We've already addressed a lot of what you suggested, Minoke.
What *harm* do you think would come to pass if, say, Lore bards had access to their choice of a cantrip at level 3 from any class?
Well, first of all you would have to rebalance all the other damage options so that they're competitive not only with the Bard's core kit but with the cantrip selection of every other class. In other words, it would need to be true that swordfighting as one of the swordfighting colleges is as good as casting Toll the Dead. Right now it only needs to be as good as Vicious Mockery. Which spills out into the power budget for the rest of the subclass and, transitively, the class as a whole. In other words, other features have to get weaker if this one's going to get stronger. Whether that's a problem will come down to how you feel about the power level of the rest of the Bard class, but I'll note that if something gets weak enough, people stop using it, and so in the extreme case you end up with Bards basically being weaker Sorcerers.
Secondly, it would more directly paint the College of Lore as being the de facto College of Damage, which is out of line with its concept, even if you can intentionally bend that concept to include it. First impressions are important! And I really like the College of Lore concept at it is, so if it had to change to better reflect this damage dealer role, I'd probably be sad about it.
Thirdly, it would lead you really quickly into a scenario where you're either going to copy the best cantrip your buddy has, or you're going to highlight how suboptimal his choice was by picking a better one. Forcing you to weigh it against a leveled spell choice means that hardly anybody actually takes a cantrip, and making it happen later necessarily limits its impact. You remove both of those things and I'm pretty sure you get an irritating, salt-inducing subclass. That's just theory though. I haven't done any focus group stuff about it. I know who has, though...!
I have a hard time accepting the notion that the bard class is so tenuously balanced that you'd have to rebalance all the other damage options if you added, say, Mind Sliver to the list of available bard cantrips, or had something like Lesser Magical Secrets available to Bard players (lore bards or what have you).
I also don't know that you're correct about how it would paint the college of Lore. Clerics aren't considered to be damage dealers because they have access to Sacred Flame. The College of Lore, as I see it, is the College focused primarily on spellcasting, and secondarily on skills. Or perhaps more accurately, it's the college most focused on versatility. Right now, as a spellcasting class, it lacks something significant - the ability to do reliable, scaling damage without expending resources to do so. Literally every other primary casting class has the ability to do so except the Bard, and I don't know that what the Bard gets makes up for that. The other spellcasters can provide support, battlefield control, and all the rest just fine. But Bards, for some reason, don't get the one basic tool in every other spellcasting toolkit.
I don't see how your third argument doesn't apply to all the other classes that have access to real damage cantrips, except maybe eldritch blast. Nobody complains that Clerics have a solid damage cantrip.
I don't think it has to be "tenuously balanced" in order for the argument to hold that, if you increase power *here*, you should decrease power *there.* Unless your stance is that the class is underpowered, so adding raw power can only serve to bring it up to par?
You can interpret the College of Lore to be whatever suits your argument, but if you go by the fluff and the mechanics, it's not the College of Flexibility or of Spells -- because that's not how subclass design works in this game. It's the college that speaks truth to power, the college that values the preservation and distribution of knowledge, etc. The mechanics serve the concept. It might be true that it more strongly emphasizes spells when compared to the other colleges, but that's a side effect, not a cause. That's my opinion, anyway.
I thought we were talking about a feature that would let the Bard choose any cantrip from any class's spell list.
I don't understand why you'd have to give something up in order to have a missing tool added to the overall toolbox. Bards are missing a key tool enjoyed by all full spellcasters. They don't need to lose anything to have that problem fixed.
And yes, if I were King of the D&D, I would at either 1st level for all Bards or 3rd for Lore, add the ability to choose 1-2 Cantrips from any spell list. If it were something for all Bards at 1st, I would let them choose one. If it were Lore only at 3rd I'd let them choose 2.
I would also add Booming Blade and/or Mind Sliver to the list for all Bards, 2bh, if I went with the Lore option outlined above.
I don't understand why you'd have to give something up in order to have a missing tool added to the overall toolbox. Bards are missing a key tool enjoyed by all full spellcasters. They don't need to lose anything to have that problem fixed.
