You are. You are able to. What rule says you aren't?
It's more that the class's hyperfocus on music is omnipresent. They get three instrument proficiencies whether the player wants them or not - worth noting, bards don't actually get Performance natively, they still have to burn a prof point on it, but they get a billion free instruments. Bards are allowed to use instruments as a spellcasting focus, but they're not allowed to use anything else as a focus unless the thing is a magic item that overrides the rules, a'la a Ruby of the War Mage. All of the bard-specific magic items are musical instruments, and several magical instruments gain special effects if you're a bard - whether or not the bard is actually proficient with the instrument.
Now sure, a DM could lift or alter any of those requirements as they see fit, but the class punches you in the face with music and makes it stringently clear that if you're not going to play a musical bard, you're not going to get your whole purchase price out of the class. I would dearly love to play a Lore bard, as one example, whose schtick is that she is the very quintessence of an Adventurer - a seeker of lost lore and forgotten relics, learning a little bit of everything to keep herself safe in ancient forgotten tombs. With magic in her hands and knowledge in her brain she seeks excitement and legend, an Indiana Jeanne who is perhaps hoping to start her own museum some day, because the Lore bard is pretty much hands down perfect as a chassis for a Histopric Explorer's Society-style character.
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
I tend to have the opposite problem more often (liking the flavor, but not the mechanics), but there are a few that I can think of.
Firstly, the College of Creation bard. The mechanics are great . . . I just don't think that the flavor fits the class at all, no-matter how much Wizards of the Coast likes to say "the universe was created by the gods singing it into existence". (The new lore that will be coming out in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons that says that Bahamut and Tiamat created the Material Plane is way better.)
Secondly, the Echo Knight fighter. I don't actually dislike the dunamancy theme, I just wish that it had given examples of how to play a non-dunamancy based Echo Knight (like a living shadow that you can send to attack people, or by sending your astral form to distract and confuse enemies).
Third, the Hexblade Warlock. I love the Hexblade's mechanics. I've played a Hexblade Warlock in a level 1 to 11 campaign, and their mechanics are great. However, the theme doesn't match the mechanics. I addressed this with their Spell List in this thread, but I have other gripes (what does a cursed sentient weapon have to do with animating the souls of fallen humanoids with as specters!?!?). I'm not complaining about the mechanics, they're great, but the theme is just kind of all over the place and doesn't fit the mechanics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
You are. You are able to. What rule says you aren't?
It's more that the class's hyperfocus on music is omnipresent. They get three instrument proficiencies whether the player wants them or not - worth noting, bards don't actually get Performance natively, they still have to burn a prof point on it, but they get a billion free instruments. Bards are allowed to use instruments as a spellcasting focus, but they're not allowed to use anything else as a focus unless the thing is a magic item that overrides the rules, a'la a Ruby of the War Mage. All of the bard-specific magic items are musical instruments, and several magical instruments gain special effects if you're a bard - whether or not the bard is actually proficient with the instrument.
Now sure, a DM could lift or alter any of those requirements as they see fit, but the class punches you in the face with music and makes it stringently clear that if you're not going to play a musical bard, you're not going to get your whole purchase price out of the class. I would dearly love to play a Lore bard, as one example, whose schtick is that she is the very quintessence of an Adventurer - a seeker of lost lore and forgotten relics, learning a little bit of everything to keep herself safe in ancient forgotten tombs. With magic in her hands and knowledge in her brain she seeks excitement and legend, an Indiana Jeanne who is perhaps hoping to start her own museum some day, because the Lore bard is pretty much hands down perfect as a chassis for a Histopric Explorer's Society-style character.
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
bro just play an eloquence bard. You're an orator! No need to get musical, even if it's included in the base class.
You are. You are able to. What rule says you aren't?
It's more that the class's hyperfocus on music is omnipresent. They get three instrument proficiencies whether the player wants them or not - worth noting, bards don't actually get Performance natively, they still have to burn a prof point on it, but they get a billion free instruments. Bards are allowed to use instruments as a spellcasting focus, but they're not allowed to use anything else as a focus unless the thing is a magic item that overrides the rules, a'la a Ruby of the War Mage. All of the bard-specific magic items are musical instruments, and several magical instruments gain special effects if you're a bard - whether or not the bard is actually proficient with the instrument.
Now sure, a DM could lift or alter any of those requirements as they see fit, but the class punches you in the face with music and makes it stringently clear that if you're not going to play a musical bard, you're not going to get your whole purchase price out of the class. I would dearly love to play a Lore bard, as one example, whose schtick is that she is the very quintessence of an Adventurer - a seeker of lost lore and forgotten relics, learning a little bit of everything to keep herself safe in ancient forgotten tombs. With magic in her hands and knowledge in her brain she seeks excitement and legend, an Indiana Jeanne who is perhaps hoping to start her own museum some day, because the Lore bard is pretty much hands down perfect as a chassis for a Histopric Explorer's Society-style character.
