Bethany is a bard who uses necromancy as well as having an affinity for nature and love for the living and dead. Forcing that into a subclass prevents the choice of lore (more knowledge based) or valor (more warrior based) when both should have access to that trope.
Why should they? Defining classes is always equally about what they cannot do and what they can do and quite honestly the design of current D&D is to put specific tropes into subclasses whereas the overall class is a rather generic scaffold. There are a huge number of people who love the "skald" or "bardbarian" trope to the extent that tons of people play or make builds of that MC despite it being terrible. But the official classes and subclasses do not support that trope. There is no obligation by a game to allow everyone to play every kind of character that has existed in any kind of media ever. If you want to play a singing druidic necromancer you can easily do so in One D&D by taking the Musician feat at level 1 and playing a druid and taking one of the skill granting feats at level 4, and/or maybe taking Fey Touched to boost your illusion options.
That's not a reason to not support a trope in when making changes to a system. That's appealing to tradition.
First, i would say tradition, is a important part of dnd and it should at least be a guideline for progress. its not an absolute but stray to far and it will become something new rather than a continual/progression of the system. And there are some traditional Ravenloft stories about necromancy and bard types(#3 Dance of the Dead) . Basically trying to control narratives via mechanics probably isn't good(see druids and metal armor). rather character narratives should be a built on top of mechanics (one druids don't have medium armor so they never wear it) . The difference is slight but one is a control factor while the other is just not having a feature.
in particular, right now even basic tropes and archetypes are disappearing from one/revised/light dnd. Some really iconic bard spells are just gone from the list (spells that bard builds were focused around). just not wanting to spend your skills on healing is harder as it becomes the optimal use case.
now, we don't know what the other 3 subclasses will look like and some losses can be fixed via the new magical secrets design but you are still locking in such choices that you might not have had to in the past.
but this phenomena is not limited to bards. rogues, rangers, druids and clerics outlier archetypes feel squeezed towards a generic class narrative rather than as a build starting point. this happens via features changes and new rules changes.
I am even less impressed with the UA bards now that the sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards have been shown. Particularly wizards. The ability to create rituals out of non-ritual spells and remove the concentration tag from concentration spells seems a lot better than more bardic inspiration dice and expertise in a couple more skills at similar levels.
Spell mastery comes even earlier now.
I am getting more on board with just letting bards select abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, and transmutation from any spell list, and adding a school of choice later as part of the magical secrets line up of abilities.
I am even less impressed with the UA bards now that the sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards have been shown. Particularly wizards. The ability to create rituals out of non-ritual spells and remove the concentration tag from concentration spells seems a lot better than more bardic inspiration dice and expertise in a couple more skills at similar levels.
Spell mastery comes even earlier now.
I am getting more on board with just letting bards select abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, and transmutation from any spell list, and adding a school of choice later as part of the magical secrets line up of abilities.
Wizards do not remove concentration from a spell they just make it where they cant break concentration due to damage.
Also only spells with a minimum of 10 minute cast can become ritual spells.
I am even less impressed with the UA bards now that the sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards have been shown. Particularly wizards. The ability to create rituals out of non-ritual spells and remove the concentration tag from concentration spells seems a lot better than more bardic inspiration dice and expertise in a couple more skills at similar levels.
Spell mastery comes even earlier now.
I am getting more on board with just letting bards select abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, and transmutation from any spell list, and adding a school of choice later as part of the magical secrets line up of abilities.
1) I mean, what you're saying is that the Mage classes are better at magic than the non-mage expert class. Sounds like it's working as intended to me.
2) UA Bards have a pretty big advantage over sorcerers and warlocks in that they can swap out their spells every day instead of on level-up. And unlike Wizards, they're not stuck with what's in their books currently - they have the entire Arcane list to draw from, give or take some school restrictions. That means every arcane divination, illusion, enchantment and transmutation spell they ever print will be available to bards as currently written, the moment the DM allows that book, and they can grab even more via Magical Secrets. That's nothing to sneeze at.
I am even less impressed with the UA bards now that the sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards have been shown. Particularly wizards. The ability to create rituals out of non-ritual spells and remove the concentration tag from concentration spells seems a lot better than more bardic inspiration dice and expertise in a couple more skills at similar levels.
Spell mastery comes even earlier now.
I am getting more on board with just letting bards select abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, and transmutation from any spell list, and adding a school of choice later as part of the magical secrets line up of abilities.
Wizards do not remove concentration from a spell they just make it where they cant break concentration due to damage.
Also only spells with a minimum of 10 minute cast can become ritual spells.
It's a good point that wizards are still concentrating, but breaking concentration is suddenly massively harder on any spell the wizard really wants to prevent losing, and that's extremely useful.
