WHM: An idea to change the freecure trap and to encourage using damage spells

[AnotherPerson]

Agreed.

I recently leveled WHM on another character and it reminded me of these Cure I > Free Cure II procs
I do think it teaches the wrong way of healing (Use your lower tier heal until you get a free proc for better heal)

And the game never tells you that at some point, you should stop using Cure I altogether.
Hopefully they will get rid of that in the next expansion.

Honestly the WHM cures should be revamped
Cure I > single heal
Cure II > stronger single heal
Cure III > AoE heal (WHY?)

Medica I > AoE Heal
Medica 2 > AoE Heal + HOTs (WHY?)

Shouldnt Cure III be Medica II and Medica II be Regen II?

Think of each type of skill as its base skill but with a caveat.

Medica + Medica II has the cast centered from the healer while keeping their AoE Range being huge.
Cure I + Cure II + Cure III all have their skills target a player before healing.


Medica = Group AoE heal far away from healer.
Medica II = Group AoE heal with regen far away from healer.

Cure I = Single Target Heal - MP efficient but low healing power. Used when you're low on MP due to death/MP expensive fight.
Cure II = Single Target Heal - MP inefficient but heals much more when the situation is required. Used more frequently over Cure II to maintain GCD uptime.
Cure III = Single Target Heal - Medium healing power, but players nearby the target also receives the heal, so it can be much more MP efficient than Cure I or Cure II for immediate healing.

[inhaledcorn]

The problem with Freecure, and similarly with ASTs crit Benefic II, is that the proc is the opposite way round to what is optimal.

Cure II should have a chance at proccing a crit or buffed Cure I, basically making Cure I the same potency as Cure II.
This way you save MP by healing the same amount of HP as Cure II, but with the MP cost of a Cure I.
Cure III should have a similar proc that turns Cure I into an AoE. Call it... Fullcure.


For AST I'd just have Benefic II downright replace Benefic I tbh.

I would still put a proc on the Single Target/AoE DPS spells to subtly encourage healer dps, but putting procs on Cure II to make Cure I the same in power is such a good idea. There are times you have to sit there and spam Cure II because the tank is so squish and doing big pulls without proper cooldown usage you don't have time for anything else.

[Gemina]

Agreed.

I recently leveled WHM on another character and it reminded me of these Cure I > Free Cure II procs
I do think it teaches the wrong way of healing (Use your lower tier heal until you get a free proc for better heal)

And the game never tells you that at some point, you should stop using Cure I altogether.
Hopefully they will get rid of that in the next expansion.

Honestly the WHM cures should be revamped
Cure I > single heal
Cure II > stronger single heal
Cure III > AoE heal (WHY?)

Medica I > AoE Heal
Medica 2 > AoE Heal + HOTs (WHY?)

Shouldnt Cure III be Medica II and Medica II be Regen II?

That's ARR for you. Just utter nonsense. Both Cure III and Medica II are skills that could be deleted entirely. Medica II and Asylum are literally two levels apart, and WHM is going to sooner use an ogcd AoE regen than hard cast Medica II. On demand AoE regen while nice, is too underutilized to remain a part of the WHM toolkit.

The concept of Cure III is not a bad one. I love the idea of an AoE heal that generates from the target. This is something that remains WHM exclusive. However, it would be better revamped into an ocgd, renamed, and given a CD no less than 60s. In order to accommodate the long recast time, it should have a generous range and still be applicable starting at two players. Right now, WHM does have an instant AoE heal in the form of Rapture. However, the WHM has to run into range. This new Cure 3 would be a welcome addition I assure you. It would nearly work like a back up Rescue and save players at critical HP without dragging them over.

Cure I and II I have stated multiple times that they should be consolidated into a single skill using the mastery system. The thing is, if this is in the plans from the devs to eventually do this, I could understand why they would wait until they decide to do an actual rework of the healers. A current issue with GCD heals is that they don't scale properly, and it gets increasingly worse the higher our ilvs rise. This makes them even more redundant to use in the latter levels along with being a DPS loss. As an example, it takes two Cure 1's to restore a tank back to full from 1 HP at level 15. Want to guess how many it takes at level 80?

Also, while heals can crit, they cannot direct crit. This gives DH materia investors even less reason on top of all the others to not use GCD heals. Furthermore, there is nothing a healer can do to strengthen their GCD heals other than meld crit. So there's yet another reason (piling up now). Even if we could meld something to strengthen them, there is no incentive to.

