We need Instruments

Cannon · 11-21-2007, 12:20 PM

I think the devs really need to look at adding instruments for the bard classes. Not just this fluff ones but actual instruments with stats and roles to be had. Make the a charm slot item. I have seen plenty of charms geared toward fighters, mages and scouts but why not do one better I think they should really bring this back. Add an equipable effect to it. So if I equip a drum the drum will show.

Vendetta · 11-21-2007, 01:51 PM

its in the sticky

coming LU83 SMILEY

Cannon · 11-21-2007, 02:03 PM

Thats a joke right. LU83 is like 4 exp. away!

Vendetta · 11-21-2007, 02:07 PM

yes, its a joke...although you make a quite good point about it being charm slot instead of previously mentioned primary or secondary slot

maybe some day, we can only hope

Kulaf · 11-22-2007, 07:06 AM

"We need Instruments"

Whenever I see this I always ask........why?

Why do we "need" them? If it is for RP reasons.....then the graphical depictions we have now should be more than sufficient. If it is for power reasons.....then to get you have to give. This of course assumes that the devs currently consider us balanced with other classes wihtout instruments.

So be careful what you ask for......or this could turn into music mods from EQ1 where you need to gain equipment just to be "balanced" with other classes that don't.

Loresong the Bard · 11-24-2007, 10:26 AM

There is a large draw to the instruments from EQ1 days. The enhanced the effect of our spells as our AA now does. I too am one for instruments and make them stat-less. Just make them craft or rare drop only with enhancements to our buffs. Like run speed, regen, and give us back our AoE dmg ticks. I so loved running into guards and being murdered. It was half the fun of the Bard!

Seriously, though, they would serve an actual purpose. Enhancements on songs that don't have enhancements or could feasibly be enhanced without throwing the class (im)balances out of whack. Give them a drawback with the enhancement. Make it primarily for use with groups, and are pretty ineffective while soloing. Instruments could actually add that lovely little layer of happiness that us bards so lack.

And that, my dear Troubs, was my two cents.

hayaikaze · 11-28-2007, 04:21 PM

I played Vanguard for a while and instruments were a blast in that game for bards.

Perhaps one day the devs can get to this. In vanguard having a drum equipted would increase speed (there were a ton of cool drums in the game). Having a wind instrument would enhance another stat (power for example), string instruments would enhance dps, brass instruments another stat, etc. Perhaps in eq2 they could go in a charm slot to be used only by bards.

It was so much fun to play, as you constantly used a macro to change instruments depending on the situation/group need.

Putting a system like this in eq2 might make the bard class more popular than any other. We all know it needs some rejuvinating!!

Daedelous · 12-03-2007, 07:57 AM

It would be nice to make us more "bard-like". Our "songs" are pretty much just spells, and we have no instruments. What, exactly, makes us a bard in this game then? Add some bardish abilities. Some previously mentioned ideas sound good.

Kulaf · 12-03-2007, 09:00 AM

The wierd thing about class differentiation is......the more people want to be "unique"......the more they want to be the "same". Everyone wants cool effects that make them more powerful......but don't want to pay any price to get them. If we are currently "balanced", what are you willing to give up for increased utility from instruments? Or from "bard-like" abilities?

If you want to give up some melee power for more spell power from instruments.....then expect a great wailing and gnashing of teeth from another segment of the Troub community who doesn't want to lose said melee power.

Better to continue what they are doing like lowering the recast on certain abilities with equipment or removing the concentration requirement from a song if you have enough items in a set.

missing_peace · 12-03-2007, 02:02 PM

Kulanae@Blackburrow wrote:

If we are currently "balanced", what are you willing to give up for increased utility from instruments? Or from "bard-like" abilities?

Ah, but bards are not balanced at all. Bards do not have stances, nor do they use poisons like other scouts. Bards lack the offensive and defensive capabilities of most all other classes in the game. The tradeoff for this was supposed to be the elusive 'utility' that such classes have. However, lots of classes have utility and they do not appear to sacrifice anything.

Instruments could be used to fix a lot of the gaps in the class design. There is nothing that needs to be taken away from bards. If instruments are not added, then there are still changes that need to be made so that bards are more viable.