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
Just talk to your DM, switch things around just a little bit and this is easy as pie.
Back when I started out playing D&D, it was just accepted that the DM and the players made all kinds of stuff up. Homebrew was the standard, not the exception. Whatever homebrew and changes you wanted, you just did it with the DM's permission, the goal being to have a great game, and the rules being of secondary importance. My first character was a fighter, and when I was getting bored of just making attack rolls we just switched my class to a Forest Crusader, a homebrew nature paladin that didn't exist back then. To look at forums today you'd think the rules were religious doctrine. They aren't; page 4 of the DM guide even states you should abandon the rules whenever you want to.
Swap out the instrument proficiencies, allow whatever suits your spellcasting focus to work, and voila, now you have your lorekeeper. You have the imagination to create the character, so you have the imagination to work out some easy homebrew.
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
'rei, your groups are letting you down if they expect this, and they're likely terribly inconsistent and unfair towards bards - I'd be very surprised if caster players are expected to perform magic tricks or warrior players go to the back yard with their prop swords for a mock duel every time the DM calls for initiative rolls, after all. I can't sing to save my life and it's never stopped me from playing bards, either reflavored or actual musical performers.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
'rei, your groups are letting you down if they expect this, and they're likely terribly inconsistent and unfair towards bards - I'd be very surprised if caster players are expected to perform magic tricks or warrior players go to the back yard with their prop swords for a mock duel every time the DM calls for initiative rolls, after all. I can't sing to save my life and it's never stopped me from playing bards, either reflavored or actual musical performers.
I agree... this sounds more like a problem with the table than a problem with the class itself. I'd have the same problem if a Wizard was expected to actually recite an arcane incantation with each spell being cast, or forced to physically draw a magic circle for spells like teleportation or, uh... Magic Circle. If your table demanded you do those things in order to play a Wizard, that doesn't mean that the Wizard class itself is flawed, just that the people you're playing with have unrealistic, and frankly, bizarre expectations.
I do agree that the Bard class does lean a bit too heavily on Music, especially since the writers also go out of their way in the various skills of the bard to clarify that a bard can use Music or "Stirring Words" or "Oration". I'm so used to seeing Bards being allowed to use Arcane Focuses that I didn't even realize that was homebrew until I double checked the class description. I think that any reasonable DM would allow a player to swap their musical instrument proficiencies with tool or vehicle proficiencies, or maybe even other languages, but I do agree that it's a bit of overkill to give a Bard 3 whole musical instrument proficiencies by default. I can't recall ever seeing a Bard actively use any instrument other than the signature instrument they start their campaign with. Especially since many bards take the Entertainer background, which gives yet another instrument proficiency.
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
'rei, your groups are letting you down if they expect this, and they're likely terribly inconsistent and unfair towards bards - I'd be very surprised if caster players are expected to perform magic tricks or warrior players go to the back yard with their prop swords for a mock duel every time the DM calls for initiative rolls, after all. I can't sing to save my life and it's never stopped me from playing bards, either reflavored or actual musical performers.
I blame Critical Role and Sam Riegal specifically for this expectation... Granted his portrayal of Scanlan Shorthalt is down right hilarious but he is a professional improvisational comedic actor. So of course his improvised songs are half-good. I just remind players that we are but amateurs sitting around a table entertaining ourselves so let us not take this game too seriously shall we? (it still never stopped me from telling a few bad puns for THL or busting out some of my more colorful insults for a Vicious Mockery on occasion).
I bet this happens pretty often. You have a character concept in mind, and you've figured out which classes and features would make it shine, but the wording and aesthetics of the class just do NOT fit the character in your head at all. What is it for you?
For me, I keep running into the hexblade. Every other character I brainstorm is some form of "martial character with good spellcasting". Hexblade naturally fills that out and avoids some common mechanical issues with that style of character. Buuuut, every feature and spell of the warlock class screams "edgelord cthulhu" at every given opportunity. Yes, you can reflavor things to fit your concept better, but it's a bit annoying when you have to do it for everything.
I have a player and we have basicly taken the warlock class and reskinnned it as a type of paladin. So no secret pact, or evil guy to make him make choices. No worrying when the hammer will fall. He is a hexblade warlock with the same spell list he has just reworked the wordings of the ones that he feels needs it. So mechanically he is exactly the same but flavour wise you would not know he is a warlock
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
'rei, your groups are letting you down if they expect this, and they're likely terribly inconsistent and unfair towards bards - I'd be very surprised if caster players are expected to perform magic tricks or warrior players go to the back yard with their prop swords for a mock duel every time the DM calls for initiative rolls, after all. I can't sing to save my life and it's never stopped me from playing bards, either reflavored or actual musical performers.
