I didn’t help remake this one, BUT I did help him come up with a way to design the character sheet.

I didn’t help remake this one, BUT I did help him come up with a way to design the character sheet.

I didn’t help remake this one, BUT I did help him come up with a way to design the character sheet. I got so giddy when I came up with using the staff and music notes that I was flailing my arms and shouting, “I got it! I got it!” (I’m a big band geek.)

Now having played the original DW Bard to level 7 I must say that there were times I felt pretty useless, or the idea that I needed to pull out my flute and play something real quick in the middle of battle that just didn’t fit in my mind. It was a fun campaign, but not until I hit level 6 did I feel really useful. As a person who’s played various musical instruments I just can’t imagine playing something while a skeleton comes rushing at me.  

From what I can see of David Guyll’s new take on the Bard, it seems more realistic with incorporating how the music should work before or after a battle.


19 thoughts on “I didn’t help remake this one, BUT I did help him come up with a way to design the character sheet.”

  1. I confess, I don’t really understand the whole “You have to pull out your (f)lute in battle” thing as relating to the DW Bard.  The move text for Arcane Art just says “weave a performance into a basic spell” – as far as I can tell, it could be interpretive dance for all it matters WHAT the performance is.  The only move I can find that references an instrument at all is “It Goes To Eleven” and even that is just a parenthetical. 

    So where does the “playing a lute in combat” thing come from? Arcane Art can clearly be represented as battle chant, or any other sort of performance you can dream of.

  2. Yes, I know, other games have bards that play Lutes in combat.  That’s dumb.  But that’s irrelevant. Unless I should be complaining about the Fighter because Waka in FFX used a soccer ball as his weapon of choice? 

    What I want to know is why people feel the need to PERPETUATE the dumbness in a game that, in fact, makes absolutely no requirement whatsover that you do dumb things.   Yes, interpretive dance is silly.  Is a battle chant silly?    Is the Stirring Speech for the VERY CLASS that people have created as an “improvement” on the bard somehow silly?  Because you can completely use an inspiring speech to trigger your arcane art.

    But somehow, people seem to be saying “This class is dumb, because it requires you to do ;  This replacement class is better because it lets you do

    It makes no sense to me.  The logic is missing.  You say that people are doing things in your Dungeon World game that don’t make sense… so… why are you letting them?  “I pull out my lute…” “Okay, the orc hits you.”  “I raise my voice in a hymn to the Goddess of Battle” “Okay, roll Arcane Art.”

    Solving a problem that is already solved, IMHO.  It’s fine if you want to create a different “style” of bard, but let’s not pretend here that the existing one requires you to do dumb things.  Because it doesn’t.  You are just taking all your bad examples from other media and projecting them onto this class.

  3. David Guyll It’s not unusable as is, just unappealing. Appreciate the effort to do something different. Just not sure it worked out this time. Cool class and definitely worth the $2.50

  4. C’mon, work with me here. “people” are saying what I paraphrased in the article linked at the beginning of this whole conversation.

    The reason I find this so ridiculous is people are basically saying “I’ve important my idea of what a bard is from another game, and it’s dumb, so the bard in this game is dumb.”  And complain that this is a problem in a game that “purports to put the fiction first.”  When…they are not putting the fiction first.

    So I asked why. And the response is “Isn’t it obvious from all these other games?”  And ask why I am starting to get annoyed? 🙂

  5. When it comes down to it, this is just one other option people can choose from. If someone wants to play the original bard they can. If they want to try David’s why not? Doesn’t matter what has happened in this game or that, it is always good to have some choices. Besides, we aren’t shoving this bard down anyone’s throat here.

  6. David Guyll That’s sounds like a fun improvement to my party animal move, thanks for the feedback. Since you’ve read it I’d welcome any other feedback you have as well. Were than any moves you liked, or more importantly moves you didn’t like or thought needed work?

  7. I like that this bard has moves that are rooted more in the realism; I can agree that it is a bard that could do things in a way that provides more narrative freedom. However, I don’t really agree with the removal of Arcane Art. Sure the move may not make sense if you follow the tropes of a bard, but isn’t swordplay an art, too?

