3.5e Overhaul – Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)

[nonsi]

It seems I will need to hunt for alternatives to those classes, especially if mage is tier 1.

I think that in my case the only way to avoid a wizard class to climb to tier 2 or 1 is to create versions that are bound to a single school like beguiler, dread necromancer and warmage

Notice that the Mage only goes T1 by taking the Wizard route - but that comes with a heavy price of losing 4 significant class features, spell effectiveness and spell repertoire. I'm not sure that in this case T1 is worth it. I left it more as an option than an equally worthwhile alternative to school specialization.

Notice also that focused arcanists are already in the equation:
- Beguiler: Illusionist
- Dread Necromancer: Necromancer
- Warmage: Evoker

[Valerem]

You see the Paladin role as an embodiment of righteousness

... That's.... that's what the Paladin is...

There is no argument to be had. Paladin's are THE White Knight's of D&D. The embodiment of righteousness and good. Some might be a bit too harsh, or some might be too strict to the law... but they all try and be the embodiment of righteousness and good.

Like seriously, search for the dictionary definition of Paladin, and it'll say something like 'a knight renowned for heroism and chivalry.'. There's no argument to be had. A paladin is a paladin. They are not a mere divine warrior, but hero's of the utmost quality.

It's like trying to say that a beholder isn't a flying face with one big eye and many eye stalks. Or a dragon isn't a big flying lizard with amazing magical prowess. It's just... not an argument...

[khadgar567]

... That's.... that's what the Paladin is...

There is no argument to be had. Paladin's are THE White Knight's of D&D. The embodiment of righteousness and good. Some might be a bit too harsh, or some might be too strict to the law... but they all try and be the embodiment of righteousness and good.

Like seriously, search for the dictionary definition of Paladin, and it'll say something like 'a knight renowned for heroism and chivalry.'. There's no argument to be had. A paladin is a paladin. They are not a mere divine warrior, but hero's of the utmost quality.

It's like trying to say that a beholder isn't a flying face with one big eye and many eye stalks. Or a dragon isn't a big flying lizard with amazing magical prowess. It's just... not an argument...

yet people try to fix righteous jerk called paladin

[nonsi]

... That's.... that's what the Paladin is...

There is no argument to be had. Paladin's are THE White Knight's of D&D. The embodiment of righteousness and good. Some might be a bit too harsh, or some might be too strict to the law... but they all try and be the embodiment of righteousness and good.

Like seriously, search for the dictionary definition of Paladin, and it'll say something like 'a knight renowned for heroism and chivalry.'. There's no argument to be had. A paladin is a paladin. They are not a mere divine warrior, but hero's of the utmost quality.

It's like trying to say that a beholder isn't a flying face with one big eye and many eye stalks. Or a dragon isn't a big flying lizard with amazing magical prowess. It's just... not an argument...

You're uninformed.
Take a look at the UA Paladin variants: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/cl...terClasses.htm

[Valerem]

yet people try to fix righteous jerk called paladin

That because a Paladin is more than just a 'righteous jerk'.

A heroic and righteous person does not automatically make them a 'righteous jerk'. There are many different ways one can play a Paladin.

You're uninformed.
Take a look at the UA Paladin variants: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/cl...terClasses.htm

... I am not uninformed at all.

What are you trying to prove?

A Paladin of Freedom is just a Paladin.

The Paladin of Slaughter and Paladin of Tyranny and not Paladin's at all. Their Anti-Paladin's

Plus, it's like your implying that one single source book defines what a Paladin is. Instead of the actual historical/folklore references, as well as the balazion other games that has Paladin's as 'Righteous Warrior'? Because I think otherwise.

[nonsi]

... I am not uninformed at all.

What are you trying to prove?

A Paladin of Freedom is just a Paladin.

The Paladin of Slaughter and Paladin of Tyranny and not Paladin's at all. Their Anti-Paladin's

Plus, it's like your implying that one single source book defines what a Paladin is. Instead of the actual historical/folklore references, as well as the balazion other games that has Paladin's as 'Righteous Warrior'? Because I think otherwise.

I'm not trying to prove anything and I'm not disputing your stand point.

The Cleric provides the framework for you to assemble a perfectly legit Paladin by your standaeds, but it leaves just as much room for other peoples' perspectives.

