WHM Questions/Feedback from a Warrior

I had a really long debate/discussion with a few good WHM I know the other night about the use of Stoneskin + Regen, and how effective it is for Warriors. The main point I was trying to iron out was whether or not it's more effective to keep Stoneskin and Regen up than it is to spam cures.

The reason this came up was because Warriors are starting to get 7.3k+ HP, which makes the amount absorbed by Stoneskin pretty substantial (1.3k). Also, Warriors can fill-in the gaps in damage taken between Stoneskin's with self heals.

The discussion ended with us agreeing that Cure + Cure2 are better for heals/sec, but I still think there is more to Stoneskin that many WHM don't take advantage of. I wanted to put this post out there to see what other WHM's think of stoneskin, and when is the best time to use it on a Warrior.

(Continued on 2nd post)

To start, I will point out times that I see it being useful from my personal experience.

First for the obvious list:

• Before the start of any fight
• When you know a big hit is coming and you need to mitigate it (ex. Mountain on Titan)

Now for a less-obvious list, again based on my experience as a WAR:

• When your tank is topped off and you are waiting on him to take more damage before casting your next heal (Stoneskin here)
• Repeat above until tank takes more damage and requires actual heals
• Before a Knockback is coming (ex. Repel on Demon Wall) - it blocks the knockback component [NOTE: Scholars should be able to use group Succor and have the entire group block the knockback]

What other uses are there for Stoneskin? I feel like it's such an underused ability at the moment, and needs more exploration with Warriors.

EDIT: Here are a few more suggestions/uses people have made in this thread. Keep them coming!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiosha_Maureiba

Hi there.

I oft used Stoneskin as an alternative to Cure II. It generates a lot less enmity than a heal would, so if I do need to Medica, I'm a few Cure IIs behind on that enmity list for the same MP cost. And toward the Warrior, I'm not overwriting your self-healing abilities, so I get to save MP by not having to chain cure, regen, etc if I choose heavy duty healer mode.

But for offensive white mages who stance dance, it lets me stay in Cleric's Stance longer. Stoneskin lets me pull off the equivalent of Cure II without the extra time needed to come out of the stance, cast the spell, then re-enter the stance. And when I do come out, may opt for Divine Seal, Cure II, Regen, then go back in Cleric's Stance.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarlax

I use it just as OP describes. Start fight tank has SS then recast after about 1 or 2 seconds followed by regen "or time damage in my head" and try to keep it until I have to burst heal with cures. Saves mana and you build a LOT less hate

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nailkita

I've been trying this out a bit on a few guinea pig warriors, and it is working surprisingly well, so long as no damage occurs outside of the tank (which ideally shouldn't but it happens) then it falls a bit behind.

---

When I play WHM I try to maintain Stoneskin on all the party so long as major heals on the tank are not needed.

It's a necessary utility spell that can prevent wipes.

When I play Ifrit (Hard) as WHM, even if there is a missed stun or someone doesn't move under Ifrit in time, the consequences aren't that dire. And a Raise with a Stoneskin can prevent another Raise.

But it's not just Stoneskin that I see being underutilzed. Almost all DPS have utility spells and abilities that are not getting any game time.

SMN has Eye for an Eye
BLM has Apocastasis
MNK has Mantra
DRG has Feint

Please use these.

Thanks

I generally stoneskin if there's enough time and I'm not hurting on MP. If the MP is low and SoS is down, stoneskin is low on the priority list.

It would only make sense to continually use stoneskin if the hp absorbed per mp spent ratio was better than the hp restored per mp spent ratio on cure II. The problem is, stone skin is much more expensive than cure 2, and it doesn't scale with gear. If a relic +1 whm in full left/right dl casts stone skin on you and a lvl 49 whm in af + whites casts it on you, it does the same. Cure 2, however, scales, so actually, 1.3k hp isnt' very much. Cure will crit for more than that (and non crits for almost that much for me and I'm not even full darklight yet) much less cure 2.

The only other time it makes sense to use it is when its either free (out of combat cast) or the tank needs more effective hp for the next big attack. Of course, you're a warrior, and thus made of paper, so every attack is a big attack :P

If stoneskin had no cast time and was off the gcd, then yes, it would make sense to use it pretty frequently on the wariror (assuming you could afford the mp).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiirNoivl

I seem to recall that it's the same amount of MP to use Stone Skin as it is to use Cure II

---

Using edit to reply to you to save on daily post limit. I was unable to look up exact mp requirments, but when I said expensive I meant in terms of return. Even if the spells are equal cost mp wise, as you get to full dl / relic, cure two hits for much more than ss can and is thus "less expensive."

This is an interesting thread. Lately, while healing WAR I've been wondering myself about using Stoneskin regularly on them while in combat because of their high health and lack of defense.

For any other class in the game i pop it before fights but it's useless in fights, even on most PLD.

I would like to hear from other WHM with experience with this to see if Stoneskin can be more useful in combat(in regards to WAR at least).

I seem to recall that it's the same amount of MP to use Stone Skin as it is to use Cure II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koltik

It does cost the same, but as he said it cannot crit. This makes it less efficient over time.

As for what Pied said about scaling: Stoneskin just scales differently. Rather than it scaling off of your gear, it scales off of your tank's.

---

Bah of course. And with the Wrath V buff on WAR, Cure II really is better than Stoneskin.

Hi there.

I oft used Stoneskin as an alternative to Cure II. It generates a lot less enmity than a heal would, so if I do need to Medica, I'm a few Cure IIs behind on that enmity list for the same MP cost. And toward the Warrior, I'm not overwriting your self-healing abilities, so I get to save MP by not having to chain cure, regen, etc if I choose heavy duty healer mode.

But for offensive white mages who stance dance, it lets me stay in Cleric's Stance longer. Stoneskin lets me pull off the equivalent of Cure II without the extra time needed to come out of the stance, cast the spell, then re-enter the stance. And when I do come out, may opt for Divine Seal, Cure II, Regen, then go back in Cleric's Stance.

Where I'm at, it seems to boost damage by 50+%, but drops healing by a similar amount.

Unfortunately, this play style will not work if a Warrior sits on Wrath stacks and will opt to the Cure method instead of Stoneskin (unless they are topped off).

I didn't realize Stoneskin blocks the knockback, I feel like I'm usually flying back. Sometimes to psych myself out, I will use Fluid Aura on Demon Wall and pretend like I knocked him back instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiirNoivl

I seem to recall that it's the same amount of MP to use Stone Skin as it is to use Cure II

---

It does cost the same, but as he said it cannot crit. This makes it less efficient over time.

As for what Pied said about scaling: Stoneskin just scales differently. Rather than it scaling off of your gear, it scales off of your tank's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiosha_Maureiba

Unfortunately, this play style will not work if a Warrior sits on Wrath stacks and will opt to the Cure method instead of Stoneskin (unless they are topped off).

---

First off, great examples Fiosha; especially about being able to stay in Cleric stance without affecting Stoneskin. In that case, Stoneskin is always better.

As for a warrior sitting on Wrath stacks, that's something that will make using Stoneskin much less useful. The idea here is that the warrior would be utilizing self-heals in-between Stoneskins, as needed, and not just sit on unused stacks that are collecting dust.

This had been discussed on Reddit and doesn't work.

First 1.3k is low compared to the 1.5k of a Cure II and for the same MP cost.

Second, the cast time of SS is 3 seconds where as Cure II is 2.5. So even if Cure II and SS had same values, the Cure II would still be the winner. In fact, to be as good as Cure II in terms of healing output or healing per GCP, SS needs 20% more value than Cure II.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebyos

This had been discussed on Reddit and doesn't work.

---

Can you share the link? I'd like to take a look and my google skills are failing atm.

Quote:

---

I didn't realize Stoneskin blocks the knockback, I feel like I'm usually flying back. Sometimes to psych myself out, I will use Fluid Aura on Demon Wall and pretend like I knocked him back instead.

---

It depends. If Stoneskin fully absorbs an attack with a secondary effect (such as Repel and it's knockback), the secondary effect will be nullified as well.

You can test it on healer type enemies that use Stoneskin with Aero, Aero II and Thunder. If they don't break the Stoneskin, the DoT shouldn't be applied. :p

From the discussion on the tank forum on my phone right now so not able to link. It would be better just to cure2 and regen a warrior because even though you have high health you would get more healing done with the difference of mana not to mention most warriors sit on their wrath stacks. Stoneskin does not benifit from +heals. Also it is generally less effective on a warrior due to the lower defense a warrior has compared to a pally. A warrior will eat through a stone skin faster than a pally would tanking the same content with the same gear.

However it does have its uses such as repel on demon wall or an extra 1k+ health before a mountain buster hit on Titan. Now what would see an increase on you would be a sch bubbles since to my knowledge they are based upon how much they heal ya for.

I use it just as OP describes. Start fight tank has SS then recast after about 1 or 2 seconds followed by regen "or time damage in my head" and try to keep it until I have to burst heal with cures. Saves mana and you build a LOT less hate

I've been trying this out a bit on a few guinea pig warriors, and it is working surprisingly well, so long as no damage occurs outside of the tank (which ideally shouldn't but it happens) then it falls a bit behind.

I had an interesting Ifrit HM the other day where I decided to try it out on the tank since he was well geared. By the time the nails were down the other WHM and I are both full MP and have had very little struggle. It wasn't until during a poorly timed missed stun where I was killed (not by the eruption but being unable to get to Ifrit in time after running away from said eruption) did MP become a struggle and I abandoned stoneskin for pure reactive healing.

I wouldn't say stoneskin should replace a cure, but I would like to see it more utilized when MP isn't a worry. Because of its lower enmity it's a very safe spell as well.

Effective health is damage I don't have to heal up. When you hit ~6k health on any tank, Stoneskin is the most efficient spell I can cast. It lets me sit on my hands before a pull, giving the tank a head start on threat before I have to start healing. And it can save people from being one-shot. So. Yeah. It's a beautiful thing.

OP is arguing that SS is more useful compared to other WHM heals as the tank gears up and increases health pool. This is only true for the scenario of a poorly geared healer and a well geared tank. Because the same can be said for healers - as they get better gear, their base heals also increase. In other words:

Stoneskin scales with tank Vit/gear
Cure I/II/Regen scales with healer Mind/Gear

In the end, SS is still less mana efficient than Cure I/Regen and has a sufficiently long cast time to not be reliable in movement intense fights. Furthermore, a stoneskin/regen combo has a higher likelihood of regen ticks overhealing as opposed to a Cure I/Regen combo that the healer has more control over. And finally, there is no way to know how much of the current stoneskin has been 'used up' vs remaining. Because of its long cast time, it would be necessary to precast stoneskin as the previous SS is wearing off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dragonflyseksparade

OP is arguing that SS is more useful compared to other WHM heals as the tank gears up and increases health pool.

---

Way to twist my words. I did not say it is more useful than other WHM heals, or anything even close to that. What I said was that Stoneskin scales with the tank's gear, rather than the healer's gear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koltik

Way to twist my words. I did not say it is more useful than other WHM heals, or anything even close to that. What I said was that Stoneskin scales with the tank's gear, rather than the healer's gear.

---

Did you read what you quoted? wtf is wrong with you? 1st grade reading comprehension?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dragonflyseksparade

OP is arguing that SS is more useful compared to other WHM heals as the tank gears up and increases health pool. This is only true for the scenario of a poorly geared healer and a well geared tank. Because the same can be said for healers - as they get better gear, their base heals also increase. In other words:

Stoneskin scales with tank Vit/gear
Cure I/II/Regen scales with healer Mind/Gear

In the end, SS is still less mana efficient than Cure I/Regen and has a sufficiently long cast time to not be reliable in movement intense fights. Furthermore, a stoneskin/regen combo has a higher likelihood of regen ticks overhealing as opposed to a Cure I/Regen combo that the healer has more control over. And finally, there is no way to know how much of the current stoneskin has been 'used up' vs remaining. Because of its long cast time, it would be necessary to precast stoneskin as the previous SS is wearing off.

---

I feel like we're speaking a different language.

Your tank has 7000 health. You put Stoneskin on him. Now he has 8260 health.

That's actual health, even if you can only see the 7000 health on him.

That's huge. That's essentially like he gained a ton more vitality without sacrificing any other secondary stats. Damage prevented is damage never taken.

Stoneskin keeps people from being one-shot. It allows lower geared players to have higher survivability in a way that no other spell a WHM has can accomplish. And if you're really smart, you can figure out swing timers in almost any encounter and pre-plan when you will cast your Stoneskin, and when you will hold it back for later. When you're playing with effective health, you have to do pre-planning, but it is 100% worth it because the payoff far exceeds anything you can do with reactive healing.

re: dragonflyseksparade

I would say timing the gauging the Stoneskin comes with experience, as would the timing of most abilities. Overtime, if it factors into your playstyle, you will get a rhythm of how to apply Stoneskin or if it's even worth the time / MP.

I would say, Stoneskin is not worth the cast if:
a) No enmity issues with the healer.
b) Healer not using Cleric's Stance.
c) No Disease or heal debuffs in play.
d) High healing potency healer with a low HP tank (applies to both Warrior and Paladin).
e) Ally could benefit from the full amount of a Cure I and is not capable of self-healing.
f) Not needed to survive the next wallop.

I'm sure there are more scenarios. But I do use Cleric's Stance when there's a self-healing Warrior in the party. And pure healing would be wasted in that scenario.

To add to this, I was speaking with another WHM that I group with regularly (heals me in my AK speed runs), and she also feels SS should always be used when the tank is full HP. Basically, if you're between waiting for damage to hit and then casting a heal, or just casting SS while you wait for that damage, you should always stoneskin and stay ahead of the damage intake (as long as MP permits).

In my experience this isn't usually the case and WHM's just wait for that next hit to come so that they can cast cure. Do other WHM's disagree with the above train of thought? If not, why is Stoneskin so rarely used?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koltik

To add to this, I was speaking with another WHM that I group with regularly (heals me in my AK speed runs), and she also feels SS should always be used when the tank is full HP. Basically, if you're between waiting for damage to hit and then casting a heal, or just casting SS while you wait for that damage, you should always stoneskin and stay ahead of the damage intake (as long as MP permits).

In my experience this isn't usually the case and WHM's just wait for that next hit to come so that they can cast cure. Do other WHM's disagree with the above train of thought? If not, why is Stoneskin so rarely used?

---

Two reasons:

1) It has a longer cast time than Cure or Cure II
2) It doesn't show you pretty numbers of "omg, healing done!"

Because you can't see how much damage is being absorbed, many WHM don't understand that there's actual damage being prevented. :-\

Neither and both at same time for me, I'm with Rynessa Star. What WHM sits there topping the tank off or applying SS during a fight? I am in Cleric Stance more then I am not. Sure during downtime or between fights in dungeons I pass out SS. Mountain Buster... why my Cure 2 heals for more and takes less time to cast allowing me to move onto Medica II for Tumelts.

yea, as some described you can't see how much is left, but if you pay attention you can sort of gauge when it will be depleted, and time recasts in your head. The regen is to cover the damage taken inbetween SS and very seldomly overheals if you wait.

Of course if the battle is rather serious SS wont work and, you need raw burst. Of course we all know that cure's are more efficient than SS we can see that by looking at the MP cost and casting 2x cure 1 or a cure II. It may be "my perception" of the situation, but it seems like if I don't need to lay down some serious numbers this method saves some SERIOUS hate and makes the tanks job a little easier when fighting packs of trash, and keeping things off you.