Firestarter

[Daemonfaust]

I hope people aren't making the mistake of casting Fire 3 just because it has a higher number than Fire 1. Its an honest mistake though but when you look at the numbers of mp, time casting, and damage, Fire 3 is only worth it during Firestarter procs and to get a full stack of Astral fire while in full stack of Umbral.

I like how they made all the spells have a purpose from 1 - 50 and still be used. Only issue is that the naming is a bit confusing... Fire 1 is single target, Fire 2 is less damage than Fire 1 and AOE, and Fire 3 is single target but doesn't replace the use of Fire 1 due to cast time and mp even though it does more damage. Think they could have worked out some better names.

[Divine_Ultima]

Snip

You would be surprised. If I had a dollar for every time I used the duty finder and had a BLM or THM use Fire3 until low mp then Blizzard 3 till full mp, I'd be rich. No thunder in the rotation at all because most of them say its useless and weak. I tried helping out a few only to get chewed out by them saying that I didn't know how to play the class so shut-up (last time I gave advice on a rotation). Once my CE arrives I'm re-rolling to THM I fell in love with the class in phase 3 but decided to opt out and try Arcanist this time (meh overall) and I'm underwhelmed with it.

[RonPierce]

I hope people aren't making the mistake of casting Fire 3 just because it has a higher number than Fire 1. Its an honest mistake though but when you look at the numbers of mp, time casting, and damage, Fire 3 is only worth it during Firestarter procs and to get a full stack of Astral fire while in full stack of Umbral.

I like how they made all the spells have a purpose from 1 - 50 and still be used. Only issue is that the naming is a bit confusing... Fire 1 is single target, Fire 2 is less damage than Fire 1 and AOE, and Fire 3 is single target but doesn't replace the use of Fire 1 due to cast time and mp even though it does more damage. Think they could have worked out some better names.

I'd have expected, given past naming schemes, Fire II would actually be Firega, and IDK, Fire III could have just been called anything else with a fiery context. Same with cures, there should be a Curega.

[Allyrion]

I'd have expected, given past naming schemes, Fire II would actually be Firega, and IDK, Fire III could have just been called anything else with a fiery context. Same with cures, there should be a Curega.

Should be Fire, Fira, Firaga or Blizzard, Blizzara Blizzaga etc.
That's the standard FF naming scheme.

[Braxy]

Should be Fire, Fira, Firaga or Blizzard, Blizzara Blizzaga etc.
That's the standard FF naming scheme.

Actually in FFXI, there were both. Fire, Fire 2, Fire 3, and Fire 4 were progressively stronger single-target spells. Firaga, Firaga 2, Firaga 3 were progressively stronger AOE spells.