Warchanter

[Deusxmachina]

"Warchanter:
Prereqs: Bard level 6, Bard Inspired Attack 1, Bard Inspired Damage 1, Bard Inspired Bravery 2, Power Attack, Any one of the following: Weapon Focus: Slashing, Weapon Focus: Piercing, Weapon Focus: Bludgeoning

"Your studies into war have granted you a +2 bonus to your Intimidate skill. Your Inspire Courage song gains an additional +1 to attack rolls, +2 to damage rolls, and +1 to fear saves. If you possess the Barbarian Rage ability, you gain +1 use per rest. You also gain the ability to expend a use of Bardic Music to grant all nearby allies damage reduction 5/-."
-------------------------------------

Not bad. However, as some in the bard forum have already said, requiring power attack leaves out most if not all of the TWF and sword-and-board battle bards. I don't mind the prereqs too much, although it'd be nice to have a little wider feat choice, but I do wonder about the DR5 song. It may just read that way, but if barbarian bards are the only ones who can sing that song, that leaves out ALL of the fighter bards. And that would be bad.

Frankly, that is THE exact song I've been thinking battle bard warchanters should get. But if it's barbarian only, it would greatly pigeon-hole builds.

[The_Cataclysm]

You aren't required to be a barb to take that enhancement. Just says if you have barb rage you can an extra rage.

[Freeman]

I think the DR song is gained regardless of whether or not you have a barb level, but the wording could go either way. Since I think barbarian is required for the PnP class, it could be translated either way, really. Still, I think they should leave it separate from the rage requirement, so that other melee bards could make use of it also. And yes, opening it up to a few more fighting styles would give it a broader appeal.

[EinarMal]

Even just changing the focus feats to the improved critical feats or adding both would make it a lot more attainable for many. Most battle bards take improved critical not many at all take weapon focus. That would screw up the level 6 thing though, at least at some point I could get it though.

[The_Cataclysm]

Even just changing the focus feats to the improved critical feats or adding both would make it a lot more attainable for many. Most battle bards take improved critical not many at all take weapon focus. That would screw up the level 6 thing though, at least at some point I could get it though.

That would make it impossible to be attainable by the target level.

[EinarMal]

That would make it impossible to be attainable by the target level.

Yeah that is why I added the "both" part. So it would read Power Attack + one of (IC or Focus). If you qualify via IC you couldn't get it until later but at some point you could qualify (Kind of like the new Music of the Dead thing).

[The_Cataclysm]

Yeah that is why I added the "both" part. So it would read Power Attack + one of (IC or Focus)

Ah, didn't notice that part. :)

[Schmackdown]

That would make it impossible to be attainable by the target level.
Virtuoso contains a possible prereq(ESIV) that isn't attainable until level 10, so the devs already had that in mind.

[CSFurious]

this is how i see it playing out with smart players

first, if i am looking to add a bard to my group and i see a drow pure 14-level bard, i am probably not going to say to myself let's add him for combat, rather, let's add that bard for doing what bards usually do, i.e., make the whole party better with buffs & cc

second, if i see a human or dwarf 10bard/4barbarian, i am now going to say "let's get us a warchanter" vs. "what a horrible build", i will know that i am not getting a enchantment-based cc bard with chr of 32, instead i am getting an off-tank who is going to make the other melee combatants in the group even better at making "war"

honestly, i want 2 bards in my groups now, a regular cc one & a "warchanter"

best case scenario, you get 3 bards for your group, Einar Mal's two-weapon battle-bard, a "warchanter", & a cc-specialist, i think that group would kick arse & take names

[Conejo]

i really don't see Power Attack as being a good requisite.

i would rather they gave more options to that end.

[EinarMal]

i really don't see Power Attack as being a good requisite.

i would rather they gave more options to that end.

I would be fine with that as well, more options all around! How about just saying you need two combat feats (using the fighter bonus list).

[The_Cataclysm]

I would be fine with that as well, more options all around! How about just saying you need two combat feats (using the fighter bonus list).

I think that would work great for all the fighting based bards.

[Kethir]

honestly, i want 2 bards in my groups now, a regular cc one & a "warchanter"

You sure about that? I'd want 2 sorcerors in my group (on top of the usual 1 arcane spot) rather than 2 bards.

2 bards are 2 support classes, when there really isn't a need for a "support" class at the moment.

