The Traps Beginners should be warned of

[veekie]

I believe the generally accepted wisdom is to not try to use UMD too much in judging a class' effectiveness since UMD's power doesn't really have anything to do with the class per se, unless it has a specific ability related to that skill (e.g., Warlock). 

Or a means of obtaining an excess of equipment usable with UMD, e.g. Artificer(also Warlock, but they need to pay full costs to acquire craft ability)

[TSS]

Doomspeak is IC based, isn't it?

No, it's bardic music based.  It has nothing to do with IC at all.  Unless you meant IC to stand in for all bardic music. 

I'd have to look that up.

We know.  The Bard has UMD, too (and nearly the same list if memory serves), so at best that's a wash. 

I believe the generally accepted wisdom is to not try to use UMD too much in judging a class' effectiveness since UMD's power doesn't really have anything to do with the class per se, unless it has a specific ability related to that skill (e.g., Warlock).

My point was if Celerity is such a good thing, then especially after accounting for the Bard's delayed spell progression the Beguiler can get it at about the same time. That means you get both the few good Bard spells and the better Beguiler spell list/progression/chassis. There's likely other ways of getting it, such as actually gaining Celerity as a new spell known. That's not some partial charged wand argument because it's only being used to get a few key things.

Edit: Doomspeak has a save. If you can get them to fail a save you can just kill them.

[Unbeliever]

Doomspeak is IC based, isn't it?

No, it's bardic music based.  It has nothing to do with IC at all.  Unless you meant IC to stand in for all bardic music. 

I'd have to look that up.

...

Edit: Doomspeak has a save. If you can get them to fail a save you can just kill them.

Please do look up Doomspeak before you keep on making judgments about its effectiveness. 

You'll notice it has an outsized save DC, making it significantly more likely that the target will fail such a save.  It's 5 points higher at 10th level, for instance, and keeps pulling away.

And, it runs off of a resource you can have a lot more of than save or die/suck spells lying around.  And, it allows you, or usually your party, to maximize that resource most effectively. 

[TSS]

I did look it up. That's how I know it has a save (the level instead of half level is most likely a typo and corrected in errata) and that is also how I know it is single target.

Mind Fog is the same thing except AoE. Any effect that makes the target reroll a save is worth about 5 DC.

Doomspeak would be very good if it were not dependent on making things fail a save.

I noticed you ignored the rest of the post entirely.

[Unbeliever]

I felt it was adequately covered by previous posts. 

But, let's trace the progress of this little discussion for a second.  The contentions have moved from:

• The only way to play a bard is to use Inspire Courage.  "This literally means Bards that aren't IC focused are being played wrong."  (TSS, reply #343). 

to

• The Beguiler can pick up most of the Bard's other, non-Inspire Courage-based tricks.

and

• The Bard has this ability that I think should be errata'ed (which it isn't, I happen to think Solid Fog is broken, but for the purposes of this forum I'm kind of stuck with it) that is maybe equal to a 5th level spell. 
  
  Even though the DC on that spell, which is Will negates by the way, is going to be at least 5 lower than Doomspeak's.  Both Mind Fog and Doomspeak have their uses, to be sure:  the AoE can be really valuable, I'm sure, whereas Doomspeak wrecks one guy's life, and Mind Fog lasts longer, but has to contend with SR, can be blown away, dispelled, etc.

Now, I'm no expert, but that looks like shifting the goalposts to me.  Even if it's not, we are miles from the blithe statement that  "This literally means Bards that aren't IC focused are being played wrong." 

We've shifted from, "this class is useless (or, in this case has only one real use)" to there may exist some possible ways of doing this stuff more effectively, especially if you throw some serious optimization at it."  This kind of shifting, and defining a trap in the latter way, is what makes this thread pernicious to newbies rather than helpful. 

[TenaciousJ]

Champions of Ruin does not have an official errata document.  I guess RAW, Doomspeak has an awesome DC.

