The new Dance Bard is very interesting, probably a smidge too powerful(but that's often the case with the first UA revision of a new subclass). I do worry that it's intruding on the Monk's territory a bit, similar to how the new Four Elements Monk gets awfully close to the Ascendant Dragon Monk in Fizban's. But similar to the Sea Druid, it fills a gap in the lore around the class, and it'll be interesting to see how it plays.
The new Dance Bard is very interesting, probably a smidge too powerful(but that's often the case with the first UA revision of a new subclass). I do worry that it's intruding on the Monk's territory a bit, similar to how the new Four Elements Monk gets awfully close to the Ascendant Dragon Monk in Fizban's. But similar to the Sea Druid, it fills a gap in the lore around the class, and it'll be interesting to see how it plays.
I think niche protection is over rated. Monks shouldn't be the only class who uses unarmed any more than rogues should be the only class that is sneaky. Rogues will in the end likely be better at it since they can do it as a bonus action, but monks will still be better at the punching and stuff thanks to ki, flurry of blows etc. In fact I want more unarmed combat options for other classes. Like a rogue should be able to use sneak attack with unarmed strikes for a action movie neck snap, or austin powers judo chop though less parodyish usually. But I think the rogues weapons should be opened up a lot for sneak attack, not getting to sap someone with a club feels like a big miss. But that's another topic.
Yeah, for one, the Dance Bard doesn’t get much in the way of unarmed combat specials (FoB, PD, Extra Attack, Stunning Strike, etc.). I think that makes the Dance Bard not truly as good at unarmed combat as a Monk.
And for me, a niche isn’t a binary, or doesn’t need to be one. As long as the Monk is better at it than anyone else, that’s as much niche protection as they need. Completely blocking anyone else from being good at all in that niche isn’t necessary.
My problem with Dance Bard is it doesn't really feel like a dance battler; it feels like a caster that's good at dodging AoE and can punch something decently hard once. Valor and Swords have far more synergy between their martial and caster "halves."
Agreed. All the other battler bards at least got a 2nd attack. They got increased defense and yeah cool they can punch hard, but it take a while to out pace weapon damage anyways. So it feels more like a ribbon feature than something you use in a fight. If giving them a reliable 2nd attack would step on the monks toes too much that says more about how bad the monk is than how good the dance bard is.
can't dance bard just... be? they already kick, cast, skill monkey, and 'face.' three more than monk, but the comments come back wondering why dancers don't kick more.
when you can already move with haste, fly through the sky, deflect bullets, blow a cone of cold air, see through walls... at what point are the other justice league members just there to workshop your next cool power?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
Anyone else find it odd a Bard can be 60 feet away and do a little Shimi and this will allow an ally 60' away from the bard to move and allow the bard to move 15 feet farther away from his ally with Inspiring Movement: The ally does not even have to be able to see or hear the bard.
I said it before, and I say it again. Inspiring Movement: should be like Battle master's BAIT AND SWITCH maneuver for a more "May I cut in?" feel. Anyone else feel the same.
Anyone else find it odd a Bard can be 60 feet away and do a little Shimi and this will allow an ally 60' away from the bard to move and allow the bard to move 15 feet farther away from his ally with Inspiring Movement: The ally does not even have to be able to see or hear the bard.
Kind of like Timon singing and dancing a jig to distract Scar's hyenas?
Anyone else find it odd a Bard can be 60 feet away and do a little Shimi and this will allow an ally 60' away from the bard to move and allow the bard to move 15 feet farther away from his ally with Inspiring Movement: The ally does not even have to be able to see or hear the bard.
Kind of like Timon singing and dancing a jig to distract Scar's hyenas?
As written the ability will also work if Bard is hidden/invisible.
As I said. this ability should be more like Bait and Switch. As a reaction the bard can move to a target within his movement range. (This movement will not trigger Opportunity attacks.) He swaps places with the triggering target (May I cut in?) (This movement does not trigger opportunity attacks) The BI die roll affected movement distance or AC (Maybe AC for bard and Distance for target ally/) IF I DM? that will be how I play it - Flavor wise more like a 'dance."