Anywho, point being is many concepts about the WHM toolkit are old AF and badly in need of an update.

[Raikai]

There was always this debacle on what a WHM actually brings to the table and the answer was always "more healing". But in many occasions it's really just overhealing.

It would really be nice if the "boon" was actually WHM being able to do more personal dps without sacrificing a lot of healing, so yeah... I don't know if what the OP suggests is the best route, but something connecting Stone/Glare to a proc that would benefit healing would be nice.

[glamazon]

How about whm brings cc or if not that then extra dps

AST brings buffs not just dmg buffs

SCH brings debufffs

New healer can be jack of all trades w melee strikes that heals and buffs and debuffs

[FujikoN]

I think, expecting from healer to do high dps in the dungeons...it's something laughable. I think healer job is healing and if they do dps that's very beneficial. I, as a new in healer role in FFXIV I think we don't have a reason to complain compared for example wow healer classes.
Probably there is a few things what the developers can make more smooth but I'm very satisfied with what WHM offer me both in dps and healing.

[Veis_Alveare]

I think, expecting from healer to do high dps in the dungeons...it's something laughable. I think healer job is healing and if they do dps that's very beneficial.

Nope!

Just like you expect dps to use their utility tools healers need to dps. If they don't they're dead weight and should be kicked if an explanation doesn't get through to them.

I love the idea of tying a buff to a dps ability to help encourage this but the down side of it being on Stone/Glare is that the only time I tend to use Cure 2 at level cap is towards the end of a big dungeon pull if I'm out of lillies and oGCDs. Like sure, on occasion it's a button to cover up a mistake but it doesn't really see much use otherwise.

I guess if the goal is less to provide WHM with a functional buff and more just to get lazy healers to dps then it might be worth it? It just sucks that such a thing is even necessary.

[FujikoN]

"I guess if the goal is less to provide WHM with a functional buff and more just to get lazy healers to dps then it might be worth it?"

Uhh, the "lazy healers" was a quite harsh statement, don't you think?
I experienced, the healer role one of the hardest job -keep everyone alive in every situation, no matter what - I definitely refuse your statement. I have dps role as well and I find that easy. I think I'm a quite good healer - from 50 dungeons only a few dps or tank died, but not because I was lazy....

[Veis_Alveare]

"I guess if the goal is less to provide WHM with a functional buff and more just to get lazy healers to dps then it might be worth it?"

Uhh, the "lazy healers" was a quite harsh statement, don't you think?
I experienced, the healer role one of the hardest job -keep everyone alive in every situation, no matter what - I definitely refuse your statement. I have dps role as well and I find that easy. I think I'm a quite good healer - from 50 dungeons only a few dps or tank died, but not because I was lazy....

I don't think that calling out healers who need a carrot on a stick in order to contribute damage like the rest of the party is harsh at all. Everyone else is pushing their damage buttons, healers are no exception.

We all have the same role; kill the enemies before they kill us. If you only contribute to that passively by healing then you would be doing a very, very bad job. That would be like a BLM ignoring Fire4 - the button that should be their most pressed one, the core if their rotation.

People dying doesn't mean you're good or bad or lazy or anything. Sometimes they're going to die to their own incompetence or just a bad mistake they made and there's nothing you can do about it. A more experienced healer will probably be able to save more of those players but still not all. Don't measure your skill as a healer by how many people die. Contribute what you're able and help where you can. If you sit there waiting for something to heal or keeping everyone at 100% you're just wasting everyone's time.

[Liam_Harper]

Let's not get into the standard misunderstanding.

When we say healers should dps in dungeons, no one (sensible) means you should somehow manage to keep a paper tank and 3 aoe-addict dragoons alive while simultaneously topping the meters. If your tank is demanding every GCD just to keep them alive then by all means pour heals into them. That's fine.

What they mean is if the party isn't taking massive damage and you have spaces of free time, even if only 3 seconds in-between your heals, you make it your goal to add some dps there. It's fine if you find it difficult at first as long as you're learning and on the lookout for opportunities. Both SCH and AST can weave oGcD's with their aoe too and WHM's stuns trash packs and you can weave with Misery. You become a better and more efficient healer for it.