Oh the ignorance!

[aldan]

Ran with a Sorc last night that was running his mouth about classes, then mentioned that Bards are worthless, they cant cast arcane spells very well, cant fight very well, and cant heal like clerics very well. I wanted to backhand him.

First of all, a Bard is a difficult class to build. Many different types of Bards out there. Mine happens to be a Human Battle Bard with spashed fighter at 12 when I get there for ITWF.

I just didnt know where to start educating this idiot about his ignorance. With all the buffs, displacement, etc Bards can whoop some serious arse. I mentioned the DPS output of a Warchanter battle bard can rival fighters and he said "no way can a bard outpace a fighter. When the quest was over and my 65 to 44 kills showed up, he claimed kill stealing. LOL..... Not to mention I didnt get hit that much cause I was displaced, he on the other hand was being wand whipped by a cleric that was watching his toons future cash supply dwindling with each whip of the wand.

I thought bards were useless too when at headstart, didnt really know how good they could be until a guildie built aruguably the best figthting bard I have ever seen.

Bards rock! Face it.

[Oreg]

Agreed. Bards do rock. But so does a well played Sorc, which your adversary was not if he got spanked by you in a kill count contest. Especially if it was understood that there was to be a competition.

[Strakeln]

Like most classes, it depends a lot more on the player than the build.

The vast majority of bards that I have run across tend to equate to "wasted party spot" unless they're covering some key ability that the rest of the party is lacking (haste, possibly healing). Since I usually PUG with my cleric, the bards - especially "battle bards" - typically end up being nothing more than a money/mana sink for me. *ESPECIALLY* in quests where dispelling is common.

This isn't to say that bard builds can't be amazing. I have personally seen some very impressive bards... but I'm sure it was more the player than the build. It's just that the majority of the time, they're an amazing waste of party space. This opinion shouldn't be a surprise to anyone - the bard is the "jack of all trades, master of none" class... so the bard will be of minimal benefit when surrounded by the masters of the trades he dabbles in.

[Zenako]

"The old Jack of all trades, Master of none" is the first mistaken assumption. Bards are the MASTERS of Song. Bards can stop vitrually anything, cold in their tracks, except the red names that no one can stop. Rare is the critter that fails to dance or trance or change sides to help the party. A Bard (or in fact any character) which tries to do something they are not skilled in will come up short.

I ran the other night with a poor player, (who happened to be a bard). They could have been running almost any type of character to almost the same level of effect. (or lack thereof). That reflected on the player, not the class. Perhaps it is the high expectations you have from seeing well played bards that makes it hard for players less skilled to live up to those hopes.

[RichD]

The only way a bard is a useless party member is if they don't do anything. They are contributing if:

1) they are actively healing (assuming the party needs the extra healing OR the cleric takes advantage of the extra SP to do CC)
2) they are actively buffing (assuming the party casters take advantage of the extra SP for CC/Damage)
3) they are actively fascinating (assuming the party casters don't use AOE attacks every time you fascinate)
4) they are actively fighting using stat-damagers/special effects (assuming they know what they are doing)
5) they are actively fighting for DPS (assuming they are built/equipped to do so)

A bard who does two (or more) of these things as needed by the party more than makes up for the loss of 1 other party member by making everyone else in the party at least 20% more effective. Bards can be direct (obvious) contributors to party success, but are often indirect contributors though less obvious support activities.

[geezee]

If youre going to use the quote, use the whole quote.

"Jack of all trades, master of none, but oft times better than a master of one."

So what's the job of a jack-of-all-trades? Whatever will help the group the most at any given moment. No other class can do that as well.

The opposite of useless.

[maddmatt70]

Like most classes, it depends a lot more on the player than the build.

The vast majority of bards that I have run across tend to equate to "wasted party spot" unless they're covering some key ability that the rest of the party is lacking (haste, possibly healing). Since I usually PUG with my cleric, the bards - especially "battle bards" - typically end up being nothing more than a money/mana sink for me. *ESPECIALLY* in quests where dispelling is common.

This isn't to say that bard builds can't be amazing. I have personally seen some very impressive bards... but I'm sure it was more the player than the build. It's just that the majority of the time, they're an amazing waste of party space. This opinion shouldn't be a surprise to anyone - the bard is the "jack of all trades, master of none" class... so the bard will be of minimal benefit when surrounded by the masters of the trades he dabbles in.

Qwiji, I disagree. Which bards have you been running with these days anyway. A part of what you should look at when your running your cleric with a bard is the damage a party takes overall. Is it less? That is a bard's greatest contribution is damage mitigation for an overall party. If you are running with a battle bard his/her mitigation style is through increasing damage both his/her own and the overall partys. If you are running with a cc bard it is about limiting the overall damage taken through cc, etc.. I argue again the bard is the master of damage mitigation. Of course if you are running with squishy bards who will not buff up the party, cc anybody, can't heal, or swing a sword well then that player is just a less then adequate player. It would not matter if that player was playing a fighter or a bard they would well suck...

