On first blush it feels like bards got the absolute assballs nerfed out of them and got even more of a goddamn focus on Music Dandy, which is sad. I love the idea of a Magic Expert, but I can't carry a tune with a forklift and I'm getting awfully sick of having to sing and dance and be Sam Riegel every time I want to try and play an Arcane Expert. Blugh.
Okay, what am I missing, to me it looks like they got a decent buff overall.
One thing I'm unclear on. Invisible says you cannot be seen. Blindsight says you can see invisible creatures within the range. Does this mean blindsight fully circumvents the invisible condition? or only partly?
Blindsight fully bypasses invisibility, it always has done.
This is absolutely not a settled conclusion.
Again, blindsight is not actually sight based, invisible is applicable to sight, which is why blindsight specifies that it in fact DOES see invisible creatures. in this case we would then rule that invisible is general and blindsight is specific, specific beats general.
I don't want to derail this thread any further with my comments on the way things work in the current edition, so I'll suffice it to say that you have said several things that I disagree with. And I'll leave it at that.
EDIT: Blindsight in the new document does say you can effectively see invisible creatures within the range, so it is effectively sight-based in definition in the playtest.
I think you are not putting enough emphasis on the effectively part. It is not sight based but it allows people with it to target people with spells and other things that say it requires you see them.
Oh! Shield Bash doesn't use your Bonus Action. Nice.
Yes now there is more balance dmg and no builds around those two feats for power. i can say all the feats are pretty balanced and i certainly love shield bash change and dual wielding.
That is good and bad, good balance around martials with martials but bad in that they kind of needed that in order to compete with spellcasters in combat. Even with the new mark not requiring concentration without sharpshooter etc will the ranger keep up in combat with a wizard. At least the ranger offers a bit more out of combat, but what about the barbarian or fighter. Unless those classes get some serious boosts in damage they may be left behind.
The way I see it GWM and SS only undermined the classes that could not take it and did not make them optimal for some. Now with dual wielding and Shield Mastery, classes can explore diferent ways to boost dmg beside Long Range and Two handed weapons.
Not only loot at the feats look at the Rule changes around them now with One Attack action u can attack with two weapons if they are light ( more dmg) and u can shield bash( Prone = Advantage)
On first blush it feels like bards got the absolute assballs nerfed out of them and got even more of a goddamn focus on Music Dandy, which is sad. I love the idea of a Magic Expert, but I can't carry a tune with a forklift and I'm getting awfully sick of having to sing and dance and be Sam Riegel every time I want to try and play an Arcane Expert. Blugh.
Okay, what am I missing, to me it looks like they got a decent buff overall.
Right?!
The only thing that kind of looks like a nerf to me is maybe bardic inspiration prof bonus is less than stat at most levels and a reaction overall may be weaker as you can't pre hand them out to the party before a boss fight, and it changes to short rest at level 7. Everything else looks better to me, though I guess if you were set on a specific spell they had that was dropped from their list that is a nerf as well, but I suspect they also gained a few.
but hey it was one read through and i miss things here and there, like in the last one grapple condition i did not read into it to see how moving the grappler may not break the grapple only moving the grappled target does.
The biggest disappointment for me is the change to bardic inspiration.
Bardic inspiration uses = proficiency bonus means you have significantly fewer uses through like level 10 (the levels most people play). Though the change to reaction is more powerful, it's less flexible (can't have multiple party members with bardic inspiration). And it just takes your reaction now instead of being able to use your bonus action.
And from a flavor standpoint, I think it's worse. When I think of inspiring someone, I think of something you do ahead of time, proactively, not something you do as a reaction (though there are some situations where that might be the case).
For the Study action, I like that they actually clarified what knowledge skill can be used for which creature types you're dealing with.
Need info on angels, devils, ghosts, liches, or demons? Religion
Need info on chwingas, pixies, aboleths, beholders, or owlbears? Arcana
Need info on frost giants, the gith, or the grung? History
Need info on dragons, black puddings, corpse flowers, or T-Rexes? Nature
Also I was always unsure what skill you'd use for technology knowledge, as Arcana seems to be too all-encompassing as is and not all tech is magical, and just making an Intelligence check didn't seem right. So Investigation being given that role is almost a relief to me.
