bard over cleric as sub for warlock

[Disconn3cted]

I would keep my sub 10 lvls lower no matter what it was so that I could have the lvl 10 warrior skill shield trash, I was thinking of delvling my cleric for bard because cleric takes up too much sp is there any advantage at all to bard besides moving speed if its 10 lvls lower?

[pr0klobster]

Less march, less noise, less-powerful nukes, slightly less tambour...?

Bard nukes still fire pretty fast so I would think 80 bard would do similar damage to 90 cleric, since you might want to factor the abs dmg attacks in.

[willieb3]

umm dont tanke a lvl 10 shield trash at lvl 90 its useless it would be hard to kb and it wont do damage at all.

bard gets moving speed, dances,noice,and a ton of mana stuff, and high powered quik nukes which go excellent for lock

[Advancechao]

Level 80 Cleric is 78,791 SP (12 Faith, 12 Charity, 10 Bless Spell, 7 RD, 1 Holy Spell, 1 Healing Orbit)
Level 80 Bard is 63,721 SP (6 Moving March, 2 Swing March, 12 Mana Cycle, 7 Noise)

It's a 15k difference for both trees, which is a pretty substantial difference even with both trees at their bare minimum (but really it is less than two days of ong farming). If you need the SP then going Bard is good.

umm dont tanke a lvl 10 shield trash at lvl 90 its useless it would be hard to kb and it wont do damage at all.

I totally disagree with this comment. Knockback probability isn't affected by levels unlike knockdown; I have shield trash and it manages to stop enemies at its stated 80% chance, very consistently too. The damage is the last thing that it is used for. The knockback and dull statuses alone are a great help. Without shield trash I would probably die ten times as much. It stops glaives, bladers, rogues, and warriors in their tracks, and when used with two stun skills, it is possible to stall your opponent indefinitely. The SP cost is minimal for an excellent disabling skill. *Can't live without it*