EDIT:

In "The Paladin of the Night" (Rose of the Prophet, #2) by Weis & Hickman, the so called Paladin was far from bein a nice guy, but he was a defender of his faith, so in his own view he was doing good - and we all know that sometimes one man's good is another man's evil.

[Valerem]

... A. Paladin. Is. Not. A. Cleric.

A. Paladin. Is. Not. A. Focused. On. His. Faith.

A. Paladin. Is. A. White. Knight. A. Person. Of. Extreme. Heorism. And. Chivalry.

This. And This. are what defines a Paladin.

You are not someone who thinks you are doing good because of your faith..

You ARE doing good. You ARE a force of good seeking out and smiting evil!

There is no arguement to be had.

A Paladin, whilst they have multipule ways of being played. Has ONE. And ONLY ONE definition!

Yes, there in some settings, there might be Paladin's that do evil actions in the name of good. Yes, that makes for fascinating story and philosphocial discussion. But it does NOT change what a Paladin is!

You can't change a dragon! You can't change a beholder! You cannot change a Paladin!

And you DO NOT allow someone to play a Paladin!

[nonsi]

... A. Paladin. Is. Not. A. Cleric.

The term Cleric is used in this project to loosely describe someone that effectively combies divine spellcasting with martial prowess. It's not the core Cleric.

A. Paladin. Is. Not. A. Focused. On. His. Faith.

A. Paladin. Is. A. White. Knight. A. Person. Of. Extreme. Heorism. And. Chivalry.

This. And This. are what defines a Paladin.

Someone can be all of those when it comes to people of his nation and yet perform unspeakable attrocities against outsiders.

An what does one's attitude have to do with mechanics? I just showed you how you could put ALL the characteristics of the official Paladin into a single build - including Smite (then role it to your heat's content) and you're stil not satisfied.

You are not someone who thinks you are doing good because of your faith..

You ARE doing good. You ARE a force of good seeking out and smiting evil!

There is no arguement to be had.

A Paladin, whilst they have multipule ways of being played. Has ONE. And ONLY ONE definition!

Yes, there in some settings, there might be Paladin's that do evil actions in the name of good. Yes, that makes for fascinating story and philosphocial discussion. But it does NOT change what a Paladin is!

Your effort here feels to me like trying to forcefeed people their fluff. This won't work, because different people have different views and different preferences.

As long as you can use the rules to create a Paladin to your taste, I don't see the problem.

You can't change a dragon! You can't change a beholder! You cannot change a Paladin!

And you DO NOT allow someone to play a Paladin!

Dragons you say? Well, some dragons are radically different from one another. I'd gladly show you, but for the next week I'll be replying from my mobile, so that'll have to wait.


EDIT:

Not having a class tagged "Paladin" does not prevent you from playing A paladin in any way.

[Valerem]

... I'm not trying to forcefeed anyone fluff.

A Paladin has a set fluff. A Paladin is a set archetype. A bard is a wandering musicain, one steeped in lore of the world and of legends. You won't argue what one of those is. So why would you argue against a Paladin?

I mean yeah. I suppose you could make a Cleric, or a Fighter that's part Priest and call yourself a Paladin. But its not a Paladin. We've had Paladin's every since the very first D&D game. Removing them is just... not giving the source material proper tribute.

A Paladin is The White Knight, a Holy Warrior that fights for the forces of Good, the class that you call if you want to SMITE EVIL!

And... your system does not allow it. There is nothing that allows you to Smite Evil.

You might think its a minor thing... but the fact you can't regonize its a problem at all, is a major issue with the overhaul in general.

People should be allowed freedom to play the characters what you want... and your fluffless, netural character classes doesn't allow that most of the time.

[nonsi]

A Paladin has a set fluff. A Paladin is a set archetype. A bard is a wandering musicain, one steeped in lore of the world and of legends. You won't argue what one of those is. So why would you argue against a Paladin?

Because I don't need a separate class to provide a paladin.

I mean yeah. I suppose you could make a Cleric, or a Fighter that's part Priest and call yourself a Paladin. But its not a Paladin. We've had Paladin's every since the very first D&D game. Removing them is just... not giving the source material proper tribute.