And, for example, turning contingency into a ritual has synergy with arcane recovery. That creates the opportunity for frequent use of the contingency spell. There are several spells with casting times of 10 minutes or more that benefit from adding the ritual tag. This goes beyond just those advantages, however. Wizards spend money to have better versions of most spells available to bards, sorcerers, and warlocks by using modify spell and create spell. Cash for significant class benefits like that isn't a good system.
By the time spell mastery comes along there are going to be several modified 1st and 2nd-level spells from which to choose.
Arcane traditions further modify those modified spells. After those modifications arcane recovery, memorize spell, ritual caster, spell mastery, and signature spell give easy access to swapping out or casting a lot of spells that have been modified in those ways. Conceptually and thematically it looks great for wizards. Mechanically it looks like a can of worms that opens up too much compared to other arcane spell casters, particularly the bard that was rather gutted of it's design space as a spell caster in this series of UA's.
At least the note on removing vicious mockery and dissonant whispers from the list show there are some changes looking at another bard coming along. Taking away the diverse spell list is a huge issue with the bard class identity.
I am even less impressed with the UA bards now that the sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards have been shown. Particularly wizards. The ability to create rituals out of non-ritual spells and remove the concentration tag from concentration spells seems a lot better than more bardic inspiration dice and expertise in a couple more skills at similar levels.
Spell mastery comes even earlier now.
I am getting more on board with just letting bards select abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, and transmutation from any spell list, and adding a school of choice later as part of the magical secrets line up of abilities.
1) I mean, what you're saying is that the Mage classes are better at magic than the non-mage expert class. Sounds like it's working as intended to me.
2) UA Bards have a pretty big advantage over sorcerers and warlocks in that they can swap out their spells every day instead of on level-up. And unlike Wizards, they're not stuck with what's in their books currently - they have the entire Arcane list to draw from, give or take some school restrictions. That means every arcane divination, illusion, enchantment and transmutation spell they ever print will be available to bards as currently written, the moment the DM allows that book, and they can grab even more via Magical Secrets. That's nothing to sneeze at.
1) That just sounds condescending and looks more like you're interested less in issues or feedback with the classes and more in some weird status quo opinion about the classes you have. Please don't try to put words in my mouth. What I'm saying is bards had a lot taken away and other classes had a lot added. We're getting back to bards not being good enough at almost everything because of the boosts being given to other classes. A limited spell selection until magical secrets,bardic inspiration dice being delayed, and expertise isn't very comparable to any other classes.
Your take doesn't actually follow consistency given that warlocks add half their class level to multi-classing and bards add their full class level. Warlocks get their potential from invocations, not the class category.
2) I called out "particularly wizards" and this point references warlocks and sorcerers. That's deflection. However; that advantage is minor. Most players don't actually change their spell list much with preparation IME, and only having access to half the spell schools gives wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks access to a heck of a lot of spells not available to bards. The spells known number and actual options have been significantly improved for sorcerers and warlocks opening up access to a lot of wizard spells they didn't have before. Both could just focus on the same schools as bard, have similar hit points but better armor, and still add an important combat aspect like damage.
These other classes gained benefits. Bards lost the diverse spell list from 1st level and magical secrets at 11th level doesn't replace that. A feature (spell diversity) that closely associated with the class should be available at 1st level like it is in 5e. You wanting wizards to be the best spell caster has nothing to do with that. It's a loss, not a gain.
Most classes kept access to their full spell list based on the spell list given, and typically added more. Bards lost more than they gained.
Bards lost a lot of bonus healing changing song of rest to songs of restoration and giving spells to bards that bards previously had available if the player wanted them isn't giving much in return either. It's a loss, not a gain.
Changing bardic inspiration uses to proficiency bonus instead of CHA bonus slowed down access to number of uses. Moving font of inspiration to a higher level slowed down access to number of uses. It's a loss, not a gain.
In the case of the wizard, that class gained a lot.
I'm not sure I agree with the premise that bards lost a lot, personally I think they either landed in the same place or gained a bit of ground overall. The warlock I think lost some ground but I can see the argument that they landed in roughly the same spot, the wizard gained a bit, the sorcerer gained a decent amount.
Realistically the bard and wizard probably should have lost a bit, the warlock and sorcerer stayed roughly where they were or gained a small bit around the edges. Martials like the rogue needed to gain a lot of ground.
I'm not sure I agree with the premise that bards lost a lot, personally I think they either landed in the same place or gained a bit of ground overall. The warlock I think lost some ground but I can see the argument that they landed in roughly the same spot, the wizard gained a bit, the sorcerer gained a decent amount.
Realistically the bard and wizard probably should have lost a bit, the warlock and sorcerer stayed roughly where they were or gained a small bit around the edges. Martials like the rogue needed to gain a lot of ground.
How is losing the access to shared spells with the cleric and druid list, greatly slowing down access to bardic inspiration, nerfing jack-of-all-trades, and giving up bonus healing from song of rest not losing a lot?