Anyone else find it odd a Bard can be 60 feet away and do a little Shimi and this will allow an ally 60' away from the bard to move and allow the bard to move 15 feet farther away from his ally with Inspiring Movement: The ally does not even have to be able to see or hear the bard.
Kind of like Timon singing and dancing a jig to distract Scar's hyenas?
As written the ability will also work if Bard is hidden/invisible.
That would be what I find odd about it (that you can do it while hidden/invisible, which seems anathema to most of a Bard's flavor), but not the rest of it
Yeah, like people are saying... It looks like a joke. It's a Monk but with a 1:1 spell slot table
Are you sure? I choose to believe that Monks are more than just Unarmed Damage progression. Just like I feel Druids are more than Wild Shape, and Rangers are more than Favoured Enemy. Johnkzin said it really well, too, a bit further up:
As long as the Monk is better at it than anyone else, that’s as much niche protection as they need. Completely blocking anyone else from being good at all in that niche isn’t necessary.
When I think about unarmed combat, I picture the monk. That we can now have other classes showing off their knuckles and heels doesn't really infringe on that image any more than someone picking up Thieves' Tools proficiency infringe on the Rogue. More options are better! And more options lets us find that special sweet spot for our next character concept. I dunno about you all, but I'd welcome another two or three archetypes that involve unarmed roughousin'. Like, a barbarian [Indiscriminate Grappler]! Or an [Arcane Hand] sorcerer that combines touch spells with haymaker swings in the most anime way possible!
Oh, but to dream... Someone wake me up when that book releases, okay? :)
Yeah, like people are saying... It looks like a joke. It's a Monk but with a 1:1 spell slot table
Are you sure? I choose to believe that Monks are more than just Unarmed Damage progression. Just like I feel Druids are more than Wild Shape, and Rangers are more than Favoured Enemy. Johnkzin said it really well, too, a bit further up:
As long as the Monk is better at it than anyone else, that’s as much niche protection as they need. Completely blocking anyone else from being good at all in that niche isn’t necessary.
Or an [Arcane Hand] sorcerer that combines touch spells with haymaker swings in the most anime way possible!
I was calling that subclass "Physical Sorcery" (using the new name scheme in playtest 5 or 6), as a nod to the Shadowrun "Physical Adept". But I decided to drop it from my latest incarnation of things... instead:
making "Fighting Style: Unarmed" be available to everyone and not just certain classes (this also helps the Barbarian be a raging fist)
adapting the Sword Bard to include Unarmed Fighting
Give that fighting style to the Dance Bard
having a 1/3 caster subclass for the Monk (Warrior of Mysticism) (I also give Monk's a choice about which stat is their mystical attribute: it doesn't have to be Wisdom)
So, a Sorcerer could easily devote some of their levels to Bard (stat synergy) and be a "Dance Bard" or "Sword Bard" (who picks Unarmed as their Fighting Style, and uses Bardic Flourishes with their Unarmed Strikes). Or they could multiclass as a "Warrior of Mysticism" Monk.
That's my current thought about how to do a Physical Adept in OneD&D. But I'm not against there also being a Monk-ish subclass for the Sorcerer. I think they're the only caster class that doesn't have a part-martial subclass somewhere in their 5e or OneD&D official subclasses.
Yeah, like people are saying... It looks like a joke. It's a Monk but with a 1:1 spell slot table
That’s definitely something I want to see fixed about the Bard: I think they should get all 3 of the spell lists from 1st level or 2nd level, but be half-casters.
Making them half-casters with across-the-board access would definitely lean into the dabbler angle. I'm definitely not opposed to the idea. I feel the game has room for more half-caster options!
I'd also love if bards would explore their performances a bit more outside of archetypes, giving them further utility and support to fully niche them as the iconic buff/control class. Maybe a small choice of performances so each bard could assemble its own repertoir?
For instance, how about a bardic perfomance - let's call it "Attention Grabber" until something wittier comes along - that grants the invisible condition to all allies since everyone else is busy staring at the bard. Basically a stronger version of the Enthrall spell.
