What are things you ENJOY about Healers right now?

"No, what makes AST a Healer I already readily defined - it is the only one of the five (since I'm including RDM; I suppose we could include SMN and some others in here, too) that has consistent and ready access to heals (up to 5 in total, to be exact, and the only AOE one that can be used at one's discretion with no prior DPS spell required first or as part of it), and it also has the lightest direct damage kit and the only kit that does not require melee range attacks on enemies, or, indeed, any enemies around AT ALL to produce effective healing."

You can define a "healer" however you want, you can also play any of the healing jobs however you want in PVP now, your degree of success may vary- but you do you. I disagree with your definition, I would say that each of the healing jobs is a viable support job in its own way, and each of them as such is designed to provide various types of CC, DPS and heals based upon the fact that each job has its own heals , and can sometimes provide party heals, mitigation or buffs as well. Not to mention that as a healer, depending upon the content you may be the squishiest and most targeted person in the party given DR (looking at FL) - so casting a heal on a specific party member like the old mode is less useful than your CC/damage/ party utility on any healer.

Honestly, should people even be surprised that jobs like DRK 'does more healing' in Frontlines as shown in its scorecard? The one job that often jumps into the fray and presses their Recuperate & uses Elixir way more often than...say... whoever standing in Narnia because they're too afraid/cautious to get closer to use their kits effectively at proper timings? WHMs tend to have more heals but a good portion of those heals comes from their use of Afflatus Purgation that gives their party regen, which... tend to not be too useful with that much burst happening within 3s or it's overhealing whoever's sitting outside harm's reach.

I wouldn't be surprised if the scorecard also counts your Recuperate (also buffed by BH) and elixir uses as your 'healing done' then watch as those DRK/WAR/Melees/whatever job heals more because they actively engage with their kits. If you're not getting attacked, you're not going to heal yourself either.

Unsure about shield absorption though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rein_eon_Osborne

Honestly, should people even be surprised that jobs like DRK 'does more healing' in Frontlines as shown in its scorecard? The one job that often jumps into the fray and presses their Recuperate & uses Elixir way more often than...say... whoever standing in Narnia because they're too afraid/cautious to get closer to use their kits effectively at proper timings? WHMs tend to have more heals but a good portion of those heals comes from their use of Afflatus Purgation that gives their party regen, which... tend to not be too useful with that much burst happening within 3s or it's overhealing whoever's sitting outside harm's reach.

I wouldn't be surprised if the scorecard also counts your Recuperate (also buffed by BH) and elixir uses as your 'healing done' then watch as those DRK/WAR/Melees/whatever job heals more because they actively engage with their kits. If you're not getting attacked, you're not going to heal yourself either.

Unsure about shield absorption though.

---

I don't get the DRK comparison. Sure it has a high healing score, but that's exclusively HP they restore to themselves. You wouldn't describe Sion in League of Legends as a healer just because he can be a lifesteal tank.

well. it would be interesting then to look at a job like summoner and see their healing score , given that they should be able to restore HP to party members through the LB.

Thank god I went to bed when I did because holy moly. I think the disconnect is partially because Ren does not play CC much, the gamemode the PVP kits are specifically balanced around. Of course the numbers and effectiveness will be different in Frontlines, there's more targets to hit. That doesn't change the fact that the healers are in fact healers, regardless of whatever 'aesthetic' or 'healing/damage ratio in kit' rubbish. This is not like the EX1 EX2 thing, because that is a fan-made definition where no official sorting structure has been given. If the devs came out and said at fanfest 'these are the two new trials we'll have, this one is EX1 and this one is EX2' then even if 'EX2' was the one we saw first in the story, the playerbase would refer to it as EX2 because the devs did. Here, we have four jobs, and they're 'healer role' as dictated by the devs of the game. So they're healers.

And you've got it backwards Ren, using Gravity twice does not eat into your healing kit. Using Asp.Benefic twice eats into your damage kit. If you aren't saving one charge of Double Cast for each Gravity, you're losing 8000 damage to pile into a burst, and a bind effect. If you want to burn up such a powerful catch tool for a heal that can be burned off by a single Wyrmwind or Hyosho, you do you, but I doubt you'll be getting anywhere against an assassin type like a Monk or RPR when you're down to just Malefic spam. 5000 damage per cast is not going to do much to deter them from hitting you. But 8000+heavy, plus 8000+bind, plus 12000 from Macrocosmos, will halve their HP and put them low enough for an ally to jump on them and finish them off. Well, assuming you're actually near your allies, instead of Narnia. Do you also wait until the regen would be useful from Purgation?

There are cases where Aspected Benefic from Doublecast is worth using over Doublecast Gravity in Frontlines. It's just really dependent on the AST to be able to determine whether the situation calls for it or not. Similar to how Holy works in PvE as a CC, binding an enemy has a lot of advantage as well due to jobs having a range on their skills. Sometimes though, you might want a spot heal instead if you think the heal can be worth saving someone. It's ultimately dependent on how the fight progresses. In CC, usually damage is better because everyone's damage is at 100% and the number of players is equal, unless that extra aspected benefic can guarantee someone living through a mechanic (ex: blocking enough damage to prevent NIN LB from activating, ensuring someone stays alive long enough to recuperate and get out, ensuring someone has enough HP to get their LB out, etc.). In Frontlines, it depends on a lot of variables: distance, number of enemies, location, target's role, objective, etc.

Having decision-making with Double cast and choices is more of a player's expression on how they want to tackle the situation to decide whether Doublecast is worth Aspected Benefic, Malefic, or Gravity. It's why I like PvP AST a lot; it's such a simple mechanic and skillset, but it has answers to a lot of different situations due to this flexibility.

