A Bard Thought

[ty_taurus]

I may get hate for this but I'm one of those people who plays Bard as a "Ranger" and I enjoy it this way. I like bows and arrows and all the cool effects the Bard has while doing so as well as doing some fun damage. This obviously means I wasn't a Bard main for years and played the job because it was a supportive type role. I only recently started playing it because they kinda shifted away from that towards the "Ranger" type role. However, I'm a little worried now that they may push it back to being more of a support job and can completely sympathize with those players who've played it for years as a support class and got that rug pulled out from underneath them, as if this did indeed happen, I probably would stop playing Bard altogether.

It's a crappy position all around and personally I can't think of a solution outside of trying to find a happy middle ground for both sides. I imagine the balancing here can be tricky but if they take their time and put all those big brains to use, I can see a solution being an absolute possibility.

I don't know why, but when I read "happy middle ground for both sides," I thought of something interesting. It's an unrefined idea, and would need a lot of talk, but what if Bard got their own "Diurnal Sect" and "Nocturnal Sect"? I'm going to call them: "Hunter's Rhyme" and "Minstrel's Rhyme."

Hunter's Rhyme is basically what we have now: Has you using actions like Apex Arrow, Refulgent Arrow, Empyreal Arrow, and Pitch Perfect to do higher selfish DPS like an Archer.

Minstrel's Rhyme changes these actions to musical abilities that support like how Dancer functions. You lose out on a large chunk of selfish DPS, but you gain a lot of additional DPS through padding.

I can immediately see this being a tightrope of a balancing act as you would want them both to essentially contribute an equal amount of DPS ultimately, but this strategy could be done without needing to add another job. Just make Bard able to flex between a bow-focused fighter and a song-focused fighter.

[LunaFaelyn]

I don't know why, but when I read "happy middle ground for both sides," I thought of something interesting. It's an unrefined idea, and would need a lot of talk, but what if Bard got their own "Diurnal Sect" and "Nocturnal Sect"? I'm going to call them: "Hunter's Rhyme" and "Minstrel's Rhyme."

Hunter's Rhyme is basically what we have now: Has you using actions like Apex Arrow, Refulgent Arrow, Empyreal Arrow, and Pitch Perfect to do higher selfish DPS like an Archer.

Minstrel's Rhyme changes these actions to musical abilities that support like how Dancer functions. You lose out on a large chunk of selfish DPS, but you gain a lot of additional DPS through padding.

I can immediately see this being a tightrope of a balancing act as you would want them both to essentially contribute an equal amount of DPS ultimately, but this strategy could be done without needing to add another job. Just make Bard able to flex between a bow-focused fighter and a song-focused fighter.

OMG! This is brilliant! Both sides win! Please let SE see this to get their creative juices flowing on how to fix what I am calling "the bard community divided".

[Vivi_Bushido]

I don't know why, but when I read "happy middle ground for both sides," I thought of something interesting. It's an unrefined idea, and would need a lot of talk, but what if Bard got their own "Diurnal Sect" and "Nocturnal Sect"? I'm going to call them: "Hunter's Rhyme" and "Minstrel's Rhyme."

Hunter's Rhyme is basically what we have now: Has you using actions like Apex Arrow, Refulgent Arrow, Empyreal Arrow, and Pitch Perfect to do higher selfish DPS like an Archer.

Minstrel's Rhyme changes these actions to musical abilities that support like how Dancer functions. You lose out on a large chunk of selfish DPS, but you gain a lot of additional DPS through padding.

I can immediately see this being a tightrope of a balancing act as you would want them both to essentially contribute an equal amount of DPS ultimately, but this strategy could be done without needing to add another job. Just make Bard able to flex between a bow-focused fighter and a song-focused fighter.

This sounds great on paper but wouldn't end very well. First and foremost, DPS are selfish. It's just the honest blunt truth. It would be like RDM with Embolden all over. Bards would try to stay in Hunter's Rhyme for as long as they're physically able to before someone calls them out to change. People already hate how DNC has to stop DPSing to buff everyone.

[Suniva]

snip

Hey~! I had a similar idea ! I thought it would be crazy, but it's nice to see that I am not the only one reaching for something like this to try and appease both kinds of play styles that have divided the bard camp over the years. I feel that as the game has become more popular since 2.0 and attracted more players, this would eventually come to a boiling point where people want the bard to play more like a ranger simply because of how other games have designed classes that wield a bow and arrow. I, personally, read up on how bard was way back in 1.0-2.0 and decided to go with it because I loved the idea of bringing the supportive element to my group at the cost of my overall dps and was/is completely and totally fine with it. Then you have players that come to the game that are not so much interested in the lore or even the history of "jobs" and just want to see big numbers, them bring the "big d dps".

