No Bards in Lore?

[Salvager23]

I like what you're saying about a technology based tank spec and I'd like it too. I would imagine there would be a ranged component to the abilities, but in order to hold threat you'd have to use the "melee" abilities.

And if I had the time I could think of Bard-oriented abilities that coincide with either a melee or ranged playstyle. Just requires some creative thinking!

I understand. It’s not easy being creative if you don’t have a lot of time.

[kiramon]

Wc3 has sirens and kiddos
Wow has mumur, sirens, chords (Waycrest), shouts, hymns, etc

Pretty easy to fit bard in... like tons of other games do.

Eq2 does bard with rogue + buff/damage songs (many games do this)

Some games use bards as healers (lotro does this)

Some use them as pure buffers (ff11 does this)

Some as ranged with some buffs (ff14 does this)

And many many many many many more (even RO used bards !!)

So arguing about a bard being possible because of lol flute smack is pretty ridic


oh and wow has this new thing that they’ve been doing for a while- you may remember an interview about them running out of “wc3” characters etc. so they’ve been planting characters with a starting bit of lore/build up so they can bring them back in the future and build up their purpose without it being a random character coming in with no previous relationship. They’re starting this with bard too by introducing harps, using song buffs, mobs with songs, etc to set the stage for it. Prepare for singing.

[bloodmoth13]

If you can't see a way Bards might differentiate themselves from Mages, or just other classes in the game in general, then I don't know what to tell you. Other RPGs have managed, @Ielenia has created a rough concept that's plenty unique, if a person on a forum can create a unique concept then Blizzard, a multi-million dollar game developer responsible for 15 years of WoW can as well.

One way is to give the spec a melee DPS ''Fencer'' spec if you want to go the dashing scoundrel route with rapiers violins and lutes, or a ''Skald'' spec if you want to go the warrior route, with axes, wardrums and warhorns, a ranged DPS caster spec and a healer, already the Bard then differs from the 'mage' that you seem to think it resembles simply because they share the same element.

I still just see rogue and warrior. You could give a rogue a bard talent for what its worth and it would probably do enough to satisfy the bard itch. Warriors already have shouts, not sure what throwing down their axe and playing some music would accomplish.
Its something you could do but im not convinced its necessary and it feels like a class for the sake of one. The only one that piqued my interest was the healer spec as that could be an interesting choice for a rogue healing spec if they ever did 4th specs.

- - - Updated - - -

How do you explain Holy Priest vs Holy Paladin? Both are quite similar in purpose and aesthetic but quite different in practice. Gameplay mechanics are not defined by design themes. I'm sure if you access your creative side you could imagine how a Bard would differ significantly in both gameplay and aesthetic from everything else in game. It would be nothing like the Mage, no offense but it's strange that that was your example. A Bard would likely function most similarly to the Shaman, which is a class already known for its support capabilities, the bread and butter of the Bard. But that doesn't mean there is no real estate for the Bard to occupy! Being a standalone class is unlikely as nobody is asking for another leather wearer. But as a fourth spec, a class skin or another system in game? Hell yeah. Bards could definitely work. Again, just requires a little creativity.

Ok what does a bard do? They play music, thats their defining thing. Thats the input, its quirky and fun, great. Whats the output though? What does the music accomplish? Do they do nothing but buff allies? Thatll never work in this game. What are their damaging abilities or healing abilities?

See, the issue isnt that the input sucks, its the output. The output could be literally anything.
Frankly i think it could just be a proffession, thats probably the best spot for it imo.

[Varitok]

So what is his lore character name?

Tankard Mcbard

[bloodmoth13]

Sure talents and fourth specs could work for some, they'd work for me because I'm desperate, but some would still consider the fantasy of playing a Bard unfulfilled, which is the only point new classes serve at this point with every role covered, fulfilling a fantasy.

Similarly Engineering could scratch the Tinker itch for some, but not for others hence why I'd also argue why that could and should be a class.

