# Bard Multiclass..anything good?



## Emirikol

I'm wondering if the Bard would be an interesting character, however I like to multiclass.  What would be a couple of useful combos for the Bard?  Bard-Sorcerer?

jh


----------



## Kalendraf

Most of the bard multiclass options I've seen revolve around archer bard varients.  Here's a few:

Bard/Barbarian - Fight & Sing while you're at it.  Main problem is that you may not have enough high stats to fund Strength, Dex, Con & Charisma to decent values.

Bard/Fighter - Uses bard songs and low level bard spells to enhance their combat.  These make especially good archers.  Typical build keeps fighter levels close to bard levels.  Key stats are charisma & dex.

Bard/Fighter/Arcane Archer - Only available to elves or half-elves.  Not sure this is as good as a Fighter/Wizard/Arcane Archer build, but it can be done.  Fewer bard spells seem to make decent imbues for the arrows available to the arcane archer.

Bard/Ranger - More difficult to pull off since the stats between these two classes don't line up as well.  Rangers get aid from high wisdom which is otherwise pretty worthless for a bard, while the bard's high charisma is largely useless for a ranger.  However, mixing bard songs along with rangers favored enemy bonuses can lead to massive damage bonuses even at low levels.

Bard/Ranger/Arcane Archer - Again,  only availabe for elves or half-elves.  Similar pro/con issues as the b/f/aa version.

Bard/Rogue - As strange as it might seem, this can work.  Charisma & Dex are the only required high stats, though intelligence is also useful.  Likely best used in a campaign with heavy social interaction where the charisma-based skills can flourish.  Lower hit points may limit their usefulness in combat.

Attempting to mix a bard with any of the other spellcasting classes is fairly pointless.  You're much better off staying in bard or the other spellcasting class due to achieve higher spell level access.


----------



## LazerPointer

I'd have fun playing a Bard-Sorceror, bard-cleric, bard-rogue, or bard-fighter.


----------



## Darklone

Hah, my favorite.

I played a Bbn1/Rog2/BardX, a bbn2/bard (big viking skald brute with greataxe), a bard/wizard... Favorite 3.0 wasa bbn1/rog3/rgr1/bardX (Favored Class bard).

Most builds worked very well. The first one was particularly effective since his spells were chosen to supplement our horrible wizard and the melee cleric while I supported the fighter, the archer and our monk in melee with whip disarms, flanking sneak attacks and now and then a nice raging charge attack into flanking position... 

Forget the archer build in 3.5. Every nice archer spell the bard had in 3.0 (GMW, True Strike and other goodies) have gone. A power attacking melee bard with Heroism though and perhaps a polearm (one barbarian or fighter level is enough) can do a lot of funny things in melee since he hits pretty nicely, assuming a good strength. If everything goes bad and a real melee monster approaches, lay him down with a good joke and Tashas Laughter.


----------



## Li Shenron

I think that Bard/Rogue and Bard/Ranger could be the most interesting cases.

The Bard/Rogue is a very skillful character, only slightly worse than straight Rogue, has low-level spells to cast in light armor with no ASF and some sneak attack. I think that any level combination works well, depending if you prefer more spells or better sneak attack.

Bard/Ranger is definitely more combat-oriented, and probably more difficult to make effective. Skill lists don't mix very well between the two, so you may end up having more skills but not with max ranks. High charisma will benefit the Ranger only on the use of Animal Empathy and Handle Animal, but on the other hand you probably don't need a Wisdom higher than 12 or 13 unless most of the levels are Ranger. Again the good part of the combination comes from casting spells in light armor.

I also agree that mixing two spellcasting classes is not the best, and if one of the two is Bard with his low-level spells, the loss is ever more. However, I think that Cleric/Bard and Paladin/Bard (if you don't care about alignment) have been used since charisma has good synergy.
However, I would definitely avoid spellcasting characters and tank characters to mix with Bard


----------



## Thanee

If you want to make any decent use of the bard spellcasting, it's certainly best not to multiclass at all, however.

 Bye
 Thanee


----------



## Darklone

I guess you can sum it up like that:
- Rogue is the best second class for multiclassing a few levels of if you want a versatile skillful character still able in combat.
- Bard is the same if you want to have some magic tricks instead.


----------



## two

I'd never multi-class a bard.  Pure power-wise, particularly in 3.5 when the bard song ramps up so nicely, pure bard will almost always be a better fighter than a fighter/bard multiclass (with the better song and more defensive spells).  Maybe 1 level of fighter for a feat (if you MUST) or weapon proficiency -- not more.  Delaying spells stinks.  A straight bard gets new spells at levels when they are still "pretty good" for the level.  Delaying spell acquisition makes bards get, for example, 2nd and 3rd level spells a few levels beyond when they are "neat" or "powerful" effects (just in general). My opinion.