Yes, true, there are times when the double heal is 'the right decision' but those are few and far between. In fact, the NIN LB example is a good one to bring up. I've probably had more times where I 'try' to save someone with a heal before the NIN LB kills them (and it kills them anyway because of the snapshot), than times where it's actually bloody worked. I've had plenty of times where I've tried to save someone with the doublecast heal, only for the person to die anyway, and their killer to escape with sub5k HP left, low enough that the doublecast of a Gravity or Malefic would have at least equalized the scorecard. More often than not in fact, I've noticed that when there's, for example, a 2v1 and my ally is the 1 running away trying to live through the onslaught, the 2 get hardcore tunnelvision on trying to get the kill, and stop paying attention to their own HP. Thus, by going Doublecast Gravity > Macrocosmos, I can drop them low enough to easily turn the tide on them, or even kill one without them realising how low and out of position they were.

My point is that it's fine, good even, to have the player have the option of what to spend doublecast on. The issue is that the design of the gamemodes means that the 'option' decision is almost always made for you. Especially considering two of the options are damage and one is a heal. If they made it so you could Doublecast Macrocosmos, doing no extra damage but applying a second copy of the heal-compiling buff, which would pop at the same time as the original (effectively doubling the heal from Macro), would that doublecast option get used? Maybe sometimes, sure. How often would it be used in comparison to Gravity? Absolutely tiny fraction, because Gravity gives you burst damage, and burst damage leads to setting up kills. And if the enemy player is dead, then they don't do damage to your team anymore, or push the crystal, or cap the points in FL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IDontPetLalas

I disagree with your definition, I would say that each of the healing jobs is a viable support job in its own way

---

This...is what I've been saying all along, though?

Except AST, it's actually a Healer (or close enough Support-Healer)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

And you've got it backwards Ren, using Gravity twice does not eat into your healing kit. Using Asp.Benefic twice eats into your damage kit.

---

Do you ever wonder, for even a moment, why I sometimes tend to think you prefer non-Healer gameplay? /sigh

No, of course you don't.

Your focus is LITERALLY always on damage. Even when there's an interesting decision where Healing MIGHT be favored, your first instinct is to use the resource towards damage and consider it a DPS loss to use it for healing rather than an HPS loss to use it for damage. (Granted, I'm not the one that says that of you - you are - but I do wonder about it given your fixation on damage dealing first in essentially all discussion contexts...) Anyway, moving on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

There are cases where Aspected Benefic from Doublecast is worth using over Doublecast Gravity in Frontlines...

---

Agreed with all of that post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

Yes, true, there are times when the double heal is 'the right decision' but those are few and far between.

---

In CC, maybe. In Frontlines, they are many and close together.

Maybe it's because you play CC instead of Frontlines, you don't understand this. In CC, you may be attacked by few enough people you can out DPS them, but in Frontlines, there are often cases where the enemy team will pounce on one person and crowd control them to death. They can use Purify but get CCed again instantly, unable to use Recuperate, because Pruify is somehow bugged or SOMEthing where it often doesn't activate the status effect resistance. However, teams are ALSO often not SUPER coordinated, meaning they blow those abilities but don't necessarily coordinate their burst.

Using a bind isn't going to save your ally, since the enemy has several melee and ranged on them. BUT, a heal to get them through the CC CAN save them, especially AST's rapid fire ones, especially Tanks and Melee (which have SUPER boosted defense stats in Frontlines). I've kept Tanks alive with entire enemy teams wailing on them for precious seconds. Sometimes they do die, but the enemy has to blow a lot of damage resources, making them weak to the rest of my team's counterattack. Sometimes the person survives, and the enemy is denied the kill points. These are things that Gravity would not do, since there are too many enemies and many out of range of the Gravity spell, but my heals augmenting the Tank/Melee's natural defenses means my team not losing points/the enemy not gaining points AND BATTLE HIGH from the KO.

Maybe in CC, you're right, but in Frontlines, you're often...not going to be right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rein_eon_Osborne

...

---

DRK just has so much self-healing. Eventide, Salted Earth, Quietus, and Souleater. Even not using Recuperate or Elixir at all, it has somewhat insane healing. I'm kind of surprise it hasn't been nerfed. It must somehow be weak in CC, because in Frontlines, it's arguably the most OP Job right now - a frequent topic of discussion in Alliance chat during Frontline matches where the enemy team has several. 3-4 DRK's blowing Salted Earth + Salt and Darkness at the same time seems to delete entire teams, especially if you get something like a DRG LB to land in the now tightly gathered entire enemy team. It's pretty brutal and there's seemingly no defense against it if they're coordinated.

SMNs were doing this with Bahamut LB nukes being dropped all at once on enemy teams, and that got nerfed somewhat, but the DRK thing isn't even their LB, so it's far more spamable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IDontPetLalas

well. it would be interesting then to look at a job like summoner and see their healing score , given that they should be able to restore HP to party members through the LB.

---

I've been in some matches where SMNs get pretty high on the healing charts. They never get to the top (unless everyone else is slacking) because it's not spamable, but Phoenix does a pretty massive amount of healing.

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fulminating

Maybe it’s escaped your notice, but damage is the only meaningful way to contribute.

---

NARRATOR: Damage was not, in fact, the only meaningful way to contribute...

Maybe it’s escaped your notice, but damage is the only meaningful way to contribute.

