-----Original Message-----
From: John Kim <kim@...>
To: eqbards@onelist.com <eqbards@onelist.com>
Date: Friday, May 28, 1999 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: [eqbards] Will the Bard get better....

>From: John Kim <kim@...>
>
>On Fri, 28 May 1999, Lynn Uhlman wrote:
>>
>> i love my lvl 15 bard but when i comes to dishing out
>> damage in a battle i am weak. I know the bard class is
>> not designed to be a warrior, but for example, i bought a
>> mino axe at lvl 9, i still dishes the same amount of
>> damage now at lvl 15 as it did at lvl 9 except for the
>> below song and it only does 8 damage.
>
>I don't think we're that bad off at melee. We use the same
>weapon as a warrior/ranger/paladin. With the Whistling
>Warsong, you get a 15%-20% attack speedup based on research I
>and someone else have done. That btw is more than the
>difference between a combine longsword and a well-balanced
>longsword, and is like hitting for about 3 extra points damage
>with a 17 point hit from a minotaur axe. The same song also
>buffs our str and AC. Our bellow takes the place of a kick.
>And at L17 we get dual wield. Our melee skills are weaker
>than the melee classes, but IMHO the difference is only just
>starting to become apparent at L17. (The biggest difference I
>see is with my warrior friend, but he has double attack as
>well).
>

The way I see it, we are (as in so many things) better than some,
worse than others. In melee we are out done (damage wise) by
warriors, monks, rangers, rogues, paladins and shadow knights
(no particular order), but we out do clerics, druids, shamans and
the 4 mage classes. Right in the middle.

The thing some people on the a.g.eq newsgroup don't seem to
accept is that, while we can do many things, there is always
somebody (or many bodys) who can do a given thing better.

Tindayen