword, not a wand.
I would think bards will need implements since they are pretty much confirmed as arcane. Every other arcane class has an implement of some sort(Wizards, Sorcerers, and the playtest Artificers). It would also make sense if one of the paragon paths allowed the bard to use a weapon as his/her implement a la wizard of the spiral tower.
Please, just because he is arcane doesn't automatically mean he uses implements. The Sorcerer might even do without the things if it comes down to it.
If a player plays a Bard as a Jester, would he need a microphone as an implement?
Please!!
A singing sword?
Please, just because he is arcane doesn't automatically mean he uses implements. The Sorcerer might even do without the things if it comes down to it.
If a player plays a Bard as a Jester, would he need a microphone as an implement?
Please!!
Okay.. you don't seem to be getting this. You do not HAVE to use any implements. A warlock or wizard can do their thing without using an implement. In fact, look at the cleric. You can make a cleric that doesn't even need a good wisdom, yet still be effective. Bards MAY use implements(instruments), if that turns out to be the case, but I'm sure not every build will REQUIRE it. There are people who do like the instruments/musical idea of the bard, so because you do not, that means that they should be taken out? Even if a build could be put in that doesn't use ANY implements? Now, say you don't like a power the non implement using bard build has, or you really like one power that uses an implement - you can use that without, your character is not gimped.
Now, since all this talk of implements/instruments was started by me, I'm going to go out and say that I don't want EVERY bard power to use them. But, some should. Bards, fantasy and music have been intertwined for a very long time. I use to hate it, but I've kinda grown to like it, so I would like it to be kept in as a particular build, like I've said many a time, along with a more fighty type bard that could represent the jocular type character or the more story driven skald. Both can be done with the same class and very effectively, so that everyone can have their cake and eat it too. Of course the real trick is to eat your cake and still have it.
There is another fantasy staple. The Fool, or Jester. I harken back to the 2nd edition days, where Bards didn't use Components, had a rapier at the side, and only pulled out the lute when the camp fire was burning and everyone was enjoying their rations.
I want those days to return. The 3rd edition Bard was a joke. It tried to be something different and ended up being weak.
Implements for a caster class is the replacement for components, and I really don't see a reason for the Bard to have to hold himself down to an instrument that is easily destroyed and expensive to replace.
A singing sword?
Please, just because he is arcane doesn't automatically mean he uses implements. The Sorcerer might even do without the things if it comes down to it.
I mistyped that I meant to say warlock. Also you are slightly wrong in saying that implements replace components. They are actually an attempt to give caster type classes something close to the equivalent to bonuses weapons get for their to-hit.
If you want to make a Bard who uses a rapier and has no implement(if they are indeed used by Bards), then by all means, make a str based Bard and play him how you like. That is the true beauty of DND, it is a roll playing game and you choose the roll you play.
But making the implements a musical instrument? Tying the Bard to music once again? This is something that should be avoided at all costs. It didn't work in the previous edition.
No one said the only implement a Bard would have would be a musical instrument. Why can't they have multiple instruments? Wizards and Warlocks can both use multiple implements. As for tying the Bard to music, you were allowed in 3.x to take perform(dance) which really didn't tie a bard to music or an instrument of any type.
But making the implements a musical instrument? Tying the Bard to music once again? This is something that should be avoided at all costs. It didn't work in the previous edition.
First off, nothing has officially been stated that musical instruments will be an implement for bards. I think it would be cool, and I'm sure there are others that do, if something like this was done. Why should it be avoided at all costs? Now lets see, fighters weren't the best choice for high-level play in the previous edition, so they should have been cut out? Just because something didn't work in an older version doesn't mean that it wont work in the new.
You're also really dwelling on a type of implement, IF bards can use any that focuses on music. Maybe bards won't use any, or maybe they'll use wands for whatever reason we don't know.
There is another fantasy staple. The Fool, or Jester. I harken back to the 2nd edition days, where Bards didn't use Components, had a rapier at the side, and only pulled out the lute when the camp fire was burning and everyone was enjoying their rations.
If you go back and read what I have written, while I may not be the most eloquent individual, you will see what I proposed with musical instrument implements, that there is room, if WotC is smart and builds the class right, for BOTH types of bards. the fool/jester or talky bard and the music bard.
I want those days to return. The 3rd edition Bard was a joke. It tried to be something different and ended up being weak.