With Bard talents you wouldn't be a Bard, you'd be a Rogue or Warrior that could sing or play music, as opposed to a Bard that smacks things around or stabs them. If Blizzard ever introduces class specific tier sets again you also wouldn't have any feathered hats or frilly colourful shirts and jackets, you'd just have more heavy plate and more sneaky leather.

We can always settle for anything, in much the same way that you could, in theory, slap a melee conversion talent on to Arcane and call it a Battlemage. Would it be one? Sure, would it be "necessary" to do anything further? Arguably not. But would it -really- be one with all the Blizzard flair other classes have, and would every angle of what it means to be a Battlemage be covered? No.

Honestly mage base kit would mesh really well with a melee unit (blinks, arcane nova, frost nova etc) but thats another discussion.

For tinker, honestly engineering wouldnt be nearly enough for fantasy because a tinkers output has potential to be entirely mechanical. Their output would have near zero overlap with existing classes.
For the bard thpugh, no matter how you slice it, their output would have to overlap with existing classes. I just dont believe the output frankly exists. As for the input, channelling any form of magic through an instrument would work for any class. If blizz actually followed through with updating caster animations we could see every caster have the option to change their channel animation to playing music, and even change the sfx. Give a shaman an electric guitar and watch them shred a storm, or a priest a harp to channel their healing spells.
The bard fantasy of providing group buffs frankly sucks, and that role will never exist in wow. You mentioned shaman doing this before but frankly the buffing aspect to shamans sucked, always has, the only thing that made it feel good was getting free group invites. It could work however as a proffession if they revived the buff economy.
I honestly think a bard proffession and casting animations would be enough for about everyone, and i struggle to imagine what more players could ask for.

[qwerty123456]

Ok what does a bard do? They play music, thats their defining thing. Thats the input, its quirky and fun, great. Whats the output though? What does the music accomplish? Do they do nothing but buff allies? Thatll never work in this game. What are their damaging abilities or healing abilities?

See, the issue isnt that the input sucks, its the output. The output could be literally anything.
Frankly i think it could just be a proffession, thats probably the best spot for it imo.

Bard's aren't just about singing. Traditionally they told epic tales. We already have several characters in wow with Azuna ghost school and Tortollans being the most recent summoning things from stories. There could be several different specs based on this alone. You could have "stances" based on what tale you are telling and your skills would change depending on the tale, or you could have a summoner spec bringing these tales to life, etc...

As for singing. A Siren is probably the most known mythological Singer to use singing as a weapon and they used it to seduce/mind control sailors and since they also exist in the game I could easily see bards having a Spec based on mind controlling humanoids. It could end up being like a magical hunter spec or could be something more complex using multiple people you have "tamed".

Also Singing could be a buff/healer type spec that focuses more on aoe but it could also be a dps spec as several npcs have already used sound as a weapon in game.

As for visuals on the sound skills you could have notes, bars, waves, etc as well as different visuals from the caster and what ever the skill hits.

[bloodmoth13]

Bard's aren't just about singing. Traditionally they told epic tales. We already have several characters in wow with Azuna ghost school and Tortollans being the most recent summoning things from stories. There could be several different specs based on this alone. You could have "stances" based on what tale you are telling and your skills would change depending on the tale, or you could have a summoner spec bringing these tales to life, etc...

As for singing. A Siren is probably the most known mythological Singer to use singing as a weapon and they used it to seduce/mind control sailors and since they also exist in the game I could easily see bards having a Spec based on mind controlling humanoids. It could end up being like a magical hunter spec or could be something more complex using multiple people you have "tamed".

Also Singing could be a buff/healer type spec that focuses more on aoe but it could also be a dps spec as several npcs have already used sound as a weapon in game.

As for visuals on the sound skills you could have notes, bars, waves, etc as well as different visuals from the caster and what ever the skill hits.

