The reason we healers DPS

[Avidria]

Because its fun.

Less DPS less fun.
Healing only is stupid and should never be consider as a good form of gameplay itself.

Personally I don't enjoy having to dps as a healer, and very much prefer spending most of my time just healing, with dps being optional. That's just more fun for me.

That said I recognize that that has never been the style of healing in this game, which is why I almost never play healers in FF. So I totally get why so many healers are upset, but I can't say I am. I might actually give AST and SCH another shot actually...

[Freyt]

Personally I don't enjoy having to dps as a healer, and very much prefer spending most of my time just healing, with dps being optional. That's just more fun for me.

That said I recognize that that has never been the style of healing in this game, which is why I almost never play healers in FF. So I totally get why so many healers are upset, but I can't say I am. I might actually give AST and SCH another shot actually...

People are overreacting to the DPS loss for 5.0. It won't be that big, and people will still expect you to DPS as a healer. If you don't want to do both, then you might to play anything other than healer.

[Deceptus]

If you mean to say that you're having a difficulty believing in the dev team's capability of producing the sort of content that they're promising, especially because you realize they've made these same statements and commitments before, all while being unable to muster the venom necessary to feel anything more than apathy towards them and/or the situation; then yes, you are jaded. Much like many of the healers have become, and rightfully so, as Stormblood was supposed to be their opportunity to review all of this, and the changes they've put out for Shadowbringers goes against the design philosophies that the dev team claims to have for the other roles ("don't want to take away or restrict abilities, because it will feel like they're punishing the players" and bragging about raising weak classes to be stronger rather than nerfing other classes to make them weaker is something that comes immediately to mind).

That interview really irritates me. GT says:

What I've noticed is that instead of making certain classes weaker you've seemed to take the bottom classes and brought them up

Which might be true for other roles but ABSOLUTELY isn't true for healers. It seems to be just the exact opposite. So either the interviewer doesn't play healers and has no idea on how they function or he softballed the question to kiss Yoshi's butt.

[Avidria]

People are overreacting to the DPS loss for 5.0. It won't be that big, and people will still expect you to DPS as a healer. If you don't want to do both, then you might to play anything other than healer.

Hmm. Well, I'll still give it a shot I suppose. If it really isn't that big of a change, I'll just stick with bard I guess haha. Or dancer, if that's fun. We'll see.

[EaMett]

People are overreacting to the DPS loss for 5.0. It won't be that big, and people will still expect you to DPS as a healer. If you don't want to do both, then you might to play anything other than healer.

I think you're missing the point of the complaints. Healers don't care how much they dps. Or what their dps numbers are (other than relative to each other). What healers do care about is that healing downtime is about ~70% of their time for ultimate and closer to 90% for the rest of the encounters. That's a lot of time to be spamming one or two buttons, and subsequently a lot of time not having fun.
Healers like WHM have been asking for a bit more variety and options for their downtime. Instead they're still in the exact same situation but SCH was brought down to their level. Healers aren't even asking for a full dps rotation or anything, just by the twelve give us more than 2 buttons to press.

Not to mention that this also goes against any gameplay improvements we've been asking for these past 2 years in order to fix some clipping and weaving issues on healers. They fixed those for AST recently when they reduced malefic cast but they're breaking it in 5.0 for SCH (why?) and not fixing it for WHM.

Is there a bit of a knee-jerk reaction? Sure. But keep in mind SE has a history of making what I can only refer to as "mind boggling" healer changes over the past few years. Things like Lilies that every healer in the forum only had to take a glance at to figure out would be useless, and the first iteration of PI? youch. Etc. etc. These aren't just simple mess-ups. They're "I don't really play healer much" levels of screw ups. We've been rightfully concerned.
Adding to this they've kept baiting us with lines like "we need to balance healers before so and so", yet healers keep being this footnote in their live letters. Last live letter was hilarious. They went over the tanks with some depth, went over gunbraker with in-game footage, went over most of the DPS classes with in-game footage and explanations. And somewhere in the middle there they had like 5mn of "well those are the healers, whm wings, sch seraph, something something AST" done, no in-game footage, nothing, they even skipped a healer slide LOL. And this is right after they reassured and tried to hype us about big plans they had for healers (when it turned out DNC was a dps and not a healer). What are they thinking?
Honestly, the most info we ever get about healers is because media and influencers are proactive in asking them questions (bless them). If it weren't for that we wouldn't have gotten anything out of SE. Sadly those questions are usually generic and miss the role subtleties.