Aesthetics mostly. I always play healer/support roles in any game I play, in the good and the bad. The only way to make me drop healers entirely is if they take away our one dps spell (technically 2, tho I can see them removing the dots by 7.0) while simultaneously give tanks even more self sustain. Because playing spectator mode is peak game design /s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForsakenRoe

Yes, true, there are times when the double heal is 'the right decision' but those are few and far between. In fact, the NIN LB example is a good one to bring up. I've probably had more times where I 'try' to save someone with a heal before the NIN LB kills them (and it kills them anyway because of the snapshot), than times where it's actually bloody worked. I've had plenty of times where I've tried to save someone with the doublecast heal, only for the person to die anyway, and their killer to escape with sub5k HP left, low enough that the doublecast of a Gravity or Malefic would have at least equalized the scorecard. More often than not in fact, I've noticed that when there's, for example, a 2v1 and my ally is the 1 running away trying to live through the onslaught, the 2 get hardcore tunnelvision on trying to get the kill, and stop paying attention to their own HP. Thus, by going Doublecast Gravity > Macrocosmos, I can drop them low enough to easily turn the tide on them, or even kill one without them realising how low and out of position they were.

My point is that it's fine, good even, to have the player have the option of what to spend doublecast on. The issue is that the design of the gamemodes means that the 'option' decision is almost always made for you. Especially considering two of the options are damage and one is a heal. If they made it so you could Doublecast Macrocosmos, doing no extra damage but applying a second copy of the heal-compiling buff, which would pop at the same time as the original (effectively doubling the heal from Macro), would that doublecast option get used? Maybe sometimes, sure. How often would it be used in comparison to Gravity? Absolutely tiny fraction, because Gravity gives you burst damage, and burst damage leads to setting up kills. And if the enemy player is dead, then they don't do damage to your team anymore, or push the crystal, or cap the points in FL.

---

Agreed. The amount of times I've double cast a benefic on someone rather than using a gravity or a malefic is miniscule, although the choice is there in theory, in practise it's more helpful remove the threat and benefic is just not as helpful .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Despite a lot of people trying to passive-aggressive/snark, we kind of were.

Even this latest spat someone else started. I was trying to be positive pointing out that I like AST in PvP and wish there were more like it. I genuinely DO like AST in PvP and wish there was more of that because it's enjoyable.

Also, it might be nice if you said this to the other posters here. /shrug

---

As I'm sure you recall, because you specifically mentioned being shocked every time it happened, I *have* spoken up on your behalf a few times before when I thought the other people involved were either off base or going a bit to far when you were being reasonable at the time. This isn't one of those times, though. All the people you tend to get into little spats with either were posting in the spirit of the thread and avoiding their own personal grievances, or simply avoiding the thread entirely until you started kicking up sand by going "that's great that you like X thing, except it's wrong and not REALLY a healer" and then digging your heels in when someone went "no, they totally are?" in response. Are a lot of the frequent posters kind of argumentative assholes? Sure. But you're not really above that either. There was really no reason to completely derail the thread for several pages so you could argue semantic technicalities based on how you feel or how much older MMOs worked, rather than how the game and SE classifies things, which frankly is what really matters in healer discussions. And no, going "i do like this ONE thing, even if all other three are stupid things i don't like and am going to pretend they're a separate role that doesn't exist" at the start of your rants doesn't really make it better or more in the spirit of positivity.

Not sure why I bothered typing all that out and further derailing, but I guess I took offense to you acting like you did nothing wrong and I should be calling other people out instead. w/e

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icecylee

As I'm sure you recall, because you specifically mentioned being shocked every time it happened, I *have* spoken up on your behalf a few times before when I thought the other people involved were either off base or going a bit to far when you were being reasonable at the time. This isn't one of those times, though. All the people you tend to get into little spats with either were posting in the spirit of the thread and avoiding their own personal grievances, or simply avoiding the thread entirely until you started kicking up sand by going "that's great that you like X thing, except it's wrong and not REALLY a healer" and then digging your heels in when someone went "no, they totally are?" in response. Are a lot of the frequent posters kind of argumentative assholes? Sure. But you're not really above that either. There was really no reason to completely derail the thread for several pages so you could argue semantic technicalities based on how you feel or how much older MMOs worked, rather than how the game and SE classifies things, which frankly is what really matters in healer discussions. And no, going "i do like this ONE thing, even if all other three are stupid things i don't like and am going to pretend they're a separate role that doesn't exist" at the start of your rants doesn't really make it better or more in the spirit of positivity.

Not sure why I bothered typing all that out and further derailing, but I guess I took offense to you acting like you did nothing wrong and I should be calling other people out instead. w/e

---

Ah, the eternal question of how to deal with trolls. Do you engage and fall into the trap of giving the troll attention, or do you ignore them and allow their statements to stand unoposed?

-------

What do I enjoy about healers right now?

The class concepts. I love the idea of Scholar as a Tactitian- It's such a unique concept for a healer. I love the military strategist aesthetic (I wish I could wear the mortarboard as a Hrothgar SE please.) Aesthetically, I wish Scholar didn't lean that much on the Fairy theme and more on the magical-lexicon-axiomatic thingies with laws and treatises, but I guess what we have is okay. Fey abilities should feel fey-like. Though Expedient isn't really a fairy ability and its really fluttery.

I love the concept for Astrologian. Celestial magic has a big appeal for me. I love the Meteor, Comet and Star Flare spells in FF, they were really spectacular. I like the concept of time magic to heal too, I wish we didn't lose those aspects for AST.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icecylee

...

---

So all the people posting in here saying either "nothing at all" or giving really snarky, sarcastic replies weren't doing that until we started talking about "real healers"? (btw, that was Roe, not me). Stuff like:

"Can I get back to you on this? "
"Does the insta-queue for any content count? No? Well... uh..."
"I also like the memories I have of playing SCH and AST. "
"The themes and that's it. "
"SE took everything away that I LIKE about healers."

...all predate the PvP Healer discussion.

