>Other than the four skills that you mentioned (Dual Wield, Double Attack,
Kick, Bash), there are a large
>number of other factors that affect melee damage that Bards do not get:
STR-based damage increase,
>critical hits, that new thingie that Warriors get (crippling damage?), Monk
special attacks, Backstabs.
Actually, we do get STR-based damage increases. Our STR tends to not be on
par with a real tank's, because of the other stats we have to be conscious
of, but the higher a bard's STR, the harder we'll hit with a given weapon.
Are you referring to a different STR bonus?
The critical hits are nice, but I tend to consider them as procs. The
Crippling Blow is nice, but my understanding is that Warriors need to be
below a certain Health threshold for this to kick in, which they usually
won't stay at (if they're that low, a healer is gonna be healing them). Is
that understanding incorrect? And yes, I'll concur that monks and rogues
are just badasses (I consider them to be the melee version of a nuker).
>The fact that we get Dual Wield and that other hybrids get Dual
Wield/Double Attack (plus Kick, Bash,
>Slam, whatever) means that they ALL do significantly more damage than we
do. And don't even begin to talk
>about the three pure melee classes.
Kick/Bash/Slam contributes even less than a bellow every third twist would,
from what I've seen, when speaking of outright damage.
>I logged some fights between level 43 and 45 just to get a feel for things,
and I estimated that Bards do
>about 50% of the melee damage that other hybrids do, and about 25% of the
melee damage of the three pure
>melee characters. That was including my dual Ykesha procs. Btw, using
"similar weapons" is not really a
50% of a ranger's damage is not insignificant in my mind, considering he
gets double attack. Again, though, you used the magic word "estimated."
I'm looking for numbers (if you still have the logs around) -- I want to
know that X class at level L does Y damage per second against a mob of level
Z, gathered from N fights. I'm stubborn/anal that way ;).
>good measure; weapon selection is part of the ability to do damage, and the
fact that weapons are
>class-limited gives advantages to classes with good class-specific weapons.
Oh yeah, Bards don't GET
>any... The amount that a Bard contributes to melee shrinks drastically as
he and his groupmates go up in
>level.
Good point on the weapons. (Except for rangers, of course... they're
typically dual wielding Ykeshas and EBW's just like us, until they get their
planes weapons.)
>PS - Given that Verant's design intent re: Bards was to make a class that
significantly augmented groups,
>and that they balance this by making them weak soloers, one would like to
think that Bards would be one of
>the first classes that a large (4-6) group would look for. We're way down
on any list that I've seen.
>What does that tell you?
Actually, I often hear shouts in Guk and Sol to the effect of "Enchanter or
Bard wanted." I get invites often for dragon raids, planes raids, and Kedge
outtings. Of course, it's usually because they want one of the Clarity
forms or to break a room. Also, there are more bards coming of age these
days, and a group generally won't have more than one bard (unlike tanks or
casters).
On a side note, the new Chant upgrades should make life a bit easier for the
kiting-solo bard.
Raiel