Player's Gonna Play: A Bard's Guide

[DivisibleByZero]

Hey, it's your guide, you can and will rate things as you like. I just thought I'd chime in with a different opinion on that rating.

And while not every Valor Bard will focus on Strength, even finesse Valor Bards can use rapiers, which still deal more damage than the Swords' scimitars. Reduced damage and more competition make two strikes that degrade how worthwhile Battle Magic is. Still, Battle Magic is usually used when you would have cast anyways, so I can see bumping it to Blue, but not Sky Blue.

All Bards get proficiency with rapiers. It's not Valor exclusive.
And no one says that you have to TWF just because you get the style for free. Feel free to use your rapier, just like a finesse Valor Bard would.... but in so doing you're actually losing out. Two scimitars (with the style) are indeed better than one rapier.
A rapier does an average of 1pt more damage. The second attack from TWF does an average of 6-7 damage. That means every time you take the TWF bonus action, you effectively have like 6 rounds worth of the damage difference from the rapier built up. Use those next 6 rounds to do something else with your bonus action.
How you consider that a bad thing baffles me.

More importantly, the fact that the Sword Bard has features that consistently compete with each other for use is a real difference.
[snip]
Edit: Although, since you play a Sword Bard anyways, I might as well ask you. Does TWF get used often enough to justify a good rating? It seems like it would be getting crowded out pretty often.

I dual wield (with Mobile feat, to keep me out of melee). My spells control and debuff.
In combat, when I want or need to cast, that's when I hand out any BI that I might want to. Or the reverse, if I want to hand out BI, then I cast (this is a great time to toss out a vicious mockery, for example). When I want to attack, my bonus action almost always gets used on twf.
So in my opinion, yes, the addition of the style is not wasted at all. In my opinion and experience, having more options for your bonus action is a good thing, and I wouldn't categorize it as stepping on toes.

I mean, seriously, how does more options for your bonus action become a bad thing in your guide?!?

Take that as you will, and rate it how you will.

[EvilAnagram]

I think you make a fairly compelling case. I'll up the ratings of the fighting style and archetype.

[DivisibleByZero]

I think you make a fairly compelling case. I'll up the ratings of the fighting style and archetype.

I find the newer ratings (and the mention of UN's mechanics) much more fair.
Individual aspects of the Colleges Valor and Swords may be slightly different (even within the exact same abilities between the two, because of the other abilities within), but in and of themselves they are on equal footing.

[Quintessence]

How would you feel about a paladin 2/bard 18 college of swords, using a shield and long sword with full plate? Your guide is the only one that really talks about college of swords so I was hoping to possibly get some feedback and learn a bit more about your feelings towards it.

[CaptAl]

In my 5 player AL group we have a Dwarven Fighter (S&B), Halfling Rogue, Undying Warlock Half Elf, Half Orc two weapon Ranger, and myself. I've been playing a Life Cleric. We're all level 2, but I find the Clerical spell list, and flavor subpar. I am considering a rebuild to go Lore Bard with a focus on Int skills (which the party is sadly lacking), and picking up Aura of Vitality for my first magical secrets pick. My question is, can a Lore Bard provide enough healing to keep a party going in a heavily combat focused game? I went Life specifically for this purpose; I just don't like playing a Cleric.

[RickAllison]

In my 5 player AL group we have a Dwarven Fighter (S&B), Halfling Rogue, Undying Warlock Half Elf, Half Orc two weapon Ranger, and myself. I've been playing a Life Cleric. We're all level 2, but I find the Clerical spell list, and flavor subpar. I am considering a rebuild to go Lore Bard with a focus on Int skills (which the party is sadly lacking), and picking up Aura of Vitality for my first magical secrets pick. My question is, can a Lore Bard provide enough healing to keep a party going in a heavily combat focused game? I went Life specifically for this purpose; I just don't like playing a Cleric.

You might still choose to dip one level in Cleric for that juicy 1st-level ability. Remember that Disciple of Life states that you get the boost when you "use a spell of 1st level or higher" rather than specify needing to cast it. That means that Aura of Vitality gives you 2d6+5 healing as a bonus action for 10 rounds. Effectively, you start dealing Life Cleric-worthy amounts of healing around that isn't even dependent on Wisdom while everything else is Bardic.

[CaptAl]

You might still choose to dip one level in Cleric for that juicy 1st-level ability. Remember that Disciple of Life states that you get the boost when you "use a spell of 1st level or higher" rather than specify needing to cast it. That means that Aura of Vitality gives you 2d6+5 healing as a bonus action for 10 rounds. Effectively, you start dealing Life Cleric-worthy amounts of healing around that isn't even dependent on Wisdom while everything else is Bardic.

