Starting at 6th level, when casting a bard spell that deals damage or restores hit points through the Spiritual Focus, roll a d6 and gain a bonus to one damage or healing roll equal to the number rolled. A divine bard learns and casts spells as a normal bard, with some minor exceptions. A divine bard’s spells are divine spells, not arcane spells. To learn or cast a spell, a divine bard must have a Wisdom score equal to at least 10 + the spell level.
Bards can already cast ritual spells, but they are strictly limited by the fact that they permanently learn spells. Low-level spells, even if they are rituals, might need to be replaced to make a bard spell. Bards gain class features such as hit points, which are 1d8 per bard level. They cast spells using spell slots, which are recovered after a long rest.
A bard’s primary ability score is Charisma, which must be 13 or higher to play a bard or multiclass as one. Bards cast arcane spells, and healing spells were arcane when a bard cast them in 3e, 4e, and 5e.
The Dragon Compendium is a compilation of material from Dragon, which discusses the differences between a bard casting Cure Wounds and a Cleric casting Cure Wounds. Arcane casters, such as Bards, Sorcerers, Wizards, and Warlocks, cast spells that pull directly on the Weave. Divine casters, such as Clerics, cast spells that draw from the bard spell list.
📹 D&D Spellcasting Explained | Part 1
This is spellcasting explained for D&D 5e! Here in part 1, we’ll go over go over spell levels, casting at higher levels, spell slots, …
Who is the patron god of the bards?
Oghma, also known as Ogma/Ogmios, is the Celtic God of Language, Literature, Eloquence, and Ideas and Knowledge. He is often depicted with chains connecting his tongue to his followers, who are slaves to his eloquence. In this painting, the vines of the Tree of Life and Knowledge connect Oghma to his subjects, who bow their heads in humility while dancing within the realm of the Bard. The Celtic Shaman used a Crane Skin bag to carry his Ogham tools, with the sacred bird representing the Mysteries of the Eloquence of the Bard.
Oghma is credited with the invention of the Celtic writing system Ogham, which is mentioned in ancient Welsh texts like Llyfr Taliesin and the Mabinogi. The Celtic Shaman is also known as Cermait, meaning “honey-mouthed” or “sunny-faced”.
Who uses divine magic?
Divine magic, a type of magic, is primarily used by clerics, druids, rangers, paladins, and blackguards. These spellcasters cannot directly manipulate the Weave, but they often receive their power from their patron deities, often viewing it as coming from nature. Only deities with a direct tie to nature can provide spell power to druids. When divine spellcasters use their magical power, a tangible feeling of appreciation is felt, manifesting in different ways depending on the practitioner’s patron.
Can a bard cast a ritual spell?
Ritual casting is a method where spells are cast as rituals, increasing their casting time by 10 minutes without consuming a spell slot. This is a useful technique for wizards, bards, druids, clerics, and artificers, as it allows them to cast spells outside of combat. In D and D 5e, certain spells have a “ritual” tag, allowing players to cast them normally or as rituals. When cast as rituals, the casting time increases by 10 minutes and doesn’t consume any spell slots, making ritual spells useful for conserving a character’s spell slots.
For instance, casting Augury as a ritual takes 11 minutes, a minute longer than normal casting and 10 minutes for the ritual. Spell slots are a crucial mechanic in every 5e spellcasting class, as every spell casts expends a spell slot, limiting the number of spells a character can cast in a day.
Can bards cast fireball?
The Fireball spell can be utilized by clerics, druids, and bards through subclass features or spell choices. By selecting spells that complement the Fireball’s damage type or combining it with other class abilities, players can create a devastating combination that suits their character’s playstyle. Variant options and alternative spells offer unique benefits and abilities, allowing for customization and adaptability to different situations. One popular variant is the “Delayed Blast Fireball”, which creates a dormant fireball for trap setting or explosive surprise.
Who is the goddess of the bards?
Brigid the Goddess, born on February 1st, was a nurturing goddess who set up a school in Kildare, teaching her followers how to gather healing herbs, tend livestock, and forge iron into tools. They spent thirty years in service to her, learning, tending to her sacred grove, working, and teaching. Brigid’s grove had an ancient oak tree, a healing well, and a sacred flame. Nineteen of her followers, all women, tended the flame, which was tended by Brigid herself on the 20th day.
Brigid was said to reward offerings, leading to the custom of throwing coins into wells to honor her. She inspired poets and musicians and was married to Senchán Torpéist, the author of the Tain Bo Cuainge. One day, two lepers came to her for healing, and she instructed them to bathe each other in her sacred well until their sores were gone. The first leper bathed his companion faithfully, but the healed man couldn’t touch the other, leading Brigid to strike him down with leprosy again.
She then wrapped the other leper in her mantle, and his disease was gone instantly. Brigid the Goddess was a powerful figure in Irish mythology, known for her teachings and inspiring influence on poets and musicians.
What classes use divine magic?
Divine magic, or the Power, is a form of magic granted by prayer to the gods and practitioners are known as divine spellcasters. It requires the Weave for function and cannot be directly manipulated. This type of magic is predominantly used by clerics, druids, rangers, paladins, and blackguards. Druids receive their power from their patron deities, but they often view it as coming from nature. Only deities with a direct connection to nature can provide spell power to druids. When using divine magic, a tangible feeling of appreciation is felt, depending on the practitioner’s patron.
Do bards have gods?
Bards were typically drawn to the worship of magic gods like Corellon and Selûne, while good bards might worship Bahamut or Moradin. Less moralistic bards might worship Lolth, Tiamat, or Zehir. It’s impossible to predict what will make a person laugh, but it’s advisable to observe what makes them laugh. It’s a good idea to bridle one’s tongue and observe what makes them laugh, as it can help them understand their emotions and preferences.
Do bards use arcane or divine magic?
Dungeons and Dragons is a magical game that incorporates magic as a mechanic and gaming aspect. Classes like wizards, sorcerers, and bards use Arcane Magic, allowing them to cast spells. Even martial classes have sub or prestige classes that allow them to use magic. The game uses a two-fold magic system in its worlds and worldbuilding: Arcane and Divine. This may surprise those who have played only 5e.
