Bard - Fist of the Forest

[Sun Wukong]

So, how would you go about making a Bard/Fist of the Forest character?

Would you mix in Frenzied Berserker for better Power Attack Damage or just go for Bard 27/Fist of the Forest 3?

(You can do unarmed attacks while holding a lute, a drum, or a flute.)

[Reckeo]

I usually envision a character concept before attempting to interpret that character into a mechanically viable build; Meaning that it has to fit RP sense of the person' life, upbringing, backstory, race, etc etc.

Usually power comes second, and that's why most of my characters aren't so great in epic content, but fun to RP nonetheless.

That being said, I would be looking at why the character would be that kind of a mix, mechanics can be a lense through which actions manifest, but IMO shouldn't be the definition of the character. To me the mechanics flow from the concept, sometimes you can apply it in the opposite direction as well (examine mechanics and then relay it into the character concept). This usually but not always ends in there being a two way street between character concept and mechanics. However, more often than not, when I prioritize mechanics before concept, I grow severely bored with the character.

If your only desire is to build a bard that can use hand to hand attacks while holding a lute or something, and that's all, I wouldn't even recommend rolling the character simply for that reason. Now if you wanted to play, say, a Northern Skald that is prone to Drunken Brawling, or an Orcish Drummer (which is now a PRC or a kit I believe), and you wish to be able to smash your lute over a tavern patron's head, now you have something more to go on.

[aaron22]

i would think you would essentially create the M/FotF build and dip bard to get what you want out of it.

M21/FotF3/B6?

[Reckeo]

i would think you would essentially create the M/FotF build and dip bard to get what you want out of it.

M21/FotF3/B6?

Can't mix Lawful Class with non lawful: Bard requires non-lawful alignment, Monk requires lawful.

This is part of why in the other thread regarding the RCR suggestion of changing alignment and names doesn't work; it provides exploitation of otherwise impossible class mixes like monk/bard or paladin/bard.

[aaron22]

Can't mix Lawful Class with non lawful: Bard requires non-lawful alignment, Monk requires lawful

well i could if we had 100% rcr all the time.

[Reckeo]

Can't mix Lawful Class with non lawful: Bard requires non-lawful alignment, Monk requires lawful

well i could if we had 100% rcr all the time.

Not even then.

[aaron22]

Not even then.

Ex-bards = A bard who becomes lawful in alignment cannot progress in levels as a bard, though he retains all his bard abilities.

[Reckeo]

Not even then.

Ex-bards = A bard who becomes lawful in alignment cannot progress in levels as a bard, though he retains all his bard abilities.

RCR only banks character XP and is retrieved by a new one; Alignment is chosen at character creation and at this point is not changeable with a tool, although another thread suggested this, this would cause too many build problems and exploits.

Right now as it stands alignment shift is overseen with DM approval as a result of RP in-game action. This is the best way to keep it in order to justify RP. Such a character could exist, but should require massive change in RP behavior with justifiable and expressed change in such alignment with reason for taking the other class. This would be quite a lengthy and time consuming process and rare, not the norm. By making it a matter of an in game tool, it simple becomes a matter of talking to an NPC, and this destroys RP atmosphere. One day a bard, the next day an ex-bard/paladin without any kind of consistent RP to reflect the fact: poor implementation.

It looks like you're just fishing for a work-around at this point to create otherwise un-buildable characters for power gaming purpose.

[aaron22]

your right. i had the madness all mixed up.....

happens...

[Reckeo]

But we're all mad here!

[aaron22]

ok so the unarmed and unarmored aspects of the concept with bard are pretty limiting. as explained the monk is out for alignment conflict.

barb20/fotf3/b7? EW/not sure if rage bonus to con will further boost ac. good str bonus to damage, but damage will be paltry.

R17/fotf3/sd3/b7? SA and Hips EW to hit harder. could go r11/sin9, but think you might lose EP/ED.

P27/Fotf 3oops
P24/fitf3/b3 lets try to get bard back into the builds.

dont have my builder up, so just off the top of my head

think we need SA to make the damage viable

bard27/fotf3 might just be the better play

[aaron22]

B23/PM4/fotf3. kind of a weird concept.

[Sun Wukong]

Does P stand for Phantom (Ph) or Paladin (Pa)?

[Sun Wukong]

http://nwn2db.com/build/?284942 <= Put together a build.

Thoughts? Comments?

[Khazrak]

Honestly, this is one of those cases where my gut says "be a dwarf." Specifically, be a gold dwarf.

You're gonna lose out on 1 point of Great Strength in the end, but Bull's will get you the same result as a +3 STR item anyway (and don't +4 stat items exist, too?). You lose 1 AC from DEX early on, but get it back later on with FotF because you're a dwarf. You get +2 saves vs. spells and poison, and you get more HP; you get +1 Fort and +1 Will because you've got Steadfast and 2 extra CON. Otherwise, you could build exactly the same.

The biggest downside is your build isn't as front-loaded/quick to get off its feat, but what the Hell do you care? You're a dwarf! With a lute! You're dealing Unarmed Strike damage with a lute!

One thing you might consider - and this works because you're a dwarf - is dipping Fighter 4 for Unarmed Mastery. Maybe. I dunno. +4 damage (spec/master) and +2 attack (master) ain't a bad place to be. But honestly Bard 27 / FotF 3 is just fine, I think.

One important note: damage is gonna be rough on you. No flurry of blows means you're gonna have less attacks than a dedicated puncher that's not a bard; moreover, you're gonna have less damage than if you'd just gone with a dwarven waraxe or two-handed just about any weapon. Ouch.

Note that the Extend Rage feat increases the duration of Feral Stance. Maybe that amulet with extend/extra rage may be worth getting?

An important question: can you use a shield and still count as 'unarmored' for the purposes of the FotF AC bonus? If you *can*, then it seems obvious that you'll want to slap a heavy shield on and be the mostly unarmored tank, though you'd have to take it off to cast spells even if that is the case. Nevermind, you're holding a lute. I forgot.

It's a fun build idea and I want to know how you pull it off.

Finally... I guess, in the end, realize that you're not a damage dealer. If you went dwarf, maybe you could put 2 less points into CON during level-ups and 2 more into STR. That'd put you at 20 STR, or 24 with Bull's / +4 item. Maybe, just maybe Northlander Hewing is worth considering? I dunno. I guess you already have Power Attack, but having used Northlander Hewing now, Power Attack feels lackluster without Frenzied levels... and it feels lackluster with a one-handed weapon, which the fist counts as.

If you go Bard 27 / FotF 3 or Bard 23 / Fig 4 / FotF 3 and DON'T take Northlander Hewing, and instead focus on being punchy but REALLY tough to kill, I think this build will be fine. Bard tanks are a thing. You've even got an AC-boosting song if you wanna use it.