Bards don't have the the option to heal at 1st level at all anymore. At 2nd level they no longer have the option of not learning spells force on the class by songs or restoration, but are forced to use spell slots to use that healing instead of having bonus healing. Bard healing took a big hit and the variety of spells available is iconic to the class, including iconic bard spells.
Jack-of-all-trades now only applies to untrained skill ability checks and doesn't come into play until 3 levels later. Bardic inspiration is a key feature of the class and it can barely be used between changing it from CHA bonus to proficiency bonus and pushing back font of inspiration to 7th level. Countercharm is no longer a thing so now bards need to spend more bardic inspiration the class would not have. Meanwhile, the musician feat available at 1st level grants inspiration to multiple people rechargeable on a short rest. It takes a bard 9 levels before the bonus and number of targets becomes comparable to that feat, making it feal like a feat tax for bards to be bards.
They have less weapon access and light armor is still barely worth anything in AC.
The class lost the access to spell variety it had at 1st level and it's no longer available until 11th level, at which point I think it is better; but everything that made a bard useful or fun doesn't exist until high levels now. The UA bard plays like a wizard without all the spells and benefits in exchange for inspiration a couple of times a day, expertise, and very limited healing. It kind feels a lot more like a jack-of-no-trades than anything else.
I said during my playtest that I thought Bards were good with the 4 from Arcane, but that they should also get Necromancy and Abjuration from the Primal Spell List. Calling back to their roots with the druid spells. Instead of songs of restoration.
This opens up Spare the Dying and Resistance Cantrip, Cure wounds, Healing word (1st) Gentle Repose, Lesser Restoration, Pass without Trace (this one I don't think should be Abjuration personally I think it should be transmutation), Protection From poison (2nd level) Dispel Magic, Feign Death, Mass Healing Word, Nondetection, Protection From Energy, Revivify (3rd) Freedom Of Movement (4th) Antilife Shell, Greater Restoration, Mass Cure Wounds, Reincarnate (5th) Heal (this may be the big no no, but at this level Bards have Magical Secrets anyway) (6th) Nothing 7, nothing 8, 9 True Resurrection and Power Word Heal.
All very on theme for the Bard, except MAYBE pass without trace. Feign Death is a surprise pick up here that is cool thematically to the bard due to "acting".
Add in Aid, Harm, and Resurrection, and I think that would be kind of perfect. Though, as you point out, Harm and Resurrection could be done via Magical Secrets. Aid could as well, but Aid should be available to them at 3rd level, IMO.
I'm not sure I agree with the premise that bards lost a lot, personally I think they either landed in the same place or gained a bit of ground overall. The warlock I think lost some ground but I can see the argument that they landed in roughly the same spot, the wizard gained a bit, the sorcerer gained a decent amount.
Realistically the bard and wizard probably should have lost a bit, the warlock and sorcerer stayed roughly where they were or gained a small bit around the edges. Martials like the rogue needed to gain a lot of ground.
IMO: the only class change I've felt strongly about, and wouldn't ever want to play, is the new Bard (as written). Reading what they had done to their spell selection instantly turned me off from the class. I like the suggested change about allowing 2 schools of Primal spells in (along with Aid). I agree that the Warlock is radically different, but IMO it's almost entirely an improvement, while the Bard went from an interesting JOAT to ... I don't know, nothing I really want to play.
So, right now, we have a half-caster Divine class (Paladin), a half-caster Primal class (Ranger), and a half-caster Arcane class (Warlock). The Warlock is very different from the other two in that they are NOT "half caster, half martial", but I'm ok with that. I don't think we truly need a half-Arcane/half-Martial class, as long as we end up with an EK, and the AT, I think partial-Arcane casters are covered well enough that I'm not worried about it.
But I do kind of like the idea of a half-caster any-list class. (Weren't Bards half-casters in 3e? or was that more 2e-ish?). Double Down on "Jack of all Trades, Master of None". Get rid of "Songs of Restoration", and "Magical Secrets". Replace them with the ability to pick spells from all 3 of the big lists (Arcane, Divine, Primal). But, they're only half-casters, so they are "Master of None" compared to Clerics, Druids, and Wizards. I think it would really strongly make them the "little bit of everything" highly flexible class.
(Keeping Magical Secrets only makes sense if they're able to use it to learn restricted spells ... which I am not sure is a good idea)
I'm not sure I agree with the premise that bards lost a lot, personally I think they either landed in the same place or gained a bit of ground overall. The warlock I think lost some ground but I can see the argument that they landed in roughly the same spot, the wizard gained a bit, the sorcerer gained a decent amount.
Realistically the bard and wizard probably should have lost a bit, the warlock and sorcerer stayed roughly where they were or gained a small bit around the edges. Martials like the rogue needed to gain a lot of ground.
