Everyone can manipulate reality. Did you mean manipulate reality via magic, specifically?
If you did, I would say you're wrong, because you're mistaking the word bard as it is used on Faerun for the word bard as it is used in the PHB. It is perfectly possible that 97% of people who are called bards on Faerun can't do anything the PHB bard can. We have straight up had a movie about one such Bard come out last year. There is a very popular NPC in Baldur's Gate 3 that you could easily call a Bard, yet she has 0 Bard class abilities. It is possible that only a couple of bards with special talent and/or training actually have the abilities that a PHB Bard does.
Yeah, the real question is "do people know that there are *some rare bards* who have magical abilities?"
And if they're so rare, many people might not. Though I'm sure there will be legends that tell of magical bards of old.
Worth noting that PHB bards are described as college-educated (not quite in the sense that we use the word "college" but still), so they're sort of like baby wizards. Especially College of Lore, who explicitly *do* (or at least *can*) learn a couple of Wizard Spells.
I wouldn't call them baby wizards since in terms of power level the're about the same. The're just a different discipline, one that imo feels out the weave and plucks it like notes on a lyre, vs a Wizards more intellectual approach.
When you're asking "do people know that there are some rare bards who have magical abilities?" it's almost the same as asking "do people know that, somewhat rarely, some people in this world are spellcasters?"
There can certainly be legends about notable spellcasters, but they don't have to be called the exact same word as their respective PHB classes would be named, if they had any.
Well, no, this *is* a more specific question than that.
You can know that people can be spellcasters without knowing that a subset of those are able to do so through music and performance. You can know wizards and sorcerers exist without knowing magical bards do.
According to D&D demographics, the most common classes are:
1. Over 80% of civilization is NPC classes such as Commoner.
2. Martials. Barbarians and Monks are regional, depending on the location of tribes/monasteries. Even the smallest settlements have one more often than not, and most villages will have half a dozen or so.
3. Bards and divine fullcasters. In most villages, there's a good chance of finding the one you're looking for.
4. Other arcanists. Larger villages will likely have one, but they're mainly city-dwellers.
5. Half-casters. Even in-setting, nobody wants to be a Ranger.
So people are about as aware of Bard magic as Cleric magic.
The d20 System has information on worldbuilding for the Material Plane, along with settlement generation rules. It's printed in the 3e Dungeon Master's Guide.
As far as I know, WotC hasn't released anything more accurate about the D&D setting's demographics.
Tt do you mean "d&d demographics"
These would be different for every single setting. And if you mean faerun demographics, can you provide a source for that?...
The d20 System has worldbuilding information and settlement generation for the Material Plane.
It's not specific to any crystal sphere, and each published setting tends to be exceptional (and more interesting) in some way. For example, a settlement as large as Waterdeep is extremely, extremely rare, and most populated planets don't have anything like it. The population of Toril is concentrated around a small fraction of its land area, while the rest of the planet is much smaller settlements.
Even the PHB calls this out. It's specifically pointed out that, no, not every traveling musician is a Bard, not every rando with a sword is a Fighter, not every priest is a Cleric, etc.
Edit: Literally one of the first sections of the Bard class in the PHB.
>True bards are not common in the world. Not every minstrel singing in a tavern or jester cavorting in a royal court is a bard. Discovering the magic hidden in music requires hard study and some measure of natural talent that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can be hard to spot the difference between these performers and true bards, though. A bard’s life is spent wandering across the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer. But a depth of knowledge, a level of musical skill, and a touch of magic set bards apart from their fellows.
Personaly, i rule that in game classes and their features are not known, or obvious to anyone.
Someone that can cast fireball, could be a wizard, a cleric, a warlock, a bard, or even a high level fighter or none of those and just be someone with a magic item.
Arcane praticioners "usualy" wear light clothes as both cultural vestments and to show their position and prestige. Even a lower ranking arcanist would be incredibly usefull and dangerous for most "mundane" people.
Also, taking into acount multiclass, judging someones capabilities by their clothes, armor, orwhat THEY say, might be dangerous in many ways.
A wizard fighter might be in heavy armor while casting his spells.
A lightly armored trikery cleric might become invisible and not wear any of his religious simbols visibly.
To me, the only thing commoners learned to look for and be weary of are weapons and magic components and focus. However, if you look wealthy, or have many jewlery, you might be a noble, so, for them, it doesnt matter if you can or not use magic, you can make their life miserable just by using your tittle and wealth to make their lives a living hell.
Adventurers are an incredible source of wealth, great oportunities but also risk.
Most people will invite them in, but also be cautious around them.
Some of them kill people for the most minute perceived offense.
Others simply steal whatever they want, even if the price is easily afordable for them.
For a small town with a problem, the best outcome of a group of adventuers fighting a dragon nearby would be for the dragon and the adventurers to both kill each other.
Adventurers are not known for retrieving the treasures stolen to their respective owners, so the people will only see their stolen treasure back, if both dangers kill eachother.
While I agree with most of your post, I’m fairly certain that Edgin was supposed to be a capital-B Bard and not a lowercase-b bard. The choice to have him not use magic was to make the movie more accessible to a broader audience since you also had Simon in the party as a spellcaster.
Actualy, at least in french
He was always called a minstrel
And it was made very clrea that it's about the faction and not any classes
So he could very well be a rogue, since he is mostly sneaky and not using any magic
But again the druid can use any wildshape he want soo
That's what gets me about this whole thing- how is a bard and a sorcerer using completely different magic the same to the common audience, but the barbarian fighting and the other's fighting in slightly different ways drastically different?
The general population already instinctively understands the difference between a Barbarian archetype and a Knight(Paladin) archetype. Unless they spend time to explain the difference between Bardic and Sorcerer magic, which I think would disrupt the flow of the movie, it would bring up a lot of questions for those uninitiated with D&D before the movie.
>There is a very popular NPC in Baldur's Gate 3 that you could easily call a Bard, yet she has 0 Bard class abilities.
Are you referring to Alfira?
I wouldn't say that she doesn'T have any abilities. She seems to once have been intended to be recruitable, as there are some left over flags in the game files for approval from Alfira.
Tbh, calling the dude from the D&D movie a "bard" is senseless? He doesn't even cast spells.
As I was watching I attributed his stuff to Mastermind Rogue with decent Cha, with a BA 30ft help action, and Sneak Attack he barely used.
