What are things you ENJOY about Healers right now?

[IDontPetLalas]

Yes, true, there are times when the double heal is 'the right decision' but those are few and far between. In fact, the NIN LB example is a good one to bring up. I've probably had more times where I 'try' to save someone with a heal before the NIN LB kills them (and it kills them anyway because of the snapshot), than times where it's actually bloody worked. I've had plenty of times where I've tried to save someone with the doublecast heal, only for the person to die anyway, and their killer to escape with sub5k HP left, low enough that the doublecast of a Gravity or Malefic would have at least equalized the scorecard. More often than not in fact, I've noticed that when there's, for example, a 2v1 and my ally is the 1 running away trying to live through the onslaught, the 2 get hardcore tunnelvision on trying to get the kill, and stop paying attention to their own HP. Thus, by going Doublecast Gravity > Macrocosmos, I can drop them low enough to easily turn the tide on them, or even kill one without them realising how low and out of position they were.

My point is that it's fine, good even, to have the player have the option of what to spend doublecast on. The issue is that the design of the gamemodes means that the 'option' decision is almost always made for you. Especially considering two of the options are damage and one is a heal. If they made it so you could Doublecast Macrocosmos, doing no extra damage but applying a second copy of the heal-compiling buff, which would pop at the same time as the original (effectively doubling the heal from Macro), would that doublecast option get used? Maybe sometimes, sure. How often would it be used in comparison to Gravity? Absolutely tiny fraction, because Gravity gives you burst damage, and burst damage leads to setting up kills. And if the enemy player is dead, then they don't do damage to your team anymore, or push the crystal, or cap the points in FL.

Agreed. The amount of times I've double cast a benefic on someone rather than using a gravity or a malefic is miniscule, although the choice is there in theory, in practise it's more helpful remove the threat and benefic is just not as helpful .

[Icecylee]

Despite a lot of people trying to passive-aggressive/snark, we kind of were.

Even this latest spat someone else started. I was trying to be positive pointing out that I like AST in PvP and wish there were more like it. I genuinely DO like AST in PvP and wish there was more of that because it's enjoyable.

Also, it might be nice if you said this to the other posters here. /shrug

As I'm sure you recall, because you specifically mentioned being shocked every time it happened, I *have* spoken up on your behalf a few times before when I thought the other people involved were either off base or going a bit to far when you were being reasonable at the time. This isn't one of those times, though. All the people you tend to get into little spats with either were posting in the spirit of the thread and avoiding their own personal grievances, or simply avoiding the thread entirely until you started kicking up sand by going "that's great that you like X thing, except it's wrong and not REALLY a healer" and then digging your heels in when someone went "no, they totally are?" in response. Are a lot of the frequent posters kind of argumentative assholes? Sure. But you're not really above that either. There was really no reason to completely derail the thread for several pages so you could argue semantic technicalities based on how you feel or how much older MMOs worked, rather than how the game and SE classifies things, which frankly is what really matters in healer discussions. And no, going "i do like this ONE thing, even if all other three are stupid things i don't like and am going to pretend they're a separate role that doesn't exist" at the start of your rants doesn't really make it better or more in the spirit of positivity.

Not sure why I bothered typing all that out and further derailing, but I guess I took offense to you acting like you did nothing wrong and I should be calling other people out instead. w/e

[GrimGale]

As I'm sure you recall, because you specifically mentioned being shocked every time it happened, I *have* spoken up on your behalf a few times before when I thought the other people involved were either off base or going a bit to far when you were being reasonable at the time. This isn't one of those times, though. All the people you tend to get into little spats with either were posting in the spirit of the thread and avoiding their own personal grievances, or simply avoiding the thread entirely until you started kicking up sand by going "that's great that you like X thing, except it's wrong and not REALLY a healer" and then digging your heels in when someone went "no, they totally are?" in response. Are a lot of the frequent posters kind of argumentative assholes? Sure. But you're not really above that either. There was really no reason to completely derail the thread for several pages so you could argue semantic technicalities based on how you feel or how much older MMOs worked, rather than how the game and SE classifies things, which frankly is what really matters in healer discussions. And no, going "i do like this ONE thing, even if all other three are stupid things i don't like and am going to pretend they're a separate role that doesn't exist" at the start of your rants doesn't really make it better or more in the spirit of positivity.