1. This project is not about paying tribute - it's about character concept viability.
2. In BECMI D&D, Paladin was a 9th level Fighter option, so if you're talking about going back to the source, then I'm closer on that one.

A Paladin is The White Knight, a Holy Warrior that fights for the forces of Good, the class that you call if you want to SMITE EVIL!

So play cleric with the propper character build. I even told you where to add Smite: a 4th God's Champion alternative called "Smite Opposition". If you're LG, it becomes Smite Evil.

And... your system does not allow it. There is nothing that allows you to Smite Evil.

Taking Cleric (with the stated domains) grants you spells, turn undead and solid swordplay.
The spells also grant you detect evil and remove disease.
Stonefaced Soldier feat grants fear immunity.
Stand Against The Tide feat is your aura of courage.
Smite Opposition option is the Smite Evil you're so attached to
Wild Cohort feat grants you your mount.
The modified feats also provide the means for Divine Grace.

There, a perfectly legit Paladin build.

Btw, this exchange reminded me that I wanted to add my own version of Battle Blessing to the Cleric. I'll handle it when I'm back at my PC... and by then I'll also add improved Smite myself.

People should be allowed freedom to play the characters what you want... and your fluffless, netural character classes doesn't allow that most of the time.

As far as the Paladin goes, I seem to have it covered with extra.

[nonsi]

.
A Paladin is The White Knight, a Holy Warrior that fights for the forces of Good, the class that you call if you want to SMITE EVIL!

And... your system does not allow it. There is nothing that allows you to Smite Evil.

I'd like to thank you for your persistrnce.
This exchange got me rethinking about the Paladin archetipe and I've come to the conclusoion that building a typical Paladin in this system is a bit overtaxing in terms of character resources.
I intend to remedy this by introducing minor changes and additional options to the Cleric variant.

[Valerem]

Hmmm, thank you. It likely won't be enough to 100% satisfy me. But that is just being completely and utterly greedy.

Thank you for listening to me, and making changes accordingly.

[nonsi]

Hmmm, thank you. It likely won't be enough to 100% satisfy me. But that is just being completely and utterly greedy.

Thank you for listening to me, and making changes accordingly.

All relevant changes have been applied. I just hope I didn't over do it.
In the process, the Elemental Adept also received a small improvement.

[Valerem]

I'm not entirely sure what all the changes were, but the addition of Smite Opposition is noted, and thankful for. The double damage of Smite damage against people with the Alignment Type might be a bit over the top through. A 50% power increase would be more than enough IMO.

It's a shame that you have to wait till level 9 to get it. But at least it is actually an option now. Which does help in satisfying people like me who would want to play a Paladin with the power to SMITE. EVIL. So Kudos for adding it.

[nonsi]

I'm not entirely sure what all the changes were,...

1. Amplified Smite.
2. Battle Blessing - a huge boon.
3. Holy Sword - almost on a whim.
4. Lay On Hands option.

The double damage of Smite damage against people with the Alignment Type might be a bit over the top through. A 50% power increase would be more than enough IMO.

You're right - I did feel I'm overreaching a bit.

It's a shame that you have to wait till level 9 to get it. But at least it is actually an option now. Which does help in satisfying people like me who would want to play a Paladin with the power to SMITE. EVIL. So Kudos for adding it.

Back in the days of AD&D, there weren't any Epic Level rules and there wasn't much discussion about post-20th features. I remember encountering a web document that allowed epic paladins to smite (don't remember the specifics).
I do agree that level 20 is way too late to talk about Smite, but smiting the foes of your faith shouldn't be something that every snot nose self-proclaimed "Paladin" should be able to do. To compensate, Smite has been significantly amplified, and it catches up with extras by 12th level.

[AtlasSniperman]

... I'm not trying to forcefeed anyone fluff.

[SNIP]A bard is a wandering musicain, one steeped in lore of the world and of legends. You won't argue what one of those is. [SNIP]

Actually, I will argue against that.
A bard isn't defined in the fluff as a wandering musician. In the 3.5 PHB it says "Wandering across the land, gathering lore, telling stories, working magic with his music and living on the gratitude of his audience" Sure that sounds like your bard but... Not all need apply to one person. I can easily think of 3 character concept that can be called a bard without fitting your definition;
A circus ringmaster
A camp guide(for one of those summer camps the yanks have)
And WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, the guy people call "the bard", did not wander the land or work magic with his music. He gathered lore and told stories though, world influencers.

