Oh the ignorance!

[Blind_Skwerl]

A warforged bard ...hmm.... have a creation slot left very tempting idea.
Oh sorry can you give me a idea on the stats? Im really interested.

It's pretty much the warforged chanter build, except I spalshed 1 level of fighter. I also went up the THF feat tree, just for fun.

[Vardak]

Divine Vitality ()
Though that's in the same area as conserving spell points, which Spellsingers do.

Okay, so, Turn Undead.

lol, I keep hearing about this turn undead thing.... can't cay I've ever actually seen a cleric TURN an undead though.

[jaasper]

I run with 2 Bards often and they are a party's best friend, esp a Barb...
Just to name a few, Gloom, Guapo, and Jupbox.... we have solo'd very high level quests just the bard and my Barb, without a glitch. A Barb with a Bard is serious damage.
I am very glad they are in the game and those who I play with play very well. Any class can be played badly, but if you are into ddo as most of us are, you learn very quickly how to play effectivly.

[TommyBoy]

There is no way a battle mage will be a better fighter than a well built battle Bard. DPS wise it is not even close....

Not sure about the high lvls but at the low to mids my battla mage can out kill most fighters. Ive even taken down fighters that are +3 my lvl in pvp doing straight melee. My battle mage is low on hp and is not ment to tank but as an off tank melee/buffer/cc/dd caster he works really well. @ lvl8 i have a 17 attack and and 38 ac buffed.

If that guys battle mage is wf (just judging from the avatar) I'de deffently put money on him vs a melee "only" in combat. no only can he buff, but also heal himself. WF battle mages are the new drawf battle clerics only with more fire power.

lastly if i cant find a cleric i always look for a bard and often prefer one to a cleric.

[EinarMal]

Not sure about the high lvls but at the low to mids my battla mage can out kill most fighters. Ive even taken down fighters that are +3 my lvl in pvp doing straight melee. My battle mage is low on hp and is not ment to tank but as an off tank melee/buffer/cc/dd caster he works really well. @ lvl8 i have a 17 attack and and 38 ac buffed.

If that guys battle mage is wf (just judging from the avatar) I'de deffently put money on him vs a melee "only" in combat. no only can he buff, but also heal himself. WF battle mages are the new drawf battle clerics only with more fire power.

lastly if i cant find a cleric i always look for a bard and often prefer one to a cleric.

Battle mages are great my point was they will not outdamage a battle Bard unless the mage also has a Bard in the group. There is no way the mage can make up the +8 to hit and +6 damage or more from bard song buffs. At least in terms of physical melee damage. Now if you start talking about battle casters and firewalls as well as melee then it is a whole different ball game. I have a battle caster myself, and a battle Bard it is a lot of fun. However, the person who said that battle mages out DPS a battle Bard in terms of melee damage is misinformed, the numbers just don't support that.

[Hadrian]

I read your post.

I see groups like that almost daily. Not everyone plays prime-time!

You're acting like you're disagreeing with me when we've said the same thing. The group you described is the type of group in which I said a bard is best. You're saying that this was your experience. Where do we disagree?

To say that a group make up is more rare now than it used to be is not to say that it cannot ever exist in any way. I said they're more rare now than they used to be because that is the case.

Someone posted numbers of 6.7% less casts assuming a certain level of saves. Even if you assume 5 casters in a group with a bard or 6 casters, it should be clear that the percentage of spell points used by the group is smaller for having 6 casters than for having to cast 6.7% less. This is even true if you include the 10% bonus in spell points to each of the 5 casters vs the 100% full bar of the 6th caster. The fewer casters in the group the less the benefit of the bard.

The bard does other things, but then the question is, is someone else already in the group that can do it better? That was the point someone else was trying to make.

On the other hand, melee DPS is boosted considerably and it does make a huge difference, especially on high AC or high HP targets.

This is my explaination of why I agree with that argument for caster-heavy groups but disagree with it for melee-heavy groups.

[Blind_Skwerl]

To say that a group make up is more rare now than it used to be is not to say that it cannot ever exist in any way. I said they're more rare now than they used to be because that is the case.

And I contend that "rarity" depends on when you play. With my hours, I have seen 5 ranger 1 rogue parties. Wierd combos constantly. We take what we can get.