A "Siren Song" performance that forces selected creatures to use their movement to approach the bard. Throw in a more dire upgrade at later levels where opponents need to do a Wisdom save or walk into hazardous locations or off of heights to reach the bard.
Maybe a "Victory Cheer" offering a small group-wide heal or temporary HP when reducing an opponent to 0 HP?
Bringing back Song of Rest would also be a good idea if they were to go the half-caster route.
Bard would actually be a good candidate for the half caster model WotC were trying with the UA Warlock. A half caster with broad access to different spells, with Vancian casting of single higher level spells once per long rest.
However it looks like they're going back to individual spell lists, which makes the UA Bard redundant anyway.
The issue with yanking them down to half caster at this point is defining the other half. As things stand, all three half caster classes in 5e are dedicated martials. They experimented with “half caster and a grab bag of bells and whistles” with the Warlock UA, and it didn’t fly in the survey, in part because people didn’t think the grab bag constituted a sufficient second half. So what exactly are they going to do with the Bard? It’s clearly not an archetype that will fit well into being a class that’s primarily attacking with weapons, and from what I’ve seen I don’t have much confidence that they can create an effective grab bag of options that can stand in for full casting. For better or worse, that is the metric most people will compare changes against, and short of creating what would amount to an abridged second spell system, I’m not sure how else one would deliver that.
The issue with yanking them down to half caster at this point is defining the other half.
"Jack of all trades, master of none." They're a little bit of everything. For one, none of the other half-casters have access to every spell list (and in 5e, their list was sort of a hybrid of other lists). For two, the Bard already has the "jack of all trades" feature that gets them skills across the board. Their subclasses already do a little bit of finding a niche within their adaptable generalist role. Some fighting ability (more than the full casters before their subclasses are factored in). Some spell ability (in all categories). Some skill ability.
Giving them a full caster progression is kind of the opposite of "master of none". Especially when you combine it with eventually getting all 3 spell lists.
The issue with yanking them down to half caster at this point is defining the other half.
"Jack of all trades, master of none." They're a little bit of everything. For one, none of the other half-casters have access to every spell list (and in 5e, their list was sort of a hybrid of other lists). For two, the Bard already has the "jack of all trades" feature that gets them skills across the board. Their subclasses already do a little bit of finding a niche within their adaptable generalist role. Some fighting ability (more than the full casters before their subclasses are factored in). Some spell ability (in all categories). Some skill ability.
Giving them a full caster progression is kind of the opposite of "master of none". Especially when you combine it with eventually getting all 3 spell lists.
It’s a pithy quote, but as a lot of people who’ve tried going wide via multiclassing will tell you, in play that typically just means that you don’t get many opportunities to shine because anything you can do, someone else can do better. Once again, that was one of the flaws of the half caster Warlock model; Wizards and Sorcerers would be objectively superior casters, and nothing in the Invocation or Pact Boon kit was a truly breakout feature either. A PC needs some form of mastery to meaningfully impact their table.
The issue with yanking them down to half caster at this point is defining the other half.
"Jack of all trades, master of none." They're a little bit of everything. For one, none of the other half-casters have access to every spell list (and in 5e, their list was sort of a hybrid of other lists). For two, the Bard already has the "jack of all trades" feature that gets them skills across the board. Their subclasses already do a little bit of finding a niche within their adaptable generalist role. Some fighting ability (more than the full casters before their subclasses are factored in). Some spell ability (in all categories). Some skill ability.
Giving them a full caster progression is kind of the opposite of "master of none". Especially when you combine it with eventually getting all 3 spell lists.
It’s a pithy quote, but as a lot of people who’ve tried going wide via multiclassing will tell you, in play that typically just means that you don’t get many opportunities to shine because anything you can do, someone else can do better. Once again, that was one of the flaws of the half caster Warlock model; Wizards and Sorcerers would be objectively superior casters, and nothing in the Invocation or Pact Boon kit was a truly breakout feature either. A PC needs some form of mastery to meaningfully impact their table.
it seems like an odd thing to choose bard and then expect to do combat, magic, or skills better than a warrior, mage, or expert. if there's something they should master, it'd be charismatic arts: illusion and charm. and maybe necromancy too (arcane research being so akin to grave robbing) which could use a more positive image with regard to player options.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
The issue with yanking them down to half caster at this point is defining the other half.
