Kobold Avenger
Legend
Not the same thing, but Bards can get access to Phantom Steed and that can be cast as a ritual, it's not useful for combat but quite good for travel and exploration.
D&D (2024) 2024 Player's Handbook reveal: "New Bard"
- Thread starter Veltharis ap Rylix
- Start date
I'm not clear what you are trying to convince me of.
Not really trying to convince so much as discuss, but in a nutshell: the level a paladin gains access to a spell is irrelevant to the level a bard gains access to a spell via secrets as far as power level is concerned. Getting access to a paladin specific spell is no more powerful than gaining access to any other spell on the paladin list that isn't paladin specific.
I disagree with the idea that a 2nd or 4th or 5th level spell is somehow more powerful because a bard might have access to it earlier than a paladin when those spells are nothing more than another choice among many other 2nd or 4th or 5th level spells as far as the bard is concerned. It's not a power issue and it is the typical casters vs martials argument instead.
What matters is considering an ability iconic to the paladin placed within the spells and then seeing the bard take it earlier. This looks like it's getting corrected by limiting bard selection by class in the newer version.
Hopefully that helps clarify.
Chaosmancer
Legend
Okay, but I've also DM'd for a lot of Paladins who never bothered to take Find Steed because they never found it useful. So I don't see Bard's losing access to Find Steed to be a blow against any serious concepts.
It does -- thanks, sincerely, for spelling it out.Not really trying to convince so much as discuss, but in a nutshell: the level a paladin gains access to a spell is irrelevant to the level a bard gains access to a spell via secrets as far as power level is concerned. Getting access to a paladin specific spell is no more powerful than gaining access to any other spell on the paladin list that isn't paladin specific.
I disagree with the idea that a 2nd or 4th or 5th level spell is somehow more powerful because a bard might have access to it earlier than a paladin when those spells are nothing more than another choice among many other 2nd or 4th or 5th level spells as far as the bard is concerned. It's not a power issue and it is the typical casters vs martials argument instead.
What matters is considering an ability iconic to the paladin placed within the spells and then seeing the bard take it earlier. This looks like it's getting corrected by limiting bard selection by class in the newer version.
Hopefully that helps clarify.
And I agree with you if power level is what's being measured.
In a more abstract (and admittedly subjective) measure, though, it sort of bites that something that is built for the paladin can be sniped, by up to six levels, by another class. Working in one class to get a unique ability and then making it available to another class much earlier, to me, feels like bad design. (I'd feel the same way if, say, a Ranger subclass gave Uncanny Dodge at level 3, when the Monk and Rogue get it at 7 -- I'd see these as comparable issues.)
Having finally watched the video, I really can't stand this "niche protection" thing the new edition has going on.
Magical secrets can no longer pull from Warlock, Paladin or Ranger? This is so stupid, the spells on those lists were not OP to start with, when your Bard pulled from these lists it was usually for a cool thematic reason, not to pick an OP spell. Now they just can't do that. Got to protect the "niche" of Warlock, Ranger, Paladin and Sorcerer .....
Apparently this is true with Magic Initiate too. Wizard, Cleric or Druid only!
I hate the way they are dialing back creative build options in the new version and forcing everyone into stereotype builds.
Magical secrets can no longer pull from Warlock, Paladin or Ranger? This is so stupid, the spells on those lists were not OP to start with, when your Bard pulled from these lists it was usually for a cool thematic reason, not to pick an OP spell. Now they just can't do that. Got to protect the "niche" of Warlock, Ranger, Paladin and Sorcerer .....
Apparently this is true with Magic Initiate too. Wizard, Cleric or Druid only!
I hate the way they are dialing back creative build options in the new version and forcing everyone into stereotype builds.
I don't mind that.
I agree that those spells were not OP to start with, but those spells were typically only taken by niche builds and I can see the point where an iconic ability like the paladin's steed getting snagged much earlier by a bard than a paladin can be concerning to paladin players.
It's not like the cleric, druid, and wizard (the biggest list in the game) lists aren't full of plenty of spells with which to work. I believe those lists still allow for plenty of creativity regardless of potentially losing a few choices.
For me, it's an easy concession with the class because the bard will still adequately express what a bard is.
Overall I do think the class took a bit of a nerf between losing Song of Rest and changes to Jack of All Trades (if the playtest UA is accurate) while other spell casters like the sorcerer and warlock improved significantly, but a few spells isn't much when most of the abusive spells come from the main lists anyway; and Bardic Inspiration is improved. The number of those spells to which bards now have access did increase.
I'd also note that bards fall behind farther in martial capabilities with some of the changes, but overall the class still seems iconic and capable enough to me.
2cp
I will disagree here at least in principal.
A paladin gets access to their 5th level paladin spells at 17th level, a bard gains them at 10th. Now its possible that a paladin's 5th level spell is designed to be equivalent to any old other 5th level spell....but there is not a strong guarantee of that considering anyone designing paladin spells might have gone "well this thing needs to be carrying its weight at 17th level it needs to be beefy"
Now in actual, perhaps your right, perhaps there isn't a single paladin spell that a bard getting 6-7 levels quicker has any issue for, but I can see why you wouldn't want to limit your design space in the future either. If the second you think of a new paladin spell the first question out of anyone's mouth is "but is it too OP for a bard to have several levels earlier?"....than that stiffles the creativity of what you can do with a paladin spells.
UngeheuerLich
Legend
I think 5th level spells should be roughly equivalent in power. Otherwise the paladin should have been a full caster with to begin with.
This is what I always liked about the 5e bard. They always were powerful spellcasters in D&D. They sometimes had spells that other classes got later and some spells thus were really powerful for the bard spell level.
I don't want that to be reproduced with paladins.
Similar Threads