I'll argue against anyone who says that a class only has one flavour. One "right way" to play.

[nonsi]

Actually, I will argue against that.
A bard isn't defined in the fluff as a wandering musician. In the 3.5 PHB it says "Wandering across the land, gathering lore, telling stories, working magic with his music and living on the gratitude of his audience" Sure that sounds like your bard but... Not all need apply to one person. I can easily think of 3 character concept that can be called a bard without fitting your definition;
A circus ringmaster
A camp guide(for one of those summer camps the yanks have)
And WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, the guy people call "the bard", did not wander the land or work magic with his music. He gathered lore and told stories though, world influencers.

I'll argue against anyone who says that a class only has one flavour. One "right way" to play.

Wandering around a bit, I found the following definition:

Any group of adventures is going to have characters who fill several different roles. These roles are specific to that particular character's class.
A character's class is much more than a set of skills and feats, this is his profession. It determines what that character is capable of in matters of problem solving, battle and his basic everyday life.
When generating a character a player may already have some idea what role that character will be will play within the group.


I view classes as means to an end – each one being a toolbox of gadgets that can combine to assist bringing you as close as possible to defining the kind of character you wish to role.
Your character can focus on a single toolbox and specialize in it to perfection, or possess several toolboxes, specializing in each of them to a lesser degree, but having a greater diversity of tools to choose from..... or maybe even mix them to create their own specialization (e.g. the Class-Combo feats).

[AtlasSniperman]

Wondering around a bit, I found the following definition:

Any group of adventures is going to have characters who fill several different roles. These roles are specific to that particular character's class.
A character's class is much more than a set of skills and feats, this is his profession. It determines what that character is capable of in matters of problem solving, battle and his basic everyday life.
When generating a character a player may already have some idea what role that character will be will play within the group.


I view classes as means to an end – each one being a toolbox of gadgets that can combine to assist bringing you as close as possible to defining the kind of character you wish to role.
Your character can focus on a single toolbox and specialize in it to perfection, or possess several toolboxes, specializing in each of them to a lesser degree, but having a greater diversity of tools to choose from..... or maybe even mix them to create their own specialization (e.g. the Class-Combo feats).

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm 100% on your side. Classes without flavour are better in my opinion as I can slot whatever flavour I want onto their abilities. My problem is when people say that a particular class IS a certain way, and it's not possible to deviate from that :D

[Valerem]

I'll argue against anyone who says that a class only has one flavour. One "right way" to play.

Hey. I was never arguing that a class only has one flavour, or one way to play. Bodhi's Guide to the Optimal Paladin, list at least 4 different ways to play a Paladin. And I'm sure that somewhere. T.G Oskar talked about different ways to play a Paladin as well. One that is almost always skirting the edge of falling, and is actually expecting to fall in the end.

There's a lot of ways one can take the Paladin archetype, the 'White Knight' archetype, and put your own twist on it.

[khadgar567]

Hey. I was never arguing that a class only has one flavour, or one way to play. Bodhi's Guide to the Optimal Paladin, list at least 4 different ways to play a Paladin. And I'm sure that somewhere. T.G Oskar talked about different ways to play a Paladin as well. One that is almost always skirting the edge of falling, and is actually expecting to fall in the end.

There's a lot of ways one can take the Paladin archetype, the 'White Knight' archetype, and put your own twist on it.

okay treat derailment ahead but I wanna know whats your paladin idea looks like mine is divine idiot who thing his morals are superior to every one of his comrades( plus looks good with shakespearean theatrics)

[PapaQuackers]

okay treat derailment ahead but I wanna know whats your paladin idea looks like mine is divine idiot who thing his morals are superior to every one of his comrades( plus looks good with shakespearean theatrics)

You're falling victim to common tropes. The "divine idiot" paladin is prevalent in fantasy literature in the like not because it's the norm for what a paladin is expected to be but a twisting of ideals into something dangerous. For what a paladin is fundamentally you shouldn't look at famous examples of their ideologies being twisted into something dangerous, but rather look at paladins who play smaller roles in stories. They are devout men, like clerics, who wish to protect the people around them because they believe it is the will of their deity. Whether you think that's foolish is besides the point, the paladin is a paragon of what their deity believes is right, it is not arrogance that leads them to believe their morals are superior to those around him it's the tenants of his religion. Though it would be prudent to mention that humility is usually a big part of being a paladin or any kind of religious figure, none of them boast that their morals are above reproach.

