TOPIC: Feedback on Bard Troubadour RoSP class

I sorely, sorely regret not frequenting the design discussion on this. The changes are not conducive to the way the class is generally intended to be played. It can be adjusted for via tokens, but it feels

First the Positives. I like the Song of Support special power. That gives a little versatility to the idea of Bardsong. I can either help with the attack, or help with the defense. As a bard is a jack-of-all-trades support class, this works really well mechanically and thematically. I also REALLY like the Enhance Bardsong spell. That is a fantastic change for the treasure finding spell. Big thumbs up there.

Considering everything else is pretty much the same, that is unfortunately the end of the positives.

My biggest complaint is the removal of Soothe Wounds and Soundburst, while keeping Inspire and adding a new spell, Taunt, that is completely against the best interests of the concept of the bard as a whole.

Inspire, while a fine spell considering it affects the entire party, is not as useful in the dungeon as having Soundburst or Soothe Wounds. While the removal of status affects is certainly a plus, in this instance Inspire should have been dropped for the Enhance Bardsong spell. The spell is far too specific, as to feel like a common token. Maybe this would come in handy for True Grind, but for general purpose it is practically useless considering the scarcity with which Charm, Fear, and Hold effects occur.

Taunt is garbage for a bard. Maybe it fits thematically, but from the bigger bard picture this is the worst thing for the party as a whole. The bard is providing an incredible bonus to the ENTIRE party for hit and damage. Why would the bard EVER want to take one for the team and risk those bonuses for the rest of the combat? The bard is not the tank for the group, nor should they ever take on that position for even one round. The bard should be avoiding getting hit, and when they are not able to wear the best AC items, have pretty soft HP totals, can really only mitigate this by wearing a Cloak of Shadowskin, not to mention that the Dwarf Fighter can already Taunt on command, the sum of the parts to make Taunt work for a bard makes Taunt a garbage spell, far less useful to the party than Soothe Wounds and infinitely less useful to the bard as Soundburst.

As it stands, the only 2nd level spell I would ever cast as a Troubadour is Enhance Bardsong, just like in the previous Troubadour when the only 2nd level spell I would ever cast is the treasure finding spell. There is no hard choice here. If the other two spells were Soothe Wounds and Soundburst, however, then I have a hard choice to make as I play through the dungeon. Do I hit all the monsters for 8 points of damage? Do I give everyone 3 HP of healing? Do I bump my Bardsong? All three of those are tough choices, because all three do something for the ENTIRE party, and with two spell slots at least one of those choices will not be used. So really the balance in the design is in making that "at least one" unused choice a difficult one to give up by making all the options compete with each other. Inspire just isn't as strong a competitor compared to Soothe Wounds, Soundburst, and Enhance Bardsong, and Taunt isn't even in the same league given its anti-help-the-party strategy of risking the Bardsong bonus.

My minor grief is over the Song of Support being heavy-handed with it NEVER EVER EVER being altered or augmented by a Bardsong instrument, and that it can NEVER EVER EVER be performed with Bardsong in the same round. Struck me as a bit too future-proofed, because what if there were a future legendary token that did allow for one or both situations to occur? Since I went through the process of getting the RoSP, I'd likely be interested in going through the process of obtaining a token that helps the Song of Support power, but I also know that since the class isn't available to the general public that such a token wouldn't appear in the usual annual collection. Meaning there is opportunity here for future options of token pursuit, yet the card seems to shut that opportunity down completely.

Last bit is a typo on the back of the card, which I believe I brought up elsewhere. Shout is described on the back, yet no Shout is found on the front.

I have no idea how this could be helpful, considering the cards are printed and done, but I felt I needed to give my feedback after playing the class this year. Maybe it helps, maybe not. Thanks!

First off, the RoSP classes are not supposed to be uber powerful.

They are about as powerful as the standard Level 5 classes, in some cases you could argue they are worse (I think the RoSP Cleric is worse than the Level 5 Cleric because it doesn't have the restore spell/power abilities, and many Wizards think the Level 5 Wizard is better than the RoSP Wizard). The main benefit the classes have is not needing any other token to get to 5th level (so... basically an extra charm or ring slot).