    I get that Stirring Speech is a replacement for it, allowing you to grant the boon to everyone before a fight, but the trigger should be changed to exclude the “before a conflict.” It should be up to the character if they want to expose themselves to a danger in order to inspire during a combat.

    Also, all the ‘before/after combat’ stuff could render the bard useless in a series of encounters that don’t allow rest. If I am involved in a combat that immediately leads to a chase scene, or vise-versa, I’m not going to make everyone wait while i encourage them.

    Lastly, I don’t see the purpose of Stories & Legends. It doesn’t differentiate itself from Spout Lore and introduces the chance of failure into your knowledge move. The point of bardic lore was you know a ton of obscure facts about the topic of your lore. You can still spout lore normally on things not covered.

  8. On Spouting Lore: whether I ask the question on a topic using Stories & Legends, or I Spout Lore on it, the GM will be telling me the same answer. Spout/Bardic Lore: “You know that this is the Spear of Longinus, it is known to do these things. What Tale have you heard this from?” Stories & Legends: “I’ve heard of this spear in the book of Wu’tever. What does it do?” GM: “You know that this is the Spear of Longinus, it is known to do these things.”

    Bard vs Thief: Charm vs Poison. Thought narrative combat is what DW excels at, that doesn’t mean all characters are one directional-ly directed into fighting, both of these classes, while having combat abilities, feature skills which can prevent combat, or sway the direction an series of events is headed in.

    Goes to Eleven, Metal Hurlant, and Vicious Blast: I don’t see how these are relevant to the conversation unless you intentionally misinterpret the triggers. Goes to Eleven doesn’t even make sense in the first place/can only be explained as magic, so who gives a damn. Metal Hurlant is a Dragon Shout or Power Chord. Vicious blast never mentions instruments.

  9. The instruments in the parenthesis on Goes to Eleven are suggestions, as portrayed by the “maybe.” Metal Hurlant as well gives you an alternative to instruments, using your voice. It is possible, without even having to stretch the rules, to make a bard that doesn’t play/sing a note. The instruments are optional.

    Arcane Art can’t be explain; what magic can? I’ve read plenty of books and never shot lightning from my fingertips. It’s magic! IF you want a subtle bard, that’s fine. I like an ostentatious, spooney bard. All spell casters don’t make any damn sense.

    All prior arguments aside: What makes your Bard more interesting or innovative than the core book Bard? Your moves do make realistic sense, but I think the other one sounds like a more interesting character.

  10. David Guyll  Am I missing something in this or are there no advanced moves? I see up to bonds (pg. 5) and that’s it.

    I like that you did something with carouse. I too, try to incorporate changes in the basic moves that are less commonly used. I also like the initial choice of what school of thought you come from – good choices there.

    Not a huge fan of the starting gear. Not sure what specifically, but I suppose it just doesn’t feel “special.”

    I agree that there are good downtime starting moves here, but, as the bard is a good buffing class mid-combat, I struggle to see myself as doing much in the more tense and active situations as this class. Like I said, I might not be seeing advanced moves?

    And, for what it’s worth, I don’t dig the sheet too much. Something about using the original template makes it just fit better for me.

  11. What even strikes me more, when I step back and take a Bird’s Eye look at the playbook, is that this really does feel like the kind of person that I would run into if I was living in a LOTR style world. The carousing those at a local tavern may look like any other normal person at first glance, but once they start talking or singing, you suddenly feel engrossed in their sound – like the forest scene where the bard began to sing. It is magical, sure, but it’s like watching David Blane (sp?) perform magical feats. At first you wonder what the hell, but that’s really just a normal dude.

    The subtlty of the class is pronounced here, which I don’t think jives with everyone. I think it depends how you want to play your character.

    Does it make it better than the original Bard class? I think the overly mechanical nature is the only reason I don’t ever choose the Bard. So the short answer is yes. Much better? Tough to say whether I would go out of my way to play this playbook. CHA playbooks are my favorite, but that Bard is so crunchy that it pains me.

Comments are closed.