Bard question

Remove all ads!

Can anyone quantify the effects of the normal (non-kit) bard song, and if/howmuch these effects improve as the bard advances in levels?

I assume the song does get better with levels, as one of the disadvantages to the Blade kit states is "Bard song doesn't improve." But I can't find any charts or tables that illustrate this...

 

Sorry to distract about your topic a bit, but people who play bards, what is the most fun about them? I've considered playing them, but Haer'Daelis is so horrendous an NPC, that I have been put off.

 

As a bard myself natuarally I chose to play a bard as my first PC. They are not so awful and I have given many reasons in previous posts... if you di a search for "nyladin" you shoud get these or just search for bard

 

a bard is the most useless class. It is sort of a mage, thief, fighter class, but not good enough to be either of them.

 

Haer'Dalis is pretty good. And bards are very versatile, some say this is a weakness, the rest say it's a strength. A bard is at least as good as a thief in close combat and shooting, can use elven mail and all the nice bard eq, casts spells if needed (hey, put stoneskin and mirror image on Haer'Dalis and he no longer seems that weak), can pickpocket and is a living identify scroll rack.

Oh yeah, he gains levels as quickly as a thief, which is the fastest of them all

 

Bards absolutely, without a doubt, are the weakest class in BG2.

People often defend bards saying that because they can do a lot of different things (jack-of-all-trades), they are good characters. However, the key point here is that a bard can't do all his different things simulatenously -- he can only do one thing at a time!! He has to devote himself fully into being:

A Lousy Mage: Standing in the back of the group, just as naked and vulnerable as a regular mage, except that his casting abilities are roughly equivalent to those of a mage half his level.

A Horrendous Fighter: Even priests get a better THAC0 progression that rogues. Between their bad thaco, single (*) proficiency, and 1 attack per round, a bard deals out laughable melee damage -- not much better than what a mage with a dagger in his hand can do. And don't delude yourself into believing bards, because they can wear chainmail, can take much more damage than your typical thief; they can't. Chainmail doesn't offer anywhere close to the AC or slashing/piercing bonuses that Full Plate offers, so your bard will get hit much more often than a warrior, and he doesn't have the HPs to take that kind of punishment.

A song player: The bonuses of his songs are nice, especially the skald, but you have to be realistic about it. Is your bard really pulling his own weight in the group when he's devoting all his energies just to improving his teammate's THACO and AC? Maybe in a warrior-intensive group he is, but in a normal group with only a couple of tanks, having a character who does nothing but sing a song that provides a few combat bonuses is truly a spot in your group that could more effectively be filled by just about any other class.

A thief: The bard's only saving grace IMO. Pickpockets and lore are both nice luxuries. They still don't help you kill anything, however.


Bard's can only devote himself to one of those roles at a time!!! It's almost like "pick your poison" -- do you want a weak fighter, a weak caster, or a song player -- you can't have them all at the same time!!

I think that in order for bards to be a viable class, they SHOULD be able to use all their abilities simulatenously -- wear chain, cast spells, and play their songs. Because unless they can do all of those things together, they're not helping your group much at all.

As it stands, the only reason to play a bard or choose to have one in your group is for the fun and challenge of it, because they clearly are the least powerful class in the game.

 

In P&P, bards are the greatest class to roleplay. You get to be a 'romantic' rogue, a minstrel, the funny guy everybody loves or maybe the serious poet-idealist. I've played six different bards and had the time of my life playing each one of them.
As for CRPG's and BG 2 in particular, bards can be quite strong - if your are smart enough to know how to use them, that is...
At first, when you don't have any special armor and stuff, they can be good enough fighters with the chainmail they get to wear. Later on, they can find armor that allows them to cast spells too. And you shouldn't forget their lore ability.
Bards are a must. First time I played BG2 was with my skald, imported from BG, and he was my man all the way through.

 

Yes but BG2 makes allowances for this. Melodic Chain and Elven Chain, helps the AC and can still cast spells. Haer'Dalis is Lvl 17 in my party, he was the last to join, but has already leveled up quicker than everybody. His AC is lower right now because I have Drow equipment and am in the Underdark, but before I had him down to -1 or -2. His defensive spin and offensive spin are great and have used both equally depending on the situation. I must admit I haven't used his song but three times and that's because he doesn't sit back and watch, he gets in the action. Right now the kill distribution in my party is around 220's for Nomar (my Berserker) and Korgan. 180's for Vic and Haer'Dalis. 150's to Edwin and Jan. He was the last to join and has already caught up with Vic. No he's not the best mage, thief, or fighter in my party, but he pulls his own weight. I don't see why anyone cannot create a bard that would be just as good, if not better.