Not sure why I bothered typing all that out and further derailing, but I guess I took offense to you acting like you did nothing wrong and I should be calling other people out instead. w/e

Ah, the eternal question of how to deal with trolls. Do you engage and fall into the trap of giving the troll attention, or do you ignore them and allow their statements to stand unoposed?

-------

What do I enjoy about healers right now?

The class concepts. I love the idea of Scholar as a Tactitian- It's such a unique concept for a healer. I love the military strategist aesthetic (I wish I could wear the mortarboard as a Hrothgar SE please.) Aesthetically, I wish Scholar didn't lean that much on the Fairy theme and more on the magical-lexicon-axiomatic thingies with laws and treatises, but I guess what we have is okay. Fey abilities should feel fey-like. Though Expedient isn't really a fairy ability and its really fluttery.

I love the concept for Astrologian. Celestial magic has a big appeal for me. I love the Meteor, Comet and Star Flare spells in FF, they were really spectacular. I like the concept of time magic to heal too, I wish we didn't lose those aspects for AST.

[Renathras]

...

So all the people posting in here saying either "nothing at all" or giving really snarky, sarcastic replies weren't doing that until we started talking about "real healers"? (btw, that was Roe, not me). Stuff like:

"Can I get back to you on this? "
"Does the insta-queue for any content count? No? Well... uh..."
"I also like the memories I have of playing SCH and AST. "
"The themes and that's it. "
"SE took everything away that I LIKE about healers."

...all predate the PvP Healer discussion.

And my contribution to that was that I liked AST, I just didn't feel the other three were Healers/played like Healers (because of how little focus they actually have on healing), which wasn't me starting anything. And I'm going to ask you this genuinely, where did I say "except it's wrong"? Did I say it was "wrong" at any point? Didn't I say it was a good thing and I wish the game would embrace it? Isn't that the opposite of saying it's "wrong"?

I "dug my heels in" when they "dug their heels in". Defending a position is not "digging heels". My general paradigm is that when I say something and someone challenges it, I try to explain why I think the thing I think. The way my mind works, I like understanding reasons for things, and even if I may not fully agree with someone, if they tell me why they think what they do/how they're defining things, I can say "Ah, that makes sense, and I can see you're self-consistent with that position, even if I may not fully agree with that definition". It's why I point out to, for example Ty, that my position has been self-consistent, and it's why I state what it is I think Healers are. It's why I started that thread a few weeks ago asking people what they thought Healers were and why they fit into the Trinity, since I think part of the consistent friction here is in how we all view the concept of "Healer" with some (me, mainly) viewing it as "thing that heals" and other people thinking, in their words not mine, of "Supports".

I didn't derail the thread arguing semantics. That was done in response to me. The specific post that started the thread derail was this one:

They all are actual healers with good healing throughput (other than SGE in terms of healing throughput because most of the required healing is done through Pneuma and LB). Rather than saying you're looking for "an actual healer that can handle damage", you're looking more for "a pure healer that doesn't need to interact with the enemies to handle damage" because that's what all the PvE healers oGCD toolkits resembles.

Were you okay with this post? If so, why was it acceptable and mine not, since it is what started the back and forth countering people's views/argument. Why is THAT post okay, but my post before it (or after it?) not okay? And where did I talk about "how much older MMOs worked"?

But you're not really above that either.

Thing is, I want to actually discuss topics. I post a lot of threads in here for various discussions to try to get to the heart of various matters. Hell, my proposed SCH change thread seemed to have been pretty well liked overall.

And no, going "i do like this ONE thing, even if all other three are stupid things i don't like and am going to pretend they're a separate role that doesn't exist" at the start of your rants doesn't really make it better or more in the spirit of positivity.

Again, now do these:

"Can I get back to you on this? "
"Does the insta-queue for any content count? No? Well... uh..."
"I also like the memories I have of playing SCH and AST. "
"The themes and that's it. "
"SE took everything away that I LIKE about healers."

.

I guess I'd just like some consistency here.

EDIT:

Then there's stuff like this:

Ah, the eternal question of how to deal with trolls. Do you engage and fall into the trap of giving the troll attention, or do you ignore them and allow their statements to stand unoposed?

