A Bard that is picking up the Lute of Fury for use needs to examine the group they usually play with. Bard class is the jack-of-all-trades class that helps the party out as a whole by doing a little of everything. So if the group thinks it would be far more beneficial to gain that +1 to attack in exchange for a +1 to damage, then the Bard should be open to carrying it in their repertoire.
My viewpoint is this token is meant to provide a way towards the relic, which is objectively a better instrument than the Lute of Fury. The legendary is even further above it.
In my mind, that makes the question of picking up the Lute of Fury as a must-have dependent upon the recipes of the relic and the legendary, and the consensus of the group with whom they are running.
Of course, the Bard is perfectly within their rights to decide if it fits their play style first and foremost. If the Bard doesn't like it or want to use it because they like sliding or slinging scrolls, then they aren't going to grab it.
I also don't like the idea of giving the Lute of Fury the ability to use it as a weapon in addition to the bonuses. It treads a bit much on the UR Widseth's, and if it serves as a functional reprint then why not just reprint Widseth's?
Adding the ability to do the Monster Lore check simultaneously... interesting, but it makes the Bardsong bonus math different from the rest of the UR instruments that the Bard is likely to switch to the second round, and thus changing the bonus on the DM, which I could see as being a bit frustrating having to shift the math around each time the Bard changes instruments. It's part of the design beauty of the Lyre of Lore in that the bonus doesn't change when the Bard switches to a UR. The relic and legendary keep things simple that way, as the Bard isn't likely to switch up instruments with them. That's clean from a design and play perspective, which I like a lot. However I haven't seen it clarified yet if the Bard can do a Monster Lore check with the relic and legendary, and if not then the Lyre of Lore will still prioritize over a legendary in the first round for me, making the bonus change something I feel is my responsibility to clearly communicate.
For me personally, the Lute of Fury feels like an uncommon in power. Hard to argue it as a rare to me. As a UR it's weird, and in the context of providing an ingredient to the relic and/or legendary it makes sense, yet there are other UR instruments that could have been reprinted to fill that purpose. That's what Jeff wants to do, though, so that's that as far as I'm concerned.
I thought for sure the instrument to use wands was going to be the next step, but Bards don't have many attractive options for wand usage at the moment, even with a Medallion of Mystic Mouth build. It doesn't have the punch of a solid Amorgen's scroll slinger build, nor the combat slider fun of a strength-based Widseth's build, so I can see that a wand instrument isn't something that is interesting enough to merit following through at this time. This set doesn't seem to be the right set to explore making a Bard wand user build worth it to me.
For my purposes, the Lute of Fury has a "wait and see" tag that will be decided once I see finalized recipes for the relic and the legendary. If it is a named token in the recipe, then I'll need one. If it is similar to the Redoubt recipes where any UR instrument will serve, then I won't be picking one up. I expect the relic recipe will name the Lute of Fury, though, and the legendary recipe will need the relic plus probably any one UR instrument.
If the legendary requires one of every UR instrument out there... That's a mixed bag of emotions for me. An alternative recipe like the CoA seems unlikely, but if Jeff likes that idea then fine. If it is the only recipe, then it makes it that much more difficult and expensive for new transmuting Bards to get to.
Avatar Image by Graven, 2015. Thanks, Graven!