IMO: the only class change I've felt strongly about, and wouldn't ever want to play, is the new Bard (as written). Reading what they had done to their spell selection instantly turned me off from the class. I like the suggested change about allowing 2 schools of Primal spells in (along with Aid). I agree that the Warlock is radically different, but IMO it's almost entirely an improvement, while the Bard went from an interesting JOAT to ... I don't know, nothing I really want to play.
I'd never play the warlock as written. Though I am just talking about pure mechanical balance. The bard gained some, lost some and is roughly in the same spot mechanically. Thematically they lost more than a bit, the one dnd warlock is a waste of ink as written currently.
But the lack of design flexibility lost in changing from class lists to the arcane shared list irked me to no end and left that icky feeling about the class. After working with it a bit I made these changes:
Give bards a choice of which spell list from which they prepare spells at 1st level. Consider those spells arcane spells cast by the bard. This gives that versatility of build styles for many more archetypes that was missing while still limiting bard spells as intended.
Bards have access to the divination and enchantment schools plus two other schools of their choice other than evocation. This limits access to the spell list as intended and still allows for something like protection spells or breaking enchantments that are iconic some bard archetypes.
Remove Songs of Rest and use the current Song of Rest. This removes the forced healer spells while bards who want to heal can access those spells via spell list and school selection.
I found this felt much more like a 5e bard shifted into the playtest paradigm.
If you're going to go with this kind of change, why limit them to a single list? I think it makes more sense for Bards to have access to all list spells, but be limited by spell schools, I could probably get onboard with those schools being selectable like you suggest, with Magical Secrets to allow a limited number of free picks over time.
I agree Songs of Rest is a bit paltry; the Bards I love most aren't healers (or at most they have healing word and that's it), it's the control and illusion Bards who ruin everyone's day, or the left of field mad Bard builds nobody excepts, like the College of Swords Tortle who goes from playing a jaunty tune on his bagpipes then runs in dual wielding axes while enlarged with mirror image active (and that's only because he can't turn into a tyrannosaurus rex yet).
"Build your own list" would be a very cool way to handle Bards, and I don't really see why it should be limited to one list if it's going to be limited schools of magic, as otherwise you're only ever getting a fraction of one list, plus a few Magical Secrets.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
But I do kind of like the idea of a half-caster any-list class. (Weren't Bards half-casters in 3e? or was that more 2e-ish?). Double Down on "Jack of all Trades, Master of None". Get rid of "Songs of Restoration", and "Magical Secrets". Replace them with the ability to pick spells from all 3 of the big lists (Arcane, Divine, Primal). But, they're only half-casters, so they are "Master of None" compared to Clerics, Druids, and Wizards. I think it would really strongly make them the "little bit of everything" highly flexible class.
I figured out what I would replace Magical Secrets with (or, at least, I would want to play test this idea to see if it works very well).
Pick a subclass from another class (can't be a Bard subclass). At 11th level, you get the other subclass's 3rd Level subclass feature. At 15th level, you get that other subclass's 6th Level subclass feature. Again: "Jack of All Trades, Master of None."
Not sure what I would replace the 2nd level "Songs of Restoration" with, though. A Bonus Feat? Maybe limit it to 1st level Feats.
The point of selecting a single list is to make bards customized by style. In 5e we select spells based on the type of bard we want (or at least I do). Access to the three spell lists doesn't feel like I'm customizing the character whereas the spell list becomes a meaningful choice in the flavor of the bard.
It's a fraction of one list (arcane) now in the UA with less flexibility in school choices. My proposal allows for a different choice in that fraction of one list.
I'm not particularly adverse to spell school selection from more lists. I'm not adverse to trying something more like the UA warlock and going half caster with all lists at that slower progression limited by some schools with magical secrets in place of mystic arcanum either provided there is a good selection of other abilities from which to choose for additional abilities.
What I know i really don't like is "Here, now you're just using a subset of wizard spells with some rogue-lite skill benefits and the occasional inspiration bonus; but you're get to always be a weak healer too. Someday you'll have the variety you used to have at 1st level."
So, right now, we have a half-caster Divine class (Paladin), a half-caster Primal class (Ranger), and a half-caster Arcane class (Warlock). The Warlock is very different from the other two in that they are NOT "half caster, half martial", but I'm ok with that. I don't think we truly need a half-Arcane/half-Martial class, as long as we end up with an EK, and the AT, I think partial-Arcane casters are covered well enough that I'm not worried about it.
But I do kind of like the idea of a half-caster any-list class. (Weren't Bards half-casters in 3e? or was that more 2e-ish?). Double Down on "Jack of all Trades, Master of None". Get rid of "Songs of Restoration", and "Magical Secrets". Replace them with the ability to pick spells from all 3 of the big lists (Arcane, Divine, Primal). But, they're only half-casters, so they are "Master of None" compared to Clerics, Druids, and Wizards. I think it would really strongly make them the "little bit of everything" highly flexible class.