"Jack of all trades, master of none." They're a little bit of everything. For one, none of the other half-casters have access to every spell list (and in 5e, their list was sort of a hybrid of other lists). For two, the Bard already has the "jack of all trades" feature that gets them skills across the board. Their subclasses already do a little bit of finding a niche within their adaptable generalist role. Some fighting ability (more than the full casters before their subclasses are factored in). Some spell ability (in all categories). Some skill ability.
Giving them a full caster progression is kind of the opposite of "master of none". Especially when you combine it with eventually getting all 3 spell lists.
It’s a pithy quote, but as a lot of people who’ve tried going wide via multiclassing will tell you, in play that typically just means that you don’t get many opportunities to shine because anything you can do, someone else can do better. Once again, that was one of the flaws of the half caster Warlock model; Wizards and Sorcerers would be objectively superior casters, and nothing in the Invocation or Pact Boon kit was a truly breakout feature either. A PC needs some form of mastery to meaningfully impact their table.
it seems like an odd thing to choose bard and then expect to do combat, magic, or skills better than a warrior, mage, or expert. if there's something they should master, it'd be charismatic arts: illusion and charm. and maybe necromancy too (arcane research being so akin to grave robbing) which could use a more positive image with regard to player options.
Wizards and Sorcerers get more spellcasting support and quite a few additional spells, any dedicated martial performs better than even the gish subclasses, and Rogues ultimately do better on skill profs. Bards already aren’t the pinnacle of any field, but if they cannot even do any of those well, then you’re just handicapping yourself if you play the class. That’s the flaw in making them half casters, particularly when they can be contrasted against a full casting Bard and all but inevitably be found wanting.
The issue with yanking them down to half caster at this point is defining the other half.
"Jack of all trades, master of none." They're a little bit of everything. For one, none of the other half-casters have access to every spell list (and in 5e, their list was sort of a hybrid of other lists). For two, the Bard already has the "jack of all trades" feature that gets them skills across the board. Their subclasses already do a little bit of finding a niche within their adaptable generalist role. Some fighting ability (more than the full casters before their subclasses are factored in). Some spell ability (in all categories). Some skill ability.
Giving them a full caster progression is kind of the opposite of "master of none". Especially when you combine it with eventually getting all 3 spell lists.
It’s a pithy quote, but as a lot of people who’ve tried going wide via multiclassing will tell you, in play that typically just means that you don’t get many opportunities to shine because anything you can do, someone else can do better. Once again, that was one of the flaws of the half caster Warlock model; Wizards and Sorcerers would be objectively superior casters, and nothing in the Invocation or Pact Boon kit was a truly breakout feature either. A PC needs some form of mastery to meaningfully impact their table.
it seems like an odd thing to choose bard and then expect to do combat, magic, or skills better than a warrior, mage, or expert. if there's something they should master, it'd be charismatic arts: illusion and charm. and maybe necromancy too (arcane research being so akin to grave robbing) which could use a more positive image with regard to player options.
Wizards and Sorcerers get more spellcasting support and quite a few additional spells, any dedicated martial performs better than even the gish subclasses, and Rogues ultimately do better on skill profs. Bards already aren’t the pinnacle of any field, but if they cannot even do any of those well, then you’re just handicapping yourself if you play the class. That’s the flaw in making them half casters, particularly when they can be contrasted against a full casting Bard and all but inevitably be found wanting.
this is so much like saying arts majors aren't valuable because they so rarely diagnose cancer, win sports games, or run car companies. gosh, who would want to live a sub optimal life where they never discover a planet? who would do that to themselves, handicapping their future earning potential for... what, enjoyment? chasing dreams? a sense of worth that's not based on their output?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The new Dance Bard is very interesting, probably a smidge too powerful(but that's often the case with the first UA revision of a new subclass). I do worry that it's intruding on the Monk's territory a bit, similar to how the new Four Elements Monk gets awfully close to the Ascendant Dragon Monk in Fizban's. But similar to the Sea Druid, it fills a gap in the lore around the class, and it'll be interesting to see how it plays.