Can bards cast any spells?
You can use a musical instrument as a spellcasting focus for bard spells starting at 2nd level. You can add half your proficiency bonus to any ability check without your bonus. At 2nd level, use soothing music or oration to revitalize wounded allies during a short rest. If you or friendly creatures hear your performance, they regain 1d6 hit points by spending Hit Dice at the end of the rest.
Can bards cast healing spells?
Bards, arcane spellcasters, can heal without the need for alchemy or divine blessings. They have not tried to find medicinal applications for magic, but Glizgo, an 8-intelligence Gnome Bard, managed to heal by shouting “FUCK” at level 1. This raises questions about the motivation behind Bards’ healing abilities. Artificers, who have advanced spellcasting to a point where it’s indistinguishable from magic, have medicine in their wheelhouse. However, Bards may be motivated to find a hangover cure and have stumbled into the secrets of arcane healing.
What type of magic do bards use?
The bard is a playable character class in many editions of the Dungeons and Dragons fantasy role-playing game. They are versatile, capable of combat and magic, with divine magic in earlier editions and arcane magic in later editions. Bards use their artistic talents to induce magical effects and are loosely based on the special magic that music holds in stories like the Pied Piper of Hamelin. The class is inspired by Taliesin, Homer, Will Scarlet, and Alan-a-Dale.
The name is originally Celtic, descended from the Old Celtic ‘bardo’, which in turn produced the Scottish and Irish Gaelic ‘bard’. The term was initially considered a term of great respect among the Welsh but one of contempt among the Scots. Throughout history, the bard has existed in various forms, with bardic traditions spanning various personal approaches, public conceptions, and historical contexts.
A bard is traditionally defined as a poet, especially one who writes impassioned, lyrical, or epic verse. In Dungeons and Dragons, bards are a playable class centered on accessing magic through artistic expression.
📹 Bard Playtest 6 One dnd: A Very Powerful Spellcaster
Timestamps: 0:00 Intro 0:37 Level 1 11:26 Levels 2 – 5 15:22 Levels 6-11 19:18 Higher levels 22:29 Subclasses general 24:12 …
I think a big point about backwards compatibility is that while people who stick with the old source books might not be interested in the new core books, they may very well be interested in the new expansion books and subclasses that come with them – and you’d be losing those customers if the new subclasses can’t be used with the old cores. In general adaptation of new versions is always slow-ish unless the last version was incredibly un-liked, so being able to cater to the majority who hasn’t transitioned makes sense monetarily.
I think the backwards compatibility thing is an anchor on their necks that’s going to drag them down to turning out a product that very few people will actually be really excited about. For American English speakers, using the ‘glamour’ spelling is akin to spelling fairy as ‘faerie’; making it more British makes it seem older and more magical.
Bard’s Inspiration as a reaction is neat and does make it simpler, true, but giving it beforehand is so much more flavorful, I like it more that way. And with a duration of an hour, it gives some options like sending someone scour ahead with Inspiration to help with a Perception or Stealth check even if the Bard isn’t around.
I think Counterspell and other reaction spells may have been a concern for the Reaction use inspiration. If the goal is to get people to use resources and not hoard them, having such strong competition for you one reaction per round could severely limited it’s use. At a certain level, I would be much more likely to hold my reaction for counterspell or absorb elements than I would to use it for a bardic inspiration.
Something I noticed with the Dance Bard, is that shocking grasp exists as a melee option, which starts as average lower damage but scales better, and scales with the primary casting stat. So if a Bard wanted to mix it up in melee, there isn’t really a reason to do so if you had the cantrips-known budget to spend on Shocking grasp. Also, it solves the problem of ‘Okay Bard, you’re in Melee and you hit the guy… Now what?’ of the Dance Bard. To compare to this UA’s Monk subclasses, while they could be better, most of them (excluding Way of Mercy) have ways of going into melee, and then getting back out again. They also have more movement on their own turn, which allows them to outpace pursuers. While Inspired Movement allows for more movement, it’s after a creature has already gone, and it doesn’t specifically help the Bard avoid being run at.
Whats frustrating is that for the most part, people really liked having standardized subclass progressipn, but the one thing that sucked was starting at level 3. Classes like warlock and sorcerer are now really weird because their origin and patron should be right when you make the character, not manifest later. And yet, now they axe the thing that most people liked while also keeping all subclasses at 3rd level? Its like the worst of both worlds
Our table almost always allows these kinds of post roll modifiers like shield or BI after the DM announces the outcome. We play on a VTT with open rolls, so the DM is usually immediately announcing outcomes of rolls, and attack rolls against players are all open for everyone to see anyway. This is mainly to keep the flow of combat and make things move quickly.
I do not care about backwards compatibility, if anything I consider it a huge downplay on my enthusiasm I’m fairly new to DnD and this was going to be the first time in my life I would see a new edition being made (started playing 5E around 2021 so it was already well established by the time I arrived.) That being said, I must admit I’m glad Inspiration is a Bonus Action once more because as a Bard I cannot overstate how important having your Reaction free for Counterspell becomes at later levels.
I played Bardic Inspiration RAW 2014. My players are generally much slower at their rolls than most optimized tables are, so anytime they give me a roll, I make sure to repeat their roll to them before making the pass/fail call, so the use of inspiration before the pass/fail was never an issue for us. I prefer it over the newest version, but the reaction inspiration was my favorite.
Do not forget the added utility of the updated Unarmed Strike options such as Grapple and Shove baked into the feature. The Dance bard gets those as options included with the free Unarmed Strike. Its basically 2 weapon masteries I foresee giving inspiration and doing a shove for free then taking an action
Worth mentioning that the ability to swap out Magical Discoveries spells will stack with your normal ability to swap spells. So after level 6, Lore Bards will be able to swap out up to two spells per level (one of which can be a spell from any list), which will be pretty nice on odd levels in particular, and generally will help prevent any spell selection backlog as you progress.
