What spell more thoroughly embodies the cancer of nuD&D than Vicious Mockery? I can't think of anything. It's just so fricking stupid and just helps to turn bard into even more a joke class rather than something soulful.
 It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
 Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68 |
It's All Fucked Shirt $22.14 |
That's Shadow of the Demon Lord though. The scat fetish game that Reddit tries to pretend is better than 5e.
Look, DnD is shit, but you pic is Shadow of the Demon Lord.
Eldritch Blast, because it's SO fricking low-effort and generic and they somehow managed to build and entire class around it, and that class somehow displaced Rogue as the class homosexual That Guy Edgelords always play now.
Eldritch blast was a thing since 3.5
3.5 is nuD&D cancer.
now this is some funny revisionism. /tg/ is always harping on about "the good old days" of 3.5
now THIS is the bullshit. viscous mockery might be absurd but silvery barbs is just mechanically busted.
>/tg/ is always harping on about "the good old days" of 3.5
/tg/ is not one person.
Fair, it's at least 5 of us now.
> /tg/ is always harping on about "the good old days" of 3.5
>the good old days
Am I really that old? Or did all the literal fa/tg/uys keel over and die and I'm the only one that remembers 2E discussions here?, before the OSR generals?
I'm 30 and my entire friend group started with 4e. 3.5 is fricking ancient dude.
D&D 3rd came out in 2000, Ganker started in 2004; /tg/ didn't exist until 2007. Sure, you might have had some AD&D discussion here and there, but 3.0 was by far already a dominant presence.
True, and people freaked out about it then too. It turned out to be not that big a deal, because 10d6 damage every round at level 20 is nothing compared to other classes at that level. The problem with Eldritch Blast in 5e is that encounter HP scales differently and puts much much more of the Monster Manual in "one shot to kill" territory with EB's damage. So instead of a trusty reliable heavy revolver in your hand, you're carrying around an anti-material rifle that never runs out of ammo and doesn't have to be reloaded.
What would make a fricking bard soulful, OP? He sing a good blues song or what?
Bards have always been jesters and minstrels, I have now idea how or why you'd want to waste effort making them into something hip 'n' bas'd.
>What would make a fricking bard soulful, OP?
Music being a core part of the magic of the world has been a thing since the Silmarillion and even far before that in mythology. The bard is an incredibly soulful class and fits very well into a serious fantasy campaign. or at least it did before 5e shit all over it and leaned into the HAHA I SEDUCE DRAGON memes that this shithole board helped spawn.
The Song of Creation has never been a core part of D&D, however. So stop being a complete homosexual.
>The Song of Creation has never been a core part of D&D, however
>In the worlds of D&D, words and music are not just vibrations of air, but vocalizations with power all their own. The bard is a master of song, speech, and the magic they contain. Bards say that the multiverse was spoken into existence, that the words of the gods gave it shape, and that echoes of these primordial Words of Creation still resound throughout the cosmos. The music of bards is an attempt to snatch and harness those echoes, subtly woven into their spells and powers. - 5th Edition PHB
>Bards believe the cosmos is a work of art-the creation of the first dragons and gods. That creative work included harmonies that continue to resound through existence today, a power known as the Song of Creation. The bards of the College of Creation draw on that primeval song through dance, music, and poetry, and their teachers share this lesson: "Before the sun and the moon, there was the Song, and its music awoke the first dawn. Its melodies so delighted the stones and trees that some of them gained a voice of their own. And now they sing too. Learn the Song, students, and you too can teach the mountains to sing and dance." Dwarves and gnomes often encourage their bards to become students of the Song of Creation. And among dragonborn, the Song of Creation is revered, for legends portray Bahamut and Tiamat-the greatest of dragons-as two of the song's first singers. - Tasha's Cauldron of Everything, College Creations Bard
That is still not The Song of Creation, which is a specifica thing from the Tolkien Legendarium. You should be smart enough to know that, not have it spelled out for you.
I agree with you but
>using 5e PHB to support your argument
>5e shit all over it and leaned into the HAHA I SEDUCE DRAGON memes that this shithole board helped spawn.
First of all, that's been around longer than 5e has existed. Second, no it fricking didn't, you have to use a musical instrument as a focus, all of your actual abilities are tied to song and music. Third, Bard being le funny music man is moronic and lazy, and they should be performers in general, not just the homosexual in the back playing lute. Fourth, your spells can be flavored however you like; if you want vicious mockery to be a limerick instead of just a yo mama joke then make it that dumbass.
