I know we're not supposed to have access to all the neat skills that squares have access to, but why not get a few skills?

We can already learn shield bash via the CMAN system, why not be able to learn it via the shield skill system and save a few points?

If all we could learn was shield bash, shield forward, and phalanx, I'd be happy.

I'm sure a similar discussion is going on in the Ranger world.

Yah, I was disappointed that they didn't allow some of the more generic shield skills for rangers and bards. Their shield users need just as much love as the other professions do/did/whatever.

>The issue is not overall protection for a bard or the viability of the ohe/shield path, but sparking some interest and fun for a shield using bard.
~Galenok

The initial release did a good job of improving the viability for those that needed it. This doesn't mean that things couldn't change and some of the SMans could open up to others. I think a limited number should go out to everyone, especially ones that require a group.


>I'll go ahead and agree. I think semis got a short end of the stick with the shield stuff. I think bards haven't gotten anything in a hell of a long damn time. Frankly there's been almost no professional growth or change in I don't know how long, since they "fixed" 1025?

This describes a lot of professions, unfortunately.

-farmer

>I think a limited number should go out to everyone, especially ones that require a group.

Agreed. They usually DO release group-based CMANs to everyone. It just takes a few years for them to get around to it.

The only one I really want is Whirling Dervish. That really by it's nature should be a bard CMAN. I can't figure out why we were skipped.

~ Heathyr and friends

<<<PS. I should note that it's possible for bards to access one or two of the spell up/mana verbs that were released through post cap training (as it's incredibly unlikely to get before then). I'm 2 mil post cap and not even remotely close to accessing them, however it is a late game option.>>>


I commented on this earlier, as well. Our primary mana control is Mental, yet our only buffs outside of spellsongs are Minor Elemental. What this means is, that if you train like most bards, you don't get access to even 2 multi-casts unless you purposefully invest in Elemental Mana Control, in addition to the normal Mental Mana Control. By contrast, Rangers normally train in Spiritual Mana Control. This gives them 2 multi-casts in both the Ranger and Minor Spiritual circles without ever doing anything special, other than 1 extra rank of Spiritual Mana Control (25 ranks). My pure/brawling bard has 30 ranks in Mental Mana Control and gets nothing.

It's a minor quibble, I admit, but it's quite annoying.

~ Heathyr and friends

Couldn't agree more. I love playing a bard, but I need something new to do. Done with instruments, 4 ranks from the last artisan skill I can master, so it's down to hunting and improving skills. I'd love some cmans to play around with or some guild skills or.. something.

I'd have liked to enjoyed some of the releases on my bard as well. I fully support the classes that did get the new shield and cmans and how they were divied up. I certainly would love to see more folks at both ends of the spectrum being deadly with a shield in hand. A number of them could be added to both bards/rangers (I think both professions would tie for 4th in how applicable the shield skills could be to the profession) most notably any that take more than 1 person in the group with training in that skill.

One of the difficulties that comes to mind is that you'd have to give bards/rangers enough shield skills that choices have to be made or somehow it wouldn't be quite as satisfying after the initial 'new toy' phase.

The ones that would make the most sense to me for a bard would be

1. Focus with a cost of 4,6,8,10,12
2. Bash with a cost of 2,4,6,8,10 Maybe charge also, I can't quite picture it but maybe.
3. Push with a cost of 2,4,6,8,10 I picture more of the get away from me action rather than the manipulating a creature into another room.
4. Swiftness with a cost of 6,12,18 Maybe having Tonis has colored my view of bards, but I've always felt nimble.
5. Shielded Brawler with a cost of 6,8,10,12,14 Quite a few brawling bards out there.
6. Shield Riposte with a cost of 4,8,12 This maneuver is how I initially viewed PUSH and fits far better than Push imo
7. Spike Focus with a cost of 8,12 Because...spikes really do need all the love they can get. Mechanically they are meh so if someone views them as fitting their character well let's support their choice!
8. Spike Mastery with a cost of 8,12 Same reason
9. Deflection with a cost of 6,12,18 Possibly. Since this is a misdirection, diversion of momentum technique I could see it fitting a bard reasonably.
10. Deflection Mastery with a cost of 8,10,12,14,16 This might be too potent for the profession to have. 50 points is rather costly but if this maneuver in addition to the available CMANS would make a bard immune to CML attacks..than I could see bards being denied.
11. Block the Elements with a cost of 6,12,18 I for one am not afraid to hide behind my shield. I'd kinda tie this one in with the resistances already on sonic armor.
12. Deflect the Elements with a cost of 6,12,18 Equally as possible as Block the Elements. The player's choice of shield size for their bard would determine which one you'd pick most likely.
13. Spell Block/Shield Mind I'm undecided on their potency and how they might fit in with my bard.
14. Protective Wall with a cost of 4,6 In a crisis, a bard would be rather ballsy and step up and do what it takes.
15. Strike and Strike Mastery I'm undecided.
16. Phalanx with a cost of 2,4,6,8,10 Most definitely. As it is only useful with other players trained in this skill this could only be a good thing for folks to have the option of training. My most frequent hunting partner is an ohb/shield using paladin and as a duo that both use tower shields this would be an obvious top 3 pick for us.

