Why are white mages allergic to regen?

Quote:

---

While letting you die is a problem, this isn’t. If the healers have things under control it’s better for them to dps than unnecessary healing.

---

That's the thing though, clearly they don't have things under control if people are dying.

That's not to say that it's necessarily the healer's fault; sometimes people just don't handle mechs correctly and die because of that. But seemingly very often nowadays, I see people slowly die where at least one healer is just happily DPSing away without a care in the world, and that is a problem.

Quote:

---

But I will never ever understand why SE thinks making it so healers with high DPS and as little healing as possible are the ‘best’ healers.

---

You are completely misattributing the blame here. That is a player issue.

SE clearly wants healer DPS to take a backseat to actual healing, they explicitly say so in Hall of the Novice at least 3 times or so.

Quote:

---

The sad truth about healing in FFXIV is that it has no real purpose. If you’re doing a fight and the boss is at 10% HP, and the whole party except both healers die. There is absolutely no reason for those healers to heal if they can just kill the enemy. (obviously healers can’t take a boss down that much but just for example’s sake). In fact, it would be considered far more skilled for the healers to refuse to Raise and heal the party in favour of just killing the enemy. It doesn’t make any sense to me. Why have healers in the first place if they want healing to barely exist

---

Not sure what you're talking about here tbh. If you think healing has "no real purpose" try and go queue Eden with a 6 DPS party and let me know how it turns out.

I made a post about healers leaving DPS to essentially die in favour of DPS and how it’s actually encouraged, but it felt like it was moving away the point of the thread.

Basically though, healers letting DPS come close to dying is actually encouraged and considered ‘more skillful’ than healing them.

Best example of this; imagine the boss is at 10% and everyone except the healers have died. It would be considered far more skilful for those healers to kill the enemy than it would to raise the party (obviously healers can’t take a boss from 0 to 10% but just for examples sake). Why would they waste time and MP healing when they could just win the fight? They’d probably be more likely to wipe if they tried to raise the party.

This is exactly why we aren’t seeing players use things like Regen. There’s absolutely no point in sustained healing if the target won’t die without it. And thus, the vast majority of the time Regen is a waste of GCDs and MP (because you won’t die without it), which honestly I think is a really awful design for a role lol.

Imagine if DPS were less skilled the more DPS they done? And were actively encouraged by the game’s design to exclusively utilise their ancillary toolkits (e.g Red Mage Vercure spam). It wouldn’t make a lot of sense, would it? And naturally, having one or two DPS focus on a design like this isn’t necessarily bad. But when it’s applied to literally every job in the role, you start to question just what the developers are trying to do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

I made a post about healers leaving DPS to essentially die in favour of DPS and how it’s actually encouraged

---

First time I've heard of it.
Healers DPS is like 1/3rd of a competent DPS players output.
Letting one die is ALWAYS a DPS loss, never encouraged and most certainly frowned upon. Oo

Quote:

---

Best example of this; imagine the boss is at 10% and everyone except the healers have died. It would be considered far more skilful for those healers to kill the enemy than it would to raise the party (obviously healers can’t take a boss from 0 to 10% but just for examples sake). Why would they waste time and MP healing when they could just win the fight? They’d probably be more likely to wipe if they tried to raise the party.

---

If literally only the two healers are left, they are likely Completely Screwed without a lb3 unless we're talking like, some old raid boss and not a current one. If it's a current one, the boss will just smack both of them to the floor.

Even if they can manage to get a tank up and back in control of the boss without getting killed themselves, they're likely still going to die the next time the boss throws out something like a stack mechanic, which most bosses have at some point or another (a mechanic designed specifically to ensure that healers aren't just letting people die and stay dead)

And if this happens in any *serious* raid (again without a healer LB3), you're definitely boned anyway even if you could recover from it, because that'll mean a severe loss in DPS that will ensure you don't meet the enrage timer. TBH if I'm in a raid where everyone except me has died and it's all but certain that I'm next, I'm not going to try to raise anyone because I know I'd just be wrecking their gear further for no good reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Connor

This is exactly why we aren’t seeing players use things like Regen. There’s absolutely no point in sustained healing if the target won’t die without it.

---

Regen: 1.2K potency /GCD
Cure II: 700 potency/GCD
You can bet your ass I will cast regen if there is no urgency requiring direct casts, esp on the tanks. Regen is mostly used on tanks because incoming DPS is of a steady nature, compared to DPS, where it is more random/spiky and generally urgent to heal it back up before the next hit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

That's the thing though, clearly they don't have things under control if people are dying.

That's not to say that it's necessarily the healer's fault; sometimes people just don't handle mechs correctly and die because of that. But seemingly very often nowadays, I see people slowly die where at least one healer is just happily DPSing away without a care in the world, and that is a problem.

You are completely misattributing the blame here. That is a player issue.

SE clearly wants healer DPS to take a backseat to actual healing, they explicitly say so in Hall of the Novice at least 3 times or so.

Not sure what you're talking about here tbh. If you think healing has "no real purpose" try and go queue Eden with a 6 DPS party and let me know how it turns out.

---

I really don’t think you can argue healer DPS is purely a player based issue. It’s very much part of encounter design that healers deal damage during downtime and don’t heal unnecessarily (which ends up being often).

Isn’t the Hall of the Novice for, well, novices? By definition it exists for lower skilled players who aren’t familiar with the game. I’m talking about in level 80 content, where players will be more familiar and skilled with the game. Lastly, they doesn’t the Hall of the Novice specifically tell healers to deal damage when there’s no healing required? That doesn’t sound like it ‘taking a backseat’ to me, more like always having it on your mind

As for the second point, you seem to be misunderstanding. I’m not saying it’s a good thing to literally let people die. But if they come extremely close it doesn’t technically matter what their HP is until the next mechanic is coming, and it’s very easy to plan out use of oGCD healing to match every mechanic so that you spend as little time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Granyala

Regen: 1.2K potency /GCD
Cure II: 700 potency/GCD
You can bet your ass I will cast regen if there is no urgency requiring direct casts, esp on the tanks. Regen is mostly used on tanks because incoming DPS is of a steady nature, compared to DPS, where it is more random/spiky and generally urgent to heal it back up before the next hit.