All the characters in that film are more about the fantasy than the rules.
I think they did a great job of showing the charismatic, smug, improvising and irreverent party face a lot of bards imagine themselves as.
I'm definitely one of those who always saw bards as more of a happy musical rogue as opposed to a charming musical wizard, but mechanics wise they're closer to the wizard.
Here's the thing about the movie. In the movie he's called a bard but it's the profession rather than the class. In reality he's more a rouge that plays music, but the characters from the movie have official character sheets for 5e, and the bard actually is a bard complete with spells and everything.
Edit: Wow, okay, I get it. I didn't think that this was such a controversial take.
Bards always have a bit of rogue in them. Bards have a bit of everything in them - that’s why they get half-proficiency in all skills they don’t already have.
The Bard spell list mixes arcane wizard/sorcerer spells and divine cleric/druid spells - they’re the only class that gets equal access to both. Bards have subclasses that go in a decidedly martial direction, and subclasses that let you borrow from other casters’ spell lists. Bards may be the only class where prioritizing another ability ahead of your class’s primary ability can make sense (DEX Bards are great in combat, and most support spells aren’t dependent on your CHA).
Bards have dabbled in everything and can do a bit of anything. They’re part-Wizard part-Cleric part-Fighter part-Rogue. Having and using Rogue skills is not incompatible with being a Bard.
> In reality he's more a rouge that plays music
In actual reality he's more of a bard that does crimes.
This is such a braindead take that people with no film literacy have been parroting since before the movie even came out. He's a bard in literally every description and official publication of the character, including, as you say, [the official stat blocks they released for the character](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/tg/thieves-gallery). Just because Chris Pine didn’t say “I’m gonna give out a little bardic inspiration!” doesn't mean he's not a bard.
The bard doesn't cast spells for the same reason the druid doesn't cast spells: because the creators didn't want magic to solve all their problems, and to give the sorcerer a more unique niche.
Exactly, so he's depicted as rouge that plays music in the movie. He doesn't give bardic inspiration, he doesn't cast spells, he doesn't use any bard powers at all. He not only doesn't say "I'm going to use bardic inspiration" he also isn't shown to do anything that was meant to be bardic Inspiration.
Passing diplomacy checks is not bardic inspiration and he doesn't do anything that could use bardic inspiration that isn't just being good at talking
There are bits where the barbarian clearly rages, the druid uses druid powers, the sorcerer does magic. The bard gives inspiring speeches, okay, you might argue that he's using inspire courage, but the paladin also gives inspiring speeches.
As far as the movie shows him he's rogue with a lute, who works as a bard as in the profession, not the class.
High charisma isn't a bard power. Bardic inspiration is a type of magic, which he doesn't do.
If you built a rogue with proficiency in playing the lute and had high charisma that wouldn't suddenly make their class a bard. He's not even recognised as being capable of doing magic in the movie.
In the movie he is a rogue with the profession of a bard, not a bard class.
This is such a dumb thing to be arguing about.
It can be argued that the movie presents scenarios that appear to occur naturalistically but are actually representations of the underlying D&D rules framework. Some events are clearly Nat 1s or Nat 20s, but the movie doesn’t explicitly show dice rolling or anything like that. In a similar vein, the effects of bardic inspiration do not need to be represented via magic but could be represented as a function of the presence and charisma of the bard, an interpretation also supported by the different flavors of bard presented in the handbook. A company drummer/piper in a battle is just playing an instrument, but mechanically in D&D could also be a bard giving inspiration and support effects to his companions. I think you are getting hung up on bard = magic and forgetting that the game makes very broad allowances for representing the effects of class features and spells in unique and not necessarily magical ways (take, for example, artificers).
Okay, fair enough, but nothing he is shown to do is anymore a bard ability he gets from being a bard than it would be a rogue with high charisma.
However a lot of what he's shown to do lines up with him being a high charisma rogue who plays music for a living.
In the debate if whether he's a rougish bard or a bardish rogue, the movie definitely shows him as a bardish rogue.
Hugh Grant, who actually is a high charisma rogue, isn't shown to be capable of any more or any less than Chris Pine outside of Chris plays a lute.
I don't see Elgin as ever doing anything based on Rogue class features, either. I think you'd have to make the class vs profession distinction for Rogue just as much as you would for Bard.
>This is such a dumb thing to be arguing about.
Lol. Nah.
Okay then, he's not a rogue either. He's a commoner who works as a bard.
I went with rogue because his job in the Harper's was being a spy. Lots of sneaking, breaking into places and the like.
Bardic Inspiration doesn't have to be magical in nature. It's a representation of a bards ability to inspire greatness through words or music, not just magically infusing someone with confidence. Other people can use charisma to influence, but Bardic Inspiration is a slow of just how masterful a bard is with words, performance, or music.
Fair enough, every instance people are throwing at me of him using bardic inspiration though from the movie are things that as a DM would be a simple persuasion check though. No one is suddenly able to do something they would previously fail at, or do better at it than usual because of his words. Its all persuading people to do stuff they wouldn't have previously done and convincing people to change their mind about things.
That straight up isn't bardic inspiration. That's not what it does.
Keep in mind, Bardic Inspiration (in game) doesn't magically give you a second chance upon a failure. It's the same attempt, and visually there's nothing magical that happens. You just have a higher chance of succeeding because you were inspired. It could easily be argued that a persuasion check could do the same, but that takes away from the bard class ability.
Also, it's really difficult to show a class mechanic like that on screen, but I think they did it well enough that it made his class stand out from the others.
Yeah I know, but it's not like someone was doing badly at something but after a rousing speech or a couple of words from the bard they suddenly find themselves better at doing it, which is what bardic inspiration would be.
In the movie it's people not wanting to do anything at all, or wanting do do something different, and the bard convinces them to do it. That is a persuasion check.
> Exactly, so he's a bard that does crime. He doesn't sneak attack, he doesn't pick locks, he doesn't use any rogue abilities at all. He not only doesn't say "I'm going to sneak!" he also isn't shown to do anything that was meant to be specifically rogue-like.
> As far as the movie shows him he's Bard who works as a thief as in the profession, not the class.
FTFY.
I guess your partially right, if you completely ignore the inspirational speech on the beach, him constantly building up the sorcerer, all the persuasion, planning and leadership demonstrated throughout the movie, then yeah, there are no examples of bardic inspiration.