One thing you forgot to mention with the Mantle of Majesty interacting with Beguiling Magic: Command is also an Enchantment spell. If you are willing to expend the inspiration to reuse Beguiling Magic, you could use Mantle of Majesty to charm multiple people and then bounce around locking them down with Commands. It’s gets expensive as the number of targets grow, but it can be a really disruptive control option against enemies.
One of the few things I really loved this UA was Bard being able to choose their spell school, less for mechanics, and more for theme. A bard in a remote tribe might make more sense as Primal. A bard with the Divine spell list makes so much sense as for a lot of character ideas. Even if Arcane might be the most “generally powerful” spell list, there are so many storytelling options opened up here, and I love it. It’s right up there with Warlocks being able to choose mainstat. If only they let Monks choose mainstat, too. Ripping off that Pact Boon structure for Monks would have allowed classic Dexterity, but also Strength Monks to capitalize on Athletics, or Wisdom Monks just because that’d be fun too. Give each their own alternative defense calculation, and away we go.
Its true reaction inspiration was a great feature, but downside is you can only do one inspiration at a time. Sometimes if I know we’re coming up to a big battle I give out 2 or 3 inspiration before the battle starts. With reaction you can’t do it, and you give up your ability to possible shield or absorb elements depending on what might come your way. But reaction does make it so that you never have to worry about handing it out ahead of time, as long as you have your reaction you can help, so I guess I see both ways.
I’m of two minds regarding backwards compatibility. On one hand, it makes it easy to just fit in a subclass. There are many I haven’t played and there are a few favorites that I’d like to try with the new base class changes. On the other hand, it stifles creativity and restricts advancements in the base class, such as Bardic Inspiration as a reaction.
I absolutely hate waiting to announce successes or failures as a DM. So my game experience went exactly as you said. Started playing Inspiration by RAW, but then as everyone got more experienced, I started valuing quicker and snappier gameplay. So inspiration has been rolled after the announcement for a long time now.
I personally care about backwards compatibility. There are a lot of subclasses that I really loved the flavor and/or mechanics of, but haven’t had the chance yet. I have a feeling my group will move on to this edition when it’s released, and I don’t want to miss my chance to play, say, a graviturgist or a chronomancer.
I prefer innovation over backwards compatibility. The reaction mechanic for inspiration is a perfect example of a new idea I’d rather have over backwards compatibility. I also think changing the subclass progression was a substantial improvement to some classes (looking at cleric but especially at rogue).
I loved the reaction based inspiration! I have actually home brewed a fix for backward compatibility. Use the rules in play test 6, but allow reaction inspiration proficiency bonus times per day. This way you don’t interfere with established mechanics, but can still throw out those clutch moment inspirations. It is a little more to keep track of, but the bards at my table are really enjoying how much more impactful they feel getting to actively use the ability. Glad to see I’m not the only one who was saddened by the loss. BTW I also have a couple of bards of different levels in my game. The way we have dealt with the whole “who gave whom what die of inspiration” problem is as follows. Each bard has a number of the appropriate dice. When they inspire someone, they hand them one of those dice. That way they know how many inspirations they have left, who was inspired by whom, and the player with inspiration has that die sitting in front of them as a reminder that it is available. We use starkly monochromatic dice for this, and all of one color for each of them, so they are easy to pick out at the table. I can just look at a player’s area and tell if they have inspiration. It really saves on all that confusion, at a cost of about 5 bucks from the local game store’s loose dice bin.
If WotC plans to reprint old subclasses with player feedback in mind, then I don’t care at all about backwards compatibility. I have a Monk I’ve been meaning to play that works really well flavor-wise with the Way of Long-Death from SCAG for example. Also, you could do an actual poll on your community page, it’s good for the algorithm! Great article, appreciate the work you do as always!
Here’s the reason to use the RAW for the 2014 version(s) – the classic scene. The DM & player stare at each other across the field. Er, table. The DM holds up a pocketwatch playing a tinkling tone. Then suddenly a hero appears. With a pocketwatch playing the same tinkling tone. Sweat beads on people’s brows. Violins swell. Staccato guitar strumming. Horns join in. Then all goes silent except for the tinkling of that dang watch. . .Will you or won’t you? Suddenly there is a crack of thunder! Did you choose correctly? If not, you have to bring A Few Dollars More of munchies to the next session…
This version of the Bard is awesome. Related to bardic inspiration I really like the newest presentation, having BI linked to reactions meant that one, potentially, missed out on casting absorb elements, feather fall, countercharm (the reworked one), counter-spell, shield, and slivery barbs. Personally, I’m using BI rarely if its a reaction only, which is in direct competition with the spells listed previously. Being able to use spell slots to regain BIs could be useful, I like the option. The subclasses are ok to great related to changes made. College of Dance is a cool concept, and strong but I do agree that the level 3 feature “Fancy Footwork” needs to be buffed, but disagree with the idea that the level 6 features may need to be nerfed to compensate for the improvement. As a side note, I really liked the idea of Song of Rest as a feature I just think the implementations weren’t quite good enough, the 2014 version wasn’t that effective, and the re-work from the expert playtest was too specific/”you are definitely a healer now”. Backwards compatibility I can take or leave it, but I understand why they have leaned heavily into it. Take care all.
Just for the tables I have been at, the inspiration die was always used before the DM stated it one way or the other. Its never been an issue or awkward at all for us. If someone remembers that they had it after the fact, then they do miss it for the roll, just like they do whenever someone forgets they had a feature or a thing, no big. Asking to use it after or anything like that would ironically lead to what you mentioned, slowing down the game. I did love the idea of a reaction to inspire, just like the reaction change to guidance. I hope they do go back to that. Not only do I not care about backwards compatibility, I think it is going to get in the way of doing anything truly meaningful about how the game’s currently balanced. Every class in the game should feel fun and impactful, certainly having their strengths and weaknesses. The weapon masteries were a great step forward for that, but it was only a step, not the whole journey. Dex for example is still way over valued while strength is basically a dump stat on nearly everyone unless they are willing to except great weapon master as a requirement for a martial.
