My character is a travelling "entertainer" so I was leaning into Valor on the RP side plus I didn't like that Cutting Words can be resisted by creatures that can't hear you, Combat Inspiration doesn't have that limitation.
If you're talking about the target having to hear you then yes, of course the target of Combat Inspiration has to be able to hear you. Which of course makes sense (for cutting words as well) since you are literally using words and sounds for this ability. Not that it's really a problem since there are few enemies that are deaf or can't hear you. And, considering the super high stats you have, if you want to powergame then Lore is better than Valor.
My character is a travelling "entertainer" so I was leaning into Valor on the RP side plus I didn't like that Cutting Words can be resisted by creatures that can't hear you, Combat Inspiration doesn't have that limitation.
If you're talking about the target having to hear you then yes, of course the target of Combat Inspiration has to be able to hear you.
Does this mean that if I give Combat Inspiration to an ally and then the next turn they can't hear me, they can't use the Inspiration I just gave them?
I guess my issue isn't the just the limitation of them not hearing you but how it's used also. Cutting Words give me more options but I don't like that it's a reactive ability. Though I agree that being deaf is probably not going to come up very often anyways and Lore is stronger later in the game.
I've been playing a Bard primarily for several years now. Let me tell you that people who advise you to cast a lot of cantrips are giving you bad advice. There just aren't that many good combat cantrips for bards.
What I do as a Bard of Lore is focus on trying to control the battle with spells like Heat Metal and Hypnotic Pattern. At your current level, you can still use Sleep.
Then, while concentrating on such a spell, I use my xbow to inflict damage.
There's a tendency to forget to use Bardic Inspiration.
This isn't necessarily bad advice. Playing a caster to primarily fulfill the role of battle field control is the best way to play a caster.
But, to say casting cantrips (when no other option is feasible, cause we're presumably talking about a purebred bard) repeatedly is bad advice? That's just wrong. To say you're better off firing a crossbow? and as a lore bard? Even more wrong. Let's assume you decided to pick up a hand crossbow, and you start out with a 16 in DEX. But, you want to be a good boy, and good boys raise their CHA to 20 by lvl 8 just to really maximize our ability for battlefield control.
Let's say you're lvl 8. You could either do an average of 5 damage with vicious mockery, or you could do 6.5 damage with firing the crossbow.... Except, you're more likely to miss with a 3 mod in your DEX than things are to succeed on your WIS save.
You're saying you'd trade the likely possiblity of imposing disadvantage for the opportunity to maybe deal 1.5 more DPR? That's what I'm hearing.
My character is a travelling "entertainer" so I was leaning into Valor on the RP side plus I didn't like that Cutting Words can be resisted by creatures that can't hear you, Combat Inspiration doesn't have that limitation.
If you're talking about the target having to hear you then yes, of course the target of Combat Inspiration has to be able to hear you.
Does this mean that if I give Combat Inspiration to an ally and then the next turn they can't hear me, they can't use the Inspiration I just gave them?
I guess my issue isn't the just the limitation of them not hearing you but how it's used also. Cutting Words give me more options but I don't like that it's a reactive ability. Though I agree that being deaf is probably not going to come up very often anyways and Lore is stronger later in the game.
No, the requirement for bardic inspiration is the target needs to hear you for you to grant it, not for them to use it once you've done that.
My character is a travelling "entertainer" so I was leaning into Valor on the RP side plus I didn't like that Cutting Words can be resisted by creatures that can't hear you, Combat Inspiration doesn't have that limitation.
If you're talking about the target having to hear you then yes, of course the target of Combat Inspiration has to be able to hear you.
Does this mean that if I give Combat Inspiration to an ally and then the next turn they can't hear me, they can't use the Inspiration I just gave them?
What Ashrym said.
I guess my issue isn't the just the limitation of them not hearing you but how it's used also. Cutting Words give me more options but I don't like that it's a reactive ability.Though I agree that being deaf is probably not going to come up very often anyways and Lore is stronger later in the game.
Can't see why that is a problem. It along with Counterspell (another reactive ability) are among the best abilities in the game. Talk about control.
I've been playing a Bard primarily for several years now. Let me tell you that people who advise you to cast a lot of cantrips are giving you bad advice. There just aren't that many good combat cantrips for bards.
What I do as a Bard of Lore is focus on trying to control the battle with spells like Heat Metal and Hypnotic Pattern. At your current level, you can still use Sleep.
Then, while concentrating on such a spell, I use my xbow to inflict damage.
There's a tendency to forget to use Bardic Inspiration.
This isn't necessarily bad advice. Playing a caster to primarily fulfill the role of battle field control is the best way to play a caster.