[Bilger]

You're acting like you're disagreeing with me when we've said the same thing. The group you described is the type of group in which I said a bard is best. You're saying that this was your experience. Where do we disagree?

To say that a group make up is more rare now than it used to be is not to say that it cannot ever exist in any way. I said they're more rare now than they used to be because that is the case.

Someone posted numbers of 6.7% less casts assuming a certain level of saves. Even if you assume 5 casters in a group with a bard or 6 casters, it should be clear that the percentage of spell points used by the group is smaller for having 6 casters than for having to cast 6.7% less. This is even true if you include the 10% bonus in spell points to each of the 5 casters vs the 100% full bar of the 6th caster. The fewer casters in the group the less the benefit of the bard.

The bard does other things, but then the question is, is someone else already in the group that can do it better? That was the point someone else was trying to make.

On the other hand, melee DPS is boosted considerably and it does make a huge difference, especially on high AC or high HP targets.

This is my explaination of why I agree with that argument for caster-heavy groups but disagree with it for melee-heavy groups.

A bard can make ANY group better from what you are saying bards are worthless with the more melees there are.
I would have to disagree.
You are one of the first people that I have heard that says they are not. The bonuses from songs and buffs are a EXTREMELY welcome addition to any party. The pluses to hit and damage increases the melee output alot and if all the melees are hitting more things are dieing faster. So explain to me again how bards are not useful with the more melees that are in group. You make no sense!!
You also stated that there is always someone in the group who can do it better. Bards have equal to or better CC(fascinate), Can backup heal, and have the best buffs in game.
So lets see:
CC nothing is more powerful than fascinate, Disco balls very rarely will anything get through (everything will get a perfect roll every now and then) So a caster can disco to and they are pretty much equal in that category but bards win out because of fascinate.
Backup healer everyone should have some way of healing themselves and having someone who can raise the cleric or keep a party from wiping is welcome anytime. High UMD characters can do this too but most(unless has BARD levels or cleric levels) don't have the spells to achieve the healing part. (scrolls and Wands are just to slow, spells win out) So as a backup healer they are the best suited because of having both the spell and UMD abilities.
Buffs show me a person who don't like buffs casters have GH, Blur, Displacement, and resists. Bards have all but the resists but can easily be had with a Resist wand which are easy to come by. Bards also have songs that wow give pluses to attack and damage what can a caster do there. Spellsinger and warchanter songs 5DR or +1 DC and 10% more SP who wouldn't welcome that? So bards win out again.
This is all my opinion and to me bards are more helpful to any party than you make them out to be.
That is the problem so many people don't understand what a Bard brings to the table so say they are useless or what can they do that this class can't.
If a bard can do two classes job how can they make them less useful to a group?
Bards are the most versatile class in the game and make ANY party no matter the makeup better.
All I hear in these type of posts is someone who has no idea what a bard does or can do and probably someone who will never be convinced otherwise.

[Hadrian]

from what you are saying bards are worthless with the more melees there are.
I would have to disagree.

So would I. It is, in fact, the opposite of what I said.

[A_Sheep]

If 4 maximized firewalls on top of each other is the method of solving a quest, any class other than Sorceror is an inefficient choice.

If that is your method of solving a quest, your efficiency probably doesn't matter either. Not knocking that method, I use it myself a lot of the time. When a caster direct damage solution is availible, people tend to take it. That's why from the dawn of my playing DDO, I have only thrice taken down the Guardian of Shan-to-Kor with melee. Most of the time, we form a wall and the caster magic missiles him down. Caster Direct damage solutions are safer than any other solution right now. Sometimes it's a lot of fun, sometimes it's not. It just is what it is.

When crowd control/melee combine tactics are the chosen method of solution, adding a bard to the party is the most efficient class choice. When using non-casting direct damage solutions, I build the party around having one of us (my guildies and I) bring their bard. Everyone else's classes fall into place afterwards.

[maddmatt70]

If 4 maximized firewalls on top of each other is the method of solving a quest, any class other than Sorceror is an inefficient choice.

If that is your method of solving a quest, your efficiency probably doesn't matter either. Not knocking that method, I use it myself a lot of the time. When a caster direct damage solution is availible, people tend to take it. That's why from the dawn of my playing DDO, I have only thrice taken down the Guardian of Shan-to-Kor with melee. Most of the time, we form a wall and the caster magic missiles him down. Caster Direct damage solutions are safer than any other solution right now. Sometimes it's a lot of fun, sometimes it's not. It just is what it is.