I personally feel that reverting away from reaction inspiration isn’t that bad. The issue was that reaction limits it to once per round limiting it’s flexibility. Also it becomes another hoarding issue of worrying about not wanting to use your reaction for inspiration when you may want to use other reaction spells/abilities vs. bonus action which bards were rarely worried about using.
Hi Chris! Both my tables use the original Bardic Inspiration, and I quite prefer it! Mostly because I think it makes the decision to use BI more of a prophylactic one, rather than a reactionary one, which feels like it keeps the player evaluating risk/reward more. It’s also much less powerful than knowing whether the roll would succeed or fail without adding BI prior, to the point where several of us feel like this is TOO good of an improvement. It’s lost all risk now. It’s almost a Legendary Resistance lite, and steps on the toes of Reliable Talent.
Dazzling footwork sounds incredible. Dexterity and Charisma are the main focuses or a dancing bard anyway, so it’s perfectly normal to start with an AC of 17-18 without a shield and with no disadvantage on stealth checks. It is a fantastic feature and does not come with downsides like having an otherwise bad race (tortle). Go variant human and pick this and a lvl 1 feat and you are off to the races. With rolled stats this is even better. Glorious feature. Barbarian gets Dex + con which is usually worse as they’d normally want strength over dex. Sounds a 10 / 10 feature. Fantastic.
I think backwards compatibility is important because of all of the 3pp who have years of 5e supplements out, and that helps keep them relevant and able to continue selling those books. It also helps me because I have many 3pp subclasses I have not yet been able to play in a game that I would really like still be able to use when people start moving over.
The other fun thing about College of Dance is that it’s an interesting lynchpin for multiclass builds. That might be more theme-forward than results-forward, but having a punching-character who isn’t a Monk opens up a tonne of options. Maybe not “strong” options (paladin still needs 13 strength and can’t wear armor, for example), but oh so much fun.
My tables play add-to-roll-before-announcement features as-written, but we are all comfortable with each other and on the same wavelength. We are not slow players. So usually in that beat after a roll is made that will likely be a failure, a player will start talking without the DM needing to ask explicitly if someone is going to try and modify the roll, either immediately saying what they’re going to use (sometimes clicking the feature into the roll20/foundry chat as they do so), or saying “I’m considering using this, but I’m uncertain due to X reason, what do you guys think?” And we have a back-and-forth usually lasting no longer than 10 seconds before a decision is made on using a feature or spell to modify a roll. I remember a time where the indecision could take a while, where players would look through their features to see if they had anything they could do about a roll. Sometimes that still happens if we are playing a one shot at high level, which I get is something you do a fair bit of. But overall, it hasn’t been an issue at my tables years.
As a DM I rule bardic as written in the 2014 PHB, BUT ONLY at times where I want extreme narrative tension. Rolling perception for travels on the road and using a bardic? Sure adding that bardic after I’ve announced its a failure? Also fine. But when it’s a boss fight, and someone roles a saving throw for some catastrophic ability, I will try and build tension by getting them to roll and then asking if they want to add anything else before I announce they/pass fail. It keeps tension high, when they roll like 16+ and I still say “are you you don’t wanna use bardic ” All that said, I don’t mind the change.
Backwards compatibility matters to me. Not enormously, but I would be lying if it didn’t matter at all. We’ve spent a decade building up interesting subclasses, and seeing like half of them no longer being supported would be frustrating, especially for those I had been planning on playing in the next few years. I likely would have made homebrew conversions for them that my tables would be fine with (I already use a homebrew buffed artificer), but for instances outside of that, yes, I think there are certain types of content that shouldn’t be made obsolete. Classes and subclasses fall under that purview. The other reason I’m glad levelling progressions for subclasses has changed is because artificer actually gains some really fascinating identity by having a subclass feature at 5th level, and I’ve had been sad to see that go.
Personally, I’m a big fan of them changing bardic inspiration back to a bonus action, as I’m of the believe Bards have far better uses for their reaction than their bonus action. Bardic Inspiration being a reaction meant you couldn’t use spells like Shield, Absorb Elements, Silvery Barbs, or Counterspell, nor could you use subclass features like Cutting Words, making their be anti synergy between the base class and its subclasses. Additionally, I don’t think it’s that big of an ask for people to just keep track of their bardic inspiration in writing (I personally have a set of green character dice I only put out onto the table when I have bardic inspiration, that way I have a visual reminder of both when I have bardic and the die type) so keeping it a reaction to not bog down gameplay seems unnecessary.
The current bard has countercharm to use as a reaction to help saves. Having to use reaction for inspiration was convenient, but also put too much pressure on the limited resource that is reactions. We always let effect that improve rolls happen when it is known if you succeed or fail. The most important reason for this is to not slow down play. Backwards continuity is nice. In fact, some of the subclasses they selected could simply have used their previous versions.
The 18th level feature is to prevent people from starting combats against rats or guards or trees to awkwardly farm inspiration dice in adventurers league games like back when you brought a bag of rats. I dont mind this change. You control if you deplete your bardic inspirations or not yourself anyway. It’s a good change that doesn’t allow RAW warriors to abuse it to farm dice. It is simple to understand. However, it could read “When combat starts your uses is restored to two if it is less than that.” or similar so someone with a single use isn’t screwed over.
As for bardic inspiration, I believe the best solution would be to offer both options: Bards can use bardic inspiration as a bonus action to give a floating bonus that can be used as needed once within the next hour, OR you can use it as a reaction to help an ally that just failed a save or check of some kind. This would be a much more practical use of the ability and would cater to those who prefer either style.