Cannon · 12-03-2007, 02:59 PM

missing_peace wrote:

Kulanae@Blackburrow wrote:
If we are currently "balanced", what are you willing to give up for increased utility from instruments? Or from "bard-like" abilities?
Ah, but bards are not balanced at all. Bards do not have stances, nor do they use poisons like other scouts. Bards lack the offensive and defensive capabilities of most all other classes in the game. The tradeoff for this was supposed to be the elusive 'utility' that such classes have. However, lots of classes have utility and they do not appear to sacrifice anything.
Instruments could be used to fix a lot of the gaps in the class design. There is nothing that needs to be taken away from bards. If instruments are not added, then there are still changes that need to be made so that bards are more viable.

I see your point but we also need to be our own character as well. I mean Plate tanks can take the heavy damage and top the DPS charts. Leather Tanks have high agi and can put out some serious DPS as well, same can be seen with other clases as well I mean come on now you have to have a Swashie or Brigand tank mobs on ocasions and they still put out sick dps. I would just like something that defines the bard class. Giving us items that go in the charm slot specific to our class is not asking to much they dont have to have stats maybe just and effect. Thus we gain and we lose. I mean they took our speed away from us. GIVE US SOMETHING PLEASE SMILEY

Jehannum · 12-04-2007, 11:49 AM

Okay, let's examine something that was said in this thread... SMILEY

The tradeoff in the utility. That's a mouthful, it really is.

Is there another class (other than our brethren the dirges) who can can cast a majority of their CAs and spells, on the run, and at range?

Is there, therefore, another class (with the same exception) which is capable of tight-loop kiting?

Is there another class (same deal) who can achieve a consistent in-combat runspeed such that they can effectively kite normal-speed mobs in a large ring and never risk being hit (except by adds)?

Is there another class, other than enchanters who have their own deficiencies as balance, which can charm or mez a mob when an encounter is going south, whether it be solo or group content?

With casters (and scouts) doing their thing a lot more often in Kunark, it actually becomes valuable to have a mezzer rather than a rooter; while I wouldn't argue specifically against a boost for some of our defensive/damage abilities, claiming that our utility is difficult to see is either ignorant or disingenuous. Now that you know, it's just disingenuous. SMILEY

Cannon · 12-04-2007, 12:50 PM

I know you are not calling that 9 second wanna be charm actually usefull for charming? It is more or less just a quick and glorified mez that may save you some aggrivation.

I mean rangers can charm animal creatures alot longer then we can. They can also control their charmed mob.

Did you ever have the original charm for troubs? I don't mind giving up a conc spot for a charmed mob and it lasted about 3 minutes. It is worth alot more then this "Glorified Mez" that we get now. To your in combat run speed. You really need to rethink its benifits. Most mobs in Kunark will still hit you. I meant the hill giants alone there have a big enough range. And just running around in a circle does not work that well any more the mobs are smarter and will cut you off unless you are running around an object.

I don't want to get into a who said who match with you. What I was trying to do is spice up the troub/dirge class talk with what we all would like to see. Don't call some one disingenuous because you don't agree with what is being said. This is a public forum for people to sound of on their class not on others.

Jehannum · 12-04-2007, 01:32 PM

Actually, I was specifically thinking about the Kunark mobs I was outrunning last night doing precisely the large-ring kiting to which I referred. I was kiting cockatrices and scorps for quests, and often got adds of rhinos, scorpikis and cockatrices. When that happened, I'd cease snaring (despite the drop in damage) and use large-ring kiting techniques. None caught up. When I have issues with mobs catching up it's usually not a problem to cheap shot, shield bash or AE-knockdown that mob.

I'd grant, though, that the trick doesn't work as well in water, and that mobs with large attack ranges may require additional stunning (though snaring usually takes care of that too)

My point was (and remains) that claiming other classes have more utility and that we require rebalancing is disingenuous in light of our breadth of capability.

"The tradeoff for this was supposed to be the elusive 'utility' that such classes have. However, lots of classes have utility and they do not appear to sacrifice anything." This is not a justification for change. People have different utility, and blanket statements like this are meaningless due to their lack of specificity. Even a claim that two specific classes have a relative balance issue requires a holistic comparison of benefits, issues and synergies as well as a situational awareness of how things change solo vs grouped vs duo'd vs raiding, and potentially even more granular than that. Frankly, as players we just don't have the tools to make those comparisons, but if we intend to establish a need or justification, the onus is on us to establish the specific comparison as valid.

