You realize one can play a singing bard who collects stories for their ballads without trying to seduce everyone?
And what is wrong with the "inspiring soldier"? Bards can also be poets, story tellers, acrobatic artists etc. They don't *have to* carry a lute.
The same argument can be made about every other class, really. "There are only two ways a Paladin will be played: Lawful stupid white knight or cringy pragmatist who believes his order is too indecisive to get things done." "There are only two ways to play a wizard: a wise old carbon copy of Gandalf or a novice spell caster fresh out of Hogwarts." "Rogues? Either they steal from the party because 'their character would do it' or they are the Robin-Hood-Lookalike scoundrel".
Every character and class can be reduced to be "either cliche or anti-cliche" that's nothing special about the bard class.
You evidently got very upset. Re-read my post, I said in my experience, as someone that has managed a hobby store, and played or DM'd for 30+ years, that's how they end up being played. They are the meme version of bard that was popular even before the internet had memes, and has become ever so much more popular, or they are as anti-meme as you can get. They can be played with tons of nuance, and I didn't get into other classes as this thread is about why bards suck.
Every class sucks, some mechanically, some on execution, some for lack of core identity. They can all be played well or poorly. I have seen singing bards, poet bars, drum bards, pan-pipe bards. In fact the kind that is least popular seems to be lute bards. I once saw in 3.5 a bard that used "magic" tricks like sleight of hand as their form of performance. But not once have I seen someone execute playing a bard well. They are never EVER people. They are some form of caricature of the "I seduce the dragon, now where is the brothel" bard, or a complete anti-meme version, where anything the meme bard would ever consider doing, they refuse to play that way.
Its similar to the rogue execution issue. Rogues are all some form of urchin/orphan/(insert emo backstory here> taking loot from the party and likely chaotic neutral because the DM won't allot them to be evil, OR they are some form of being super put together, lovable scoundrel with a heart of gold, and likely noble, or at least look down their noses at theft and backstabbing the party. I see more counter examples of rogues not fitting that mold as i do the bards, but it happens a lot.
Lone wolf ranger that's some form of Driz or Aragorn
the list does go on, but bards are the worst at execution, as they only get played as one of two flavors: Meme or Anti-meme. No middle ground. I am certian people have had good experiences with bards, but in 1st ed, 2nd ed, (i skipped 3.0), but 3.5, 4.0, and 5, with the dozens of tables I have been at, hosted, or seen ran, including con games, one shots, campaigns, and modules, and the literally thousands of players I have experienced/observed in those years, those tales, those cons, I have yet to find a single person that plays a bard as an inspiring guy, and just a joke.
Again, your reply shows you didn't really read my original post, and instead got somehow defensive. I am sorry if you consider yourself a bard player, and you play one of those tired old tropes. to quote myself: "They suck because of all the people that read memes, pass on stories, and in general play the bard to be 'the bard'"
I didn't say all bards play that way, I said they suck because of all the people that do play them that way. What i did say is, they are always played as the cliche OR the anti-cliche. Its tired, its boring, its why bards suck. Wanna know why I think every class sucks in their own way?
Its not like I called Bards a D list class, like Monks, which mechanically was very poorly executed, and thematically only somewhat fit in, and often feel like a very shoehorned addition to the party. Bards have great mechanics, in fact mechanically are absolutely A list. But execution is where they suck.
We had a one shot where a friend played one. I forgot to ask what he specialized in for entertaining until he gets up to cast his first spell on a room of devils. "I jump up on the table, rip off my pants to display my glitter undergarments. I cast enthrall". Every. Devil. Failed.
Kirrath the Exotic Dancer Bard was born. Just a quiet guy studying hard to learn history who had to take up a side job at the local brothel to pay the bills.
Played right, a traditional bard is somewhere between Scaramouche and Gandalf. The thing is that the flavor of bards is, hearkening back to the 3.5 era, inherently leaning on the silly. I think they can be played well, but you have to put a lot of thought into the character and make them a bit more than comic relief. A poorly played bard can throw off the tone of the whole campaign. You, as a player, also are best off bringing some performative talent to the table if you want to play a Bard as well, which is difficult because playing a good DnD character in the first place already requires decent improv chops.
Bards are great mechanically. Very powerful bois. But I tend to avoid playing them because it is inherently very difficult to do the class justice and seldom have I seen a bard roleplayed in a way that was satisfying.