And my contribution to that was that I liked AST, I just didn't feel the other three were Healers/played like Healers (because of how little focus they actually have on healing), which wasn't me starting anything. And I'm going to ask you this genuinely, where did I say "except it's wrong"? Did I say it was "wrong" at any point? Didn't I say it was a good thing and I wish the game would embrace it? Isn't that the opposite of saying it's "wrong"?

I "dug my heels in" when they "dug their heels in". Defending a position is not "digging heels". My general paradigm is that when I say something and someone challenges it, I try to explain why I think the thing I think. The way my mind works, I like understanding reasons for things, and even if I may not fully agree with someone, if they tell me why they think what they do/how they're defining things, I can say "Ah, that makes sense, and I can see you're self-consistent with that position, even if I may not fully agree with that definition". It's why I point out to, for example Ty, that my position has been self-consistent, and it's why I state what it is I think Healers are. It's why I started that thread a few weeks ago asking people what they thought Healers were and why they fit into the Trinity, since I think part of the consistent friction here is in how we all view the concept of "Healer" with some (me, mainly) viewing it as "thing that heals" and other people thinking, in their words not mine, of "Supports".

I didn't derail the thread arguing semantics. That was done in response to me. The specific post that started the thread derail was this one:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

They all are actual healers with good healing throughput (other than SGE in terms of healing throughput because most of the required healing is done through Pneuma and LB). Rather than saying you're looking for "an actual healer that can handle damage", you're looking more for "a pure healer that doesn't need to interact with the enemies to handle damage" because that's what all the PvE healers oGCD toolkits resembles.

---

Were you okay with this post? If so, why was it acceptable and mine not, since it is what started the back and forth countering people's views/argument. Why is THAT post okay, but my post before it (or after it?) not okay? And where did I talk about "how much older MMOs worked"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icecylee

But you're not really above that either.

---

Thing is, I want to actually discuss topics. I post a lot of threads in here for various discussions to try to get to the heart of various matters. Hell, my proposed SCH change thread seemed to have been pretty well liked overall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Icecylee

And no, going "i do like this ONE thing, even if all other three are stupid things i don't like and am going to pretend they're a separate role that doesn't exist" at the start of your rants doesn't really make it better or more in the spirit of positivity.

---

Again, now do these:

"Can I get back to you on this? "
"Does the insta-queue for any content count? No? Well... uh..."
"I also like the memories I have of playing SCH and AST. "
"The themes and that's it. "
"SE took everything away that I LIKE about healers."

.

I guess I'd just like some consistency here.

EDIT:

Then there's stuff like this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrimGale

Ah, the eternal question of how to deal with trolls. Do you engage and fall into the trap of giving the troll attention, or do you ignore them and allow their statements to stand unoposed?

---

You know I'm not a troll. You might find me an ass or antagonistic, but you've seen me engage in good faith discussions and try to start them plenty. Yet see that?

Yet will you say that person shouldn't have said that?

Maybe you will...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrimGale

Huh, must have been the wind.

---

See? But again, I don't suspect consistency - I would be pleasantly surprised by it, though.

Huh, must have been the wind.

Quote:

---

What are things you ENJOY about Healers right now?

---

Not wanting to spend thousands of words waxing philosophical, here are some small things I enjoy about FFXIV's Healers*:

• WHM (PvE): vfx for Glare, vfx for Holy (the twirl is divine), wings (Temperance), a well-timed Lilybell.
• SCH (PvE): fairy placement + fairy-centered heals, a button/button-combo for every occasion, understated vfx.
• AST (PvE): vfx and sfx.
• WHM (PvP** CC): a well-timed Seraph Strike into Cure III.
• SCH (PvP FL): Deployment Tactics for spreading Galvanize+Catalyze or Biolytic.

* Healers as listed in FFXIV's Official Job Guide.

** I'm bad at PvP. Sue me. :P

Anyway, moving on from all THAT (since I don't expect consistency or whatnot):

Another thing I really like about Healers in FFXIV is that they really do feel like what I think Healers "feel" like. That subjective tactile thing. They all have a wide slate of heals and some mitigations, and a few have party buffs, they all do a similar thing but in distinct ways when you're really flexing the healing kits, and they all feel good and strong, no "wet noodle" heals; even the basic cure spells (though rarely used due to being inefficient) are decently strong. The ability to pull a party back from the brink feels really good and just works, and it really feels like you're making an impact and doing your part in the battle.

Idunno, the current iterations of Fey Blessing and Collective Opposition feel oddly wimpy and placeholdery to me

Granted not every button can be an Earthly Star or Indom, but IMO they would be better off with a full switcharoo into something more interesting. Both used to be really quite unique abilities in their time, now they are just strange 1 minute cooldown mini medicas for the sake of it.

I can't believe I'm going on a tangent this long, so I hope this HB tag works as intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

I didn't derail the thread arguing semantics. That was done in response to me. The specific post that started the thread derail was this one:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

They all are actual healers with good healing throughput (other than SGE in terms of healing throughput because most of the required healing is done through Pneuma and LB). Rather than saying you're looking for "an actual healer that can handle damage", you're looking more for "a pure healer that doesn't need to interact with the enemies to handle damage" because that's what all the PvE healers oGCD toolkits resembles.

---

Were you okay with this post? If so, why was it acceptable and mine not, since it is what started the back and forth countering people's views/argument. Why is THAT post okay, but my post before it (or after it?) not okay? And where did I talk about "how much older MMOs worked"?

---

In case no one explains why people are responding to you like you're troll, I'll reply.

