Marc Allie wrote:
<snip a lot of stuff I agree with>

Now we all agree that bards do not make a party - they make a
party better.

Now we just have to convince the rest of the world of this fact.

I had a similar argument regarding the usefullness of a bard with
a friend of mine who groups with other friends of mine who have
long since passed my grouping range (unlike some other people, I
cannot spend every waking moment playin EQ 8).

Her party - SK, cleric, monk, warrior, enchanter.
Would she rather have, as an additional party member, a bard or
another class?
Answer: I'd like another tank.

People just don't seem to realise the immense value a bard can
bring to a well balance party (or even one that is not so well-
balanced!).

Of course, playing a bard when your party is mob-chasing is
dangerous at best - everything that is not being attacked by
the party (and in a good party I believe this will be everything
except the ONE creature being attacked) will attack the bard.
This makes it necessary for the other party members to divert
their attacks from the primary target of the moment and get the
attention of the ones waiting to die, who are attacking the poor
bard.

This is the main weakness to a bard as I see it.
If your party is taking on monoliths, then you have no problem, but
in a mob-hunt, you are dead meat.

Rocket