Bards are amazing. Jack of all Trades, Inspiration, Magical Secrets.... you have an answer for pretty much anything, and if you don't, your party members do (and they won't whiff with you around). Just my two centavos.
"Basically bards suck because the players that usually play them suck. Not all, but enough to give them all a bad rep."
You basically say, if someone plays bard, they most likely "suck". That insults pretty much every player who ever played a bard because of a class they chose.
My current bard is a traveling ministrel who listened to the stories of Storm Silverhand in her childhood and now tries to live like her hero and inspire others to follow those ideals. She sees her music as a way to inspire people and wake or calm emotions. A cure for the soul where her spells provide cure for the body.
She is also insanely curious which caused her ending up in a pact with a magic weapon that claimed to belong to Storm and promised to grant her the necessary skill with a blade to defend herself and others like her hero did.
So... is she the cliche or anti-cliche?
If after 30+ years you never met a player who played something other than a meme I feel very sorry for you.
But defaulting to insult all players of a certain class is a pretty bad way to express yourself. Adding that maybe somewhere out there is a rare kind of player who doesn't qualify for the insult doesn't make that much better, either.
You realize one can play a singing bard who collects stories for their ballads without trying to seduce everyone?
"There are only two ways to play a wizard: a wise old carbon copy of Gandalf or a novice spell caster fresh out of Hogwarts."
Ironically, Gandalf was inspired from Myrddin Wyllt and Väinämöinen.Both of these characters fall under the bard heading. Myrddin was also the inspiration for Merlin.
Gandalf was a magician who inspired others to go out and do heroic things based on tales of old heroes and ancient songs. What he does not do is carry around a spell book puzzling over magical formulae. What Gandalf does do is sing the Song of Lorien to Grima Wormtongue when revealing himself and sing the Riddle to the Ents when speaking with Theoden. He used the term wizard but I would argue he's a bard with a sage background and the given the inspirations Tolkien used that would be a correct interpretation.
Brom from Eragon fits the storyteller bard trope as well. He inspired Eragon with tales of the dragon riders and then became a trainer and advisor, uses magic and healing, and engages in combat like Gandalf does.
The bard composing songs and stories certainly does not need to be seducing everyone everywhere, I agree. It's definitely the player and not the class making such choices. When I saw your example of Gandalf I thought it would be useful to point out that Gandalf's inpiration came from bards and his portrayal syncs up with bards to demonstrate more than just some character with a lute when it comes to the class.
I actually wanted to add this but I didn't find a source for it. Thank you for linking those articles and pointing it out. :D
"Basically bards suck because the players that usually play them suck. Not all, but enough to give them all a bad rep."
You basically say, if someone plays bard, they most likely "suck". That insults pretty much every player who ever played a bard because of a class they chose.
My current bard is a traveling ministrel who listened to the stories of Storm Silverhand in her childhood and now tries to live like her hero and inspire others to follow those ideals. She sees her music as a way to inspire people and wake or calm emotions. A cure for the soul where her spells provide cure for the body.
She is also insanely curious which caused her ending up in a pact with a magic weapon that claimed to belong to Storm and promised to grant her the necessary skill with a blade to defend herself and others like her hero did.
So... is she the cliche or anti-cliche?
If after 30+ years you never met a player who played something other than a meme I feel very sorry for you.
But defaulting to insult all players of a certain class is a pretty bad way to express yourself. Adding that maybe somewhere out there is a rare kind of player who doesn't qualify for the insult doesn't make that much better, either.
Just read the two posts after mine... "Kirrath the Exotic Dancer Bard was born. Just a quiet guy studying hard to learn history who had to take up a side job at the local brothel to pay the bills."
OH look a dancing bard.. that could be cool, oh wait, exotic dancer that used bedazzled underwear to cast spells, and worked at a brothel..... MEMETASTIC. Could it have jsut been a dancing bard, something akin to a blade singer, sure... but it wasn't. It wasn't a guy that inspires with wit and wisdom, bringing his fellows courage in a time of need, and beguiling the enemy through chicanery and sleight of hand. It was a walking disco ball that follows the lower head.
as CirrikhLoremistres so conceisely put it: "Played right, a traditional bard is somewhere between Scaramouche and Gandalf. The thing is that the flavor of bards is, hearkening back to the 3.5 era, inherently leaning on the silly. I think they can be played well, but you have to put a lot of thought into the character and make them a bit more than comic relief. A poorly played bard can throw off the tone of the whole campaign. You, as a player, also are best off bringing some performative talent to the table if you want to play a Bard as well, which is difficult because playing a good DnD character in the first place already requires decent improv chops.