But, to say casting cantrips (when no other option is feasible, cause we're presumably talking about a purebred bard) repeatedly is bad advice? That's just wrong. To say you're better off firing a crossbow? and as a lore bard? Even more wrong. Let's assume you decided to pick up a hand crossbow, and you start out with a 16 in DEX. But, you want to be a good boy, and good boys raise their CHA to 20 by lvl 8 just to really maximize our ability for battlefield control.
Let's say you're lvl 8. You could either do an average of 5 damage with vicious mockery, or you could do 6.5 damage with firing the crossbow.... Except, you're more likely to miss with a 3 mod in your DEX than things are to succeed on your WIS save.
You're saying you'd trade the likely possiblity of imposing disadvantage for the opportunity to maybe deal 1.5 more DPR? That's what I'm hearing.
That looks like cherry-picking the level for the math when you go to 8th level. There are many levels before and after that. ;-)
The point of the crossbow (which does 7.5 on a d8+3) is the relative safety of range and using cover. The lore bard would do more damage TWF dual short swords for 10 (2d6+3). Even that 3rd die on vicious mockery is only 7.5 damage on a failed save, although that's not entirely accurate.
When a person factors is save and hit percentages it takes a required assumption for no save bonus comparing weapon attack to higher AC's for the damage to be comparable until at least the 3rd die comes into play. At 8th level in your example the vicious mockery DPR with no save bonus is ~3.8 while AC 17 with light crossbow is ~3.6 and TWF with AC 19 is ~3.7 in comparison.
At 2nd level vicious mockery is ~1.5 damage assuming no save. The light crossbow versus 20 AC is ~2.1 damage and the dual short swords versus 20 AC is ~2.7 damage. When is requires extremely favorable conditions for the vicious mockery numbers and difficult for the weapon numbers it's hard to justify giving up another useful cantrip for vicious mockery when I can have another cantrip benefit and better damage. The disadvantage on a single attack roll isn't worth it.
That's all assuming no other investment into weapons is being taken. With no other investment than going valor or swords the extra attack places damage at your 8th level damage much better against AC 20 than vicious mockery against no save bonus. As a lore bard, I can still do better damage most of the time, have that other cantrip, and as levels increase the dependence on cantrips or weapon attacks decreases.
On top of that, it's easier to add bonuses or apply debuffs for hitting with attack rolls than it is to affect saving throws. We aren't talking a point or two of damage here. When we look at the bigger picture it's quite a bit of damage even with favorable assumptions for the save spell.
That looks like cherry-picking the level for the math when you go to 8th level. There are many levels before and after that. ;-)
The point of the crossbow (which does 7.5 on a d8+3) is the relative safety of range and using cover. The lore bard would do more damage TWF dual short swords for 10 (2d6+3). Even that 3rd die on vicious mockery is only 7.5 damage on a failed save, although that's not entirely accurate.
When a person factors is save and hit percentages it takes a required assumption for no save bonus comparing weapon attack to higher AC's for the damage to be comparable until at least the 3rd die comes into play. At 8th level in your example the vicious mockery DPR with no save bonus is ~3.8 while AC 17 with light crossbow is ~3.6 and TWF with AC 19 is ~3.7 in comparison.
At 2nd level vicious mockery is ~1.5 damage assuming no save. The light crossbow versus 20 AC is ~2.1 damage and the dual short swords versus 20 AC is ~2.7 damage. When is requires extremely favorable conditions for the vicious mockery numbers and difficult for the weapon numbers it's hard to justify giving up another useful cantrip for vicious mockery when I can have another cantrip benefit and better damage. The disadvantage on a single attack roll isn't worth it.
That's all assuming no other investment into weapons is being taken. With no other investment than going valor or swords the extra attack places damage at your 8th level damage much better against AC 20 than vicious mockery against no save bonus. As a lore bard, I can still do better damage most of the time, have that other cantrip, and as levels increase the dependence on cantrips or weapon attacks decreases.
On top of that, it's easier to add bonuses or apply debuffs for hitting with attack rolls than it is to affect saving throws. We aren't talking a point or two of damage here. When we look at the bigger picture it's quite a bit of damage even with favorable assumptions for the save spell.
Just, what are you trying to prove? That TWF on a lore bard does peanuts more than a cantrip? If you want to get in melee with 14 AC and without a fighting style, you do you. You say disadvantage on a single roll isn't worth it, but that's really just your opinion. However much you value the possibility to turn a hit into a miss, or a crit into a survivable hit, is entirely up to you, but it doesn't make it an objective truth.
But what I will say, if you're the bard without bonus proficiencies in armor or weapons, or without extra attack, you're seriously over valuing the "contribution" being made by firing a single crossbow shot anywhere outside of tier 1. Even within that very tier, the damage difference is so negligible you're probably better off imposing disadvantage to let the damage dealers do their job and live.