Is it me or NATURE'S VEIL is a waste? I mean what do you gain from it? A lvl2 spell nerfed when you hit level 13? And yes, I already noticed that it says "spell slot", so you could use it with one of your 4 lvl 1 spell slots. But still, gaining invisibility for one turn by spending a spell slot doesn't seem like a big deal to me. . Although maybe it's just me, and I'm not seeing something. In my opinion, that feature cries out to be a number of times equal to your Proficency Bonus without spending a spell slot.
Other than that I like what they've done with the ranger. They already did well at Tasha's, and here they have followed that line.
I also like what they've done with the Bard, though I wish they'd traded Magical Secrets for something else. Why does the bard have access to every spell in the game? Shouldn't that be a wizard thing? I would have at least limited the Magical Secrets to the 4 schools that the bard can choose by default. But really what I would have given him is something that enhances the support role even more, which is what thematically works best for a bard.
I think you are not putting enough emphasis on the effectively part. It is not sight based but it allows people with it to target people with spells and other things that say it requires you see them.
It's literally called blindsight. In terms of my original question, does it fully circumvent the invisible condition? I ask because the definition of the condition itself makes no provisions for what happens when something circumvents it. If we fall back on idiomatic English, the condition starts with "while you are invisible" so we could assume that you are not invisible to someone who has the blindsight ability. Then again, as long as the condition is active, the condition itself says that you can't be seen and therefore the properties of the condition apply. Since invisibility is (currently) the only relative condition, I feel this needs extra wording to clarify the interaction. Compare this with what they did to the long rest definition from last month's document to this one. I have high hopes we will get this settled in upcoming playtest documents.
EDIT: compare this with the new definition of tremorsense, which explicitly says it is not a form of sight.
On first blush it feels like bards got the absolute assballs nerfed out of them and got even more of a goddamn focus on Music Dandy, which is sad. I love the idea of a Magic Expert, but I can't carry a tune with a forklift and I'm getting awfully sick of having to sing and dance and be Sam Riegel every time I want to try and play an Arcane Expert. Blugh.
Okay, what am I missing, to me it looks like they got a decent buff overall.
Right?!
The only thing that kind of looks like a nerf to me is maybe bardic inspiration prof bonus is less than stat at most levels and a reaction overall may be weaker as you can't pre hand them out to the party before a boss fight, and it changes to short rest at level 7. Everything else looks better to me, though I guess if you were set on a specific spell they had that was dropped from their list that is a nerf as well, but I suspect they also gained a few.
but hey it was one read through and i miss things here and there, like in the last one grapple condition i did not read into it to see how moving the grappler may not break the grapple only moving the grappled target does.
I could see Proficiency Bonus number of dice as a nerf for sure, but I also see it as a buff for people that like to multiclass.
I think you are not putting enough emphasis on the effectively part. It is not sight based but it allows people with it to target people with spells and other things that say it requires you see them.
It's literally called blindsight. In terms of my original question, does it fully circumvent the invisible condition? I ask because the definition of the condition itself makes no provisions for what happens when something circumvents it. If we fall back on idiomatic English, the condition starts with "while you are invisible" so we could assume that you are not invisible to someone who has the blindsight ability. Then again, as long as the condition is active, the condition itself says that you can't be seen and therefore the properties of the condition apply. Since invisibility is (currently) the only relative condition, I feel this needs extra wording to clarify the interaction. Compare this with what they did to the long rest definition from last month's document to this one. I have high hopes we will get this settled in upcoming playtest documents.
EDIT: compare this with the new definition of tremorsense, which explicitly says it is not a form of sight.
you said you wanted to stop the derailment, I have already given you the answer, the fact you disagree with it is irrelevant. Blindsight and invisibility is a case of specific (blindsight) beating general (invisible), blindsight specifies what it does in the interaction with invisibility. Or are you arguing that the "See Invisibility" spell can not see invisible creatures too? Since that too specifies the interaction, it sees invisible creatures. Specific beats general.