Bards are great mechanically. Very powerful bois. But I tend to avoid playing them because it is inherently very difficult to do the class justice and seldom have I seen a bard roleplayed in a way that was satisfying."
They are jokes, they are parodys, they are gimmicks, they are never ever played in any sort of satisfying way. You wont get a Gandalf. You'll instead get "Gandalf but with a predilection for paraplegic half goblins, in which every waking moment is talking about how hot goblins that cant walk are" (yes, seen that bard before)
You will get the "bard that is a strict no harm pacifist that wont take any actions that might in some way hard anyone, including aiding the party in defending their lives" (seen it)
The list goes on and on. When I managed a shop (about 10 years ago) I kept a notebook of every character concept that i overheard, and not one bard was satisfying. They were one trick pony gimmicky memes, that not once ever impressed. I saw wizards and rogues be more inspiring than the bard. They could be great, but they suck because anyone that picks them to play them, cant come up with a decent way of playing them. Good players seem to go for other classes, and jokes go to the bard.
So yeah it is sad, that the D&D community in the last 30 years, through 5 (6 if you count 3.0 and 3.5) editions, and countless spinoff RPG's have not once found a way to make bard executed well, especially when we have solid literary examples of what they could be.
Now go back to your stand up comic bard, or your beat-box bard, or your disco bard, your seduce the dragon bard, your "where's the brothel" bard, your "I distract the orc by taking my pants off" bard, your "air guitar" bard..... man I'm done explaining why bards suck. Your welcome to love them, anyone is. Every class sucks in its own way. Sadly most people somehow get offended when their favorite is called out.
Any character sheet can be played well (even if un-optimally made), any character can be played poorly (no matter how munchkin'd the sheet is). The thing that makes bards suck is not their mechanics tho. Mechanically they are one of the strongest and most versatile classes in 5e, and in most of the prior editions. No what makes them suck is execution. Someday I might see one that is played well. I know for a fact I could not play it well. I would rely on jokes, memes, and brothels for the laughs. But it gets old fast, and I recognize that.
Prove me wrong tho, make a bard that fits their sheet, that hides their inner torment with the songs and stories of old. Start it our as a meme, but as the group gets to know him, have some serious pathos come out. As the story gets darker, and the weight of the world falls onto the party, have his stories get a little darker, a little heavier. Have him lose his powers for a time, being unable to find hope from within, and being unable to inspire others. Have some solid roleplay with the group, where they help him find his way again. They inspire him once again. I would at least find that more interesting than "I seduce the dragon with my exotic dancing"
First of all, if all you care about is rolling lots of damage dice, Bards are probably not for you. Otherwise, they make a great controller and support class. Their spell selection has pretty much everything on it that can ruin a BBEG's day. Inspiration is great at helping allies get hits without needing to burn a help action. And with 3 of any skills, plus expertise and jack of all trades, they are great in social and exploration situations.
This hits the nail on the head about bards.
if you’re all about the massive damage die life and nothing else in D&D. Bards aren’t for you.
"Basically bards suck because the players that usually play them suck. Not all, but enough to give them all a bad rep."
You basically say, if someone plays bard, they most likely "suck". That insults pretty much every player who ever played a bard because of a class they chose.
My current bard is a traveling ministrel who listened to the stories of Storm Silverhand in her childhood and now tries to live like her hero and inspire others to follow those ideals. She sees her music as a way to inspire people and wake or calm emotions. A cure for the soul where her spells provide cure for the body.
She is also insanely curious which caused her ending up in a pact with a magic weapon that claimed to belong to Storm and promised to grant her the necessary skill with a blade to defend herself and others like her hero did.
So... is she the cliche or anti-cliche?
If after 30+ years you never met a player who played something other than a meme I feel very sorry for you.
But defaulting to insult all players of a certain class is a pretty bad way to express yourself. Adding that maybe somewhere out there is a rare kind of player who doesn't qualify for the insult doesn't make that much better, either.