My point is this: You need to multiclass to access any meaningful combat option once concentration's started. You say vicious mockery's disadvantage isn't worth it, maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But I don't think a single crossbow shot is any much better. I personally think neither option is as meaningful as swinging around a greatsword while clad in heavy armor, or tossing out several powerful Eldritch Blasts.
I've been playing a Bard primarily for several years now. Let me tell you that people who advise you to cast a lot of cantrips are giving you bad advice. There just aren't that many good combat cantrips for bards.
What I do as a Bard of Lore is focus on trying to control the battle with spells like Heat Metal and Hypnotic Pattern. At your current level, you can still use Sleep.
Then, while concentrating on such a spell, I use my xbow to inflict damage.
There's a tendency to forget to use Bardic Inspiration.
This isn't necessarily bad advice. Playing a caster to primarily fulfill the role of battle field control is the best way to play a caster.
But, to say casting cantrips (when no other option is feasible, cause we're presumably talking about a purebred bard) repeatedly is bad advice? That's just wrong. To say you're better off firing a crossbow? and as a lore bard? Even more wrong. Let's assume you decided to pick up a hand crossbow, and you start out with a 16 in DEX. But, you want to be a good boy, and good boys raise their CHA to 20 by lvl 8 just to really maximize our ability for battlefield control.
Let's say you're lvl 8. You could either do an average of 5 damage with vicious mockery, or you could do 6.5 damage with firing the crossbow.... Except, you're more likely to miss with a 3 mod in your DEX than things are to succeed on your WIS save.
You're saying you'd trade the likely possiblity of imposing disadvantage for the opportunity to maybe deal 1.5 more DPR? That's what I'm hearing.
Remember to factor in the +1 or +2 from the xbow being magical.
I've been playing a Bard primarily for several years now. Let me tell you that people who advise you to cast a lot of cantrips are giving you bad advice. There just aren't that many good combat cantrips for bards.
What I do as a Bard of Lore is focus on trying to control the battle with spells like Heat Metal and Hypnotic Pattern. At your current level, you can still use Sleep.
Then, while concentrating on such a spell, I use my xbow to inflict damage.
There's a tendency to forget to use Bardic Inspiration.
This isn't necessarily bad advice. Playing a caster to primarily fulfill the role of battle field control is the best way to play a caster.
But, to say casting cantrips (when no other option is feasible, cause we're presumably talking about a purebred bard) repeatedly is bad advice? That's just wrong. To say you're better off firing a crossbow? and as a lore bard? Even more wrong. Let's assume you decided to pick up a hand crossbow, and you start out with a 16 in DEX. But, you want to be a good boy, and good boys raise their CHA to 20 by lvl 8 just to really maximize our ability for battlefield control.
Let's say you're lvl 8. You could either do an average of 5 damage with vicious mockery, or you could do 6.5 damage with firing the crossbow.... Except, you're more likely to miss with a 3 mod in your DEX than things are to succeed on your WIS save.
You're saying you'd trade the likely possiblity of imposing disadvantage for the opportunity to maybe deal 1.5 more DPR? That's what I'm hearing.
Remember to factor in the +1 or +2 from the xbow being magical.
I would build into Lore Bard at this point, since it does more of the magical stuff and skill stuff that you're typically playing a bard for. If you want more armour take the moderately armored feat to give proficiency with medium armour and shields, but you're probably better off grabbing Magic Initiate (Sorcerer). You can take the Mage Armor spell, which will boost your AC to 17 while it's active, and with an 8 hour duration you should have it up for most of your adventuring, and you can also grab a couple of damaging cantrips to compensate for the fact that Vicious Mockery runs out of puff a bit once enemies start getting extra attacks. I'd take Chill Touch and Toll the Dead as cantrips, Chill Touch has a nice long range and stops your enemy healing, and Toll the Dead has the largest damage dice available in the game as long as your target is damaged. Since Sorcerer is also a charisma class you're covered. For your level 6 extra magical secrets grab Fireball and Counterspell.
That looks like cherry-picking the level for the math when you go to 8th level. There are many levels before and after that. ;-)
The point of the crossbow (which does 7.5 on a d8+3) is the relative safety of range and using cover. The lore bard would do more damage TWF dual short swords for 10 (2d6+3). Even that 3rd die on vicious mockery is only 7.5 damage on a failed save, although that's not entirely accurate.
When a person factors is save and hit percentages it takes a required assumption for no save bonus comparing weapon attack to higher AC's for the damage to be comparable until at least the 3rd die comes into play. At 8th level in your example the vicious mockery DPR with no save bonus is ~3.8 while AC 17 with light crossbow is ~3.6 and TWF with AC 19 is ~3.7 in comparison.