I play raw with regards to bardic inspiration. We are very intuitive at my table, with is a super privilige stemming from being very good friends and being quite experienced, so we can often tell if a roll is relevant for bardic inspiration consideration right away – before the DM has a chance to say anything. This tends to work just fine. Out DM enjoys seeing us immediately jump into discussion whenever there is an “uncertain roll” in play :3
I’m sad Bards lose the class identity of having a unique spell list with a limited yet strong collection of the thematically-appropriate spells across the Divine, Primal, and Arcane lists. Instead, they can choose between being a pseudo Cleric, Druid, or Wizard (only Charisma-based). I much preferred the direction of the Expert Classes UA and I’m especially disappointed about the abandoning of Songs of Restoration and the Heal option of Bardic Inspiration that ensures that the table can rely on any Bard having access to some kind of healing. I fear tension due to the Bard player wanting to pick the Arcane spell list, while the other players and the DM suggest that they pick the Divine or Primal list if they’re the only potential healer at the table. From level 10, Bard will eventually be a perfectly generic spellcaster as they have access to all three spell lists. Moreover, Bard players get decision paralysis each level from 10-20 instead of having Magical Secrets feel like an exciting special occasion at levels 10, 14, and 18.
People definitely need to remember that, by the time you get to Level 10 play, you’re not just suddenly going to change how you’ve been building your Bard that whole time? Like, there are a LOT of spells from Level 1 to 5, but you can only trade out one spell per level with this version of the playtest Bard, so when you consider that many games end around that Level 14 mark, that’s just not enough time to go back and get those choice lower-level spells without missing out on getting more of those higher-level spells. So, even though the boost is appreciated, you DO still have the opportunity cost that balances out that added flexibility (and that’s a good thing). As far as backward compatibility, in my own brain, I was fully prepared to dump entire books from my brain for the new PHB rules, and while there is some new appeal for previously-released subclasses due to those rule changes, I think I could have easily waited for those subclasses to make re-appearances in later sourcebooks. There’s also my concern that 5th edition might go the way of some earlier editions, where it becomes so bloated with content that it will become too difficult for new AND old players to find the games that they’re looking to play (e.g. LFGs needing to specifically include which PHB will be used, or worse, Session 0s attempting to Frankenstein hybrid rules that no one will be able to properly keep track of). We definitely paid an opportunity cost for backward compatibility, one that we hopefully won’t have to pay ten years from now when the game reaches a similar decision point.
Wearing medium armour as a dance bard feels like sacrilege. Plus, it totally gives up on the entire point of the subclass, which is its flow and its focus on close-range support! Leading Evasion requires you stand right next to allies, which is often a terrible idea because stuff Evasion works on tends to be AoE… but it’s great if you have another reason why you’re right next to your ally, such as acting as an off-tank using Inspiring Movement + Armour of Agathys, or standing right next to the enemy with Spirit Guardians up. And while you’re standing this close anyway, you may as well chip in a bit of damage with your bonus action and reaction unarmed strikes any time you’re using Inspiration anyway. Giving up Dazzling Footwork means giving up the subclass’s entire intended playstyle, which is being right behind the front lines next to your allies casting melee and small AoE spells. I also don’t think they can nerf Leading Evasion without disrupting the intended synergy with Dazzling Footwork. I think if I wanted to double down on Dazzling Footwork, I’d replace Tandem Footwork completely. Maybe a feature that lets you, as an action, spend a use of bardic inspiration to either take the Attack action (melee attacks only) or cast a cantrip requiring a melee attack, and also let an ally move up to half their speed towards the target of your Attack or spell and make a melee weapon attack against them (probably using their reaction). The ally adds the bardic inspiration die to the attack roll.
Backwards compatibility is incredibly important to me. I like making sure my players have every option they could want open to them, and if someone has a great Echo Knight concept Id hate to be like ‘ok yeah so you use the old rules but the other Fighter can use the new ones’ it’s just way too much of a limitation
I feel Inspiring Movement should be like the Battle Master “Bait and Switch” maneuver. Sort of like “May I cut in?” If you are within movement distance or 1/2 Movement distance and you can reach the ally, you can roll the die move adjacent to ally and switch places giving you or Ally boost to AC and immunity to opportunity attacks for you and ally for this movement.
Bard gives out an inspiration. Recipient fails some attack rolls and lets them fail. He then fails a saving throw and all of the sudden he feels the inspiration the bard gave him 45 minutes ago to reroll the save. To me if the Bard is no longer in control (no longer a reaction) then the recipient gets the reroll and bonus on the first fail since getting the inspiration.
I care about backward comptability. I have purchased both physically and digitally all 5e wotc content, as well as many 3rd party products with class options. That being said, I still encourage them to bring new exciting mechanics to the game (I want the UA Exhaustion back!) I certainly wouldn’t mind if they added extra features to some of the “dead levels” for the subclass progressions. I would simply add one of these new features to the old subclasses. For example, the new bard could get a subclass feature at 11th level to bridge the gap between 6th and 14th level. Even if the old subclasses don’t get any, it’s an easy fix for any creative DM: either pick one of the new features (perhaps adjust it thematically), have the player choose a thematic appropriate feat, or come up with a homebrew feature. PS: that In Memoriam bit was quite funny. But I am one of the players/DM that prefered the handing out bardic Inspiration dice mechanic. Our group hasn’t had any issue with it, and I like it when not all classes have the same mechanics. This felt unique to the bard. Must be in the majority since they reverted back. But if they went back to using a Reaction, I’d probably get used to it.
My biggest gripe about Bards is they give them personal flavor at level 1 with selecting a spell list. Two bards don’t have to be the same! Then level 10 comes around. All bards now have access to all spells. No more being different than another bard. Level 1 Bards get good flavor, and then lose it once level 10 comes.
As far as backwards compatibility goes, I actually think for the Bard specifically this is a hugely interesting topic. Yes, I would in fact like to play a divine Swords bard and add Divine Favour to my scimitar strikes (though I wish I could use a rapier…). I would also be very interested in being able to trade 1st-level slots for bardic inspiration uses to spend on Blade Flourishes.
The bard is why i dislike the no spell list option. The bards style and power level is so much different because its just as good at most things as a wozard and it can steal good spells from other lists and always has healing prepared… I doubt they’re going back on this but ill see how good the other classes feel before i get upset.