Off-tanks are ok, but not necessary. They certainly don't speed things up. A secondary fighter type (without sneak attack) isn't better than a regular high dps fighter - better at taking down monsters.

The reason for these enhancements, from what I can tell, is that bards are seriously hurt in the current environment. With the specialization required these days, bards are jacks of no trade, masters of jack.

A high charisma level 14 bard is fine for fascinate (which any old bard can do atm), greater heroism (which is fine off girds and as an arcane spell), blur (arcane spell), displacement (arcane spell), dancing ball (wizard spell), dance (arcane spell), soundburst (cleric spell, which btw only works against casters, which are better just killed than stunned), and haste (arcane spell).

In most respects, a pure charisma bard is just a bad sorceror. Their only benefit is songs, and songs aren't that helpful in my opinion, at level 14. Most things die quick anyway.

A warchanter gets to make fighters +1 to hit better and +2 to damage better. Thats nice. But at high levels, fighters don't do the damage anyway - at least they won't as more casters learn the fastest way to go thru a quest is to start killing things, and for those people who do speed runs.

From my understanding, the current environment is pretty bard unfriendly. This doesnt' do much to help.

The only way to really help bards, I suspect, is the weaken fighters, specifically, fighters that are 2 handed weapon specialists. However, if you weaken fighters, you REALLY increase the power of casters - which I don't disagree with, just creates an issue.

DDO is entering the high level phase of D&D, at which point the character classes become MASSIVELY unbalanced. It'll be interesting to see how it pans out, esp. since to be true to the idea of high fantasy, MASSIVE unbalance is the name of the game.

After all, Gandalf the Grey didn't sing songs and buff the Fellowship, did he?

And I'm not saying all bards are bad, plenty are great. But looking at the build and the environment, playing a really great bard (at level 14) isn't exactly like playing a sorceror or a pure fighter 2 handed specialist.

[Conejo]

I think that would work great for all the fighting based bards.

yes. that's a more elegant option than just Power Attack.

[CSFurious]

i do not think that it would make much difference if the group had either 2 bards or 2 sorcerors, i.e., both parties would crush most quests in this game

from memory, good example is delera's elite, i have blown thru that quest in a group with 2 bards, me as one of the bards, and in a group with 2 sors, me as one of the sors, both groups were better because of the "dynamic duos"

as to bards not being strong right now, i would submit that bards are very strong right now & every group can benefit from a good bard


You sure about that? I'd want 2 sorcerors in my group (on top of the usual 1 arcane spot) rather than 2 bards.

2 bards are 2 support classes, when there really isn't a need for a "support" class at the moment.

Off-tanks are ok, but not necessary. They certainly don't speed things up. A secondary fighter type (without sneak attack) isn't better than a regular high dps fighter - better at taking down monsters.

The reason for these enhancements, from what I can tell, is that bards are seriously hurt in the current environment. With the specialization required these days, bards are jacks of no trade, masters of jack.

A high charisma level 14 bard is fine for fascinate (which any old bard can do atm), greater heroism (which is fine off girds and as an arcane spell), blur (arcane spell), displacement (arcane spell), dancing ball (wizard spell), dance (arcane spell), soundburst (cleric spell, which btw only works against casters, which are better just killed than stunned), and haste (arcane spell).

In most respects, a pure charisma bard is just a bad sorceror. Their only benefit is songs, and songs aren't that helpful in my opinion, at level 14. Most things die quick anyway.

A warchanter gets to make fighters +1 to hit better and +2 to damage better. Thats nice. But at high levels, fighters don't do the damage anyway - at least they won't as more casters learn the fastest way to go thru a quest is to start killing things, and for those people who do speed runs.

From my understanding, the current environment is pretty bard unfriendly. This doesnt' do much to help.

The only way to really help bards, I suspect, is the weaken fighters, specifically, fighters that are 2 handed weapon specialists. However, if you weaken fighters, you REALLY increase the power of casters - which I don't disagree with, just creates an issue.

DDO is entering the high level phase of D&D, at which point the character classes become MASSIVELY unbalanced. It'll be interesting to see how it pans out, esp. since to be true to the idea of high fantasy, MASSIVE unbalance is the name of the game.

After all, Gandalf the Grey didn't sing songs and buff the Fellowship, did he?

And I'm not saying all bards are bad, plenty are great. But looking at the build and the environment, playing a really great bard (at level 14) isn't exactly like playing a sorceror or a pure fighter 2 handed specialist.