The lorewalker angle is interesting, but telling the same story over and over would seem weird... Its a bit gimmicky... And necromancer or shaman would do the whole bringing the dead back to speak thing better.
Using sound as a weapon isnt bad either, like sonic cannons, but... That wouldnt match an apex musician, you would just be blasting a cacophony to burst their eardrums, which while its fucking metal as hell, we're still in a fantasy game.
Enchanter could be cool too, but if its using soldiers to fight for you i feel like it should be a warrior spec.
Trying to combine it into a cohesive class would be a struggle.
Blizz can always make new lore to include them, but i dout they will anytime soon.
I still think just makint musical animations for each race and enabling them for each class would be the best compromise

[qwerty123456]

The lorewalker angle is interesting, but telling the same story over and over would seem weird... Its a bit gimmicky... And necromancer or shaman would do the whole bringing the dead back to speak thing better.
Using sound as a weapon isnt bad either, like sonic cannons, but... That wouldnt match an apex musician, you would just be blasting a cacophony to burst their eardrums, which while its fucking metal as hell, we're still in a fantasy game.
Enchanter could be cool too, but if its using soldiers to fight for you i feel like it should be a warrior spec.
Trying to combine it into a cohesive class would be a struggle.
Blizz can always make new lore to include them, but i dout they will anytime soon.
I still think just makint musical animations for each race and enabling them for each class would be the best compromise

You probably wouldn't be telling an actual story it would probably be that the "tales" would show different visuals and change different things of the abilities. The tales themselves would probably be just flavor text for the bard. For example lets take monks roll. If it was a story teller skill the base one without you telling a tale would just be roll but if you start to tell the tale of the Bob the first Goren that non damaging skill would then turn into Goren roll and allow you to damage enemies and knock them up or if you told the tale of Ragnaros it might turn into a movement skill that lets you pass through enemies but burns them and leaves a trail of fire.

The summoning class wouldn't be bringing dead back to life it would be bringing stories to life if it were based on the book summons we got in game atm. Necromancer is typically about a bunch of small summons all undead this would have the potential to be a more traditional summoner with stronger summons and potentially better customization as Blizzard could have you seek out new stories for new creature and item summons where Necromancer is always going to be about undead.

Sound as a weapon wouldn't be using a sound cannon it would likely be about different songs doing different things like other games already has. It's not like the bard is actually singing a song in the game and spending 5 minutes to finish it so the song skill Daughter of the Sea might put a Demoralizing Shout effect on a group of enemies as well as some frost damage. I assume it would probably be a more aoe focused spec.

Warrior's don't really mind control people though plus would probably be fighting in melee range with any allies. I guess you could spend gold to Hire mercenaries or something though. Siren would work much better imo.

It wouldn't be that hard to combine into a cohesive class as they are all things bards are known for but if it was too confusing for some people they could easily call it an entertainer or something.

[bloodmoth13]

You probably wouldn't be telling an actual story it would probably be that the "tales" would show different visuals and change different things of the abilities. The tales themselves would probably be just flavor text for the bard. For example lets take monks roll. If it was a story teller skill the base one without you telling a tale would just be roll but if you start to tell the tale of the Bob the first Goren that non damaging skill would then turn into Goren roll and allow you to damage enemies and knock them up or if you told the tale of Ragnaros it might turn into a movement skill that lets you pass through enemies but burns them and leaves a trail of fire.

The summoning class wouldn't be bringing dead back to life it would be bringing stories to life if it were based on the book summons we got in game atm. Necromancer is typically about a bunch of small summons all undead this would have the potential to be a more traditional summoner with stronger summons and potentially better customization as Blizzard could have you seek out new stories for new creature and item summons where Necromancer is always going to be about undead.

Sound as a weapon wouldn't be using a sound cannon it would likely be about different songs doing different things like other games already has. It's not like the bard is actually singing a song in the game and spending 5 minutes to finish it so the song skill Daughter of the Sea might put a Demoralizing Shout effect on a group of enemies as well as some frost damage. I assume it would probably be a more aoe focused spec.

Warrior's don't really mind control people though plus would probably be fighting in melee range with any allies. I guess you could spend gold to Hire mercenaries or something though. Siren would work much better imo.

It wouldn't be that hard to combine into a cohesive class as they are all things bards are known for but if it was too confusing for some people they could easily call it an entertainer or something.