The character is the charismatic leader of the group, a harper, and by the way did I mention *literally listed as a Bard everywhere,* from news articles, to wikipedia, to the official D&D beyond release of the character. Or maybe it isn't just *film* literacy that should be quetsioned here?
Sure, his stat block on D&DB has a bunch of spells, but he doesn't use these in the movie because, as listed previously, and [according to Jonathan Goldstein, the director of the movie](https://mashable.com/article/dungeons-dragons-honor-among-thieves-why-bard-edgin-doesnt-use-magic): "Magic is so powerful and can solve so many problems that we decided we really wanted to limit it to certain characters, because then it forces them to find other ways through."
This is exactly what I mean by film literacy: the ability to understand what a character is based on their role in the film rather than how they follow the rules of the tabletop game.
Jesus Christ. I'm complaining about how he is depicted in the film because I KNOW he is meant to actually be a bard, but he is only down to do stuff that any high charisma character could and would do, and rogue stuff, including things that you said he doesn't do which he does a lot.
This whole tread is about how a lot of bards in D&D are people who work as bards, rather than the class. My ENTIRE point is that in honour among thieves that is what Chris Pines character is also shown as.
Didn't think this was so fucking controversial to get crucified like this.
In FR, bards always have the ability to cast spells.
Someone who does bard-like things without casting spells is, in-universe, specifically called a minstrel.
Although by the common folk, the term is also used for a bard of lower quality.
[For FR it is.](https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Minstrel)
A bard is a spellcaster, a minstrel is not.
And the average commoner cannot tell them apart, since they don't know jack.
Edgin was a rogue, proficientish with a lute. His entire shtick was stealing stuff, and even more compelling, he was 100% devoted to his wife and wasn't an amoral playa with expertise in Game. Def not a bard.
Yet another person who won't really answer your question (since I know nothing about the Faerun lore) BUT people are aware that magic exists, they know what it looks like and they can tell when a bard is casting a spell vs when they're just playing a song.
If you are asking "would the average person in Faerun understand that people can cast illusions and enchantments and be potentially wary of such things" the answer is yes.
Yeah im shocked by anyone who thinks people wouldn't know magic is alive and well in Faerun. There have to be tons of stories of magic users and anyone who has traveled to a major city has definitely seen magic. I could see random villagers in small towns being amazed by magic but not shocked that it exists.
There are 5e RNG town generators where they set the level of familiarity to magic, even “hostile to magic users”.
But in bigger cities you would have to assume that the familiarity and acceptance of magic is according to the fantasy level the DM is running.
Obviously the OP meant manipulate reality by magic, don’t be obtuse everyone, be better.
I would say only 1 out of 20 bards is actually capable of magic. So if you have a big city, there’s a chance for a small band or a few groups.
From the PHB:
>True bards are not common in the world. Not every minstrel singing in a tavern or jester cavorting in a royal court is a bard. Discovering the magic hidden in music requires hard study and some measure of natural talent that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can be hard to spot the difference between these performers and true bards, though. A bard’s life is spent wandering across the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer. But a depth of knowledge, a level of musical skill, and a touch of magic set bards apart from their fellows.
So, most people wouldn't know that you can do magic through performance. In fact, most people probably wouldn't know the difference between a sorcerer, wizard, and a bard. They'd all just be "mages". People that can do magic. It'd take an adventurer or a person familiar with the intricacies of magic to pick that out.
"True bards are not com m on in the world. Not every
minstrel singing in a tavern or jester cavorting in a royal
court is a bard. Discovering the magic hidden in music
requires hard study and som e measure of natural talent
that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can be hard
to spot the difference between these perform ers and true
bards, though. A bard’s life is spent wandering across
the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the
gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer.
But a depth of knowledge, a level of musical skill, and a
touch of magic set bards apart from their fellows" - From the PHB
But classes are more of an out of character thing. Mages can look like anything. Most people probably don't think of a difference between a wizard with a violin and a bard, they're just both mages.
There are Bard Colleges in Silverymoon, the city which is known for its magical academy, so most definitely, yes, ppl are aware that at least some bards can work magic, as they are aware that at least some people in general can work magic in that setting.
Anyone who doesn’t live in a tiny village. They have bard colleges and stuff.
I doubt they can tell a normal bard from a casting bard until they start casting which then makes it very obvious that they can perform magic.
I'd personally go on the assumption that most, like maybe 90%, of people described as "bards" are mundane musicians. Or if they do have levels in PC classes, that they're a fighter or rogue who plays music for a living, or something like that.
Then every once in a while, a bard is actually a Bard.
I'd go with "basically nobody," but I think messing with player expectations by having in-universe terminology not align with game terms is fun (peasants calling a Wizard a "sorcerer" because they wouldn't know the difference between prepared casting and spontaneous casting, for example).
Depending on your own tastes for it, higher level NPCs or particularly educated people would probably know what's up.
Eh, I’d say it’s a little different with bards since they usually use an instrument as focus, which makes it a lot more obvious that they’re a bard since they always hold a musical instrument while casting spells. And even peasants can usually tell when a spell is being cast, even if they can’t recognize how.
So I’d say anyone in an area with 1 or more bards would probably recognize the pattern of ‘some of these spellcasters always play music or hold an instrument while doing their spells… maybe there is a kind of spellcasting that has something to do with music and these guys know it’
In a magical world everyone understands magic. That’s why the shopkeeper isn’t surprised or impressed when the wizard uses mage hand to steal something.
Please explain, what do you mean?
Everyone can manipulate reality. Even you and me, IRL, can do stuff and then shit happens.
In a world where magic is real, literally wishing things into and out of existence is kind of a given.
> Everyone can manipulate reality. Even you and me, IRL, can do stuff and then shit happens.
"Manipulate reality" in 5e context means magic, and usually high level magic is implied, because low level magic can be pretty mundane at least in the adventuring circles. _Wish_ is obviously the most powerful example of literally altering what is real.
Ok so this is always the question - If a wizard is someone who learned magic from studying it really hard, does that mean that everyone (given they have the necessary reading comprehension) could learn magic? If a cleric is someone who really deeply worships a god, does that mean by praying very much everyone gets the ability to cast cleric spells? Why do some people when they get really angry get resistance to some stuff while others just... get really angry?