With 33 released shield maneuvers there were 16 I could see bards potentially having. (The focus listed as #1 actually being 4 different choices) 13 of them I could strongly see as fitting my vision of the range of what a bard might be in dangerous situations. I didn't add up the costs but 13 skills would easily eat up the available 202 possible shield points and still leave something try toy around with in that next fixskill.

Lochiven

>I was considering these as one since they are tied into shields in general and/or released together. I was referring to the mana verbs. Also, you guys had some much needed updating to your spell list recently, I thought.
Galenok


Afraid not. You've seen us banter various spell improvements, and wonder about that 'Paladin Spell Review' mentioned by staff in the goals not too many years ago but the only official thing that's happened lately is a nerf (when GoS was released) and a bug fix (apparently years old). Oh, and another profession seemingly got a fancy new spell that looks very similar to something suggested in the Paladin folder.

As for the mana verbs, we're about as likely to use it as bards are when you consider the small minority of Paladins that even bother learning SMC to raise. Though I'll admit, it's strange that this is the case. Bards should have the most use for it out of the Semis, considering they're the most magical, with Paladins being the least.


>Likely not, however, I did make mention of what style of bard one might play, too. I indicated that this would open back up some potential training paths that have lately been ignored due to a lack of potency and efficiency.

True, but again, I don't see the amount of CMans and SMans that Bards would have gotten (this amount based on the differences between Bards/Rangers versus other more martial professions) with this new release as being more than a few days worth of 'Huh. That's neat.'


-farmer

Hells yes on all that Archales.

>but I am not okay with only some professions being able to develop skills without having to spend training points
Archales

I'm unsure what you're referring to. Which free skills are these?


>Semi's should not be left without any non-combat ways to gain experience/or utility/or spend our time.

You have loresinging (both for items and singing up gems) for utility. That's not an unuseful or unneeded skill. Rangers have imbuing and resistance. This concern seems more a Paladin issue than for a bard or ranger one.


>Having access to any shield maneuver would free up around 30 to 45 cman points for a bard and I'm sorry that's huge to me.

I'm not sure that's always going to be true. That's only if you choose to learn bash or charge via SMan points versus CMan points. Depending on which SMans you'd want, you might still need to keep those CMan points, just to have enough points to get x rank in a particular SMan.


>Since we aren't the best casters or fighters, we must be the best at using magical items, or trading, or the other tertiary skills.

I've always felt that's the point of being a semi. You aren't going to be the best caster when compared to a pure (even though I personally think bards can be just as magically powerful as pures when it comes to combat), or the best physical fighters when compared to a Square. Looking at it within just the semi realm, bards actually are the best casters, and certainly not the worst at physical fighting.



-farmer
>"Mine lights my character on fire and makes her all glowy." -Raelee

>Free skills would include any ability you gain by spending time, not using skill points i.e., guild, alchemy, artisan, skills, I include armor skills as well because for the same 150 armor rank investment I get no additional skills, compared to a square with identical training.
Archales

Gotcha. The 'no tp cost' thing confused me. Because there are tps used. Some professions just get more benefit than others. And in most cases, I'm OK with this.


>While everyone is entitled to their opinion as to which profession is the strongest, I respectfully disagree that a profession that doesn't hit the hardest in any way AS/CS wise can be called way overpowered.

I joke a lot about bards, and to a lesser extent ranger, OP-ness. And quite honestly, you can't really say they're not in the top tier for combat ability. Plus, well.. just because bards don't have the highest, doesn't mean they can't be the most powerful. Disruption is the most damaging spell in the game.


>As far as I was discussing, the shield ranks freed up would be from a simple 1 to 1 exchange of cman shield bash to shield maneuver shield bash, since bards do not have access to any other shield maneuvers it would seem very probable that almost every bard would find using the shield maneuver better than spending the cman cost to learn shield bash via the combat maneuver list. If there is some exception I'm missing that applies to bards, could you please give a little more detail?