Because increased choices is always a power boost. Even if a player can still only select the same number for their character to know, having a larger pool of options is a boon.
Anyway, the only full spellcaster who doesn't get ritual casting is the Sorcerer. Do you feel that's something they need? I've never heard anyone say that. (It would certainly make the Sorcerer more powerful, which I have heard it needs on occasion, but is that the right way to do it?) The only full spellcaster who doesn't get Light is the Druid. They've been excluded from the exploration pillar! Everyone should use the same tools! Restrictions breed creativity? Necessity is the mother of invention? Bah! :P
I don't understand why you'd have to give something up in order to have a missing tool added to the overall toolbox. Bards are missing a key tool enjoyed by all full spellcasters. They don't need to lose anything to have that problem fixed.
And yes, if I were King of the D&D, I would at either 1st level for all Bards or 3rd for Lore, add the ability to choose 1-2 Cantrips from any spell list. If it were something for all Bards at 1st, I would let them choose one. If it were Lore only at 3rd I'd let them choose 2.
I would also add Booming Blade and/or Mind Sliver to the list for all Bards, 2bh, if I went with the Lore option outlined above.
Let'sgivetheclass
1.)the fighters number offeats
2.)the barbarian ability to take damage
3.)the clerics healing spells
4.)the druid ability to shape change
5.)the monk's ability with unarmed combat
oh hell, let's just give the class every other classesschtick.
I don't see how greater variety in choice = power increase (nor do I agree that the Bards don't need a power increase in the first place). I believe the lack of solid damage dealing cantrips is a huge gap in the class and needs to be repaired.
I don't see why Sorcs shouldn't have ritual casting. That's a great point, and I didn't even realize it was a thing. Doesn't make a lot of sense that your Witch in the woods who has always had magic at their fingertips wouldn't access their powers ritually as well as instinctually.
But I think we can also agree that comparing the sorcerer's lack of ritual casting isn't really comparable to what we're talking about. Ritual casting, by definition, isn't a combat mechanic.
I don't see how greater variety in choice = power increase (nor do I agree that the Bards don't need a power increase in the first place). I believe the lack of solid damage dealing cantrips is a huge gap in the class and needs to be repaired.
I don't see why Sorcs shouldn't have ritual casting. That's a great point, and I didn't even realize it was a thing. Doesn't make a lot of sense that your Witch in the woods who has always had magic at their fingertips wouldn't access their powers ritually as well as instinctually.
But I think we can also agree that comparing the sorcerer's lack of ritual casting isn't really comparable to what we're talking about. Ritual casting, by definition, isn't a combat mechanic.
In a way I think it is comparable. Ritual casting saves the caster from having to spend a valuable resource (spell slots) from being expended. Whereas a more damaging cantrip would also save the caster from having to spend a valuable resource (spell slots) to crank out more damage.
Right, but you're way more likely to cast several instances of Fire Bolt than you are to sit for 10 minutes to cast Comprehend Languages a bunch of times. both save resources, but direct damage cantrips save *way* more in a typical session that includes a normal amount of combat.
TheBard would be more likely to just CharmPersonthe bad guy and have a discussion with them over a nice cup of (poisoned)tea while learning about where their cohorts are and the best way to rob them.
Just plain damage is for the small mind with small thoughts, like WizardsandFighters.
Technically all Bard's have to do is expend an ASI to get the Magic Initiate (Sorcerer) feat to get two damage cantrips (Chill Touch and Shocking Grasp?) plus a level 1 Sorcerer spell (Mage Armor?) that key off the charisma stat that they're using for everything anyway.
Just as Sorcerers just need 13 Wisdom and an ASI to get the Ritual Caster feat for ritual casting.
That said only Pact of the Tome Warlocks with the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation get ritual casting in the Warlock archtype.
Hello, I am planning to create a bard that is why I am gathering tips, Can you please give me some tips for new create bard char.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I really love playing online games even though I'm a girl.
I have been playing games for most of my life. I think it is because video games are really fun to play. It doesn't matter what you are playing, they are all fun to play!
Hello, I am planning to create a bard that is why I am gathering tips, Can you please give me some tips for new create bard char.