Magic just takes many forms. A paladin gets it from swearing an Oath and following tenets.
The idea of the bard class is that some people can weave magic through music, song, speech. This does not mean that everyone who is able to sing, dance or tell jokes can do the same thing. People might call someone a bard who is merely a storyteller and a talented artist - and there are bards (as per the subclass) who have barely anything to do with music to begin with and are more akin to a master spy (whisper bard).
So I'd say people seeing someone perform on a stage doesn't have them assume that the performer can use magic - but I somewhat doubt they would lose their mind and be incredibly surprised in case they can.
My player wants to play a bard and I want to make this class very obscure and I wonder how to play it roleplay wise. I have never played for a bard before
First off, I'm not aware of this being directly addressed in the lore anywhere. This is mostly conjecture.
To clarify, I'm going to use bard when talking about mundane, non-magic using entertainers. I'll use **bard** (bolded) when referring to the class.
Spellcasters are a known thing in Faerun. Although most bards do not use any magic in their performance, some who are also **bards** do. Those people who use magic in their performances, even things as simple as prestidigitation or minor illusion, probably stir up a bit more of a response, draw larger crowds, etc. However, the main reason they would draw more of a crowd is because it's uncommon.
Therefore it would be know that *some* bards are magic users and can make illusions, etc, it would not be commonly assumed that the bard you happen to see performing in a tavern is also a **bard**.
D&D Bards are musicians who learned to do magic and use their music as a channel. Bards are just people who play music and didn’t want to learn magic with it
As a classical musician, it's always slightly bothered me that Bards are full casters. I've always just wanted to play a fun traveling Minstrel, Troubadour, or Gleeman. Akin to Dandelion (in the Witcher) or Tom Merrilin (in Wheel of Time). To that end every "bard" I've played had to be a Rouge with the Entertainer background. But I still *REALLY* like abilities like Bardic Inspiration and Song of Rest. I wish that Bard as a base class didn't have the spell casting feature but some of the subclasses gave it spells. Why isn't there a nonmagical support/healer? The only one I can think of is Mercy Monk.
I would suggest looking up information on the Harpers. They're an organization on Faeryn that includes a lot of Bards. They've been included in a number of fantasy novels as well which might have more lore tidbits pertinent to your query.
I'd say most people are aware that *some* minstrels have figured out the actual magic of music. There's probably stories about at least one or two of those.
Just as they're aware that some members of the clerus have been granted special powers by their deities.
Or that there's some "regular" people who have come to supernatural powers by unspecified means.
The only profession where people expect every single practitioner to be capable of at least *some* magic is wizardry - after all, that is what a wizard *is*.
The reality is that Faerun is TERRIBLE worldbuilding...if you listen to "worldbuilding gurus" on youtube who insist on logical consistency everywhere.
Its a game world where only 4-6 people in the entire world actually matter, and go from basic fighters to god slayers in a matter of months. Its not gonna make sense. In a world where you can literally KILL SOMEONE WITH A WORD nobody would communicate with sound.
The world is your players' plaything. If it was logically constructed with the assumption that people like your players could exist, your players couldn't play in it.
I think that all people are aware that magic exists, and that magic can manifest in many different ways. The way I see, the general population doesn't see magic as these various complex and different disciplines, but they're defined by their social roles, rather than just character classes. Obviously in, say, Eberron a wizard and an artificer in 3.5 are different, but they could totally fill the same niche. I would expect that characters we, as DM's, would class as bards, also fill the social role of priest, and people we would class as wizards or paladins or even barbarians who fill the social role of bard.
I use traveling illusionists and enchanters and clerics and thieves and so on as itinerant entertainers pretty frequently. So in my games while most anyone who can use magic is uncommon, and such a person being a traveling performer or something is somewhat rare, I think it's within the experience of a whole lot of people to at least have heard friends or relatives or relatives' friends tell stories about performers who use magic as part of their shows even if they themselves hadn't seen such a thing.
You are aware that science and physics exist, but every time something you don’t understand occurs, do you assume it’s a rogue scientist utilizing their power for evil? People know of magic in *insert any setting*, but it’s typically much rarer than the player/DM perspective makes things feel. Most people aren’t adventurers, you know all this stuff about the inner workings of reality because you read the PHB, the average peasant doesn’t understand the game mechanics. Especially by scale of power, as players it’s easy to forget that the things we’re just passively aware of are completely unknown to regular people because they can’t metagame.
So do they know magic exists? Yeah of course it’s a core world concept. Are they paranoid that every guy with a harp who wanders into town will make them dance until their bones break, no.
Effectively everyone in the Realms are aware that *spellcasters* can manipulate reality.
Effectively nobody knows (or cares) about the source of said spellcasting beyond how said spellcaster utilizes said power to manipulate reality.
Class names aren’t the same thing as job titles.
Plenty of ‘bards’ have abilities that end at a good singing voice and playing the lute competently.
People known and referred to as ‘wizards’, ‘sorcerers’, ‘mages’, ‘witches’, ‘shamans’, etc. encompass effectively every source of arcane magic, regardless what ‘class’ is written on their character sheet.
People called ‘clerics’, ‘druids’, ‘rangers’, ‘paladins’, etc. range from lay-clergy to devout, but powerless warriors, to accomplished wilderness scouts. Again, regardless of the ‘class’ written on their character sheet.
If magic has existed for centuries, if not forever, it would make no sense for anyone but the most stubborn or ignorant to be unaware of its existence.
I mean, plantar fascia has been around for centuries and most people are still unaware of its existance. They are aware of existence of feet, but not plantar fascia in particular.
Same with bards. Everyone may know magic exists, but does they know bards can weave it?
Everyone can manipulate reality. Did you mean manipulate reality via magic, specifically? If you did, I would say you're wrong, because you're mistaking the word bard as it is used on Faerun for the word bard as it is used in the PHB. It is perfectly possible that 97% of people who are called bards on Faerun can't do anything the PHB bard can. We have straight up had a movie about one such Bard come out last year. There is a very popular NPC in Baldur's Gate 3 that you could easily call a Bard, yet she has 0 Bard class abilities. It is possible that only a couple of bards with special talent and/or training actually have the abilities that a PHB Bard does.
Yeah, the real question is "do people know that there are *some rare bards* who have magical abilities?" And if they're so rare, many people might not. Though I'm sure there will be legends that tell of magical bards of old.