At 2nd level vicious mockery is ~1.5 damage assuming no save. The light crossbow versus 20 AC is ~2.1 damage and the dual short swords versus 20 AC is ~2.7 damage. When is requires extremely favorable conditions for the vicious mockery numbers and difficult for the weapon numbers it's hard to justify giving up another useful cantrip for vicious mockery when I can have another cantrip benefit and better damage. The disadvantage on a single attack roll isn't worth it.
That's all assuming no other investment into weapons is being taken. With no other investment than going valor or swords the extra attack places damage at your 8th level damage much better against AC 20 than vicious mockery against no save bonus. As a lore bard, I can still do better damage most of the time, have that other cantrip, and as levels increase the dependence on cantrips or weapon attacks decreases.
On top of that, it's easier to add bonuses or apply debuffs for hitting with attack rolls than it is to affect saving throws. We aren't talking a point or two of damage here. When we look at the bigger picture it's quite a bit of damage even with favorable assumptions for the save spell.
Just, what are you trying to prove? That TWF on a lore bard does peanuts more than a cantrip? If you want to get in melee with 14 AC and without a fighting style, you do you. You say disadvantage on a single roll isn't worth it, but that's really just your opinion. However much you value the possibility to turn a hit into a miss, or a crit into a survivable hit, is entirely up to you, but it doesn't make it an objective truth.
But what I will say, if you're the bard without bonus proficiencies in armor or weapons, or without extra attack, you're seriously over valuing the "contribution" being made by firing a single crossbow shot anywhere outside of tier 1. Even within that very tier, the damage difference is so negligible you're probably better off imposing disadvantage to let the damage dealers do their job and live.
My point is this: You need to multiclass to access any meaningful combat option once concentration's started. You say vicious mockery's disadvantage isn't worth it, maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But I don't think a single crossbow shot is any much better. I personally think neither option is as meaningful as swinging around a greatsword while clad in heavy armor, or tossing out several powerful Eldritch Blasts.
It's only "peanuts more" when a person assumes a non-existent saving throw bonus versus a high AC. The point is weapon damage is usually more damage than cantrip damage. This is especially true when referring to vicious mockery. Calling it peanuts or negligible doesn't change that. Ignoring the point about improving accuracy being easier on attack rolls than saving throws didn't prove your argument.
It's the vicious mockery damage that's negligible until 11th level or higher, at which point it's just bad. Bards are using spell slots more often than cantrips by then so I wouldn't waste one of the few cantrips the PC gets to know on a spell that does virtually no damage before then and only helps defend against a single attack when there are other ways to create disadvantage.
The best way to use vicious mockery is in conjunction with another spell such as bane or slow to make it more worthwhile because that's how to land the failed save more (bane) or restrict attackers to single attacks for the disadvantage (slow). If I'm going to be doing that anyway I may as well toss out faerie fire and increase accuracy for the entire party's weapon attacks because those are going to be more prominent than saving throws.
Even a poor attack option like the crossbow is free instead of the limited cantrip selection. Free and better damage. My advice is take a non-combat cantrip that's more useful than an extremely low damage cantrip with a limited effect that isn't stackable with other sources of the same effect and easily countered by advantage. Vicious mockery is fun to RP but not a good choice mechanically. Better to be an artificer with guardian armor.
Also, it doesn't remotely take multi-classing for meaningful contribution to combat. It does take investment but not multi-classing.
The most likely time I am going to use V-M is when I also wish to use Healing Word as a bonus action. V-M is a good thematic Cantrip but it isn't one of the Bad Boys of damage cantrips. Bard can't do everything better than the other classes. It just wouldn't be faire.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Lore Bards should get Lesser Magical Secrets at 3rd level and be able to draw 2 Cantrips from other lists.
Just choose a race with bonus cantrips, or use a feat, or use one of the magical secrets at 6th level for a damage cantrip if that's the plan. Lore bards are fine and don't need more options here; just use existing ones. ;-)
Yeah, but I think the subclass needs it in general, instead of having to use a specific race or subrace. I don't think it would overbalance them, and having now played a Lore Bard for many months, it's been clear to me that you need something better than Vicious Mockery to cast from turn to turn when slots aren't warranted or run out.
Yeah, but I think the subclass needs it in general, instead of having to use a specific race or subrace. I don't think it would overbalance them, and having now played a Lore Bard for many months, it's been clear to me that you need something better than Vicious Mockery to cast from turn to turn when slots aren't warranted or run out.
I disagree.
Bards have enough going for them that they don't need to add better direct damage without investing in it, even in a subclass. They are designed with support heavily in mind.
Vicious mockery does almost no damage. It's meant to be used for the disadvantage it imposes. The issue with it as that there are too many other ways to impose disadvantage and too many opportunities for multiple attacks to make a single attack with disadvantage meaningful (but it does work much better with slow).