I think tools will all be consolidated and half of the rules are released. Crawford said you get bonus when making a check if you use a relevant tool for the check. So I think they’ll have you make an athletics check for bonking your hammer and get a bonus if you are proficient with the relevant tool or similar. This would remove the need of adding 1 skill for each possible profession in the entire DND universe (lockpickers, blacksmiths, woodcarver or whatever).
Caveat: I DM much more than play. If I was a player looking to ensure I could play these old subclasses at any table, my answer might be different. As a DM, who started in 3.5 but enjoyed adapting 3.0 material – I don’t care about backwards compatibility. If I like something from an old book I’d gladly tweak it to match the new rules.
Shield has always felt like it was designed without knowledge of how the majority of people would play the game. Even when I’ve tried to use it before an attack is rolled it’s frequently awkward to interrupt the DM’s description of an attack, and try and get before the roll goes off on something like a VTT
I’m not dead set on backwards compatibility for the new PHB at all. I would rather either have a new edition entirely that changes the subclass feature progression and rules for things that we’ve seen in the UA packets OR just a Tasha’s or Xanathar’s style book that revamps the 2014 PHB subclasses to the level that the Tasha’s subclasses are. I understand they’re trying to sell books, but I would buy a book that included a good Storm Sorcerer, Hunter Ranger, Four Elements Monk, or otherwise if they made the classes powerful enough to be playable in the game’s current state. I can’t help but think many other people would as well, considering the success of 5th edition. Trying to mix the two is creating a middle ground that doesn’t satisfy either party. I don’t necessarily want to go back to square one if the new books aren’t backwards comparable, but I really think if they just gave us some guidelines for porting over our 5e subclasses I would be absolutely fine with it. Home brew is part of the game for so many people that it doesn’t seem too far of a stretch and if they want to make money just rerelease them with the new progression as other content in the new edition like Tasha’s or Xanathar’s.
In regards to inspiration, typically played it like the 2014 rules, but typically they question was not whether the roll succeeded or not, but rather whether inspiration was going to be enough to make it succeed and whether it was worth it to expend the inspiration or not as something like AC is very quickly pinpointed by “that hit, that missed” going around the table.
I have played a Valor Bard for about 3 years in a long-running campaign, and I am telling you know that the subclass does NOT pull its weight at higher levels. Because past about level 9, what is a D&D player going to buff with a D10? The Saving Throw that could charm them/cut their HP in half, or a single attack roll? After a certain point, the players care about keeping their characters alive more than adding a D10 to their damage, so that feature completely dies, but then when Saving Throws get scary enough with stronger monsters, the addition to AC is rarely used either. People seem to look at Valor Bard, think “kind of good” and then leave it be. This is my personal banner to hold, my hill to die on. BUFF VALOR BARD! Bladesinger got an awesome addition to their extra attack, and I would love to see something like that added.
I think there might be a new trend where Glamor is distinct from Glamour in that glamor might refer to fashion and style, while Glamour refers more to magical tricksiness, illusions, and enchantment. Obviously related, but I think to Final Fantasy 14 which uses a lot of British spellings, and they have Glamours as magical items which players use to make their gear look like other gear they have, but which is used very often in the story for illusions and other clever tactics as well.
The only reason I’m slightly interested in backwards compatibility is if there’s a build I want to try and I haven’t had the time before the new PHB launches. About the college of dance – if they improve the fancy footwork, do we still really need the monk as a class? It seems more like a fighter subclass than a full class at that point compared to the bard-monk with full spellcasting dishing out unarmed strikes
I care quite a lot about backwards compatibility. Not just for the core DnD sourcebooks, but for the many great third party classes, subclasses, and sourcebooks. Books like Grim Hollow and Steinhardt’s Guide to the Eldritch Hunt. Classes like Blood Hunter and Illrigger (less important but keeps things in line). Subclasses like Gunslinger. The work that these authors put into their creations is important. Given the whole OGL issue earlier this year almost put these people out of a job, having the new core DnD ruleset work with any third party book written for 5e keeps everything in line and balanced so that they or any players wishing to use that content don’t have to work to change or rebalance anything. It can just be slotted into a One DnD game without issue.
One D&D Bard Playtest: Reaction Bardic Inspiration is better for the long term health of offline pen & paper D&D Revised Bard Playtest: One hour non-reaction was easier to program in a VTT UI 💻 Don’t know if there really was a conversation like that. Maybe they are dedicated to pen and paper and this is just a coincidence.
For tools I’d like to see Jack of All Trades allow you to make the roll at all if you don’t have the proficiency, but if you do you get the bonus to your roll. Magical Secrets – Alright, would rather it give access to another list, not both then have a subclass that gives access to all three OR have the third appear at a higher level. Calstone – my recommendation be the PC can choose 2 of the Power Word Heal, Kill, Stun, or Pain. Allows an good character who may balk at outright killing (PW Kill) may prefer PW Stun instead. Backward capability? Not that interested really, but I kind of understand it for monetary reasons. I’d rather they just give tools to a DM to allow it and how they can adapt to it if it is too powerful or underpowered. College of Dance is OP.
Backwards compatibility is just a hurdle at this point. How many cool things offered to us in this playtest were thrown away to cling onto backwards compatibility I wonder? There’s a reason we keep calling this 5.5e or 6e. Because this is an evolution. this is the next era. And we can’t move forward if WOTC is trying desperately to cling to the past. I want the uniform progression, and I want it without losing the Rogue’s shiny new cunning strikes feature.
When the revision was announced I wanted backwards compatibility. But since seeing what positive effects abandoning backwards compatibility could bring, I don’t care for it anymore. To me ultimately the backwards compatibility that matters is that the core mechanics don’t get changed. I want to be able to run old adventurers easily, adjust monsters and magic items quickly. Character options are the least important aspect of backwards compatibility for me.
When I hear “backwards compatibility”, I can’t help but think that if we’re still playing this new version of D&D in 2034, will Peace and Twilight clerics still be the best clerics after all that time, or will they be the new baseline that is powercrept over the next ten years? Because both of those options seem really bad to me. I’d much prefer they got rid of backwards compatibility and got rid of the ten years of baggage that goes along with it.