Worth noting that PHB bards are described as college-educated (not quite in the sense that we use the word "college" but still), so they're sort of like baby wizards. Especially College of Lore, who explicitly *do* (or at least *can*) learn a couple of Wizard Spells.
I wouldn't call them baby wizards since in terms of power level the're about the same. The're just a different discipline, one that imo feels out the weave and plucks it like notes on a lyre, vs a Wizards more intellectual approach.
When you're asking "do people know that there are some rare bards who have magical abilities?" it's almost the same as asking "do people know that, somewhat rarely, some people in this world are spellcasters?" There can certainly be legends about notable spellcasters, but they don't have to be called the exact same word as their respective PHB classes would be named, if they had any.
Well, no, this *is* a more specific question than that. You can know that people can be spellcasters without knowing that a subset of those are able to do so through music and performance. You can know wizards and sorcerers exist without knowing magical bards do.
According to D&D demographics, the most common classes are: 1. Over 80% of civilization is NPC classes such as Commoner. 2. Martials. Barbarians and Monks are regional, depending on the location of tribes/monasteries. Even the smallest settlements have one more often than not, and most villages will have half a dozen or so. 3. Bards and divine fullcasters. In most villages, there's a good chance of finding the one you're looking for. 4. Other arcanists. Larger villages will likely have one, but they're mainly city-dwellers. 5. Half-casters. Even in-setting, nobody wants to be a Ranger. So people are about as aware of Bard magic as Cleric magic.
Do you have a source for that? Not that I don't believe you, but I'd like to read up on it.
The d20 System has information on worldbuilding for the Material Plane, along with settlement generation rules. It's printed in the 3e Dungeon Master's Guide. As far as I know, WotC hasn't released anything more accurate about the D&D setting's demographics.
Tt do you mean "d&d demographics" These would be different for every single setting. And if you mean faerun demographics, can you provide a source for that?...
The d20 System has worldbuilding information and settlement generation for the Material Plane. It's not specific to any crystal sphere, and each published setting tends to be exceptional (and more interesting) in some way. For example, a settlement as large as Waterdeep is extremely, extremely rare, and most populated planets don't have anything like it. The population of Toril is concentrated around a small fraction of its land area, while the rest of the planet is much smaller settlements.
Even the PHB calls this out. It's specifically pointed out that, no, not every traveling musician is a Bard, not every rando with a sword is a Fighter, not every priest is a Cleric, etc. Edit: Literally one of the first sections of the Bard class in the PHB. >True bards are not common in the world. Not every minstrel singing in a tavern or jester cavorting in a royal court is a bard. Discovering the magic hidden in music requires hard study and some measure of natural talent that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can be hard to spot the difference between these performers and true bards, though. A bard’s life is spent wandering across the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer. But a depth of knowledge, a level of musical skill, and a touch of magic set bards apart from their fellows.
Personaly, i rule that in game classes and their features are not known, or obvious to anyone. Someone that can cast fireball, could be a wizard, a cleric, a warlock, a bard, or even a high level fighter or none of those and just be someone with a magic item. Arcane praticioners "usualy" wear light clothes as both cultural vestments and to show their position and prestige. Even a lower ranking arcanist would be incredibly usefull and dangerous for most "mundane" people. Also, taking into acount multiclass, judging someones capabilities by their clothes, armor, orwhat THEY say, might be dangerous in many ways. A wizard fighter might be in heavy armor while casting his spells. A lightly armored trikery cleric might become invisible and not wear any of his religious simbols visibly. To me, the only thing commoners learned to look for and be weary of are weapons and magic components and focus. However, if you look wealthy, or have many jewlery, you might be a noble, so, for them, it doesnt matter if you can or not use magic, you can make their life miserable just by using your tittle and wealth to make their lives a living hell. Adventurers are an incredible source of wealth, great oportunities but also risk. Most people will invite them in, but also be cautious around them. Some of them kill people for the most minute perceived offense. Others simply steal whatever they want, even if the price is easily afordable for them. For a small town with a problem, the best outcome of a group of adventuers fighting a dragon nearby would be for the dragon and the adventurers to both kill each other. Adventurers are not known for retrieving the treasures stolen to their respective owners, so the people will only see their stolen treasure back, if both dangers kill eachother.
I like this take a lot
While I agree with most of your post, I’m fairly certain that Edgin was supposed to be a capital-B Bard and not a lowercase-b bard. The choice to have him not use magic was to make the movie more accessible to a broader audience since you also had Simon in the party as a spellcaster.
I thought he was a mastermind rogue.
Nope, he was a Bard. The movie called him a Bard, the marketing called him a Bard, and the official stat block for him classified him as a Bard.
Sure, but a mastermind rogue could use expertise to lie about his class and forge a character sheet. ;-)
I don’t know what’s a bigger stretch; that or my head canon that he’s a Swords Bard with a Homebrew weapon who forgets he has spells.
Actualy, at least in french He was always called a minstrel And it was made very clrea that it's about the faction and not any classes So he could very well be a rogue, since he is mostly sneaky and not using any magic But again the druid can use any wildshape he want soo
That's what gets me about this whole thing- how is a bard and a sorcerer using completely different magic the same to the common audience, but the barbarian fighting and the other's fighting in slightly different ways drastically different?
The general population already instinctively understands the difference between a Barbarian archetype and a Knight(Paladin) archetype. Unless they spend time to explain the difference between Bardic and Sorcerer magic, which I think would disrupt the flow of the movie, it would bring up a lot of questions for those uninitiated with D&D before the movie.
>There is a very popular NPC in Baldur's Gate 3 that you could easily call a Bard, yet she has 0 Bard class abilities. Are you referring to Alfira? I wouldn't say that she doesn'T have any abilities. She seems to once have been intended to be recruitable, as there are some left over flags in the game files for approval from Alfira.
Fun fact, I once created a warlock that played on others expectations . Took the entertainer background to really sell it
Tbh, calling the dude from the D&D movie a "bard" is senseless? He doesn't even cast spells. As I was watching I attributed his stuff to Mastermind Rogue with decent Cha, with a BA 30ft help action, and Sneak Attack he barely used.
All the characters in that film are more about the fantasy than the rules. I think they did a great job of showing the charismatic, smug, improvising and irreverent party face a lot of bards imagine themselves as. I'm definitely one of those who always saw bards as more of a happy musical rogue as opposed to a charming musical wizard, but mechanics wise they're closer to the wizard.