The Player's Handbook's advice on this subject is good. Also: Make sure, if your DM cares about this, to buy spell components when possible. Bards can learn a lot of spells that consume or otherwise require costly spell components. You don't want to be stuck with a spell that you can't actually cast.
Of course, Charisma is your top stat. You may well want to make Dex your second best stat. I use a wooden flute as my spell casting focus even though I carry a lute in town for RP reasons. The flute is handier for using in a tight situation. Talk to the other players about what you intend to do to help them in combat. If you go Lore Bard, as I did, Cutting Words is an incredible use of your Bardic Inspiration. Also, assuming your DM is OK with taking a short rest about every meal, remember to use Song of Rest and get your party to understand how that works.
I think playing a bard is great fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We've already addressed a lot of what you suggested, Minoke.
What *harm* do you think would come to pass if, say, Lore bards had access to their choice of a cantrip at level 3 from any class?
Well, first of all you would have to rebalance all the other damage options so that they're competitive not only with the Bard's core kit but with the cantrip selection of every other class. In other words, it would need to be true that swordfighting as one of the swordfighting colleges is as good as casting Toll the Dead. Right now it only needs to be as good as Vicious Mockery. Which spills out into the power budget for the rest of the subclass and, transitively, the class as a whole. In other words, other features have to get weaker if this one's going to get stronger. Whether that's a problem will come down to how you feel about the power level of the rest of the Bard class, but I'll note that if something gets weak enough, people stop using it, and so in the extreme case you end up with Bards basically being weaker Sorcerers.
Secondly, it would more directly paint the College of Lore as being the de facto College of Damage, which is out of line with its concept, even if you can intentionally bend that concept to include it. First impressions are important! And I really like the College of Lore concept at it is, so if it had to change to better reflect this damage dealer role, I'd probably be sad about it.
Thirdly, it would lead you really quickly into a scenario where you're either going to copy the best cantrip your buddy has, or you're going to highlight how suboptimal his choice was by picking a better one. Forcing you to weigh it against a leveled spell choice means that hardly anybody actually takes a cantrip, and making it happen later necessarily limits its impact. You remove both of those things and I'm pretty sure you get an irritating, salt-inducing subclass. That's just theory though. I haven't done any focus group stuff about it. I know who has, though...!
I have a hard time accepting the notion that the bard class is so tenuously balanced that you'd have to rebalance all the other damage options if you added, say, Mind Sliver to the list of available bard cantrips, or had something like Lesser Magical Secrets available to Bard players (lore bards or what have you).
I also don't know that you're correct about how it would paint the college of Lore. Clerics aren't considered to be damage dealers because they have access to Sacred Flame. The College of Lore, as I see it, is the College focused primarily on spellcasting, and secondarily on skills. Or perhaps more accurately, it's the college most focused on versatility. Right now, as a spellcasting class, it lacks something significant - the ability to do reliable, scaling damage without expending resources to do so. Literally every other primary casting class has the ability to do so except the Bard, and I don't know that what the Bard gets makes up for that. The other spellcasters can provide support, battlefield control, and all the rest just fine. But Bards, for some reason, don't get the one basic tool in every other spellcasting toolkit.
I don't see how your third argument doesn't apply to all the other classes that have access to real damage cantrips, except maybe eldritch blast. Nobody complains that Clerics have a solid damage cantrip.
I don't think it has to be "tenuously balanced" in order for the argument to hold that, if you increase power *here*, you should decrease power *there.* Unless your stance is that the class is underpowered, so adding raw power can only serve to bring it up to par?
You can interpret the College of Lore to be whatever suits your argument, but if you go by the fluff and the mechanics, it's not the College of Flexibility or of Spells -- because that's not how subclass design works in this game. It's the college that speaks truth to power, the college that values the preservation and distribution of knowledge, etc. The mechanics serve the concept. It might be true that it more strongly emphasizes spells when compared to the other colleges, but that's a side effect, not a cause. That's my opinion, anyway.
I thought we were talking about a feature that would let the Bard choose any cantrip from any class's spell list.
I don't understand why you'd have to give something up in order to have a missing tool added to the overall toolbox. Bards are missing a key tool enjoyed by all full spellcasters. They don't need to lose anything to have that problem fixed.