Re: Backwards Compatability. Do not care. The current version will have been out for 10 years when they publish the newest version. That is a long enough time to move forward without having to hold sacred the old version. The shift from 3 to 3.5 to 4 was only a handful of years apart and understanably led to some player resentment. But 10 years is acceptable. They need to stop being so timid and worrying about upsetting the “old edition” gronards on this one.
As far as I’m concerned If I need to buy a whole new set of books it’s a new edition. I don’t care all that much about backwards compatibility either. Since it’s a new edition and I need to buy new books we might as well fix all the flaws and smooth over all the existing rough edges without worrying about whether some things mesh perfectly with material published 10 years ago or not.
I hated the previous playtest inspiration using a reaction. It pretty much conflicted with everything else – shield, absorb elements, counterspell. You could argue that these are not inherently bard spells, and that the bard either had to multiclass to get them, or spend Magical Secrets on these spells, and that the reaction usage of inspiration was made to push bards away from these spells. But I dont buy it. I simply see it as they having fumbled it, because they kept the lore bards cutting words as it was, making cutting words conflict with inspiration as well.
Jack of All trades absolutely should not have been added to initiative, counterspell etc. That is an oversight as the rules were written on different times. It was not supposed to be this simple to make them so improved for so cheap. It was pretty much abuse, as these mechanics were added later. This is a good change.
Not necessarily the most powerful spellcaster but making the bard the most versatile spellcaster in the game really makes no sense in the fantasy flavor that I like, for my taste they should get more buffs and debuffing features by their musical abilities and don’t have any need to be a full spellcaster, 5e bard design is a huge meh for me, even they official movie know that
Mixed feelings about backward compatibility. Most existing subclasses need some rebalancing anyways (Twilight Cleric, every Monk subclass, Horizon Walker and probably Gloomstalker, Land Druid, most Sorcerers, Archfeylock and Hexblade, Devotion and Crown Paladins, Alchemist, etc.), but if there’s one that works for a table, and the player and DM can figure out a way to make the existing subclass fit into the new version of the base class, that should be good enough, and if there’s an improvement to the class that can be made, that should come first. As far as excitement over new options, there’s a ton of builds within the existing material that I’d like to play but haven’t gotten to play, so new subclasses aren’t necessarily the most exciting thing, so much as a better-designed base on which to execute existing ideas. Side note on cutting words- if the target can’t hear you, but can see you, you can hit it with sign language, make it read your lips, see a rude gesture, or telepathically project your voice into its mind.
I really do wanna focus on these arcane spellcasting classes in a vaccuum, but it’s hard not to look at them and think they’re too powerful when they get all these extra features on top of being able to use all the same spells with a superior spell casting ability score, while the broke wizard has to spend a fortune just to use their special feature, that’s probably gonna get nerfed in the next play test
Currently play eating a lvl 10 dancebard and I can say that they certainly are not a better monk. I rarely (so far) have hit anything with agile strikes. From my read the ONLY way to use it is with inspiring movement which is likely a fault of wording. Agile strikes is when YOU expend YOUR bardic insp, and I can’t find another way to do that outside the movement feature. You can’t give yourself insp and when other people use it it wouldn’t trigger (inspiration is expended on use not on giving it per BI wording)
I do care about backwards compatibility. There’s still loads of concepts in current print that I want to try, and I don’t want to be locked out of those options because I’m using the current content. If it was a new edition it might be a different story, but as they’ve been repeating over and over again from day 1 of the playtest, this is not a new edition, but a modification of the current edition. Now I do think that they could have made a conversion guide for prior subclasses without giving up on some of the more interesting structural changes they’ve introduced, but it would be a lot of work and I think they just don’t have the time.
I do care about backward compatibility because most of my friends started on dnd during lockdown and they buyed most books because they where told that was going to be compatible with what’s coming. I understand that for people that have been playing since 5e came out, probably have played a lot with the current content, but for the pleople that entered on this game a few years ago wouldnt be fair.
I think that backwards compatibility is a bonus, but I don’t want it to come at the cost of balance or good gameplay feel. They could conceivably release a separate pdf with instructions on how to make old subclasses compatible. In a perfect world they would do what they need to do to make the game better, then rework/rebalance all the old subclasses.
Valor getting weapons as spell focus means I have a new option for my spellbow. Previously, it was a warlock or an artificer. Basically the weapon as a spell focus allows you to cast ranged spell attack cantrips through your bow. Fire bolt, ray of frost, eldritch blast could be reflavored as spell arrows or “trick arrows” for a Hawkeye or Green Arrow type build. So Yay!!🎉 I’m extremely happy for this one change (as well as the base class feature to choose whatever Spell List you want means starting Arcane for the cantrips and by lvl 10, you are getting fifth level spells so lightning arrow, swift quiver and hail of arrows are all available. Too bad about conjure barrage and conjure volley now being ranger-exclusive, but it’s fine.)
The community along with many content creators have been complaining about how its not backwards compatible… even though it was, there were clear rules on how to use the old subclasses. Well ya’ll can pat yourselves on the back, you got identical progression, its everything you hoped and dreamed I am sure.
My dnd group is playing a homebrewed version of 5e where my dm has buffed certain things to be better (like monks) and nerfed things that are op (silvery barbs) so while I think we do want the new stuff to be somewhat compatible with the old stuff, what we really want is whichever one is more balanced. Although I think what’s gonna end up happening is we’re gonna keep playing with the 5e skeleton but just adapt certain things when us players ask like for example I’ve been telling my dm about the new rogue “manuvers” and how I think we should use them.
I tried to play bard with this test and I think is that he must get free Vicious Mockery as a cantrip. Two cantrips is not enough for the Jack of All Trades style of a character. His famous cantrip is probably will always be a part of this selection for most of the players so you will just gain one another cantrip to play with. At least previously I could choose between rapier attack and Vicious Mockery at early levels, but now my turns felt pretty one-sided and boring. I took 1 level of cleric and additional cantrips with feat just to have some selection of actions and AC to walk through the first levels.