Beyond that: Controlling a monster's attack is an incredibly powerful ability. Combat typically is 4 rounds or less, so you get to influence 1/4 or so of all the monster's choices.

The fact that a Bard must choose between two incredibly powerful abilities (Level 5 Bardsong, Taunt) does not seem like a demerit.

However! The Bard doesn't have to chose, they can do both with Braino's Blessed Bohdran or Ring of Spell Storing, or the rare Lyre of Echoes.

If you're that concerned about it, have the Paladin guard you - but nowadays bards can hit AC of ~33 at the Relic level, which is unhittable at Normal and Hardcore, and like a 15% chance on Nightmare.

Templar is meant to be a battle-cleric. Critting even uncritable critters on an 18+ is awesome, if you're geared for it and can slide well. And that's in effect for every slide, not just once per game for the abilities you give up.

So I won't agree it's worse than normal 5th level cleric, but I won't argue it's better, either. It's definitely different.

And that was the point of the RoSP classes: to be different, and thus fun.

Brad Mortensen wrote: Templar is meant to be a battle-cleric. Critting even uncritable critters on an 18+ is awesome, if you're geared for it and can slide well. And that's in effect for every slide, not just once per game for the abilities you give up.

So I won't agree it's worse than normal 5th level cleric, but I won't argue it's better, either. It's definitely different.

Agreed, it's meant to be a combat cleric. I played it for the first time this year, in a group that was so well geared that I casted ZERO healing spells the whole run (We had a druid too.) Crit on 18 is awesome.

Hawk Fingle wrote: Taunt is garbage for a bard. Maybe it fits thematically, but from the bigger bard picture this is the worst thing for the party as a whole. The bard is providing an incredible bonus to the ENTIRE party for hit and damage. Why would the bard EVER want to take one for the team and risk those bonuses for the rest of the combat? The bard is not the tank for the group, nor should they ever take on that position for even one round. The bard should be avoiding getting hit, and when they are not able to wear the best AC items, have pretty soft HP totals, can really only mitigate this by wearing a Cloak of Shadowskin, not to mention that the Dwarf Fighter can already Taunt on command, the sum of the parts to make Taunt work for a bard makes Taunt a garbage spell, far less useful to the party than Soothe Wounds and infinitely less useful to the bard as Soundburst.

If I'm not mistaken, wouldn't this be a great way to draw an attack round to a paladin-guarded bard, especially if said paladin is an AC wall?

I never ran into this particular situation because I run mostly with wizards, granted, but I see Taunt as a great way to make sure that a monster wastes a round if your paladin is confident that they can hold off the force of the attack.

I've been on runs where there is no Dwarf, so that sort of strategy could be viable in certain situations

Tobin Blake wrote:

Hawk Fingle wrote: Taunt is garbage for a bard. Maybe it fits thematically, but from the bigger bard picture this is the worst thing for the party as a whole. The bard is providing an incredible bonus to the ENTIRE party for hit and damage. Why would the bard EVER want to take one for the team and risk those bonuses for the rest of the combat? The bard is not the tank for the group, nor should they ever take on that position for even one round. The bard should be avoiding getting hit, and when they are not able to wear the best AC items, have pretty soft HP totals, can really only mitigate this by wearing a Cloak of Shadowskin, not to mention that the Dwarf Fighter can already Taunt on command, the sum of the parts to make Taunt work for a bard makes Taunt a garbage spell, far less useful to the party than Soothe Wounds and infinitely less useful to the bard as Soundburst.

If I'm not mistaken, wouldn't this be a great way to draw an attack round to a paladin-guarded bard, especially if said paladin is an AC wall?

I never ran into this particular situation because I run mostly with wizards, granted, but I see Taunt as a great way to make sure that a monster wastes a round if your paladin is confident that they can hold off the force of the attack.