When crowd control/melee combine tactics are the chosen method of solution, adding a bard to the party is the most efficient class choice. When using non-casting direct damage solutions, I build the party around having one of us (my guildies and I) bring their bard. Everyone else's classes fall into place afterwards.

If your going to go for a caster direct damage solution - the best bard option is a healing bard in a party sans a cleric. He drops the timely heal keeps the casters buffed, saves their spellpoints, etc. Casters are more efficient in terms of offense then a cleric so why not have a facilitator - bard rather then an inefficient competitor (dps competitor) - cleric.

In the next mod inspire heroics looks to be along the same vein you can save the casters their mana with just one song (if they want a gh for umd then cast that on them).

Really alot of the time when a direct damage solution is deemed to be the best/ most efficient solution a fascinate and run through is just as effective and really more efficient..

[~Jules921]

[QUOTE=Strakeln;1482181]
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).

QUOTE]

Show me another class who's buffs don't get dispelled by Beholders. There are none. Only the bard buffs will stay with you. Add that to the + to hit and + to damage for the entire party. The spellsinger's song giving your cleric a discount in spell points - again no other class can do that.

Bards are excellent support, and everyone knows support is the invisible backbone of any group.

Jules

[Strakeln]

Show me another class who's buffs don't get dispelled by Beholders. There are none. Only the bard buffs will stay with you. Add that to the + to hit and + to damage for the entire party. The spellsinger's song giving your cleric a discount in spell points - again no other class can do that.

A few counter-points:
1) Action boosts don't get dispelled, and are often notably more powerful than bard buffs (manyshot, for example).
2) The sorc that buffs you then insta-kills beholders from a distance has buffs that don't get dispelled by beholders
3) If you need buffs to kill a beholder, you need more than a bard can give you
4) There is one - count 'em, ONE - beholder in the game where not having buffs dispelled really makes a difference. This beholder appears twice. All the others are insta-killed, stoned, or completely neutered via optic nerves. And, mind you, this beholder is generally killed by clerics and casters, who really don't care about that extra damage swinging their potency item.
5) Spellsinger is great. But is it really saving mana? Take 5 sorcs, all with 2000 SP. 10% savings to each means a total of 1000 SP saved. Which suggests you'd be better off with the 2000 SP from another sorc... and really, how many 5 caster/1 bard parties do you see? Not to mention, of course, the fatal flaw in this argument: a cleric can provide DVs.

However, I think we've gotten off the beaten path. Yes, bards have things they can do that no other class can. So does every other class. Rogues are the only class in the game who can disable traps. Are they therefore the uber class that should be a part of every party? Wizards are the only class that can cast every arcane spell in the game. Are they therefore the uber class that should be a part of every party? The answers to these questions are quite evident... no.

I respect that bards have abilities that no other class has. However, this does not make them the uber class that should be a part of every party. This is painfully obvious in actual execution: of all the classes, bards are often the ones you see least in groups.

[Raithe]

A few counter-points:
1) Action boosts don't get dispelled, and are often notably more powerful than bard buffs (manyshot, for example).
2) The sorc that buffs you then insta-kills beholders from a distance has buffs that don't get dispelled by beholders
3) If you need buffs to kill a beholder, you need more than a bard can give you
4) There is one - count 'em, ONE - beholder in the game where not having buffs dispelled really makes a difference. This beholder appears twice. All the others are insta-killed, stoned, or completely neutered via optic nerves. And, mind you, this beholder is generally killed by clerics and casters, who really don't care about that extra damage swinging their potency item.
5) Spellsinger is great. But is it really saving mana? Take 5 sorcs, all with 2000 SP. 10% savings to each means a total of 1000 SP saved. Which suggests you'd be better off with the 2000 SP from another sorc... and really, how many 5 caster/1 bard parties do you see? Not to mention, of course, the fatal flaw in this argument: a cleric can provide DVs.

1) Manyshot is probably the only boost you'll ever see that comes close to full-time bard buffs. It lasts 20 seconds once every 2 minutes. Now imagine how much better manyshot is with bard buffs active...