Once again, see what I wrote above, the new bard may work very well with music, it may not have music at all, which I would find sad.
Implements for a caster class is the replacement for components, and I really don't see a reason for the Bard to have to hold himself down to an instrument that is easily destroyed and expensive to replace.
So, just to be a bit facetious here, bards shouldn't have to hold himself down to weapons that are easily destroyed, and expensive to replace. Or armour. That's not cheap. Bards could lose their pants at some point, so it's best that they not wear any. Or any clothes for that matter. Yep, bards should be standing around naked trying in inspire everyone or playing the fool while juggling their ba... well, I'm sure you see where this is going.
I guess I stand somewhere in the middle here, if that's at all possible. I like the idea of a bard that's just as potent if they choose either path. Maybe they're in the thick of combat, tossing about insults to demoralize or enrage the opponent while they have at them with the rapier. On the other hand, being able to rock out with the harp solo and heal your allies or charm your enemies wouldn't be bad, either. I just think it would be better served as a power you can choose.
Believe it or not, I feel the same way, not all bards should be musically inclined, but some SHOULD if you want to play that type of character. The bard should be capable of doing both, and yes some powers may charm others, and that is why I suggested musical instruments as implements, because they would only accentuate the character not tie it down in any way. That and music has a long history with warfare and battle, and it would be nice to keep that in for those that want it, while at the same time being able to make a bard that scoffs at picking up an instrument.
3XE touched upon the idea of musical instruments as "implements" by presenting the instrument options in Complete Adventurer. They specifically augmented Bardic Music, not magic, but it was a synonymous mechanic. I had no problem playing instruments in combat, but some seem to have an issue. Instruments should be treated exactly like implements; not requisite for power usage, but beneficial for power usage when an appropriate instrument is used. The two builds for the Bard will probably focus on both a "Bard with sword" and "Bard with lute" archetypes. One will sing and focus augmenting his sword/battle prowess, the other will sing and focus augmenting his instrument/magic prowess (just like in 3XE).
I've never liked the idea of the Bard as a comedian. It just doesn't add up that one-liners could tap, unlock, and allow one to wield arcane might.
A "battle-dancer" is more Dervish than Bard. Make the concept into its own class or a Paragon Path.[/indent]
BROM54:
[indent]
No one said the only implement a Bard would have would be a musical instrument. Why can't they have multiple instruments? Wizards and Warlocks can both use multiple implements. As for tying the Bard to music, you were allowed in 3.x to take perform(dance) which really didn't tie a bard to music or an instrument of any type.
While Perform (dance) was available to the Bard, 3XE RAW is explicit in stating that the Bard's Bardic Music capabilities were accessed/produced through sound. The Bard must be "heard" in order to have effect. Perform (dance) was not a valid prereq for utilizing Bardic Music*.[indent]And Perform (dance) with bells on your person is not a means of avoiding the stipulation. Essentially you would have to have taken Perform (bells).[/indent][/indent]
Anyway, I tend to agree with That Blasted Somoflange. There should be builds utilizing instruments, and builds not. Though my ultimate preference would be to have some powers tied to instruments, and some tied to a lack thereof. A bard, by nature, is a jack-of-all-trades, master of none. Sometimes he tells a good joke, and boosts morale. Sometimes he sings a song and achieves much the same. Perhaps some spells need to be sung, while some require the recitation of a sonnet? Some may need an intricate dance, while some might need the plucking of a harp.
I like the idea of a bard as a performer, first and foremost. Multifaceted and flexible. Whether that is as a fool (see my name), or as a musician, his capabilities should be that which captivates an audience, whether it consists of a royal court, or a bar full of drunkards.
Please put me in the "no instruments in combat" group. If you write the class as needing a instrument/implement, the rest of the group will certainly demand that you use said instrument in place of anything more fun. "Shut up and play speed" oh god how many times did I hear that in other games. Or am I just supposed to wave my violin in one hand and a short sword in the other?
The only problem I had with that, is you weren't doing much with the instrument you were playing. Remember you will have at will, encounter and daily attacks now, you aren't just playing an instrument providing bonuses anymore, you're making at-will attacks on enemies will defenses, ect. Playing an instrument is having a weapon, far more flavorful than a sword, any shmuck can use a sword as weapon. Talk about boring and lame. If I want to stab someone I'll play a rogue, or fighter thanks.