(Keeping Magical Secrets only makes sense if they're able to use it to learn restricted spells ... which I am not sure is a good idea)
Bards were never "half-casters". That's not even a game term; it's a construct of discussion based entirely on spell progression without acknowledging other factors.
In previous editions bards cast spells at their class level like clerics, druids, wizards, and sorcerers. Rangers and Paladins cast spells lower than their class levels. Based on caster level instead, bards would be "full casters".
In 2e, maximum spell level was based on caster stat and different classes had different maximum levels in addition to that. Only mages cast spells up to a 9th level spell list and only with much more INT than within standard deviation of the rolling method. All bards could cast 6th-level spells while clerics and druids cast 5th-level to 7th-level spells based on ability score. Based on max spell level we would either reclassify clerics and druids as "half-casters" or acknowledge bards as "full casters".
4e gave bards arcane spells at the same progression as everyone else.
3.x used the combined method of a spell table and a lot of magical songs as a secondary resource. That spell list also gave "bard iconic spells" at the same or similar level to "full casters" by placing the spells at different spell levels for different classes. The combination of the two magical sources was also equivalent to "full casters" by taking that secondary resource into consideration.
Calling bards "half-casters" is either cherry-picking a single element and ignoring other relevant elements, or being disingenuous, because full caster level, similar spell levels or spells at similar levels (depending on edition), and similar amount of magic by combined magical resources.
The point of selecting a single list is to make bards customized by style.
Sure, but you're already doing that by choosing schools of magic; so long as you can't choose from too many schools of magic then you're still creating your own customised "Bard" list, but limited by schools of magic rather than Arcane/Divine/Primal.
If the maximum is four schools of magic then while you will have access to (roughly) half of all spells, you still don't have access to the other half (except as Magical Secrets) so you've still got a limited spell list roughly in line with the size of the core spell lists, limited further by the number of spells you can actually prepare. You could limit it to three schools of magic to be sure they can't end up with more (as some schools are over-represented), but I'm not sure that's really needed if evocation isn't allowed.
I think it's the easier way to do it, otherwise players need to deal with the fact that some lists have fewer spells from some schools of magic, which means in practice the choice of which schools to take will feel redundant because each list has its best schools to pick (most spells to choose from or strongest spells) and its worst (poorly represented by that list), so it feels less like a choice in the end.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
So, right now, we have a half-caster Divine class (Paladin), a half-caster Primal class (Ranger), and a half-caster Arcane class (Warlock). The Warlock is very different from the other two in that they are NOT "half caster, half martial", but I'm ok with that. I don't think we truly need a half-Arcane/half-Martial class, as long as we end up with an EK, and the AT, I think partial-Arcane casters are covered well enough that I'm not worried about it.
But I do kind of like the idea of a half-caster any-list class. (Weren't Bards half-casters in 3e? or was that more 2e-ish?). Double Down on "Jack of all Trades, Master of None". Get rid of "Songs of Restoration", and "Magical Secrets". Replace them with the ability to pick spells from all 3 of the big lists (Arcane, Divine, Primal). But, they're only half-casters, so they are "Master of None" compared to Clerics, Druids, and Wizards. I think it would really strongly make them the "little bit of everything" highly flexible class.
(Keeping Magical Secrets only makes sense if they're able to use it to learn restricted spells ... which I am not sure is a good idea)
This is a fun idea, but the Bard would need to get Medium Armour and Extra Attack to make up for the loss of spell power, alternatively unlimited BI might make up for them being a 1/2 caster?
So, right now, we have a half-caster Divine class (Paladin), a half-caster Primal class (Ranger), and a half-caster Arcane class (Warlock). The Warlock is very different from the other two in that they are NOT "half caster, half martial", but I'm ok with that. I don't think we truly need a half-Arcane/half-Martial class, as long as we end up with an EK, and the AT, I think partial-Arcane casters are covered well enough that I'm not worried about it.
But I do kind of like the idea of a half-caster any-list class. (Weren't Bards half-casters in 3e? or was that more 2e-ish?). Double Down on "Jack of all Trades, Master of None". Get rid of "Songs of Restoration", and "Magical Secrets". Replace them with the ability to pick spells from all 3 of the big lists (Arcane, Divine, Primal). But, they're only half-casters, so they are "Master of None" compared to Clerics, Druids, and Wizards. I think it would really strongly make them the "little bit of everything" highly flexible class.
(Keeping Magical Secrets only makes sense if they're able to use it to learn restricted spells ... which I am not sure is a good idea)
This is a fun idea, but the Bard would need to get Medium Armour and Extra Attack to make up for the loss of spell power, alternatively unlimited BI might make up for them being a 1/2 caster?