Plus that juicy heavy armor proficiency. I'm guessing that Wis saves are pretty important in Curse of Strahd too.

[RickAllison]

Plus that juicy heavy armor proficiency. I'm guessing that Wis saves are pretty important in Curse of Strahd too.

Take less damage so he has even less to heal! Additionally, he could also grab Goodberry with a side of cheese for easy, out-of-combat healing. 40 HP for a first-level spell is hard to turn down when you are in an area that is not exactly permissive of resting...

[CaptAl]

Take less damage so he has even less to heal! Additionally, he could also grab Goodberry with a side of cheese for easy, out-of-combat healing. 40 HP for a first-level spell is hard to turn down when you are in an area that is not exactly permissive of resting...

I'm convinced. Life Cleric 1/ Lore Bard X and on to morning.

[RickAllison]

I'm convinced. Life Cleric 1/ Lore Bard X and on to morning.

Very effective combo. In case you care what other spells you get to prepare that you would normally have to Magical Secrets:

Spoiler: Bonus spells from Cleric 1!

Show

3 cantrips from Guidance, Sacred Flame, Spare the Dying, Thaumaturgy, as well as several others that are also Bard cantrips.

1st level spells: Bless, Command, Create or Destroy Water, Detect Evil and Good, Detect Poisons and Diseases, Guiding Bolt, Inflict Wounds, Protection from Evil and Good, Purify Food and Drink, Sanctuary, and Shield of Faith.

That is a pretty nice list that lets you boost your companions before they get injured!

[CaptAl]

Very effective combo. In case you care what other spells you get to prepare that you would normally have to Magical Secrets:

Spoiler: Bonus spells from Cleric 1!

Show

3 cantrips from Guidance, Sacred Flame, Spare the Dying, Thaumaturgy, as well as several others that are also Bard cantrips.

1st level spells: Bless, Command, Create or Destroy Water, Detect Evil and Good, Detect Poisons and Diseases, Guiding Bolt, Inflict Wounds, Protection from Evil and Good, Purify Food and Drink, Sanctuary, and Shield of Faith.

That is a pretty nice list that lets you boost your companions before they get injured!

Bless alone is worth the dip. With the Magic Initiate feat for good berry, I'll have approximately all the cantrips.

[EvilAnagram]

How would you feel about a paladin 2/bard 18 college of swords, using a shield and long sword with full plate? Your guide is the only one that really talks about college of swords so I was hoping to possibly get some feedback and learn a bit more about your feelings towards it.

Well, your smites will be off the charts at the cost of delaying your spell learning. However, you can pick mostly save-or-suck spells, so you don't have to worry about your spell damage lagging. You absolutely need to grab War Caster for this to work at all, though.

One problem I can see is that you'll either be unable to smite until level 8, or you won't get Extra Attack until level 8. That's a major impediment to your early melee.

Still, you'll benefit from basically all of the Sword College's features, and you'll be able to smite on top of that. It's not bad.

snip

Yeah, Bards have plenty of healing. More importantly, you always have the option of reducing your enemy's ability to hit with Vicious Mockery, while increasing your allies' ability with Inspiration, so you should need to heal less than you did as a Life Cleric.

And when you cast Vicious Mockery, it's always a good idea to actually insult your enemy. It makes for a fun table.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

Thanks DivisibleByZero for advocating for the Swords College. It is an interesting variation.

Some comparisons between a Valor and a Swords following a similar progression I did for those interested in the numbers:

On AC: Valor is higher, by 1-3 points depending on the armor and feat choices. This is mainly because of a Shield.
Valor maxes at 20 with a shield and medium armor master.
Swords maxes at 19 with medium armor master and Dualist feats. This is a heavy feat investment however, so not every build will get this.
Swords is able to compensate if things look bad by gaining 1 Inspiration die to AC for a round for a bonus action.

On damage:
If they both follow a similar, DEX-based progression, Swords is doing from 4.5 to 9.5 more at-will damage per turn, depending on level, DEX mod and feats acquired.
Valor may compensate by adding inspiration dice to allies' damage. Starts at 3.5*CHA mod per long rest, becomes 6.5*CHA mod per short rest, so something like 10 to 33 extra damage per rest. About 2 to 3 bonus attacks for a Swords bard.

[Ewhit]

My question is whe will evilanagram complete other classes

[Quintessence]

Well, your smites will be off the charts at the cost of delaying your spell learning. However, you can pick mostly save-or-suck spells, so you don't have to worry about your spell damage lagging. You absolutely need to grab War Caster for this to work at all, though.