Tremorsense is not sight, you can not use it for abilities or spells that require line of sight, blindsight is sight in that it gives you line of sight but it is not sight as in physical sight, it specifically says it is not physical sight.
I think I could have saved us both a lot of time by posting this in the first place:
I would like to see the wording of the invisible condition changed from "While you are Invisible, you experience the following effects:" to "While you are Invisible and cannot be seen, you experience the following effects:"
On first blush it feels like bards got the absolute assballs nerfed out of them and got even more of a goddamn focus on Music Dandy, which is sad. I love the idea of a Magic Expert, but I can't carry a tune with a forklift and I'm getting awfully sick of having to sing and dance and be Sam Riegel every time I want to try and play an Arcane Expert. Blugh.
Okay, what am I missing, to me it looks like they got a decent buff overall.
Bardic spellcasting now comprises half and only half the Arcane spell list, with their spell choice severely restricted. They can't trade out spell levels anymore - no trading a first-level spell for an improved second-level version on level up, you HAVE to prepare four first, two second, two third, and so forth. Preparation over innate casting is a huge boon to be sure, and they seem to've excised vestigial legacy features like Countercharm which helps. But between a drastic reduction in uses of their signature Inspiration and the heavy cuts to their Spellcasting, I have to wonder if I'd be able to rebuild any of my current bard characters worth a spit in the new system.
I know Manadh, my current curse-centric fey witch technically-bard I was super looking forward to trying out some day, is completely dead in the water given not only the dramatic cuts to the bard spell list, but also the doubled-down focus on Musical Dandy Horny Man. Her Bane spell is gone, her Faerie Fire spell is gone, her Bestow Curse spell is gone, her Dimension Door spell is gone, her Synaptic Static spell is gone, and she doesn't really get jack-monkey squat to replace any of it until and unless she's lucky enough to gain access to Magical Secrets. Which comes in later for bards, with no opt-in for earlier access to Secrets anymore. Plus the fact that I was respinning her Glamour Bard class as a fey-spirited forest witch is also dead, because Wizards, like...quadruple-downed on the whole "ALL BARDS MUST BE EXTREMYL MUSICAL SUPER PERFORMERS AND THEIR PLAYERS HAD BEST BE MADONNA, WEIRD AL, GEORGE CARLIN AND ELVIS ALL WRAPPED UP IN ONE" language that makes bards so incredibly difficult to play if you're not a professional performer your own-assed IRL self.
I know, it's playtest, everything's in flux. I'm not screaming sky-is-falling or anything, I'm just a lot more ambivalent about the changes to the bard class than I am about other 1DD stuff so far. The Origins playtest was a slam dunk, but this one feels like it might need another go through the wash to me. That's all.
One thing I'm unclear on. Invisible says you cannot be seen. Blindsight says you can see invisible creatures within the range. Does this mean blindsight fully circumvents the invisible condition? or only partly?
When the feedback survey opens up, I plan on asking for a passive aggressive comment like "it really should go without saying, but a creature can't benefit from the invisible condition against you if it's not invisible to you."
Youprepare Spells for each of your Classes individually,referring tothe Spell Slots ofan individualClassto determine the number and levels of the Spells you preparefor it.
Finally! No more questions about preparing 9th level bard spells on your bard 1/cleric 19 based on the multiclass spell slot table.
the rules already say that, Wolfbees. People ask anyways, because they can't figure out why their spell slots are different than their spell lists.
They don't say exactly that. The new statement cuts the ambiguity: You use your class's table to prepare that class's spells.
This rule tells you to use the class table explicitly to prepare for a class; whereas the old rule sent you to your class rule, then your class said to use your slots generically; and many, many people misinterpreted that to mean the mutliclass spell slots.