I don't think the caster subclass would be hurt or somehow broken if you got to grab Firebolt and Booming Blade or some such when you picked your class. A Subclass is an investment - you're making a choice as to what your path will be, and you're giving up the advantages of other subclasses. Might be worth while to add just a single cantrip from any class. In any case, I have now directly experienced the "Now what" moment of playing a bard where everyone in the party is slamming things about for 10-20 damage a hit and you're like "um, take 2d4 and then you have disadvantage on the first of your three attacks in your multiattack".
Booming blade would be cooler, or Eldritch Blast. You can invest in a feat, but there should be a subclass for Bard that doesn't have to right out of the gates. Lore seems the most likely candidate.
Lore Bards should get Lesser Magical Secrets at 3rd level and be able to draw 2 Cantrips from other lists.
Just choose a race with bonus cantrips, or use a feat, or use one of the magical secrets at 6th level for a damage cantrip if that's the plan. Lore bards are fine and don't need more options here; just use existing ones. ;-)
Using your magical secrets on a cantrip has got to be one of the worst ways to use a secret. Bro, you talk about investments for accessing those neat damage options, but I'm gonna tell you straight up, it's just not as viable as it is to multiclass.
If a bard says "yeah, I think i'll use my lvl 4 for grabbing magic initiate: warlock for EB," well, now they've got a mediocre blasting option since it lacks agonizing blast. Now they're behind the curve cause their charisma didn't get raised. Whereas had the bard just multiclassed, they would've gain access to much more. In a real campaign setting, you're only going to have two chances to increase an ASI, at best. Using it on a mediocre option just to say "see? bards can do access decent damage options if you just invest :^) " is just asinine at best.
What if the player creating a bard doesn't want to be a high elf to access a damage cantrip? What if their concept includes a half orc? what then? Face it, the bard chassis sucks for sustainable, resourceless damage.
I don't think the caster subclass would be hurt or somehow broken if you got to grab Firebolt and Booming Blade or some such when you picked your class. A Subclass is an investment - you're making a choice as to what your path will be, and you're giving up the advantages of other subclasses. Might be worth while to add just a single cantrip from any class. In any case, I have now directly experienced the "Now what" moment of playing a bard where everyone in the party is slamming things about for 10-20 damage a hit and you're like "um, take 2d4 and then you have disadvantage on the first of your three attacks in your multiattack".
Booming blade would be cooler, or Eldritch Blast. You can invest in a feat, but there should be a subclass for Bard that doesn't have to right out of the gates. Lore seems the most likely candidate.
Or you could shoot a crossbow and use the cantrip known for something out of combat? At 3rd level that's still better damage. ;-)
Cantrip damage sucks in general compared to weapon attacks. Ability modifier to damage when cantrips need something to add that same benefit, the extra attack feature is multiplicative in damage applied so we have something more like QFLW when it comes to at-will damage, easier options to add bonus action attacks, and much better feat support for damage oriented characters.
The reality is that cantrip damage is on the lower side of average without leveraging things like agonizing blast or meta-magic. I don't bother with learning cantrip damage on most spell casters until 4th level in preparation for the 5th level jump in damage to something that's more like a basic weapon attack.
Bards were deliberately limited in these damage options, however. They were designed for support more in line with clerics and druids. Traditionally, bards fight with weapons. Those flashier better damage cantrips are in the purview of other casters meant to be a bit better at spell casting than bards as part of the bard's general proficiency in so many aspects of the game.
Bard who want to have those types of spells do and should pay for them in some way. Customized spell lists are part of the bard purview based on a broad range of spells and magical secrets. Lore bards are still an excellent choice without free damage cantrips at 3rd level because they get other nice things. If I were your DM and you did want a variation I might consider swapping cutting words and bonus proficiencies out for lesser magical secrets and allow 2 cantrips from any school. Not more stuff on a class that has plenty. That still leaves the JOAT bonus on the 3 lost skill proficiencies, standard bardic inspiration (which is still good), and the base class still picks up expertise at that level as well.
There are other bard subclasses that step up damage if a person wants more damage. So instead of wanting more damage on a lore bard you can play a valor bard or swords bard for better weapon damage (which is much better than cantrips), or you can play a spirit bard who gains bonus damage on spells or bonuses through tales from beyond, or you can play a whispers bard for the psychic blades bonus damage, or you can play a creation bard for the animating performance pet damage.
Lore, glamour, and eloquence colleges get benefits aside from damage so giving it to any of them freely takes away relative value from other arcane spell casters and other bard subclasses when lore, glamour, and eloquence are often called out as the best bard subclasses by players already. No class or subclass gets everything; even lore bards. ;-)
On that same note, it's very easy to fit benefits in by race, feat, or magical secrets.
A high elf gives a wizard cantrip that could be used for booming blade or other damage cantrip where the save / attack roll is less impacted by caster stat.