It has pretty much been confirmed that the Bard will be an Arcane Leader, Arcane classes utilize spells. Arcane classes also use implements, the known implements are wand, staff, orb, dagger and rod, the wizard having orb, staff and wand; the warlock has dagger, rod or wand.
The bards spells will most likely take the form of songs or orations of some sort. Will there be musical instruments? Most likely. Will there be implements? Most likely. Will they be one and the same? Unknown. There will be at least two builds for Bards, usually the split between builds is damage or finesse and for leaders it's by example or by inspiration. Builds for Bards? The Oratorial Bard and the Lyrical Bard.
The Oratorial Bard exhorts his allies like Aragorn before the walls of Mordor, President Whitmore before leading the assault on the alien craft in Independence Day. He may carry an inplement, most likely a light blade of some type.
The Lyrical Bard has spell for buffing his allies, but also for hampering his foes, he wiill use things like satire to demoralize the enemy, mockery to anger them into bad judgement moves and maybe even name-calling, like Bilbo in the Mirkwood. He may carry an implement, most likely a musical instrument of easy use, no drum sets.
Whew, that was longer than I thought it'd be.
Bel
1> All Arcane classes to this point use impliments (Wizard, Warlock, & Artificer).
2> Bards are intrinsically linked to the concept of Lyric Poetry. And that blends into music.
Ergo, any class called Bard which has an Arcane Powersource is almost certainly going to have Impliments, and the most logical ones are muscial instruments.
But making the implements a musical instrument? Tying the Bard to music once again? This is something that should be avoided at all costs. It didn't work in the previous edition.
There is another fantasy staple. The Fool, or Jester. I harken back to the 2nd edition days, where Bards didn't use Components, had a rapier at the side, and only pulled out the lute when the camp fire was burning and everyone was enjoying their rations.
I want those days to return. The 3rd edition Bard was a joke. It tried to be something different and ended up being weak.
Implements for a caster class is the replacement for components, and I really don't see a reason for the Bard to have to hold himself down to an instrument that is easily destroyed and expensive to replace.
a jester could have a rod full of bells and the like as his implement, a bard implement would not have to be a musical instrument, heck they could even make it a dummy. The implement just allows the character to get additional benefit by using it, it is not a requirement. A wizard can use an orb, a staff or a wand but can still use his powers just fine without them too. A bard would also likely have the same setup, with a few choices of implement, however, I suspect some of his martial powers may not have the implement keyword.
The Oratorial Bard exhorts his allies like Aragorn before the walls of Mordor, President Whitmore before leading the assault on the alien craft in Independence Day. He may carry an inplement, most likely a light blade of some type.
This is purely the domain of the Warlord and not the Bard. The bard casts spells.
This is purely the domain of the Warlord and not the Bard. The bard casts spells.
But the Bard is a leader as is the Warlord, maybe his speeches are spells similar to the prayers of the cleric for example. The Warlord leads with tactical accumen or the experiences that trial and error have taught him.
Bel
But the Bard is a leader as is the Warlord, maybe his speeches are spells similar to the prayers of the cleric for example. The Warlord leads with tactical accumen or the experiences that trial and error have taught him.
Bel
but we know the bard is an arcane leader, thus spells it is
Really, think about how the dynamics of this are going to work.
NNNooooo!!
Hrm, so are these "instruments" I am to use as my implement going to be one or two handed? Do I wave a violin at someone with my left hand and swing a sword with my right? Or do I need to sheath the sword, draw the violin, play for two rounds while I cast spells, put the violin away, draw the sword, etc, etc. Or do I never draw the sword, but just carry a violin through the whole bloody dungeon because all my encounter based powers need an "implement".
Really, think about how the dynamics of this are going to work.
So the character would be like those that use either a ranged weapon such as a longbow or crossbow normally who get engaged in melee? They'd draw their melee weapon to attack? Yep. That's bad alright. Shame they that can be an issue for a ranger, or more recently the artificer.
Use some sense here, you don't need to put the violin away to draw a sword. Simply hold it in your off hand. Yes you'd have to put your sword away or drop it to play your violin, but as I said before, no different than someone who primarily uses ranged weapons and has to use a melee weapon from time to time.
