Valor is more defensive and supportive, Swords is more flashy and offensive. Considering the Bard class is generally built for support, Valor does a better job of synergizing with the rest of the class abilities than Swords. Swords gives the Bard a little bit of martial ability, but I would consider it something like a 1/3rd martial subclass.
So Valor does a better job at being a Bard in general than Swords does. A Swords Bard is still a Bard, which is a full spellcasting class, and thus it's still a powerful character to play because the Bard is a good class, but the subclass does nothing to emphasize the spellcasting OR the support and when you do wade into melee with your Blade Flourishes you are basically not being a spellcaster and thus probably not doing to most effective thing at the moment.
I think both Colleges are viable, but Valor is all around going to be more effective. And this is from a person whose favorite character is a Swords Bard. Swords is probably more effective as part of a multiclass build. That favorite character of mine is a Swords 5/Swashbuckler 4/Hexblade 1, for instance: https://ddb.ac/characters/2725951/43uWsx
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The Swords Bard works better as a battlefield controller/skirmisher and is almost always going to be more selfish with Bardic Inspiration - not necessarily a bad thing. The Valor Bard, as Ophidimancer said, is better suited to the traditional support role that Bards play. Both are viable depending on the needs of the party, the classes present at the table, and the ability of PCs/players to cooperate and communicate effectively.
The Swords Bard works better as a battlefield controller/skirmisher
The sad thing is if a Swords Bard wants to be an effective battlefield controller they're still usually better off using spells than their Blade Flourishes. Dissonant Whispers, Earth Tremor, Longstrider, and Thunderwave are some examples of just 1st level spells that can accomplish that controller/skirmisher thing just as well, or better, than Blade Flourishes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The Swords Bard works better as a battlefield controller/skirmisher
The sad thing is if a Swords Bard wants to be an effective battlefield controller they're still usually better off using spells than their Blade Flourishes. Dissonant Whispers, Earth Tremor, Longstrider, and Thunderwave are some examples of just 1st level spells that can accomplish that controller/skirmisher thing just as well, or better, than Blade Flourishes.
The difference is that those do not replenish on a short rest, whereas your Bardic Inspiration, once you reach 5th level, does. As such, your ability to Flourish is recharged more easily than your spell slots. Also, having more options to change positioning is generally better.
The thing I like about sword bards is the options it gives. It might not be the best at anything but it really leans into the jack of all trades. Casting spells is great. Sometimes I want to hit something though. Maybe I want to push an enemy. Maybe I want to stand in front of a boss for 2 rounds with +5 AC.
Bard is a great class. None of the subclasses are bad because of this. I enjoy my sword bard because they are useful in almost all situations. While maybe not as optimal as others in a specific situation.
They are both viable. I prefer valor over swords because the nature of combat inspiration focuses on party support while flourishes reduce party support by sharing the bardic inspiration dice pool and not giving additional uses for bardic inspiration to other PC's like valor does.
Because when you really put them side by side. Up until 14th level they do almost the same thing except for in one subtle but significant difference. Swords focuses on itself up to 14th level, and then because of it's 14th level ability starts to spread the love around because they have infinite d6's to spend on themselves. Valor on the other hand focuses on the group until it gets up to level 14 where it then gains a tried and true ability that other subclasses for other classes have (who's effectiveness is variable) of getting in a nice extra hit on top of spell casting either to damage the enemy or support the party.
Personally I wish the Sword Bard got the blade singer ability to sub one of their attacks for a cantrip. Attacking and also Mocking them so feels like something a person doing these flurish would do.
I even made a magical items as a home brew so I could do this and my GM at the time alowed it. chocker of insults
A simple, but highly debated question.
Valor is more defensive and supportive, Swords is more flashy and offensive. Considering the Bard class is generally built for support, Valor does a better job of synergizing with the rest of the class abilities than Swords. Swords gives the Bard a little bit of martial ability, but I would consider it something like a 1/3rd martial subclass.
So Valor does a better job at being a Bard in general than Swords does. A Swords Bard is still a Bard, which is a full spellcasting class, and thus it's still a powerful character to play because the Bard is a good class, but the subclass does nothing to emphasize the spellcasting OR the support and when you do wade into melee with your Blade Flourishes you are basically not being a spellcaster and thus probably not doing to most effective thing at the moment.
I think both Colleges are viable, but Valor is all around going to be more effective. And this is from a person whose favorite character is a Swords Bard. Swords is probably more effective as part of a multiclass build. That favorite character of mine is a Swords 5/Swashbuckler 4/Hexblade 1, for instance: https://ddb.ac/characters/2725951/43uWsx
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The Swords Bard works better as a battlefield controller/skirmisher and is almost always going to be more selfish with Bardic Inspiration - not necessarily a bad thing. The Valor Bard, as Ophidimancer said, is better suited to the traditional support role that Bards play. Both are viable depending on the needs of the party, the classes present at the table, and the ability of PCs/players to cooperate and communicate effectively.
The sad thing is if a Swords Bard wants to be an effective battlefield controller they're still usually better off using spells than their Blade Flourishes. Dissonant Whispers, Earth Tremor, Longstrider, and Thunderwave are some examples of just 1st level spells that can accomplish that controller/skirmisher thing just as well, or better, than Blade Flourishes.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The difference is that those do not replenish on a short rest, whereas your Bardic Inspiration, once you reach 5th level, does. As such, your ability to Flourish is recharged more easily than your spell slots. Also, having more options to change positioning is generally better.
The thing I like about sword bards is the options it gives. It might not be the best at anything but it really leans into the jack of all trades. Casting spells is great. Sometimes I want to hit something though. Maybe I want to push an enemy. Maybe I want to stand in front of a boss for 2 rounds with +5 AC.
Bard is a great class. None of the subclasses are bad because of this. I enjoy my sword bard because they are useful in almost all situations. While maybe not as optimal as others in a specific situation.
They are both viable. I prefer valor over swords because the nature of combat inspiration focuses on party support while flourishes reduce party support by sharing the bardic inspiration dice pool and not giving additional uses for bardic inspiration to other PC's like valor does.
Both are highly viable.
Why you might ask?
Because when you really put them side by side. Up until 14th level they do almost the same thing except for in one subtle but significant difference. Swords focuses on itself up to 14th level, and then because of it's 14th level ability starts to spread the love around because they have infinite d6's to spend on themselves. Valor on the other hand focuses on the group until it gets up to level 14 where it then gains a tried and true ability that other subclasses for other classes have (who's effectiveness is variable) of getting in a nice extra hit on top of spell casting either to damage the enemy or support the party.
Personally I wish the Sword Bard got the blade singer ability to sub one of their attacks for a cantrip. Attacking and also Mocking them so feels like something a person doing these flurish would do.
I even made a magical items as a home brew so I could do this and my GM at the time alowed it. chocker of insults
I spell Goodly.