Can Someone Please Clarify What Sage's Eukrasian Diagnosis Does

So, at first glance this is an obvious "stupid question" as the tooltip for the skill seems perfectly clear:

"Restores target's HP.
Cure potency 300
Additional Effect: Erects a magicked barrier which nullifies damage equalling 125% of the HP restored ..."

So to me is says if I cast it on a party member and they get, say, 100 HP back they'll get a shield which will absord 125HP. Makes perfect sense, right?

BUT .. and this is where my confusion arises .. during the initial solo instance you get from the Sage role quest NPC, at the point you get to fight the first 'boss' the tutorial script tells you to cast "Eukrasian Diagnosis" on the NPC to 'shield him when first engaging' .. and the script blocks progress until you do this to reinforce the point; nostalgia for Stoneskin returns /sigh.

At this stage the NPC is at full health so the spell restores ZERO HP, so what use is the shield he gets since according to the tooltip it will nullify ZERO damage, or is the tutorial misleading having you cast it pre-battle giving the IMPRESSION it will do anything when the NPC is first attacked?

As I see it for the shield to absorb any HP the tooltip must be simply badly worded when it says "... if the amount of HP restored ..." .. if that isn't the case how does the shield provide any absorption without first having restored HP?

Cheers

[edit]

I looked in the Battle Log to see what that tells me about the application of the skill, it shows when the party member GETs the buff, but there's no log line for when it's removed so I can't see any battle action that causes it to drop even though the buff icon disappears during the battle!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pintsized

So, at first glance this is an obvious "stupid question" as the tooltip for the skill seems perfectly clear:

"Restores target's HP.
Cure potency 300
Additional Effect: Erects a magicked barrier which nullifies damage equalling 125% of the HP restored ..."

So to me is says if I cast it on a party member and they get, say, 100 HP back they'll get a shield which will absord 125HP. Makes perfect sense, right?

BUT .. and this is where my confusion arises .. during the initial solo instance you get from the Sage role quest NPC, at the point you get to fight the first 'boss' the tutorial script tells you to cast "Eukrasian Diagnosis" on the NPC to 'shield him when first engaging' .. and the script blocks progress until you do this to reinforce the point; nostalgia for Stoneskin returns /sigh.

At this stage the NPC is at full health so the spell restores ZERO HP, so what use is the shield he gets since according to the tooltip it will nullify ZERO damage, or is the tutorial misleading having you cast it pre-battle giving the IMPRESSION it will do anything when the NPC is first attacked?

As I see it for the shield to absorb any HP the tooltip must be simply badly worded when it says "... if the amount of HP restored ..." .. if that isn't the case how does the shield provide any absorption without first having restored HP?

Cheers

[edit]

I looked in the Battle Log to see what that tells me about the application of the skill, it shows when the party member GETs the buff, but there's no log line for when it's removed so I can't see any battle action that causes it to drop even though the buff icon disappears during the battle!

---

You don’t need too heal dmg with the spell to apply the shield. Any overheal works the same. It’s the same with scholar. It says HP restored not healed.

So if your heal lands for 10,000 HP, your target also gets a shield of 12,500 HP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pintsized

So to me is says if I cast it on a party member and they get, say, 100 HP back they'll get a shield which will absord 125HP. Makes perfect sense, right?

---

There are games that work like this but FF14 isn't one of them. So the above remains true even if that target is at 100% health, because the heal is still 10,000 HP even if only 100hp or no hp are missing. Perhaps the tooltip wording could be better, and in the past it's been an issue with for example Dark Knight (where only applied healing was measured). But for here and like 99% of the game, think of it as being uncapped.

It's because they intend to bring accuracy back as a healer-specific mechanic, and so there will eventually be a chance for all of our healing to miss on each individual target. It means that some party members are going to die to the incoming raid-wide attack no matter how hard you try, naturally resulting in the clown fiesta many of us refer to as the high point in the healer experience at this time.

No, just kidding, it's just weird wording, like these two have said. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pintsized

So, at first glance this is an obvious "stupid question" as the tooltip for the skill seems perfectly clear:

"Restores target's HP.
Cure potency 300
Additional Effect: Erects a magicked barrier which nullifies damage equalling 125% of the HP restored ..."

So to me is says if I cast it on a party member and they get, say, 100 HP back they'll get a shield which will absord 125HP. Makes perfect sense, right?

BUT .. and this is where my confusion arises .. during the initial solo instance you get from the Sage role quest NPC, at the point you get to fight the first 'boss' the tutorial script tells you to cast "Eukrasian Diagnosis" on the NPC to 'shield him when first engaging' .. and the script blocks progress until you do this to reinforce the point; nostalgia for Stoneskin returns /sigh.

At this stage the NPC is at full health so the spell restores ZERO HP, so what use is the shield he gets since according to the tooltip it will nullify ZERO damage, or is the tutorial misleading having you cast it pre-battle giving the IMPRESSION it will do anything when the NPC is first attacked?

As I see it for the shield to absorb any HP the tooltip must be simply badly worded when it says "... if the amount of HP restored ..." .. if that isn't the case how does the shield provide any absorption without first having restored HP?