God, I just got a mental image... Dueling Banjos in the middle of the woods.
NNNooooo!!
I find the idea of my Bard and an evil Necromancer getting into a banjo duel while magic flies between us both hilarious and epic.
Hrm, if we go with this solution, will Bard spell have the same range that Ranger arrows do (20/40)? Those would be some long range spells; even Wizards can at best throw a spell out to a range of 20 squares.
I see what you did here. You took a minor detail (range of a bow) and applied it to your argument on how the idea of musical instruments as implements wouldn't work. Well, range has nothing to do with it. I'm not saying that the idea means that musical instruments become ranged weapons, only two handed implements. The only similarity between the two is that (bows and instruments) is that they would both need two hands to use. To go into melee, you would put the two handed item away and use a melee weapon. The range would be determined by the power of the bard that uses the instrument.
I used the example of someone putting away a longbow, or other ranged two handed weapon, and drawing a melee weapon because it is already in the game, and it counters your one problem with bard musical instruments in that regard and had nothing to do with range.
Instruments and 'something else' (probably wands)
Bards are definitely a leader type, obviously. Now the two leaders we have are (broadly) leaders first, and have arguably secondary roles they can take in the party- clerics controller, Warlord defender.
I could easily see this being build based- music bard controllery, wise-cracking oratory bard with a rapier/short sword in one hand and a implement in another strikery.
What's to say that bard isn't the primal leader, especially in light of the artificer being an arcane leader?
As for the musical implement discussion... I'm just not going to touch that. I will say though that wizards need implements, but have a perfectly good Paragon Path that makes it so they can use a sword and I don't see why that would be impossible to do with bards.
1- a bard who goes to the front and sings
2- a bard who stays behind playing his flute, guitar or wardrumms.
and get bonuses on his Power Effects (like fighter exploits that grant extra bonuses for using a heavy blade or flails or lightblades...) but it would be for using a String Instrument for example...
certainly a bard who wants plays a Piano should have an overkill boost for the inconvenience of taking a piano to a dungeon ^^ LoL
make two roles available...
1- a bard who goes to the front and sings
2- a bard who stays behind playing his flute, guitar or wardrumms.
and get bonuses on his Power Effects (like fighter exploits that grant extra bonuses for using a heavy blade or flails or lightblades...) but it would be for using a String Instrument for example...
certainly a bard who wants plays a Piano should have an overkill boost for the inconvenience of taking a piano to a dungeon ^^ LoL
See this is what I'm suggesting.. have roughly half the powers use an implement, in the bard case a musical instrument - most of which are two handed - and the other half are just powers, or use a weapon. That way if you don't want to play the singy bard, you play the fighty bard.
Music has in the real world, been one of the most powerful REAL forces in the world. It's played an important part in EVERY SINGLE culture throughout the world, pretty much no known exceptions that I'm aware of. It's been a part of "magical" rituals, inspired people to great feats for millennia, and has had it's influence described as magical more often than anything else on the planet. Music has played such a powerful part in culture, and the magical power of music so great in story, legend, and song (of course), I'd honestly say music magic deserves to be a whole power source in it's own right.
For all of you that want bards that don't play music, there are other classes that do just fine. Music IS the bard, it's the only class that pays any attention to the most powerful inspirational and in my opinion and countless others magical thing on this planet.
So please,if you want to stab someone, play a rogue, or multi-class into bard.
If you want to tell jokes, or pratfall like a bafoon, bard is not the class for that, neither of those are used to inspire any strong emotions besides laughter. They don't inspire people to greatness, or influence hatred to strong degrees, and they do not, by themselves stir the emotions of others. You don't need to understand a word of a song to be effected by it, to have your emotions stirred. From the very beginning of a song you can start feeling your emotions stir, add real magic to that, and you may be able to inspire anything, or influence anything.
What I don't want to see happen, is music being turned into some thing you kinda do, no, where they screwed up with bards is they didn't make music special and unique enough. It was just kinda, something you did, and it was so very limited in application. It didn't stand out enough, and on top of that you got not music magic, and well... It just wasn't concentrated enough.
Music deserves at the very least it's own class if not power source.
I don't want a class just like every other class that just happens to have some musical talent if you want them to. I want the class to actually be special and unique.
Now, bards shouldn't be limited to music. Singing, dance, scene arts, etc.... Could be interesting.