I meant with the summoner role you would basically have etherial images of past characters, it would be very similar to a necromancer speaking with the dead, but closer to a shaman invoking their ancestors (which would probably be a more practical take but shaman has become synonymous with elementalist now)
Also retelling tales of the past in a sense is breathing life into the dead, just figuratively not literally. In fact it would be a pretty sweet take on a necromancer bard hybrid, bellowing out songs of each spirit conjured

Sound for buffs is pretty much expected, but for dealing damage like you said its now treading mage territory. Having caster animations would be enough imo since you could just roleplay your bard animated frost mage is playing a song about jaina or whoever, it would essentially make dozens of bard specs over night for maximum effect from minimum effort.

As for the commander vs enchanter, its essentially the same bones of a class, only difference really would be command animations, which are cosmetic, as the roleplay would (and should) cover whether your troops are enchanted, hired, conscripted or enthralled.

I still dont see a class existing personally, they would need new lore to justify it like with the monk, which personally is my least favorite class thematically due to how contrived it is (monk could have also been a skin for existing melee tbh)

[Ielenia]

I still just see rogue and warrior. You could give a rogue a bard talent for what its worth and it would probably do enough to satisfy the bard itch.

Oh, do tell me how much did giving Metamorphosis to the warlock satisfied the "demon hunter itch" for those who wanted to play demon hunters.

Warriors already have shouts,

Warriors having 'shouts' is irrelevant. That's like saying hunters should not exist because warriors can equip a bow.

Ok what does a bard do? They play music, thats their defining thing. Thats the input, its quirky and fun, great. Whats the output though? What does the music accomplish? Do they do nothing but buff allies? Thatll never work in this game. What are their damaging abilities or healing abilities?

That's narrow-thinking. They could do much more. Cast offensive AND defensive spells. Russell Brower, for example, can cast frost magic through his songs and music.

[devilzxlin]

i just want a true support class/spec,path of exile is more interesting than world of warcraft,path of exile is a game like diablo.

[Teriz]

I've never been a huge fan of this concept. Frankly I feel that Bards have no place in the class structure of this game.

That said, I will offer a general viewpoint that I think many people are overlooking; I think you're trying to merge two very different concepts into a single concept that isn't really based in WoW, but based more on DnD games. A class that utilizes sound for a weapon probably isn't going to be utilizing a bow and arrow, but instead, will ONLY be using their specific brand of magic.

That being the case, I think the best path for the Bard would be a character that either worships, or follows Murmur, and utilizes sound magic much the way a Mage would utilize Arcane/Frost/Fire magic. Sort of like a Shaman who calls a sound elemental to its aid, or like a Mage or Warlock who enslaves the elemental to do their bidding. Further, like those types of magic, sound magic should have its own unique property, and I think that property should be reverberation. Essentially the ability for spells to bounce off targets and hit other nearby targets. You could have two general specs; A damaging spec that uses various sound types to damage targets, and a healing spec that uses a lot of channeled/AoE effects. Additionally, the unique quality of sound magic would be the ability to "bounce" spells around, making many single target spells AoE if properly targeted.

TDLR: Make the Bard a new type of caster class, like Warlocks, Mages, and Priests. Completely abandon the idea of them using bows, and essentially make them sound mages.

Depending on how this goes, I may do a class write up.

[Ielenia]

<snip>

The bard, just like the druid, is a "jack-of-all-trades". They can wield a bow, and a sword, and be a spellcaster. All three are valid interpretations of the RPG bard concept. It doesn't use "just sound" as a weapon. It is "one of" its weapons. That's like saying druids shouldn't have shapeshifting into animals AND magic. That the hunters must always be ranged and never melee.

One spec healer, one spec spellcaster, one spec ranged with bows/x-bows/guns works perfectly for the bard. Even a fourth spec with swords could be added if Blizzard is feeling particularly generous.

[bloodmoth13]

Oh, do tell me how much did giving Metamorphosis to the warlock satisfied the "demon hunter itch" for those who wanted to play demon hunters.