Not saying this is what I want but it is a kind of back to roots style bard. In 1e they were multi-dual classes starting as a fighter through 5-8th level, then thieves to at least one level higher than fighter, then druid at which point they pick up the bard class. So a half caster with some rogue(expert) stuff, influence bard stuff and combat skills would fit the OG mold. Arcane instead of primal or maybe a choice or access to all but limited schools etc and it might work. Not sure it would work for the players, it would likely be as upsetting to many bard fans as the warlock is to some warlock fans. But on a mechanical level it could work out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That's not a reason to not support a trope in when making changes to a system. That's appealing to tradition.
First, i would say tradition, is a important part of dnd and it should at least be a guideline for progress. its not an absolute but stray to far and it will become something new rather than a continual/progression of the system. And there are some traditional Ravenloft stories about necromancy and bard types(#3 Dance of the Dead) . Basically trying to control narratives via mechanics probably isn't good(see druids and metal armor). rather character narratives should be a built on top of mechanics (one druids don't have medium armor so they never wear it) . The difference is slight but one is a control factor while the other is just not having a feature.
in particular, right now even basic tropes and archetypes are disappearing from one/revised/light dnd. Some really iconic bard spells are just gone from the list (spells that bard builds were focused around). just not wanting to spend your skills on healing is harder as it becomes the optimal use case.
now, we don't know what the other 3 subclasses will look like and some losses can be fixed via the new magical secrets design but you are still locking in such choices that you might not have had to in the past.
but this phenomena is not limited to bards. rogues, rangers, druids and clerics outlier archetypes feel squeezed towards a generic class narrative rather than as a build starting point. this happens via features changes and new rules changes.
I am even less impressed with the UA bards now that the sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards have been shown. Particularly wizards. The ability to create rituals out of non-ritual spells and remove the concentration tag from concentration spells seems a lot better than more bardic inspiration dice and expertise in a couple more skills at similar levels.
Spell mastery comes even earlier now.
I am getting more on board with just letting bards select abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, and transmutation from any spell list, and adding a school of choice later as part of the magical secrets line up of abilities.
Wizards do not remove concentration from a spell they just make it where they cant break concentration due to damage.
Also only spells with a minimum of 10 minute cast can become ritual spells.
1) I mean, what you're saying is that the Mage classes are better at magic than the non-mage expert class. Sounds like it's working as intended to me.
2) UA Bards have a pretty big advantage over sorcerers and warlocks in that they can swap out their spells every day instead of on level-up. And unlike Wizards, they're not stuck with what's in their books currently - they have the entire Arcane list to draw from, give or take some school restrictions. That means every arcane divination, illusion, enchantment and transmutation spell they ever print will be available to bards as currently written, the moment the DM allows that book, and they can grab even more via Magical Secrets. That's nothing to sneeze at.
It's a good point that wizards are still concentrating, but breaking concentration is suddenly massively harder on any spell the wizard really wants to prevent losing, and that's extremely useful.
And, for example, turning contingency into a ritual has synergy with arcane recovery. That creates the opportunity for frequent use of the contingency spell. There are several spells with casting times of 10 minutes or more that benefit from adding the ritual tag. This goes beyond just those advantages, however. Wizards spend money to have better versions of most spells available to bards, sorcerers, and warlocks by using modify spell and create spell. Cash for significant class benefits like that isn't a good system.
By the time spell mastery comes along there are going to be several modified 1st and 2nd-level spells from which to choose.
Arcane traditions further modify those modified spells. After those modifications arcane recovery, memorize spell, ritual caster, spell mastery, and signature spell give easy access to swapping out or casting a lot of spells that have been modified in those ways. Conceptually and thematically it looks great for wizards. Mechanically it looks like a can of worms that opens up too much compared to other arcane spell casters, particularly the bard that was rather gutted of it's design space as a spell caster in this series of UA's.
At least the note on removing vicious mockery and dissonant whispers from the list show there are some changes looking at another bard coming along. Taking away the diverse spell list is a huge issue with the bard class identity.
1) That just sounds condescending and looks more like you're interested less in issues or feedback with the classes and more in some weird status quo opinion about the classes you have. Please don't try to put words in my mouth. What I'm saying is bards had a lot taken away and other classes had a lot added. We're getting back to bards not being good enough at almost everything because of the boosts being given to other classes. A limited spell selection until magical secrets, bardic inspiration dice being delayed, and expertise isn't very comparable to any other classes.
Your take doesn't actually follow consistency given that warlocks add half their class level to multi-classing and bards add their full class level. Warlocks get their potential from invocations, not the class category.
2) I called out "particularly wizards" and this point references warlocks and sorcerers. That's deflection. However; that advantage is minor. Most players don't actually change their spell list much with preparation IME, and only having access to half the spell schools gives wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks access to a heck of a lot of spells not available to bards. The spells known number and actual options have been significantly improved for sorcerers and warlocks opening up access to a lot of wizard spells they didn't have before. Both could just focus on the same schools as bard, have similar hit points but better armor, and still add an important combat aspect like damage.