I don't know. But as someone who has played right after 1.0 destroyed the world of Eoroza up until now, the "bard" player base has seem to have attracted both kinds of players: those who enjoy being and bringing a supportive element to their parties, as the name "bard" implies and those who have enjoyed bow and arrow type ranged classes in other games and like a more "selfish" dps play style. It seems hard to balance but in all honesty, adding a sort of "ranger" form and "bard" form could appease both of the camps without having to do major changes or even adding another class to the game. I find that it would be a nice way to keep both camps overall satisfied. And while I DO see that groups that enjoy pushing through savage content would PREFER an actual "bard" that provides group wipe buffs, it still leaves the ability for those who prefer to be more ranger focused the ability to contribute in terms of their overall dps.

I hope that SE can find a way to appease both sides. This was inevitable as the game became more popular and now we are finally here. I stand firmly on the side of the camp that feels that my overall job identity has been lost to make the class "easier" and appeasing to newer players and very, VERY much dislike it. I want my songs to bring a supportive element to the group, I want to manage songs such as Foe's Requiem in between fights. My opinion is one where I enjoyed the class because of it's unique play style and how we HAD to be aware of how the fights were progressing to "sing" the proper songs for our party depending on the circumstances. I've been playing since our limit break was the group wide rez shared with healers and when it was changed to what is now laughed at how it worthless it was compared to what it was before (Honestly, how many fights have been designed that make a range LB preferred to use rather than a melee one?). I understand that there are many others that may not agree with me, but at the same time, I cannot and will not be satisfied that the class I have played for 6 years has now been reduced to a form of selfish dps for the sake of making it easier to play and more appeasing to newer players. Sorry, but I truly feel that it is completely unfair to ignore a portion of the player base that truly enjoyed bard for it's supportive elements and to nuke it to the ground in order to make way for those who don't.

Sorry if you read this and don't agree with me. But at the end of the day, after all is said and done, I want bard to BE a bard, and not a ranger. If I wanted to bring "big d dps" I would play a class more focused on doing just that, like machinist, or monk, or dragoon. (Take a look at my character if you want and see for yourself.)

[HyoMinPark]

I don't know why, but when I read "happy middle ground for both sides," I thought of something interesting. It's an unrefined idea, and would need a lot of talk, but what if Bard got their own "Diurnal Sect" and "Nocturnal Sect"? I'm going to call them: "Hunter's Rhyme" and "Minstrel's Rhyme."

Hunter's Rhyme is basically what we have now: Has you using actions like Apex Arrow, Refulgent Arrow, Empyreal Arrow, and Pitch Perfect to do higher selfish DPS like an Archer.

Minstrel's Rhyme changes these actions to musical abilities that support like how Dancer functions. You lose out on a large chunk of selfish DPS, but you gain a lot of additional DPS through padding.

I can immediately see this being a tightrope of a balancing act as you would want them both to essentially contribute an equal amount of DPS ultimately, but this strategy could be done without needing to add another job. Just make Bard able to flex between a bow-focused fighter and a song-focused fighter.

The issue with you advocating for AST-like Sects on BRD is that they would never be balanced. That is something AST has struggled with since it was released in 3.0: Diurnal is always better than Nocturnal unless one is solo-healing Savage/Ultimate, where shields would be needed. Your idea would likely leave BRD in a similar state, where one stance is always preferred and the other is blatantly underpowered by comparison (Noct Sect is essentially a trash, less MP-efficient SCH; where as Diurnal is as decent as a WHM).

You can’t have a heavily support-oriented “Sect” without risking it affecting the balance currently between the physical ranged—which has been an issue in the past. MCH wasn’t terrible in SB, but it didn’t offer nearly the same kind of rDPS contributions that BRD could. Coupled with how god-awful it could be to play at higher latencies, BRD was blatantly favored because it could do everything a MCH could and more. And it had the bow & arrow aesthetic people love while not feeling horrible to play at higher ping. Giving BRD an rDPS buffing/padding stance risks upsetting this balance and tilting the scales in favor of the job while leaving the other two sort of hanging out on the sidelines. Conversely, if they don’t make the rDPS stance “worth it enough”, then it becomes the useless stance (Nocturnal), and you will be required to use your damage stance more often than not.