On first blush it feels like bards got the absolute assballs nerfed out of them and got even more of a goddamn focus on Music Dandy, which is sad. I love the idea of a Magic Expert, but I can't carry a tune with a forklift and I'm getting awfully sick of having to sing and dance and be Sam Riegel every time I want to try and play an Arcane Expert. Blugh.
Okay, what am I missing, to me it looks like they got a decent buff overall.
Bardic spellcasting now comprises half and only half the Arcane spell list, with their spell choice severely restricted. They can't trade out spell levels anymore - no trading a first-level spell for an improved second-level version on level up, you HAVE to prepare four first, two second, two third, and so forth. Preparation over innate casting is a huge boon to be sure, and they seem to've excised vestigial legacy features like Countercharm which helps. But between a drastic reduction in uses of their signature Inspiration and the heavy cuts to their Spellcasting, I have to wonder if I'd be able to rebuild any of my current bard characters worth a spit in the new system.
I know Manadh, my current curse-centric fey witch technically-bard I was super looking forward to trying out some day, is completely dead in the water given not only the dramatic cuts to the bard spell list, but also the doubled-down focus on Musical Dandy Horny Man. Her Bane spell is gone, her Faerie Fire spell is gone, her Bestow Curse spell is gone, her Dimension Door spell is gone, her Synaptic Static spell is gone, and she doesn't really get jack-monkey squat to replace any of it until and unless she's lucky enough to gain access to Magical Secrets. Which comes in later for bards, with no opt-in for earlier access to Secrets anymore. Plus the fact that I was respinning her Glamour Bard class as a fey-spirited forest witch is also dead, because Wizards, like...quadruple-downed on the whole "ALL BARDS MUST BE EXTREMYL MUSICAL SUPER PERFORMERS AND THEIR PLAYERS HAD BEST BE MADONNA, WEIRD AL, GEORGE CARLIN AND ELVIS ALL WRAPPED UP IN ONE" language that makes bards so incredibly difficult to play if you're not a professional performer your own-assed IRL self.
I know, it's playtest, everything's in flux. I'm not screaming sky-is-falling or anything, I'm just a lot more ambivalent about the changes to the bard class than I am about other 1DD stuff so far. The Origins playtest was a slam dunk, but this one feels like it might need another go through the wash to me. That's all.
Yurei has now turned into a Gibbering Mouther on the DnDBeyond Forums it would seem. JKJK Yurei.
I can see your points about the spell list, but I don't see there being anymore "musical super performer" than before.
Oiy. I'm specifically saying, more'n once, that this doc is gonna take a few run-throughs to absorb and start formulating proper opinions on. First-blush reactions are just that. Don't @ me bro. Hueh.
As for "all bards must ALWAYS be Ultramusicians"?. I direct your attention to the class fluff for bards:
"Invoking magic through music, dance, and verse, Bards are expert at inspiring others, soothing hurts, disheartening foes, and creating illusions. Bards believe that the creators of the multiverse spoke and signed it into existence and that remnants of those Words of Creation still resound and glimmer on every plane of existence. The magic of Bards is an attempt to harness those words—which transcend any language—and direct them to create new wonders. Almost anything can inspire a new song or tale, so Bards are fascinated by almost everything. They have a wide-ranging knowledge of many subjects and develop an aptitude to do almost anything well. Bards become masters of many things, including musical performance, the workings of magic, and the formation of jests. Not every singer or poet in a tavern or jester in a royal court is a Bard. Harnessing the Words of Creation requires hard work and some measure of natural talent that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can sometimes be hard to spot the difference between these performers and Bards, though. A Bard’s life is spent wandering across the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer. But Bards’ depth of knowledge, level of musical skill, and mastery of magic sets them apart."
Bards invoke magic through music, dance, and verse. They're fishing for the Words of Creation, basically the "music, dance and verse" of the cosmos. They're inspired by new songs or tales - not new knowledge or anything else, specifically "songs or tales". The class is specifically compared to singers, poets, and jesters - not to adventurers. Want to make an awesome magical Indiana Jones-esque polymath? NOPE. You have to make Jaskier, instead. Want to make a tricksy fey witch who just uses the bard chassis because it's the closest mechanical approximation of what you want? NOOOPE. Gotta be Jaskier. Want to make a wandering war skald trying to prove herself to her clan and collect new tales of battle and bravery to add to her ancestor's Tome of Heroes? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE. You get to Toss a Coin to Your Witcher(!!) and spend every combat doing sick lute solos* instead of fighting.