Bards can still make excellent archers; their song stacks with arrow damage, and they have great buffing spells.  It's not as sweet as 3.0, granted, but if your party needs an archer, pick a Bard over the fighter-based version just for greater flexibility.

Too much multi-classing robs the bard of its one great power:  spellcasting in light armor.  Spells are powerful in D&D.  The difference between a Bard20 and, say, a Bard14/fighter4/rogue2 is going to be significant on the spell-slinging side.


----------



## The Souljourner

I'm with two on this one... don't multiclass your bard.  They get so many class abilities *and* a reasonably good spell progression.... losing class levels for what, rage and one base attack bonus every 4 levels?  No way man!  I'm even less inclined to multiclass bards than other spellcasters, since they not only get spells but cool abilities too.  You really don't want to delay getting the better bardic music abilities... they totally rock.

-The Souljourner


----------



## RiTz21

A few month ago, we started a new D&D game and I took a Bard (for the first time since I've been playing the game for 20+ years). After 2 levels, I decided to Dual class it to Ranger.

I really like this combination - I started with two weapon combat, and just added two weapons defence for the 3rd level feat. At 2nd level, the Ranger will get me combat expertize - Archery...

After 4th level (2xBard, 2xRanger) I will probably focus on the Bard again. Note that the Ranger is awsome to help me increase SPOT to the maximum, for which it's a Class skill (unlike the Bard) - In the game, I was *always* missing on the "spot" - but since I became a Ranger, I was able it fix this annoying problem !

RiTz21


----------



## Spatula

Bard/sorcerer - both use Cha to cast spells, but sorcerer levels don't have much else to offer.  The sorcerer has worse hp, BAB, saves, and skills than the bard.  The sorcerer spells are not going to be as useful as the bard spells you would have gotten with further bard levels.  And you'd suffer ASF when casting sorcerer spells if you wear armor.  Maybe one level could be worthwhile, to get unrestricted access to sorcerer scrolls/wands, but that's more cherry-picking than multi-classing.

I can definitely see a bard taking levels in either fighter or rogue, in order to focus more on one aspect of the bard's abilities (fighting or skill-use).  Unfortunately, the 3.5 bardic music abilities are tied to your class level, so you lose out on spells and music if you go that route.


----------



## danielinthewolvesden

two said:
			
		

> I'd never multi-class a bard.  Pure power-wise, particularly in 3.5 when the bard song ramps up so nicely, pure bard will almost always be a better fighter than a fighter/bard multiclass (with the better song and more defensive spells).  Maybe 1 level of fighter for a feat (if you MUST) or weapon proficiency -- not more.  .




Right- taking an early level of fighter (say 2nd) can give you that all important extra feat and composite longbow.

Other than that- don't.


----------



## Wolf72

I still want to try a Half-Orc Barbarian/Bard ...


----------



## tarchon

It used to work well in 3.0, but since the Bard Song got more level dependence, it's less attractive.
I played a Bard 8/Barb 2 for a while, seemed to be good.  I'd just take a few levels in a class that reflects which bard abilities you want to emphasize, though I don't think I'd do Sorc or Cleric.  Warrior types or Rogue are probably the most promising.


----------



## irdeggman

bard/sorcerer is really a pretty decent combo.

They both use the same ability score for spell casting.  They have different spell lists.  Bards have fewer spells on their list but get access to higher level ones quicker than does a sorcerer. Bard spells include the cure spells (something I really hate about 3/3.5 and about the only issue I have with the bard spell list) while sorcerers don't.  Sorcerers get better offensive spells (magic missile, fireball, etc.)

Sorcerers get familiars. Gotta luv them. The familiar's hit points are determined by the master's total, regardless of class.  Most other abilities are dependent on master appropriate class level (sorcerer in this case).

The bard's special abilities are real useful, especially when a character has used up all of his spells for the day.  That way the character can still be useful to the party.

Both classes cast spontaneous spells, thus no spell books.  While a bard can cast his spells in light armor w/o a chance for arcane spell failure a sorcerer can't - a conditional choice for the player.

Now the character will never be as good at either class as he would have if he hadn't multiclassed, but for overall use the two work fairly decently together.


----------



## Vrecknidj

In an upcoming campaign, I plan to play a character that starts out as a bard.  He's basically the type to run from a fight, so he'll be far more fun to role play than to use in combat.  I don't plan for him to get better at combat for a long time, so I'm planning on taking one level each in bard, rogue, and expert before he ever gets a BAB of +1.

I also see him as the girlfriend-stealer-type, so he'll probably get punched out a lot.  Basically, he'll be a bit of a comedic sidekick, with just enough information, and just enough roguery skills to make him useful enough not to just abandon at the next inn.

I see him starting a lot of fights that his comrades have to then take care of.