Flitting (poetically insulting people) is older and more traditional than whatever gay conception you have for the bard
cry about it
It's called flyting. To flit is to move swiftly.
>What would make a fricking bard soulful
NTA but in my mind its a matter of giving the bard enough internality with theming which minimizes Whedonesq snark and the rest flows into place.
A wandering jester who delights in bringing joy to others
A aspiring musician who draws upon adventures he has had for his music
A collector of stories who is just as likely to gather people around a warm hearth and spin tales as he is to say his poetic epics.
The bard is a conduit for the wonder of the world, in verse, song, and story to be brought to the mundane man. That is the craft of the bard and it is the soul of one. And by that link, that understanding of the world and its wonders, channeled into a expression, channeled into something which delights the hearts of people, is where the magic comes from
To boil down that wonder to "Horny Bastard" and "Snarky butthole" is a disservice to the concept.
That is not to say those can't be a part of the character but if that's all there is then you have just made a souless husk.
Its old but the song still hits
How about any attempt to make them more than yet-another-arcane-caster?
>How about any attempt to make them more than yet-another-arcane-caster?
They tried to do that several editions in row, with subpar results. Turning them into full caster is reasonable experiment. (And probably reasonable thing in general if we are talking about the caster-centric system like DnD.)
They can use magical secrets
so they can get spells from any class
the soul could do something with that for plot
or idk bagpipes
>What would make a fricking bard soulful, OP?
Make Bard as a class based around playing a song and weaving in different magical effects, with the 'benefit' of bard being that they can have multiple magical effects that require concentration going at once so long as they can fit them into 'the song'.
So you've got an every growing list of magic song effects to weave between, with stuff like 'All allies gain advantage on reflex saves, 3 turns then stop.' "enemies can't use reactions, every other other' and so on. So the bard is overlapping different durations and effects to hit the whole battlefield, orchestrating the combat and setting a tempo that the rest of the party has to match to get the full effect of the buffs. High level bards = more complex songs, more effects doing at once.
Then you also give them abilities to influence the fight in direct ways by 'choreographing' the fight, but at a cost to your song. Force an enemy to miss and attack a different target next round, but one of your song buffs gets turned off prematurely and you can't activate a new one for 3 turns. Give an ally an extra attack this round for the same cost, etc.
So it becomes a balancing act between battle-wide rotating buffs, and specific targeted interventions. Sure, you CAN stop singing and pull out a sword, but if you've done that you either have fricked up or burned out all of your song powers.
That is WAY to complex for the average DnD player and therefore WAY to complex for 5e.
The thing that really, really fricked with me was the movie poster, where Chris Pine has his instrument over his shoulder like it's a sword. Most moronic shit ever.
He was more like a rogue with point in Performance in that. I don’t remember him using one spell.
One of my favorite characters was based on Scots-Irish folk music, and he travelled around the world collecting tragic stories and putting them to song like a fantasy Alan Lomax.
>I don’t remember him using one spell.
Then you didn't watch the movie, because he uses multiple spells, most notably Major Image during the third act.
If this is about the scene where his face starts melting, I thought that was cast by the Sorcerer.
He also made frequent use of bardic inspiration. It wasn't shown as a spell or anything, just Edgin inspiring his party with some motivational words.
It was cast by the sorcerer, these people are lying to you. The Bard never cast any magic in the movie.
>He's never seen a rogue pretend to be a bard
nobody tell him
Imagine starting this thread and not picking Silvery Barbs, the 100% bullshit spell from a worthless splat book that is the most efficient use of a spell slot in the entire game.
What does it do
Forces a reroll on any d20 roll just made (usually negates monster crits or successful monster saves) and gives an ally advantage. As a reaction. I've literally seen it used witj multiple casters in a party and it's so broken it literally cucks entire encounters. The only hope against it is legendary resistances.
What level is the spell.
1st
the playtest version had it as a mid-level archetype feature and it was too good there so for some reason they gutted all the book's content and just made this better
>1st level
wtf is this bullshit.