You could probably answer this yourself if you read the following post I made:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

What makes a Healer is that they are and focus on HEALING. This should be a tautology as it's in the name. This is distinct from a Support which is focused across domains of damage dealing, buffing, debuffing, healing, and other utility (like run speed) and act in a Supporting role, which can include healing people but also swinging over to DPS down an enemy or buffing/debuffing/utility to ensure their team can do so. If that's the kind of gameplay you like, then Support roles/Jobs/classes are right up your alley.

...that doesn't make them Healers, though.

---

Just confirming. Does that mean that because a shield healer's primary goal is not to heal flat hp, but apply support utility such as shields / mitigation to ensure the party lives through damage through preventative means, you don't think healers like SCH and SGE are considered healers?

---

My post explaining why every healer in PvP is still a healer with good healing throughput was made for clarification on a misunderstanding in how PvP healers function through the perspective of a shield healer as they are currently (which is currently inline with the goal of why I enjoy those healers in this thread, because I like the way they all play). However, the way you phrased your response denies shield healers as "actual healers" in your definition, but as "supports". Your response is not only a classification challenge to at least 3 PvP healers, but an affront to the existing classification of PvE shield healers, which can be problematic in a discussion thread about enjoyment of said healers.

Shield healers are classified as such because their primary role as a healer is to prevent damage from killing the party, be it through shields, mitigation, or other preventative means. This is especially true at the Savage level and Ultimate level, where shields and mitigation is very much an integral core of shield healer gameplay in surviving against damage that is very much lethal at min ILVL. While it may not be your intention, you pretty much provoked everyone who plays SCH and SGE with that statement because their roles from their very inception was suddenly deemed as "not a healer" through your choice of words.

I asked for confirmation to give you the benefit of the doubt that this is not what you meant so you can clarify the misunderstanding, but instead of answering to this response, you provoked others by continuously bringing up the point of why your post wasn't acceptable in a thread about things healers enjoyed and doubled down on the idea that those healers are "supports" rather than healers. This is not any indication of good faith in a positivity thread about what people like about healers. Your response is in direct challenge to the topic when you state "those aren't healers", which means even if people liked SGE, SCH, or PvP WHM, you indirectly attempted to kick them out of the discussion and told them "I asked for what you enjoy about 'REAL healers', not supports". People replied in this thread under the assumption you were referring to what a healer represents as it is now in game (PvP, PvE, Pure & shield healers), not what a healer represents in your definition, and people definitely did not expect you to exclude certain healers by going "AST is the only healer in PvP, the others are supports".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

The fact that RDM is more of a Healer than at least half (and as much as 3/4ths) of the "Healers" is just ridiculous, honestly.

---

Even to the point where you say RDM is possibly more of a healer in white shift, thereby really cementing the idea that you are excluding the idea of healers using preventative means as a form of healing should be considered as healers.

While it may be offputting for someone who doesn't see eye to eye on certain aspects they like on healers that another person may not agree with, it's another thing entirely to talk about other healers not being real healers in a thread aimed for positivity. As the original poster that made this thread who brought that point up, the implications are worse, as your actions has a bigger impact and instead speaks volumes to your intentions are in making this thread when your reply sows chaos and negativity through the exclusion of certain healers. It's almost as if you were intentionally trying to create toxicity and drama on the forums in what was supposed to be a 'positive' space, so to speak. Those are not the actions of any person wanting to start a discussion in good faith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Don't get me wrong:

I'm absolutely HAPPY that the Healers feel distinct in PvP.

I'm absolutely HAPPY that there are Support DPS Jobs in PvP for people that like playing Support. I'd be MORE happy if SE would just admit that's a Role already and embrace it, but baby-steps.

Me making this distinction isn't saying they suck and are unfun to play (other than SGE), but it IS me saying they aren't Healers other than AST and at a stretch possibly WHM...but probably not (ironic, that...). And me pointing out that they're more liked by people who want to play a Support DPS also isn't somehow beyond the pale. I'm just stating reality as I see it, complete with supporting arguments and consistent positions. I also don't understand why people find the truth so unwelcome; I'm not saying it's BAD to want a more offensive or support focused playstyle. I've said it's good and that the game should embrace that.

I think if it did, there'd be way less friction and way more happy people.

---

While you might have said that in good intentions, this isn't the right thread to bring that up. Sure, you can say you are happy that healers feel distinct in PvP, but now you brought up the distinction that RDM and AST being the 'healers' and the other 3 PvP healers not being 'healers' in this thread. Do you think that's going to go very well when you took a stance to indirectly exclude the other 3 PvP healers in this discussion as the thread starter?

While it is well in your opinion to not like the other 3 PvP healers and not consider them as such, making it known on this thread and doubling down with constantly explaining your rationale has different implications in the healer subforum, which does categorize those healers as actual healers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

"The themes and that's it. "

---

Excuse you, that's a legit response. You asked what I liked about CURRENT healers.

I like that SCH is supposed to be a pet healer with the fairy.

I like AST's theme around space and the cards.

SGE Idgaff about but its interesting to see some of its flashy abilities.

And while I prefer WHM before Shb+ I can say that I like its theme of being tied to nature and the elements of which, if we want to, can say that they went to Light because of the First.

Just because YOU DON'T LIKE my answer doesn't mean that it isn't a true one.

I shouldn't have to go into a full depth explanation just because YOU feel that "themes" isn't a good one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ASkellington

Excuse you,

---

Right, no antagonism at all. <_<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

In case no one explains why people are responding to you like you're troll, I'll reply.

---

Dude, I've been posting here for over a year. People treated me as a troll from the moment I suggested that even one Healer remain as it is (PvE kits) and it hasn't changed since. New evolutions or reasons to add to the bucket don't change the fact that the bucket was wrong to begin with, and if you guys think I'm a troll, you don't know what a troll is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

However, the way you phrased your response denies shield healers as "actual healers" in your definition, but as "supports".

