No, but since our mez spells are effectively useless a mere 5 levels after
we get them, why give them to us at all? Even before the change we were in
no way as effective as an enchanter in mezzing. Not even close. We went
from being an acceptable secondary choice to being no longer available as an
option where mezzing was required.
-----Original Message-----
From: John Tatsukawa [mailto:
john@...]
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2000 1:19 PM
To:
eqbards@egroups.com;
eqbards@egroups.com
Subject: RE: [eqbards] Abashi finally responds... sort of
I don't think you'd have to be a level 50 bard to be able to give opinions
of a bard's usefulness. Each level of a bard should be considered when
making an evaluation. I remember groups loving my level 10 bard and how
little downtime the group experienced with Hymn. That's probably the best
thing I feel about bards is their ability to reduce downtime.
Not that I agree with Kitasi about bards being totally nerfed to the point
of ineffectiveness. Verant has stated that the Bard's mezmerize will never
be as effective as an enchanters. As a matter of fact, at level 40 in City
of Mist, I can really only effectively reduce the number of mobs attacking
my group by 1 (with charm) and have him attack a mob that is currently
being engaged by my group. Unlike an enchanter, who would be able to
effectively mez 2 or 3 of them. It does seem that the higher level up a
bard goes, the less effective a crowd controller they become.
I still have a lot of fun with my 40 bard. I still am mostly in pickup
groups (part time bard who only plays at most 3 hours) and those groups all
love having me. Most don't realize I can charm and help with crowd control
(of course they all know about clarity). I did some pulling (lament still
works nicely), some charming mobs off of our healer, and then battle
buffing. When there's not an enchanter around, the tanks all pray for my
Celerity to speed their attack.
BTW, after I told my enchanter friend about how lousy bard mez is, he
mentioned that they should at least give bards a way to slow down the mobs
attack. I laughed and said that we get both target and AOE slow down songs.
I haven't sung Largo's in a long time, due to aggro problems. But I may
throw that in the mix and see how it works.
Anyway, if you really wanted to play a character that is the best of class
in what they do, then a bard is not for you. Bards are versatile and can
help every group they join. I find I have to tell my groups what I'm doing
for them to give them a better appreciation.
Lastly, I really thank those who posted some of their various "macros" for
weaving. I've found that the one for "Hymn and Clarity" weaving for
downtime is great. My weary fingers thank you!
---Windleaf
At 11:27 AM 10/11/00 -0700, Jeffrey Sue wrote:
>heh, the bard's flexibility only increases up to about level 52. once you
>start fighting
>52+ mobs, you lose the ability to crowd control with charm. so you made
>it all the
>way to 31 and make sweeping generalizations about the flexibility and
>effectiveness
>of a bard?
>
>
>At 09:57 AM 10/11/00 -0600, you wrote:
> >I think the 'at some point' means when they are working on EQ2. It was
very
> >apparent that nothing that is related to bards is even remotely 'high
> >priority'. Bards are at this point pretty much 'one hit wonders'. If it
> >were not for manasong the only groups we'd be getting into would be those
> >with our friends. Bards have become the most 'group oriented' kiting
> >enabled class imaginable. Every reason I had for playing a bard in the
> >beginning has been systematically taken away, other than the role-playing
> >aspect. But hey! my druid can hold a mandolin as well as anybody!
>
>ummm, by this standard you would never be getting into groups since you
don't
>have manasong. but taking a step back and looking at all the classes,
outside
>of clerics and enchanters, what class has an ''in'' to get into a group
>over all other
>classes? none.
>
> >Seriously though. I played a bard because of the tactical flexibility.
> >There was actually a choice of which songs to use in which circumstances
and
> >at what times. When was it better to Lullaby, when to Chords? When was
it
> >better to Anthem, and when Psalm? Those days have gone by as each and
every
>
>and you really have all those choices still at level 31. as far as i
>know, chords,
>anthem, and psalm, as well as hymn, charm, fear, etc all work just fine.
i've
>never had the problems with pixie that other bards complain about. i was a
>mezzing machine in solb on beetles and ldc's at level 50ish.
>
> >tactical option is deleted or made unusable. I never Chain unless alone
> >snare is now far better and only level 1! I never Lullaby unless it's to
>
>you never chain unless alone? maybe you just don't understand the
flexibility
>of a bard then.
>
> >help some newbie, and even then it's pretty pathetic. I've given up
trying
> >to Pixie anything, better to just charm it and be 'protected' when the
spell
> >goes off. Verant has successfully taken 90% of the things I loved about
> >bards and killed them. All because of some 'balance' issue that never
>
>90%? heh, nice exaggeration. i suppose if the ONLY things you liked about
>a bard was snaring and crowd control this might be true. i personally
>like a lot
>more things about my bard. just as a side note, what is your cha and do
you
>use a wind instrument when using pixie?
>
> >existed. If bards were so powerful, how come we've always been among the
> >rarest classes in a game that's all about power???
>
>because our power is nicely masked. you have to be a good player and
>understand
>a lot about our songs and the way the game works and other classes before
>you can
>be that superpowerful bard. most people either don't stick with it long
>enough or don't
>have enough knowledge to really master the bard class.
>
>
> > Kitasi, lvl 31 tailor, retired bard
>
>
>Please send submissions for the eqbards newsletter to lol@...
>with the subject submissions.
Please send submissions for the eqbards newsletter to
lol@...
with the subject submissions.