A spell that's nominally supposed to be for a specific setting (wizard school for maximum caster supremacy) but 5e's too shrivel-wienered to actually put a restriction on it so it gets to ruin every other game it's allowed in.
there are people old enough to vote that are younger than 3e
From my experience with it- its a fantastic spell but it does come at the cost of your reaction like all reaction options- meaning no Shield spell or Absorb Elements spell or Counterspell or whatever reactionary options you have as a class or subclass. Plus it doesn't always work, sometimes you force the reroll and it makes no difference in the outcome and the advantage doesn't always matter, but both of these things happening back to back is kinda rare. The spell to me only becomes actually insane in one specific case:
>Order Domain Cleric
These guys at level 1 have a feature called Voice of Authority that makes it so when you cast a spell using a spell slot of 1st level or higher and that spell targets an ally you can make that ally make a weapon attack against a creature of your as a reaction. This combos so well off of Silvery Barbs as it not only forces a re-roll for an opponent but grants an ally an attack with advantage... its so plus its silly- I've seen monsters kill themselves for attacking someone or succeeding a save.
Doesn't help that Order Domain Cleric is also a very powerful 1 level multiclass not just for Voice of Authority but you get proficiency in all armor and shields and healing spells too.
I started typing to tell you that silvery barbs targets the enemy making the attack, not its target, but then I re-read silvery barbs:
"You magically distract the triggering creature and turn its momentary uncertainty into encouragement for another creature. The triggering creature must reroll the d20 and use the lower roll.
You can then choose a different creature you can see within range (you can choose yourself). The chosen creature has advantage on the next attack roll, ability check, or saving throw it makes within 1 minute. A creature can be empowered by only one use of this spell at a time."
Why the FRICK does it give advantage to a friendly target? Was 1st level counter-everything reaction not enough? I'm actually perplexed.
Like I said fantastic spell, easily in the top 5 spells in the game.
I would argue VoA can't be used with silvery barbs unless the creature triggering SB is an ally
I can’t even think of a 3.5 spell that can compete (at least for 1st level.)
>Requires sight
Seems easy enough for a DM to neuter when they need to.
First, which is absolutely insane.
It's a completely insane spell. IMO you should have to cast it before they roll the save/attack/check and it just gives them disadvantage. That way it would be a situational, but still useful spell. A convenient way of giving an enemy disadvantage when you really need it is already powerful, but letting them wait until after the roll, AND letting it stack with disadvantage has me fr shook
first level. Its a forced reroll, so it can stack with disadvantage. Its on reaction, so you can do it on someone who just passed a spell save, and finally you can do it on ANYTHING. Its power crept bullshit that will either warp your campaign so hard it becomes the bard hour of power or it gets banned / avoided by dm fiat.
The idea of a Reaction-based Bard spell is so fantastically fricking stupid. I was going to post picture related as a retort on busted spells, but man then I read what you wrote and damn.
Name two examples. I have no qualms with Vicious Mockery as a spell, but I call bullshit on your claim.
>picture related
Fricked that I guess. Let's try again.
That's a fricking dogshit spell.
>Loresong
Somehow made worse by also being a Wiz/Sorc spell. I like the idea of Bards being discount arcanists working spells into song, but their spell-list should be largely unique to them, because it should necessitate them actually playing and singing. And they should use magic as a wizard, since their magic comes from the study of lore and practice of tricks, not innately. The idea that every single bard has dragon blood is so fricking stupid.
why do they let so many spells be multiclass? Whats the actual point of multiclassing when there's an 80% spell list overlap. wtf
Bards insulting people so hard it physically harms them was a thing in folklore hundreds of years ago, moron.
How do you insult an unintelligent beast, or a construct, or someone who doesn't understand your language and doesn't care what you have to say?
It's 5e though, so you just get to do it anyway! Because all anything in 5e amounts to is a few damage dice!
Yipppppie!!!!
nobody tell him about Bloody Path
>Because all anything in 5e amounts to is a few damage dice!
The strongest spells and abilities in the game are the ones that don't do direct damage. Criticise 5e but don't seethe about what you don't understand
>How do you insult an unintelligent beast, or a construct, or someone who doesn't understand your language and doesn't care what you have to say?
What the frick do you think the enchantments are doing? It's also shorthand for "Bards will not be frequently cucked out of their one damage cantrip". No enemy cares what their murderers/victims have to say.
>Criticise 5e
I just did, dimwit.
HYTNPD&D
>/tg/'s most literate reader
>How do you insult an unintelligent beast or someone who doesn't understand your language and doesn't care what you have to say?
Tell me you never leave your house without telling me you never leave your house.