[Solik]

You know, it's not like Power Attack is entirely useless for 1h weapon + shield users. Activate it and crit something with a Heavy Pick and smile. It's not bad with axes or mauls either.

Granted, it's certainly not the best feat for a TWF user. However, I'm not sure why TWF bards think Warchanter should cater to them. It's simply not a generalized combat specialization option. It's not supposed to be. Use other tricks, like picking up a few rogue levels for the sneak attack and evasion.

[Gimpster]

I would be fine with that as well, more options all around! How about just saying you need two combat feats (using the fighter bonus list).
How about just one fighter feat?

The Spellsinger option only requires one feat to qualify, and over 99% of bards already take Extend Spell, so they don't need to spend any feats to get it.

Why should Warchanter require not just 1 more feat, but 2?

[Gimpster]

A warchanter gets to make fighters +1 to hit better and +2 to damage better. Thats nice. But at high levels, fighters don't do the damage anyway - at least they won't as more casters learn the fastest way to go thru a quest is to start killing things, and for those people who do speed runs.
That's just a painfully ignorant thing to read.

[Deusxmachina]

2 bards are 2 support classes, when there really isn't a need for a "support" class at the moment.

Off-tanks are ok, but not necessary. They certainly don't speed things up. A secondary fighter type (without sneak attack) isn't better than a regular high dps fighter - better at taking down monsters.

A good warchanter wouldn't be merely a support class, though. He'd be a good support class and high DPS. Not pure-barbarian DPS, but he should be pretty high. Warchanters would likely have anywhere from four to 12 barbarian or fighter levels and high strength. That's not your typical support-only bard.

With things seemingly constantly becoming more immune to spells, melee is where it's at a lot of the time, and if they actually spend a few bucks and buy some potions, they hardly ever even have to take a rest break.

Different point of view, I guess. Every time I'm in a group of good melee that has a good buffing bard, it's like the game gets broken. It's somewhat on par with the old fighter action boosts but being on more than 20 seconds at a time. Granted, there are also cases where a wizard or sorcerer can one-shot nearly everything, but in Monty Haul campaigns like DDO, melee gets a big boost thanks to all the toys.

Anyway, that's all a bit off the subject. I do think requiring less action points but two feats is a fair tradeoff for a warchanter, but, yeah, it'd be nice if the feat list was a little larger.

People are saying how easy it is to qualify for the other prestige classes, but I don't think that's necessarily the case if the person has a battle bard. Taking AP away from toughness or +con or +str or +tactics etc might not be that easy of a decision.

edit: amusingly enough, the DR5 song would actually be a big reason for me to consider taking more bard levels than fighter or barbarian in a warchanter build. If someone only has, say, eight levels of bard, that's only four castings of DR and IC and none left for Fascinate. Adding that DR song makes bards better at what they should be better at: songs.

[Gimpster]

A good warchanter wouldn't be merely a support class, though. He'd be a good support class and high DPS. Not pure-barbarian DPS, but he should be pretty high.

The thing is, does it need to take two feats to qualify? Suppose you have a barb 1/ bard 13 with the Power Attack feat. He is already a pretty high DPS thing. His dedication to melee combat is obvious. So why does he also need Weapon Focus to qualify for Warchanter?

Do the devs know that even many pure barbs / pure paladins don't bother with Weapon Focus? In PnP, Weapon Focus was already a rather marginal feat. In DDO's melee system extra attacks at a higher BAB are at a bonus instead of a penalty, which makes spending a feat to boost your attack rolls even less attractive.

[Elfvyra]

How about just one fighter feat?

The Spellsinger option only requires one feat to qualify, and over 99% of bards already take Extend Spell, so they don't need to spend any feats to get it.

Why should Warchanter require not just 1 more feat, but 2?

Ummm, because it's different from the Spellsinger? Different abilities, different focus, different pluses and minuses, etc. Perople who want it will take it, those who don't, won't. ;)

[Conejo]

The thing is, does it need to take two feats to qualify? Suppose you have a barb 1/ bard 13 with the Power Attack feat. He is already a pretty high DPS thing. His dedication to melee combat is obvious. So why does he also need Weapon Focus to qualify for Warchanter?

