POLL: Are Bards useful?

Remove all ads!

Sure, a Bard probably isn't a 'must have' but then not much really is. Bards suit my playing style because I am too lazy to micro manage all my characters for every encounter and get bored of going through all the 'buff up' routines etc. So a Bard is brilliant because you can push the sing button then let them do their stuff. Plus, if you give them high intelligence and dexterity as well, they can do all the Rogue jobs, plus the identifying and talking. Brilliant.

 

@Falstaff: come on man, you didn't take AlexGK's commentary so seriously did you??? It was just a joke...

On topic: i never use bards in any games, i don't like them... nothing personal against them but i think they're sissies
Now guys don't take what i wrote too seriously...

 

like Harbourboy said...

imho, a Bard is sort of a jack of all trades but master of none...

he cant fight as well as the fighter (or barb)

cant cast spells as well as the sorc or wiz

cant sneak around/pick locks like the rogue

but he can do all of those things marginally well, and you can focus on one or more if you want to...

I generally do not use Bards, but I can see their usefullness... I will try to play one in the future.

a Bard isnt a must for a party, but it can fit in nicely...

using a Bard could possibly allow you to focus on other things with your other characters... give your Bard high Int and Cha, and he/she can be your party spokesperson, as well as perform some of the rogue abilities... plus cast decent spells. throw in some multiclass with rogue and sorc, and this character could be very effective...

if you have a party strong in melee, a Bard is a nice support char with their songs and buff spells... and can act as excellent missle support, imho.

the Bard might be best suited to smaller parties where he/she can serve multiple roles within the party so that the other characters can be focused into one area (melee, spells, etc)

 

I will not use any bard ever, and they are definately easily eliminated at character creation. The whole idea of some dude/dade singing and playing a flute while a battle rages on and fireballs and such are being thrown everywhere is absurd. So once again, they are not must haves by any stretch of the imagination. Utterly ridiculous to even ponder the idea.

 

I considered taking a bard for a short time, but I decided it was moderately useless. Spontaneous healing of good clerics is enough for any party's healing needs, charisma-mongers include sorcerers and paladins, sorcerers with a decent selection of spells provide better buffs for whole party than some bard's song. Thieving skills of bards are just a joke unless someone does bother pickpocketing. So, I finally took a paladin with high int for the leader and spokesman, a good old dwarven fighter pure class for the versatile tanking, a morninglord with nice stat distribution for healing, spontaneous included, and auxilliary tanking, two sorceresses for buffs and a human rogue(2)/ranger(x) for scouting, searching, lockpicking and disarming. And then it worked like a charm, almost no fun sometimes. So what would I need a pathetic bard for?

 

Because they're fun.

And that horn that summons the barbarians instantly is very useful (and funny) for a few chapters.

Bards rock.

I might make an all Bard party and see how they go.....

 

I like them. I wante to try having a bard in a party once and I was amazed at how fun they were. Not too much to dpeak of at loew levels, but as the game went on they became more and more useful. Eventually, my cleric didn't have to use much of anything for his healing - my Bard took care of it all, freeing up slots for more interesting cleric spells.

 

Plus the soundset is great!

But seriously, I play Bards. All the time. Im going through a re-run of Icewind Dale II and my party consists of Me (Half-elf Bard), a Wizard, a Ranger and a Rogue. This way, the Ranger will hold off the enemies, while the Rogue can backstab in the area's that need it while running round the battle, and the Wizard can beef them both up with spells, while frying the opposition?

Me, I can Hide, creep up at smack the odd orc over the head should I need to. I could summon critters or flame them all. I could even sing.

I fill the spaces that need me. Plus bards conversational skills are great, and you only need one Diplomat. They Rock

 

As a powergamer i dont know if you would like my opinion or not but i have played the game twice so far and this is what i think of bard.

Being a Tank
Well unless you are trying to be tought or want the game to go slowly because of melee combat or you have the patients to revive the bard all the time because he is slayen by things like duegar and aurilite rangers i dont suggest it.

On the other hand we have the pallie of helm*eg* which at level 8 after aquiring the fiendslyer feat can start to take fighter levels which means he gets cleric spell and paladin magic(special abilities like smite evil) and a plus to AC with his charisma but also he can use items like the little giant(SPOILER:+4 str only for fighters) which cn enhance his powers greatly. Also he can get that long blade specialization for the Cera Sumat wich when dueled with the golden heart of <CHARNAME> makes him pure hardcore!

A fighter here is a good option but a pallie of helm could kill one because of many reasons like extra haling and bonus AC(NOTE: only at level 12 thought).

As a spellcaster
Well well they have their uses with a strange mage and cleric mix spells an i found that bards are better casters than fighters. I woud prefer a sorceror or wizard(more wizard) and also a pallie of mystra does a grand job at higher levels as long as you have some good drow armor or drakkas furry).

Best use
A bards best use is his voice (AMAZINGLY) he can use those nasty spells not only to boost youre battle prowess but also to weaken that of the enemies and he can at higher levels give you regeneration and domination over youre enemies. At the black raven monastery i had a bard do the quests using the dominating song and it worked wonders until the two lasts chambers where the monks where a little hardcore so i used my paladin.


In conclusion
Bards do not rck or suck they are medium with a good balance between spellcraft and melee althought so far i hve prefered having a rogue/bard for certain reasons. Also a bard with ambidexterity two weapon fghting and weapon finesse can take down a fighter at higher levels.

 

You could always give him a Ranger level, and get the Two Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity feats for free, as well as better Fighting ability.

Though doing so for the sake of the feats is pure powergaming evil ( ), but for Roleplay purposes is fine. I play Ranger/Bards a lot

 

The Bard/Sorceror combo is pretty good; you'll never run out of spells again.

A good build is to take 11 levels of Bard for the all the songs and take the rest as Sorceror (effectively making a Bard 11/Sorceror X). This build won't be really effective until you start HoF but until then they make great support characters with their songs and(for high dex bards) decent crossbow skills.

Another plus is that they can use the Bardic Horn of Valhalla; a great artifact that summons 2 to 4 barbarian warriors to act as meat shields.
The barbarians have good HP and are useful even towards the end of the game.