---

The wording is mainly to imply how the shielding scales off the healing value. If Eukrasian Diagnosis heal 100 HP, then the shield value will be scaled based on the amount of HP that value is, which in this case, would be 125 shield, not the amount of HP it heals up.

In contrast, skills like Haima, Panhaima, and Gobskin work slightly differently because it "erects a magical barrier that absorbs damage equivalent to [X] potency". It applies a flat shield value, regardless of whether healing is disabled.
Unlike Eukrasian Diagnosis, which is "Erects a magical barrier which nullifies damage equaling to [X]% of the amount of HP restored"

This is only apparent for situations which disable healing (The Great Hunt Trial). If you heal 0 (or miss a heal back when accuracy was a thing), then even if the shield is 125% of the potency, 0 HP x 1.25 is still 0. However, because Haima, Panhaima, and Gobskin are all just 'shields', they get the full shield value applied to the target.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pintsized

I looked in the Battle Log to see what that tells me about the application of the skill, it shows when the party member GETs the buff, but there's no log line for when it's removed so I can't see any battle action that causes it to drop even though the buff icon disappears during the battle!

---

Do you have log messages for

Battle
Subject>Friendly NPCs
Beneficial effects on friendly NPCs ending.

turned off? If you can see the application message but not the removal message this is probably the issue.

Kupo <3 I believe WoW resto druids back in the day had this issue with healing 'hots' at full health and healing arithmetic etc.. kupo <3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MintnHoney

It's because they intend to bring accuracy back as a healer-specific mechanic, and so there will eventually be a chance for all of our healing to miss...

No, just kidding...

---

You had me going for a moment there, ha ha! I was almost like:

https://i.imgur.com/7O9nLlm.gif

Many thanks for all the replies.

As is now clear, I read the words and as some of you pointed out the concept of "overheal" simply isn't mentioned and while I understand what that is I had no reason to infer that, this is the first time I think I've seen in any game where the excess heal actually is USED for something and not simply ignored.

Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pintsized

the concept of "overheal" simply isn't mentioned and while I understand what that is I had no reason to infer that, this is the first time I think I've seen in any game where the excess heal actually is USED for something and not simply ignored.

---

Here's how I make assumptions about whether overheal is ignored. Suppose someone is missing 5 HP and someone casts a 10,000 HP heal on them.

If I'm playing a game where the flytext or combat log say they regained 10,000 HP, the additional effects should work based on that 10,000 HP value including the overheal.

If I'm playing a game where the flytext or combat log say they regained 5 HP, the additional effects should be based on actual HP restored only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mortex

You don’t need too heal dmg with the spell to apply the shield. Any overheal works the same. It’s the same with scholar. It says HP restored not healed.

---

Restored means HP was lost (and normaly does not consider overheal, as that is not restoring). Healed on that effectively also means overhealing can be included. But the entire statement is vague (and wrong because it doesnt rely on restoring at all). Why isnt it done like?:
Heal potency: 300
Shield potency: 375

That way you instantly know that you can potentialy heal someone worth 675 in combat. As shield in this case is completely irrelevant because that health gets taken away anyway. The only problem i can imagine is rounding. Even if the potency would be 310, then 125% becomes a lot less neat number, but still... 387.5 is not too bad anyway (and with a potency rounding of 5, it will cause 2 decimals like 0.25). Sure, 2 decimals isnt neat, but its still accurate and easier to work with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UkcsAlias

Restored means HP was lost (and normaly does not consider overheal, as that is not restoring). Healed on that effectively also means overhealing can be included. But the entire statement is vague (and wrong because it doesnt rely on restoring at all). Why isnt it done like?:
Heal potency: 300
Shield potency: 375

That way you instantly know that you can potentialy heal someone worth 675 in combat. As shield in this case is completely irrelevant because that health gets taken away anyway. The only problem i can imagine is rounding. Even if the potency would be 310, then 125% becomes a lot less neat number, but still... 387.5 is not too bad anyway (and with a potency rounding of 5, it will cause 2 decimals like 0.25). Sure, 2 decimals isnt neat, but its still accurate and easier to work with.

---

Because people would assume skills that affect "healing actions" no longer include "shields" since shield potency is listed differently from heal potency.

It's a shame they could never balance shields and it always has to be this strange sort of split with a heal component and a small shield. A lot of the time the heal is wasted because you apply shields before taking damage. If debuffs always applied even when 0 damage is taken, we could have had more abilities that are simply a pure shield.

Yes, it still sounds really strong that you could stack a pure GCD shield with some pure oGCD shields and make a big raidwide do 0. But if you wouldn't have died, it's irrelevant. Shields are inherently smaller than pure heals, so you're putting more resources into negating that raidwide than you would by simply taking it and healing it fully in a button or two.

When they announced the shield/pure split, it was a good opportunity to rework barrier healers and make pure shield gameplay a thing. Of course shield healers should have some pure heal, perhaps some traits too, like overwriting any leftover Adlo shield converts the excess into a heal. But it should have been a gameplay style.

Instead, nothing changed, it just became more limited.