A levistus tiefling gives ray of frost.
A yuan-ti gives poison spray.
A mountain dwarf give medium armor for lore bards who want AC while TWF.
A mark of making human gains a free use of the magic weapon spell. (I don't recommend this one for this purpose but it is an option.)
A variant human can use a bonus feat for any one of several cantrips that add damage.
A custom lineage that can use a feat in the same way.
An ASI on magic initiate.
An ASI on spell sniper.
An ASI on aberrant dragonmark.
An ASI on artificer initiate.
An ASI on wood elf magic
Various combat ASI's that I won't go into details on.
The easiest approach is to spend a feat at 4th level or a bonus feat at 1st level on moderately armored then pick up booming blade and either shadow blade or shillelah at 6th level. Shadow blade creates incentive to max DEX and CHA if going single classed while shillelagh does a bit less damage and allow for more feats instead of ASI's. A person can max both DEX and CHA on point buy, and skip moderately armored. Or max both and take moderately armored (mostly for the shield and half ASI bonus) and still max both stats with room for another feat.
The even easier approach is just use one extra secret for a ranged cantrip or a feat to do the same.
The bottom line is that you seem to be arguing that a bonus cantrip should be provided because you don't want to invest in it with the only argument for it being that it might not hurt anything. My argument is the lore bard is already a strong option and doesn't need more, and that if you want more as a player the existing rules will allow you to add what you want for a small investment. I think my argument sounds stronger. ;-)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If you're talking about the target having to hear you then yes, of course the target of Combat Inspiration has to be able to hear you. Which of course makes sense (for cutting words as well) since you are literally using words and sounds for this ability. Not that it's really a problem since there are few enemies that are deaf or can't hear you. And, considering the super high stats you have, if you want to powergame then Lore is better than Valor.
Does this mean that if I give Combat Inspiration to an ally and then the next turn they can't hear me, they can't use the Inspiration I just gave them?
I guess my issue isn't the just the limitation of them not hearing you but how it's used also. Cutting Words give me more options but I don't like that it's a reactive ability. Though I agree that being deaf is probably not going to come up very often anyways and Lore is stronger later in the game.
This isn't necessarily bad advice. Playing a caster to primarily fulfill the role of battle field control is the best way to play a caster.
But, to say casting cantrips (when no other option is feasible, cause we're presumably talking about a purebred bard) repeatedly is bad advice? That's just wrong. To say you're better off firing a crossbow? and as a lore bard? Even more wrong. Let's assume you decided to pick up a hand crossbow, and you start out with a 16 in DEX. But, you want to be a good boy, and good boys raise their CHA to 20 by lvl 8 just to really maximize our ability for battlefield control.
Let's say you're lvl 8. You could either do an average of 5 damage with vicious mockery, or you could do 6.5 damage with firing the crossbow.... Except, you're more likely to miss with a 3 mod in your DEX than things are to succeed on your WIS save.
You're saying you'd trade the likely possiblity of imposing disadvantage for the opportunity to maybe deal 1.5 more DPR? That's what I'm hearing.
No, the requirement for bardic inspiration is the target needs to hear you for you to grant it, not for them to use it once you've done that.
What Ashrym said.
Can't see why that is a problem. It along with Counterspell (another reactive ability) are among the best abilities in the game. Talk about control.
That looks like cherry-picking the level for the math when you go to 8th level. There are many levels before and after that. ;-)
The point of the crossbow (which does 7.5 on a d8+3) is the relative safety of range and using cover. The lore bard would do more damage TWF dual short swords for 10 (2d6+3). Even that 3rd die on vicious mockery is only 7.5 damage on a failed save, although that's not entirely accurate.
When a person factors is save and hit percentages it takes a required assumption for no save bonus comparing weapon attack to higher AC's for the damage to be comparable until at least the 3rd die comes into play. At 8th level in your example the vicious mockery DPR with no save bonus is ~3.8 while AC 17 with light crossbow is ~3.6 and TWF with AC 19 is ~3.7 in comparison.
At 2nd level vicious mockery is ~1.5 damage assuming no save. The light crossbow versus 20 AC is ~2.1 damage and the dual short swords versus 20 AC is ~2.7 damage. When is requires extremely favorable conditions for the vicious mockery numbers and difficult for the weapon numbers it's hard to justify giving up another useful cantrip for vicious mockery when I can have another cantrip benefit and better damage. The disadvantage on a single attack roll isn't worth it.
That's all assuming no other investment into weapons is being taken. With no other investment than going valor or swords the extra attack places damage at your 8th level damage much better against AC 20 than vicious mockery against no save bonus. As a lore bard, I can still do better damage most of the time, have that other cantrip, and as levels increase the dependence on cantrips or weapon attacks decreases.