 

And just to add some numbers to further illustrate how bad bards are, compare one to a multiclass Fighter/Mage. (Dualclasses are even better, actually, but let's keep it at multi for simplicity's sake).


Proficiencies:
--------------------
BARD: 1 prof. (*) per weapon
F/M: 2 prof. (**)'s per weapon
How important is this? Well, the extra (*) gives the F/M +1 to hit, +2 dmg, and an extra 1/2 attack per round. It's a major difference in offensive capabilities.

Thac0
---------------------
BARD: Lvl 23. has base THAC0 of 10
F/M: Lvl 13/13 has base THAC0 of 8

Hitpoints
---------------------
Roughly the same, though F/M will receive greater CON bonuses with CON of 17 or 18.

Spellcasting
---------------------
Roughly the same -- lvl 23 bard and lvl 13 mage cast almost the same number of spells, both peaking at 6th level spells.

Armor selection
--------------------
BARD: when he decides to suit up to fight, he can wear chainmail.
F/M: when he decides to suit up to fight, he can wear fullplate mail, use large shields, and wear helmets. (Shields and helmets he can even use while casting).

Number of attacks
-------------------
BARD: Fixed at 1 attack per round.
F/M: Recieves extra 3/2 attacks per round at fighter levels 7-12, 2 attacks per round at fighter level 13. These attacks are in addition to bonus attacks gained from (**) proficiency. So by the time the F/M reaches level 13/13, he could attack 5/2 times per round with a weapon he is specialized in.


To sum up the difference in offense, in a minutes time (10 rounds), a bard will swing his weapon 10 times. A F/M will swing his weapon 25 times. Not only is the F/M swinging more, he lands more of those attacks (better THAC0), and those attacks do more damage (specialization bonus + exceptional strength bonus). It's no contest.

What does the bard get in return? A high lore, the ability to pickpockets, or the ability to forgo spellcasting&melee entirely and just play songs. You be the judge. Are those things worth the *massive* disadvantages he gives up in all those other areas? I think it's a pretty clear NO.

 

Boogie, don't judge everything based on some lousy numbers. You know, if you were refering to playing bards in general I would be pretty angry right now(OK not that angry but still...). But, considering the fact that you're talking about a computer game, I understand your urge for *power*. Just, remember that beating the 'game' is not the only thing that matters sometimes; the way you do it is equally important.

 

Those 'lousy numbers' just show how weak the bard truly is. Don't get me wrong, I love the bard mystique and charm from a rp aspect. (I played an EQ bard for nearly 2 years).. but in BG2 they are just a horribly underpowered character.

It's great that people can play the bard and have fun with him, but when people post things like "Haer'Dalis was a great fighter and kicking butt for me," well, that's just not accurate. Bard melee in BG2 is a joke with their lousy thaco, single attack per round, and lack of weapon specialization. Your bard is truly not doing much more damage up there than a mage would (similar thaco, same number of attacks, same level of proficiency...), and that is just disappointing to me.

Between their abysmal offense, tough-as-paper defense, mediocre spellcasting ability, and lackluster-song, I've never had a BG2 bard pull his on weight in any of my groups. The only thing hes good at is carrying my loot and identifying it =)

 

Boogie - listen "Watcher - LEVEL 0", you may wish to cloud this argument with spurious logic and boring facts but my first PC was a bard and got through the game fine.

When I had Minsc, Anomen, Mazzy and greater werewolf Cernd why would I want him to tank?

And when I had Edwin why would I want anything but a backup mage?

He could stand at the back and sing his heart out giving a nice bonus to all.

Anomen and Edwin (and Cernd if need be) took care of spells, but if needed he could fling some level 6 spells at the enemy.

Ok bards are not the best class but they work well as main PC's. Standing at the back not getting hurt, with haste and some sheilds (cast be themselves) they can then don some +5 chainmail and go and tank too if need be. You wont find better pickpockets either. Also you get a nifty harp later on to dispel the 'hold' spell and the really annoying 'stun' which normal dispel magics wont do.

Oh and before I go... they can use bows too!

