PDA

View Full Version : Spellsinger vs Warchanter



bobbryan2
06-28-2007, 12:46 PM
So... before the GMs announced what the three prestige enhancements were going to be for bards, I had formulated my own ideas of what each would bring. I was pretty much guessing that I would be going with virtuoso.

Boy, I was wrong. But that's mainly because virtuoso just doesn't do anything. At best, it lowers the saves of facinated creatures so you can dance them better... but is that really necessary for a charisma specced bard?

So, the choice really became down to warchanter and spellsinger. After reading the description, I realized it was going to actually be a tough decision. I've made it a point to keep my damage enhancements maxed out for Inspire courage, just because I also play a fighter, and I LOVE the added DPS from a bard. So, just reading the added bonuses I could be giving to fighters, on top of the DR was scrumptious.

And I read spellsinger. There's just a lot of great stuff going on there. 100 more SP, -10% casting costs, +1 DCs to spells, +2 UMD. That's just an awesome amount of buffs.

And I knew the choice was going to be tough, until I saw the reqs.

There is no choice... I'm guessing 95% (or more) bards will go for Spellsinger. Seriously? Requiring power attack is bad... but throwing weapon focus on top of that? It seems to be catering to multi-classed bards. And multi-classed bards aren't going to have the highest numbers on Inspire Courage anyway.

Spellsinger, on the other hand, requires one of 7 feats that most bards already have. (I Have 5 of them on my bard)

So... I would say to loosen the reqs up on Warchanter if you want it to actually be used. I would say... Requires one of the following feats: Power Attack, Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Weapon Finesse, Combat Expertise, or the ability to use all Martial Weapons. Chances are a few of those feats will actually hit normal bard builds.

As far as Virtuoso... you're definately going to have to come up with something better than that. If it were me, I'd make that one a bit more of a combination of the other two. Also give that one a song that decreases spell point expenditure by 5%, a song that increases Inspire Courage by +1 Attack and +1 Damage. That way they can have a bit more help, because right now... the buff to facinate just isn't nearly attractive enough.

Gimpster
06-28-2007, 01:03 PM
Spellsinger, on the other hand, requires one of 7 feats that most bards already have. (I Have 5 of them on my bard)
Yes, the feat "requirement" for spellsinger is like a bad joke. All bards have Extend Spell. All of them.

Maybe some bards who can't cast Haste yet are waiting to get Extend later. But they will- there's just no realistic choice not to.

Why'd they bother making up a list of 7 possible feat choices, when one of them is something that everyone will have. May as well have not included the requirement at all.

I almost wonder if the inclusion of Extend Spell was an error. If so, it would make Spellsinger a lot more costly and exclusive for a lot of bards.


As far as Virtuoso... you're definately going to have to come up with something better than that.
Maybe if you played songs twice as fast, and with double the area?

Vardak
06-28-2007, 01:11 PM
I almost wonder if the inclusion of Extend Spell was an error. If so, it would make Spellsinger a lot more costly and exclusive for a lot of bards.


Shhhhhhhh

bobbryan2
06-28-2007, 01:28 PM
Maybe if you played songs twice as fast, and with double the area?

Or instantaneous effects with the song just being a cooldown? You could be onto something there.

The addition of weapon finesse into Warchanter (along with improved critical) could actually bring the feat requirement into a semblance of sanity.

Power attack + Weapon Focus is just ridiculous for a caster character.

jkm
06-28-2007, 01:50 PM
it looks cool for a toon that uses fascinate a ton, because you can get almost 20 songs that last 10% longer? of course, that means a toon that runs with people who know that.

it would have been the must have had they put -> "20% chance that the target will remain fascinated even after hit" instead of the minor symbol of pain effect.

or

allows you to use suggestion song on constructs and undead

or

fascinate is an instantaneous effect

or

bard songs heal players for 100 hit points and stun them for 12 seconds in awe of the skill of hte bard. oh wait...

bobbryan2
06-28-2007, 01:54 PM
A healing song might be kinda cool actually. Use a bardic song for a mass divine healing (for fewer hit points). Be a nice way for bards to help top off HP between fights.

jkm
06-28-2007, 02:00 PM
i was thinking more of the bard singing the kargon theme song but what you say is a fairly interesting addition.

EinarMal
06-28-2007, 02:00 PM
Perhaps they don't really have a choice in the requirements. Anyone know if these are all requirements for PNP?

Well there are no enhancements in PnP so my guess is that it is pretty wide open. They I guess are loosely based on some prestige classes but certainly are not really like them (your not spending levels taking them).

Cool first ninja post!

ebt-dnd
06-28-2007, 02:00 PM
Perhaps they don't really have a choice in the requirements. Anyone know if these are all requirements for PNP?

jkm
06-28-2007, 02:07 PM
we know that the enhancement system can do prereqs off of feats and other enhancements. that's why they don't check to see if you have invested points in skills before you can open up enhancement lines. assassins are required to have 8 ranks in hide and 8 ranks in MS. in ddo, they are required to have 2 levels of the same in action points. if it were based on skills, i wouldn't mind my new assassin build going the way of the assassin. investing over 15% of my actions points though is pretty restrictive (hide 2, MS 2, subtle backstabbing 1).