As far as being a bard goes, I've picked that class for its particular combination of skills and class abilities, but I'm probably going to spread his skill points as widely and shallowly as possible, so that he doesn't have max ranks in anything except Escape Artist and Tumble (gotta be able to get away . . .).

Should be an interesting.

Dave


----------



## CCamfield

Ok, really weird idea here... what about taking a few levels (maybe only one) in bard, and given an appropriate alignment change (NG to LG, say), multiclassing to paladin?


----------



## tarchon

irdeggman said:
			
		

> bard/sorcerer is really a pretty decent combo.



I have considered that in the past - the one scenario that looks good to me is higher levels of bard with 1 of sorcerer, provided that you choose 1st level spells, especially non-bard spells, like Color Spray (pretty bardly anyway IMO), Endure Elements, and True Strike that don't have a level dependence (Identify also might be OK, if only for opening a bard spell slot).  True Strike in particular recommends itself as something pretty weak for single-class sorcerers, but more attractive for a bard who spends a lot more time trying to hit things.
Being able to fill out your cantrip list and pick up 4 extra 1st level utility spells per day (off a list of 2), plus the familiar, could be just enough to make up for the lost bard level.

(Getting that +3 Bluff from the snake does look nice, dunnit?)


----------



## two

Vrecknidj said:
			
		

> In an upcoming campaign, I plan to play a character that starts out as a bard.  He's basically the type to run from a fight, so he'll be far more fun to role play than to use in combat.  I don't plan for him to get better at combat for a long time, so I'm planning on taking one level each in bard, rogue, and expert before he ever gets a BAB of +1.
> 
> I also see him as the girlfriend-stealer-type, so he'll probably get punched out a lot.  Basically, he'll be a bit of a comedic sidekick, with just enough information, and just enough roguery skills to make him useful enough not to just abandon at the next inn.
> 
> I see him starting a lot of fights that his comrades have to then take care of.
> 
> As far as being a bard goes, I've picked that class for its particular combination of skills and class abilities, but I'm probably going to spread his skill points as widely and shallowly as possible, so that he doesn't have max ranks in anything except Escape Artist and Tumble (gotta be able to get away . . .).
> 
> Should be an interesting.
> 
> Dave




That's a schtick. I've seen it done a fair amount in the past; it's one of the Bard stereotypes. Seems like you could do this very well as a pure bard.  Plus, of course, while you COULD suck at combat/battles, you don't need to.  You can play a fighter with an 8 strength using a dagger in battle (no shield) and be pretty durn useless in combat as well.  Bards dont' have a lock on that.

I'm not quite sure why people have a desire to play a bard in a narrow way such as this (only good at people skills, runs from danger) when you could also play a more multi-faceted bard (good at people skills, runs from danger, but when backed into a corner has a surprisingly strong punch).

But, whateva.


----------



## Ridley's Cohort

I would never ever, ever multiclass in Bard.  Okay, I might take a single level in another class for roleplaying reasons, but that would be it.  The Bard class itself is already a pseudo-multiclass -- a second stringer at a broad number of things.  Spreading out further just waters your character down.

If you want a little spellcasting and then something else, I would combine Rogue levels with cleric or wizard or psion, and then blend in other class.  A multiclassed Bard is easily going to fall behind a buffing specialized WizX/OtherX or ClericX/OtherX.  Spontaneous casting means squat when your caster level and spell selection are weak.


----------



## Oscar carramiñana

CCamfield said:
			
		

> Ok, really weird idea here... what about taking a few levels (maybe only one) in bard, and given an appropriate alignment change (NG to LG, say), multiclassing to paladin?



A bard paladin of Sune the goddess of love and beauty seems very  nice idea to play.


----------



## Felix

BardX/Ftr2/Rog2/Sor1

Human, of course, although Gnome could work as well. This gives you just about as much versatility as you want: 2 fighter feats, a nice +1d6 SA, utility spells from the sorcerer level, and a fair degree of bard music and knowledge. The BAB works out to be the same as straight bard, and in the end you get a +2 to Fort saves for a -1 to will saves (5 levels mixed compared to the last 5 levels of bard)


----------



## Darklone

One thing about the singleclass bard dudes here: 

Starting with barbarian or fighter might screw your skills a little bit... but without the additional hitpoints, I wouldn't have survived till level 2 in any of these campaigns.

Don't you have 15 level 1 char groups where the DM hunts the PCs with trolls and owlbears?


----------



## The Spectrum Rider

CCamfield said:
			
		

> Ok, really weird idea here... what about taking a few levels (maybe only one) in bard, and given an appropriate alignment change (NG to LG, say), multiclassing to paladin?




