Please sell me on why I'd want to ever play a bard, when they seem so weak...

[Rukelnikov]

Eh, I mean. They do more damage, but they are also pretty commonly agreed upon to be the two worst archtypes. This is where I would rate success. The cost of doing damage is high enough to be considered a downgrade.

Wasn't aware that was the case, I only played a Lore bard, which I think is generally agreed is the most powerful college, but given the chance to play another I'd go Swords without a doubt, those guys seem pretty strong to me.

[bid]

Level 1: Hexblade 1 (for Wis/Cha save proficiencies, medium armor + shields, Shield spell, Hex)

If you go Valor or Sword bard you can even dual-wield short swords for 6d6+4ish (three attacks at 2d6 each from Hex, +Dex bonus on the first two) though it requires an initial setup round for Hex and personally I would just stick with sword + shield.

Even better, +Cha bonus since you're hexblade.

[sophontteks]

Wasn't aware that was the case, I only played a Lore bard, which I think is generally agreed is the most powerful college, but given the chance to play another I'd go Swords without a doubt, those guys seem pretty strong to me.

I think its a three-way tie. Lore is just the most obviously powerful. Both Valor and Glamour will fight for that top spot very competitively, and in many situations, totally overshadow lore bards.

Valor bards are mistaken as being hybrid caster/fighters. Really they are full casters with shields, medium armor, and an incredibly strong grapple game. There are no agro mechanics in this game really, so giving a bard 19 AC in a tough campaign is a really big deal. Expertise in one of the most useful skills in the game isn't bad either. Valor bards can compete with barbarians in the grapple game. Great at-will single-target CC.

And glamour bards. First, their charm nuke is all sorts of crazy in any social situation. It's potentially game-breaking in certain campaigns. But we are here for combat. The glamour bard inspiration is basically sculpt spell for bards, except its better. Healing and repositioning on top of sculpt spell is insane, and bards have plenty of powerful AOEs to make this a top-tier bardic ability.

Swords, unlike valor, really is a gish. The spellcasting and fighting don't play nice. He has to swing a weapon to get the same AC bonus valor just always has on. If he's swinging, he can't cast spells. That's not a good deal for a full caster at all. And the actual swinging isn't impressive enough to carry the day. Its not bad, but its definately weaker.

[Crgaston]

No dinos allowed in most of our campaigns, sad to say. We've only had a single one that had zombified t-rex mutants.

It doesn't really change anything. Polymorph is a great spell to use on your teammates.

A Giant Ape is crazy good. It turns you or your nearly-dead ally into Huge beast with 157 HP and 23 Str, a +9 Athletics for grappling, and a 40' Climb Speed. You can grapple any creature in the game. You can grab a Medium creature, run up a wall or tree, then toss them up like a volleyball serve and punch them at +9 for 3d10+6 plus the subsequent falling damage and Prone condition. Or you could just punch them twice. You also have a decent ranged attack with the thrown boulder.

[Xihirli]

I don't much like the T-Rex anyway. Can't multiattack the same target when an enemy is just as dangerous at 5 hit points as 37.

[Bovine Colonel]

I mean if you turn a troll into a frog and blast him with fire only for him to change back into a troll and not have his regenearation nullified, what's the point of using polymorph at all?

The trick in that situation is to ignore the frog until the rest of the enemy team is dead.

More generally, let's say you've got 4 enemies. Three of them are smaller monsters, which your party can kill in one round, and one is a big guy that takes 3 rounds for your party to kill. The small monsters deal 10 damage on their turns, and the big one does 30. If you just do damage to them one at a time, starting with the smaller monsters, your party takes:

60 damage on the first turn (30 from the small guys, 30 from the big one)
then 50 on the second turn
then 40
then 30
then 30 again, since it takes longer to kill the big monster
then 30

for a total of 240 damage to the party. If you start by killing the big one, your party instead takes:

60 damage
then 60 again
then 60 (and the big monster dies this round)
then 30
then 20
then 10

which is also 240 damage.

Now, instead of doing nothing but damage, let's say you land a Polymorph or Suggestion on the big monster on the first turn, so he can't do anything until the party decides to fight him. Since this is a simple example let's say that not only do you, the bard, go last but somehow (?) your whole party doesn't get to do any damage on the turn you cast that spell. In this case, your party takes:

60 damage the first round, since the big monster is still up
then 30
then 20
then 10
then 0, and your party gets to heal up and act before the big monster now
then 30
then 30

for a total of 180 damage. By turning one fight (vs all 4 monsters) into two fights, you're stopping some of the monsters (in this case the big guy) from doing damage while you fight the other monsters. It only cost you one spell to take away 1/4 of the whole enemy team's damage, and you're still helping your team with damage and buffs and whatever else on round 2 and afterward.