2) Beholders (and really all mobs in DDO) aren't dangerous if they aren't aggroed. Being able to kill a non-aggroed beholder is not really remarkable at all. I've seen how well sorcs, clerics, and other casters perform after a beholder is aggroed. It hasn't been pretty. And, btw, enervation doesn't currently generate aggro in the game. A bard could enervate and FoD/FtS a beholder the same way any other caster without enlarge could (actually a bard could fascinate first, making the possibility of aggro nil).

3) Actually, the boosts to damage, hit bonus, and fort save of bard buffs will take most so-so fighters and barbarians into beholder killer range. It in fact doesn't require much more than a bard can provide.

5) The bard saves the 5 casters 1000 sp, not counting the improved DC savings, and has 1000 sp of his own (using your maxxed out values). He/she also provides spells and higher UMD values for healing. I think you've done an excellent job of proving that 5 sorcerors should basically look for a spellsinger bard every time.

However, I think we've gotten off the beaten path. Yes, bards have things they can do that no other class can. So does every other class. Rogues are the only class in the game who can disable traps. Are they therefore the uber class that should be a part of every party? Wizards are the only class that can cast every arcane spell in the game. Are they therefore the uber class that should be a part of every party? The answers to these questions are quite evident... no.

I respect that bards have abilities that no other class has. However, this does not make them the uber class that should be a part of every party. This is painfully obvious in actual execution: of all the classes, bards are often the ones you see least in groups.

The fact that most parties don't carry a bard says more about the people playing than it does about the nature of the class.

[Strakeln]

The fact that most parties don't carry a bard says more about the people playing than it does about the nature of the class.

Since a lot of people's point of view seems to be that a bard's buffs make a party uber, I'll point out that this means a bard's contribution to a party is limited by the skills and abilities of the party.

In other words: the parties where a bard would contribute most are also the parties that need him least. Food for thought.

[Bilger]

Since a lot of people's point of view seems to be that a bard's buffs make a party uber, I'll point out that this means a bard's contribution to a party is limited by the skills and abilities of the party.

In other words: the parties where a bard would contribute most are also the parties that need him least. Food for thought.

A Bard contributes to any and all parties that they are in. NO MATTER the makeup. Raise, heal, buff, CC, DPS(Battle Bard), and many other ways could spend hours discussing this. From your posts you have no idea all that a bard brings and could do. So no matter what we say you are just going to not listen. Me personally will take a bard to fill out a party before an extra melee, caster, cleric or any other class.
Bards buffs do make a party better but in the end it comes down to the actual players ability to use them correctly.

[Blind_Skwerl]

Since a lot of people's point of view seems to be that a bard's buffs make a party uber, I'll point out that this means a bard's contribution to a party is limited by the skills and abilities of the party.

In other words: the parties where a bard would contribute most are also the parties that need him least. Food for thought.

This is skewed logic. Adding a component to other components makes a great product, therefore the original components must be great and in no need of each other to make the product. No matter how good your sugar is, it won't make a good cupcake without flour, oil, etc..

Truth is, there are a lot of parties that get by just fine without a bard. There are lots of parties that get by without clerics, casters, melees, rogues, battle-anythings, dps-whatevers. Having said this, I have been in parties where there were issues. We didn't have enough offensive oomph, our healer sucked, or the arcane was zerging around swinging a bastard sword and dying constantly. In situations like these, bring in a bard has made the difference between completing the quest or resurrecting out. This is where a bard contributes most. We can make a great party better, but more importantly, we can make a bad party functional. More food for thought.

[brshelton]

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...

is a 35 umd not high enough? my sorc will hit that with +2 tome and 7 fingered gloves

[Strakeln]

From your posts you have no idea all that a bard brings and could do.

You can continue to think this, but I do have and use a capped spellsinger bard to compliment characters on my main account. Bards are excellent 2nd account characters, specifically due to their adaptability and their enhanced ability to improve the abilities of others. Contrary to what you say, I'm acutely aware of exactly what a bard can do, and I find it nifty... but not the be-all-end-all to uberness like most people in the bard forums appear to think.

The way some here are talking, no party has ever been successful without a bard

[Blind_Skwerl]

is a 35 umd not high enough? my sorc will hit that with +2 tome and 7 fingered gloves

Nice umd. How'd you do that? My 34 charisma drow sorc hits 27 umd with the golden cartouche and max points into umd. with 7 fingered, I'd hit 29... still not enough to play healer IMO.