These other classes gained benefits. Bards lost the diverse spell list from 1st level and magical secrets at 11th level doesn't replace that. A feature (spell diversity) that closely associated with the class should be available at 1st level like it is in 5e. You wanting wizards to be the best spell caster has nothing to do with that. It's a loss, not a gain.
Most classes kept access to their full spell list based on the spell list given, and typically added more. Bards lost more than they gained.
Bards lost a lot of bonus healing changing song of rest to songs of restoration and giving spells to bards that bards previously had available if the player wanted them isn't giving much in return either. It's a loss, not a gain.
Changing bardic inspiration uses to proficiency bonus instead of CHA bonus slowed down access to number of uses. Moving font of inspiration to a higher level slowed down access to number of uses. It's a loss, not a gain.
In the case of the wizard, that class gained a lot.
I'm not sure I agree with the premise that bards lost a lot, personally I think they either landed in the same place or gained a bit of ground overall. The warlock I think lost some ground but I can see the argument that they landed in roughly the same spot, the wizard gained a bit, the sorcerer gained a decent amount.
Realistically the bard and wizard probably should have lost a bit, the warlock and sorcerer stayed roughly where they were or gained a small bit around the edges. Martials like the rogue needed to gain a lot of ground.
How is losing the access to shared spells with the cleric and druid list, greatly slowing down access to bardic inspiration, nerfing jack-of-all-trades, and giving up bonus healing from song of rest not losing a lot?
Bards don't have the the option to heal at 1st level at all anymore. At 2nd level they no longer have the option of not learning spells force on the class by songs or restoration, but are forced to use spell slots to use that healing instead of having bonus healing. Bard healing took a big hit and the variety of spells available is iconic to the class, including iconic bard spells.
Jack-of-all-trades now only applies to untrained skill ability checks and doesn't come into play until 3 levels later. Bardic inspiration is a key feature of the class and it can barely be used between changing it from CHA bonus to proficiency bonus and pushing back font of inspiration to 7th level. Countercharm is no longer a thing so now bards need to spend more bardic inspiration the class would not have. Meanwhile, the musician feat available at 1st level grants inspiration to multiple people rechargeable on a short rest. It takes a bard 9 levels before the bonus and number of targets becomes comparable to that feat, making it feal like a feat tax for bards to be bards.
They have less weapon access and light armor is still barely worth anything in AC.
The class lost the access to spell variety it had at 1st level and it's no longer available until 11th level, at which point I think it is better; but everything that made a bard useful or fun doesn't exist until high levels now. The UA bard plays like a wizard without all the spells and benefits in exchange for inspiration a couple of times a day, expertise, and very limited healing. It kind feels a lot more like a jack-of-no-trades than anything else.
Add in Aid, Harm, and Resurrection, and I think that would be kind of perfect. Though, as you point out, Harm and Resurrection could be done via Magical Secrets. Aid could as well, but Aid should be available to them at 3rd level, IMO.
IMO: the only class change I've felt strongly about, and wouldn't ever want to play, is the new Bard (as written). Reading what they had done to their spell selection instantly turned me off from the class. I like the suggested change about allowing 2 schools of Primal spells in (along with Aid). I agree that the Warlock is radically different, but IMO it's almost entirely an improvement, while the Bard went from an interesting JOAT to ... I don't know, nothing I really want to play.
So, right now, we have a half-caster Divine class (Paladin), a half-caster Primal class (Ranger), and a half-caster Arcane class (Warlock). The Warlock is very different from the other two in that they are NOT "half caster, half martial", but I'm ok with that. I don't think we truly need a half-Arcane/half-Martial class, as long as we end up with an EK, and the AT, I think partial-Arcane casters are covered well enough that I'm not worried about it.
But I do kind of like the idea of a half-caster any-list class. (Weren't Bards half-casters in 3e? or was that more 2e-ish?). Double Down on "Jack of all Trades, Master of None". Get rid of "Songs of Restoration", and "Magical Secrets". Replace them with the ability to pick spells from all 3 of the big lists (Arcane, Divine, Primal). But, they're only half-casters, so they are "Master of None" compared to Clerics, Druids, and Wizards. I think it would really strongly make them the "little bit of everything" highly flexible class.
(Keeping Magical Secrets only makes sense if they're able to use it to learn restricted spells ... which I am not sure is a good idea)
I'd never play the warlock as written. Though I am just talking about pure mechanical balance. The bard gained some, lost some and is roughly in the same spot mechanically. Thematically they lost more than a bit, the one dnd warlock is a waste of ink as written currently.
If you're going to go with this kind of change, why limit them to a single list? I think it makes more sense for Bards to have access to all list spells, but be limited by spell schools, I could probably get onboard with those schools being selectable like you suggest, with Magical Secrets to allow a limited number of free picks over time.
