The role name "Healer" should be changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

No matter if your perspective is "I DPS until it's time to heal" or "I DPS when heals aren't needed." you're still cut from the same cloth. So please stop wasting your time trying be right.

---

By the same coin, though... she's not wrong, either.

And if it's just the time-tried question of half-full or half-empty, it seems logical to approach it from whatever end most feels pertinent to one's game experience. If, to them, that's "Green DPS" more so than "Healer (who spends most of their time dealing damage)", what's it matter to you?

:: For my own part, I'd bring a healer, except where forced anyways, when/if bringing one makes me clear the fight faster than not, and I'd prefer from them whichever behavior on average (including any wipes caused) clears the fight faster, so if they're not the same cloth, then... I'd have to go with hers instead.

The thing that gets me here is that roles in general are an out-of-character way to look at archetypes. I'm not saying "no, don't rename the group of green jobs" but if you need a lore-friendly and immersive name for your job... white mage, astrologian, and scholar are right there for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Urthdigger

A healer is simply the party member that can most effectively recover HP, a tank is the party member that takes the least damage from attacks, a DPS is the party member that deals the most damage. A role is what you excel at, not the sole thing you do with absolutely nothing else done whatsoever.

---

Ultimately if this gets changed, that's fine in my eyes, but it's an inane and petty thing to go out of the way and ask to be changed. In my experience, I've never come across someone in-game saying "I'm a healer, so all I'm going to do is heal." Maybe this is just my experience, but I genuinely don't understand how this is so much of a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yuumiy

The thing that gets me here is that roles in general are an out-of-character way to look at archetypes. I'm not saying "no, don't rename the group of green jobs" but if you need a lore-friendly and immersive name for your job... white mage, astrologian, and scholar are right there for you.

---

What? We play jobs now? Not just slightly revised and reskinned role templates? Please take me to the past, future, or alternate reality you've descended from!

I jest, but it really is sad how much we've pushed away from that over the game's expansions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jandor

I have more issue with the DPS name than healer tbh, being a damage per seconder is stupid.

---

Well .. i mean .. The Devs refer to them as Damage Dealers, or DD for short. DPS is a community name.

The reason why the 3 roles are called tank, dps, healer is because of the playerbase. You'd think they'd be called Sentinel, Ravager, Medic, or defender, attacker, support. It's actually quite funny because in ffxi there were no such terms. Tank is a modern term for a mobile armor with a mounted gun on a Turret. That was not the original classification SE had in mind when designing tank roles. Or how about calling dps DPS? Damage per second? That's odd
But why call your roles anything but what the masses will call them because by now the slang rank, dps, healer have already stuck as prominent classifications of roles in MMOs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shurrikhan

By the same coin, though... she's not wrong, either.

And if it's just the time-tried question if half-full or half-empty, it seems logical to approach it from whatever end most feels pertinent to one's game experience. If, to them, that's "Green DPS" more so than "Healer (who spends most of their time dealing damage)", what's it matter to you?

:: For my own part, I'd bring a healer, except where forced anyways, when/if bringing one makes me clear the fight faster than not, and I'd prefer from them whichever behavior on average (including any wipes caused) clears the fight faster, so if they're not the same cloth, then... I'd have to go with hers instead.

---

I never said she was wrong. Whether we should be DPSing or not is tired old argument. That's why I brought up that the two mentalities are cut from the same cloth. But some posters just have to be argumentative and express, "My mentality is right, and yours is wrong.", and I tire of that argument from five years ago because when both of us are in combat, our actions as far as the decision to DPS or heal will likely be very similar. That is why I say save your breath for more constructive arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

Spin it how you want. It's still your primary responsibility to sustain the group, and DPS stops when heals are needed. Period. Number of skills is entirely irrelevant, but if you want to go there you might want consider not how many more healing skills you have opposed to DPS abilities, but rather how many/few of those abilities you have in respect to the other members of your group.

No matter if your perspective is "I DPS until it's time to heal" or "I DPS when heals aren't needed." you're still cut from the same cloth. So please stop wasting your time trying be right.

---

I'm not trying to be right, just pointing out where you're wrong. I understand that you aren't some curebot, I'm glad for it and happy for all the parties that get you... that doesn't mean you aren't staying something that's blatantly false, though.

Everyone's objectives are the same in XIV. We are all given toolkits with varying degrees of damage and support and it's up to us to use them as best we can to clear every instance. That means killing the enemies while allowing our party members to do the same. A tank mitigating, a dps avoiding excess incoming damage, a healer healing up unavoidable damage - they're all the same thing, they're just letting your teammates continue chipping away at the enemies.

If we want to talk percentage comparisons let's look at the number of GCDs spent on damage versus healing, or even HPS versus DPS. Outside of later Savage floors or Ultimate I'm virtually always contributing more DPS than HPS... so why am I called a healer then?

Until we can honestly look at every person in an instance and see them as equals with exactly the same responsibilities we will continue having the completely stupid healer dps debate. I don't want to contribute to that, do you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

I'm not trying to be right, just pointing out where you're wrong. I understand that you aren't some curebot, I'm glad for it and happy for all the parties that get you... that doesn't mean you aren't staying something that's blatantly false, though.

Everyone's objectives are the same in XIV. We are all given toolkits with varying degrees of damage and support and it's up to us to use them as best we can to clear every instance. That means killing the enemies while allowing our party members to do the same. A tank mitigating, a dps avoiding excess incoming damage, a healer healing up unavoidable damage - they're all the same thing, they're just letting your teammates continue chipping away at the enemies.