Well, if bards were able to learn shield maneuvers, per your example, one would think they'd get more than... two. Which is why I said that it might be better for a bard to keep those bash or charge ranks via CMans, versus SMans. As it stands now, no, there isn't any bard exception.

>while loresingin and gem purification do keep me busy, I could gain exp fast watching grass grow or picking up trash, and gem purification would require me to go hunting to get the gems and then risk blowing off my hand.

You asked for things to do. I'm too tired to find exactly what it was, but it wasn't strictly limited to exp, which is why I pointed that out. Guildwork (rogue,warrior,alchemy) don't produce anything useful in the way of exp either. So using that as an example isn't doing you much. The only real decent (IMO) way to gain exp without hunting is for empathic healing and clerical raising. (No, I'm not in the camp that counts enchanting 50 items a day as decent exp gain.) That's it. No other profession has it so good, or even close. So that doesn't help you either.

>I am complaining that the side effects for bards are so severe relative to other skills. I have to put up with some unspecified amount of impact vulnerability that can't be trained off to get armor that absorbs some elemental damage, squares and paladins can block the flares with what a 30 sec cool down?

I'm pretty sure that plenty of other professions would be happy to have essentially free 7x weightless armor (and two other weapons to boot) at the cost of some mana. Sure, it has limitations, but you're not working with an absolutely junk spell. It's a unique, bardic spell with considerable advantages. This weakness doesn't make it horrible, IMO.

>I want some bard development

I agree with you. I want some bard development too.


>and specifically some tweaking of our songs to bring them more inline with the new maneuver abilities and armor abilities that have been added to the game.

Depending on the proposed change, I've always been in support of professional dev. The difference to me is that most dev is based on need. Just because one profession gets maneuver help (spell/cman, whatever) I don't feel like every other profession should get the same maneuver boost. Armor and Shield skills aren't an area that I think Bards specifically need. Would it be nice to have a few to choose from? Sure. Is the need as great as it was for other professions? Not in my opinion.




-farmer
>"Mine lights my character on fire and makes her all glowy." -Raelee

If I wish for three impossible things.
1.Much like Side by side and disarm have been opened up for everyone I think there should be a list of Shield skills open to all professions. I have already argued Monks should have shield brawling in the Monk folder and while I do not see any shield skills that scream BARD to me I would at least like the universal skills opened up. There is no reason to give a profession CMAN shield bash and not Shield SBASH. That along with phalanx and the shield focus's would probably more than make up 202 skill points if the costs for the skills are doubled or 1.5 times the costs of what a Square would learn.

2.As far as the Armor skill tree I have no idea what we could/should get from that and really it has never bothered me not to get something from it. I would not say no to a universal armor skill but what would it be? Support?

Now the third impossible thing guild skills. I HATE training for guild skills. It is the single most boring evil thing in gemstone IMO. Why would I wish that on myself you ask? I want to multi cast 1004 at a gem. The hours I have spent in game singing to gems is INSANE. Trade Mastery/Diplomacy singing while injured is a good set of guild skills to learn. Minor alchemy of healing potions, minor mana potions etc fit it well as three guild skills we could use. Guild skills will never happen and its sad.

So now that the impossible has been wished for.

Spell songs.

Finish the Circle. Edited to limit my thoughts from wandering far afield.
We have lost illusionary creature from the original bard circle.
We have lost Node to node transport of 1050 (which was probably just a filler copy of 450.
We are never going to get +15 TD. As much as I miss the old 1006 the new 1006 is amazing and well worth its lost.
So what is left?

GBB

"Sure. I could get behind that. Gem singing while injured would work, but not combat singing. A guild ability that mimics the trading skill so Bards can save training points. As long as the total value didn't exceed the bonus from using TPs versus guild points. Alchemy? I just don't see that working with my view of bards. Music school? Trading school? Maybe even an item appraisal school? Sure. Brewing potions? Not so much.-Farmer"

These ideas are mostly from my view as Jack of all Trades master of none title that bards have held in to some extent over the years in a variety of video game and board games. God I do not Wish alchemy on anyone and for sure I would be happy with not having it but it fits to my mind because of that albeit antiquated title the bards once held. Sometimes bards are considered assassins there are loads of skills we can get that would make us that Jack of All trades master of none Title if that is what Simutronics still thinks Bards should be. I think they should be. I also think this is purely an intellectual exercise that has 99.99 percent chance of never happening. (Yes I am saying there is a chance) If (insert superhero/coder here) decided to code for simutronics and had a green light on all his projects and and and.