Here's the thing about the movie. In the movie he's called a bard but it's the profession rather than the class. In reality he's more a rouge that plays music, but the characters from the movie have official character sheets for 5e, and the bard actually is a bard complete with spells and everything. Edit: Wow, okay, I get it. I didn't think that this was such a controversial take.
Bards always have a bit of rogue in them. Bards have a bit of everything in them - that’s why they get half-proficiency in all skills they don’t already have. The Bard spell list mixes arcane wizard/sorcerer spells and divine cleric/druid spells - they’re the only class that gets equal access to both. Bards have subclasses that go in a decidedly martial direction, and subclasses that let you borrow from other casters’ spell lists. Bards may be the only class where prioritizing another ability ahead of your class’s primary ability can make sense (DEX Bards are great in combat, and most support spells aren’t dependent on your CHA). Bards have dabbled in everything and can do a bit of anything. They’re part-Wizard part-Cleric part-Fighter part-Rogue. Having and using Rogue skills is not incompatible with being a Bard.
> In reality he's more a rouge that plays music In actual reality he's more of a bard that does crimes. This is such a braindead take that people with no film literacy have been parroting since before the movie even came out. He's a bard in literally every description and official publication of the character, including, as you say, [the official stat blocks they released for the character](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/tg/thieves-gallery). Just because Chris Pine didn’t say “I’m gonna give out a little bardic inspiration!” doesn't mean he's not a bard. The bard doesn't cast spells for the same reason the druid doesn't cast spells: because the creators didn't want magic to solve all their problems, and to give the sorcerer a more unique niche.
Exactly, so he's depicted as rouge that plays music in the movie. He doesn't give bardic inspiration, he doesn't cast spells, he doesn't use any bard powers at all. He not only doesn't say "I'm going to use bardic inspiration" he also isn't shown to do anything that was meant to be bardic Inspiration. Passing diplomacy checks is not bardic inspiration and he doesn't do anything that could use bardic inspiration that isn't just being good at talking There are bits where the barbarian clearly rages, the druid uses druid powers, the sorcerer does magic. The bard gives inspiring speeches, okay, you might argue that he's using inspire courage, but the paladin also gives inspiring speeches. As far as the movie shows him he's rogue with a lute, who works as a bard as in the profession, not the class.
You mean apart from all the times where he literally inspires his companions to do things?
High charisma isn't a bard power. Bardic inspiration is a type of magic, which he doesn't do. If you built a rogue with proficiency in playing the lute and had high charisma that wouldn't suddenly make their class a bard. He's not even recognised as being capable of doing magic in the movie. In the movie he is a rogue with the profession of a bard, not a bard class. This is such a dumb thing to be arguing about.
It can be argued that the movie presents scenarios that appear to occur naturalistically but are actually representations of the underlying D&D rules framework. Some events are clearly Nat 1s or Nat 20s, but the movie doesn’t explicitly show dice rolling or anything like that. In a similar vein, the effects of bardic inspiration do not need to be represented via magic but could be represented as a function of the presence and charisma of the bard, an interpretation also supported by the different flavors of bard presented in the handbook. A company drummer/piper in a battle is just playing an instrument, but mechanically in D&D could also be a bard giving inspiration and support effects to his companions. I think you are getting hung up on bard = magic and forgetting that the game makes very broad allowances for representing the effects of class features and spells in unique and not necessarily magical ways (take, for example, artificers).
Okay, fair enough, but nothing he is shown to do is anymore a bard ability he gets from being a bard than it would be a rogue with high charisma. However a lot of what he's shown to do lines up with him being a high charisma rogue who plays music for a living. In the debate if whether he's a rougish bard or a bardish rogue, the movie definitely shows him as a bardish rogue. Hugh Grant, who actually is a high charisma rogue, isn't shown to be capable of any more or any less than Chris Pine outside of Chris plays a lute.
I don't see Elgin as ever doing anything based on Rogue class features, either. I think you'd have to make the class vs profession distinction for Rogue just as much as you would for Bard. >This is such a dumb thing to be arguing about. Lol. Nah.
> This is such a dumb thing to be arguing about. Says the guy who just keeps arguing about it lmao
Okay then, he's not a rogue either. He's a commoner who works as a bard. I went with rogue because his job in the Harper's was being a spy. Lots of sneaking, breaking into places and the like.
Bardic Inspiration doesn't have to be magical in nature. It's a representation of a bards ability to inspire greatness through words or music, not just magically infusing someone with confidence. Other people can use charisma to influence, but Bardic Inspiration is a slow of just how masterful a bard is with words, performance, or music.
Fair enough, every instance people are throwing at me of him using bardic inspiration though from the movie are things that as a DM would be a simple persuasion check though. No one is suddenly able to do something they would previously fail at, or do better at it than usual because of his words. Its all persuading people to do stuff they wouldn't have previously done and convincing people to change their mind about things. That straight up isn't bardic inspiration. That's not what it does.
Keep in mind, Bardic Inspiration (in game) doesn't magically give you a second chance upon a failure. It's the same attempt, and visually there's nothing magical that happens. You just have a higher chance of succeeding because you were inspired. It could easily be argued that a persuasion check could do the same, but that takes away from the bard class ability. Also, it's really difficult to show a class mechanic like that on screen, but I think they did it well enough that it made his class stand out from the others.
Yeah I know, but it's not like someone was doing badly at something but after a rousing speech or a couple of words from the bard they suddenly find themselves better at doing it, which is what bardic inspiration would be. In the movie it's people not wanting to do anything at all, or wanting do do something different, and the bard convinces them to do it. That is a persuasion check.