Just read the two posts after mine... "Kirrath the Exotic Dancer Bard was born. Just a quiet guy studying hard to learn history who had to take up a side job at the local brothel to pay the bills."
OH look a dancing bard.. that could be cool, oh wait, exotic dancer that used bedazzled underwear to cast spells, and worked at a brothel..... MEMETASTIC. Could it have jsut been a dancing bard, something akin to a blade singer, sure... but it wasn't. It wasn't a guy that inspires with wit and wisdom, bringing his fellows courage in a time of need, and beguiling the enemy through chicanery and sleight of hand. It was a walking disco ball that follows the lower head.
as CirrikhLoremistres so conceisely put it: "Played right, a traditional bard is somewhere between Scaramouche and Gandalf. The thing is that the flavor of bards is, hearkening back to the 3.5 era, inherently leaning on the silly. I think they can be played well, but you have to put a lot of thought into the character and make them a bit more than comic relief. A poorly played bard can throw off the tone of the whole campaign. You, as a player, also are best off bringing some performative talent to the table if you want to play a Bard as well, which is difficult because playing a good DnD character in the first place already requires decent improv chops.
Bards are great mechanically. Very powerful bois. But I tend to avoid playing them because it is inherently very difficult to do the class justice and seldom have I seen a bard roleplayed in a way that was satisfying."
They are jokes, they are parodys, they are gimmicks, they are never ever played in any sort of satisfying way. You wont get a Gandalf. You'll instead get "Gandalf but with a predilection for paraplegic half goblins, in which every waking moment is talking about how hot goblins that cant walk are" (yes, seen that bard before)
You will get the "bard that is a strict no harm pacifist that wont take any actions that might in some way hard anyone, including aiding the party in defending their lives" (seen it)
The list goes on and on. When I managed a shop (about 10 years ago) I kept a notebook of every character concept that i overheard, and not one bard was satisfying. They were one trick pony gimmicky memes, that not once ever impressed. I saw wizards and rogues be more inspiring than the bard. They could be great, but they suck because anyone that picks them to play them, cant come up with a decent way of playing them. Good players seem to go for other classes, and jokes go to the bard.
So yeah it is sad, that the D&D community in the last 30 years, through 5 (6 if you count 3.0 and 3.5) editions, and countless spinoff RPG's have not once found a way to make bard executed well, especially when we have solid literary examples of what they could be.
Now go back to your stand up comic bard, or your beat-box bard, or your disco bard, your seduce the dragon bard, your "where's the brothel" bard, your "I distract the orc by taking my pants off" bard, your "air guitar" bard..... man I'm done explaining why bards suck. Your welcome to love them, anyone is. Every class sucks in its own way. Sadly most people somehow get offended when their favorite is called out.
Any character sheet can be played well (even if un-optimally made), any character can be played poorly (no matter how munchkin'd the sheet is). The thing that makes bards suck is not their mechanics tho. Mechanically they are one of the strongest and most versatile classes in 5e, and in most of the prior editions. No what makes them suck is execution. Someday I might see one that is played well. I know for a fact I could not play it well. I would rely on jokes, memes, and brothels for the laughs. But it gets old fast, and I recognize that.
Prove me wrong tho, make a bard that fits their sheet, that hides their inner torment with the songs and stories of old. Start it our as a meme, but as the group gets to know him, have some serious pathos come out. As the story gets darker, and the weight of the world falls onto the party, have his stories get a little darker, a little heavier. Have him lose his powers for a time, being unable to find hope from within, and being unable to inspire others. Have some solid roleplay with the group, where they help him find his way again. They inspire him once again. I would at least find that more interesting than "I seduce the dragon with my exotic dancing"
I don't actually think the meme bards are not legitimate version of the class, tbh. Bard abilities cover a lot of cultures through a lot of time periods despite a setting specific name. Just start with "life in Ancient Greece was like this..." and we have a prominent culture suitable to D&D where a version of the bard would have been prominent as well that suits some of those memes. In some cultures the word "bard" had different connotations such as whether it was a court position or a derogatory term. Gandalf and Tom Bombadil are both bard tropes portrayed differently taken from similar inspirations by the same author. D&D is like that too. There's room for many different styles of bard. It's unfortunate that you don't like how many people portray them and I agree to some extent but I have to acknowledge those memes demonstrate the existence of that bard trope in modern culture.