[khadgar567]

You're falling victim to common tropes. The "divine idiot" paladin is prevalent in fantasy literature in the like not because it's the norm for what a paladin is expected to be but a twisting of ideals into something dangerous. For what a paladin is fundamentally you shouldn't look at famous examples of their ideologies being twisted into something dangerous, but rather look at paladins who play smaller roles in stories. They are devout men, like clerics, who wish to protect the people around them because they believe it is the will of their deity. Whether you think that's foolish is besides the point, the paladin is a paragon of what their deity believes is right, it is not arrogance that leads them to believe their morals are superior to those around him it's the tenants of his religion. Though it would be prudent to mention that humility is usually a big part of being a paladin or any kind of religious figure, none of them boast that their morals are above reproach.

Quackers I hear you but there is 90% chance they switch to religious zealot stage after a year then they subconsciously starting to believe holy massacre is only way for their deity to become supreme one and become the same thing they fight as their enemy while calling your ur-priest friend heretic and try to burn him

[PapaQuackers]

I'm sorry but that's just flat out wrong, very very very rarely do good align paladins stray from their deities will and doing so often leads to them being stripped of their paladin powers. Forcing them to go through atonement in order to regain them. Religious zealots are few and are between and are usually evil aligned Paladins or Anti-Paladins. You're once again falling prey to the commonality of tropes, it's the same thing that leads people to believe that all Samurai were rigid, inflexible, often somber people that followed the tenants of Bushido so closely they were above wrong doing. That's just a stereotype used to further stories or develop character, it's not a norm and it shouldn't be treated as such.

[khadgar567]

your own paladin maybe non corrupt but I can bet my 5 gold pieces that somebody high in his order has bigger plans for himself including assassinating his superior so he can promote in his place and rule with iron fist

[AuraTwilight]

Considering paladins can't really falsify their own alignments, I doubt it. Maybe you should stop running games with poorly done paladins.

[khadgar567]

Considering paladins can't really falsify their own alignments, I doubt it. Maybe you should stop running games with poorly done paladins.

agreed dm an player needed to know what tenets order uses so dm can balance the game for it

[nonsi]

Hey. I was never arguing that a class only has one flavour, or one way to play. Bodhi's Guide to the Optimal Paladin, list at least 4 different ways to play a Paladin. And I'm sure that somewhere. T.G Oskar talked about different ways to play a Paladin as well. One that is almost always skirting the edge of falling, and is actually expecting to fall in the end.

There's a lot of ways one can take the Paladin archetype, the 'White Knight' archetype, and put your own twist on it.

The thing is that while PrCs are most definitely archetypes, base classes aren't.
That's one of the reasons why I don't like PrCs in the aftermath - I don't like it when class designs attempt to force archetypes upon players. Classes are meant to be a means to an end, not an end. Sure, a class most definitely takes you in a general direction, but it should be in the hands of the player to determine where his/her bull's-eye is. It gives you a certain set of tools to play in the sandbox, but it should be in your hands to decide how to play in the sandbox.

[SowelBlack]

I really like the strain/tolerance system you've got in here. Thanks for making it!

[nonsi]

I really like the strain/tolerance system you've got in here. Thanks for making it!

I didn't make it (see the credits; post #2), I just improved it... but there's a lot of wonderful stuff in here that's originally mine.

[nonsi]

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm 100% on your side. Classes without flavour are better in my opinion as I can slot whatever flavour I want onto their abilities. My problem is when people say that a particular class IS a certain way, and it's not possible to deviate from that :D

Actually, till today I don’t remember having seen a noteworthy class that had no flavor. I was wondering for the last few days if it is at all possible to create one. I came up with something. Not sure if it has absolutely no flavor, but it's as close as I can come up with given two hours of my time (don't recognize any flavor ATM).