If we want to talk percentage comparisons let's look at the number of GCDs spent on damage versus healing, or even HPS versus DPS. Outside of later Savage floors or Ultimate I'm virtually always contributing more DPS than HPS... so why am I called a healer then?

Until we can honestly look at every person in an instance and see them as equals with exactly the same responsibilities we will continue having the completely stupid healer dps debate. I don't want to contribute to that, do you?

---

Ok, where have you pointed out that I'm wrong? Simply telling me I'm wrong doesn't make it so, and if you're unable to indisputably exhibit that I am wrong, then you best be right. However, hopefully I don't have to scream into your ear for you to get that regardless of your perspective, it doesn't change how you optimize the healer toolkit. Tell me, what am I stating that is blatantly false? Best be careful to make sure that it isn't just your opinion.

Sure, everyone's objectives in PvE are the same: Kill the enemy, and win. So what? That does very little to prove your point, as this objective is an umbrella that all roles fall under, and if you are keeping the tank and DPS from eating the floor, you are still contributing towards making this happen. However, I'm not going to go back and forth with you all day over what should be elementary basics for you; because I can tell you this, if a player hits the mat and you could have prevented it, then you're not paying attention to what you should be doing. They are going to look right at you.

If you want to go off on a tangent about being a green-DPS, then this tells me your frustration has little to do with me, and more with healer design in FFXIV.

And no, not all jobs are created equal, and a current issue we do have with the game is SEs attempts to homogenize the jobs within a given role. Everyone does have the responsibility of contributing as much damage as possible, but tanks and healers have other responsibilities as well. And we can continue this 'DPS or heals first' debate if you wish, but that is even more redundant than the healer DPS debate, which has been buried for a long time now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gemina

And no, not all jobs are created equal, and a current issue we do have with the game is SEs attempts to homogenize the jobs within a given role. Everyone does have the responsibility of contributing as much damage as possible, but tanks and healers have other responsibilities as well. And we can continue this 'DPS or heals first' debate if you wish, but that is even more redundant than the healer DPS debate, which has been buried for a long time now.

---

Things are getting a little heated here and we're deviating from the topic, so I'll say...
You call my position petty, sure, but I ask you to look at the greater meaning. This title of "Pure healer" that we've been shackled to this expansion, after seeing a so-called "pure healer" in Stormblood WHM (which I then proceeded to not play, because I'm not into that,) is... Well, Pure Healer. Renaming the role "Healer", to fit its actual in-game playstyle, means dropping the "healer" part of "pure healer." That pretty much calls for a formal divorce from the illusion that FF14 is a game where you can play a pure healer, and (while playing a pure healer) be a highly effective member of your party. If I'm able to keep preventable deaths at 0, while also pumping out damage that shaves seconds / minutes off the fight's duration, I'm more effective, right?
Healer design principles are not vibin' with healer playstyles or healer-PoV encounter design at all. The name isn't helping. Officially changing its name to reflect its playstyle, and dropping this nonsense where everyone is forced to be a "pure healer" even when they just want to be an effective healer, would show a level of understanding not shown to the role since the dropping of Accuracy and the addition of Stoneskin II... And I think that is something sorely needed right now. Does that put things in a more understandable perspective?

Actually, rather than changing the names of the roles, I believe it would be in the development team's best interest to create additional roles to avoid broadening the current roles' definitions too much. Particularly, I think adding in a Support role, at the very least, and moving some existing jobs into it, might help fine-tune the definitions of the roles and may allow them to better balance the roles. In this case, jobs in the Support role would be equipped with a moderate amount of power in DPS output and relative power in other area(s), depending on their focus. A job in the Support role might have a secondary role associated with them.

The party make up for 4-man parties would be adjusted to 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 1 DPS, and 1 Support. In this case, although the overall DPS may be lesser than the original combo of 1 Tank, 1 Healer, 2 DPS, since the Support would be allowed a moderate amount of power, I'd imagine that drop wouldn't be too terribly significant.
The party make up for 8 man parties would be adjusted to 1-2 Tanks, 1 Healer, 1 Support, 4-5 DPS. I believe we've been shown that Solo healing has become something of a regular thing as of late, and I think it would be wise to push into that, both to allow healers to potentially have the chance to heal more, and also to allow healers the chance to shine. The Support will be there to help out, so there would still be a cushion for the healers, but not nearly enough so as to trivialize the role.

Regarding jobs which would be moved into the role, out of the 3 current healers, I believe Astrologian would be best suited to the Support role; this would allow them to have a greater focus on their support abilities, and allow them to become a true secondary healer, as is what seems to be their desired interaction with WHM and SCH when you consider the Sects. Leaving WHM and SCH in the Healing role would allow them to be the de-facto healers of each type of healing, while Astrologian could be there to provide a bit of what the team might be missing (if ever) or emergency assistance with healing when the Healer has run into issues.

Examples of jobs from other roles which might fit into the Support role would be Red Mage, Dancer, and possibly Gunbreaker; perhaps Blue Mage, if they could get past the whole Limited Job thing. I'd like to think that they could bring Bard into the Support role, too, but they would need to make a decision on what they want Bard to be; they can either a have sharpshooter, who happens to whistle while they work, or a Poet/singer who happens to shüt. If they want Bard to be a sharp-shooter, then they should keep the development on this current path and keep them in the DPS spectrum; otherwise, bring them into the Support role and bring back karaoke night.


...That aside, it's probably best not to change the name of the role, as anything else might give the wrong impression for the jobs, and then there's the matter of translation and making sure it's easy to understand what the job's thesis statement is.