So yeah, when their "great plan", a 4 year endeavor and roadmap to set up a 4th healer is finally revealed.....we get these changes dropped on us? And this might be pedantic of me but they didn't even get some potencies right (and it's not tooltip errors like there have been for other classes). I know they're "subject to change" but c'mon after 6 years these should be basic concepts for them. It certainly isn't helping us feel confident in their ability to deal with healers.

So yeah, healers got their panties in a bunch, but it's a whole 2 year buildup and set of events that led to it.

[EaMett]

Which might be true for other roles but ABSOLUTELY isn't true for healers. It seems to be just the exact opposite. So either the interviewer doesn't play healers and has no idea on how they function or he softballed the question to kiss Yoshi's butt.

Sadly it seems like none of the guests/media/influencers invited to the media tour were healer mains (with high level experience).

[Reiryuu]

I think you're missing the point of the complaints. Healers don't care how much they dps. (snip).

While I agree with most of what you said, DPS or at least contribution is still an issue. Why? Simple. You have only a certain amount of time to complete an encounter. No amount of healing will ever be able to extend this time limit unless SE decides to remove it for this expansion (which doesn't seem likely). If any one class of healer paired with any one else does not have the healing output to keep a raid alive from the damage an encounter outputs, the heals on that job will have to be buffed. This means, that in order to complete any given raid, you still need to focus on which job is going to give you the most DPS contribution to beat the clock.


Yes, I want something to do during downtime when I'm not healing... not that WHM has many oGCD abilities to use in the first place so I have to wait on cooldowns regardless most of the time... But I'm still worried that since, well, WHM still has no raid utility to buff raid DPS in any way and I'm really not convinced that Misery is going to do anything since... well... 4 GCDs for 900 potency < 4 GCDs for 1200 potency with glare... I guess if you really have to use that lily heal enough you get... something back... but... I dunno it seems rather meh to me. Not sure if I'm missing something or what. Everyone seems convinced it is the most epic ability ever.

If all jobs are equivalent pDPS wise, and all jobs have enough healing... then AST and SCH with their buffs are still going to win out because of that tiny bit more that can help beat the clock.

[EaMett]

Not sure if I'm missing something or what. Everyone seems convinced it is the most epic ability ever.

No you've got it right. You basically get 3 healing GCDs for the price of 1. It's potentially more if you use misery during a dps window but yeah.
It's hard to tell how much rDPS sch and ast will have without more info on actual encounters but it looks like this expansion again WHM is where it should be in pDPS on a dummy which probably won't translate well to actual raiding (just as things are now). I could see WHM needing a bit of a dps buff.
If things don't change, at least WHM will be the dungeon king. No more taking my SCH out for dungeons, I'll tell you that much.

Edit: Amended my first post to account for dps relative to other healers. For meta purposes.

[MintnHoney]

That interview really irritates me.

It should, because there are a lot of design philosophies stated in that interview, literally spoken by Aimee, that they seem to just be ignoring when it comes to healers.

[Reiryuu]

It should, because there are a lot of design philosophies stated in that interview, literally spoken by Aimee, that they seem to just be ignoring when it comes to healers.

It actually gets better. In an interview he said with Mr. Happy, he mentioned that the level of abilities was determined to how close to the "core" aspect of the job it was. That's why Paladin's gap closer is 72. So... get this... by this logic, "Protect" (previously level 7/8 WHM spell in 2.0) and "Divine Seal" (level 40 quested WHM ability) are so far from the core of WHM that they are a level 80 ability. Admittedly, protect being upgraded to half of PVP protect's effect is much better than the original... but at level 80 when SCH gets Sacred Soil at 40 and AST gets Collective Unconscious or whatever it's called at 56?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uFvDXs-rLk&t=118s <-- there's the video and the question is just before the 2 minute mark.