---

In PvE?

This post - that I didn't reply to and think I missed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

Just confirming. Does that mean that because a shield healer's primary goal is not to heal flat hp, but apply support utility such as shields / mitigation to ensure the party lives through damage through preventative means, you don't think healers like SCH and SGE are considered healers?

---

How can you take a non-replied to post as a statement? o.O

You, entirely literally in this case, have to invent words and put them into my mouth to present your current position that I said Barrier Healers in PvE are not Healers. Can you show me where in this statement - since it seems to be the basis of your claim - that I said "Barrier Healers are not Healers"?

Quote:

---

What makes a Healer is that they are and focus on HEALING. This should be a tautology as it's in the name. This is distinct from a Support which is focused across domains of damage dealing, buffing, debuffing, healing, and other utility (like run speed) and act in a Supporting role, which can include healing people but also swinging over to DPS down an enemy or buffing/debuffing/utility to ensure their team can do so. If that's the kind of gameplay you like, then Support roles/Jobs/classes are right up your alley.

---

I even made sure to add to it - the part you left out which clarifies the position:

Quote:

---

If the focus is on dealing damage, then it's not a Healer. It might not be outright a Damage Dealer/DPS if the focus is on support buffing, debuffing, crowd control, etc...but it isn't a Healer at that point, it's a Support.

---

Why DID you leave this part out, btw?

So notice what I listed, support buffing (I didn't say shielding or mitigation; if you notice, I tend to list those as their own category of thing which is under the domain of both Healers and/or Tanks in a lot of games, though in this game even DPS have some), debuffing, crowd contrrol, etc. I didn't mention shields, shield healing, or barrier healers in any capacity, yet you're presuming I did because you did, and when I didn't answer (because I didn't see the post), drawing conclusions about me saying things that I...didn't actually say; indeed, in this case, I literally said nothing and you interpreted nothing as "Barrier Healers in PvE aren't Healers" somehow. Can you see how that might be a mistake on your part, by chance?

Hell, I even used YOUR terms of offensive and defensive support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

Your response is not only a classification challenge to at least 3 PvP healers, but an affront to the existing classification of PvE shield healers,

---

HOW??

I literally didn't make a statement at all on the matter and it's somehow a statement? How is a person not saying something equivalent in your mind to them making an ironclad declarative statement?

For the record, if I were to respond to that post, I would say the following:

"All Healers in PvE right now are focused by kit and function on healing. With few exceptions, most mitigation abilities in the game have a healing component, either directly (Adloquium, Succor, Sacred Soil, Seraphic Veil, Consolation, Collective Unconscious, Celestial Intersection, Neutral Sect, Exaltation, Eukrasian Diagnosis, Eukrasian Prognosis, Kerachole, Taurochole, and Holos) or indirectly by increasing healing (Temperance, Fey Illumination, Protraction), of the top of my head. The only ones that don't do this are WHM's Divine Benison and Aquaveil (but WHM isn't a Barrier Healer, so it's a moot point), Expedient, Haima, and Panhaima (and these last two are debatable since they do provide healing at the end if there are any shield stacks left over at the end of the duration). Setting that aside, SCH and SGE both have massive amounts of raw healing throughput to turn empty HP bars into full HP bars, and they are used either as the components that are part of their mitigation buttons (Sacred Soil/Kerachole's HoT, Holos' direct AOE heal) or as part of their expansive oGCD healing suit. Indeed, one of the classic and consistent complaints here is that Healer Jobs in FFXIV are not focused on DPS and that DPS abilities seem to be filler afterthought for the purposes of soloing more than anything, with even SGE having a very unsatisfying DPS kit."

(Seriously, the common refrain here is that the Devs designed the Healer kits for damage that the game doesn't output to justify them, and with DPS as such an afterthought that it's dreadfully boring to many of the posters here because of how unfocused and "filler" it is.)

Meaning by the above definition you quoted me having said, SCH and SGE in PvE are "focused on healing". SCH has exactly one debuff used on CD, so it's not a focus of the Job and has no interactivity with the rest of the kit, AST has offensive support buffs but is very strongly a Healer, and probably the most powerful one in the game with tools that massively fill empty HP bars including party-Benediction Macrocosmos, and SGE is healing with literally every action they take, even their damage spells.

So not only did I not say what you claim and are using as justification for the attacks, what I did say can't be used to support your conclusion that you imagined me saying.

I didn't "pretty much provoke everyone who plays" SCH and SGE. For one thing, I main SCH! The people "provoked" where the people who are perpetually provoked at me for breathing at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

I asked for confirmation to give you the benefit of the doubt that this is not what you meant so you can clarify the misunderstanding,

---

And then assumed that, instead of a short post at the bottom of a page in an active thread being missed, I confirmed your belief that isn't even consistent with the thing I had just said that you've twisted?

How is "I asked you to clarify, and then assumed the worst" a good faith giving of benefit of doubt, exactly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

you provoked others by continuously bringing up the point of why your post wasn't acceptable in a thread about things healers enjoyed

---

I wasn't "provoking" anyone. I was stating my opinion in a thread about opinions, and to explain what I DID like about AST in PvP. My GOD...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

and doubled down on the idea that those healers are "supports" rather than healers.

---

In PvE or PvP?

Not PvE, since we weren't TALKING ABOUT PvE.

In PvP, I presented AST as an example of the one that felt like a Healer to me and why I felt that.

Your post seems to be saying "Ren, you are not allowed to have an opinion, or if you do, you are not allowed to state it because someone might be provoked by it."