The problem is the memes are all some people see. Most of my bards are traditional styles while I've also done the fascinating exotic dancer and klepto magical thief -- those can be fun too. One of the best things about the 5e mechanics is how customizable the bard class is towards the style the player wants it to be. How a player wants to play it is not actually an issue with the class but more an issue with some perceptions of the class.
The original concepts were based on the fili, skald, and jongleur. I most commonly play to those roots. That does not mean other choices become less valid although it might mean people would be better off learning what those roots are and what the bard can represent other than memes created by lack of knowing those roots or the historical bard roles.
Bards, that strange mix between Beethoven and Satan.
I'll pass on playing one, I prefer artificers or wizards, or any other real spellcaster.
You could not be more wrong. I am enjoying my Bard more than any Wizard I have ever played before.
Just kidding, bards can be seriously fun, though they get a bad rep because a few players decide to seduce every mimic they see. (Always counter these bards with Succubi/Incubi, that'll teach them)
I do prefer Wizards and Artificers, just because I like playing intelligent characters that are smarter than everyone else, and can save the party at the last second.
Bards are cool, just never felt the need to play one, also, I DM almost all the time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I have several adventurers league characters and there are only very few subclasses that are underwhelming. Whisper bard is essentially a rogue with 9th level spell slots. It's a killer combo with elven accuracy and catnap (to get your inspirations back on a short rest) and if you take simulacrum as a magical secret, then expect to out DPS everyone. My favorite combo is swift quiver on turn 1 as a bonus action, then take 1 attack. Turn 2 throw out synaptic static, then 2 bonus action swift quiver shots. Crit fish with advantage and you're looking at 8D6 from synaptic static and another 8 to 16D6 from psychic blades once each, + weapon damage. It's just mean.
Valor bard can be really fun, and their inspiration can be a literal lifesaver for the party when facing the big bad.
Lore bard is the true jack of all trades with their additional magical secret at level 6 and peerless skill at 14. They're probably the most generalist out of all bards.
Sword bard is the only bard subclass that I've been underwhelmed by. It's decent to multiclass with, but it's abilities aren't as useful as they appear in higher tiers.
The bards that try to seduce everything are giving the rest of us hard working bards a bad name, I tell ya. Don't let them fool you into thinking that we're not awesome.
Yeah, I know it's just an opinion. I like bards as a class, and between DMing and very rarely being a player, I've never felt inclined to play a bard. I am a singer in real life, but bards don't seem like something I'd like playing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Yeah, I know it's just an opinion. I like bards as a class, and between DMing and very rarely being a player, I've never felt inclined to play a bard. I am a singer in real life, but bards don't seem like something I'd like playing.
Imagine if you were a singer who invested many years in a specialized education memorizing songs and poems that were used as a mnemonic aid. And that those songs and poems were the oral history of your people from lineages to customary law to the hierarchy of religion and more. Bards would be called on to entertain but the role was as an advisor and repository of knowledge. The songs, poems, and stories told what people needed to hear instead of what they wanted to here. It was often told in parable like a Rabbi sharing wisdom.
The music was also meant to be able to soothe and calm or rouse as needed. A calming lullaby vs a rousing war march vs psychological warfare instilling fear in the enemy.
Bards were experts in geneology, history, law, and much more. The reason for the thief skills were originally included was because a bard might be called on for military scouting and thief was the game representation for a scout at the time. Eulogies were the domain of the bards and also included the bard making a prophesy regarding the successor.
All bards could be called on to entertain but entertainment was not the actual main role and all entertainers were not bards. Bards were expected to be a lot of everything. They epitomized the Renaissance centuries before the Renaissance existed. They had political and military rank. Even modern military carried a musician rank.
Over the years their roles in society changed and other inspirations influenced their pop culture representation. It was much later in history that a general entertainer was the association, and the magical musician is more a latter half of the 20th century trope (but there are other historical references). The jongleur is more the minstrel part of the inspiration. Too many players miss the forest through the trees only seeing the minstrel / musician roots. ;-)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You evidently got very upset. Re-read my post, I said in my experience, as someone that has managed a hobby store, and played or DM'd for 30+ years, that's how they end up being played. They are the meme version of bard that was popular even before the internet had memes, and has become ever so much more popular, or they are as anti-meme as you can get. They can be played with tons of nuance, and I didn't get into other classes as this thread is about why bards suck.