By the way, to all those who want to distance bards from music.
Music has in the real world, been one of the most powerful REAL forces in the world. It's played an important part in EVERY SINGLE culture throughout the world, pretty much no known exceptions that I'm aware of. It's been a part of "magical" rituals, inspired people to great feats for millennia, and has had it's influence described as magical more often than anything else on the planet. Music has played such a powerful part in culture, and the magical power of music so great in story, legend, and song (of course), I'd honestly say music magic deserves to be a whole power source in it's own right.
For all of you that want bards that don't play music, there are other classes that do just fine. Music IS the bard, it's the only class that pays any attention to the most powerful inspirational and in my opinion and countless others magical thing on this planet.
So please,if you want to stab someone, play a rogue, or multi-class into bard.
If you want to tell jokes, or pratfall like a bafoon, bard is not the class for that, neither of those are used to inspire any strong emotions besides laughter. They don't inspire people to greatness, or influence hatred to strong degrees, and they do not, by themselves stir the emotions of others. You don't need to understand a word of a song to be effected by it, to have your emotions stirred. From the very beginning of a song you can start feeling your emotions stir, add real magic to that, and you may be able to inspire anything, or influence anything.
What I don't want to see happen, is music being turned into some thing you kinda do, no, where they screwed up with bards is they didn't make music special and unique enough. It was just kinda, something you did, and it was so very limited in application. It didn't stand out enough, and on top of that you got not music magic, and well... It just wasn't concentrated enough.
Music deserves at the very least it's own class if not power source.
I don't want a class just like every other class that just happens to have some musical talent if you want them to. I want the class to actually be special and unique.
I half agree with you. The part about music being magical in it's own right was spot on. However, you lost me when you stated that jokes and pratfalls are not befitting the Bard.
Actually, in days of old, the Fool was often the closest adviser to the King. The Court Jester was often the only person that could give a King advice without the risk of ending up a head-length shorter, especially within a public setting.
The foolery was a guise to hide the actual intelligence of the Bard. They made wonderful spies, since most took them for simpletons, except the King.
This is why I believe that the Bard's abilities should be tied to all forms of artistry. Perhaps before a battle, the Bard can sing a rousing tune to boost the party. Perhaps after, a soothing song to heal wounds. During the battle, he can use sarcasm to put his foes off-balance, or recite epic poems of bravery to inspire his friends. Perhaps a great work of art can be involved in a ritual.
A Bard is multifaceted, and should not be constrained to any particular form of art (unless the individual so desires to play a constrained persona). I'd be very upset if the Bard were pigeonholed into any particular format. Put all the possible options on the table, and let the player make the decision to throw out what doesn't fit.
Secondly I want to ask why jesters or fools should not be musicians?
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=6of3kMxV6z4
Last but not least, musicians have always been on the battle field. Yes in actualy Combat. Be it the battle dummers, flueters or trumpeteers, even on the deck warships.
What is the problem with music in combat?
Indeed, sir! Let us not make the Jester or the Fool separate classes, but have the Bard be multifaceted in that Art is the word for his talents, not Music. I also hearken to the story tellers of yore, ones that relate history through tales of heroes and of time gone by, ones who write new stories, not about themselves but of the others he is with. Yes, he know that person... let him tell you a story.
Music is but a single art among many that the Bard can aspire to best, and aspire others with.
Indeed.
I find the idea of my Bard and an evil Necromancer getting into a banjo duel while magic flies between us both hilarious and epic.
Not to mention it has its roots in myth and folklore.
That is the true beauty of DND, it is a roll playing game and you choose the roll you play.
Oh sweet irony!
Or do I never draw the sword, but just carry a violin through the whole bloody dungeon because all my encounter based powers need an "implement".
I'll try once more since you were obviously not paying attention earlier:
There is not a single Power in the game that a character NEEDS and implement to use the power.
You can cast a spell with the "Implement" key word without actually holding or even having an implement on your person.
"The swordmage class is in the FR Player's Guide. Bard you'll see in PH 2. However, I'd *hope* that an extensive and playable bard preview will hit DDi sometime in the next couple of months."
I'll start with my two cents I guess.
Bards = Poets and scholars.
This, to me, means there are a lot of options for Bards, some with music some without.
Bards =/= Jesters or Fools
Can Bards tell jokes, or funny stories... Yes, but not as the sole function.