Dane_McArdy
06-28-2007, 02:08 PM
i was thinking more of the bard singing the kargon theme song but what you say is a fairly interesting addition.

Is that the one that goes:

Ham ham ham ham ham, tasty tasty tasty ham!

I think that might be the chorus though...

Yaga_Nub
06-28-2007, 02:49 PM
i was thinking more of the bard singing the kargon theme song but what you say is a fairly interesting addition.

Not that I don't like Kargon as much as the next person but I think they have done plenty for him.

bobbryan2
06-28-2007, 03:32 PM
So... here's a question for you.

Is the general consensus that the requirements for Warlord are stupid? Or is it that the requirements for Spellslinger are too easy? Or perhaps some combination of the two.

To me... it seems like any pure class bard will automatically qualify for Spellslinger. Does that really make it a prestige class? At a very minimum, I would require any 3 of those 7 feats. So at least it requires some degree of specialization, an obvious desire to spec yourself out for casting.

The warlord requirements are just outside the realm of what most (read: any) pure class bards would have. You'll find a good deal of bards that aren't finessed and are strength based, but I think you would be hard pressed to find any of those bards that took Weapon Focus and Power Attack just to fight.

I don't the the argument that it's a PrC meant for multi-classed bards holds much water either. Do any of the other enhancement lines really favor multi-classed rogues, clerics, or otherwise?

Maybe instead of requiring Power Attack, merely require being 'eligible' for power attack. And there obviously is going to be a need to have more choices than simply weapon focus. Weapon focus is a very underpowered feat at best, and is simply icing on the cake for Fighters. The choice between which weapon focus feat you want is simply not a choice at all.

And really, I just don't even feel Virtuoso is worth talking about with it's way below par rewards. More songs, and longer songs is great... but your songs aren't doing anything really different than they were before. So... what's the point? I'd rather have shorter songs that did something new, than 40 seconds more on a song I could just sing again.

Cinwulf
06-28-2007, 04:08 PM
I'd say 95% spellsingers would be about right. Not that I think the requirements are out of line, but maybe most bards gravitate to that style of play naturally. Not saying some of the requirements for the other two make alot of sense either.

Teufel_Hunden
06-29-2007, 08:23 AM
Aye, hopefully they'll put a different tune in their songs for SS Spell DC song and The WC DR reduction song.

Zenix_Leviticus
06-29-2007, 08:43 AM
Alot of people that I have talked to in my guild say NOOO WAYY on
Warchanter.


A few of them are thinking of taking Virtuoso until they get to level 11 then
switching to Spellsinger.


I wil try spellsinger with one of my bards and see how it works out before
I change either of the others.

Cedrica-the-Bard
06-29-2007, 08:53 AM
So I've been processing a little more...

My Battle Bard was built to not only kill but also to be able to pull off the "zerg, kite, fascinate" technique without getting killed. I must say, he is very good at fascinating mobs. And, as any good Bard knows, the effectiveness of this strategy depends on the REST of the group knowing to then tackle the mobs one at a time. When this happens correctly, my groups blow throw quests so fast, it's ridiculous. Granted I play with people who know how to take advantage of this method. But still, when 3 or 4 fighters (buffed by me and including me) wail on one guy at a time, they are dead in a split-second versus the time it takes for one person to take on one baddy one at a time. Meanwhile the casters are back there enervating and casting FOD/Banishment/Otto's/etc.. on the remaining fascinated baddies (spells that don't pop the fascinate) to help clean up even faster.

SO....... I think that Virtuoso is EXTREMELY under-rated at this point! Especially for the above technique, which I apply in most situations. I avoid it in Pugs alot because most players are too stunned to realize how powerful the technique is, so I don't bother. But now I can because that -2 to hit and -2 to will saves is far more effective than giving a +1 to the DC of the other spellcasters. The Virtuoso de-buff of ALL of the baddies GUARANTEED is like giving the casters a +2 to the DC of their will-based spells AND prevents extra damage to the other members due to the -2 to hit.

Personally, I think this is way more powerful than people are giving it credit for. I suspect the reason for that is because most players still don't understand how fascinate really works and therefore rarely take advantage of it. I, for one, have decided that my Battle Bard is going to be a Virtuoso. An added benefit for him is that he will now be able to get Song of the Dead which I currently do not have because of the AP costs on his build. So yet another benefit...

I also solo alot making extensive use of Fascinate, and this is definitely gonna help with that too. Win/Win as far as I'm concerned...

bobbryan2
06-29-2007, 09:10 AM
So I've been processing a little more...

My Battle Bard was built to not only kill but also to be able to pull off the "zerg, kite, fascinate" technique without getting killed. I must say, he is very good at fascinating mobs. And, as any good Bard knows, the effectiveness of this strategy depends on the REST of the group knowing to then tackle the mobs one at a time. When this happens correctly, my groups blow throw quests so fast, it's ridiculous. Granted I play with people who know how to take advantage of this method. But still, when 3 or 4 fighters (buffed by me and including me) wail on one guy at a time, they are dead in a split-second versus the time it takes for one person to take on one baddy one at a time. Meanwhile the casters are back there enervating and casting FOD/Banishment/Otto's/etc.. on the remaining fascinated baddies (spells that don't pop the fascinate) to help clean up even faster.