Do the devs know that even many pure barbs / pure paladins don't bother with Weapon Focus? In PnP, Weapon Focus was already a rather marginal feat. In DDO's melee system extra attacks at a higher BAB are at a bonus instead of a penalty, which makes spending a feat to boost your attack rolls even less attractive.

really, though, that's only more reason for Turbine to go back to the PnP way of doing extra attacks.

[Gimpster]

Ummm, because it's different from the Spellsinger? Different abilities, different focus, different pluses and minuses, etc. Perople who want it will take it, those who don't, won't.
"Things are different" is insufficient justification for one enhancement to require TWO feats while another requires ZERO.

[Gimpster]

really, though, that's only more reason for Turbine to go back to the PnP way of doing extra attacks.
Be real. That won't happen.

Changing the requirements for Warchanter might happen.

[Mad_Bombardier]

How about just one fighter feat?

The Spellsinger option only requires one feat to qualify, and over 99% of bards already take Extend Spell, so they don't need to spend any feats to get it.

Why should Warchanter require not just 1 more feat, but 2?If they lower it to 1 feat, they need to add more AP requirements. Warchanter has the lowest at 6 APs spent. But, that is a better solution for most bards, who do not have 2 feats to spare.

[Gimpster]

If they lower it to 1 feat, they need to add more AP requirements. Warchanter has the lowest at 6 APs spent.
It is unrealistic to say it takes 6 AP, as any serious bard is already going to partly meet the enhancement requirements.

We don't know how many APs it actually costs to get Warchanter or Spellsinger. Let's assume they're all equal, whatever they are.

Here are the requirements again:
Spellsinger- Enh: Energy 2, Concen 2, Magic 2, Lyric 1
Feat: One of Mag Training, MT, SF Enchant, Empower, Heighten, Max, Extend
Virtuoso- Enh: Song 2, Perform 2, Lingering 1, Charisma 1
Feat: SF Perform OR Negotiator OR Enhance Song 4
Warchanter- Enh: Attack 1, Damage 1, Bravery 2
Feat: PA AND (WF Slash or WF Pierce or WF Bludgeon)

Assuming a typical bard with typical normal enhancements, he'd have to spend the following to qualify for the various specializations:

Spellsinger: Concentration 1,2=3 AP. Lyric 1=1 AP. Magic 2=3 AP. Total 7 AP (or less, if he already has Song Magic). Zero cost in feats.
Virtuoso: Perform 2=3 AP. Extra Song IV=4 AP. He is unlikely to need to train Extra Song III, as typical bards already have it. Total 7 AP. Zero cost in feats.
Warchanter: Bravery 2=3 AP. Power Attack=1 feat, Weapon Focus=1 feat. Total 3 AP and 2 feats.

Spellsinger needs 7 AP + 0 feats, Virtuoso needs 7 AP + 0 feats, Warchanter needs 3 AP + 2 feats.

[Kethir]

Warchanters would likely have anywhere from four to 12 barbarian or fighter levels and high strength. That's not your typical support-only bard.

I didn't really think of the 2/12 bard/barbarian split. I was assuming more like 10/4 bard/barbarian. At least thats about as far as I see out there.
2 feats is pretty steep.

Can you get this enhancement with just 2 levels of bard? And would it help much if done so (aren't you missing on alot of other bard song bonuses)?

[Deusxmachina]

The thing is, does it need to take two feats to qualify? Suppose you have a barb 1/ bard 13 with the Power Attack feat. He is already a pretty high DPS thing. His dedication to melee combat is obvious. So why does he also need Weapon Focus to qualify for Warchanter?



A PnP warchanter requires WF and Combat Expertise. Requiring Combat Expertise in DDO would be painful. So, I do think requiring two fighting feats (of some sort) is fair enough, and the second feat somewhat offsets the extra AP the other two bard prestige classes require.

I don't think requiring two combat feats is the main problem. It's requiring those two specific feats. It especially screws over ranged bards. It screws over finesse bards, too, but finesse bards should be back in the barracks making real bards sammiches anyway. :p

[EinarMal]

I didn't really think of the 2/12 bard/barbarian split. I was assuming more like 10/4 bard/barbarian. At least thats about as far as I see out there.
2 feats is pretty steep.

Can you get this enhancement with just 2 levels of bard? And would it help much if done so (aren't you missing on alot of other bard song bonuses)?

It requires 6 levels of Bard to even take the enhancement.

[dormetheus]

I hate thinking about "spare" feats and having to use them to access certain builds/enhancements/prcs.