I've been on runs where there is no Dwarf, so that sort of strategy could be viable in certain situations

Actually The 44AC Paladin guarding the Bard on Taunt is really frustrating for DMs

Chip Bowles wrote:

Tobin Blake wrote:

Hawk Fingle wrote: Taunt is garbage for a bard. Maybe it fits thematically, but from the bigger bard picture this is the worst thing for the party as a whole. The bard is providing an incredible bonus to the ENTIRE party for hit and damage. Why would the bard EVER want to take one for the team and risk those bonuses for the rest of the combat? The bard is not the tank for the group, nor should they ever take on that position for even one round. The bard should be avoiding getting hit, and when they are not able to wear the best AC items, have pretty soft HP totals, can really only mitigate this by wearing a Cloak of Shadowskin, not to mention that the Dwarf Fighter can already Taunt on command, the sum of the parts to make Taunt work for a bard makes Taunt a garbage spell, far less useful to the party than Soothe Wounds and infinitely less useful to the bard as Soundburst.

If I'm not mistaken, wouldn't this be a great way to draw an attack round to a paladin-guarded bard, especially if said paladin is an AC wall?

I never ran into this particular situation because I run mostly with wizards, granted, but I see Taunt as a great way to make sure that a monster wastes a round if your paladin is confident that they can hold off the force of the attack.

I've been on runs where there is no Dwarf, so that sort of strategy could be viable in certain situations

Actually The 44AC Paladin guarding the Bard on Taunt is really frustrating for DMs

I can imagine. As a 40AC Paladin player, I can see the way their faces fall when they try to beat up my wizardly charges who keep cutting themselves.

Tobin Blake wrote:

Chip Bowles wrote:

Tobin Blake wrote:

Hawk Fingle wrote: Taunt is garbage for a bard. Maybe it fits thematically, but from the bigger bard picture this is the worst thing for the party as a whole. The bard is providing an incredible bonus to the ENTIRE party for hit and damage. Why would the bard EVER want to take one for the team and risk those bonuses for the rest of the combat? The bard is not the tank for the group, nor should they ever take on that position for even one round. The bard should be avoiding getting hit, and when they are not able to wear the best AC items, have pretty soft HP totals, can really only mitigate this by wearing a Cloak of Shadowskin, not to mention that the Dwarf Fighter can already Taunt on command, the sum of the parts to make Taunt work for a bard makes Taunt a garbage spell, far less useful to the party than Soothe Wounds and infinitely less useful to the bard as Soundburst.

If I'm not mistaken, wouldn't this be a great way to draw an attack round to a paladin-guarded bard, especially if said paladin is an AC wall?

I never ran into this particular situation because I run mostly with wizards, granted, but I see Taunt as a great way to make sure that a monster wastes a round if your paladin is confident that they can hold off the force of the attack.

I've been on runs where there is no Dwarf, so that sort of strategy could be viable in certain situations

Actually The 44AC Paladin guarding the Bard on Taunt is really frustrating for DMs

I can imagine. As a 40AC Paladin player, I can see the way their faces fall when they try to beat up my wizardly charges who keep cutting themselves.

As one of those wizards I say thank you!

Matthew Hayward wrote: First off, the RoSP classes are not supposed to be uber powerful.

(...)

Beyond that: Controlling a monster's attack is an incredibly powerful ability. Combat typically is 4 rounds or less, so you get to influence 1/4 or so of all the monster's choices.

The fact that a Bard must choose between two incredibly powerful abilities (Level 5 Bardsong, Taunt) does not seem like a demerit.

However! The Bard doesn't have to chose, they can do both with Braino's Blessed Bohdran or Ring of Spell Storing, or the rare Lyre of Echoes.

I'm not arguing that the RoSP classes should be uber powerful. I'm arguing that the choices made limit the versatility of the class, which given how pricey a RoSP token is these days plus the fact that you can only play the class once a year, makes little sense to me.