If you can completely shut down the big monster so that it can't even fight back (Fear, Phantasmal Force, Hold Person, maybe Blindness, Suggestion to stand perfectly still so your Fighter can tie it up), or do something to shut down the big guy and someone else (maybe use Suggestion to make the big monster grapple one of the others, or upcast Blindness or Hold Person, or hit everybody with a Fear or Stinking Cloud) the numbers get even better--and it still only costs you one action.

[Potato_Priest]

Valor bards are mistaken as being hybrid caster/fighters. Really they are full casters with shields, medium armor, and an incredibly strong grapple game. There are no agro mechanics in this game really, so giving a bard 19 AC in a tough campaign is a really big deal. Expertise in one of the most useful skills in the game isn't bad either. Valor bards can compete with barbarians in the grapple game. Great at-will single-target CC.

At actually grappling opponents they indeed compete very well with barbarians. At staying alive after restricting an enemy to close range (the “secret” requirement for any grappler), they fall decidedly behind barbarians (and even grappler rogues thanks to their uncanny dodge and evasion, or grappler wizards thanks to arcane ward+shield).

At mobility (a nice boost for grapplers but not strictly necessary) they again fall behind the barbarian and rogue thanks to increased movement speed and cunning actions, but are about on par with the wizard.

At the end of the day, if I want a grappler, there are at least three other classes I’d choose first now that the prodigy feat makes expertise available to all.

[Rukelnikov]

I think its a three-way tie. Lore is just the most obviously powerful. Both Valor and Glamour will fight for that top spot very competitively, and in many situations, totally overshadow lore bards.

Valor bards are mistaken as being hybrid caster/fighters. Really they are full casters with shields, medium armor, and an incredibly strong grapple game. There are no agro mechanics in this game really, so giving a bard 19 AC in a tough campaign is a really big deal. Expertise in one of the most useful skills in the game isn't bad either. Valor bards can compete with barbarians in the grapple game. Great at-will single-target CC.

And glamour bards. First, their charm nuke is all sorts of crazy in any social situation. It's potentially game-breaking in certain campaigns. But we are here for combat. The glamour bard inspiration is basically sculpt spell for bards, except its better. Healing and repositioning on top of sculpt spell is insane, and bards have plenty of powerful AOEs to make this a top-tier bardic ability.

Swords, unlike valor, really is a gish. The spellcasting and fighting don't play nice. He has to swing a weapon to get the same AC bonus valor just always has on. If he's swinging, he can't cast spells. That's not a good deal for a full caster at all. And the actual swinging isn't impressive enough to carry the day. Its not bad, but its definately weaker.

Problem is, you are looking at a Swords Bard and thinking how you would play him as a Lore bard or Valor bard, play him for what he is, a gish, like you would play an EK or a Sorcadin.

You are not gonna be focusing on buffing anyone but yourself (save for Aid), and later your Greater Steed. AC is not gonna be a problem because you WILL be swinging a sword every turn. You will have to start with the tax lvl of Hexblade though. Also they make great ranged attackers.

[Skylivedk]

they are not very weak (plenty of folks before me gave examples of what they can do), but they definitely are lacking in the damage department. If combat is the main focus of your campaign, I don't wanna sell you the bard, to be honest. Even if you would like a support / heal / controll character and don't mind damage too much, I'd rather recommend a cleric (with heavy armor and shield) or Druid (shepard is great for that). Let's be fair: a Bard is really, really good with skills and had very nice utility spells, the trade off is combat abilities. If you don't use the former in your game, there's no compensation for the relative weak latter, and it simply isn't a great class for your game.

They don't though. They trade one type of combat effectiveness for another. Hypnotic Pattern and Fear are the two best level 3 control spells. Polymorph is the best heal spell until Heal and doubles as single target cc. Animate object is one of the best DPR spells in the game.

Their real weakness isn't combat generally speaking: it's certain creature types.

Do they only mitigate damage through healing or are there other ways to lower damage to party members for bards? Admittedly I tend to focus on blasters for spellcasting, hence my difficulty in seeing the value of bards.

Healing is very very bad mitigation. Causing opponents to lose turns, attack each other, attack with disadvantage/penalties are great ways of mitigating damage. Rolling legendary deception checks and cutting words on insight checks combine to a similarly great way to preemptively end encounters.

I’ve got to disagree with the assertion that bards are buffing specialists. While a lore bard who puts all their resources into acquiring buff spells will be about the best buffer it is possible to be, any other configuration of the class falls behind the wizard, the cleric, or both.

While bardic inspiration has been favorably compared to bless and guidance here, it doesn’t take a genius to see that those abilities are far stronger due to the number of dice they can give for the resource expenditure. (Though bardic inspiration does have the nice boost of not requiring concentration)

Further, bards don’t have access to the best buff spells like stoneskin and haste, except through magical secrets. This means that to even catch up to a wizard in the buffing department, they have to spend their extraordinarily valuable class specific resource.

Thus, by simple virtue of their spell list, I’d argue that bards are not the best buffers in the game.

Their situation is a bit better, but still not great in the debuffs department. A wizard again has a superior spell list (especially post xanathar’s with frostbite as a vicious mockery knockoff), though bards can catch up if they want to blow their special resources on being as good, but not much better, than another class. The reason I say bards are better here than at buffs is the spell list differences are less obvious and problematic, and the cleric isn’t also in the running here, getting basically zilch after the god-mode spell known as command.

Do they still make adequate buff/debuffers with a mix of skill monkey thrown in? Certainly. Just not perhaps as good at either as their previous edition history might suggest.

I agree that they miss Haste. I don't think I've ever picked up Stoneskin on any caster ever not prepared it when I had it for free. Bards have most of the good debuffs. Lore Bards are downright filthy with illusions due to the handicap they give to investigation checks. Since you can only run one concentration spell at a time, I don't think you should think of them as competing with Wizards. A bit with clerics maybe... still Faerie Fire + Bless = Enemies on the floor bleeding, crying for their mummy.

But the comparison between Bless and Bardic inspiration makes no sense.
A) they stack. Very powerful.
B) you end up getting 15(!) Bardic Inspirations per normal adventuring day. And you still have your spell slots.
C) BI ends up giving much bigger average bonuses/penalties

I think my real problem is that when it comes to odd effects that don't involve die rolls for damage, buffing or de-buffing that affect enemies, I find myself at a loss on how to use them. I tried polymorph but what's the point of turning someone into a frog in a basement if they'll just turn back into what they were the instant they take damage. I mean if you turn a troll into a frog and blast him with fire only for him to change back into a troll and not have his regenearation nullified, what's the point of using polymorph at all? Why have counterspell if enemies you face use powers instead of actual spells to counter? None of it makes sense to me.

I'd rather have a fireball or lightning bolt that I know will likely do at least a little damage if they save then try hold person or banishment and have them succeed on their save, wasting my only action for a turn.

It seems like you would benefit a lot from reading Treantmonk's guide to Wizards... And maybe also his video on Valor Bards. And IMO, he's not even close to maximizing potential yet.

Taking an enemy out of the fight is great if it's the right enemy. Otherwise, polymorph is the best heal in the game until tier 3 that can also double (triple) as utility.

It doesn't really change anything. Polymorph is a great spell to use on your teammates.

Disagree.

Well, I'd originally looked over the lore bard and if I were to start one at lv. 8, my spell list would go:

Mage Hand or Prestidigitation
Minor Illusion
Vicious Mockery

Comprehend Languages
Cure Wounds
Detect Magic
Dissonant Whispers (for a damaging option)
Faerie Fire
Healing Word

Heat Metal
Lesser Restoration
Phantasmal Force
Shatter

Lore Spells (from Sorcerer list)

Fireball
Shield

Ditch cure wounds. It's a pretty awful spell most of the time. Sleep, Thunderwave (especially if you have someone with Spiked Growth), Silent Image and occasionally Heroism (dragons) are all better. Maybe also let the Wizard do the detect magic.

I find Suggestion, Blindness/Deafness, Invisibility and Silence to outclass Shatter easily. I'd take Counterspell over Shield any day of the week. If give Conjure Animals a look if you have someone with Fireball. It's crazy strong. Hexblade 1 it's probably too good not to take. You can grab Shield that way and increase your survivability a whole lot. Also WIS > Dex as a saving throw IMX. Later maybe do the 2nd level if you really miss that DPR. Probably not worth before 5 or 11 even.

Problem is, you are looking at a Swords Bard and thinking how you would play him as a Lore bard or Valor bard, play him for what he is, a gish, like you would play an EK or a Sorcadin.

You are not gonna be focusing on buffing anyone but yourself (save for Aid), and later your Greater Steed. AC is not gonna be a problem because you WILL be swinging a sword every turn. You will have to start with the tax lvl of Hexblade though. Also they make great ranged attackers.

Nope. Problem is that your buffs are better spend elsewhere and you're a below average martial for most/all of the game. Your other abilities do not make YOU better at fighting. No synergy.

If you want gish, go Sorcadin, Hexblade, Padlock, EK, Arcana Cleric, Bladesinger (meh) are all better. Don't gish with Valor without dipping... And if you dip, seriously ask yourself if Valor is worth it compared to more martial (Swords/Whisper) or more control (Lore/Glamour)

[Agent-KI7KO]

I hit level 4 on my bard with one confirmed kill throughout the entire duration.

It was an elf child that a demon mind controlled me for one turn to kill.

I also only have exactly one healing spell and almost no damaging ones yet somehow everyone in this 100-player server wants me in their party.

If you ask me why, I honestly don’t know what i bring to the table aside my RP.

EDIT: i am weak in attrition combat but i bring control and so many out of combat utility that it balances out and i enjoy it.

[sophontteks]

At actually grappling opponents they indeed compete very well with barbarians. At staying alive after restricting an enemy to close range (the “secret” requirement for any grappler), they fall decidedly behind barbarians (and even grappler rogues thanks to their uncanny dodge and evasion, or grappler wizards thanks to arcane ward+shield).

At mobility (a nice boost for grapplers but not strictly necessary) they again fall behind the barbarian and rogue thanks to increased movement speed and cunning actions, but are about on par with the wizard.

At the end of the day, if I want a grappler, there are at least three other classes I’d choose first now that the prodigy feat makes expertise available to all.

Don't forget bards have the level 1 spell, longstrider, for +10 movement. And the grapple trip combo gives the enemy disadvantage on attacks. It's not the grappled target which is the problem, it's other targets nearby. With a high AC a bard can more or less take a target out of the fight by grappling. Beating their AC with disadvantage is pretty tough.

But mostly grappling isn't an all or nothing strategy. The valor bard pays very little for excellent grappling. I definately agree that a barbarian is better due to just being a better martial class, but the Bard is a full caster on top of it.

A barbarian may be looking to grapple targets by charging right into the thick of it. A valor bard is instead using their spellcasting primarily. But when enemies inevitabley push past the tanks, the bard can pin them down in a single turn with a high success rate and no slots used.

This changes over time. When valor bards get magical secrets they could pick up enlarge/reduce if they wanted to be more dedicated grapplers. At which point they have a pretty sizable advantage over martial grapplers.

[darknite]

They're typically support casters and skill monkeys but I've found the Sword Bard to be a very powerful melee character who also happens to be a full caster.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Yeah, Hexblade 2/lore bard 6+ with Fireball sounds much more appealing to me. Agonizing Repelling EB with Hex sounds pretty good and having Shield as well as having half-plate + a shield and charisma for melee attacking if foes get too close seems to be more in keeping with my ability to play a caster.

That's pretty damn solid, yeah. A Hexblade dip on any Cha-based character is strong, but especially on a Bard who otherwise doesn't have great damage options.

If you want to go the Sharpshooter route, a Valor/Swords bard is honestly pretty solid at it. No Archery Style stinks, but you have Hand Crossbow proficiency for Crossbow Expert, and at higher levels you can pick up Swift Quiver via Magical Secrets to turbocharge your rate of fire.

You might also see if your DM will let you use the College of the Storm from my Guide to Greatness. It's all about calling down thunder and lightning on your enemies to add some direct damage to the mix-- you get boosted versions of Gust, Shocking Grasp, and Thunderclap, and can spend Inspiration dice to mix in Call Lightning.

[Potato_Priest]

But mostly grappling isn't an all or nothing strategy. The valor bard pays very little for excellent grappling. I definately agree that a barbarian is better due to just being a better martial class, but the Bard is a full caster on top of it.

A barbarian may be looking to grapple targets by charging right into the thick of it. A valor bard is instead using their spellcasting primarily. But when enemies inevitabley push past the tanks, the bard can pin them down in a single turn with a high success rate and no slots.

Wizards also have longstrider, (and enlarge/reduce from level 3 onwards) so are still fully competitive there, and rogues and barbs have the equivalents always on without resource expenditure. Also, I enjoyed the sizeable advantage pun.

That said, I agree with your points below. A valor bard can make a relatively good grappler for low investment if you’ve already got the 4 good attributes necessary to make a strength based one, (dex for armor, str for attacks, con for hit points, cha for spellcasting) and they will be better off being a caster that can grapple in certain specific scenarios where it’s useful than trying to act like a dedicated grappler-tank like a barbarian.

I agree that they miss Haste. I don't think I've ever picked up Stoneskin on any caster ever not prepared it when I had it for free. Bards have most of the good debuffs. Lore Bards are downright filthy with illusions due to the handicap they give to investigation checks. Since you can only run one concentration spell at a time, I don't think you should think of them as competing with Wizards. A bit with clerics maybe... still Faerie Fire + Bless = Enemies on the floor bleeding, crying for their mummy.

But the comparison between Bless and Bardic inspiration makes no sense.
A) they stack. Very powerful.
B) you end up getting 15(!) Bardic Inspirations per normal adventuring day. And you still have your spell slots.
C) BI ends up giving much bigger average bonuses/penalties

Fair on bardic inspiration and bless.

Also, what do you mean wizards and bards aren’t competing? If you mean that they won’t prevent each other from doing their thing in a party then I absolutely agree, the more buffs the merrier. That doesn’t change the fact that wizards have better buffs and more options to spend their concentration on than bards, unless bards blow magical secrets on catching up.

Also, I don’t know why your groups don’t use stoneskin. It’s absolutely amazing on a fighter or other non-barbarian melee character.

[Rukelnikov]

Nope. Problem is that your buffs are better spend elsewhere and you're a below average martial for most/all of the game. Your other abilities do not make YOU better at fighting. No synergy.

If you want gish, go Sorcadin, Hexblade, Padlock, EK, Arcana Cleric, Bladesinger (meh) are all better. Don't gish with Valor without dipping... And if you dip, seriously ask yourself if Valor is worth it compared to more martial (Swords/Whisper) or more control (Lore/Glamour)

I was talking about Swords...

[samcifer]

Yeah, the more I think on it, the better hexblade/lore sounds like an option I can enjoy playing so long as I focus on damaging spells for the lore spells. It's good defenses, a single attack stat with good weapons from up close and range, no drop in HP like with the sorc route and the ability to use damaging spells that I understand the usefulness of better than most illusions, charms and enchantments (the kinds of spells I just can't figure out good uses for). It may not be an optimal bard, but it's what I know how to play.

[MaxWilson]

But the comparison between Bless and Bardic inspiration makes no sense.
A) they stack. Very powerful.
B) you end up getting 15(!) Bardic Inspirations per normal adventuring day. And you still have your spell slots.
C) BI ends up giving much bigger average bonuses/penalties

(D) BI happens after the roll, so can be used more efficiently. Bless turns a miss into a hit about 1/7 of the time, so in a party with lots of Extra Attacks it will add about one hit per round. 6/7 of Bless rolls are wasted. Bardic Inspiration has an efficiency/effectiveness tradeoff but if you just use it whenever you want the median bonus, only about 1/2 of Bardic Inspiration will get wasted.

Net: those 15 rolls go further than they sound like they'd go.

Also, not requiring concentration and being on a bonus action are both huge. It's like getting to cast single target Bless and one other spell, both in the same turn.

[Potato_Priest]

(D) BI happens after the roll, so can be used more efficiently. Bless turns a miss into a hit about 1/7 of the time, so in a party with lots of Extra Attacks it will add about one hit per round. 6/7 of Bless rolls are wasted. Bardic Inspiration has an efficiency/effectiveness tradeoff but if you just use it whenever you want the median bonus, only about 1/2 of Bardic Inspiration will get wasted.

Net: those 15 rolls go further than they sound like they'd go.

Also, not requiring concentration and being on a bonus action are both huge. It's like getting to cast single target Bless and one other spell, both in the same turn.

Yeah, I can concede to that. Those are a lot of significant upsides. Out-of-combat I still prefer guidance, but BI applying after you roll is indeed huge, especially for GWMers and the like.

[Skylivedk]

Also, what do you mean wizards and bards aren’t competing? If you mean that they won’t prevent each other from doing their thing in a party then I absolutely agree, the more buffs the merrier. That doesn’t change the fact that wizards have better buffs and more options to spend their concentration on than bards, unless bards blow bardic inspiration on catching up.

Also, I don’t know why your groups don’t use stoneskin. It’s absolutely amazing on a fighter or other non-barbarian melee character.

That as a party role, I'd see wizards more in competition with sorc's than bards. The other point is that the bard sharing some spells with the wizard, it frees the wizard to cast haste (or the sorc...). I'd say you normally don't have the toss up between the wiz and the bard when you compose your party. It's more likely to be between your sorc and your bard or your bard and your rogue. With wizard being the only INT class, they're almost mandatory in my book. As a player, my party just lost their wizard. Avg. IQ of party dropped with 50%. Not pretty.

As for Stoneskin: since it only targets 1 target, a limited amount of damage types and does nothing against status effects, I find it too limited. Normally, I'd rather my concentration slot go for an AoE debuff or something that mitigates both damage and spells (Greater Invisibility). It's rare that something dealing physical damage can effectively be held back by the fighter alone. It's not that Stoneskin isn't good... It's just not good enough ;) Arcane Eye, Banishment, Confusion, Dimension Door, Greater Invisibility and Polymorph and Otiluke's Resilient Sphere are all better in my experience. Depending on situation, I might add Evard's Black Tentacles, Fireshield and Wall of Fire. So definitely not top-5, probably fighting to be in top-10 if even that. Aka not good.

I was talking about Swords...

M'bad... Teaches me to drink (coffee) before posting. Eye-to-brain jumble.

[Bloodcloud]

What if I were to go the sharpshooter route? Would that allow for halfway decent damage? Is valor bard the only route to go without missing lots of spell slots and spell levels through multiclassing in order to get a second attack per turn?

My party has a Bard. He proved very effective.

Now, at low level Bards suffer a bit. They are not very resiliant, and lack damage dealing option. They don,t have a lot of spell slots, so they might spend a few turns not doing much, that is true.

But as you get more spell slots, you get to shine big time in combat.

Don't try to do much damage yourself. Act as a damage multiplier for others.

Dissonant whisper so the rogue gets a reaction sneak attack? Yes please!

Heat metal to debuff the big armored combattant? Attaboy! Might have just saved the party.

Hypnotic pattern to remove half the enemy from the fight? It's super effective!

That said, valor bard does get decent damage with sharpshooter. If your party is low on ranged damage option, might be worth it. Otherwise, go lore and grab the good spells.

Regarding damage mitigation, cutting word (lore bard) can turn hit into miss on a reaction, so that's less damage right there. The valor one can be used on AC and do the same. And you got some good healing options.

[Frozenstep]

I don't much like the T-Rex anyway. Can't multiattack the same target when an enemy is just as dangerous at 5 hit points as 37.

I could use the same argument to support the opposite. Against a tough, medium sized target, another hit may not kill them, but the t-rex's hit will at least restrain them. It makes for a better attack of opportunity too.

Only useful against a medium or smaller creature that can take like 50+ damage, though.

[Torpin]

im barding in 3 different campaigns right now, 2 lore and a valor, ive barded easily 30-40 times in the last two decades. so here are some fun things you can do as a bard.
1st level you can cast dissonant whisper, and if it succeeds possibly doubling your groups damage per round.
got a cleric in heavy armor and you guys need to sneak past some people great you inspire it. boom for the low cost of 1 inspiration your cleric can decently sneak since disadvange +d6 averages out to the practically the same as a regular check.
10th level you get holy sword, potentially doubling your fighters dpr, with just your concentration, and still take your full action.
15th glibness... let me say that again glibness. by now your charisma should be at least a +4 meaning it is impossible for you to roll less than a 21 a charisma check, i.e. dispel and counterspell which means unless they have cutting words you always succeed at those checks.
let us not forget you can always seduce your foe.

[LibraryOgre]

Bards don't do well in small parties in my opinion, but if you put them as the 5th man in a party, suddenly you've got a dangerous party. Between all the great buff and debuff spells, bardic inspiration, and magical secrets, you have a class that can fill any gaps nicely and make everyone else better.

It does gear more towards RP than combat, but it's no slouch when it comes to a fight. Jack of all trades applies to counterspell and dispel magic too, which is a bonus unto itself.

