Buff Bard: CL vs. Dispel & ASF Reduction

[Jack Oat]

As is, with the current Dispel meta (which I talk about in another post, funny enough- though this point goes for both the 20 + 6 and the 22 + 4 metas) casting as a Bard is basically useless except in short stuff (Warcry) or long-term buffs for PvE only. Anything else is liable to get dispelled easily. Even then, casting usually requires either Still Spell (meaning glhf to your 6th level spells) or the entire ordeal of removing armor, then casting, then putting armor back on.

My suggestion is twofold:
1) Grant Bard a +3 to CL vs. Dispel on its cast spells at level 20, similar (but not the same) as Paladin. This will better allow Bards to withstand both PvP and PvE dispels without being relegated to basically only using their songs.
2) Grant Bard ASF reduction. It can be a simple 10% total reduction to offset Greensteel, or a scaling 5-20% as they level up of some kind. Either way, grant them the ability to be effective while wearing armor without being forced to invest/use Still Spell only or pull some cheesy doff/cast/don nonsense.

Edit: Do not add these to Warlock (not that it needs it).

[Tarkus the dog]

Hell, *sips*.

A 33 CL bard and a lasting inspiration. *sips*

What else could a man ask for? *sips*

[liver and bones]

At minimum your second point should be a thing. Bard is such a horribly tedious class when it pretends to be a melee-casting class.

The dispel CL is tricky. The 20/6/4 is dispel bait and its buffs are a necessity, but its buffs make it ridiculously strong. Only reason this is a concern is that with these changes people could drop 2 fighter, still spell, and toughness. Grab abj and arcane def. That's a dispel CL of 27.

[R0GUE]

Agree 100% on the ASF%. In fact I'm more radical and say bards should get to wear light armor and all shields with no ASF%. But I'm a little biased I guess. I just wish I could graduate beyond Spellthief armor at some point.

[Xerah]

The ASF was supposed to be in the last update but there was a weird bug with it so it didn’t make it. Will retry this week.

[R0GUE]

The ASF was supposed to be in the last update but there was a weird bug with it so it didn’t make it. Will retry this week.

Oh wonderful!

[Astral]

The ASF was supposed to be in the last update but there was a weird bug with it so it didn’t make it. Will retry this week.

That was fast. Thanks a lot.

[Jack Oat]

The ASF was supposed to be in the last update but there was a weird bug with it so it didn’t make it. Will retry this week.

You're a hero, thanks!

[Peppermint]

Strange when buffs are requested for the strongest class in the game.

(And even stranger when the devs give said buffs to them, but I digress.)

One could make an argument that bards should be pushed in a more caster-oriented direction, though that should necessitate nerfs elsewhere.

Bards aren't hit half as hard by dispels as some players make them out to be. A lot of the crucial stuff (i.e. magic weapon, bard song, and in the case of divine bards--divine might/divine shield) is completely impossible to dispel.

[R0GUE]

Strange when buffs are requested for the strongest class in the game.

(And even stranger when the devs give said buffs to them, but I digress.)

One could make an argument that bards should be pushed in a more caster-oriented direction, though that should necessitate nerfs elsewhere.

Bards aren't hit half as hard by dispels as some players make them out to be. A lot of the crucial stuff (i.e. magic weapon, bard song, and in the case of divine bards--divine might/divine shield) is completely impossible to dispel.

Well, I think you are arguing that bards who play a certain type of bard should be nerfed, or at least not receive buffs.

The ASF reduction is a QoL issue for bards, regardless of the style they play. I play a Dex based shooty bard for example, definitely not going to be considered a top-tier build when I am all said and done. But the ASF thing is just to make playing the class more fun.

[Xerah]

Strange when buffs are requested for the strongest class in the game.

(And even stranger when the devs give said buffs to them, but I digress.)

One could make an argument that bards should be pushed in a more caster-oriented direction, though that should necessitate nerfs elsewhere.

Bards aren't hit half as hard by dispels as some players make them out to be. A lot of the crucial stuff (i.e. magic weapon, bard song, and in the case of divine bards--divine might/divine shield) is completely impossible to dispel.

It has nothing to do with this post. The plan was already approved in the feature design well before this.

[Iceborn]

Strange when buffs are requested for the strongest class in the game.

(And even stranger when the devs give said buffs to them, but I digress.)

One could make an argument that bards should be pushed in a more caster-oriented direction, though that should necessitate nerfs elsewhere.

Bards aren't hit half as hard by dispels as some players make them out to be. A lot of the crucial stuff (i.e. magic weapon, bard song, and in the case of divine bards--divine might/divine shield) is completely impossible to dispel.

I am playing a bard 20.
It's become common joke with a character to trade dispels. I shoot a greater dispel, and SOMETIMES it does something, they shoot a mord, and I am stripped of 95% of the buffs.
Really, it's kinda amusing to read the combat log and see a small wall of text with only buffs lost.
In my character, that means losing +4 str, +4 dex, +4 con, mage armor, see invisiblity, ultravision, and one extended amplify. At least.
If I am combat, it also means potentially losing all combat-effective buffs, the usual trio of barkskin, shield, haste, and anything else that, my character kinda needs to survive.