One problem I can see is that you'll either be unable to smite until level 8, or you won't get Extra Attack until level 8. That's a major impediment to your early melee.

Still, you'll benefit from basically all of the Sword College's features, and you'll be able to smite on top of that. It's not bad.

Well sadly I would have to start as Paladin in order to get heavy armor, I suppose I could do TWF in heavy armor until I get second attack.. Alright I have a general idea of how to make this work, thank you very much.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

My question is whe will evilanagram complete other classes

I'm not sure he's intending to do more, though I certainly would appreciate it. A Wonk or Marlock guide would be nice - all the guides for them are rather out of date.

[Mervold]

Heroism: The temp HP is extremely strong when you first get it, but that fades with time and levels.

Sleep: You can lay waste to entire encounters with this spell.

I like how you have shown with Heroism that it fades quickly. Unfortunately Sleep fades even quicker, in my opinion it is close to useless by level 3. So I would make it Purple, and mention that it starts as Sky Blue.

[EvilAnagram]

I like how you have shown with Heroism that it fades quickly. Unfortunately Sleep fades even quicker, in my opinion it is close to useless by level 3. So I would make it Purple, and mention that it starts as Sky Blue.

From experience, I can tell you that Sleep is effective through level 5, but I see your point.

[Mervold]

From experience, I can tell you that Sleep is effective through level 5, but I see your point.

I guess we had very different DMs.

I love how you kept the WotC coloring scheme, sometimes I get really confused on this forum, where in some guides Gold is the second worst value.

I see you did not do a Magic Item section, I understand, they are mostly the same for all classes. One big exception is Instrument of the Bards, DMs tend to hand them out as they start from uncommon, and are thematically correct. They give disadvantage on charm saving throws. I would defintely mention in the spells section that Animal Friendship, Charm Person, Dominate X, Hypnotic Pattern become at least one category better if you have such an item.

[Ehergert]

Hello all -

I am still very new to tabletop rpg games, but have been getting started at my local store recently.

While I don't necessarily care about pure optimization, I don't want to be significantly underpowered either. I was looking at a possible rogue swashbuckler / bard MC, but I really don't see any conversation on that build. Is there a reason why?

[EvilAnagram]

Hello all -

I am still very new to tabletop rpg games, but have been getting started at my local store recently.

While I don't necessarily care about pure optimization, I don't want to be significantly underpowered either. I was looking at a possible rogue swashbuckler / bard MC, but I really don't see any conversation on that build. Is there a reason why?

Honestly, it's so clearly good in so many ways that it's not worth commenting on. Bard/Rogues are obviously good together, and a Charisma Rogue obviously has even more overlap. Everyone agrees on this, but all the conversation revolves around out disagreements.

Swashbuckler is a solid class, and it meshes well with all the Bard archetypes.

[Mervold]

Honestly, it's so clearly good in so many ways that it's not worth commenting on. Bard/Rogues are obviously good together, and a Charisma Rogue obviously has even more overlap. Everyone agrees on this, but all the conversation revolves around out disagreements.

Swashbuckler is a solid class, and it meshes well with all the Bard archetypes.

I am confused. To the guy who wanted to play a Paladin/Bard you said he is gona have problems, and now Bard/Rogue is supposed to be great?
Ok, Rogue is pretty front-loaded, but Swashbuckler does not advance spellcasting, and providing Inspiration interferes with off-hand attacks. If you go Valor, Medium Armor quickly becomes redundat, if you go Lore delaying your spell progression will hurt even more.

What does a Rogue add to a Bard, that it really needs? Ok, probably DPR, but Warlock2 does it much better.
What does a Bard add to a Rogue, that it really needs? Nothing, unless the party has no other healer/controller.
Bards profit much more from Cleric1 or Warlock2, and Rogues profit much more from Battlemaster, or Arcana Cleric, or Sorcerer.
I agree Bard/Rogue is hard to do very badly, but it is impossible to do great.

[EvilAnagram]

I agree Bard/Rogue is hard to do very badly, but it is impossible to do great.

He wanted to know that he wouldn't be lagging behind or fall into a trap. He won't, so I told him it's fine. He specifically said he's not out to uber-optimize, so the fact that his features don't build much on each other won't matter.

[Mervold]

He wanted to know that he wouldn't be lagging behind or fall into a trap. He won't, so I told him it's fine. He specifically said he's not out to uber-optimize, so the fact that his features don't build much on each other won't matter.

You are right, I was a bit over-zealous.