[Blind_Skwerl]

I run warchanting battlebard (13/1). I know that I help parties that are more melee oriented. I bring the best melee buffs in the game. I have near-instantaneous self-healing (reconstruct scrolls), so I am seldom a burden on a healer. As far as what I have to offer an arcane, I am able to ease the burden of party buffs (GH, Blur, Displacement, Freedom of Movement, etc.).

Can I outkill a well built/run sorcerer? No. But neither will a dps barb or fighter, ranger, pally, cleric, rogue, or even wizard. I have a 34 charisma drow pk/fod sorc. Did a competition run of PoP a while back with a couple dps barbarians (one had SoS), a pally, a wizard, and an offensive casting cleric. Drow sorc: 59, others 6. I know my bard can't keep up with that. But what my bard could do is elevate the abilities of the other melees. Put a little weight on the other side of the scale. Get the party through faster and safer.

[Strakeln]

How did I know that all of you would be reading what you wanted to, as opposed to what I said.

I said - in the very first line - "Like most classes, it depends a lot more on the player than the build."

Unfortunately for bards, this dependency on player skill is massive. I would argue moreso than even rangers.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My cleric's problem with bards (especially battle bards): low HP, low AC.... they might as well be a turtle outside their shell the second they run into a dispell. It often feels like I'm healing a sorc who prefers swinging to slinging. Yes, there are exceptions, but they're pretty rare.

Further reasoning for my stance: Occasionally I do run into pretty good bards. These bards are good because they have a great player behind em. For one thing, they never "wow" me. I've never really seen a bard pull off something that was amazing. But the real thing is, anytime one of these good players with a bard joins, I silently wish that they would camp over to one of their other characters... because they can contribute to party success much better that way.

It comes down to this: bards have excellent ways to contribute to party success. Almost every other class can greatly exceed this contribution. I've seen almost every class do amazing things... I've seen bards do a lot of "meh" things (rogues are the other exception).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will give those of you on my server the chance to prove me wrong, although I'm not sure how you would go about doing so. (Impress me and it just means you're a good player, it doesn't mean that bards are amazing... and chances are, you could have been even MORE impressive with another of your characters...).

[arcanehealer]

i have to agree with all, BARDS RULE. i once got on my lvl 5 wizard, got with a lvl 6 battle bard and we did stk by our selves

[Blind_Skwerl]

The thing about bards is they can almost do it all. I can rez, I can buff, I can fight, I can CC, I can even heal a bit (not built for it, but I've muddled through before). I've even been eying FoD scrolls as of late, just because I have plat to burn. What other class can do that?

[EinarMal]

.

Further reasoning for my stance: Occasionally I do run into pretty good bards. These bards are good because they have a great player behind em. For one thing, they never "wow" me. I've never really seen a bard pull off something that was amazing. But the real thing is, anytime one of these good players with a bard joins, I silently wish that they would camp over to one of their other characters... because they can contribute to party success much better that way.

This is simply not true, I've played Rangers/Fighter and melee characters of all types and my Battle Bard is better for me personally than any other build I've tried.

It comes down to this: bards have excellent ways to contribute to party success. Almost every other class can greatly exceed this contribution. I've seen almost every class do amazing things... I've seen bards do a lot of "meh" things (rogues are the other exception).

Again this is way off, what you fail to "see" is the huge passive bonuses everyone gets in the party that makes things run much faster. Buffing a melee party with +8 to hit and +6 damage on every swing is HUGE. That is worth way more by adding a battle Bard to a party with a couple of DPS melee builds rather than adding another Barbarian/Fighter.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will give those of you on my server the chance to prove me wrong, although I'm not sure how you would go about doing so. (Impress me and it just means you're a good player, it doesn't mean that bards are amazing... and chances are, you could have been even MORE impressive with another of your characters...)
Like anyone needs to prove anything to you....

.

Replies in red...I will say as well that posting this kind of anti-Bard junk in the Bard forum is highly annoying and just asking for a flame war.

[Strakeln]

The thing about bards is they can almost do it all. I can rez, I can buff, I can fight, I can CC, I can even heal a bit (not built for it, but I've muddled through before). I've even been eying FoD scrolls as of late, just because I have plat to burn. What other class can do that?

Sorcerers, for starters.

[Strakeln]

Replies in red...I will say as well that posting this kind of anti-Bard junk in the Bard forum is highly annoying and just asking for a flame war.