[RetroGamer24]

Main problem with bard is it only goes up to 6th level spells with base class only.  Beguiler has ninth level spells by default in base class.  Without going into PrCs beguiler has more power.  State wise Beguiler uses intelligence for its spells which helps its skills.  Now Bard uses charisma for its spells.  Beguiler has a slight bit more syngergy  this way.

Take elite aray.  Bard might look like this.  Cha 15, Con 14, Dex 13, Int 12, Wis 10, Str 8.  Beguiler Int 15, Con 14, Dex 13, Cha 12, Wis 10, Str 8.  It looks, to me, that while Beguiler is going to be lacking in say UMD he has more skills to use then Bard.  Bard does have an advantage in terms of knowledge skills but not the synergy to get a lot of them unless he dumps say Con to get more skill points. 

Now in terms of saves Bard gets Ref and Will as good while Beguiler gets only Will.  Beguiler also gets his spells, like 4th levels, earlier then the Bard does.

If I am missing anything from this quick back to back tell me.

[Halinn]

The Healer also has 9th level spells, without being more powerful than the bard. It's not just a matter of spell levels, but also what options you have within that.

[Sinfire Titan]

All right, I know it is kinda my fault, but if the Bard VS Beguiler argument is going to continue please started a new thread.

[RetroGamer24]

Agreed Sin.  I will start one tonight when I have access to my books since i am at work.

[TSS]

The point has always been that the only reason for the Bard's tier placement is Inspire Courage and everything else he does is done better by a Beguiler. So not only is a lack of sufficient focus in your character a trap, a focus on the wrong things (such as a Bard focusing on something other than IC) is also a trap.

Some people attempted to disprove that but the only point that was close to being valid is Doomspeak, which is also inferior to Beguiler options.

Which means that a Bard that is IC focused and does some other things is fine, but if you want the Bard to do anything else there is no reason not to be a Beguiler both because they're mechanically better and because they fill exactly the same conceptual niche. Further, a Bard focused on something other than IC is a trap because they don't do anything else good enough. They lack the DCs and spells known to make that effective as a focus and they do the other stuff even worse.

At no point in time did the topic shift away from discussing traps, even though some people focused on that specific example too much and missed the overall point.

That does bring up another trap though.

Enchantment. There's a reason this is one of the most commonly banned schools, and it's because immunities to it are extremely common. If it weren't for that it would be quite good since it's near universally Will save based which is the best sort of save and most of the effects are good if the target isn't immune to them... but because it's so easy to become immune, good luck finding things that are not immune.

Both Bards and Beguilers take a big hit for this reason. Both of them have other spells (the Beguiler much more than the Bard) that helps. Classes that need less focus to be good such as the Wizard have an even wider array of non enchantments.

Even so, it's too easy to stop for it to not be a trap.

[SorO_Lost]

Main problem with bard is it only goes up to 6th level spells with base class only.  Beguiler has ninth level spells by default in base class.  Without going into PrCs beguiler has more power.  State wise Beguiler uses intelligence for its spells which helps its skills.  Now Bard uses charisma for its spells.  Beguiler has a slight bit more syngergy  this way.

If I am missing anything from this quick back to back tell me.

Yeah, Skills are a trap

Plus this is the Bard we're talking about. Bardic Knowledge is a working substitute for a couple Knowledge checks whereas his AFC Bardic Knack gives him an effective 10 ranks in every single skill printed, UMD came up, what about UPD? Autohypnosis is pretty cool too, Iaijutsu can help bring the hurt. All dang near free. Then like any Arcane, several spells replace the need for skills and Bards get the Improvisation spell which gives I think four sets of a +10 Luck bonus to skills. Point being, who needs extra Skill Points when you've got Spells and Class Features that replace them?

[lans]

Yes, my main contention was that they would never one shot an average cr 1, secondary was showing that its only as much of a trap as using a greatsword with out other factors.

Showing some specific longsword build only does as well as a basic anything with a greatsword is not a point in your favor. After all the greatsword user can be doing 2d6+12 with 2 attacks a round.