I agree Songs of Rest is a bit paltry; the Bards I love most aren't healers (or at most they have healing word and that's it), it's the control and illusion Bards who ruin everyone's day, or the left of field mad Bard builds nobody excepts, like the College of Swords Tortle who goes from playing a jaunty tune on his bagpipes then runs in dual wielding axes while enlarged with mirror image active (and that's only because he can't turn into a tyrannosaurus rex yet).
"Build your own list" would be a very cool way to handle Bards, and I don't really see why it should be limited to one list if it's going to be limited schools of magic, as otherwise you're only ever getting a fraction of one list, plus a few Magical Secrets.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I figured out what I would replace Magical Secrets with (or, at least, I would want to play test this idea to see if it works very well).
Pick a subclass from another class (can't be a Bard subclass). At 11th level, you get the other subclass's 3rd Level subclass feature. At 15th level, you get that other subclass's 6th Level subclass feature. Again: "Jack of All Trades, Master of None."
Not sure what I would replace the 2nd level "Songs of Restoration" with, though. A Bonus Feat? Maybe limit it to 1st level Feats.
The point of selecting a single list is to make bards customized by style. In 5e we select spells based on the type of bard we want (or at least I do). Access to the three spell lists doesn't feel like I'm customizing the character whereas the spell list becomes a meaningful choice in the flavor of the bard.
It's a fraction of one list (arcane) now in the UA with less flexibility in school choices. My proposal allows for a different choice in that fraction of one list.
I'm not particularly adverse to spell school selection from more lists. I'm not adverse to trying something more like the UA warlock and going half caster with all lists at that slower progression limited by some schools with magical secrets in place of mystic arcanum either provided there is a good selection of other abilities from which to choose for additional abilities.
What I know i really don't like is "Here, now you're just using a subset of wizard spells with some rogue-lite skill benefits and the occasional inspiration bonus; but you're get to always be a weak healer too. Someday you'll have the variety you used to have at 1st level."
Bards were never "half-casters". That's not even a game term; it's a construct of discussion based entirely on spell progression without acknowledging other factors.
In previous editions bards cast spells at their class level like clerics, druids, wizards, and sorcerers. Rangers and Paladins cast spells lower than their class levels. Based on caster level instead, bards would be "full casters".
In 2e, maximum spell level was based on caster stat and different classes had different maximum levels in addition to that. Only mages cast spells up to a 9th level spell list and only with much more INT than within standard deviation of the rolling method. All bards could cast 6th-level spells while clerics and druids cast 5th-level to 7th-level spells based on ability score. Based on max spell level we would either reclassify clerics and druids as "half-casters" or acknowledge bards as "full casters".
4e gave bards arcane spells at the same progression as everyone else.
3.x used the combined method of a spell table and a lot of magical songs as a secondary resource. That spell list also gave "bard iconic spells" at the same or similar level to "full casters" by placing the spells at different spell levels for different classes. The combination of the two magical sources was also equivalent to "full casters" by taking that secondary resource into consideration.
Calling bards "half-casters" is either cherry-picking a single element and ignoring other relevant elements, or being disingenuous, because full caster level, similar spell levels or spells at similar levels (depending on edition), and similar amount of magic by combined magical resources.
Sure, but you're already doing that by choosing schools of magic; so long as you can't choose from too many schools of magic then you're still creating your own customised "Bard" list, but limited by schools of magic rather than Arcane/Divine/Primal.
If the maximum is four schools of magic then while you will have access to (roughly) half of all spells, you still don't have access to the other half (except as Magical Secrets) so you've still got a limited spell list roughly in line with the size of the core spell lists, limited further by the number of spells you can actually prepare. You could limit it to three schools of magic to be sure they can't end up with more (as some schools are over-represented), but I'm not sure that's really needed if evocation isn't allowed.
I think it's the easier way to do it, otherwise players need to deal with the fact that some lists have fewer spells from some schools of magic, which means in practice the choice of which schools to take will feel redundant because each list has its best schools to pick (most spells to choose from or strongest spells) and its worst (poorly represented by that list), so it feels less like a choice in the end.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
This is a fun idea, but the Bard would need to get Medium Armour and Extra Attack to make up for the loss of spell power, alternatively unlimited BI might make up for them being a 1/2 caster?
Not saying this is what I want but it is a kind of back to roots style bard. In 1e they were multi-dual classes starting as a fighter through 5-8th level, then thieves to at least one level higher than fighter, then druid at which point they pick up the bard class. So a half caster with some rogue(expert) stuff, influence bard stuff and combat skills would fit the OG mold. Arcane instead of primal or maybe a choice or access to all but limited schools etc and it might work. Not sure it would work for the players, it would likely be as upsetting to many bard fans as the warlock is to some warlock fans. But on a mechanical level it could work out.