Still, I do not get the appeal of Swashbuckler/Bards. This is the 3rd one I see, so it is quite popular, but it is the same flavor/fluff as a standalone Swashbucker or standalone Bard, just weaker.

[Citan]

You are right, I was a bit over-zealous.

Still, I do not get the appeal of Swashbuckler/Bards. This is the 3rd one I see, so it is quite popular, but it is the same flavor/fluff as a standalone Swashbucker or standalone Bard, just weaker.

Hmm. I don't quite understand how you could say this.
Swashbuckler never gets any spellcasting.
Bard would have to rely heavily on spells to add mobility or damage.

While the pertinence of Swashbuckler / Lore Bard could be more debatable (although even so there could be many things to justify it at least for lvl 3 dip), it makes a very great combo with Valor Bard.

Extra Attack from Valor means extra chance to inflict Sneak Attack, extra Expertise and Reliable Talent from Rogue makes you a beast in every proficient skill, Cunning Action means you can more easily go help an ally, freely disengage from melee and double your movement And you get the great defensive reaction abilities which complement the lack of Fighting Style of the Lore Bard and means less/better uses of your Inspiration die.

Even for a Lore Bard, it can be a great option...
Reliable Talent becomes even more powerful since you know extra skills from Lore.
Cunning Action means you can disengage from a melee enemy to move away or cast your attack spell without disadvantage, dash to get optimal distance for an attack or spell before backtracking to safety, or hide to prepare/concentrate without risk.
Sneak Attack can be enabled with a Magic Secret cantrips or even a plain ranged weapon, giving an actual decent "sustained damage", better than Vicious Mockery.
AND, the bonus to initiative of swashbuckler means you have a much better chance to be the first to act in the fight, which you can use if only to help friends (Faerie Fire) or try and change the game rules (Bestow Curse, Slow, Blindness).

IMO, for a Valor Bard, Swashbuckler Rogue is a given, as strong or better than Fighter depending on the build focus.
For a Lore Bard, I'd say Swashbuckler is a clear winner for dips as low as 3. Above lvl 5, I'd prefer Arcane Trickster because the lvl 9 is not so further away and would synergize greatly with all Bard debuffs, making it a fair trade for the loss of spellcasting.

[wunderkid]

I am confused. To the guy who wanted to play a Paladin/Bard you said he is gona have problems, and now Bard/Rogue is supposed to be great?
Ok, Rogue is pretty front-loaded, but Swashbuckler does not advance spellcasting, and providing Inspiration interferes with off-hand attacks. If you go Valor, Medium Armor quickly becomes redundat, if you go Lore delaying your spell progression will hurt even more.

What does a Rogue add to a Bard, that it really needs? Ok, probably DPR, but Warlock2 does it much better.
What does a Bard add to a Rogue, that it really needs? Nothing, unless the party has no other healer/controller.
Bards profit much more from Cleric1 or Warlock2, and Rogues profit much more from Battlemaster, or Arcana Cleric, or Sorcerer.
I agree Bard/Rogue is hard to do very badly, but it is impossible to do great.

Rogue adds to bard with expertise and cunning action. Im playing a rogue arcane trickster 3/bard lore 3 right now, and the extra expertises really do give you a lot in terms of game play.

I have +10 to hide (with advantage giving them disadvantage from an uncommon item) which can be utilized to cast a spell then using cunning action to hide and avoid return fire.

When you're debuffing/controlling which is the role I've chosen you get a lot of attention from people not wanting to be debuffed/suggested/whispered/laughed so Hiding as a bonus action is a godsend and helps protect your concentration.

I have +10 also to deception. I can now talk my way (and the group) through a fair few situations. Persuasion would also be a good choice here for the same reasons.

I have a passive perception of 23 I think (10 base, 6 expertise, 2 wisdom, 5 is from an uncommon magical item giving advantage)

And a sleight of hand of +15 before rolling (thanks to finding gloves of thievery this is also uncommon I believe).

So what the rogue adds to the bard isnt DPR, in fact it costs dpr, but the utility that it brings is really top knotch. You'll never out dpr the fighter, and you're not going to have as many spell slots as the full caster but that's not just what you're bringing to the table at the end of the day you're a skill monkey who strains bounded accuracy, not to mention a lot of the low level bard spells remain amazingly relevant due to them being control effects whereas damage spells usually need higher slots to stay relevant.