These feats should compliment the builds.

I don't know of any barbarian or bard that would take weapon focus. WF is only really viable for fighters and fighter multis.

In other words, you're pretty much forced to splash or multi fighter for Warchanter, just so you can get a "spare" feat.

If there is going to be a 2 feat requirement, I'd like to see the list expanded.

The power attack requirement makes sense to me. BUT, if Turbine is going to encourage THF, it should make it to the second feat requirement list.

[Deusxmachina]

I didn't really think of the 2/12 bard/barbarian split. I was assuming more like 10/4 bard/barbarian. At least thats about as far as I see out there.
2 feats is pretty steep.

Can you get this enhancement with just 2 levels of bard? And would it help much if done so (aren't you missing on alot of other bard song bonuses)?

Whoops, hehe, "4 to 12" barbarian levels, I was thinking of if/when all 20 levels are available. Something like 8bard/12barbarian.

And, like I said, and it's a big point to me, is these bard song bonuses (and lack of AP to use for other classes) would have me thinking long and hard about how many bard levels/songs I'd want to give up. A good ol' "battlebard" with only eight bard levels is mainly relying on IC, but double or even triple his number of good songs, and suddenly eight bard levels looks a little rough for the lone fact he can't sing many songs between rests.

[Gimpster]

I didn't really think of the 2/12 bard/barbarian split. I was assuming more like 10/4 bard/barbarian. At least thats about as far as I see out there.
10/4 doesn't work. 12/2 doesn't even really work.

If you're looking to Warchanter to get a higher total melee buff from Inspire Courage, you can't splash away from bard more than one level. Heck, for the strongest buff you've got to stay pure bard 14.

At bard 14 your Inspire Courage bonus goes up by +1 attack +1 damage.
At bard 13 you qualify for Inspired Attack III, +1 attack.
At bard 12 you qualify for Inspired Damage III, +1 damage.

So a bard of level 8 to 11 is down a total of -2 attack -2 damage from a pure bard 14. Warchanter gives you +1 attack +2 damage. A 10/4 bard with Warchanter would be at net -1 attack +0 damage compared to a simple bard 14. All Warchanter does in this case is help the multiclassed bard compensate for the reduced buff power he got by being impure- but multiclassing (except to fighter) does not help you qualify for Warchanter.

If the bard 14 spent feats on Weapon Focus and Power Attack, he'd have a total +7 attack +8 damage, or +2/+2 above the 10/4.

[Gimpster]

A PnP warchanter requires WF and Combat Expertise.
A PnP warchanter is so different from this enhancement that it makes little sense to even bring it into the discussion. Their "Inspire Recklessness" ability is just completely distinct from what DDO offers. As is their song of BAB-increase (Which is ludicrously powerful if combined with certain powerful melee classes that are balanced by a low BAB)

[Mad_Bombardier]

It is unrealistic to say it takes 6 AP, as any serious bard is already going to partly meet the enhancement requirements.

Spellsinger needs 7 AP + 0 feats, Virtuoso needs 7 AP + 0 feats (IF Bard waits til level 10.4 to get VirtuosoI), Warchanter needs 3 AP + 2 feats.Ok, I see what they were trying to do with the PrC requirements. But, maybe it should be +1 feat. Or broaden the feat requisite so that it's more likely met with an existing battleBard feat.

[Deusxmachina]

At bard 14 your Inspire Courage bonus goes up by +1 attack +1 damage.
At bard 13 you qualify for Inspired Attack III, +1 attack.
At bard 12 you qualify for Inspired Damage III, +1 damage.

So a bard of level 8 to 11 is down a total of -2 attack -2 damage from a pure bard 14. Warchanter gives you +1 attack +2 damage.

8bard/6other would have +2 BAB over the 14 bard, along with more feats or more run speed or DR or rage or weapon and armor proficiencies, etc. And IA and ID III have diminishing returns due to the AP cost.

Those kind of builds have been compared in the bard forums. Both have their good and bad points. But a straight bard14 does indeed not get certain things the multiclassing can give.

These would be some strong songs, though. Every bard level would be hard to give up just due to the song power. And I think that's great. This is a big buff for bards, which, as always, is thus a big buff for the rest of the party.

[dormetheus]

10/4 doesn't work. 12/2 doesn't even really work.