You could also end up with the DNC situation: where your personal damage is much lower to compensate your rDPS contributions. DNC can provide 1,600+ in rDPS buffs compared to BRD’s ~400 with Battle Voice, but their personal damage is much lower. Almost to the point where some players are dissatisfied because they feel weak, and others harbor misconceptions that the job cannot clear content and begin locking them out of Party Finders (unfortunately, I have seen instances of this already on Aether in E3S and E4S PFs—they’re doing the same thing with NIN, as well). Trick Attack is directly hurting NIN right now because of “how much it can give”, and it’s to the point where a lot of NINs are asking for it to be removed entirely.

In short, there is a huge balancing act required for this sort of idea. And, unfortunately, it’s not as easy as it seems. Given the way developers want to tax high rDPS with lower pDPS, I would hate to see them push BRD into a position like what DNC and NIN are in currrently: where their utility is either bordering on or actively hurting the jobs (in other words: DNC could stand potency buffs to bring it up a bit and NIN is just in a right state at the moment). I think this design philosophy is flawed—because I think you can find better ways to balance; and I think one can have decent rDPS contributions without taxing pDPS too heavily. But I’m not a game designer. I also know that AST has struggled with these two different stances/identities since its inception, and I don’t feel confident that your BRD wouldn’t undergo the same struggle.



Your declarations of wanting an “actual BRD” are unlikely to happen—because I’m interpreting “actual BRD” as something similar to XI, where they were closer to pure support as opposed to the hybrid that they have been in XIV. This game could not fit in a pure support-type role, nor would I want it to.

I’d be more than happy with an iteration of BRD similar to 4.x BRD: bring back Foe’s, allow it to be flexible in terms of function; and I’d honestly be happy with a bit more resource management on BRD as they had in the past (e.g., MP recovery a la Refresh) but I know that that’s unlikely to happen given how most jobs seem to be responsible for their own resource management now. Add in some QoL adjustments like charges on BL and maybe EA, as well as a functionality change on Apex, and I’d be fairly happy. I don’t have any desire to be 100% support.

[Cetonis]

Oh god please no. There's no need to run all the way to the most extreme, craziest ideas possible.

The masses were content with Stormblood Bard, flavor wise. You don't need to do anything more extreme than SB Bard. And all SB Bard was, was a music-themed archer, with some support skills that that provided the second or third-most added raid damage.

That's all they need to do. Keep it as-is, add some ~400-800 dps worth of support via abilities that are interesting and engaging to use, buff the other ranged in turn because all three are behind anyway. Maybe do some QoL cleanup, do something for those poor badping MCHs, call it a day. Easy.

[Grimoire-M]

Honestly, why not have Foe Requiem return as a song-based cooldown? Let it augment the current song you're in (likely by generating Repertoire) and offer a raid boost while it's in effect. Let your song rotation charge it up (up to 3 charges, consumes each charge for 10/20/30s duration. 20s cooldown) and as long as you're properly rotating between Paeon/Minuet/Ballad and you're good to go. That way you reward players who not only want to support with a potentially powerful cooldown, but also give them incentive to align their support with other raid buffs.

[Vendalwind]

To throw it out there i like the stance idea. But perhaps instead of a sect alignment like AST it should just be two phases. Current songs already set up this very thing in point of fact. One of the three could open a few of the current oGCDs that are archer styled. One song could give access to music styled attacks with more magical effect, and the third could give access to buff effects.

Since each song forcibly lasts 30 seconds and all three must be used the only choice comes in choosing which mode to open with.

You could even balance it so certain comps do better with one song as an opener. Buff magic dmg minimally during bard phase. Physical during archer phase minimally, and both during support phase.

Its really quite pheasable, and other than adding a few new music moves the groundwork for it is already in place.

[Vendalwind]

Then combined comps would prefer a support or song opener. Magic heavy comps would prefer a bard opener. Melee or physical heavy comps could prefer archer opener

[Suniva]

Then combined comps would prefer a support or song opener. Magic heavy comps would prefer a bard opener. Melee or physical heavy comps could prefer archer opener

This is a very interesting idea! But yes while all our songs to last 30 seconds, we do cut Army's Peon short just because it is more optimal to do so in current form. I don't know what they could introduce to make us want to sing that particular song for a full 30 seconds to be honest.