Tanks with utility sacrifice durability. Healers with utility sacrifice healing potency. Clothies with utility sacrifice raw dps. Scouts with utility (us and rogues) sacrifice dps for either tanking ability or massive breadth of marginal utility. If we're going to argue about our utility, it does no good to denigrate the payments others do make for their utility. Arguing that they pay less and receive more may be legitimate, but that doesn't make for quite such an interesting discussion I suppose.

missing_peace · 12-04-2007, 03:49 PM

Jehannum

I think that you have mistaken a response to a particular point for a 'bard's suck!' post. My response was to a specific point from a previous post and is meant to be taken within that context. It is also meant to stay within the larger context of adding instruments for the bard classes.

My post was a response to a point given by Kulanae@Blackburrow. The base point is that if bards are currently balanced, then what must be taken away in order to be given instruments? My response essentially states that I think that most players would not agree that bards are balanced. A number of the standard abilities given to classes are absent from bards and in place they have been given abilities that, collectively, are referred to as 'utility'. But, utility is situational, difficult to balance and often of no more than marginal value. Thus, I refer to it as 'elusive'. I have never in all my years of playing seen a well balanced 'utility' class.

Within the greater context of adding instruments, I then proceed to say that instruments could be used to address the shortcomings of the classes, but that there is really nothing that needs to be taken away for balance purposes. After all, most all classes in this game have utility. Most of them have access to the same kinds of utility as bards and many have more powerful versions of that utility as well. The conclusion being that bards still lack the abilities of other classes, but also do not have 'better' utility, only a wider selection of utility. Instruments could make that utility better if they were to be implemented for that reason. Even if instruments are never implemented, then bards still have issues that need to be resolved.

If you wish to argue that this is somehow not the case, then I will be happy to debate you on the topic. However, I think that you should avoid using kiting as an example of utility. It's not utility at all, it's a tactic.

11-21-2007, 12:20 PM	#1
Cannon Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 70	I think the devs really need to look at adding instruments for the bard classes. Not just this fluff ones but actual instruments with stats and roles to be had. Make the a charm slot item. I have seen plenty of charms geared toward fighters, mages and scouts but why not do one better I think they should really bring this back. Add an equipable effect to it. So if I equip a drum the drum will show. __________________

11-21-2007, 01:51 PM	#2
Vendetta Apprentice Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 15	its in the sticky coming LU83 __________________

11-21-2007, 02:03 PM	#3
Cannon Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 70	Thats a joke right. LU83 is like 4 exp. away! __________________

11-21-2007, 02:07 PM	#4
Vendetta Apprentice Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 15	yes, its a joke...although you make a quite good point about it being charm slot instead of previously mentioned primary or secondary slot maybe some day, we can only hope __________________

11-22-2007, 07:06 AM	#5
Kulaf Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 387	"We need Instruments" Whenever I see this I always ask........why? Why do we "need" them? If it is for RP reasons.....then the graphical depictions we have now should be more than sufficient. If it is for power reasons.....then to get you have to give. This of course assumes that the devs currently consider us balanced with other classes wihtout instruments. So be careful what you ask for......or this could turn into music mods from EQ1 where you need to gain equipment just to be "balanced" with other classes that don't. __________________

11-24-2007, 10:26 AM	#6
Loresong the Bard Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Fresno, CA Posts: 18	There is a large draw to the instruments from EQ1 days. The enhanced the effect of our spells as our AA now does. I too am one for instruments and make them stat-less. Just make them craft or rare drop only with enhancements to our buffs. Like run speed, regen, and give us back our AoE dmg ticks. I so loved running into guards and being murdered. It was half the fun of the Bard! Seriously, though, they would serve an actual purpose. Enhancements on songs that don't have enhancements or could feasibly be enhanced without throwing the class (im)balances out of whack. Give them a drawback with the enhancement. Make it primarily for use with groups, and are pretty ineffective while soloing. Instruments could actually add that lovely little layer of happiness that us bards so lack. And that, my dear Troubs, was my two cents. __________________ Please... Flame Me. Just when you thought it was safe to post... HAMBURGERS! Loresong Symphonia - 52 Troubador of Venekor And you thought Troubadors didn't exist. Silly Freeps, get mezzed.