And yes, if I were King of the D&D, I would at either 1st level for all Bards or 3rd for Lore, add the ability to choose 1-2 Cantrips from any spell list. If it were something for all Bards at 1st, I would let them choose one. If it were Lore only at 3rd I'd let them choose 2.
I would also add Booming Blade and/or Mind Sliver to the list for all Bards, 2bh, if I went with the Lore option outlined above.
Because increased choices is always a power boost. Even if a player can still only select the same number for their character to know, having a larger pool of options is a boon.
Anyway, the only full spellcaster who doesn't get ritual casting is the Sorcerer. Do you feel that's something they need? I've never heard anyone say that. (It would certainly make the Sorcerer more powerful, which I have heard it needs on occasion, but is that the right way to do it?) The only full spellcaster who doesn't get Light is the Druid. They've been excluded from the exploration pillar! Everyone should use the same tools! Restrictions breed creativity? Necessity is the mother of invention? Bah! :P
Let'sgivetheclass
1.)the fighters number offeats
2.)the barbarian ability to take damage
3.)the clerics healing spells
4.)the druid ability to shape change
5.)the monk's ability with unarmed combat
oh hell, let's just give the class every other classesschtick.
I don't see how greater variety in choice = power increase (nor do I agree that the Bards don't need a power increase in the first place). I believe the lack of solid damage dealing cantrips is a huge gap in the class and needs to be repaired.
I don't see why Sorcs shouldn't have ritual casting. That's a great point, and I didn't even realize it was a thing. Doesn't make a lot of sense that your Witch in the woods who has always had magic at their fingertips wouldn't access their powers ritually as well as instinctually.
But I think we can also agree that comparing the sorcerer's lack of ritual casting isn't really comparable to what we're talking about. Ritual casting, by definition, isn't a combat mechanic.
In a way I think it is comparable. Ritual casting saves the caster from having to spend a valuable resource (spell slots) from being expended. Whereas a more damaging cantrip would also save the caster from having to spend a valuable resource (spell slots) to crank out more damage.
In both instances its about preserving resources.
Right, but you're way more likely to cast several instances of Fire Bolt than you are to sit for 10 minutes to cast Comprehend Languages a bunch of times. both save resources, but direct damage cantrips save *way* more in a typical session that includes a normal amount of combat.
TheBard would be more likely to just CharmPersonthe bad guy and have a discussion with them over a nice cup of (poisoned)tea while learning about where their cohorts are and the best way to rob them.
Just plain damage is for the small mind with small thoughts, like WizardsandFighters.
Bardsdo everything with more elan.
Technically all Bard's have to do is expend an ASI to get the Magic Initiate (Sorcerer) feat to get two damage cantrips (Chill Touch and Shocking Grasp?) plus a level 1 Sorcerer spell (Mage Armor?) that key off the charisma stat that they're using for everything anyway.
Just as Sorcerers just need 13 Wisdom and an ASI to get the Ritual Caster feat for ritual casting.
That said only Pact of the Tome Warlocks with the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation get ritual casting in the Warlock archtype.
Hello, I am planning to create a bard that is why I am gathering tips, Can you please give me some tips for new create bard char.
I really love playing online games even though I'm a girl.
I have been playing games for most of my life. I think it is because video games are really fun to play. It doesn't matter what you are playing, they are all fun to play!
The Player's Handbook's advice on this subject is good. Also: Make sure, if your DM cares about this, to buy spell components when possible. Bards can learn a lot of spells that consume or otherwise require costly spell components. You don't want to be stuck with a spell that you can't actually cast.
Of course, Charisma is your top stat. You may well want to make Dex your second best stat. I use a wooden flute as my spell casting focus even though I carry a lute in town for RP reasons. The flute is handier for using in a tight situation. Talk to the other players about what you intend to do to help them in combat. If you go Lore Bard, as I did, Cutting Words is an incredible use of your Bardic Inspiration. Also, assuming your DM is OK with taking a short rest about every meal, remember to use Song of Rest and get your party to understand how that works.
I think playing a bard is great fun.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt