|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Nov 8, 2009 10:29:28 GMT -6
www.grey-elf.com/dnd/Bard.pdfCurious to hear your thoughts on it. Took the magic user spells out and replaced them with a healing ability, revamped the per-level titles and the way Lore and Charm work. Also revamped the XP progression.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Nov 9, 2009 9:09:58 GMT -6
No comments?
|
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Nov 9, 2009 16:30:54 GMT -6
I have never used bards in my games, so I am perhaps under qualified to comment, but that not withstanding, it does look like a very nice job greyelf. I do wonder whether it might not be tightened somewhat -- three pages seems a rather lengthy class definition in OD&D terms. Perhaps the class mechanics themselves could be simplified? The mesmerise mechanic, for example, uses a save versus wands but I'm not even sure that OD&D monsters have (listed) saves versus wands (or do they?). The various modifiers to the roll, and the additional test to implant a suggestion might end up being a little too "crunchy" in play -- although this depends on how much die rolling your group likes. Would it be enough to just roll 2d6 + bard's level - target's level or HD, requiring a 10+ for success, and any success allows a suggestion on a double? Could you simply say undead are immune? The healing mechanics could probably be simplified too -- could you simply treat it like an AD&D paladin's lay on hands, and say a bard can heal up to 2 hit-points per level per day? You might even allow a charisma or wisdom modifier to the amount per day if you were felt like it was a good fit. However, I really dig the lore roll, which seems like a great tool for the referee to introduce juicy background details into the game as well as a handy skill for players. I guess I'd like to see automatic success for "common" lore, and lore that the bard has encountered before... the bard should only be made to roll for obscure stuff. Overall very nice job greyelf, well done  |
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 9, 2009 22:19:39 GMT -6
I like it.
I like the Lore usage, which really is what Bards should be able to do. I also like the way you tie the healing ability into the Lore; that works pretty well. Should keep it from being overpowerful, but still gives the party some kind of healing. That's nice.
I'll be interested in how it plays.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Nov 10, 2009 8:31:29 GMT -6
waysoftheearth: What's interesting is that 90% of the description is taken from the original Bard class in The Strategic Review. It's been re-worded, but not expanded. The length is approximately the same.
Though I will say that if you look at things like the Thief, Monk, and Assassin in Supplements I and II, the classes when everything is taken together do take up 2-3 pages each.
As for the suggestion mechanic...it's the same as the original Bard's, only changed from % dice to a saving throw mechanic. I don't see a saving throw as particularly difficult, especially since it puts the rolling in the hands of the DM. The bard simply needs say, "I sing and suggest." Doesn't get simpler than that.
I don't like simply giving the bard magic healing abilities. I specifically wanted it tied into their lore ability. It seems you're coming at this from a "3 LBB" standpoint, which is good and valid--I'm coming at it from somewhere between the 3 LBBs, Greyhawk, and Blackmoor. That is to say, I'm not opposed to rolls to simulate abilities, but want to remove % dice from the equation.
|
|
