Is anyone else carrying the hell out of their group with their Bard? My group can barely get hits unless they're inspired, always get wrecked unless I've imposed disadvantage through VM, have trouble with a single monster while I'm knocking out a pack of them with sleep, stand and fight a giant and all get knocked down while I kite the thing to death with dissonant whispers, and almost die every single fight just to be saved by my cure wounds.
I thought Bards were supposed to be the practically useless in combat skill monkey class...
One of my best friends declared, "I will play a bard - they're pretty useless" before even looking inside the 5e players book, when we decided I was going to run a 5e campaign.
As you say, Bards excel at battlefield control and really are an amazing addition to a party.
They *used* to be just skill monkeys in previous editions of the game.
Huh, weird - I guess it depends on the party composition though.
Generally speaking, the Bard won't be as good as any other party member, at the thing that party member specialises in. They're not as good at spells as a Wizard, or sneaking as a Rogue, or fighting as a Fighter.They'll be not that far behind though and that's
They'll be not that far behind though and that's their main strength imho - they can accompany the rogue on stealth recon and be good at it. They can join the fight with the fighter and hold their own. They can provide spells to control the battle or manipulate the environment outside of fights.
It's about flexibility and complimenting the rest of the group for me.
People who say that the Bard is weak are probably wanting their character to shine as "the best at X" whatever X happens to be.
Just because a class has a lot of potential doesn't mean players will ever reach that potential. The DM will also affect just how much potential a class really has, but it sounds like you're experiencing what Treantmonk like to describe in his guides and why a lot of people consider the 5e Bard as better than the 5e Wizard.
I'd say bards are the best controllers and diplomats. Especially since they can dip into the best spells for such roles from any class. They are also fantastic healers with even one level of life cleric. Basically, they're best at support, while the other classes are the best for fighting and dungeoneering.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
Is anyone else carrying the hell out of their group with their Bard? My group can barely get hits unless they're inspired, always get wrecked unless I've imposed disadvantage through VM, have trouble with a single monster while I'm knocking out a pack of them with sleep, stand and fight a giant and all get knocked down while I kite the thing to death with dissonant whispers, and almost die every single fight just to be saved by my cure wounds.
I thought Bards were supposed to be the practically useless in combat skill monkey class...
One of my best friends declared, "I will play a bard - they're pretty useless" before even looking inside the 5e players book, when we decided I was going to run a 5e campaign.
As you say, Bards excel at battlefield control and really are an amazing addition to a party.
They *used* to be just skill monkeys in previous editions of the game.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
The two people I've played with in campaigns who have played a Bard wound up multiclassing out of it and generally whined about how they were useless.
Huh, weird - I guess it depends on the party composition though.
Generally speaking, the Bard won't be as good as any other party member, at the thing that party member specialises in. They're not as good at spells as a Wizard, or sneaking as a Rogue, or fighting as a Fighter.They'll be not that far behind though and that's
They'll be not that far behind though and that's their main strength imho - they can accompany the rogue on stealth recon and be good at it. They can join the fight with the fighter and hold their own. They can provide spells to control the battle or manipulate the environment outside of fights.
It's about flexibility and complimenting the rest of the group for me.
People who say that the Bard is weak are probably wanting their character to shine as "the best at X" whatever X happens to be.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Just because a class has a lot of potential doesn't mean players will ever reach that potential.
The DM will also affect just how much potential a class really has, but it sounds like you're experiencing what Treantmonk like to describe in his guides and why a lot of people consider the 5e Bard as better than the 5e Wizard.
I'd say bards are the best controllers and diplomats. Especially since they can dip into the best spells for such roles from any class. They are also fantastic healers with even one level of life cleric. Basically, they're best at support, while the other classes are the best for fighting and dungeoneering.
Feature Requests || Homebrew FAQ || Pricing FAQ || Hardcovers FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources