Only changes I like to see for healers is them bringing back cleric stance and group or land base AOE attacks for all healers.
Printable View
Only changes I like to see for healers is them bringing back cleric stance and group or land base AOE attacks for all healers.
Cleric stance lost its purpose in HW because it didn't affect healing abilities. Things like indom, lustrate, tetra and essential dignity straight up ignored its healing penalty. It only affected healing GCDs, and you already know what the community's stance on healing GCDs are.
I can't think of a healer that needs more work than SCH though. It's the only healer that has an opportunity cost on their healing resources. Dissipation literally locks half of your kit and stops you from building fairy gauge.
Why and for what? 300 potency under raid buffs every 3 minutes? Energy drain doesn't even give back MP anymore. Why does seraph lock out fey blessing AND aetherpact? It's just not worth it. SGE has better damage AND healing across majority groups because it makes no such concessions.
I don't want them to neuter SCH either, and maybe after these recent reworks we should be more wary of who we suggest reworks for. But SCH can be better.
Nah. That's exactly the reason. One half of it anyway. Also, I raid myself. That's the only time in the game where I feel the tiny differences between jobs have a slight impact. Leave it to the players to optimise the fun out of everything. SE shouldn't oblige that behaviour. And the same is true for barely having to press a button to get through the MSQ. There is easy and there is being patronising. lol Different difficulty setting exist for a reason.
Every.healer.does.not.need.to.be.able.to.do.everything.
The entire point of the revamp was to emphasize shield vs regen healers to attempt to encourage bringing one of each so you don't stack a job.
Same thing was attempted with tanks, it failed miserably. This Shield vs Regen healer thing is looking to do the same because every healer is becoming a copy of each other.
Because negative things are only bad if they're on Scholar. Suggesting good things are given to White Mage = bad homogenization, not every healer needs to be good at everything. Suggesting good things be given to Scholar = thank god, long time coming, Scholar is so singularly aggrieved, poor Scholar is merely a powerful healer, a strong damage dealer, has strong raid buff contribution, and is utility-laden, but *that's* not being good at everything. Now give Scholar some more power. It's sooooo underpowered.
This is the double standard this community has always used for WHM versus Scholar/AST.
It is rewarding, you get 3 aetherflows and boosted gcd healing. In other words, you get a broil's worth of energy drains to compensate for the GCD you cast, or a 2/3 refund if you've run into a spot where you need to use an aetherflow for healing.
I mean look at temperance, formerly largesse formerly divine seal - that's currently the same healing buff (20%), with a minor mitigation tacked on. I'd argue that despite white mage relying more on GCDs to heal, it's more of a nothingy ability as it requires no thought instead of very little.
Would I turn down a lv92 trait to make it affect oGCDs too? Of course not, but it's not at all necessary as of yet.
I'm not going to point you at your signature but I am slightly baffled by your stance.
Oh the all-important faerie gauge, however will we cope without it for 30s? It's not even like whispering dawn gets cancelled if you use dissipation while it's active.
And temperance costing a lily would be interesting - now that they're on 20s generation it lines up exactly with the duration. There's no reason white mage shouldn't also have opportunity costs if it makes it more interesting. Why do people go on about making healers more interesting and then turn around to suggest that they be made even more braindead?