On top of that, it's easier to add bonuses or apply debuffs for hitting with attack rolls than it is to affect saving throws. We aren't talking a point or two of damage here. When we look at the bigger picture it's quite a bit of damage even with favorable assumptions for the save spell.
Just, what are you trying to prove? That TWF on a lore bard does peanuts more than a cantrip? If you want to get in melee with 14 AC and without a fighting style, you do you. You say disadvantage on a single roll isn't worth it, but that's really just your opinion. However much you value the possibility to turn a hit into a miss, or a crit into a survivable hit, is entirely up to you, but it doesn't make it an objective truth.
But what I will say, if you're the bard without bonus proficiencies in armor or weapons, or without extra attack, you're seriously over valuing the "contribution" being made by firing a single crossbow shot anywhere outside of tier 1. Even within that very tier, the damage difference is so negligible you're probably better off imposing disadvantage to let the damage dealers do their job and live.
My point is this: You need to multiclass to access any meaningful combat option once concentration's started. You say vicious mockery's disadvantage isn't worth it, maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But I don't think a single crossbow shot is any much better. I personally think neither option is as meaningful as swinging around a greatsword while clad in heavy armor, or tossing out several powerful Eldritch Blasts.
Remember to factor in the +1 or +2 from the xbow being magical.
Lol, wut? Why would you assume that?
I would build into Lore Bard at this point, since it does more of the magical stuff and skill stuff that you're typically playing a bard for. If you want more armour take the moderately armored feat to give proficiency with medium armour and shields, but you're probably better off grabbing Magic Initiate (Sorcerer). You can take the Mage Armor spell, which will boost your AC to 17 while it's active, and with an 8 hour duration you should have it up for most of your adventuring, and you can also grab a couple of damaging cantrips to compensate for the fact that Vicious Mockery runs out of puff a bit once enemies start getting extra attacks. I'd take Chill Touch and Toll the Dead as cantrips, Chill Touch has a nice long range and stops your enemy healing, and Toll the Dead has the largest damage dice available in the game as long as your target is damaged. Since Sorcerer is also a charisma class you're covered. For your level 6 extra magical secrets grab Fireball and Counterspell.
I absolutely cannot resist doing this, one of my fav parody videos.
https://youtu.be/P2dCzFZ9qcM
Some good tips on how to Bard in there. Or is it how NOT to Bard?
It's only "peanuts more" when a person assumes a non-existent saving throw bonus versus a high AC. The point is weapon damage is usually more damage than cantrip damage. This is especially true when referring to vicious mockery. Calling it peanuts or negligible doesn't change that. Ignoring the point about improving accuracy being easier on attack rolls than saving throws didn't prove your argument.
It's the vicious mockery damage that's negligible until 11th level or higher, at which point it's just bad. Bards are using spell slots more often than cantrips by then so I wouldn't waste one of the few cantrips the PC gets to know on a spell that does virtually no damage before then and only helps defend against a single attack when there are other ways to create disadvantage.
The best way to use vicious mockery is in conjunction with another spell such as bane or slow to make it more worthwhile because that's how to land the failed save more (bane) or restrict attackers to single attacks for the disadvantage (slow). If I'm going to be doing that anyway I may as well toss out faerie fire and increase accuracy for the entire party's weapon attacks because those are going to be more prominent than saving throws.
Even a poor attack option like the crossbow is free instead of the limited cantrip selection. Free and better damage. My advice is take a non-combat cantrip that's more useful than an extremely low damage cantrip with a limited effect that isn't stackable with other sources of the same effect and easily countered by advantage. Vicious mockery is fun to RP but not a good choice mechanically. Better to be an artificer with guardian armor.
Also, it doesn't remotely take multi-classing for meaningful contribution to combat. It does take investment but not multi-classing.
The most likely time I am going to use V-M is when I also wish to use Healing Word as a bonus action. V-M is a good thematic Cantrip but it isn't one of the Bad Boys of damage cantrips. Bard can't do everything better than the other classes. It just wouldn't be faire.
Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscript catapultas habebunt
Lore Bards should get Lesser Magical Secrets at 3rd level and be able to draw 2 Cantrips from other lists.
Just choose a race with bonus cantrips, or use a feat, or use one of the magical secrets at 6th level for a damage cantrip if that's the plan. Lore bards are fine and don't need more options here; just use existing ones. ;-)
Yeah, but I think the subclass needs it in general, instead of having to use a specific race or subrace. I don't think it would overbalance them, and having now played a Lore Bard for many months, it's been clear to me that you need something better than Vicious Mockery to cast from turn to turn when slots aren't warranted or run out.
I disagree.
Bards have enough going for them that they don't need to add better direct damage without investing in it, even in a subclass. They are designed with support heavily in mind.
