I'm have to argue semantics here. You effectively argue that we are
powerful - and even "not-underpowered". The power you describe here is one
that makes it easy for us to get into groups - especially given the small
number of bards in general. The Druids and Rangers in my guild get
frustrated at how much more difficult it is for them to get in groups in,
say Karnor - while I get often get tells asking me if I'm a group (even when
I don't have LFG flag on).
Arguing semantically even further - I could argue you have made not a single
argument towards power - only versatility - but that would pretty much be
arguing for arguing sake - I think you DO make a good arugment that bards
aren't underpowered and are consistently powerful vis-├á-vis other classes.
On the other hand, I have yet to see an effective argument by you or anyone
else that bards are "Over" Powered. To be "Over Powered" would imply that
the class needs to be "nerfed". If we were overpowered - you would often
see people say "we can't start this group until we have a bard". I've seen
this said about clerics, enchanters, even Shaman, but never Bards.
Slyde

Whee Wrote:
i almost never solo. i mean we are over powered with respect to other
classes in a group
setting, more so in broken groups than cle/enc/war groups, but the fact that
we can
make a group without a cleric, enchanter, OR warrior able to go deep into
sebilis or
howling stones or karnors seems pretty powerful to me.