Yes, I understand that the class fluff isn't necessary, but man it's really disheartening to see them going all-in on the Musical Dandyman ****ery in the 1DD document when the base bard actually made half an attempt to acknowledge that bards aren't always necessarily horny song fops. Blegh. This is one meme I dearly wish the community would just let die already.
Rangers as an expert class feel lacking in abilities that make them an "expert". their whole combat approach has been rebalanced (notice steel wind strike is just gone, an conjure animals will be nerfed unless something ). Bards get Jack of all trades, rogues get reliable talent. but rangers seem to get less. (they do have utility spells and guidance but that has also been nerfed a bit )
So far there have been few options for travel utility or party boosts or preparation tools.(letting the party know about immunities, I guess but i always did that via skills/research)
any reference to difficult terrain assistance for the ranger is gone. outlander has not been converted to a feat and favored terrain is also gone.
Basically the whole ranger play loop has been manipulated and its hard to tell if its for the better. I suspect fans of the ranger will be unhappy but people who enjoy other classes will think its an improvement.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Right?!
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I think you are not putting enough emphasis on the effectively part. It is not sight based but it allows people with it to target people with spells and other things that say it requires you see them.
The way I see it GWM and SS only undermined the classes that could not take it and did not make them optimal for some. Now with dual wielding and Shield Mastery, classes can explore diferent ways to boost dmg beside Long Range and Two handed weapons.
Not only loot at the feats look at the Rule changes around them now with One Attack action u can attack with two weapons if they are light ( more dmg) and u can shield bash( Prone = Advantage)
The only thing that kind of looks like a nerf to me is maybe bardic inspiration prof bonus is less than stat at most levels and a reaction overall may be weaker as you can't pre hand them out to the party before a boss fight, and it changes to short rest at level 7. Everything else looks better to me, though I guess if you were set on a specific spell they had that was dropped from their list that is a nerf as well, but I suspect they also gained a few.
but hey it was one read through and i miss things here and there, like in the last one grapple condition i did not read into it to see how moving the grappler may not break the grapple only moving the grappled target does.
The biggest disappointment for me is the change to bardic inspiration.
Bardic inspiration uses = proficiency bonus means you have significantly fewer uses through like level 10 (the levels most people play). Though the change to reaction is more powerful, it's less flexible (can't have multiple party members with bardic inspiration). And it just takes your reaction now instead of being able to use your bonus action.
And from a flavor standpoint, I think it's worse. When I think of inspiring someone, I think of something you do ahead of time, proactively, not something you do as a reaction (though there are some situations where that might be the case).
For the Study action, I like that they actually clarified what knowledge skill can be used for which creature types you're dealing with.
Need info on angels, devils, ghosts, liches, or demons? Religion
Need info on chwingas, pixies, aboleths, beholders, or owlbears? Arcana
Need info on frost giants, the gith, or the grung? History
Need info on dragons, black puddings, corpse flowers, or T-Rexes? Nature
Also I was always unsure what skill you'd use for technology knowledge, as Arcana seems to be too all-encompassing as is and not all tech is magical, and just making an Intelligence check didn't seem right. So Investigation being given that role is almost a relief to me.
Is it me or NATURE'S VEIL is a waste? I mean what do you gain from it? A lvl2 spell nerfed when you hit level 13? And yes, I already noticed that it says "spell slot", so you could use it with one of your 4 lvl 1 spell slots. But still, gaining invisibility for one turn by spending a spell slot doesn't seem like a big deal to me. . Although maybe it's just me, and I'm not seeing something.
In my opinion, that feature cries out to be a number of times equal to your Proficency Bonus without spending a spell slot.
