So your main argument against bards is that they have more opportunities to mess things up. Doesn’t that mean they inversely have more opportunities to make group changing plays? Every example you cited as a weakness is a benefit that can be gained through correct play.
Meanwhile you claim monks can’t screw things up that bad, to me that means they can’t add all that much. Personally I would prefer to have a properly played rogue and bard vs a monk and a bard.
Bard utility can’t be dismissed simply by saying it could go bad if played incorrectly. That is way to easy to dismantle
|