There is a lot of third party expansion content (indipendent creators using Kickstarter etc) being created for 5e, and they often feature new subclasses. Some of these projects take years and lots of money to make, and people’s livelihood depends on them. Breaking backwards compatibility would make a lot of these books pretty worthless. There are a lot of these still in progress, and they would be outdated as soon as they come out. I see backwards compatibility mostly as a necessary measure to safeguard these content publishers (many independent third parties), rather than something for the normal everyday user that migh own a few older books. With that taken into consideration, I can’t really argue against backwards comapt, even if it isn’t particularly exciting for end users
I do care about backwards compatibility. And I’m not planning on sticking on sticking with 2014 phb, but I do want the options from other sourcebooks to work in one dnd as well because more options is better than less. It also allows those options to not be labeled legacy and obsoleted. Like, I like the rogue subclasses a lot, but I also want to try out the rogue changes and how they would apply to psi knife or phantom.
I would like backwards compatibility with old subclasses but I don’t want it at a detriment to improvements to the game. A simple solution is to simply say in the players handbook what to do if using a old subclass on how to adapt it, and adding a new generic subclass feature for classes whose new progression will gain one
One version of Bardic Inspiration I really wish we could have playtested would be having only 1 use of it, but it recharging whenever you spend a spell slot to cast a bard spell, so it’s not exactly a separate pool of resources. Connected to that, I think Countercharm should simply be something that happens when you cast a bard spell on your turn, no additional action/bonus action/reaction required: you do your bard thing, allies who hear you get advantage.
Out of curiosity, would you be able to combine the unarmoured defenses between the Monk and the Dance Bard since they have different feature names? If that’s possible then wouldn’t it be that you could have 20 AC at level 4? (10 AC + 4 charisma (18 with ASI) + 2 dex = 15. 15 AC + 2 dex + 2 wis = 19.) Doing standard array with a 15 in charisma + racial stat bonus for 16/17, 14 in dex, 13 in wisdom + racial stat bonus for 14, that gives you a 15 AC at level 1 which jumps to 19 AC at level 4 unarmoured rather than 16, and then that can be a 23 AC at level 20 if you use your ASI’s to get to 20 charisma and 18 dex. This probably isn’t optimised properly. I’ve probably just got my hopes high, but it seems like potentially it could be very strong.
Irresistible Dance effectively comes back on a short rest unless you’re under weirdly specific time pressure. If you can rest for one hour, you can usually rest for two hours, so first get back your uses of Bardic Inspiration, then use those to get the Dance back, then get your Inspiration back again
I always have multiple games running with different rulesets, some admit more homebrew than others, in the same vein, I’ll probably have a 5.5 only game, but Im probably going to have hybrid games where you can use old content (maybe banning old subclasses that have a new version) but as an Artificer main I see the need of some kind of backwards compatibility. With that said, I never expected that compatibility to be seemless and I don’t like that idea limiting changes on the playtest
In regards to backwards compatibility (BC), it’s a bit messy and unclear to me. WotC did make this commitment but it really depends on how they will define it. Will it just be adventures or also (sub)class progression? I’m pretty sure JC stated they will revise the leftover subclasses in other expansions after the new version of the core books (but that can take a while). A significant portion of the community is still skeptical of One D&D as a whole and we are used to all these options so it might be a big draw for people to combine the new and the old. But the new (sub)classes will be more powerful and have more QoL improvements so how many players will in practice still choose the old options? It might not be that much because as you said, all the options and tools look fresh. DM’s have a big factor in this too and they can choose to use a clean slate and not complicate things any further. For example, use only the options prior to One D&D or the 2024 version, especially if there are no conversion guidelines. WotC might lose in both cases, either they change too much and endanger/complicate BC OR don’t change enough to address the issues in 5e. For the latter, people could just stick to the old core books plus Xanathar’s and Tasha’s if there’s no incentive to switch. They made it abundantly clear they are not making a new edition so I understand not changing it too much. If they prioritize BC, the old issues would be imported automatically. For me personally, I also don’t care about BC because after Tasha’s 5e wasn’t even compatible with itself anymore.
I really don’t like how much this new bard’s spellcasting steps on the toes of other classes. I love how the current bard spell list pushes the class identity towards an Arcane support character. This just feels like WotC throwing up their hands, saying screw class identity, just give them everything.
Regarding backwards compatibility: I think this priority makes a lot of sense for financial reasons. From the point of view of the players who have spent money on all the source books, they would be likely to refuse to buy or use the new PHB if it meant that they lost their entire investment. To somebody like you who has made a profession out of D&D and analyzing all the new stuff, that may not be much of a sacrifice, but for the average hobbyist it might be a different story. For the large segment of the community that distrusts everything WotC does after the OGL debacle, you can bet that it would be widely seen as a big money grab. From WotC’s point of view, if they didn’t make it backwards compatible, then sales of books like Tasha’s would immediately plummet once the new PHB is released. And new offerings would be affected as well. Who would bother buying Bigby Presents: Glory of the Giants when it is released next month, knowing that it will be unusable in just another year?
I’m sort of middle of the road for backwards compatibility, in some cases I prefer the 2014 level progression for classes (mainly Sorcerer and Warlock getting their subclass at level 1), in some cases I prefer the new level progression (mainly Rogues getting their second subclass feature significantly earlier), in for the rest I’m indifferent.
I personally think backward compatibility hinders creativity and stops them from getting rid of some annoying features from 5e. For me the biggest example is keeping the Rogue’s subclass progression, even though it means a lot of rogues will do most of their career without progressing in their subclass.
Unless I’m misunderstanding something, I don’t think every Bard gets Vicious Mockery for free. “Whichever list you choose, it includes the Vicious Mockery cantrip for you.” implies to me that you have access to it no matter what spell list, but you still have to select it as one of your cantrip options, similar to 5E warlock subclass spells.