Every class sucks, some mechanically, some on execution, some for lack of core identity. They can all be played well or poorly. I have seen singing bards, poet bars, drum bards, pan-pipe bards. In fact the kind that is least popular seems to be lute bards. I once saw in 3.5 a bard that used "magic" tricks like sleight of hand as their form of performance. But not once have I seen someone execute playing a bard well. They are never EVER people. They are some form of caricature of the "I seduce the dragon, now where is the brothel" bard, or a complete anti-meme version, where anything the meme bard would ever consider doing, they refuse to play that way.
Its similar to the rogue execution issue. Rogues are all some form of urchin/orphan/(insert emo backstory here> taking loot from the party and likely chaotic neutral because the DM won't allot them to be evil, OR they are some form of being super put together, lovable scoundrel with a heart of gold, and likely noble, or at least look down their noses at theft and backstabbing the party. I see more counter examples of rogues not fitting that mold as i do the bards, but it happens a lot.
Lone wolf ranger that's some form of Driz or Aragorn
the list does go on, but bards are the worst at execution, as they only get played as one of two flavors: Meme or Anti-meme. No middle ground. I am certian people have had good experiences with bards, but in 1st ed, 2nd ed, (i skipped 3.0), but 3.5, 4.0, and 5, with the dozens of tables I have been at, hosted, or seen ran, including con games, one shots, campaigns, and modules, and the literally thousands of players I have experienced/observed in those years, those tales, those cons, I have yet to find a single person that plays a bard as an inspiring guy, and just a joke.
Again, your reply shows you didn't really read my original post, and instead got somehow defensive. I am sorry if you consider yourself a bard player, and you play one of those tired old tropes. to quote myself: "They suck because of all the people that read memes, pass on stories, and in general play the bard to be 'the bard'"
I didn't say all bards play that way, I said they suck because of all the people that do play them that way. What i did say is, they are always played as the cliche OR the anti-cliche. Its tired, its boring, its why bards suck. Wanna know why I think every class sucks in their own way?
Its not like I called Bards a D list class, like Monks, which mechanically was very poorly executed, and thematically only somewhat fit in, and often feel like a very shoehorned addition to the party. Bards have great mechanics, in fact mechanically are absolutely A list. But execution is where they suck.
Hmm bards....
We had a one shot where a friend played one. I forgot to ask what he specialized in for entertaining until he gets up to cast his first spell on a room of devils. "I jump up on the table, rip off my pants to display my glitter undergarments. I cast enthrall". Every. Devil. Failed.
Kirrath the Exotic Dancer Bard was born. Just a quiet guy studying hard to learn history who had to take up a side job at the local brothel to pay the bills.
/sigh
Played right, a traditional bard is somewhere between Scaramouche and Gandalf. The thing is that the flavor of bards is, hearkening back to the 3.5 era, inherently leaning on the silly. I think they can be played well, but you have to put a lot of thought into the character and make them a bit more than comic relief. A poorly played bard can throw off the tone of the whole campaign. You, as a player, also are best off bringing some performative talent to the table if you want to play a Bard as well, which is difficult because playing a good DnD character in the first place already requires decent improv chops.
Bards are great mechanically. Very powerful bois. But I tend to avoid playing them because it is inherently very difficult to do the class justice and seldom have I seen a bard roleplayed in a way that was satisfying.
Bards, that strange mix between Beethoven and Satan.
I'll pass on playing one, I prefer artificers or wizards, or any other real spellcaster.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Bards are amazing. Jack of all Trades, Inspiration, Magical Secrets.... you have an answer for pretty much anything, and if you don't, your party members do (and they won't whiff with you around). Just my two centavos.
Partway through the quest for absolute truth.
To quote our original post:
"Basically bards suck because the players that usually play them suck. Not all, but enough to give them all a bad rep."
You basically say, if someone plays bard, they most likely "suck". That insults pretty much every player who ever played a bard because of a class they chose.
My current bard is a traveling ministrel who listened to the stories of Storm Silverhand in her childhood and now tries to live like her hero and inspire others to follow those ideals. She sees her music as a way to inspire people and wake or calm emotions. A cure for the soul where her spells provide cure for the body.
She is also insanely curious which caused her ending up in a pact with a magic weapon that claimed to belong to Storm and promised to grant her the necessary skill with a blade to defend herself and others like her hero did.