I'd likely only dip 2 rogue if I was building hard to keep the 18th level magical secrets. But it's a blooming good dip nonetheless. I tried palabard and it felt like a wannabe fighter (that in my opinion palasorc does better but that's an entirely different topic all together.) The rogue bard has its own little niche of stealth control with a metric tonne of proficiencies and expertise. It fills a role that no other pure class can fill, pure rogues offer DPR and skills with stealth. Pure bards offer Control and skills but at the cost of being a target with not that amazing ac (this is along a similar reasoning that a lot of people dip one level for heavy armour proficiency, only I like it with stealth). The Hybrid sits nicely as a skirmishing controller who can skill their way through a lot of issues too.

[RickAllison]

A dip of 6 into Lore Bard can also be great to nab Pass Without Trace (as that synergizes better than 3 Druid). PWT, Reliable Talent, and Expertise give a level 17 minimum (presuming 20 Dex) of 37, which beats Tiamat if she didn't have true sight. Without a special sense that negates PWT, the Bard/Rogue is effectively impossible to detect barring someone optimized to perceive.

[Mervold]

I am not saying a Swashbuckler Bard is horrible in combat, but in a party with the usual amount of social interaction and a decent Cleric or Land Druid a pure Rogue performs better. The same is true for the other half.
And if you are in a social-heavy game than the question is how can the other party members survive without Expertise.

I have a passive perception of 23 I think (10 base, 6 expertise, 2 wisdom, 5 is from an uncommon magical item giving advantage).

Expertise is only added if you make a check, and passive perception is not a check.

Hmm. I don't quite understand how you could say this.
Swashbuckler never gets any spellcasting.
Bard would have to rely heavily on spells to add mobility or damage.

When I say flavor, I mean the roleplaying aspects. Both do the typical high charisma, womanizing, chandelier-swinging act. You are talking about game mechanics.

I agree a Valor Bard benefits more from a Rogue than from Fighter, but a Rogue benefits more from Battlemaster. Ripost is such a huge addition for DPR.

[wunderkid]

Expertise is only added if you make a check, and passive perception is not a check.
---------------------------------------------


"Here’s how to determine a character’s total for a passive check: 10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check"

It is a modifier that normally do applies to the check. Therefore expertise is applied.

Likewise passive scores are the "average result for a task done repeatedly" which means expertise once again as intended would be applied regardless of how RAW heavy you want to go.

[Citan]

I am not saying a Swashbuckler Bard is horrible in combat, but in a party with the usual amount of social interaction and a decent Cleric or Land Druid a pure Rogue performs better. The same is true for the other half.
And if you are in a social-heavy game than the question is how can the other party members survive without Expertise.

Expertise is only added if you make a check, and passive perception is not a check.

When I say flavor, I mean the roleplaying aspects. Both do the typical high charisma, womanizing, chandelier-swinging act. You are talking about game mechanics.

I agree a Valor Bard benefits more from a Rogue than from Fighter, but a Rogue benefits more from Battlemaster. Ripost is such a huge addition for DPR.

Well, as a fact, I don't agree either on the bolded part. ;)
Charisma is really intrisical to the Bard, because 100% of the fluff revolves about interacting socially in a more or less open and subversive way, and 85% of the mechanics also revolve around this.

This is typically not true for Rogues. Even if you don't take mechanics into account (with one in PHB and one in SCAG biaising INT, 2 in PHB biaising DEX/STR, one in UA biaising WIS, and one biaising CHA). Charisma is absolutely NOT a requirement for a Rogue to "be" a Rogue or play as a Rogue, and it's logicial because the pillar of Rogue fluff is subterfuge and thievering, and using social interactions to achieve that are but one way among many others.

Many rogues embraced the career because they did not have the required background or intrisic capacities to create a place for themselves "in the light". You could be a very potent Assassin while still avoiding any contact with people. As well as a Rogue that has basically no brains but is a natural genius at reading people...
Technically, you could even play an Arcane Trickster with dump INT, and justify it by the fact that you somehow memorized the spells well enough to use them, although you don't actually understand what the symbols mean... :)
Or a Rogue that is so unimpressive, so "transparent" (= low Charisma) that it actually helps him greatly in hiding because people tend to not even notice his presence.

As for effectiveness of multiclass builds...
You give an example of "decent Cleric and Druid", but a Bard gets many exclusive spells compared to them and could still get a handful of the best spells they could have. Sure Rogue would deal much better damage but needs to ensure he hits, and Bard gets spells that are outright better than dealing damage in the sense that they could disable a powerful enemy in one round that a Rogue couldn't.

As for your last sentence, beyond the fact that I really don't see how we could compare Battlemaster and Bard since the benefits from each are so different, what you say cannot be stated as "always true statement" since you get many other ways to get or improve a Reaction attack (Sentinel, Warcaster) that have no use limit, compared to Riposte.