11-28-2007, 04:21 PM	#7
hayaikaze Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 147	I played Vanguard for a while and instruments were a blast in that game for bards. Perhaps one day the devs can get to this. In vanguard having a drum equipted would increase speed (there were a ton of cool drums in the game). Having a wind instrument would enhance another stat (power for example), string instruments would enhance dps, brass instruments another stat, etc. Perhaps in eq2 they could go in a charm slot to be used only by bards. It was so much fun to play, as you constantly used a macro to change instruments depending on the situation/group need. Putting a system like this in eq2 might make the bard class more popular than any other. We all know it needs some rejuvinating!!

12-03-2007, 07:57 AM	#8
Daedelous Loremaster Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 4	It would be nice to make us more "bard-like". Our "songs" are pretty much just spells, and we have no instruments. What, exactly, makes us a bard in this game then? Add some bardish abilities. Some previously mentioned ideas sound good.

12-03-2007, 09:00 AM	#9
Kulaf Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 387	The wierd thing about class differentiation is......the more people want to be "unique"......the more they want to be the "same". Everyone wants cool effects that make them more powerful......but don't want to pay any price to get them. If we are currently "balanced", what are you willing to give up for increased utility from instruments? Or from "bard-like" abilities? If you want to give up some melee power for more spell power from instruments.....then expect a great wailing and gnashing of teeth from another segment of the Troub community who doesn't want to lose said melee power. Better to continue what they are doing like lowering the recast on certain abilities with equipment or removing the concentration requirement from a song if you have enough items in a set. __________________

12-03-2007, 02:02 PM	#10
missing_peace Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 90	Kulanae@Blackburrow wrote: If we are currently "balanced", what are you willing to give up for increased utility from instruments? Or from "bard-like" abilities? Ah, but bards are not balanced at all. Bards do not have stances, nor do they use poisons like other scouts. Bards lack the offensive and defensive capabilities of most all other classes in the game. The tradeoff for this was supposed to be the elusive 'utility' that such classes have. However, lots of classes have utility and they do not appear to sacrifice anything. Instruments could be used to fix a lot of the gaps in the class design. There is nothing that needs to be taken away from bards. If instruments are not added, then there are still changes that need to be made so that bards are more viable.

12-03-2007, 02:59 PM	#11
Cannon Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 70	missing_peace wrote: Kulanae@Blackburrow wrote: If we are currently "balanced", what are you willing to give up for increased utility from instruments? Or from "bard-like" abilities? Ah, but bards are not balanced at all. Bards do not have stances, nor do they use poisons like other scouts. Bards lack the offensive and defensive capabilities of most all other classes in the game. The tradeoff for this was supposed to be the elusive 'utility' that such classes have. However, lots of classes have utility and they do not appear to sacrifice anything. Instruments could be used to fix a lot of the gaps in the class design. There is nothing that needs to be taken away from bards. If instruments are not added, then there are still changes that need to be made so that bards are more viable. I see your point but we also need to be our own character as well. I mean Plate tanks can take the heavy damage and top the DPS charts. Leather Tanks have high agi and can put out some serious DPS as well, same can be seen with other clases as well I mean come on now you have to have a Swashie or Brigand tank mobs on ocasions and they still put out sick dps. I would just like something that defines the bard class. Giving us items that go in the charm slot specific to our class is not asking to much they dont have to have stats maybe just and effect. Thus we gain and we lose. I mean they took our speed away from us. GIVE US SOMETHING PLEASE __________________

12-04-2007, 11:49 AM	#12
Jehannum Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 651	Okay, let's examine something that was said in this thread... The tradeoff in the utility. That's a mouthful, it really is. Is there another class (other than our brethren the dirges) who can can cast a majority of their CAs and spells, on the run, and at range? Is there, therefore, another class (with the same exception) which is capable of tight-loop kiting? Is there another class (same deal) who can achieve a consistent in-combat runspeed such that they can effectively kite normal-speed mobs in a large ring and never risk being hit (except by adds)? Is there another class, other than enchanters who have their own deficiencies as balance, which can charm or mez a mob when an encounter is going south, whether it be solo or group content? With casters (and scouts) doing their thing a lot more often in Kunark, it actually becomes valuable to have a mezzer rather than a rooter; while I wouldn't argue specifically against a boost for some of our defensive/damage abilities, claiming that our utility is difficult to see is either ignorant or disingenuous. Now that you know, it's just disingenuous.