[Cortex]

you could just not cast spells as a bard and use wands to have the same 30 cl everyone else has,while still having bard song aka the strongest buff in the game

[Iceborn]

you could just not cast spells as a bard and use wands to have the same 30 cl everyone else has,while still having bard song aka the strongest buff in the game

Mmm. I almost sounds like you are telling me to not play a bard.
HMmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[Ork]

It is fairly restrictive to either play a divine-bard (and also never use spells) or a non-divine bard (and completely dump CHA). There really is only one build for bard, and all others pale in comparison. It'd be nice to have more options.

[Nitro]

you could just not cast spells as a bard and use wands to have the same 30 cl everyone else has,while still having bard song aka the strongest buff in the game

Mmm. I almost sounds like you are telling me to not play a bard.
HMmmmmmmmmmmmm.

I mean, Bard/curse song alone makes bards extremely potent. That's a swing of +-5 AC, +-2AB, +-3/2/2 saves, significantly increasing the odds that Taunts/KD's will land from the -8 skill debuff and giving additional safety against the same (and extra saves from spellcraft) from the +8 skill boost.

If you're playing a bard for the spellbook, you might as well be a sorcerer instead.

[Ork]

It seems to me one of the bards major hindrances in adjustment is the fact that bard song is it's strongest at L16 and lasting inspiration at L20. There's no longer any justification in going deeper into bard, especially since the cost to perform rises dramatically for no reason.

I'd be interested if there are mechanical alternatives to bard song that could be dished out similar to PDK abilities for epic level investment.

[Cortex]

25 bard provides +1 AC and +6 skill points over a 20 bard, and if you don't tech the curse song, that's -14 discipline and -6 AC. You'll be having an intimate relationship with the ground, or worse yet, find yourself disarmed.

If for some reason you wanna get crazy and go 30 bard for the big song, it becomes +7 AC +19 skills (and the inverse for curse), which is huge for parties. Obviously you wouldn't be as powerful on your own, but at least your spells wouldn't be dispelled, hmm?

[Iceborn]

I don't disagree Cortex, but if the most optimal way to play a bard is to ignore 1/3 of the kit, there's probably something wrong.
Just consider that.

[Sockss]

I don't disagree Cortex, but if the most optimal way to play a bard is to ignore 1/3 of the kit, there's probably something wrong.
Just consider that.

You're right, bards are extremely good just utilising a third of their kit so, if anything, they should be nerfed - not buffed.

[Ork]

The biggest cost of 25 or 30 bard is self-efficiency and you've noted that those builds really only shine in a group setting. Whereas the 20/6/4 you become a physical threat and a competent hexer. -8 to disc & -5 ac is enough to really bring down most anybody while maintaining at least individual potency.

Bard is A-tier when 20/6/4, and 25 or 30 really is only situationally useful in party and less self-reliant.

[Cortex]

"1/3 of the kit "is a very generous fraction you're giving, that applies to builds that have sub-21 bard levels.

You were complaining that the proper way to play bard is not to be a bard, I said that you can play a 25-30 bard character and still be useful, while being a bard and even making use of spellcasting if you gear toward it. I don't know what else you could want?

Thematically, bards have been support characters in most games, so a lack of self-suffiency is part of the deal. If they were self-sufficient, I guarantee you that pure/near pure bards would be up there with druid monoliths and previously PMs.

[Ork]

I guess for me I don't see where this argument is coming from. Bard spells should be functional to the overall kit of the class, but at present it is much more beneficial to ignore their spellcasting entirely. CHA provides little synergy with the primary abilities of a bard, but requires on creation an investment of at least 3 stat points.

As design around other classes emerge I'm awed by the ability the balance team has provided to breathe new life into classes from barbarians to rangers. I think the bard kit deserves attention. I'd be fine with a nerf to bard song where the enhancements make more sense, or rather tethering bard songs effectiveness directly to CHA.

As it stands now, I'd rather dump CHA than invest unless I was going divine-bard.

Cortex, your arguments strike me odd since you redesigned barbarians into something epic. The comments could be paralleled to the line of thinking that barbarians were fine pre-buff because they could get +8 to soft stats and terrifying rage. While those things were good, you did barbarians better.

[Cortex]

Bard is better compared to monk, in the sense that monks could not be changed without removing uncapped speed. Ditto with bard and the power of bard song, they cannot be buffed without changing bard song.

It could be done, but it'd take a lot more effort than either barbarian or monk to change something that IS good and IS powerful. Vanilla barbarians were absolute dogshit, and monks were only "good" because you couldn't kill them unless you got a lucky KD followed by immediate execution, but otherwise they were lackluster in every other area.

Most servers back in the day would nerf bards, extremely few ever buffed them, not that this is a good arguement on its own to decide anything, but it should provide a little more context.

[Ork]

I get that, and I agree adding CL isn't the fix we need for the bard issue. The bard issue really rests solely on the synergy of CHA and divine might/shield. The bard song kit has some counter-play (would be nice if there was more). Adding ASF is at best a net neutral imo.

I think I'm just ready for bard redux. If that includes bard song nerf, let's do that. It just isn't an attractive class and bard song isn't even an interesting mechanic. Especially when compared to PDK abilities. Those are fun.