I think niche protection is over rated. Monks shouldn't be the only class who uses unarmed any more than rogues should be the only class that is sneaky. Rogues will in the end likely be better at it since they can do it as a bonus action, but monks will still be better at the punching and stuff thanks to ki, flurry of blows etc. In fact I want more unarmed combat options for other classes. Like a rogue should be able to use sneak attack with unarmed strikes for a action movie neck snap, or austin powers judo chop though less parodyish usually. But I think the rogues weapons should be opened up a lot for sneak attack, not getting to sap someone with a club feels like a big miss. But that's another topic.
Yeah, for one, the Dance Bard doesn’t get much in the way of unarmed combat specials (FoB, PD, Extra Attack, Stunning Strike, etc.). I think that makes the Dance Bard not truly as good at unarmed combat as a Monk.
And for me, a niche isn’t a binary, or doesn’t need to be one. As long as the Monk is better at it than anyone else, that’s as much niche protection as they need. Completely blocking anyone else from being good at all in that niche isn’t necessary.
can't dance bard just... be? they already kick, cast, skill monkey, and 'face.' three more than monk, but the comments come back wondering why dancers don't kick more.
when you can already move with haste, fly through the sky, deflect bullets, blow a cone of cold air, see through walls... at what point are the other justice league members just there to workshop your next cool power?
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
Anyone else find it odd a Bard can be 60 feet away and do a little Shimi and this will allow an ally 60' away from the bard to move and allow the bard to move 15 feet farther away from his ally with Inspiring Movement: The ally does not even have to be able to see or hear the bard.
I said it before, and I say it again. Inspiring Movement: should be like Battle master's BAIT AND SWITCH maneuver for a more "May I cut in?" feel. Anyone else feel the same.
Kind of like Timon singing and dancing a jig to distract Scar's hyenas?
Yeah, like people are saying... It looks like a joke. It's a Monk but with a 1:1 spell slot table
As written the ability will also work if Bard is hidden/invisible.
As I said. this ability should be more like Bait and Switch. As a reaction the bard can move to a target within his movement range. (This movement will not trigger Opportunity attacks.) He swaps places with the triggering target (May I cut in?) (This movement does not trigger opportunity attacks) The BI die roll affected movement distance or AC (Maybe AC for bard and Distance for target ally/) IF I DM? that will be how I play it - Flavor wise more like a 'dance."
That would be what I find odd about it (that you can do it while hidden/invisible, which seems anathema to most of a Bard's flavor), but not the rest of it
Are you sure? I choose to believe that Monks are more than just Unarmed Damage progression. Just like I feel Druids are more than Wild Shape, and Rangers are more than Favoured Enemy. Johnkzin said it really well, too, a bit further up:
When I think about unarmed combat, I picture the monk. That we can now have other classes showing off their knuckles and heels doesn't really infringe on that image any more than someone picking up Thieves' Tools proficiency infringe on the Rogue. More options are better! And more options lets us find that special sweet spot for our next character concept. I dunno about you all, but I'd welcome another two or three archetypes that involve unarmed roughousin'. Like, a barbarian [Indiscriminate Grappler]! Or an [Arcane Hand] sorcerer that combines touch spells with haymaker swings in the most anime way possible!
Oh, but to dream... Someone wake me up when that book releases, okay? :)
I was calling that subclass "Physical Sorcery" (using the new name scheme in playtest 5 or 6), as a nod to the Shadowrun "Physical Adept". But I decided to drop it from my latest incarnation of things... instead:
So, a Sorcerer could easily devote some of their levels to Bard (stat synergy) and be a "Dance Bard" or "Sword Bard" (who picks Unarmed as their Fighting Style, and uses Bardic Flourishes with their Unarmed Strikes). Or they could multiclass as a "Warrior of Mysticism" Monk.
That's my current thought about how to do a Physical Adept in OneD&D. But I'm not against there also being a Monk-ish subclass for the Sorcerer. I think they're the only caster class that doesn't have a part-martial subclass somewhere in their 5e or OneD&D official subclasses.