12-04-2007, 12:50 PM	#13
Cannon Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 70	I know you are not calling that 9 second wanna be charm actually usefull for charming? It is more or less just a quick and glorified mez that may save you some aggrivation. I mean rangers can charm animal creatures alot longer then we can. They can also control their charmed mob. Did you ever have the original charm for troubs? I don't mind giving up a conc spot for a charmed mob and it lasted about 3 minutes. It is worth alot more then this "Glorified Mez" that we get now. To your in combat run speed. You really need to rethink its benifits. Most mobs in Kunark will still hit you. I meant the hill giants alone there have a big enough range. And just running around in a circle does not work that well any more the mobs are smarter and will cut you off unless you are running around an object. I don't want to get into a who said who match with you. What I was trying to do is spice up the troub/dirge class talk with what we all would like to see. Don't call some one disingenuous because you don't agree with what is being said. This is a public forum for people to sound of on their class not on others. __________________

12-04-2007, 01:32 PM	#14
Jehannum Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 651	Actually, I was specifically thinking about the Kunark mobs I was outrunning last night doing precisely the large-ring kiting to which I referred. I was kiting cockatrices and scorps for quests, and often got adds of rhinos, scorpikis and cockatrices. When that happened, I'd cease snaring (despite the drop in damage) and use large-ring kiting techniques. None caught up. When I have issues with mobs catching up it's usually not a problem to cheap shot, shield bash or AE-knockdown that mob. I'd grant, though, that the trick doesn't work as well in water, and that mobs with large attack ranges may require additional stunning (though snaring usually takes care of that too) My point was (and remains) that claiming other classes have more utility and that we require rebalancing is disingenuous in light of our breadth of capability. "The tradeoff for this was supposed to be the elusive 'utility' that such classes have. However, lots of classes have utility and they do not appear to sacrifice anything." This is not a justification for change. People have different utility, and blanket statements like this are meaningless due to their lack of specificity. Even a claim that two specific classes have a relative balance issue requires a holistic comparison of benefits, issues and synergies as well as a situational awareness of how things change solo vs grouped vs duo'd vs raiding, and potentially even more granular than that. Frankly, as players we just don't have the tools to make those comparisons, but if we intend to establish a need or justification, the onus is on us to establish the specific comparison as valid. Tanks with utility sacrifice durability. Healers with utility sacrifice healing potency. Clothies with utility sacrifice raw dps. Scouts with utility (us and rogues) sacrifice dps for either tanking ability or massive breadth of marginal utility. If we're going to argue about our utility, it does no good to denigrate the payments others do make for their utility. Arguing that they pay less and receive more may be legitimate, but that doesn't make for quite such an interesting discussion I suppose.

12-04-2007, 03:49 PM	#15
missing_peace Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 90	Jehannum I think that you have mistaken a response to a particular point for a 'bard's suck!' post. My response was to a specific point from a previous post and is meant to be taken within that context. It is also meant to stay within the larger context of adding instruments for the bard classes. My post was a response to a point given by Kulanae@Blackburrow. The base point is that if bards are currently balanced, then what must be taken away in order to be given instruments? My response essentially states that I think that most players would not agree that bards are balanced. A number of the standard abilities given to classes are absent from bards and in place they have been given abilities that, collectively, are referred to as 'utility'. But, utility is situational, difficult to balance and often of no more than marginal value. Thus, I refer to it as 'elusive'. I have never in all my years of playing seen a well balanced 'utility' class. Within the greater context of adding instruments, I then proceed to say that instruments could be used to address the shortcomings of the classes, but that there is really nothing that needs to be taken away for balance purposes. After all, most all classes in this game have utility. Most of them have access to the same kinds of utility as bards and many have more powerful versions of that utility as well. The conclusion being that bards still lack the abilities of other classes, but also do not have 'better' utility, only a wider selection of utility. Instruments could make that utility better if they were to be implemented for that reason. Even if instruments are never implemented, then bards still have issues that need to be resolved. If you wish to argue that this is somehow not the case, then I will be happy to debate you on the topic. However, I think that you should avoid using kiting as an example of utility. It's not utility at all, it's a tactic.