So... is she the cliche or anti-cliche?
If after 30+ years you never met a player who played something other than a meme I feel very sorry for you.
But defaulting to insult all players of a certain class is a pretty bad way to express yourself. Adding that maybe somewhere out there is a rare kind of player who doesn't qualify for the insult doesn't make that much better, either.
I actually wanted to add this but I didn't find a source for it. Thank you for linking those articles and pointing it out. :D
You could not be more wrong. I am enjoying my Bard more than any Wizard I have ever played before.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Just read the two posts after mine... "Kirrath the Exotic Dancer Bard was born. Just a quiet guy studying hard to learn history who had to take up a side job at the local brothel to pay the bills."
OH look a dancing bard.. that could be cool, oh wait, exotic dancer that used bedazzled underwear to cast spells, and worked at a brothel..... MEMETASTIC. Could it have jsut been a dancing bard, something akin to a blade singer, sure... but it wasn't. It wasn't a guy that inspires with wit and wisdom, bringing his fellows courage in a time of need, and beguiling the enemy through chicanery and sleight of hand. It was a walking disco ball that follows the lower head.
as CirrikhLoremistres so conceisely put it: "Played right, a traditional bard is somewhere between Scaramouche and Gandalf. The thing is that the flavor of bards is, hearkening back to the 3.5 era, inherently leaning on the silly. I think they can be played well, but you have to put a lot of thought into the character and make them a bit more than comic relief. A poorly played bard can throw off the tone of the whole campaign. You, as a player, also are best off bringing some performative talent to the table if you want to play a Bard as well, which is difficult because playing a good DnD character in the first place already requires decent improv chops.
Bards are great mechanically. Very powerful bois. But I tend to avoid playing them because it is inherently very difficult to do the class justice and seldom have I seen a bard roleplayed in a way that was satisfying."
They are jokes, they are parodys, they are gimmicks, they are never ever played in any sort of satisfying way. You wont get a Gandalf. You'll instead get "Gandalf but with a predilection for paraplegic half goblins, in which every waking moment is talking about how hot goblins that cant walk are" (yes, seen that bard before)
You will get the "bard that is a strict no harm pacifist that wont take any actions that might in some way hard anyone, including aiding the party in defending their lives" (seen it)
The list goes on and on. When I managed a shop (about 10 years ago) I kept a notebook of every character concept that i overheard, and not one bard was satisfying. They were one trick pony gimmicky memes, that not once ever impressed. I saw wizards and rogues be more inspiring than the bard. They could be great, but they suck because anyone that picks them to play them, cant come up with a decent way of playing them. Good players seem to go for other classes, and jokes go to the bard.
So yeah it is sad, that the D&D community in the last 30 years, through 5 (6 if you count 3.0 and 3.5) editions, and countless spinoff RPG's have not once found a way to make bard executed well, especially when we have solid literary examples of what they could be.
Now go back to your stand up comic bard, or your beat-box bard, or your disco bard, your seduce the dragon bard, your "where's the brothel" bard, your "I distract the orc by taking my pants off" bard, your "air guitar" bard..... man I'm done explaining why bards suck. Your welcome to love them, anyone is. Every class sucks in its own way. Sadly most people somehow get offended when their favorite is called out.
Any character sheet can be played well (even if un-optimally made), any character can be played poorly (no matter how munchkin'd the sheet is). The thing that makes bards suck is not their mechanics tho. Mechanically they are one of the strongest and most versatile classes in 5e, and in most of the prior editions. No what makes them suck is execution. Someday I might see one that is played well. I know for a fact I could not play it well. I would rely on jokes, memes, and brothels for the laughs. But it gets old fast, and I recognize that.
Prove me wrong tho, make a bard that fits their sheet, that hides their inner torment with the songs and stories of old. Start it our as a meme, but as the group gets to know him, have some serious pathos come out. As the story gets darker, and the weight of the world falls onto the party, have his stories get a little darker, a little heavier. Have him lose his powers for a time, being unable to find hope from within, and being unable to inspire others. Have some solid roleplay with the group, where they help him find his way again. They inspire him once again. I would at least find that more interesting than "I seduce the dragon with my exotic dancing"
This hits the nail on the head about bards.
if you’re all about the massive damage die life and nothing else in D&D. Bards aren’t for you.