I'm "provoked" by most of the things you guys say, but clearly that doesn't prevent you from saying it nor is there a collective soul searching and chastising of each other for saying those things. I've even presented people being passive aggressive sarcastic in this thread and someone calling me a troll (how is that not "provoking", exactly?), and instead of chastising people doing that, you defend and justify ACTUAL and direct provocation, on the grounds of imagined slight justifying ACTUAL slight. In what way does that make sense in your mind?

Having to invent words to put into someone's mouth, to then use to justify ongoing assaults on this person, that predated said words that they did not even say, and would be going on regardless of said words being said (which weren't even said) is just so far beyond the pale at this point, I'm honestly aghast. I thought this subforum was bad, but I think this may actually be a new...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnotherPerson

This is not any indication of good faith in...

---

Oh my god.

I just can't even with this post anymore.
I'm sorry.

[QUOTE=Renathras;6250610]Right, no antagonism at all. <_</QUOTE]

Pot, kettle:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

So all the people posting in here saying either "nothing at all" or giving really snarky, sarcastic replies weren't doing that until we started talking about "real healers"? (btw, that was Roe, not me). Stuff like:

"Can I get back to you on this? "
"Does the insta-queue for any content count? No? Well... uh..."
"I also like the memories I have of playing SCH and AST. "
"The themes and that's it. "
"SE took everything away that I LIKE about healers."

---

My post which you so rudely lumped for no reason simply because you don't like me was open for discussion (the second one). Which you could have gone on to then give examples of HOW they could have been brought back into the game or even argue that they're already there.

No. You just want to use it as 1. an attack on yourself when I specifically mentioned saying that it's SE's problem not yours, and 2. not even address it yet want to have a discussion.

The first two actually made me laugh. We're not allowed to have humor?

I can't speak for Ty's but mine wasn't written with snark. Especially the first one.

All of this to say, yes I don't like healers how they are outside of flashy effects right now, yet that's not the answer that you want when the threat is LITERALLY titled "what are things you enjoy about healers right now". Ok.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

Why DID you leave this part out, btw?

So notice what I listed, support buffing (I didn't say shielding or mitigation; if you notice, I tend to list those as their own category of thing which is under the domain of both Healers and/or Tanks in a lot of games, though in this game even DPS have some), debuffing, crowd contrrol, etc. I didn't mention shields, shield healing, or barrier healers in any capacity, yet you're presuming I did because you did, and when I didn't answer (because I didn't see the post), drawing conclusions about me saying things that I...didn't actually say; indeed, in this case, I literally said nothing and you interpreted nothing as "Barrier Healers in PvE aren't Healers" somehow. Can you see how that might be a mistake on your part, by chance?

I just can't even with this post anymore.
I'm sorry.

---

The support skills you and I listed all work under damage prevention. I call PvP healers offensive and defensive supports, but I still basically place them under the "healer" label since that's the job's goal in utilizing them.

The concept that barrier healers use "preventing damage" as its representative form of managing damage is basically in both PvE and in PvP. It's just very pronounced in PvP for SCH and SGE because that's the only thing in their toolkit, but also shows up in lower amounts for WHM. However, you took offense to all the 3 healers that use said forms of prevention in different ways when talking about their healing throughput (the three being WHM, SCH, and SGE). WHM is more balanced in mitigation due to having Protect on Seraph Strike, Aquaveil as both a cleanse and shield, Miracle of Nature to disable any lethal engages, and LB's Afflatus Purgation that also acts as a disable on multiple targets. These aspects are all aligned to 'preventing damage', which is what a barrier healer excels at. This is the first post I explained to you in how their healing throughputs work. The problem is that after I explained that, you started segregating those PvP healers and called them as "supporters" as opposed to healers because they don't heal HP rather than not having good healing throughputs, touting how AST is the real healer afterwards.

The problem with stating stuff like "Support which is focused across domains of damage dealing, buffing, debuffing, healing, and other utility (like run speed)" ... is that has been always the case for healers even before ShB dropped. These aspects are what makes a healer in the damage prevention side (aka barrier healer aspects). In PvE, Holy still exists as a way to prevent damage, and that is a huge way PvE WHMs mitigate damage in dungeon mobs. All shield healers apply a support buff to shield, all shield healers apply effects to mitigate damage. SCH had stuff like eye for an eye and shadowflare (applies slow) in the past. These are all PvE abilities. That would mean you could have considered SCH as a support from the very beginning as opposed to a healer. Yes, barrier healers have lots of ways to restore HP... but SE separated the distinction specifically because barrier healers are also meant to prevent damage as a means to keep the party alive, and when this is the only thing present in the toolkit, this very idea goes against what you consider PvP healers as 'healers' rather than support. Even to the point where even if WHM has Cure II and Cure III in its current toolkit, because Seraph Strike exists and grants Protect to allies, you called it 'not a real healer' but as an offensive 'supporter'.

The main reason why this conclusion popped up for me (and probably others) is also because you bring up RDM as a healer with AST in PvP. RDM has a heal through verholy and LB, but it's even worse in dependability because you have to charge up 3 melee combo hits before activating it under white shift. The LB has an even worse hitbox range due to its cross shape if you're relying that to heal allies, so even if it's an AoE, the target range is way more difficult to utilize correctly, making it less reliable as a source of healing. Even PvP SGE would be considered a better healer than RDM as Pneuma doesn't have any of that multiple GCD prep delay other than the cooldown. That's why I'm so confused why you don't even consider PvP SGE as a healer or WHM as a healer, but RDM as one when the conditions to activating RDM's heal is more complex.
... So correct me if I'm wrong, even if you didn't explicitly say it, everything you said said implies shield healers to only be healers because they heal HP. So that means you don't look as shields or mitigation as part of what makes a healer 'a healer'. At least not in PvP's case. After process of elimination, you really left no other choices for me to consider when you consider PvP RDM a healer more than PvP WHM due to their kit differences. I can't really see any other alternatives either. Even if you disliked Seraph Strike... it's an instant cast ability. It really does not interfere with getting Cure III out in the next GCD. You could equally do Cure II -> Seraph Strike -> Cure III for big burst healing. Even when compared to PvP RDM's verholy, PvP WHM's Cure III is way easier to put forth. I want to doubt thinking this is not what you meant when you meant the 3 PvP healers were not healers, but ... what is left for me to doubt?