Yes it is. If the whole concept of S&B is a trap, then just using  a greatsword with nothing but strength and BAB to back it up is also a trap.

What action? The move action that would otherwise let him get a full attack? At level 1 the move action isn't doing much. Granted if you have to move up to wack somebody you can't do that, but I didn't feel that had to be pointed out.

Except letting you close to the enemy so you can attack them. Either way anything involving using a thing that starts with dropping that thing is not viable.

Its only one tactic out of 3 or so.

You enter it when your initiative comes up.

And it still defeats the point.

What do you think the point is?

Its only a -2 penalty, or are you talking about missing out on a bonus? What feat are you referring to?

It actually doesn't require TWFing or impose the normal TWFing penalties. It's still -2 to hit for no reason. There are only two reasons why you'd want to take -2 to hit at low levels: You are PAing, and you are using Whirling Frenzy.

So taking -2 to hit for +4.5 avg is worth less than -2 for +4pts of damage?

Edit-How much healing on a given level do you think would make it worth it for levels 1-10?

It doesn't matter. Even if you did get yourself to the point where one person can heal one creature's damage output for one round it's just going to encourage them to focus on the healer and/or flat out kill their targets without allowing any chance to heal them.

They are already focusing fire, and killing their targets without allowing any chance to heal them when ever they can. Them focusing fire on the cleric might be the best case scenario as far as the party is concerned.

Both of which are easy to do and are often as simple as just having two creatures both attack the same target. In the meantime you have a Cleric playing healbot instead of a Cleric being a Cleric. That's two people's actions already accounted for every round.

Again they are already attacking the same target, and if the other character dies, that means he doesn't get healed.

[Rejakor]

Biggest problems new players run into, other than party balance, and stuff like 'we need a cleric for teh healz' and 'the CR system isn't a joke' are social stuff like one guy wanting to run the show or people doing stuff that makes other people uncomfortable/annoyed (like playing a kender, say) and people (especially DMs) not knowing how to deal with that.  As if somehow it being a roleplaying game doesn't mean that someone being a dick is being a dick.

protip; they're still being a dick.

ofc sometimes it's the other way and groups decide the one good/reasonable person in their midst isn't playing according to their rules but that situation is so screwed up anyway that there's no real way to fix it other than the odd one out leaving or conforming  (leaving is better).

EDIT:  lans, orc barb with greatsword who ploughs all his feats into Skill Focus does perfectly fine, and will be the star of the show even in a med-high op environment (colour spray looks lame compared to lotso'damage) up til level 6.  In a low op environment, with sufficient lootdrop luck or a DM who lets you buy and sell shit, that stuff stays relevant to 20.

EDIT EDIT:  And I dunno what that is about enchantment.  Enchantment rocks the house.  Lots of bruiser monsters and things you can shut down completely with enchantment.  The problem is if you go will save focused, and then you're fighting undead for the next 5 levels.  Also some DMs fucking hate save or dies and will shut you down if you focus on them by piling on massive saving throws or immunities - this comes under 'bad DMing'.  You are the DM, your monsters are SUPPOSED to die.  If they die too quick, make more shittier monsters not one big monster and look at that the single target SoD specialist is suddenly using shitty fireballs.  Ofc if you then do that 100% of the time, still shitty DMing.

[wotmaniac]

@ Soro:
I think that you still might need at least be "trained" in the skill for Bardic Knack to work.  just sayin'

======

In general, I've always kinda considered spells that allow saves to be traps -- at least ones that have zero effect on a successful save.  Aside from "save for no effect", it's just too easy to get immune to mind-effecting and death spells, and evasion is pathetically easy to get (which circles back around to the "save for no effect").  SR isn't such a big deal -- spell immunity is a lot rarer, and caster level is laughably easy to boost.
/2cp

[veekie]

EDIT EDIT:  And I dunno what that is about enchantment.  Enchantment rocks the house.  Lots of bruiser monsters and things you can shut down completely with enchantment.  The problem is if you go will save focused, and then you're fighting undead for the next 5 levels.  Also some DMs fucking hate save or dies and will shut you down if you focus on them by piling on massive saving throws or immunities - this comes under 'bad DMing'.  You are the DM, your monsters are SUPPOSED to die.  If they die too quick, make more shittier monsters not one big monster and look at that the single target SoD specialist is suddenly using shitty fireballs.  Ofc if you then do that 100% of the time, still shitty DMing.

