Is DPS'ing as a Healer Vote Kickable?

[Bourne_Endeavor]

No? Hmm, we must be remembering things differently. Things like fighting in the mock PvP MSQ where such AoE skills were quite nice to have at your disposal. Just one instance I can recall off the top of my head. Maybe not needed, but certainly more efficient. However, that had been my point. Open world where multiple monsters could jump on you if you aren't paying attention to your surroundings. You can run, yes, but if you need to kill them, having AoE skills at your disposal is better than none.

Yes, however their potency wouldn't need to be nearly as high in that scenario, which has been my point. It requires 6+ mobs before a Dragoon can deal more direct potency compared to a White Mage assuming the latter only spams Holy. If SE didn't intend for healers to DPS even just sparingly, then this is simply a design flaw. The current healer DPS meta exists because healers deal such significant damage and nothing hurts hard enough to warrant consistent healing. They had to know this would happen.

And open world mobs deal so little damage on average. Even if they did pile on you, Stone III would be more than adequate. Again, it isn't efficiency we're talking about but whether SE gave healers the abilities they have purely for solo-able content or to actually contribute damage whenever possible. In that specific MSQ event, I mostly did single target combos. It didn't take much longer nor would it had I been on White Mage spamming Stone III.

A simple solution would be actually make content hit hard enough or have healer checks that severely restricts how much downtime you have to DPS. Until they do, the meta will not change.

[Risvertasashi]

They had to know this would happen.

The hilarious thing is that they didn't. Look at dev comments or sometimes even patch notes. Round 1 holy nerfs? "Healers should not feel pressured to DPS". Hall of novice? "You MAY wish to DPS if you have time." Or other tidbits like "We know SOME groups' playstyle is to have healers DPS."

However, most people favor maximum contribution and so reach the logical conclusion: Healers are capable of significant DPS output and often have enough downtime to safely DPS. Thus, to maximize contribution, healers should DPS.

In the end it doesn't matter though. You can basically kick someone for a party for any reason except to grief them, so you can kick a healer that does/doesn't DPS.

[Bourne_Endeavor]

The hilarious thing is that they didn't.

You know, I wrote that and immediately thought exactly this, xD. Granted, I wasn't around for the Holy nerfs and whatnot.