Warriors having 'shouts' is irrelevant. That's like saying hunters should not exist because warriors can equip a bow.


That's narrow-thinking. They could do much more. Cast offensive AND defensive spells. Russell Brower, for example, can cast frost magic through his songs and music.

Are you comparing an immobile caster with a talent that belongs to a hyper mobile class with a mobile swashbuckler with a talent that belongs to a mobile swashbuckler with a lute?

Apples and trousers on that one.

[Ielenia]

Are you comparing an immobile caster with a talent that belongs to a hyper mobile class with a mobile swashbuckler with a talent that belongs to a mobile swashbuckler with a lute?

Apples and trousers on that one.

No, it's "apples and apples". It wouldn't satisfy the "bard itch" at all. First of all: bards aren't "mobile". They're more mobile than your average spellcaster (which, by the way, bards are ALSO spellcasters), but they're much less mobile than your average melee class.

They're also not "swashbucklers".

[Teriz]

The bard, just like the druid, is a "jack-of-all-trades". They can wield a bow, and a sword, and be a spellcaster. All three are valid interpretations of the RPG bard concept. It doesn't use "just sound" as a weapon. It is "one of" its weapons. That's like saying druids shouldn't have shapeshifting into animals AND magic.

And we have Malfurion, Druid of the Claw, and Druid of the talon to show us that. Magic AND Shapeshifting.

That the hunters must always be ranged and never melee.

Except we have Rexxar to show us that not all a Hunters are melee. I wasn’t saying using a sound weapon, but a caster of sound magic based on the element of sound.

What examples of WC Bards do we have to show us this “jack of all trades” that you speak of?

[Ielenia]

And we have Malfurion, Druid of the Claw, and Druid of the talon to show us that. Magic AND Shapeshifting.

Except we have Rexxar to show us that not all a Hunters are melee. I wasn’t saying using a sound weapon, but a caster of sound magic based on the element of sound.

Teriz, you're missing the point. I mentioned the druid not because I'm talking about Warcraft representation, but as an example of how making the playable class purely a shapeshifter, or purely a spellcaster, would be ignoring important parts of the concept. And the concept of the RPG bard shows how it can be everything, from spellcaster, to archer, to sword-fighter, and that's important to the concept.

What examples of WC Bards do we have to show us this “jack of all trades” that you speak of?

If you want to take things that way, alright. But first you must show examples of Warcraft monks using the power of "chi" and "healing with mists" before MoP, of course.

[Teriz]

Teriz, you're missing the point. I mentioned the druid not because I'm talking about Warcraft representation, but as an example of how making the playable class purely a shapeshifter, or purely a spellcaster, would be ignoring important parts of the concept. And the concept of the RPG bard shows how it can be everything, from spellcaster, to archer, to sword-fighter, and that's important to the concept.

And you're missing the point that WC3 provided a basis for a Shapeshifter that could also cast spells. We don't have a basis in WC for a Bard with the ability set that you're providing.

If you want to take things that way, alright. But first you must show examples of Warcraft monks using the power of "chi" and "healing with mists" before MoP, of course.

The resource is irrelevant, and "healing with mists" is also pretty irrelevant too when you consider that the the WC3 Brewmaster hero provided a major basis for the majority of the Monk class. The Brewmaster provided the basis for the tank spec, the brewing sub spec, a major ability for Windwalker monks (SEF), and the iconography/culture of the class. Do we have anything similar for Bards?

[Ielenia]

And you're missing the point that WC3 provided a basis for a Shapeshifter that could also cast spells. We don't have a basis in WC for a Bard with the ability set that you're providing.

It doesn't matter. Again: I'm not talking about "warcraft representation". I'm talking about RPG concepts.