Vicious mockery does almost no damage. It's meant to be used for the disadvantage it imposes. The issue with it as that there are too many other ways to impose disadvantage and too many opportunities for multiple attacks to make a single attack with disadvantage meaningful (but it does work much better with slow).
I don't think the caster subclass would be hurt or somehow broken if you got to grab Firebolt and Booming Blade or some such when you picked your class. A Subclass is an investment - you're making a choice as to what your path will be, and you're giving up the advantages of other subclasses. Might be worth while to add just a single cantrip from any class. In any case, I have now directly experienced the "Now what" moment of playing a bard where everyone in the party is slamming things about for 10-20 damage a hit and you're like "um, take 2d4 and then you have disadvantage on the first of your three attacks in your multiattack".
Booming blade would be cooler, or Eldritch Blast. You can invest in a feat, but there should be a subclass for Bard that doesn't have to right out of the gates. Lore seems the most likely candidate.
Using your magical secrets on a cantrip has got to be one of the worst ways to use a secret. Bro, you talk about investments for accessing those neat damage options, but I'm gonna tell you straight up, it's just not as viable as it is to multiclass.
If a bard says "yeah, I think i'll use my lvl 4 for grabbing magic initiate: warlock for EB," well, now they've got a mediocre blasting option since it lacks agonizing blast. Now they're behind the curve cause their charisma didn't get raised. Whereas had the bard just multiclassed, they would've gain access to much more. In a real campaign setting, you're only going to have two chances to increase an ASI, at best. Using it on a mediocre option just to say "see? bards can do access decent damage options if you just invest :^) " is just asinine at best.
What if the player creating a bard doesn't want to be a high elf to access a damage cantrip? What if their concept includes a half orc? what then? Face it, the bard chassis sucks for sustainable, resourceless damage.
Or you could shoot a crossbow and use the cantrip known for something out of combat? At 3rd level that's still better damage. ;-)
Cantrip damage sucks in general compared to weapon attacks. Ability modifier to damage when cantrips need something to add that same benefit, the extra attack feature is multiplicative in damage applied so we have something more like QFLW when it comes to at-will damage, easier options to add bonus action attacks, and much better feat support for damage oriented characters.
The reality is that cantrip damage is on the lower side of average without leveraging things like agonizing blast or meta-magic. I don't bother with learning cantrip damage on most spell casters until 4th level in preparation for the 5th level jump in damage to something that's more like a basic weapon attack.
Bards were deliberately limited in these damage options, however. They were designed for support more in line with clerics and druids. Traditionally, bards fight with weapons. Those flashier better damage cantrips are in the purview of other casters meant to be a bit better at spell casting than bards as part of the bard's general proficiency in so many aspects of the game.
Bard who want to have those types of spells do and should pay for them in some way. Customized spell lists are part of the bard purview based on a broad range of spells and magical secrets. Lore bards are still an excellent choice without free damage cantrips at 3rd level because they get other nice things. If I were your DM and you did want a variation I might consider swapping cutting words and bonus proficiencies out for lesser magical secrets and allow 2 cantrips from any school. Not more stuff on a class that has plenty. That still leaves the JOAT bonus on the 3 lost skill proficiencies, standard bardic inspiration (which is still good), and the base class still picks up expertise at that level as well.
There are other bard subclasses that step up damage if a person wants more damage. So instead of wanting more damage on a lore bard you can play a valor bard or swords bard for better weapon damage (which is much better than cantrips), or you can play a spirit bard who gains bonus damage on spells or bonuses through tales from beyond, or you can play a whispers bard for the psychic blades bonus damage, or you can play a creation bard for the animating performance pet damage.
Lore, glamour, and eloquence colleges get benefits aside from damage so giving it to any of them freely takes away relative value from other arcane spell casters and other bard subclasses when lore, glamour, and eloquence are often called out as the best bard subclasses by players already. No class or subclass gets everything; even lore bards. ;-)
On that same note, it's very easy to fit benefits in by race, feat, or magical secrets.
The easiest approach is to spend a feat at 4th level or a bonus feat at 1st level on moderately armored then pick up booming blade and either shadow blade or shillelah at 6th level. Shadow blade creates incentive to max DEX and CHA if going single classed while shillelagh does a bit less damage and allow for more feats instead of ASI's. A person can max both DEX and CHA on point buy, and skip moderately armored. Or max both and take moderately armored (mostly for the shield and half ASI bonus) and still max both stats with room for another feat.
The even easier approach is just use one extra secret for a ranged cantrip or a feat to do the same.
The bottom line is that you seem to be arguing that a bonus cantrip should be provided because you don't want to invest in it with the only argument for it being that it might not hurt anything. My argument is the lore bard is already a strong option and doesn't need more, and that if you want more as a player the existing rules will allow you to add what you want for a small investment. I think my argument sounds stronger. ;-)