The sole function of a Bard is to record history and tell of great adventures and feat. How else are your achievements going to last throughout the ages unless you have someone there recording your history.
Now, Bards will have to defend them selves in battle. Common the [fantasy] world we live in, is not safe what so ever. You be crazy to go out into the wild without ways to protect your self. Spells can only do so much.
Now not all instruments are two handed, and If you really want to fight with a weapon, take "Voice" as your implement. If you look up musician and or instruments, vocalist or voice/vocals are listed. IF you are a really good Bard you should be able to cont. to sing while swinging a sword, or firing an arrow.
I hope this make sense i have to stop typing ever once in a while because my boss keeps walking by, and so I am loosing my train of thought. However These are my opions of a Bard, and My Bard will use music as his "implement"
One more thing... I can't belive nobody has mentioned this yet...
If Tommy the Power Ranger can have a Flute/Sword/Dagger that is he can play one handed, than da-gum-it So can I!!!
Seriously, though, I think in pervious editions you didn't have to specifically be playing a instrument to be using a bard power. Singing, speaking poetry, etc. worked as well. I can't imagine that you would *have to* be playing an instrument, and even if you did a quick house rule would fix that.
The main thing I would like to see from the bard is some powers to make it stand apart from the other leader classes. I dont want a cleric who can carry a tune. I would like to see some charm/buguile style powers, perhaps even some better realized form of the old suggestion power. I think it might be interesting to have bards as the debuff focused leader, a leader with a bit more control thrown in, rather than just "I sing a song and everyone gets plus one to hit." I would rather see the bard confusing monsters, misdirecting them with magic (hit penalty), charming monsters, that sort of thing. Bard as cheer leader gets dull pretty quick.
-If- the Bard has powers that have anything to do with attacking (This is 4th edition. They -will-.) and said powers aren't involving weapons, they -will- involve implements. That's just how the game works, people. You need -some- way to get an enhancement bonus onto your attacks, and if it's not a weapon, it's pretty much de facto gonna have to be by implement.
So Bards, I wager, are going to have implements.
And, one of those implement choices are, I am willing to wager as well, going to be musical instruments. It's pretty much a given. It's TOO obvious not to happen. Does that mean staves, wands, or orbs aren't options? Of course not. Don't be silly. Staves would be good for bards as they double as weapons, for those fighty types. Powers might even be made that revolve around their staffiness, something no power has done yet for -any- class.
If you're hoping they never have musical instruments as an option, seriously, don't hold your breath. It's -obvious-. It's -expected.- If bards didn't it'd be such a wtf moment that it'd be incomprehensible to many players. That said, I doubt as well it'll be the only implement option available, but it's pretty much a given that they WILL use implements for at most of their powers, and weapons for the rest, IF they use weapons at all.
This is purely the domain of the Warlord and not the Bard. The bard casts spells.
Historically the Bard is, at least in large part, based on the scops and skalds of germanic and scandinavian pre-christian europe. Both of those were inspirers of warbands. The Bard shouts encouragement to his fellows, or sings an old battle hymn to pump them up, or beats a drum, something. A huge part of what inspires and informs the bard is the idea of the wandering warrior bard.
Personally i will be dissapointed if the true warrior bard is not supported in a real way. focus on bardic magic and fighting would be my prefered bard build option.
I've always asked my DMs to allow me to ditch the arcane spell progression entirely in favor of more skills and a couple extra feats(usually stuff to make him a more effective dex fighter.)
No matter what the "songs" should remain a major focus of the class. the arcane spells are secondary, and should stay that way.
It worked, and I had the add thrill of being about to say Kirin takes his Mandolin and smashes the Goblin.
Why not have a Bard's instrument be his weapon?? I did this with 3.0 for a bit. My bard had a enchanted Mandolin (Magically enhanced to be as strong as an actual weapon) that he used as a Light Mace.
It worked, and I had the add thrill of being about to say Kirin takes his Mandolin and smashes the Goblin.
Well, technically you can do this in 4e, it would be a improvised weapon doing 1d4 damage. However, if you mistreat your musical instrument (implement) like that, you had best learn the make whole ritual.
My starting talk about the bards instrument as an implement effectively would be a weapon, as implements are often magical in nature, and in 4e they give a bonus to hit and damage.