That’s definitely something I want to see fixed about the Bard: I think they should get all 3 of the spell lists from 1st level or 2nd level, but be half-casters.
Making them half-casters with across-the-board access would definitely lean into the dabbler angle. I'm definitely not opposed to the idea. I feel the game has room for more half-caster options!
I'd also love if bards would explore their performances a bit more outside of archetypes, giving them further utility and support to fully niche them as the iconic buff/control class. Maybe a small choice of performances so each bard could assemble its own repertoir?
For instance, how about a bardic perfomance - let's call it "Attention Grabber" until something wittier comes along - that grants the invisible condition to all allies since everyone else is busy staring at the bard. Basically a stronger version of the Enthrall spell.
A "Siren Song" performance that forces selected creatures to use their movement to approach the bard. Throw in a more dire upgrade at later levels where opponents need to do a Wisdom save or walk into hazardous locations or off of heights to reach the bard.
Maybe a "Victory Cheer" offering a small group-wide heal or temporary HP when reducing an opponent to 0 HP?
Bringing back Song of Rest would also be a good idea if they were to go the half-caster route.
Bard would actually be a good candidate for the half caster model WotC were trying with the UA Warlock. A half caster with broad access to different spells, with Vancian casting of single higher level spells once per long rest.
However it looks like they're going back to individual spell lists, which makes the UA Bard redundant anyway.
The issue with yanking them down to half caster at this point is defining the other half. As things stand, all three half caster classes in 5e are dedicated martials. They experimented with “half caster and a grab bag of bells and whistles” with the Warlock UA, and it didn’t fly in the survey, in part because people didn’t think the grab bag constituted a sufficient second half. So what exactly are they going to do with the Bard? It’s clearly not an archetype that will fit well into being a class that’s primarily attacking with weapons, and from what I’ve seen I don’t have much confidence that they can create an effective grab bag of options that can stand in for full casting. For better or worse, that is the metric most people will compare changes against, and short of creating what would amount to an abridged second spell system, I’m not sure how else one would deliver that.
"Jack of all trades, master of none." They're a little bit of everything. For one, none of the other half-casters have access to every spell list (and in 5e, their list was sort of a hybrid of other lists). For two, the Bard already has the "jack of all trades" feature that gets them skills across the board. Their subclasses already do a little bit of finding a niche within their adaptable generalist role. Some fighting ability (more than the full casters before their subclasses are factored in). Some spell ability (in all categories). Some skill ability.
Giving them a full caster progression is kind of the opposite of "master of none". Especially when you combine it with eventually getting all 3 spell lists.
It’s a pithy quote, but as a lot of people who’ve tried going wide via multiclassing will tell you, in play that typically just means that you don’t get many opportunities to shine because anything you can do, someone else can do better. Once again, that was one of the flaws of the half caster Warlock model; Wizards and Sorcerers would be objectively superior casters, and nothing in the Invocation or Pact Boon kit was a truly breakout feature either. A PC needs some form of mastery to meaningfully impact their table.
it seems like an odd thing to choose bard and then expect to do combat, magic, or skills better than a warrior, mage, or expert. if there's something they should master, it'd be charismatic arts: illusion and charm. and maybe necromancy too (arcane research being so akin to grave robbing) which could use a more positive image with regard to player options.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
Wizards and Sorcerers get more spellcasting support and quite a few additional spells, any dedicated martial performs better than even the gish subclasses, and Rogues ultimately do better on skill profs. Bards already aren’t the pinnacle of any field, but if they cannot even do any of those well, then you’re just handicapping yourself if you play the class. That’s the flaw in making them half casters, particularly when they can be contrasted against a full casting Bard and all but inevitably be found wanting.
this is so much like saying arts majors aren't valuable because they so rarely diagnose cancer, win sports games, or run car companies. gosh, who would want to live a sub optimal life where they never discover a planet? who would do that to themselves, handicapping their future earning potential for... what, enjoyment? chasing dreams? a sense of worth that's not based on their output?
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!