If I can get through this game with Cernd and Chaotic Neutral Anomen in my party how bad can bards be? Boogie take your figures elsewhere because a bard is concerned with the aesthetic world, poetry and music, he has no time for statistics which is why he fares so badly in your analysis.

 

One shouldn't forget the most important thing from a spell casting point of view for a bard. A bard gets fewer spells, but he casts them as mage of his level. So for number of missiles, damage dice, and difficulty of dispelling, that 23rd level bard is the same as a 23rd level mage, that 14th level mage is a 14th level mage. So he can throw some whopping magic missiles and fireballs. And when he is out of spells he can use a bow, or his bard's song.

And for good old Haer, those offensive and defensive spins are pretty nice.

 

Oh yes i forgot that

 

Wow... I believe some are expressing the way Bards 'ought-to-be' in BG2. I believe Boogie stated (excellently by the way) how they(Bards) actually ARE in BG2. I thought the logical analysis gave powerful testimony to the overall failings of the BG2 Bard character.

I very much love p&p AD&D Bards. I love fantasy lore/mythology Bard personas as well. But in the BG2 series -in the manual- they are a minor jack of all trades but a master of none. I will be the first to admit however that many RPG'ers out there love Bards and have dedicated far more time into learning how to play them than I. So they can tolerate their weaknesses and champion their strengths far more than I.

Nevertheless, Boogie's analytical comparison to a F/M is unshakable. Good job!

[This message has been edited by Draco Vlasavius (edited May 03, 2001).]

 

I'd like to voice my support for boogie here. He made a clear and well founded post.


Consider what you want in your party!
- Fighting skills
- Mage spells
- Priest spells
- Thief skills (Find Traps and Open Locks)
A Bard will not sufficiently fulfill any of these requirements. He will however give you a backup mage and can also boost the fighting skills with his song.

IMO the Bard is not a strong character and that was what boogie showed. You don't have to play the strongest character to have fun, but that's another question.

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Please, never use a posters Forum Status as a base for attacking his/her views!

[This message has been edited by Earl Grey (edited May 03, 2001).]

 

Just for curiosity, did you ever try a bard, boogie?

Don't just be blindly trusting numbers. Someone analyze my party and tell me why my shwashbuckler/mage with higher thaco, lower attacks, etc. etc. always finishes her opponents more quickly than Keldorn or Minsc? (Look, no spells used.)

The question is whether you can use Haer'Dalis (or any bard) effectively or just look at numbers before deciding "bards are crap, I won't use them" and then telling others not to use them as advice.

I had Haer'Dalis in my second party all the way through (got him as quickly as I could to max the exp gains) and I regretted not a moment of it. He simply was a good character, either casting the useful spells that Edwin discarded as 'useless' (Yes, run out of spell memorizing slots) or casting some enhancement spells and then attacking the enemy from the side. (Just imagine what a bard does with tenser's tranformation combined with his high level!) I didn't even use the defensie and offensive spins and I still thought he was good.

And yes, these are my opinions, and mine alone. I'm merely trying to give another view of bards, not saying your opinions are crap.

(For reference, I also had a bard in Icewind Dale when I played it through the first time, so I know what I'm talking about. And no, I didn't have any clerics with me.)

 

Now, isn't it a good old RP vs. PG discussion? 'd love to see where it gets.

boogie: ->

after beating the game solo on Insane diffiulty I DON'T CARE ANY MORE how tough a character is. I actually WANT it to be hard for me, otherwise it BORES me to death.

Now I'm running a Dwarf F/C + Mazzy + Jan party, next one will be Bard + Cernd + Imoen + Anomen - all the chars I never took in my previous run-throughs.

 

Hey Boogie, If you choose a skald, you can greatly improve the skills of EVERYONE in your party, something a F/M never can
If you choose a Blade, you have great fighting skill, even without all those stances (Def, Off). If you'll be a jester, you'll also have grat bonusses.
Plus you forgot that there are very special harps for Bards, that give them very cool powers.
Plus you forgot that they can use special Bard armour, plus you fogot that there are chainmails of +3, which gives the same armorclass of a plate mail, which is pretty good actually.
Plus you forgot, that YOU are talking about a dual classed character, and I'm talking about a single classed one, which are both nearly as good as eachother!

So how in the WORLD can you say that Bards are the worst characters there are!!!

 

Oh, I forgot,

A Bard is one character, with the characteristics of a fighter, a mage, a thief and a storyteller, what more can you want!