I blame Critical Role and Sam Riegal specifically for this expectation... Granted his portrayal of Scanlan Shorthalt is down right hilarious but he is a professional improvisational comedic actor. So of course his improvised songs are half-good. I just remind players that we are but amateurs sitting around a table entertaining ourselves so let us not take this game too seriously shall we? (it still never stopped me from telling a few bad puns for THL or busting out some of my more colorful insults for a Vicious Mockery on occasion).
I mean, I've played with people who wrote their own vows/oaths for their paladin character to recite, prayers for clerics to scream into the face of demonic evil, specific phrases for their arcane spells, or basic versions of thieves' cant for in-game flavour. If that's something you want to do and can do, more power to you - and singing isn't any different. I can't sing, period. Any group that made me sing would quickly realize they'd made a horrible mistake (I'll sing, not ashamed at all that way, and it'll be bad, very, very, bad, and also loud and long). But I don't blame people who can sing for doing so. It's great if people use their talents.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
'rei, your groups are letting you down if they expect this, and they're likely terribly inconsistent and unfair towards bards - I'd be very surprised if caster players are expected to perform magic tricks or warrior players go to the back yard with their prop swords for a mock duel every time the DM calls for initiative rolls, after all. I can't sing to save my life and it's never stopped me from playing bards, either reflavored or actual musical performers.
I blame Critical Role and Sam Riegal specifically for this expectation... Granted his portrayal of Scanlan Shorthalt is down right hilarious but he is a professional improvisational comedic actor. So of course his improvised songs are half-good. I just remind players that we are but amateurs sitting around a table entertaining ourselves so let us not take this game too seriously shall we? (it still never stopped me from telling a few bad puns for THL or busting out some of my more colorful insults for a Vicious Mockery on occasion).
I mean, I've played with people who wrote their own vows/oaths for their paladin character to recite, prayers for clerics to scream into the face of demonic evil, specific phrases for their arcane spells, or basic versions of thieves' cant for in-game flavour. If that's something you want to do and can do, more power to you - and singing isn't any different. I can't sing, period. Any group that made me sing would quickly realize they'd made a horrible mistake (I'll sing, not ashamed at all that way, and it'll be bad, very, very, bad, and also loud and long). But I don't blame people who can sing for doing so. It's great if people use their talents.
One of my players is a bard who’s instrument of choice are the bagpipes, even if he could play them for real I would insist he didn’t at my table lol.
Bards don’t need to be singers, they can play any instrument.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's more that the class's hyperfocus on music is omnipresent. They get three instrument proficiencies whether the player wants them or not - worth noting, bards don't actually get Performance natively, they still have to burn a prof point on it, but they get a billion free instruments. Bards are allowed to use instruments as a spellcasting focus, but they're not allowed to use anything else as a focus unless the thing is a magic item that overrides the rules, a'la a Ruby of the War Mage. All of the bard-specific magic items are musical instruments, and several magical instruments gain special effects if you're a bard - whether or not the bard is actually proficient with the instrument.
Now sure, a DM could lift or alter any of those requirements as they see fit, but the class punches you in the face with music and makes it stringently clear that if you're not going to play a musical bard, you're not going to get your whole purchase price out of the class. I would dearly love to play a Lore bard, as one example, whose schtick is that she is the very quintessence of an Adventurer - a seeker of lost lore and forgotten relics, learning a little bit of everything to keep herself safe in ancient forgotten tombs. With magic in her hands and knowledge in her brain she seeks excitement and legend, an Indiana Jeanne who is perhaps hoping to start her own museum some day, because the Lore bard is pretty much hands down perfect as a chassis for a Histopric Explorer's Society-style character.
Except...oh. Yeah. She's got to be proficient in half an orchestra first, and Yurei the player needs to also be proficient in all the same instruments, because to play a bard I'm expected to bust one of those ****ers out and give a Stirring Performance every time I offer Inspiration, or use Cutting Words, or even just cast a frickin' spell. So god damned frustrating...Lore bard minus all the musical ****ery is pretty much the perfect character...q_q...
Please do not contact or message me.
I tend to have the opposite problem more often (liking the flavor, but not the mechanics), but there are a few that I can think of.
Firstly, the College of Creation bard. The mechanics are great . . . I just don't think that the flavor fits the class at all, no-matter how much Wizards of the Coast likes to say "the universe was created by the gods singing it into existence". (The new lore that will be coming out in Fizban's Treasury of Dragons that says that Bahamut and Tiamat created the Material Plane is way better.)