HD: d8

Table: The Polymath

		Saves				Spellcasting Strain Toll
Level	BAB	F	R	W	Special	0th	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th	6th	Invocations	Eldritch Blast
1	+0	+2	+2	+2	Improvisation, Wild Cohort, Bardic Knowledge, Synergistic Adaptation	6
2	+1	+3	+3	+3	Bonus General Feat	6								1d6 (1)
3	+2	+3	+3	+3	Loremaster	6							1 (Least)
4	+3	+4	+4	+4	Synergistic Adaptation	5	7
5	+3	+4	+4	+4	Bonus General Feat	5	7							2d6
6	+4	+5	+5	+5	Defensive Aptitude	5	7						2
7	+5	+5	+5	+5	Synergistic Adaptation	4	6	7
8	+6	+6	+6	+6	Bonus General Feat	4	6	7						3d6 (2)
9	+6	+6	+6	+6	Insightful Surge	4	6	7					3 (Lesser)
10	+7	+7	+7	+7	Synergistic Adaptation	3	5	6	8
11	+8	+7	+7	+7	Bonus General Feat	3	5	6	8					4d6
12	+9	+8	+8	+8	Defensive Aptitude	3	5	6	8				4
13	+9	+8	+8	+8	Synergistic Adaptation	2	4	5	7	8
14	+10	+9	+9	+9	Bonus General Feat	2	4	5	7	8				5d6 (3)
15	+11	+9	+9	+9	Cunning Brilliance	2	4	5	7	8			5 (Greater)
16	+12	+10	+10	+10	Synergistic Adaptation	1	3	4	6	7	9
17	+12	+10	+10	+10	Bonus General Feat	1	3	4	6	7	9			6d6
18	+13	+11	+11	+11	Defensive Aptitude	1	3	4	6	7	9		6
19	+14	+11	+11	+11	Synergistic Adaptation	0	2	3	5	6	8	9
20	+15	+12	+12	+12	Bonus General Feat	0	2	3	5	6	8	9		7d6 (4)

Class Skills: all
Skill Points Per LeveL: 6 + Int-mod


Weapon Proficiencies: Simple: All ; Martial: 3 + level / 4 ; Exotic: level / 6
Armor Proficiencies: Light, Buckler


Spells: Spont. - any spell from any list, chosen on-the-fly, using the lowest instance to which the polymath has access (see Spell Access Stat below).

Spell Access Stat: Varies*:
- If a spell is an arcane spell, the polymath requires sufficient Int to cast it.
- Divine spells require Cha.
- Nature spells require Wis.
* For spells that are accessible to more than one <fullcaster> class (Priest/Mage/Druid), a polymath uses the lowest SL to which s/he has access according to his/her associated mental stats.


Invocations: Any from the Warlock's list.

Eldritch Blast: At 2^nd level, a polymath selects a single damage type from Acid / Cold / Electricity / Fire. At levels 8 / 14 / 20, a polymath selects additional damage types from this list.




Improvisation
(Level: 1)
Taken from the codex' Rogue.


Wild Cohort
(Level: 1)
Wise men know that it is always better to have a teammate than to go alone.
A polymath gains Wild Cohort as a bonus feat at 1st level.


Bardic Knowledge
(Level: 1)
Same as the core Bard.


Synergistic Adaptation
(Levels: 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19)
Covering an unusually wide variety of fields of pracctice, polymaths learn to adapt both physically and mentally.
Startng at 1st level, and again every 3 levels thereafter, a polymath gains an ability increase of +1 to his lowest ability score. If multiple ability scores share the same minimum value, the polymath is at liberty to choose which one among them in increased.


Bonus General Feat
(Levels: 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17, 20)
Starting at 2nd level and every 3 levels thereafter, a polymath gains a bonus feat to spend as s/he sees fit. The polymath must meet all the normal prerequisites of the chosen feat.
Special: This feature circumvents any and all restrictions regarding feats as far as classes, races, alignments go. (e.g. a polymath may take one or more of the Bard's Expanded Spell Repertoire feats, or the Warlock's heritage feats).


Loremaster
(Level: 3)
Same as the codex' Bard.


Defensive Aptitude
(Levels: 6, 12, 18)
Same as the codex' Bladesinger.
Polymaths are impressive survivors.


Insightful Surge
(Level: 9)
Same as the codex' Rogue.


Cunning Brilliance
(Level: 15)
Same as the codex' Bard.