Other than that I like what they've done with the ranger. They already did well at Tasha's, and here they have followed that line.
I also like what they've done with the Bard, though I wish they'd traded Magical Secrets for something else. Why does the bard have access to every spell in the game? Shouldn't that be a wizard thing? I would have at least limited the Magical Secrets to the 4 schools that the bard can choose by default. But really what I would have given him is something that enhances the support role even more, which is what thematically works best for a bard.
It's literally called blindsight. In terms of my original question, does it fully circumvent the invisible condition? I ask because the definition of the condition itself makes no provisions for what happens when something circumvents it. If we fall back on idiomatic English, the condition starts with "while you are invisible" so we could assume that you are not invisible to someone who has the blindsight ability. Then again, as long as the condition is active, the condition itself says that you can't be seen and therefore the properties of the condition apply. Since invisibility is (currently) the only relative condition, I feel this needs extra wording to clarify the interaction. Compare this with what they did to the long rest definition from last month's document to this one. I have high hopes we will get this settled in upcoming playtest documents.
EDIT: compare this with the new definition of tremorsense, which explicitly says it is not a form of sight.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I could see Proficiency Bonus number of dice as a nerf for sure, but I also see it as a buff for people that like to multiclass.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
you said you wanted to stop the derailment, I have already given you the answer, the fact you disagree with it is irrelevant. Blindsight and invisibility is a case of specific (blindsight) beating general (invisible), blindsight specifies what it does in the interaction with invisibility. Or are you arguing that the "See Invisibility" spell can not see invisible creatures too? Since that too specifies the interaction, it sees invisible creatures. Specific beats general.
Tremorsense is not sight, you can not use it for abilities or spells that require line of sight, blindsight is sight in that it gives you line of sight but it is not sight as in physical sight, it specifically says it is not physical sight.
I think I could have saved us both a lot of time by posting this in the first place:
I would like to see the wording of the invisible condition changed from "While you are Invisible, you experience the following effects:" to "While you are Invisible and cannot be seen, you experience the following effects:"
That's on me. I apologize for the mess.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Bardic spellcasting now comprises half and only half the Arcane spell list, with their spell choice severely restricted. They can't trade out spell levels anymore - no trading a first-level spell for an improved second-level version on level up, you HAVE to prepare four first, two second, two third, and so forth. Preparation over innate casting is a huge boon to be sure, and they seem to've excised vestigial legacy features like Countercharm which helps. But between a drastic reduction in uses of their signature Inspiration and the heavy cuts to their Spellcasting, I have to wonder if I'd be able to rebuild any of my current bard characters worth a spit in the new system.
I know Manadh, my current curse-centric fey witch technically-bard I was super looking forward to trying out some day, is completely dead in the water given not only the dramatic cuts to the bard spell list, but also the doubled-down focus on Musical Dandy Horny Man. Her Bane spell is gone, her Faerie Fire spell is gone, her Bestow Curse spell is gone, her Dimension Door spell is gone, her Synaptic Static spell is gone, and she doesn't really get jack-monkey squat to replace any of it until and unless she's lucky enough to gain access to Magical Secrets. Which comes in later for bards, with no opt-in for earlier access to Secrets anymore. Plus the fact that I was respinning her Glamour Bard class as a fey-spirited forest witch is also dead, because Wizards, like...quadruple-downed on the whole "ALL BARDS MUST BE EXTREMYL MUSICAL SUPER PERFORMERS AND THEIR PLAYERS HAD BEST BE MADONNA, WEIRD AL, GEORGE CARLIN AND ELVIS ALL WRAPPED UP IN ONE" language that makes bards so incredibly difficult to play if you're not a professional performer your own-assed IRL self.
I know, it's playtest, everything's in flux. I'm not screaming sky-is-falling or anything, I'm just a lot more ambivalent about the changes to the bard class than I am about other 1DD stuff so far. The Origins playtest was a slam dunk, but this one feels like it might need another go through the wash to me. That's all.
Please do not contact or message me.
