The bard's role certainly does evolve thru his career. Looks like you are
going thru levels now where you are spending most if not all of your time in
groups. That's what I did and really enjoyed myself from 20 thru 35.
Around 35, I figured out I could solo with fear chain and spent a lot of
time doing that or grouping with 1 or 2 others. By 40, I got into a guild
with alot of ppl my level and got back into groups and guild groups are
loads better than pickup groups. Also I began to get exposed to multiple
group expeditions.
As it has been pointed out, at the higher levels, in good guilds, all of the
bases are usually covered and the job of "filling in the gaps" that a bards
were good at in their 30's is no longer needed nor would they be very good
at it. By then, the bard's role is mana regen and resist & other buffing.
Once you get out of Lower Guk, bard's can deal some damage but really have
to limit their exposure to melee.
We may think that the bard dieing alot is some how heroic but I bet the
other classes think: "the dumb bard got himself killed again..." just like
we think about the dumb caster that nukes too early and too often. I should
have thought about this more when I was younger and probably done more to
not get killed and sometimes that means stepping out of the melee.
When I join a group to kill a dragon or hunt a god or clear a plane, I very
often hear: "oh good! we get a bard!" And yes this is from the casters
(clerics are casters btw). Bards are unique in that they can generate
something very valuable from nothing and replicate it widely. Mana. The
whole game is about using mana to detract from the opponents health points
faster than he can detract all of yours. One of the most important things
is assignment to groups. Getting the right mix of ppl together so that the
healer can keep them alive.
Mob <--- tank <--- healer <--- bard
Mob <--- caster <--- healer <--- bard
Someone mentioned that "you end up supporting the support classes." I
prefer to think of it as being the endless fuel supply that makes the whole
group more powerful. (Endless as long as you don't die.)
The high level monsters are so strong that you need 3 to 6 sometimes more
groups to kill them. The correct mix of classes is as important as the
number of people. No one group let alone person can do it without all of
the others. I guess the classes that "shine" the most are: cleric
(healing), monk (pulling), warrior (tanking), enchanter (crowd control) &
bard (mana). I think that all of the classes "feel weak" at the higher
levels. But this is due to the level difference between player and mob. I
wonder what Verant is thinking. Will there be "blues" and "yellows" that
single groups high 40's and lo 50's can handle.
To those of you who have not been on a multiple group event, you think it's
bad for the 'casual player' who does not want to spend 30 to 45 minutes
looking for a group. Think about doing a break-in where it takes 2 to 3
hours just to get everyone into the zone. Dragons are just as bad: an hour
or more to assemble 3 groups to clear giants. Another hour or more to
assemble the rest of the groups. An hour to buff everyone. And maybe 5
minutes to fight the dragon. Then an hour or more for CR and loot. And
then 2-4 hours or more to replace the exp you may have lost.
Like anything, the more you do it, the better you get. And then it gets
boring. Naggy? We did Vox last night can't we go kill Dojorn tonight?
Sylly
> From: Papa Legba <legba@...>
>
> This is my take on the bard's role, since this thread is sort of turning
> that way: I get most of this perspective leading a regular group as
> cleric (or in my football playing friend's words, I am the quarterback)
> We all think (with little doubt) that
> so far the least important char in our group is the wizard. She's a
> great player (remember how I said I never had to cast heals on her?
> Thats a pretty good sign of a good wizard), but I don;t think the group
> really hurts without her.