In 6.0 could we fix the Pet Potencies, please?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eloah

That's a bit different since, unlike the pet potencies, the BLM potencies, specifically for fire spells but also for their other spells, are a base, with an added multiplier that just happens to be consistent (stance and enochian). But unlike the pets, since the buff is a constant it becomes irrelevant in the long run, similar to Dragoon's buff. Now I'm not saying the tool tips couldn't be a bit more accurate, but it's not entirely the same thing as the pet potencies.

---

Pet potencies are constant too, so I'm unsure why you chose that as your second difference between them. Pet potency is just as consistent and irrelevant in the long run.

The actual main difference from things like Astral Fire is that the potency listed in the tooltip for pets is actually accurate. It's just that the end result is calculated based on the pet's stats instead of yours which in turn are based on your stats. It's not quite as simple as just changing the potency number that is displayed on the pet's ability tooltips since that number is technically accurate. A note about pet stats on the Summon I and Summon II tooltips would be nice, of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

Jesus christ no wonder why schoolar is in such bade shape.

Someone in SE really watched youtube on the second screen instead of DOING THEIR OWN JOB.

---

This sounds like someone just watched a youtube video about Scholar instead of actually playing the job.

Scholar is not in some hyperbolic bad shape. It is perfectly functional and able to do any content with ease. The main issues with it aren't even Scholar specific. I.e. pet clunkiness and healer dps rotations being boring. Aside from those two things, there's very little that needs adjusting. The only thing I can think of is making it less of a dps loss to weave oGCD and use Aetherflow for healing instead of Energy drain but that's a relatively small issue compared to the other two things.

As someone who has leveled literally everything to max and understands the core mechanics and rotations of every job, I can vouch that the main issues with sch are what were mentioned prior: pet clunkiness at times, and that fact that all healers had their dps gutted to a bare bones state.

Of the 3 healers I play ast the least. It just doesn't mesh all that well with my more dps focused mentality. The card weaving for extra party damage is nice but I enjoy being able to crunch in dps without the micro-management of the cards. I often keep moving the fairy around boss arenas to accommodate movement, but that's it.

I'm a stubborn old man with whm. I let regens do a lot of the work and supplement them with benison, lilies, and/or oGCD heals as needed. You'd be impressed at how much healing a regen + tetra on a tank in a pull does when paired alongside holy spam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darsien

My SCH is at 80, though, and I have an idea of how the class functions in difficult content. How about instead of deflecting, you address my concern? You see, I have this pet peeve: When someone literally has no frame of reference for a strong opinion on something, I call them out on it.

So either give me more details or stop parroting information you probably got from someone who does content you're not able to set foot in in the first place. Because I know why SCH is on the weaker side of the healers and I also know its stronger points as well. I know that you don't and that you also don't do content where those strengths and weaknesses matter. So please. Let me into that thought process of yours.

---

I am amazed on how easily you got triggered by 2 sentences to the point where you had to reach into lodestone of mine, to make incredible important point of your counter argument on my unimportant comment in a thread where nobody from SE is ever going to see.

My point still stands even if im 6 levels away from max lvl.
SCH is playable but that does not mean he is good, and by the comment previously posted in this thread by saying its in bad shape i meant that mechanically this job is a train wreck, with fairy responding slower than 20 action macro and the job itself having misleading potencies that are in reality 30% weaker, this kind of bug is just absurd. So yeah schoolar is in a bad shape and its also underperforming in comparison to other healers, both in rdps and heals. thats it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

and the job itself having misleading potencies that are in reality 30% weaker, this kind of bug is just absurd.

---

This is not a bug...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedkel

I am amazed on how easily you got triggered by 2 sentences to the point where you had to reach into lodestone of mine, to make incredible important point of your counter argument on my unimportant comment in a thread where nobody from SE is ever going to see.

My point still stands even if im 6 levels away from max lvl.
SCH is playable but that does not mean he is good, and by the comment previously posted in this thread by saying its in bad shape i meant that mechanically this job is a train wreck, with fairy responding slower than 20 action macro and the job itself having misleading potencies that are in reality 30% weaker, this kind of bug is just absurd. So yeah schoolar is in a bad shape and its also underperforming in comparison to other healers, both in rdps and heals. thats it

---

Scholar is good in both department.
Good healing doesn't mean crazy HPs. It means good mitigation and healing when needeed. As for rDPS, he is behind indeed. But not by a enourmous margin. Which is perfectly okay. We can't ask absolute perfect balance damage wise. Besides, when paired with AST, it actually shines because it's healing toolkit works really well with AST.

What's wrong with scholar currently isn't it's efficiency as a job or a healer, it is indeed the clunky fairy ghosting and "how" it's played, but that problem is the same for all healers.

As for the pet potency, it's not a bug. That's because the fairy healing doesn't scale the same as the owner, which is something that exists for a very long time. But it displays misleading potencies for the new players who don't know about that.

Faerie potency scaling I think is 2/3 of regular potency, but this isn't new to Shadowbringers. So Embrace is actually 100 potency, while regen is 200 (per tick/3 seconds).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mhaeric

For what it's worth as a heads up, potency displaying as something different in tooltip from the actual potency is fairly common and definitely not limited to just pet actions. None of the BLM fire spells display the actual potency for example. They at least have a tooltip for astral fire that says fire spell potency is increased, which is a step up from pet potencies, but it still says nothing about by how much it gets increased.

---

I believe it's like this:
When in
Astral Fire I 140% fire, 90% ice
Astral Fire II 160% fire, 80% ice
Astral Fire III 180% fire, 70% ice

Umbral Ice I 90% fire, 100% ice
Umbral Ice II 80% fire, 100% ice
Umbral Ice III 70% fire, 100% ice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lethros

I believe it's like this:
When in
Astral Fire I 140% fire, 90% ice
Astral Fire II 160% fire, 80% ice
Astral Fire III 180% fire, 70% ice

Umbral Ice I 90% fire, 100% ice
Umbral Ice II 80% fire, 100% ice
Umbral Ice III 70% fire, 100% ice

---

Oh, I know. The community has figured those numbers out long ago. It'd just be nice if there was a tooltip somewhere that said it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mhaeric

Oh, I know. The community has figured those numbers out long ago. It'd just be nice if there was a tooltip somewhere that said it.

---

maybe those numbers have been found the same elsewhere, but I got them from my own interest and enjoyment of figuring out what they are. So for me there was something in not everything being revealed. I was waiting for Prey Online in Azys Lla when I looked into it myself through damage numbers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mhaeric

Pet potencies are constant too, so I'm unsure why you chose that as your second difference between them. Pet potency is just as consistent and irrelevant in the long run.

The actual main difference from things like Astral Fire is that the potency listed in the tooltip for pets is actually accurate. It's just that the end result is calculated based on the pet's stats instead of yours which in turn are based on your stats. It's not quite as simple as just changing the potency number that is displayed on the pet's ability tooltips since that number is technically accurate. A note about pet stats on the Summon I and Summon II tooltips would be nice, of course.

---

I didn't say the potencies were constant, I called them a base with a constant buff. That's why I said they were a bit different. BLM's are usually under a constant buff, both from their stance and Enochian.

I can't think of a better way to explain it other then it's the constant buff that makes it different. Unlike other jobs, a BLM's buff is activated upon a cast of either a fire or blizzard spell, so you can't really gauge them without that buff. Pets dont have this stipulation.

Truthfully, it would be nice if they would add a bit of an addendum to the tool tip to show the potencies while in each stance, and their level. But it's not as difficult to figure out as the pet potencies.