When the feedback survey opens up, I plan on asking for a passive aggressive comment like "it really should go without saying, but a creature can't benefit from the invisible condition against you if it's not invisible to you."
Finally! No more questions about preparing 9th level bard spells on your bard 1/cleric 19 based on the multiclass spell slot table.
the rules already say that, Wolfbees. People ask anyways, because they can't figure out why their spell slots are different than their spell lists.
Please do not contact or message me.
They don't say exactly that. The new statement cuts the ambiguity: You use your class's table to prepare that class's spells.
This rule tells you to use the class table explicitly to prepare for a class; whereas the old rule sent you to your class rule, then your class said to use your slots generically; and many, many people misinterpreted that to mean the mutliclass spell slots.
It is absolutely clearer now.
Yurei has now turned into a Gibbering Mouther on the DnDBeyond Forums it would seem. JKJK Yurei.
I can see your points about the spell list, but I don't see there being anymore "musical super performer" than before.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Oiy. I'm specifically saying, more'n once, that this doc is gonna take a few run-throughs to absorb and start formulating proper opinions on. First-blush reactions are just that. Don't @ me bro. Hueh.
As for "all bards must ALWAYS be Ultramusicians"?. I direct your attention to the class fluff for bards:
"Invoking magic through music, dance, and verse, Bards are expert at inspiring others, soothing hurts, disheartening foes, and creating illusions. Bards believe that the creators of the multiverse spoke and signed it into existence and that remnants of those Words of Creation still resound and glimmer on every plane of existence. The magic of Bards is an attempt to harness those words—which transcend any language—and direct them to create new wonders. Almost anything can inspire a new song or tale, so Bards are fascinated by almost everything. They have a wide-ranging knowledge of many subjects and develop an aptitude to do almost anything well. Bards become masters of many things, including musical performance, the workings of magic, and the formation of jests. Not every singer or poet in a tavern or jester in a royal court is a Bard. Harnessing the Words of Creation requires hard work and some measure of natural talent that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can sometimes be hard to spot the difference between these performers and Bards, though. A Bard’s life is spent wandering across the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer. But Bards’ depth of knowledge, level of musical skill, and mastery of magic sets them apart."
Bards invoke magic through music, dance, and verse. They're fishing for the Words of Creation, basically the "music, dance and verse" of the cosmos. They're inspired by new songs or tales - not new knowledge or anything else, specifically "songs or tales". The class is specifically compared to singers, poets, and jesters - not to adventurers. Want to make an awesome magical Indiana Jones-esque polymath? NOPE. You have to make Jaskier, instead. Want to make a tricksy fey witch who just uses the bard chassis because it's the closest mechanical approximation of what you want? NOOOPE. Gotta be Jaskier. Want to make a wandering war skald trying to prove herself to her clan and collect new tales of battle and bravery to add to her ancestor's Tome of Heroes? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPE. You get to Toss a Coin to Your Witcher(!!) and spend every combat doing sick lute solos* instead of fighting.
Yes, I understand that the class fluff isn't necessary, but man it's really disheartening to see them going all-in on the Musical Dandyman ****ery in the 1DD document when the base bard actually made half an attempt to acknowledge that bards aren't always necessarily horny song fops. Blegh. This is one meme I dearly wish the community would just let die already.
Please do not contact or message me.
So the polearm master sentinel combo is nerved.
Rangers as an expert class feel lacking in abilities that make them an "expert". their whole combat approach has been rebalanced (notice steel wind strike is just gone, an conjure animals will be nerfed unless something ). Bards get Jack of all trades, rogues get reliable talent. but rangers seem to get less. (they do have utility spells and guidance but that has also been nerfed a bit )
So far there have been few options for travel utility or party boosts or preparation tools.(letting the party know about immunities, I guess but i always did that via skills/research)
any reference to difficult terrain assistance for the ranger is gone. outlander has not been converted to a feat and favored terrain is also gone.
Basically the whole ranger play loop has been manipulated and its hard to tell if its for the better. I suspect fans of the ranger will be unhappy but people who enjoy other classes will think its an improvement.