[<a href='21798.html'>Next Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='21796.html'>Previous Message in Time</a>] | 
[<a href='21798.html'>Next Message in Topic</a>] | 
[<a href='21796.html'>Previous Message in Topic</a>] <br/><br/>
<b>Message ID:</b> 21797 <br/>
<b>Date:</b> Wed Oct 11 21:00:58 BST 2000 <br/>
<b>Author:</b> Jeffrey Sue <br/>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [eqbards] Abashi finally responds... sort of <br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1070656635">At 01:30 PM 10/11/00 -0500, you wrote:<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="ireply"> &gt;Despite every flame you&#39;ve made at anyone who disagrees with you - I find no<br/>
&gt;compelling argument you&#39;ve made that bards are equally balanced as the more<br/>
&gt;powerful classes in the game (not that Bards are the only underpowered<br/>
&gt;class...)<br/>
&gt;<br/>
&gt;Slyde<br/>
<br/>
 </span></blockquote>that kind of depends on what your definition of balanced is.  if your definition<br/>
of balanced is &#39;&#39;can do the exact same things as&#39;&#39; or &#39;&#39;can get the exact same<br/>
experience as in the same amount of time solo&#39;&#39; then of course you will see<br/>
bards as underpowered.  but a bard (played well) is much more of an asset<br/>
in any dungeon than a druid overall.  a bard can solo much better than a warrior<br/>
or paladin.  a bard is not as good as an enchanter in very hi level situations, i.e.<br/>
53+.  a bard can&#39;t solo quite as well as a druid.  seems like we have lots of options<br/>
and while we may not be the best at any one thing we are pretty darn good at<br/>
a lot of them, at least as far as i can tell up to 53.  maybe at 56 or 57 we turn<br/>
more one dimensional but i haven&#39;t seen it yet.</div>