If you're looking to Warchanter to get a higher total melee buff from Inspire Courage, you can't splash away from bard more than one level. Heck, for the strongest buff you've got to stay pure bard 14.

At bard 14 your Inspire Courage bonus goes up by +1 attack +1 damage.
At bard 13 you qualify for Inspired Attack III, +1 attack.
At bard 12 you qualify for Inspired Damage III, +1 damage.

So a bard of level 8 to 11 is down a total of -2 attack -2 damage from a pure bard 14. Warchanter gives you +1 attack +2 damage. A 10/4 bard with Warchanter would be at net -1 attack +0 damage compared to a simple bard 14. All Warchanter does in this case is help the multiclassed bard compensate for the reduced buff power he got by being impure- but multiclassing (except to fighter) does not help you qualify for Warchanter.

If the bard 14 spent feats on Weapon Focus and Power Attack, he'd have a total +7 attack +8 damage, or +2/+2 above the 10/4.

Not trying to second guess you, but did you calculate the lost bab for going pure bard?

I think you lose 2 bab for pure bard vs an 8/6 split. So an 8/6 should be personally even with a pure (but lose the buff for the party). Then Warchanter gives the +1/+2 to both.

I think they're both even, but the party loses out on a piece of the action.

[Gimpster]

Not trying to second guess you, but did you calculate the lost bab for going pure bard?
No, for several reasons:
1. The buffs to the party are more important than the bard's personal combat power, as they are applied to as many as 6 characters (or 12 in raids).
2. Since DDO has increasing attack bonuses on extra attacks, the ability to hit is less important than the damage you do on each hit.
3. Bards get 3 BAB per 4 levels. It would take 4 levels warrior classes to be up by even +1 BAB over a pure bard.
4. If BAB is important, a bard has the UMD to cast a scroll of Divine Power or Tenser's Transformation to buff to BAB 14.

[EinarMal]

No, for several reasons:
1. The buffs to the party are more important than the bard's personal combat power, as they are applied to as many as 6 characters (or 12 in raids).


This is a matter of opinion in some sense. If you care about overall party efficiency the statement is true in most cases, if you want to play a better personal build for your own reasons it is not necessarily true. It also might not be true if the group you are in does not contain a lot of DPS fighter types.

Personally giving the party +6/+4 song buffs with 10 levels of Bard, +7/+6 with the new warchanter enhancements is pretty good considering most groups don't have a Bard in them period. If they don't all get +2 more to bad for them.

[dormetheus]

No, for several reasons:
1. The buffs to the party are more important than the bard's personal combat power, as they are applied to as many as 6 characters (or 12 in raids). An opinion, but an excellent point to consider. Several melee bards trade off group buffs for personal power
2. Since DDO has increasing attack bonuses on extra attacks, the ability to hit is less important than the damage you do on each hit.Depends on the level of monster AC, of course. Also, consider power attack.
3. Bards get 3 BAB per 4 levels. It would take 4 levels warrior classes to be up by even +1 BAB over a pure bard. At the current cap, this means -2 Bab
4. If BAB is important, a bard has the UMD to cast a scroll of Divine Power or Tenser's Transformation to buff to BAB 14. True, but DP is quite short. I'm not exceptionally experienced with Tenser's. Basically, you're saying that Bab is only important on named monsters and that you have plenty of buff time?

Now, consider what you could gain from, say, 6 levels of barbarian. +6 str rages, 4/- dr (with enhancements), 12 dr action boost, barb power attack, barb toughness, Con bonuses...

Really it just depends on what you're looking for

[Gimpster]

This is a matter of opinion in some sense. If you care about overall party efficiency the statement is true in most cases, if you want to play a better personal build for your own reasons it is not necessarily true.
The context was regarding a party leader looking at list of available characters such as bard14, bard12/fight2, and bard10/barb4 and judging which ones to bring into the group.

[EinarMal]

The context was regarding a party leader looking at list of available characters such as bard14, bard12/fight2, and bard10/barb4 and judging which ones to bring into the group.

Well if you can choose among those Bards then I can see going for the pure Bard for a bit more on song buffs if that is what you want. Honestly the player probably matters a heck of a lot more between the three at that point. Good luck finding three Bards on my server for you to pick from....sadly :(

I would say it isn't always cut and dry. Sometimes those extra feats make a big difference in overall fighting power. It is hard to judge a character simply on level split (as long as it is something reasonable). Now if all you are interested in is max song buffs then that is that...