>or a construct
That's why it does psychic damage, which most constructs resist or nullify.
>Tell me you never leave your house without telling me you never leave your house.
Try insulting the squirrel in your tree and see if it figures it out
5e is full of nonsense like this where everything is to be taken at face value (deal 1d4 damage lol!) and is largely ignored in how it actually interacts with the world. Godbless this ruleset exists to filter homosexuals who play the ruleset and not the world they're in.
Realism is AIDS.
Why do you play in a setting where you're on a planet with gravity? Realism is AIDS, right? See how this can be twisted? Think through your statements more.
Realism as a writing/gaming concept isn't verisimilitude, it is slavery to mundanity. Please stop having opinions, you're clearly not qualified to handle them.
>Realism
Realism? What does this have to do with realism?
Again, I'm very thankful that the containment games exist for your kind. You frickers are always so off the mark it's insane.
homie are you moronic?
You literally put
>Try insulting the squirrel in your tree and see if it figures it out
>Leave your house
Every single one of your points is realism you fricking dumbass.
I didn't make the first post you replied to. I merely pointed out you are picking and choosing what you count as realistic, which is a reason why saying realism is bad is nonsense.
>homie are you moronic?
For a mouth breather preaching lore you're rather disconnected from what is trying to be communicated. But this isn't nearly the first time I've tried to talk with someone who leaps to the assumption of "realism???" the moment something falls outside of their narrow view of what constitutes """lore""".
Because you're using real world logic "a squirrel can not hear you insult it" to a magical spell that doesn't operate on real world logic. You may as well argue the spell makes no sense because insults can't cause death.
I cast Fireball!
Its magic homosexual, literally it says "With subtle enchantments at a creature" this means that doesn't matter if the orc only knows Orcish and giant and doesn't speak a lick of common he will still be hurt. This is the same with a construct, a beast, a ooze. Unless the damn creature stat block says they resist or is immune to psychic damage it works.
This is different in pathfinder 1e or 3.5 or 4e or whatever other system. Your realism argument doesn't work due to the supernatural of this being a spell. It isn't just the words that hurt it is the enchantments of said words. Its only verbal so really not many people will even NOTICE that you're doing magic. Sure its a string of insults not just "Your Mom gay" its more "Boy get your crusty, dusty, roasty ass out of here boy, your dumbass, loose ass, stupid ass, squirrel headed ass boy. Eating nuts, yeah I bet you like eating nuts you homosexual ass rat, your bushy tailed rodent"
Completely nonsensical ramblings that is obviously insults and I did the whole "black roast session" angle but it got my point across. That squirrel isn't going to beat my spell DC and 1d4, 2d4, 3d4 or 4d4 damage will kill it with just words.
Please leave your house, read the lore, and play the fricking game.
>read the lore
>the WotC(tm) nuD&D(tm) lore
HAHAHAHAH
>nuD&D(tm) lore
I mean 1e, 2e and 3.5 lore with some 5e. Hell flavor text. Oh wait you're a GURP gay who make half baked "wOrLDs" or some shit. Its like saying not knowing the lore of 40k in a Dark Heresy game or Pokemon when you do a certain generation or what about a star wars game.
When we talk about things like for example a spell in D&D we must look in the context of the system we are playing in and the damn flavor text. You knuckle dragging rape baby.
>You knuckle dragging rape baby.
The irony of a 5eTard using this insult is not lost on me.
>How do you insult an unintelligent beast, construct, or someone who doesn't speak your language?
Body language, gesturing, etc. Don't be a stupid homosexual.
>How do you insult an unintelligent beast
Well, why are you feeling offended?
It's magic, I ain't gotta explain shit
Were bards the original cyberbullies?
https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/ottos-irresistible-dance
Weren't you able to use a True Name in the spell in the playtest(or 5e in general? I never checked) to make it truly irresistible?
Except using a True Name in a spell changed the target's True Name because apparently you could just fricking change your true name easily now.
My general opinion of 5e D&D players-
>"My bard does armpit noises"
Sovl
Soil*
Goodberry and Tiny Hut.
Both those spells killed exploration and resource management the most important aspect of old dnd imo.
>not modifying goodberry to make components consumable
You did this to yourself. I'll give you tinyhut though, that gay shit is banned from any 5e game I run.
