Wow...

>>Fictional Example: Michael Westen from Burn Notice.

I was explaining my joy at the creation of Bard Heritage groups to my fiance, who is currently in DR Dabbling stage. When I explained my take on the group to her, I pretty much described them as a spy organization: The members don't necessarily all know each other, but they work collectively towards a goal. I specifically mentioned Michael Westen as how I hoped the members of the Songsworn would have to act. She became much more interested in playing her bard in the future.

As for the still discussed Performer title: Anyone able to contact Daerlynn, Dreamheart or Chabelle? I think those are three names I very much associate with the notion of performance bards, I'd like to see their input on the subject.

-=Issus=-

Hmm, to be honest I am slightly disappointed at the idea of the pathways becoming so closely tied to our different heritages. I'm not saying I dislike the heritages, but I feel that tying them in in this way actually narrows our options a little bit.

For example, I play my bard in a very combat and magic-focused way. I was really looking forward to choosing either the combat or lorekeeper pathway for her. But I don't see her as a Songsworn or a history buff. Yes, I suppose I can still take the pathway and then RP as not one of the members, but that feels kind of cheap.

I don't really know what the solution is. More lore-based backgrounds would be neat but a lot of work. Maybe there can be "generic" pathways with groundwork laid for joining specific lore-based organizations, like the Songsworn? And potential future paths could be added later?

P.S. If lorekeepers are going to focus on mundane lore, have you considered a more magic-focused pathway?

>>Hmm, to be honest I am slightly disappointed at the idea of the pathways becoming so closely tied to our different heritages. I'm not saying I dislike the heritages, but I feel that tying them in in this way actually narrows our options a little bit.

I kind of see what you are saying here, but the bottom line is it will be next to impossible to make something for everyone. So then your task becomes to make what will appeal to the largest percentage of the Bardic population, and to use something that makes the most sense for the guild based on it's history. Of course there is always room for Bard's to take their own path, and as they said before, no Bard will be forced into a path. You can certainly just pick things you like from each Heritage and come up with your own roleplay.

Actually, calling it a Heritage, and being something that has nothing to do with Bardic heritage at all would be kind of an oxymoron, wouldn't it? Like a Neo-Bard Heritage, it just wouldn't make sense.

I haven't had caffeine yet so this post might not make as much sense typed out as it did in my head, but I think the Bard Heritage system is going to add a lot to the Bardic community. It makes sense that the official guild should offer pathways that are consistent with the Heritage of the guild and the foundations it was based upon. In DR, there are a LOT of famous NPC's that belong to a guild, but go a much different route than the guild traditionally follows, so there is always room for that. They're just offering what makes the most sense for the guild to us.


- Terra

I agree that it's definitely better to have a heritage system in place that's tied in with current lore. I guess I just wish there were a way for me to join the primary-combat line, say, without necessarily being a Songsworn. That's all. I'm happy to give up Songsworn specific fluff, but giving up the buying perks may make me sad (depending on what I want to buy, I suppose).

I am massively comforted by the fact that un-pathed bards will not be left in the cold (as unsected moon mages are).

Seeing as how combat spans all three paths by means of screams, magic, bluffs and mojo, and because each of these aspects are very important in combat as a whole I would say if you truly want to be combat oriented and not just scream/weapon damage oriented(which is what the Songsworn path is all about), IMO you would be better off being more well rounded with the paths rather than putting all of your eggs in the Songsworn basket.

__
~Leilond
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com

I think this has already been covered, but I want to emphasis it - Feats have no equivalent in the existing sect system. The current benefits to the sect system are basically cosmetic except for a few cantrips (Which are mostly cosmetic with mild niche use) and a minor spell affinity. There is a reason the old Taisgath turtle died.

The Feat system we've discussed is something that will tie into Heritages, but it is not what will define Heritages. The current draft we're discussing has a non-Heritage bard and a Heritage bard being able to get the exact same number of feats at the system cap.

-Raesh

So the top choices for replacement for Performers right now in my mind are:

1) Taleweaver
2) Troubadour
3) Entertainer/Performer
4) Merfolk

-Raesh

Can we have fins? I really want some fins.


- Terra

Tail Beavers, I like that best as well.


- Terra

<<Tail Beavers,

I hope this is a typo. Especially when in reference to a title in a sects system like the Heritage system is gonna be. If not, then I hope something else gets picked, else I will be laughing. Loudly.

:D


~Tieriana~

Definitely Taleweaver. :)

Although I guess that means it will be removed from the title list and I'll have to find a new post title I really like. =/

---

Bella
>>There are 7 levels of hell, she said, & I think one of them is reserved for people who bring jello salads to every potluck they go to.

I still like Myth Weaver or Mythweaver.

Since its not on the list i'll go with Merfolk!

Yeah I like it because it has a certain ring to it.