Impossible doesn't even begin to come close to the chances I think bards have of getting guild skills. If I win the Powerball or some similiar lottery I will donate a GM's salary to implement it. :).

GBB

Master of none? Between self spelled haste which is compatible with multistrike and sonic flares, which are amazing, bards rock at melee and ranged combat. With songs like lullaby and disruption they are quite powerful spell casters. Disruption is such a bad ass spell. Pures would kill to have it.

Hey sorry Im late in responding, I hear what you are saying about each class having unique things it can do, which is part of what rubs me the wrong way about the recent releases, despite being the most magical, bards gained very little if any of the magical (mana spell up), or anti magical shield maneuvers and ensorcelment (pretty sure that doesn't work on sonic gear but I am too lazy to look it up). I don't want abilities just because other professions got something new, I just want the ideas we suggested that get implemented to somehow apply to bards. Given that as a backdrop, it doesn't seem likely to me that we would get more than just shield bash (its the only shield cman we can learn) as a shield maneuver if they ever relented and threw us a bone like they did with sidebyside. Finally, while many professions would like the idea of weightless armor that just cost mana I doubt many of them would use it since it would require 50 spell ranks to be 7x and at square spell costs that would be quite the undertaking, plus I can only imagine the crying when it gets dispelled from the first stun, or gust of wind and they don't have the harness power ranks to resing it. I like the idea of sonic armor, but the odds of getting injured and/or then having it dispelled in places like the scatter is just too high to justify using. As far as gaining experience that was really just a poor example on my part, because my point really was about not having the ability to access skills developed through repetition to further flesh out my character's skills. while I know alot of people think of it as a hideous chore, I would honestly love something to work on, i've mastered 6 instruments, I've mastered cobbling, idle hands are the devil's workshop an all that. Plus, I've said it before and I'll say it again, 'veryone else has guild stuff, I wants stuff!, I'm not voting til I gets me some guild stuff!'

Archales

>> They have killer combat abilities and om of a kind utility skills that are in high demand by the entire player base.

I can sort of agree on the shield skills since it's basically getting a new layer of power for free. But not enabling them through CMANs doesn't make much sense. The Bard will still have to give something else up, so they won't suddenly be more powerful.

I've never understood why Bards dont have Evasion mastery (more so then shield) either... we have 2(or more?) skills that grant dodge ranks after all.

So, to summarize, bards don't need any growth and asking for anything that is similar in nature to anything another profession is gaining access to is unfair.

Got it.

Hopefully, this goes both ways and no one else gets any more development either. I get so sick and tired of asking for anything to have a bunch of other players poo poo not just the specific ideas but the concept that growth has been earned or in some manner is welcome or thought provoking. More than a handful have come here and said, screw you guys, you don't need a damn thing you OP bards. We should all go to the paladin, sorcerer and warrior folders and simply complain and counter their wishes just to do it, which is how I start to feel a select group of players act on these boards.

~Galenok

>So, to summarize, bards don't need any growth and asking for anything that is similar in nature to anything another profession is gaining access to is unfair. Got it.
~Galenok

No, I really don't think you do. At least not if this is a response to anything that I've posted.


> Hopefully, this goes both ways and no one else gets any more development either. I get so sick and tired of asking for anything to have a bunch of other players poo poo not just the specific ideas but the concept that growth has been earned or in some manner is welcome or thought provoking. More than a handful have come here and said, screw you guys, you don't need a damn thing you OP bards. We should all go to the paladin, sorcerer and warrior folders and simply complain and counter their wishes just to do it, which is how I start to feel a select group of players act on these boards.


If you want to seriously compare the state of each profession, start a new thread and I'll respond honestly.

I don't think it'll accomplish what you think it will though.



-farmer
>"Mine lights my character on fire and makes her all glowy." -Raelee

Complaining never accomplishes anything. Really all it takes is approval from dev and one GM to start coding for a set group. Since that is not very likely to happen then I think its perfectly acceptable to see what universal abilities should be given out to ALL professions with the new cmans and shield skills as well as to readdress Armor.

Cmans have unviversal skills. Side by side, cman defense. I do not see why the other two should be excluded.

One day there might be a GM that takes on bards or rangers or name that profession that has gotten no love in the last half decade and there will be little we as players can do to influence that GM to do work for whatever profession he chooses.

GBB