SO....... I think that Virtuoso is EXTREMELY under-rated at this point! Especially for the above technique, which I apply in most situations. I avoid it in Pugs alot because most players are too stunned to realize how powerful the technique is, so I don't bother. But now I can because that -2 to hit and -2 to will saves is far more effective than giving a +1 to the DC of the other spellcasters. The Virtuoso de-buff of ALL of the baddies GUARANTEED is like giving the casters a +2 to the DC of their will-based spells AND prevents extra damage to the other members due to the -2 to hit.

Personally, I think this is way more powerful than people are giving it credit for. I suspect the reason for that is because most players still don't understand how fascinate really works and therefore rarely take advantage of it. I, for one, have decided that my Battle Bard is going to be a Virtuoso. An added benefit for him is that he will now be able to get Song of the Dead which I currently do not have because of the AP costs on his build. So yet another benefit...

I also solo alot making extensive use of Fascinate, and this is definitely gonna help with that too. Win/Win as far as I'm concerned...


I understand how powerful facinate is, and I use it aaall the time. Virtuoso isn't powerful though.

As you said, the mobs are as good as dead once they're facinated. A -2 to attack on an enemy that is already 'dead' just isn't that useful. As an added perk, it'd be nice... but not as the main focal point of the enhancement.

I will still be facinating just as regularly with my crummy 'old' facinate. But I'll be doing so with +100 SP, -10% to spell cost, +1 DC on spells, aaand a little +2 to UMD bringing it to like 41 UMD without using a feat.

I like facinating as much as the next guy, but there's still no comparison. And like you said, a +2 to their will save DCs... yeah. With spell slinger, it's a +1 to reflex, fort AND will save. And you don't have to facinate enemies to do it.

chemonz
06-29-2007, 11:55 AM
Another strategy for those bards taking virtouso is to combine it with mind fog and/or otto's ball or mass suggest. I agree that this enhancement line is under appreciated and I think that an enchantment specced bard could really benefit from the virtuoso enhancement.

With -2 to will mind fog can be cast, land on more mobs, and not break fascinate, then allowing the bard to do with them as he wants with a near 100% chance of success. When the next level cap comes out 16th level bards will be able to cast mass hold person making virtuoso even more useful.

The warchanter enhancement seems to require a bard built from level 1 for it. Which just means people will have fun leveling up a completely new type of bard soon.

bobbryan2
06-29-2007, 12:01 PM
Another strategy for those bards taking virtouso is to combine it with mind fog and/or otto's ball or mass suggest. I agree that this enhancement line is under appreciated and I think that an enchantment specced bard could really benefit from the virtuoso enhancement.

With -2 to will mind fog can be cast, land on more mobs, and not break fascinate, then allowing the bard to do with them as he wants with a near 100% chance of success. When the next level cap comes out 16th level bards will be able to cast mass hold person making virtuoso even more useful.

The warchanter enhancement seems to require a bard built from level 1 for it. Which just means people will have fun leveling up a completely new type of bard soon.

1) If you're enhancement specced... Spellsinger is much much better than virtuoso. A spellsinger would get a +1 DC to all spells whether they were facinated or not. A virtuoso would get a +2 DC to will based spells only after facinating them. That's not even a fair trade off... but on top of that, the spellsinger gets extra spell points, UMD, etc etc.

2) Bards don't get mass hold person

3) If you're going to take the time to mind fog a group of enemies, you should have a near 100% chance of affecting them afterwards, whether they were hit with the virtuoso facinate or not.

The virtuoso just isn't underappreciated... it's underpowered.

mgoldb2
06-29-2007, 01:20 PM
2) Bards don't get mass hold person

Greater shout might have almost the same effect (with the added bonus of doing damge) depending on if they implment the stun part auto crit or not.

bobbryan2
06-29-2007, 01:23 PM
Greater shout might have almost the same effect (with the added bonus of doing damge) depending on if they implment the stun part auto crit or not.

Well, greater shout would wake everything up, which is why it wouldn't be as fun.

And secondly, I doubt it will autocrit, as evidenced by soundburst stuns.

EinarMal
06-29-2007, 01:26 PM
Greater shout might have almost the same effect (with the added bonus of doing damge) depending on if they implment the stun part auto crit or not.

Yeah I think this spell will be underwhelming unless they really pump up the damage. Given mob hit points this spell will be the equivalent of fireball (I like to call it caster doom).

After all of those mobs wake up from the stun there will be some major Bard beat down going on....

bobbryan2
06-29-2007, 01:53 PM
Yeah I think this spell will be underwhelming unless they really pump up the damage. Given mob hit points this spell will be the equivalent of fireball (I like to call it caster doom).

After all of those mobs wake up from the stun there will be some major Bard beat down going on....

Underwhelming is putting it nicely.

It'll be a lvl 6 fireball... that sometimes causes a 2-3 second stun. And you'll need a superior potency VI item as opposed to superior combustion III to max that damage...