The resource is irrelevant, and "healing with mists" is also pretty irrelevant too

I'm not talking about the class resource "chi", I'm talking about the concept of "chi" and its uses: the inner energy that allows you to fly forward, to have your punches hit as hard as martial weapons, to heal yourself. As for "healing with mists", it's not irrelevant. At all. It's very pertinent to the point, because it's not just a concept that is the basis of an entire spec... that has no "basis" in the lore of Warcraft. Both the concept of "chi" and "healing mists" are foreign to Warcraft.

when you consider that the the WC3 Brewmaster hero provided a major basis for the majority of the Monk class.

It wasn't, really, and I've explained that several times, already. One-third of the class, at best. The entire main concepts of the WindWalker and MistWeaver concepts came from outside of warcraft.

Do we have anything similar for Bards?

We kind of do, actually. We have Hearthsinger Forresten, who indicates a possibility for the playable class using ranged weapons like bows and guns; we have Russell Brower, who indicates a possibility for the class to be both a healer, and an offensive spellcaster; we have Lorewalker Cho and the Tortollans, as well as the kul'tiran and nightborne bards who indicate the possiblity for human, dwarf, pandaren, nightborne and kul'tiran iconography.

On top of that, your second paragraph goes completely against your first paragraph. Because on your first paragraph you say we "need a basis in WC for a bard with the ability set I'm providing", but then on the second paragraph you make a sharp 180º turn and completely dismiss the fact that we don't have any basis for "chi" and "healing mists" in Warcraft, whatsoever.

You literally engage in double-standards.

[Teriz]

It doesn't matter. Again: I'm not talking about "warcraft representation". I'm talking about RPG concepts.

Except no class has entered WoW without some form of representation.

I'm not talking about the class resource "chi", I'm talking about the concept of "chi" and its uses: the inner energy that allows you to fly forward, to have your punches hit as hard as martial weapons, to heal yourself. As for "healing with mists", it's not irrelevant. At all. It's very pertinent to the point, because it's not just a concept that is the basis of an entire spec... that has no "basis" in the lore of Warcraft. Both the concept of "chi" and "healing mists" are foreign to Warcraft.

Ah, are you saying that Blizzard more than likely pulled chi from general Monk RPG concepts? That’s a fair point to make, but it doesn’t change the fact that Warcraft had a basis for Monks before the Monk class appeared in MoP. We don’t have that basis for a Bard.

It wasn't, really, and I've explained that several times, already. One-third of the class, at best. The entire main concepts of the WindWalker and MistWeaver concepts came from outside of warcraft.

There were plenty of Monks in WoW before MoP who had fist of fury, Snap kick, and similar abilities to the WW spec. So I wouldn’t say those main concepts came from outside of WoW.

We kind of do, actually. We have Hearthsinger Forresten, who indicates a possibility for the playable class using ranged weapons like bows and guns; we have Russell Brower, who indicates a possibility for the class to be both a healer, and an offensive spellcaster; we have Lorewalker Cho and the Tortollans, as well as the kul'tiran and nightborne bards who indicate the possiblity for human, dwarf, pandaren, nightborne and kul'tiran iconography.

On top of that, your second paragraph goes completely against your first paragraph. Because on your first paragraph you say we "need a basis in WC for a bard with the ability set I'm providing", but then on the second paragraph you make a sharp 180º turn and completely dismiss the fact that we don't have any basis for "chi" and "healing mists" in Warcraft, whatsoever.

You literally engage in double-standards.

The problem with both of those characters is that none of their abilities are original. They’re all taken from other classes. Hunters had shoot, multishot, and Lullaby in MoP. Didn’t make them Bards. Priests had A split version of Russel Brower’s abilities, it didn’t make them Bards either.

Say what you will about the Monk, but Drunken Haze, Drunken Brawler, SEF, Fists of Fury, and Breath of Fire we’re absent from the class lineup.

- - - Updated - - -

There's also Russel the bard in Boralus and in Hearthstone, the latter featuring him with an ''Alluring tune'' mind control hero power, meaning that there's magic tied to his tunes, AND he's a storyteller relaying the tale of Marin the Fox.

Hearthstone is Hearthstone of course but Tortollans began there and were introduced into the game in BfA.

He’s considered a Rogue. https://wow.gamepedia.com/Russel_the_Bard