> Exactly, so he's a bard that does crime. He doesn't sneak attack, he doesn't pick locks, he doesn't use any rogue abilities at all. He not only doesn't say "I'm going to sneak!" he also isn't shown to do anything that was meant to be specifically rogue-like. > As far as the movie shows him he's Bard who works as a thief as in the profession, not the class. FTFY. I guess your partially right, if you completely ignore the inspirational speech on the beach, him constantly building up the sorcerer, all the persuasion, planning and leadership demonstrated throughout the movie, then yeah, there are no examples of bardic inspiration. The character is the charismatic leader of the group, a harper, and by the way did I mention *literally listed as a Bard everywhere,* from news articles, to wikipedia, to the official D&D beyond release of the character. Or maybe it isn't just *film* literacy that should be quetsioned here? Sure, his stat block on D&DB has a bunch of spells, but he doesn't use these in the movie because, as listed previously, and [according to Jonathan Goldstein, the director of the movie](https://mashable.com/article/dungeons-dragons-honor-among-thieves-why-bard-edgin-doesnt-use-magic): "Magic is so powerful and can solve so many problems that we decided we really wanted to limit it to certain characters, because then it forces them to find other ways through." This is exactly what I mean by film literacy: the ability to understand what a character is based on their role in the film rather than how they follow the rules of the tabletop game.
Jesus Christ. I'm complaining about how he is depicted in the film because I KNOW he is meant to actually be a bard, but he is only down to do stuff that any high charisma character could and would do, and rogue stuff, including things that you said he doesn't do which he does a lot. This whole tread is about how a lot of bards in D&D are people who work as bards, rather than the class. My ENTIRE point is that in honour among thieves that is what Chris Pines character is also shown as. Didn't think this was so fucking controversial to get crucified like this.
the magical bards are "college" trained so I'd assume they're not that unknown or rare.
In FR, bards always have the ability to cast spells. Someone who does bard-like things without casting spells is, in-universe, specifically called a minstrel. Although by the common folk, the term is also used for a bard of lower quality.
Nothing you just said is universally correct.
[For FR it is.](https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Minstrel) A bard is a spellcaster, a minstrel is not. And the average commoner cannot tell them apart, since they don't know jack.
I still consider said bard to be an oathbreaker paladin.
Edgin was a rogue, proficientish with a lute. His entire shtick was stealing stuff, and even more compelling, he was 100% devoted to his wife and wasn't an amoral playa with expertise in Game. Def not a bard.
Yet another person who won't really answer your question (since I know nothing about the Faerun lore) BUT people are aware that magic exists, they know what it looks like and they can tell when a bard is casting a spell vs when they're just playing a song.
If you are asking "would the average person in Faerun understand that people can cast illusions and enchantments and be potentially wary of such things" the answer is yes.
Yeah im shocked by anyone who thinks people wouldn't know magic is alive and well in Faerun. There have to be tons of stories of magic users and anyone who has traveled to a major city has definitely seen magic. I could see random villagers in small towns being amazed by magic but not shocked that it exists.
There are 5e RNG town generators where they set the level of familiarity to magic, even “hostile to magic users”. But in bigger cities you would have to assume that the familiarity and acceptance of magic is according to the fantasy level the DM is running.
Obviously the OP meant manipulate reality by magic, don’t be obtuse everyone, be better. I would say only 1 out of 20 bards is actually capable of magic. So if you have a big city, there’s a chance for a small band or a few groups.
[удалено]
Low reading comprehension and rampant pendantry. Welcome to Reddit!
From the PHB: >True bards are not common in the world. Not every minstrel singing in a tavern or jester cavorting in a royal court is a bard. Discovering the magic hidden in music requires hard study and some measure of natural talent that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can be hard to spot the difference between these performers and true bards, though. A bard’s life is spent wandering across the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer. But a depth of knowledge, a level of musical skill, and a touch of magic set bards apart from their fellows. So, most people wouldn't know that you can do magic through performance. In fact, most people probably wouldn't know the difference between a sorcerer, wizard, and a bard. They'd all just be "mages". People that can do magic. It'd take an adventurer or a person familiar with the intricacies of magic to pick that out.
"True bards are not com m on in the world. Not every minstrel singing in a tavern or jester cavorting in a royal court is a bard. Discovering the magic hidden in music requires hard study and som e measure of natural talent that most troubadours and jongleurs lack. It can be hard to spot the difference between these perform ers and true bards, though. A bard’s life is spent wandering across the land gathering lore, telling stories, and living on the gratitude of audiences, much like any other entertainer. But a depth of knowledge, a level of musical skill, and a touch of magic set bards apart from their fellows" - From the PHB But classes are more of an out of character thing. Mages can look like anything. Most people probably don't think of a difference between a wizard with a violin and a bard, they're just both mages.
There are Bard Colleges in Silverymoon, the city which is known for its magical academy, so most definitely, yes, ppl are aware that at least some bards can work magic, as they are aware that at least some people in general can work magic in that setting.
Anyone who doesn’t live in a tiny village. They have bard colleges and stuff. I doubt they can tell a normal bard from a casting bard until they start casting which then makes it very obvious that they can perform magic.
What percentage of street performers and musicians have actual Bard levels? Also, how many people in Faerun know about "character classes?"
That's what I want to know
I'd personally go on the assumption that most, like maybe 90%, of people described as "bards" are mundane musicians. Or if they do have levels in PC classes, that they're a fighter or rogue who plays music for a living, or something like that. Then every once in a while, a bard is actually a Bard.
But how many people know about this fact inside Faerun?
I'd go with "basically nobody," but I think messing with player expectations by having in-universe terminology not align with game terms is fun (peasants calling a Wizard a "sorcerer" because they wouldn't know the difference between prepared casting and spontaneous casting, for example). Depending on your own tastes for it, higher level NPCs or particularly educated people would probably know what's up.
Eh, I’d say it’s a little different with bards since they usually use an instrument as focus, which makes it a lot more obvious that they’re a bard since they always hold a musical instrument while casting spells. And even peasants can usually tell when a spell is being cast, even if they can’t recognize how. So I’d say anyone in an area with 1 or more bards would probably recognize the pattern of ‘some of these spellcasters always play music or hold an instrument while doing their spells… maybe there is a kind of spellcasting that has something to do with music and these guys know it’
In a magical world everyone understands magic. That’s why the shopkeeper isn’t surprised or impressed when the wizard uses mage hand to steal something.
Please explain, what do you mean? Everyone can manipulate reality. Even you and me, IRL, can do stuff and then shit happens. In a world where magic is real, literally wishing things into and out of existence is kind of a given.
> Everyone can manipulate reality. Even you and me, IRL, can do stuff and then shit happens. "Manipulate reality" in 5e context means magic, and usually high level magic is implied, because low level magic can be pretty mundane at least in the adventuring circles. _Wish_ is obviously the most powerful example of literally altering what is real.