---

If you were that worried about sustained damage wouldn’t you use Asylum? It’s still higher potency than Cure II, no MP cost, no GCD cost, and allows more DPS openings (assuming you can’t get Afflatus for the Misery). Wouldn’t Regen just waste MP over Asylum?

Quote:

---

Isn’t the Hall of the Novice for, well, novices? By definition it exists for lower skilled players who aren’t familiar with the game. I’m talking about in level 80 content, where players will be more familiar and skilled with the game. Lastly, they doesn’t the Hall of the Novice specifically tell healers to deal damage when there’s no healing required? That doesn’t sound like it ‘taking a backseat’ to me, more like always having it on your mind

---

Here is specifically what it says:
"When you've healed all there is to heal, there may be time to weave in some offensive magicks."
"But keep an eye on your companion! You should not be blasting if someone is bleeding!"
"Even when it's safe to attack, always keep one eye on your allies' health!"
"Another enemy threatens your party! You might try attacking this foe if your allies are uninjured."

That definitely sounds like it should be taking a backseat to, you know, healing. Like what your role says.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raven2014

A trademark of a good WHM, or ANY good healers really, is not about how much you heal, but knowing when and what to heal. Most high level healer will not simply heal because someone take damage, which is the common mentality in pug. For example:

-I once had a co-healer questioned why I didn't heal the party after the first AOE went out during the add phase of Innocent.
-I said I did Assize.
-The co-healer insisted it's not enough, because the party wasn't topped off and he "had to do all the work". (like many complains in this thread).
-To which I asked: why did you even top the party off to begin with?

Two and a half reason why no healer should heal during that phase:

-First: that first AOE is also the ONLY raid damage during that phase, there is no other damage (zip, nada, zero) going into the raid till the phase end. Even if someone has 1HP after that AOE, they still wont die during that phase.
-First and a half:If the tanks were top off and use their CD appropriately for the holy sword busters, then they too shouldn't need any heal before the adds die, unless your party DPS is so low that the adds stay up for long.
-Second: after the adds are down, there are a 10+ second transition into the next phase where you can't target anything, and thus have all the time in the world to heal the party up ... many times over.

---

Some healers (myself included) get a bit... twitchy... when our party isn't at or close to 100%. Because we're used to everyone else being completely incapable of avoiding avoidable mechanics and taking unnecessary damage. In pugs, I'll typically monitor the whole group's HP and hit them with one or more of my AoE heals (and maybe follow up with some Cure/Cure II/Solace if necessary) when the majority are under 75% health, so basically whenever raidwide damage goes out. This is partially because I don't trust them to stay alive if I don't, and partially because half the time it feels like my healing is having no effect, so I panic. Of course, in those situations Assize is my first reaction, or Plenary Indulgence followed by Medica II and Afflatus Rapture if I'm expecting more than one hit.

However this is also why I prefer WHM to AST or SCH - that type of "oh god everyone's dying must heal to full" healing is generally possible without burning through all of my mana.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fynlar

Here is specifically what it says:
"When you've healed all there is to heal, there may be time to weave in some offensive magicks."
"But keep an eye on your companion! You should not be blasting if someone is bleeding!"
"Even when it's safe to attack, always keep one eye on your allies' health!"
” ]if your allies are uninjured."

That definitely sounds like it should be taking a backseat to, you know, healing. Like what your role says.

---

How do these quotes contradict my statement exactly?

Healing all there is to heal isn’t a particularly difficult job at high levels. The point I’m making is that you won’t generally be in a situation where a heal means the difference between life and death. And when you are in that situation you use an oGCD. If someone is bleeding why heal them if they’re not in imminent danger of death? This is the issue with healing I’m talking about, because the chances that imminent death will come if you aren’t making good use of your healing spells is generally low in my experience, both in normal and the raid content. Is a party really ‘injured’ just because their health has went down?

I originally posted about how this largely because of oGCD strength, but it wasn’t as focused on Regen hence why I delete it. The point still stands though that incoming damage is not generally high enough that sustained healing like regens are highly valuable, especially when they cost MP/GCDs that could be used to kill the enemy (killing the enemy is the ultimate form of mitigation etc). I know as a Scholar I’m not going to have Eos/Selene use Whispering Dawn if I know I can just use Indomitability and avoid overhealing. And if I know the enemy is going to die before their next attack, or that the next attack is avoidable damage, I’m not going to use my GCDs to heal them if natural healing and Embrace if needed is enough.
Healers have a vast variety of tools that specifically allow them to deal more damage and minimise healing (this creating more DPS openings). I don’t think it’s accurate to say that damage takes a backseat to healing, if anything they’re both as valuable as each other

Quote:

---

How do these quotes contradict my statement exactly?

---

Do you even know what something "taking a backseat" means? It means that there's something else that should always be prioritized first.

Your claim about SE expecting healing to take the backseat to healer DPS is simply unfounded. Again, that's a mentality the players created. SE themselves advocates the opposite.

Quote:

---

The point I’m making is that you won’t generally be in a situation where a heal means the difference between life and death.

---

I have been in that situation tons. Plenty of times just last night doing weekly Eden. Do you even heal?

Quote:

---

Is a party really ‘injured’ just because their health has went down?

---

Uhh, yes? Is that really a question?