Yeah but it isn't old D&D, it's a different edition which has, at the very least in recent years, shifted towards a different style of play
If you want to change them then I made goodberry a choice between healing or the food thing and a creature that consumes a berry is immune to the spell for 24 hours after consumption, meaning it becomes more of an emergency ration if you eat your last or if you hit an encounter that causes you to lose your rations (i.e. they get stolen by wildlife or a kobold pack or something while you're asleep).
As for Tiny Hut, I gave it a GP cost (you could increase this if you wanted to go harder on the players for survival, it's 15 GP), and reduced its duration to 1 hour, made it so that you can't cast spells through it, the spell ends if the caster leaves the radius (10 foot radius), and the dome is opaque (meaning that the creatures inside have no idea what's going on outside while inside of it). The caster can instead consume the material component to extend the duration to 8 hours, meaning that if they want a full long rest inside of it it's going to consume the components. I also have an additional ruling at my table that if you use Tiny Hut or a similar spell for the purpose of taking a Long Rest, the spell slot is consumed after the rest, not before, regardless of if you cast it as a ritual or not, which means that if you try to use Tiny Hut to avoid survival you lose a 3rd-level slot during your next set of encounters.
Good modifications, but I prefer consumable material component for Goodberry and intelligent creatures knowing what Tiny Hut is and laying an ambush on you. Do you modify Rope Trick too? Since that is a better spell than your Tiny Hut at spell level 2 otherwise.
None of my players are going to take Rope Trick.
>NOOO LET ME BE ALL POWERFUL AND NEVER HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT TAKING MY WIZARD NAPS
Frick off.
>tiny hut
why not just ban the spell?
Seems easier than all those modifications that are all essentially saying "if you use tiny hut I'm going to be real mad and punish you for it".
It depends on the group. But if you're going to remove a spell, give them a new one or two.
I don't even modify Tiny Hut. If you're trying to use it to camp in the wild, it allows you to quickly find shelter from weather and wild beasts. But if you try to camp in a populated dungeon next to the "boss room", you might be greeted with a cave-in, poison gas or a missile barrage when you try to get out. You just don't get to cheese whole subsystems of the game with a single spell casting.
I gave Tiny Hut a utility; it makes short rests safer, while still requiring planning and thought and still offers the long rest option at the cost of a meager 15 GP. It's up to you if it's worth that GP or not, if you recently made a huge purchase (i.e. crafting magic kit or buying property/hirelings) then it might not be.
Your tables sound so fun to play at...I am being sarcastic just in case you couldn't tell
>Yeah but it isn't old D&D, it's a different edition which has, at the very least in recent years, shifted towards a different style of play
What style of play is 5e supposed to be?
unironic question
I'd also like to know.
I like my Bards to be like Thom in Wheel of Time, as in they are Rogues who know how to play music. Any song sorcerers, lyrical loremasters, magical musicians, troubadour thaumaturges, singing spell stingers should just be a branch of a more meaty spell casting class, not this hybrid of two, plus extra baggage
>fricking D&D and its...
>*throws dart*
>...Vicious Mockery!
>Send someone into a violent purging seizure, turning their body into an erupting blemish
>Literal forbidden magic tree
Anon, that's fricking great. Name anything in D&D even half as fricked up as some of the evil spells seen in SotDL.
>Name anything in D&D even half as fricked up as some of the evil spells seen in SotDL.
I think the BoVD had some fricked up stuff back in 3.5 days
Frick you. Historical barfs were bared from marrying because their insults were thought to have magical power and subjecting a spouse to that was considered abuse. There’s even one record of a nobleman dying after getting roasted.
Looks like a scat fetish to me, and I'm a 40kid. I know shitlovers when I see them.
There's a lot of weird things about bards in 5e.
>The noble insults your clothing
>Make a will save or take 6 psychic damage
Bard should have never been a class. A "bard" should just be any character with proficiency in a musical instrument and/or a performance skill. There's a reason Honor Among Thieves just made their bard into a "mastermind rogue" kind of a character: because casting spells with music is fricking stupid and everyone knows it.
I just don't think prancing around like a homosexual singing nursery rhymes should be the basis for a D&D class, let alone a species of magic.
Anything that’s not in the three little brown books.
Anything that requires Concentration.
so it's just a reddit insult then?
>if i wanted to kill myself, i'd climb up to your ego level, and just down to your IQ level and kill myself.
jump*
no one asked you to have a nice day
>you smell like shit and you look worse
Boom
Give a useful metric for what makes something "soulful/soulless" first.