SCH does not actually use the debuff on cd, at least on Frontlines. It's very much recommended to use it on cd, but that's actually the incorrect usage of Biolysis. Biolysis does not have killing power. It has pressuring power and damage reduction (aka mitigation and telling your opponents to back off). It's best to use it in large groups and in start of battles, but there are also caveats to using it as best as possible. The key word is: Pressuring power. You don't have hard CC on SCH, but you have pressure that can become soft CC towards enemies to back off. Everything in Scholar's toolkit is made for the purpose of "damage prevention". Even the DoT. It might not seem much, but the DoT can be very devastating in a long drawn out battle, which is what forces people to retreat or die in the process. Sometimes, it's worthwhile to delay the DoT so you can use Expedience to supercharge the pressuring effect and force people to back off. Biolysis isn't designed to kill, but also meant to be used defensively. However, if it gets a kill because people overstayed, then it means they didn't respect the "pressuring power" that SCH emitted, which usually happens more of a consequence rather than the original intent due to the damage penalty on SCH as a healer role in Frontlines.

As for SCH being the job with only one debuff without synergy, it's actually one debuff with 3 different skills to interact with it. SCH can activate expedience or Summon Seraph to activate Biolysis and then spread with Deployment Tactics. Almost always, you want to spread it, but there are situations where delaying Deployment Tactics slightly is better when the enemy retreats, because then you can hit a group of people sitting in the back (thereby forcing an entire alliance to do less damage to all 24 alliance members rather than just 8). Likewise, Expedience and Summon Seraph both affect Adloquium. Adloquium can then be spread by Deployment Tactics. Adloquium also enhances your own pressuring power, along with Expedience or Summon Seraph. It's ultimately up to the SCH to decide whether they want to help pressure the enemy away to disengage safely, shield allies and strengthen themselves and their team, or go all in on a defensive/offensive stance with their LB. Everything on SCH's toolkit aims at giving a lot of flexibility in how much the SCH plans on handling damage for your party, which is why I consider it a shield healer. When you called it "not a healer", I'm just boggled. Beyond boggled. Isn't that the primary goal of a shield healer? To mitigate and prevent damage? How can it not be a healer?

I'm getting too tired to read long paragraphs and formulating a detailed response. I think the main reason why this even blown up is because you only brought up 3 of those healers suddenly as "Not a Real healer" so adamantly in reply to me explaining healer throughputs of all healers is good in a thread specifically talking about what people enjoy about the healers. Take that what you will. At this point, I'm too tired to care and would be much more happier if everything is just a happy misunderstanding on my part and I'm reading into things too deeply tbh. I'm sorry if I caused any undue distress as a result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Renathras

So all the people posting in here saying either "nothing at all" or giving really snarky, sarcastic replies weren't doing that until we started talking about "real healers"? (btw, that was Roe, not me). Stuff like:

"Can I get back to you on this? "
"Does the insta-queue for any content count? No? Well... uh..."
"I also like the memories I have of playing SCH and AST. "
"The themes and that's it. "
"SE took everything away that I LIKE about healers."

---

Why are you dragging me into this? Aren't you the person who despises when others make inferences about how you feel based on what you post? I gave you an honest answer. Am I not allowed to engage with your topic without being falsely accused of doing so spitefully?

Not to put a too fine point on it, but I did get back to you. Was expressing interest in your topic a bad thing?

The one thing i enjoy most about healers is that i stopped playing them.

Likes/Dislikes of each healer, right? Sounds easy enough ^^

White Mage:

Likes- Decent healing, easy to play, Misery feels satisfying to pull off.
Dislikes- Awful MP economy, gameplay significantly reduces in quality if you die at any point.

Astrologian:

Likes- Particle effects are pretty, job is quick and complex, good job fantasy, good MP economy
Dislikes: Heals take an age to do anything, high skill floor means a bad AST is an outright burden, card system on controller needs a rework

Scholar:

Likes- Expedient is a really useful skill, easy enough to play, good job quest storyline, Deployed Critlo is satisfying to pull off.
Dislikes- Heals reliant on fairy placement results in occasional jank, isn't particularly fun at low levels as fairy does all the healing, losing the fairy if you die feels bad.

Sage:

Likes- Weapons usually have interesting designs, sound effects on skills are amazing, Icarus is a super useful skill for high-end content.
Dislikes- Eukrasia is underutilised, Addersting feels tacked-on, job skills having unusual names makes them difficult to memorise.

Now?

Well.... The aesthetics, I guess?

Sage has pretty effects :]

1. fast queue times
2. If I want to play the most "chill" role in the game.

The extra gil for being adventure in need is nice. I'm perpetually broke in this game. I like the power healing gives me to reverse an encounter with Limit Break 3 too. Countering a knock back that would kill someone with Rescue is also one of my favorite moments. I also like healing because I'm not dependent on someone else to keep me alive. The only thing worse than being bored as a healer is being frustrated as a DPS or tank that is on the receiving end of inept healing.

Simple DPS rotation that allows me to focus on duty mechanics.