Secondly, the Echo Knight fighter. I don't actually dislike the dunamancy theme, I just wish that it had given examples of how to play a non-dunamancy based Echo Knight (like a living shadow that you can send to attack people, or by sending your astral form to distract and confuse enemies).
Third, the Hexblade Warlock. I love the Hexblade's mechanics. I've played a Hexblade Warlock in a level 1 to 11 campaign, and their mechanics are great. However, the theme doesn't match the mechanics. I addressed this with their Spell List in this thread, but I have other gripes (what does a cursed sentient weapon have to do with animating the souls of fallen humanoids with as specters!?!?). I'm not complaining about the mechanics, they're great, but the theme is just kind of all over the place and doesn't fit the mechanics.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I find myself in the "Love the flavor; Disappointed by the execution" clan here.
Looking at you Sorcerer...
bro just play an eloquence bard. You're an orator! No need to get musical, even if it's included in the base class.
Just talk to your DM, switch things around just a little bit and this is easy as pie.
Back when I started out playing D&D, it was just accepted that the DM and the players made all kinds of stuff up. Homebrew was the standard, not the exception. Whatever homebrew and changes you wanted, you just did it with the DM's permission, the goal being to have a great game, and the rules being of secondary importance. My first character was a fighter, and when I was getting bored of just making attack rolls we just switched my class to a Forest Crusader, a homebrew nature paladin that didn't exist back then. To look at forums today you'd think the rules were religious doctrine. They aren't; page 4 of the DM guide even states you should abandon the rules whenever you want to.
Swap out the instrument proficiencies, allow whatever suits your spellcasting focus to work, and voila, now you have your lorekeeper. You have the imagination to create the character, so you have the imagination to work out some easy homebrew.
'rei, your groups are letting you down if they expect this, and they're likely terribly inconsistent and unfair towards bards - I'd be very surprised if caster players are expected to perform magic tricks or warrior players go to the back yard with their prop swords for a mock duel every time the DM calls for initiative rolls, after all. I can't sing to save my life and it's never stopped me from playing bards, either reflavored or actual musical performers.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I agree... this sounds more like a problem with the table than a problem with the class itself. I'd have the same problem if a Wizard was expected to actually recite an arcane incantation with each spell being cast, or forced to physically draw a magic circle for spells like teleportation or, uh... Magic Circle. If your table demanded you do those things in order to play a Wizard, that doesn't mean that the Wizard class itself is flawed, just that the people you're playing with have unrealistic, and frankly, bizarre expectations.
I do agree that the Bard class does lean a bit too heavily on Music, especially since the writers also go out of their way in the various skills of the bard to clarify that a bard can use Music or "Stirring Words" or "Oration". I'm so used to seeing Bards being allowed to use Arcane Focuses that I didn't even realize that was homebrew until I double checked the class description. I think that any reasonable DM would allow a player to swap their musical instrument proficiencies with tool or vehicle proficiencies, or maybe even other languages, but I do agree that it's a bit of overkill to give a Bard 3 whole musical instrument proficiencies by default. I can't recall ever seeing a Bard actively use any instrument other than the signature instrument they start their campaign with. Especially since many bards take the Entertainer background, which gives yet another instrument proficiency.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I blame Critical Role and Sam Riegal specifically for this expectation...
Granted his portrayal of Scanlan Shorthalt is down right hilarious but he is a professional improvisational comedic actor. So of course his improvised songs are half-good.
I just remind players that we are but amateurs sitting around a table entertaining ourselves so let us not take this game too seriously shall we?
(it still never stopped me from telling a few bad puns for THL or busting out some of my more colorful insults for a Vicious Mockery on occasion).
I have a player and we have basicly taken the warlock class and reskinnned it as a type of paladin. So no secret pact, or evil guy to make him make choices. No worrying when the hammer will fall. He is a hexblade warlock with the same spell list he has just reworked the wordings of the ones that he feels needs it. So mechanically he is exactly the same but flavour wise you would not know he is a warlock
I mean, I've played with people who wrote their own vows/oaths for their paladin character to recite, prayers for clerics to scream into the face of demonic evil, specific phrases for their arcane spells, or basic versions of thieves' cant for in-game flavour. If that's something you want to do and can do, more power to you - and singing isn't any different. I can't sing, period. Any group that made me sing would quickly realize they'd made a horrible mistake (I'll sing, not ashamed at all that way, and it'll be bad, very, very, bad, and also loud and long). But I don't blame people who can sing for doing so. It's great if people use their talents.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
One of my players is a bard who’s instrument of choice are the bagpipes, even if he could play them for real I would insist he didn’t at my table lol.
Bards don’t need to be singers, they can play any instrument.