Blank
I don't actually think the meme bards are not legitimate version of the class, tbh. Bard abilities cover a lot of cultures through a lot of time periods despite a setting specific name. Just start with "life in Ancient Greece was like this..." and we have a prominent culture suitable to D&D where a version of the bard would have been prominent as well that suits some of those memes. In some cultures the word "bard" had different connotations such as whether it was a court position or a derogatory term. Gandalf and Tom Bombadil are both bard tropes portrayed differently taken from similar inspirations by the same author. D&D is like that too. There's room for many different styles of bard. It's unfortunate that you don't like how many people portray them and I agree to some extent but I have to acknowledge those memes demonstrate the existence of that bard trope in modern culture.
The problem is the memes are all some people see. Most of my bards are traditional styles while I've also done the fascinating exotic dancer and klepto magical thief -- those can be fun too. One of the best things about the 5e mechanics is how customizable the bard class is towards the style the player wants it to be. How a player wants to play it is not actually an issue with the class but more an issue with some perceptions of the class.
The original concepts were based on the fili, skald, and jongleur. I most commonly play to those roots. That does not mean other choices become less valid although it might mean people would be better off learning what those roots are and what the bard can represent other than memes created by lack of knowing those roots or the historical bard roles.
Just kidding, bards can be seriously fun, though they get a bad rep because a few players decide to seduce every mimic they see. (Always counter these bards with Succubi/Incubi, that'll teach them)
I do prefer Wizards and Artificers, just because I like playing intelligent characters that are smarter than everyone else, and can save the party at the last second.
Bards are cool, just never felt the need to play one, also, I DM almost all the time.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Well...that's like...just your opinion, man.
I have several adventurers league characters and there are only very few subclasses that are underwhelming. Whisper bard is essentially a rogue with 9th level spell slots. It's a killer combo with elven accuracy and catnap (to get your inspirations back on a short rest) and if you take simulacrum as a magical secret, then expect to out DPS everyone. My favorite combo is swift quiver on turn 1 as a bonus action, then take 1 attack. Turn 2 throw out synaptic static, then 2 bonus action swift quiver shots. Crit fish with advantage and you're looking at 8D6 from synaptic static and another 8 to 16D6 from psychic blades once each, + weapon damage. It's just mean.
Valor bard can be really fun, and their inspiration can be a literal lifesaver for the party when facing the big bad.
Lore bard is the true jack of all trades with their additional magical secret at level 6 and peerless skill at 14. They're probably the most generalist out of all bards.
Sword bard is the only bard subclass that I've been underwhelmed by. It's decent to multiclass with, but it's abilities aren't as useful as they appear in higher tiers.
The bards that try to seduce everything are giving the rest of us hard working bards a bad name, I tell ya. Don't let them fool you into thinking that we're not awesome.
Yeah, I know it's just an opinion. I like bards as a class, and between DMing and very rarely being a player, I've never felt inclined to play a bard. I am a singer in real life, but bards don't seem like something I'd like playing.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Imagine if you were a singer who invested many years in a specialized education memorizing songs and poems that were used as a mnemonic aid. And that those songs and poems were the oral history of your people from lineages to customary law to the hierarchy of religion and more. Bards would be called on to entertain but the role was as an advisor and repository of knowledge. The songs, poems, and stories told what people needed to hear instead of what they wanted to here. It was often told in parable like a Rabbi sharing wisdom.
The music was also meant to be able to soothe and calm or rouse as needed. A calming lullaby vs a rousing war march vs psychological warfare instilling fear in the enemy.
Bards were experts in geneology, history, law, and much more. The reason for the thief skills were originally included was because a bard might be called on for military scouting and thief was the game representation for a scout at the time. Eulogies were the domain of the bards and also included the bard making a prophesy regarding the successor.
All bards could be called on to entertain but entertainment was not the actual main role and all entertainers were not bards. Bards were expected to be a lot of everything. They epitomized the Renaissance centuries before the Renaissance existed. They had political and military rank. Even modern military carried a musician rank.
Over the years their roles in society changed and other inspirations influenced their pop culture representation. It was much later in history that a general entertainer was the association, and the magical musician is more a latter half of the 20th century trope (but there are other historical references). The jongleur is more the minstrel part of the inspiration. Too many players miss the forest through the trees only seeing the minstrel / musician roots. ;-)