How are Bards in the DPS department?

[Ephirith]

Rogue > Monk >/= Warrior > Ranger > SK > Bard >/= Paladin

[Lazortag]

Originally Posted by Ephirith [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Rogue > Monk >/= Warrior > Ranger > SK > Bard >/= Paladin

Is that abomination supposed to be a "greater than or equal to" sign? If so, do you really think Monks and Warriors have comparable dps?

[Flash]

Originally Posted by Lazortag [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Is that abomination supposed to be a "greater than or equal to" sign? If so, do you really think Monks and Warriors have comparable dps?

Monks have high-damage kicks, but Warriors have Crits. Both have Double Attack and Dual Wield. I'd say it's pretty close.

[Flash]

That's more attributed to people buying stocks on credit and running up debt, painting the tape (advertising stocks to be more valuable/profitable than they actually are), and the knowledge that human beings panic and act recklessly when something goes wrong.

[Taminy]

Yes a warrior probably won't beat a monk DPS wise on average, but they can during some fights. At level 60.

Also in addition to crits (and crips if you're intentionally zerking) level 60 warriors have triple attack. Monks do not have triple attack. That's why monk weapons have better ratios than warrior ones. A warrior with a staff of battle will do more dps than a monk with a staff of battle.

[ThothAmon]

Originally Posted by Taminy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes a warrior probably won't beat a monk DPS wise on average, but they can during some fights. At level 60.

Also in addition to crits (and crips if you're intentionally zerking) level 60 warriors have triple attack. Monks do not have triple attack. That's why monk weapons have better ratios than warrior ones. A warrior with a staff of battle will do more dps than a monk with a staff of battle.

I thought Monks got triple attack at 60, also their attacks used the same damage table as a 60 warrior at 55, then a better damage table of their own at 60.

[Extunarian]

Originally Posted by ThothAmon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I thought Monks got triple attack at 60, also their attacks used the same damage table as a 60 warrior at 55, then a better damage table of their own at 60.

Monks were given triple attack somewhere around 06/2001, after Velious.

[Flash]

Okay, so to some up, Bard DPS isn't terrible, but not great either?

[Flash]

I wasn't aware that Bards actually had any form of damage with their music, only utility.

[Ephirith]

Originally Posted by Lazortag [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Is that abomination supposed to be a "greater than or equal to" sign? If so, do you really think Monks and Warriors have comparable dps?

It's more like, Monks have higher damage but the gap isn't really THAT large and you are going to see some warriors who are doing more damage at certain levels of progression.