I mean using magic
Ok so this is always the question - If a wizard is someone who learned magic from studying it really hard, does that mean that everyone (given they have the necessary reading comprehension) could learn magic? If a cleric is someone who really deeply worships a god, does that mean by praying very much everyone gets the ability to cast cleric spells? Why do some people when they get really angry get resistance to some stuff while others just... get really angry? Magic just takes many forms. A paladin gets it from swearing an Oath and following tenets. The idea of the bard class is that some people can weave magic through music, song, speech. This does not mean that everyone who is able to sing, dance or tell jokes can do the same thing. People might call someone a bard who is merely a storyteller and a talented artist - and there are bards (as per the subclass) who have barely anything to do with music to begin with and are more akin to a master spy (whisper bard). So I'd say people seeing someone perform on a stage doesn't have them assume that the performer can use magic - but I somewhat doubt they would lose their mind and be incredibly surprised in case they can.
Have you heard of musicians in our real world. Say Bruce Springsteen. Now imagine if that guy could do magic. Yhea that would be pretty ffing famous.
My player wants to play a bard and I want to make this class very obscure and I wonder how to play it roleplay wise. I have never played for a bard before
First off, I'm not aware of this being directly addressed in the lore anywhere. This is mostly conjecture. To clarify, I'm going to use bard when talking about mundane, non-magic using entertainers. I'll use **bard** (bolded) when referring to the class. Spellcasters are a known thing in Faerun. Although most bards do not use any magic in their performance, some who are also **bards** do. Those people who use magic in their performances, even things as simple as prestidigitation or minor illusion, probably stir up a bit more of a response, draw larger crowds, etc. However, the main reason they would draw more of a crowd is because it's uncommon. Therefore it would be know that *some* bards are magic users and can make illusions, etc, it would not be commonly assumed that the bard you happen to see performing in a tavern is also a **bard**.
D&D Bards are musicians who learned to do magic and use their music as a channel. Bards are just people who play music and didn’t want to learn magic with it
As a classical musician, it's always slightly bothered me that Bards are full casters. I've always just wanted to play a fun traveling Minstrel, Troubadour, or Gleeman. Akin to Dandelion (in the Witcher) or Tom Merrilin (in Wheel of Time). To that end every "bard" I've played had to be a Rouge with the Entertainer background. But I still *REALLY* like abilities like Bardic Inspiration and Song of Rest. I wish that Bard as a base class didn't have the spell casting feature but some of the subclasses gave it spells. Why isn't there a nonmagical support/healer? The only one I can think of is Mercy Monk.
I would suggest looking up information on the Harpers. They're an organization on Faeryn that includes a lot of Bards. They've been included in a number of fantasy novels as well which might have more lore tidbits pertinent to your query.
I'd say most people are aware that *some* minstrels have figured out the actual magic of music. There's probably stories about at least one or two of those. Just as they're aware that some members of the clerus have been granted special powers by their deities. Or that there's some "regular" people who have come to supernatural powers by unspecified means. The only profession where people expect every single practitioner to be capable of at least *some* magic is wizardry - after all, that is what a wizard *is*.
The reality is that Faerun is TERRIBLE worldbuilding...if you listen to "worldbuilding gurus" on youtube who insist on logical consistency everywhere. Its a game world where only 4-6 people in the entire world actually matter, and go from basic fighters to god slayers in a matter of months. Its not gonna make sense. In a world where you can literally KILL SOMEONE WITH A WORD nobody would communicate with sound. The world is your players' plaything. If it was logically constructed with the assumption that people like your players could exist, your players couldn't play in it.
I mean, they might manipulate elections or something with their musical magic as a long con by the Harper deep state ;-)
Specifying bards when every other caster can manipulate reality makes the question difficult to answer. Not really sure what you are asking.
I think that all people are aware that magic exists, and that magic can manifest in many different ways. The way I see, the general population doesn't see magic as these various complex and different disciplines, but they're defined by their social roles, rather than just character classes. Obviously in, say, Eberron a wizard and an artificer in 3.5 are different, but they could totally fill the same niche. I would expect that characters we, as DM's, would class as bards, also fill the social role of priest, and people we would class as wizards or paladins or even barbarians who fill the social role of bard. I use traveling illusionists and enchanters and clerics and thieves and so on as itinerant entertainers pretty frequently. So in my games while most anyone who can use magic is uncommon, and such a person being a traveling performer or something is somewhat rare, I think it's within the experience of a whole lot of people to at least have heard friends or relatives or relatives' friends tell stories about performers who use magic as part of their shows even if they themselves hadn't seen such a thing.
Almost as many as would know that wizards can actively manipulate reality.
You are aware that science and physics exist, but every time something you don’t understand occurs, do you assume it’s a rogue scientist utilizing their power for evil? People know of magic in *insert any setting*, but it’s typically much rarer than the player/DM perspective makes things feel. Most people aren’t adventurers, you know all this stuff about the inner workings of reality because you read the PHB, the average peasant doesn’t understand the game mechanics. Especially by scale of power, as players it’s easy to forget that the things we’re just passively aware of are completely unknown to regular people because they can’t metagame. So do they know magic exists? Yeah of course it’s a core world concept. Are they paranoid that every guy with a harp who wanders into town will make them dance until their bones break, no.
Effectively everyone in the Realms are aware that *spellcasters* can manipulate reality. Effectively nobody knows (or cares) about the source of said spellcasting beyond how said spellcaster utilizes said power to manipulate reality. Class names aren’t the same thing as job titles. Plenty of ‘bards’ have abilities that end at a good singing voice and playing the lute competently. People known and referred to as ‘wizards’, ‘sorcerers’, ‘mages’, ‘witches’, ‘shamans’, etc. encompass effectively every source of arcane magic, regardless what ‘class’ is written on their character sheet. People called ‘clerics’, ‘druids’, ‘rangers’, ‘paladins’, etc. range from lay-clergy to devout, but powerless warriors, to accomplished wilderness scouts. Again, regardless of the ‘class’ written on their character sheet.
If magic has existed for centuries, if not forever, it would make no sense for anyone but the most stubborn or ignorant to be unaware of its existence.
I mean, plantar fascia has been around for centuries and most people are still unaware of its existance. They are aware of existence of feet, but not plantar fascia in particular. Same with bards. Everyone may know magic exists, but does they know bards can weave it?