Maybe this should go into House Rules because we cheated a bit but... in our campaign bards can be of any alignment. And there is a monks' group (the Order of the Silver Lining; patron deity: Cereus, god of intelligence and clouds) that permits multiclassing with bards. So I played a bard/monk, keeping the levels roughly equal (one of the Order's rules: if your monk level is less than or equal to any of your other class levels, you can only level up as a monk) - and had a grand old time of it.

This was 3.0, where arcane spell failure applied to bards even with light armor, so it might be a little weaker now. But in any case I choose it because it was interesting, not powerful.

Edit: in 3.0 many of a bard's abilities depended only on his Perform ranks, not his class level, and Perform wasn't split into subskills (although it was in our campaign) - so this combination was *definitely* more powerful in 3.0

The Spectrum Rider


----------



## Hypersmurf

I played a Bard/Rogue/Trickery Cleric multiclass once, but he didn't last very long - he got his throat cut by a party member.

-Hyp.


----------



## tarchon

Darklone said:
			
		

> One thing about the singleclass bard dudes here:
> 
> Starting with barbarian or fighter might screw your skills a little bit... but without the additional hitpoints, I wouldn't have survived till level 2 in any of these campaigns.
> 
> Don't you have 15 level 1 char groups where the DM hunts the PCs with trolls and owlbears?



It certainly paid off with my char - when I took the 2nd Barb level, I rolled an 11 for hps too.  In 3.0, the skill points weren't an issue, since Barbarians get 4 anyway, and they got some nice class skills that Bards didn't like Wilderness Lore and Ride.


----------



## CCamfield

Oscar carramiñana said:
			
		

> A bard paladin of Sune the goddess of love and beauty seems very  nice idea to play.




Yeah, that could certainly work.  But I think there are other possibilities too... historically, and today, music has played a large part in religion.  People sing hymns in church today, the Greeks did the same 2500 years ago, I'm sure other peoples did even earlier. So in a D&D sort of setting, I was imagining a warrior of god, perhaps even a grim faced one, singing a hymn to his god while fighting evil.

For bard-fighters, or bard-barbarians, there's this sort of inspiration, of course...

"_Arise, arise, Riders of Theoden
Fell deeds awake: fire and slaughter!
Spear shall be shaken, shield be splintered
a sword-day, a red day, ere the sun rises!
Ride now, ride now! Ride to Gondor!_
...
And then all the host of Rohan burst into song, and they sang as they slew, for the joy of battle was on them, and the sound of their singing that was fair and terrible came even to the City." - Tolkien, The Return of the King


----------



## ThoughtBubble

According to a roomate, the Bard/Assassin combo is awesome.


----------



## Darklone

tarchon said:
			
		

> It certainly paid off with my char - when I took the 2nd Barb level, I rolled an 11 for hps too.  In 3.0, the skill points weren't an issue, since Barbarians get 4 anyway, and they got some nice class skills that Bards didn't like Wilderness Lore and Ride.



Right. And these bard multiclass characters usually have everything, good saves, skillpoints, class skills, not bad BAB, spells... the only problem is hitpoints if you wanna help your buddies in melee. For the bard archer it's not that bad... but you can always use feats and especially weapon proficiencies.

One level barbarian and extra rage will keep you on par with most fighters and barbarians in the group till level 8.


----------



## Oscar carramiñana

CCamfield said:
			
		

> Yeah, that could certainly work.  But I think there are other possibilities too... historically, and today, music has played a large part in religion.  People sing hymns in church today, the Greeks did the same 2500 years ago, I'm sure other peoples did even earlier. So in a D&D sort of setting, I was imagining a warrior of god, perhaps even a grim faced one, singing a hymn to his god while fighting evil.
> 
> For bard-fighters, or bard-barbarians, there's this sort of inspiration, of course...
> 
> "_Arise, arise, Riders of Theoden
> Fell deeds awake: fire and slaughter!
> Spear shall be shaken, shield be splintered
> a sword-day, a red day, ere the sun rises!
> Ride now, ride now! Ride to Gondor!_
> ...
> And then all the host of Rohan burst into song, and they sang as they slew, for the joy of battle was on them, and the sound of their singing that was fair and terrible came even to the City." - Tolkien, The Return of the King




This are so nice but _Theoden king was not a tavern bard!_ he was a knight a leader, maybe a marshall.
This song are more close to a warrior skald I think 
Before all battles the "captain" says an inspiration words to his soldiers to improve his morale.


----------



## CCamfield

Oscar carramiñana said:
			
		

> This are so nice but _Theoden king was not a tavern bard!_ he was a knight a leader, maybe a marshall.
> This song are more close to a warrior skald I think
> Before all battles the "captain" says an inspiration words to his soldiers to improve his morale.




You're quite right!  I just threw that in there for emphasis.   My point was really that all the Riders burst into song as they fought.  To go from that to a fighter/barbarian-bard singing while fighting, and inspiring his allies, is not much of a stretch.


----------