Conversely, bards can do GREAT in a small party that can't otherwise cover every role. Because they are Jacks of All Trades, they can kind of do all the skills no one got proficient in. Depending on their spell list (and college) they can fill any role you need... perhaps not as well as a specialist, but that's why they're at their best either when you need 1 person to fill two roles ("Shoot, we don't have a cleric OR a thief"), or when you have all the roles filled and just need someone to make everyone shine.

In a large party, the bard's job is to make everyone awesome. To turn defeat into hair-raising victories. To be a second set of hands on every skill.

Bards rock. They are the ultimate protagonist class, and go well with pretty much everything.

[denthor]

Your playing for fun.

[Waterdeep Merch]

This seems so strange to me. I think bards are one of the best classes in the game, and my player base agrees- I get one in nearly every game.

Their spell list has a fantastic mix of support and utility with some control thrown in for good measure, Bardic Inspiration is sort of like having a walking Lucky feat for the whole party and prevents disasters, and their subclasses offer mostly strong features, too. They're practically unrivaled in the social pillar, useful enough in the exploration pillar that you can forgo an arcane caster, and amplify everyone else in the combat pillar.

What they don't do is tank and throw out gobs of damage. You can only get so competent at those two things, regardless of build. I think that's why a lot of other players might overlook the bard- you just don't get to see those chunky numbers thrown around.

[LibraryOgre]

This seems so strange to me. I think bards are one of the best classes in the game, and my player base agrees- I get one in nearly every game.

Their spell list has a fantastic mix of support and utility with some control thrown in for good measure, Bardic Inspiration is sort of like having a walking Lucky feat for the whole party and prevents disasters, and their subclasses offer mostly strong features, too. They're practically unrivaled in the social pillar, useful enough in the exploration pillar that you can forgo an arcane caster, and amplify everyone else in the combat pillar.

What they don't do is tank and throw out gobs of damage. You can only get so competent at those two things, regardless of build. I think that's why a lot of other players might overlook the bard- you just don't get to see those chunky numbers thrown around.

One of my groups would get a bit competitive about damage... they did not like it when I started claiming damage that I enabled. That +1 to damage I gave you? That's MY damage, not yours. Did you hit only because I have you a +2 to hit? ALL that damage is mine.

It was always friendly, but a bard who keeps track of HOW they are helping usually winds up showing that they're doing a lot.

[darknite]

My high level Sword Bard / Hexblade is stupid amazing in melee and viciously effective as a covert operative. Having an Amulet of Health helps, though!

[Waterdeep Merch]

One of my groups would get a bit competitive about damage... they did not like it when I started claiming damage that I enabled. That +1 to damage I gave you? That's MY damage, not yours. Did you hit only because I have you a +2 to hit? ALL that damage is mine.

It was always friendly, but a bard who keeps track of HOW they are helping usually winds up showing that they're doing a lot.

Oh, definitely. The GWM Barbarian wouldn't be half as good without all those buffs ensuring his hits land, and the Rogue would've died sessions ago if the monsters weren't consistently fighting through disadvantage from Vicious Mockery and Cutting Words deflecting some serious blows.

While they don't do any direct damage themselves, nor can they survive it particularly well, they're a turbo charger for anyone else that can.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

One of my groups would get a bit competitive about damage... they did not like it when I started claiming damage that I enabled. That +1 to damage I gave you? That's MY damage, not yours. Did you hit only because I have you a +2 to hit? ALL that damage is mine.

It was always friendly, but a bard who keeps track of HOW they are helping usually winds up showing that they're doing a lot.

I do this, and also count all damage dealt to an enemy made vulnerable or helpless through fear or similar effects as mine.

[Hail Tempus]

One of my groups would get a bit competitive about damage... they did not like it when I started claiming damage that I enabled. That +1 to damage I gave you? That's MY damage, not yours. Did you hit only because I have you a +2 to hit? ALL that damage is mine.

It was always friendly, but a bard who keeps track of HOW they are helping usually winds up showing that they're doing a lot.

Exactly. It's the "but for" test.

When my Wizard casts Haste on the Rogue, allowing him to reliably Sneak Attack two times per round, half of the Rogue's damage for that fight wouldn't have occurred but for the Wizard.

Or, how about when the Bard hits a group of enemies with Faerie Fire, which increases damage output against those enemies by around 25%? But for the Bard, that extra damage wouldn't have occurred.