Quote from: Benoist;563572The time it took me to reach bard levels, the single classed humans in the group had become really powerful. I must have been around 14th level when they reached the truly gonzo levels of power. For me, it was like trying to catch up using my brains and the "bag of tricks" you know, with the horns and pipes and various items to make up for my lack of focus, but it was really awesome to play. Not the easy-peasy superpowered character people usually think of reading the bard description in the PH.

Interesting.  I never played a bard, but I had a player who did.  The rest of the party was mostly multi-classed demihumans, which may be why he didn't seem like he was playing catchup.  It's been a long time, but it seems to me that the bard PC rocked the house.

Maybe it's because 99% of my gaming is with characters under level 10 or so, so that's why no one liked the bard.  By the time you could qualify, everyone else was close to retirement.

I bought a copy of the A5 sized OSRIC and its a nice portable rule reference for my 1e games. I also find the reorganisation of material to be easier to navigate at the table too.

I still use my AD&D1e books when prepping a session, but they take less of a beating these days, which is also cool.

Given how cheap OSRIC was from Lulu, I recommend it for its practicality alone.

However, do you "need" it? Of course not.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563580Maybe it's because 99% of my gaming is with characters under level 10 or so, so that's why no one liked the bard.  By the time you could qualify, everyone else was close to retirement.

That's like hating a nation that exists long enough to develop a space program.

"What?  Travel to the moon sucks.  Of course most of our cities burn to the ground and our government is overthrown before we can consider such fiscal and social pursuits, so."

If everyone was a non-human multi-class using the original level limits, then yeah, the Bard would be a monster.  Compared to a single-classed character, the Bard would be tough and have a lot of flexibility, but would be out of bounds.

If someone bitches about 1e/UA classes being overpowered, they either...
1. Didn't have to actually qualify for it and/or
2. Didn't use the built in restrictions for the class.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;563582That's like hating a nation that exists long enough to develop a space program.

"What?  Travel to the moon sucks.  Of course most of our cities burn to the ground and our government is overthrown before we can consider such fiscal and social pursuits, so."

Uh...no.  It's nothing like that.  High level adventures in AD&D are not leaps better than low or mid level adventures.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;563578Interesting.  I never played a bard, but I had a player who did.  The rest of the party was mostly multi-classed demihumans, which may be why he didn't seem like he was playing catchup.  It's been a long time, but it seems to me that the bard PC rocked the house.

Question: were you using the Bard's level on the fighter to-hit matrix, or did you strictly use the Bard's fighter level instead (7th maximum)? The Attack matrix in the DMG can lead to different interpretations (since it seems to include bard levels on the fighter table), though the information in the PH is IMO pretty clear you're supposed to go with the latter. You're using your Thief level for thief abilities (5th to 9th level). Your save are the best class level you have, with your bard levels counting as a druid's.

The Charm percentage can be really useful, but is not fullproof. The Legend Lore and Item identification is pretty much always useful.

Magic items were my real resource. Assuming you're playing high level, since you reached the bard's, if the DM starves you in terms of magic item and you have no possibility to quest and search for specific items in the campaign world, then you're going to have a hard time when the single-classed humans keep going up and up the ladder like rockets and you don't. If your DM plays a true open world and your bard has opportunities to build his 'bag of tricks', adventuring, questing, asking sages or other bards for lore and stuff, the sky's the limit.

Yep.  The Bard's main advantage is tons of hit points.  It's a very good class, but hardly the powerhouse some consider it.  It's main strength is the ability to fill any role.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;563482Shame about monks, but bards were a shitty class in 1e anyway.  That's one thing where 2e improved on by leaps and bounds.

To the OP: if you like bards, I'd suggest doing what my buddy did in our 1e campaign and just played a 2e bard.  No noticeable balance issues.

There was a 1E bard variant in Dragon magazine I liked quite a lot.

Quote from: Bill;563745There was a 1E bard variant in Dragon magazine I liked quite a lot.

True.  Also, the Dragon magazine version of the monk was a lot better than the PHB one as well.

With the AD&D reprints out now, you need OSRIC less than ever!

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;564427With the AD&D reprints out now, you need OSRIC less than ever!

RPGPundit

AND more than ever, if you want to publish stuff for First Ed under the OGL, and/or want to get more stuff for your 1e game out of the zillions of modules and aids published for it already!

Quote from: Benoist;563599Question: were you using the Bard's level on the fighter to-hit matrix, or did you strictly use the Bard's fighter level instead (7th maximum)?

Man, I don't remember, for certain (long time ago), but I think we used his Fighter level.  That was a pretty early AD&D campaign, for me; I'm sure we made all sorts of rules deviations.  

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;564458Man, I don't remember, for certain (long time ago), but I think we used his Fighter level.  That was a pretty early AD&D campaign, for me; I'm sure we made all sorts of rules deviations.  

OK I was asking because that's one of the most obvious variations that come to my mind (due to the possible interpretation of the to-hit matrix in the DMG), and that changes the power level of the Bard quite radically!

Quote from: Benoist;564454AND more than ever, if you want to publish stuff for First Ed under the OGL, and/or want to get more stuff for your 1e game out of the zillions of modules and aids published for it already!

To me, that's always been the *REAL* value of the clone systems.  I'm not really interested in playing them (I've got the originals), I'm interested in the adventures and supplements.  All those OSRIC supplements that are out are a perfect match with the shiny new official AD&D books.