A choice between Bardsong or Taunt? You cannot seriously believe that is a choice that will take more than two seconds to mull over. If the Bard dies, that risks a bonus that is in effect for the entire party that directly impacts how effective the party is in combat as a whole. Ask any long time DM how often that Bardsong bonus made the difference between a hit and a miss, and Taunt is a garbage spell that will never ever ever be cast over Bardsong by a bard worth their salt in a dungeon. As I said, it requires far too many outside influences to make the spell worth casting, especially when there is Enhance Bardsong available. It is a no-brainer choice here. If I have Briano's or Ring of Spell Storing and am trying to decide between having the monster attack me or giving the party +4/+4, you can bet dollars to donuts I'm casting the +4/+4 spell every time. Taunt is a waste of a spell choice for the bard, along with Inspire. If the other two choices had been Soothe Wounds or Soundburst, then you would give a bard pause.

As a bard, I would never ever want the paladin guarding me. Ever. That guard should be reserved for the weakest AC/HP in the party, such as the wizards, or the cleric who is arguably MVP of a dungeon run. As useful as a bard's abilities are to the party, magic is far more effective over the full run. Let the heavies draw the attack aimed at the wizards. If the monster chooses to attack me, then it attacks me. What I am against is purposefully drawing the attention of the monster my way. Why would I ever do that unless I had some way of my own to avoid it? Forcing another player to use their abilities on me is selfish. I'd rather be self-reliant, and to do that would require tokens on my behalf. Again, given a choice between kitting out to make one spell work when there is an infinitely better spell that requires no tokens to make it effective, I'm using Enhance Bardsong. This is my whole point. There is no real choice here if you have ever played a bard. Just like there was no choice with the Treasure Finding spell for the old Troubadour.

Taunt should have never been a consideration as a contender against Enhance Bardsong during design, but that's that I'm afraid. Kicking myself for not being on the forums during the design discussion.

Hawk Fingle wrote: As a bard, I would never ever want the paladin guarding me. Ever. That guard should be reserved for the weakest AC/HP in the party, such as the wizards, or the cleric who is arguably MVP of a dungeon run.

That is your choice to not have the paladin guard you ever.

As a paladin player, I spend pretty much every combat guarding the Wizards. However, it *is* a valid strategy for the Troubadour to use Taunt, while guarded by the paladin. If you're taunting, the monster won't be attacking those 'weakest AC/HP' Wizards or the Cleric, essentially giving a round of free defense to potentially all *four* of those classes if the monster cannot penetrate the paladin's AC.

If the monster is wasting a round trying to get through to the Bard that is being guarded by a paladin, that in turn is potentially two rounds (depending on whether or not you get initiative) for the Wizards to unleash massive amounts of damage (If you're using the Troubadour card, I'm presuming you're a high level group) that might be enough to end the combat there, especially if you add in the damage being caused by the other members of the party in those two rounds.

It sounds like what your argument on this thread boils down to (especially when presented with the valid strategy of using the paladin guard/troubadour taunt combo) is that since you personally won't use it that way, it's a waste to have it on the card.

Brad Mortensen wrote: Templar is meant to be a battle-cleric. Critting even uncritable critters on an 18+ is awesome, if you're geared for it and can slide well. And that's in effect for every slide, not just once per game for the abilities you give up.

So I won't agree it's worse than normal 5th level cleric, but I won't argue it's better, either. It's definitely different.

And that was the point of the RoSP classes: to be different, and thus fun.

While this is true... DMs do not count the crit...

To paraphrase The room says the monster cannot be critted so that ability does not work here.

Kaledor wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: Templar is meant to be a battle-cleric. Critting even uncritable critters on an 18+ is awesome, if you're geared for it and can slide well. And that's in effect for every slide, not just once per game for the abilities you give up.

So I won't agree it's worsen than normal 5th level cleric, but I won't argue it's better, either. It's definitely different.

And that was the point of the RoSP classes: to be different, and thus fun.

While this is true... DMs do not count the crit...

To paraphrase The room says the monster cannot be critted so that ability does not work here.

That's a training issue if some DMs aren't following the rules. Maybe Stu can add it as a question on the combat DM quiz.