Well, I'd love to discuss this with you, but since your argument consists of "anything I think is true and anything you think is false", there's not much point, eh? Sounds like you've resolved this discussion in your own mind.

p.s. try looking at what I've actually posted instead of reading a couple lines and considering it "anti-bard junk". My stance has not been anti-bard... let's take a look at some things I typed (and in some cases, BOLDFACED and COLORED RED so you would hopefully notice it):

"Like most classes, it depends a lot more on the player than the build."
"This isn't to say that bard builds can't be amazing."
"I have personally seen some very impressive bards"
"bards have excellent ways to contribute to party success"

Yeah, OMG, so anti-bard... develop some thicker skin or stop trolling, troll.

[Blind_Skwerl]

Sorcerers, for starters.

A sorc cannot give near the melee buffs a warchanter can. A sorc cannot play surrogate healer (UMD just is not high enough). As for meleeing, I'd be willing to go toe-to-toe with any sorc, melee style. Oh and CC without a save...

[Strakeln]

A sorc cannot give near the melee buffs a warchanter can. A sorc cannot play surrogate healer (UMD just is not high enough). As for meleeing, I'd be willing to go toe-to-toe with any sorc, melee style. Oh and CC without a save...

CC without a save is without a doubt uber. Not disputing that. Add the category of damage via spells and it evens out. A sorc can't buff as well, can't heal as well, can't melee as well... but can damage using mana like all get out.

A sorc can play surrogate healer. Their UMD can get higher than you (apparently) think. However, bard can do it better (we're talking pure classes here, no need to muck things up with MC builds).

We're not comparing apples and oranges. A sorc can't give the same melee buffs as a bard, and vice versa. You said you could do A, B, C, and D, disregarded E (offensive spellcasting), and asked what other class could do so. I gave an example that was sort of on the weaker end (but nonetheless able to do everything you asked)... the oh-so-obvious answer, of course, would have been "cleric". A cleric wins in two of the four categories you presented (healing and melee), makes a good showing in the other two (buffs and CC), and easily towers over the bard in offensive spellcasting.

Since a cleric wins in 3/5 categories, are they a better jack-of-all-trades?

[EinarMal]

stop trolling, troll.

Says the poster who doesn't play a Bard but has to run his mouth in the Bard class forum....

[EinarMal]

The vast majority of bards that I have run across tend to equate to "wasted party spot"

It's just that the majority of the time, they're an amazing waste of party space.

so the bard will be of minimal benefit when surrounded by the masters of the trades he dabbles in.

A few positive quotes you left out of your earlier summary....

[EinarMal]

Further reasoning for my stance: Occasionally I do run into pretty good bards. These bards are good because they have a great player behind em. For one thing, they never "wow" me. I've never really seen a bard pull off something that was amazing. But the real thing is, anytime one of these good players with a bard joins, I silently wish that they would camp over to one of their other characters... because they can contribute to party success much better that way.

It comes down to this: bards have excellent ways to contribute to party success. Almost every other class can greatly exceed this contribution. I've seen almost every class do amazing things... I've seen bards do a lot of "meh" things (rogues are the other exception).

Yet more of your "positive" Bard comments in red, essentially saying that if a great player plays a Bard they are ok, but that player would be better off with another class. Sounds like anti-Bard junk to me I think I read just fine thank you.

[Blind_Skwerl]

CC without a save is without a doubt uber. Not disputing that. Add the category of damage via spells and it evens out. A sorc can't buff as well, can't heal as well, can't melee as well... but can damage using mana like all get out.

A sorc can play surrogate healer. Their UMD can get higher than you (apparently) think. However, bard can do it better (we're talking pure classes here, no need to muck things up with MC builds).

We're not comparing apples and oranges. A sorc can't give the same melee buffs as a bard, and vice versa. You said you could do A, B, C, and D, disregarded E (offensive spellcasting), and asked what other class could do so. I gave an example that was sort of on the weaker end (but nonetheless able to do everything you asked)... the oh-so-obvious answer, of course, would have been "cleric". A cleric wins in two of the four categories you presented (healing and melee), makes a good showing in the other two (buffs and CC), and easily towers over the bard in offensive spellcasting.

Since a cleric wins in 3/5 categories, are they a better jack-of-all-trades?

A bard can get a much higher UMD than a sorc. Class vs. non-classed skill. Besides that, no UMD check on heal wands. I have a 34 charisma pure sorc with umd trained every level, so I "apparently" know. What melee buff can a sorc give that a bard cannot? I was not disregarding offensive casting, I was saying what my bard does and can do regularly. My sorc would be in much worse shape trying to play healer, unless the party was all warforged.

A cleric would, at best, be a match for melee vs. a bard. A bard's songs + haste, etc. would overwhelm a cleric with divine power, aid, etc.. Offensive casting is easily on the cleric's side. So I'd rule it 3/2 in favor of the bard actually.