Tobin Blake wrote:
Hawk Fingle wrote: As a bard, I would never ever want the paladin guarding me. Ever. That guard should be reserved for the weakest AC/HP in the party, such as the wizards, or the cleric who is arguably MVP of a dungeon run.
That is your choice to not have the paladin guard you ever.
As a paladin player, I spend pretty much every combat guarding the Wizards. However, it *is* a valid strategy for the Troubadour to use Taunt, while guarded by the paladin. If you're taunting, the monster won't be attacking those 'weakest AC/HP' Wizards or the Cleric, essentially giving a round of free defense to potentially all *four* of those classes if the monster cannot penetrate the paladin's AC.
If the monster is wasting a round trying to get through to the Bard that is being guarded by a paladin, that in turn is potentially two rounds (depending on whether or not you get initiative) for the Wizards to unleash massive amounts of damage (If you're using the Troubadour card, I'm presuming you're a high level group) that might be enough to end the combat there, especially if you add in the damage being caused by the other members of the party in those two rounds.
It sounds like what your argument on this thread boils down to (especially when presented with the valid strategy of using the paladin guard/troubadour taunt combo) is that since you personally won't use it that way, it's a waste to have it on the card.
That is absolutely not my argument. Which sounds to me that you don't understand how a bard works for the party from a practical standpoint or ever considered playing the class, or you are willfully disregarding my point to set up a strawman argument. So let me try breaking it down once again.
Is having the Paladin guard the Troubadour a valid strategy for Taunt?
Yes.
With Enhance Bardsong being a much better spell choice than Taunt and there being far more important targets for the Paladin to guard, is this strategy ever likely to be implemented in the Dungeon for all intents of practicality?
No.
I watched many Paladins come through the dungeon during my three shifts as NPC this past Gen Con. I would say that the majority of the parties that came through my room had a paladin and a bard. They also usually had Dwarf Fighters taunting the monster. In all the times the party had a bard and a paladin with them, the paladin guarded the bard exactly once, which resulted in their cleric dying during the fight since the monster kept attacking the cleric and the paladin wouldn't change their guard, and they had no Dwarf Fighter to taunt, so yes the corner case does exist. It is drowned out by the many other parties that came through over the three days that I NPC'd. And while the party did defeat the monster, they still lost their Cleric.
So while the paladin guarding the troubadour is a valid strategy, it isn't likely to be implemented except in corner cases where the party doesn't have a Dwarf Fighter but does have a Paladin or the Troubadour has some way to avoid that attack, or perhaps in True Grind where the Bardsong bonuses are arguably more important than in the Dungeon. Having only heard the stories of bards being chewed to pieces and the party ending up dying since they could no longer hit the monster in True Grind, I have no personal experience to draw from. But in the Dungeon, I can tell you that Bardsong does make a difference in whether the party defeats the monster or the party runs out of time and takes push damage. I've seen it and experienced it first hand, both as a monster and as a bard, and have had a few DMs agree with that assessment based on their own experiences.
Which means any spell that can raise that Bardsong bonus is far more helpful and far more likely to be cast than a spell which draws the monster's attention. I could spend one round letting the monster attack me with the Paladin guarding, or I could spend one round giving EVERYONE a +4/+6 bonus to attack and damage that lasts for as long as I keep Bardsong going. Even if only four players hit the monster (unlikely), that is 24 extra points of damage per round on top of what those four players deal with their weapons and other bonuses. With the right earcuff equipped, the casters are getting both bonuses as well for every damage spell they cast.
It isn't about me personally not using Taunt that way, or coming up with some edge corner case that makes it work okay. It's about Taunt being garbage when compared to Enhance Bardsong. No Troubadour is going to waste a spell slot on Taunt when Enhance Bardsong is there. They won't even think about it. And telling a Paladin to guard them while they draw the monster's attention will get you crazy looks from the entire group and remarks of, "Just keep doing Bardsong."
Any bard playing the class will not give Taunt or Inspire a second thought. There is no hard choice here. It is as plain as day that the two third-level spell slots are solely reserved for Enhance Bardsong, to be cast once at the last room and once for the second-to-last combat since those are typically a bit more difficult. No bard player that understands how a bard works is going to waste a spell slot for Taunt.
Now, if you wanted to tempt the player into using those spell slots for something else, you need to give them two other spells that actually compete with Enhance Bardsong. Those two spells are Soothe Wounds and Soundburst. With those two spells on the list it makes that second slot a difficult choice, because the player is going to reserve one for Enhance Bardsong for the last room, and then has to decide to use the second slot for damage, healing, or offering better bonuses.
Heck, I would even say that since you have the Song of Support there, have Enhance Bardsong and Enhance Song of Support. Now you have a double whammy of getting a new Special Power instead of Bardsong and a spell that directly relates to the new Power, AND the player has to decide which Power to use and if they will enhance it, since both cannot be in effect at the same time. Have that spell give a +1/+1 bonus to AC and saves on top of the bonus from Song of Support, and you've got a much stronger motivation to switch from Bardsong to Song of Support since the spell would be the only thing that can enhance it. Then it wouldn't matter what the third spell on the list is since you have two pretty good spells competing with each other directly.
Right now, the spell list is just as lopsided as it was when the Treasure Finding spell was there. Taunt and Inspire are throwaway spells that will not be considered in the face of Enhance Bardsong, and knowing that to be the case why not make things a little difficult for the player by giving them some real decision to make with the other spell slot? Heal the whole party? Hit the monster for 8 damage (+4 with the right earcuff equipped)? Or bump that Bardsong bonus? Those three options are more tightly contested for that one spell slot. Even given the Ring of Spell Storing, it's still a question of which spell to use the extra third spell slot. In my case, I'd use Soothe Wounds at some point to give the other healers a break, knowing that I would still have one spell slot in the hole just in case we need the extra damage, extra healing, or extra Bardsong bonuses.
TL,DR: It isn't about what I personally do or if there is a viable corner-case strategy to make Taunt work. It's about being given two spell slots and the choices of Taunt, Inspire, or Enhance Bardsong. With Bardsong being so key to the bard's strategy to begin with and it being the primary strategy of bards everywhere, as well as the preferred strategy by other party members, no bard that understands what a bard does is going to choose Taunt or Inspire over Enhance Bardsong. Therefore, Taunt and Inspire should not have been considered for the card. Rather, putting two other spells that are nearly as good as Enhance Bardsong should have been chosen, so that the player actually has to stop and think about what they should cast for that second spell slot.