A lot of things are theoretically highly effective, but run up against game restrictions.
Enchantment and Necromancy are extremely effective when they do work(and given the monster array in the MM its safe to say they'd work most of the time given a random spread). They defeat enemies quickly, with SoDs, hard-to-resist(barring immunities) debuffs and convert enemies into persistent minions.

Of these, SoDs are immensely unsatisfactory to GMs, because they either fail or end encounter. So for any encounter they are invested into, the GM WILL impose countermeasures. So, to a lesser degree, when it is really important(boss fights), you can't rely on SoDs because they are going to meet countermeasures, even with good GMs. To a greater degree, a bad GM would just make basically half of everything you meet immune to your specialty.

The harder part is where they get you minions. Sure you could do the same with conjuration to bind outsiders, transmutation to get you exotic abilities, divination to read the plot, necromancy to raise/control undead, enchantment to mind control anything with a mind...but actually running these is a pain.
Minions need to be managed, each minion more complex than auto-attack has to be kept track of, each creatures health and gear...these are things that make you lose the ability even if it wasn't overpowered, just because its annoying to manage.
Divinations could read the plot, but while whatever you contact with the magic might be omniscient, the GM is only omnipotent, and often don't have anything for you to find out in the first place.

These are probably metagame traps. They are traps purely because their metagame difficulties makes it extremely unlikely that they'd work as expected. Or that you want to, by the time you're managing your third mind-slave.

[InnaBinder]

Divinations could read the plot, but while whatever you contact with the magic might be omniscient, the GM is only omnipotent, and often don't have anything for you to find out in the first place.

This doesn't even address the somewhat dickish but all-too-common response of some players to actively fight against divinations in order to "prove" how clever they are to their DM and fellow players.  Have a divination reveal that the party is "destined to help restore the rightful heir of the kingdom of Brigamia to the throne," and players of a certain mindset will inevitably start avoiding or attacking any reasonably likely heirs, then talk about how "useless" divination is.

[Kajhera]

Divinations could read the plot, but while whatever you contact with the magic might be omniscient, the GM is only omnipotent, and often don't have anything for you to find out in the first place.

This doesn't even address the somewhat dickish but all-too-common response of some players to actively fight against divinations in order to "prove" how clever they are to their DM and fellow players.  Have a divination reveal that the party is "destined to help restore the rightful heir of the kingdom of Brigamia to the throne," and players of a certain mindset will inevitably start avoiding or attacking any reasonably likely heirs, then talk about how "useless" divination is.

Players of an Oedipal mindset, in the original sense. It's a good opportunity to write a Greek tragedy; fiercely protecting your sense of free will is a fairly common response to prophecy.

[veekie]

Well, in either case its rendered ineffective because in one, the future is set in stone(read, heavy railroading), and your knowledge just acts as free foreshadowing which would have happened anyway if you didn't have the ability, in another, there is no specific future(sandbox types), and you get frustratingly vague info as the DM mad-libs or hedges.

[Kajhera]

Well, in either case its rendered ineffective because in one, the future is set in stone(read, heavy railroading), and your knowledge just acts as free foreshadowing which would have happened anyway if you didn't have the ability, in another, there is no specific future(sandbox types), and you get frustratingly vague info as the DM mad-libs or hedges.

Interesting opportunity here.
If the party decides to slaughter the royal family and forcefully implement democracy on the people, the party later uncovers information regarding the Ancient Democratic Republic of Brigamia.
Certain things in magic only make sense if you draw the causal arrows in the reverse direction, and in a world with both free will and prophecies, watch your players realize that their actions change the past.
(Note: This might wind up scary, or just lazy.)