You know I'm not a troll. You might find me an ass or antagonistic, but you've seen me engage in good faith discussions and try to start them plenty. Yet see that?

Yet will you say that person shouldn't have said that?

Maybe you will...

Huh, must have been the wind.

See? But again, I don't suspect consistency - I would be pleasantly surprised by it, though.

[GrimGale]

Huh, must have been the wind.

[AmiableApkallu]

What are things you ENJOY about Healers right now?

Not wanting to spend thousands of words waxing philosophical, here are some small things I enjoy about FFXIV's Healers*:

• WHM (PvE): vfx for Glare, vfx for Holy (the twirl is divine), wings (Temperance), a well-timed Lilybell.
• SCH (PvE): fairy placement + fairy-centered heals, a button/button-combo for every occasion, understated vfx.
• AST (PvE): vfx and sfx.
• WHM (PvP** CC): a well-timed Seraph Strike into Cure III.
• SCH (PvP FL): Deployment Tactics for spreading Galvanize+Catalyze or Biolytic.

* Healers as listed in FFXIV's Official Job Guide.

** I'm bad at PvP. Sue me. :P

[Renathras]

Anyway, moving on from all THAT (since I don't expect consistency or whatnot):

Another thing I really like about Healers in FFXIV is that they really do feel like what I think Healers "feel" like. That subjective tactile thing. They all have a wide slate of heals and some mitigations, and a few have party buffs, they all do a similar thing but in distinct ways when you're really flexing the healing kits, and they all feel good and strong, no "wet noodle" heals; even the basic cure spells (though rarely used due to being inefficient) are decently strong. The ability to pull a party back from the brink feels really good and just works, and it really feels like you're making an impact and doing your part in the battle.

[Sebazy]

Idunno, the current iterations of Fey Blessing and Collective Opposition feel oddly wimpy and placeholdery to me

Granted not every button can be an Earthly Star or Indom, but IMO they would be better off with a full switcharoo into something more interesting. Both used to be really quite unique abilities in their time, now they are just strange 1 minute cooldown mini medicas for the sake of it.

[AnotherPerson]

I can't believe I'm going on a tangent this long, so I hope this HB tag works as intended.

I didn't derail the thread arguing semantics. That was done in response to me. The specific post that started the thread derail was this one:

They all are actual healers with good healing throughput (other than SGE in terms of healing throughput because most of the required healing is done through Pneuma and LB). Rather than saying you're looking for "an actual healer that can handle damage", you're looking more for "a pure healer that doesn't need to interact with the enemies to handle damage" because that's what all the PvE healers oGCD toolkits resembles.

Were you okay with this post? If so, why was it acceptable and mine not, since it is what started the back and forth countering people's views/argument. Why is THAT post okay, but my post before it (or after it?) not okay? And where did I talk about "how much older MMOs worked"?

In case no one explains why people are responding to you like you're troll, I'll reply.

You could probably answer this yourself if you read the following post I made:

What makes a Healer is that they are and focus on HEALING. This should be a tautology as it's in the name. This is distinct from a Support which is focused across domains of damage dealing, buffing, debuffing, healing, and other utility (like run speed) and act in a Supporting role, which can include healing people but also swinging over to DPS down an enemy or buffing/debuffing/utility to ensure their team can do so. If that's the kind of gameplay you like, then Support roles/Jobs/classes are right up your alley.

...that doesn't make them Healers, though.

Just confirming. Does that mean that because a shield healer's primary goal is not to heal flat hp, but apply support utility such as shields / mitigation to ensure the party lives through damage through preventative means, you don't think healers like SCH and SGE are considered healers?

My post explaining why every healer in PvP is still a healer with good healing throughput was made for clarification on a misunderstanding in how PvP healers function through the perspective of a shield healer as they are currently (which is currently inline with the goal of why I enjoy those healers in this thread, because I like the way they all play). However, the way you phrased your response denies shield healers as "actual healers" in your definition, but as "supports". Your response is not only a classification challenge to at least 3 PvP healers, but an affront to the existing classification of PvE shield healers, which can be problematic in a discussion thread about enjoyment of said healers.

Shield healers are classified as such because their primary role as a healer is to prevent damage from killing the party, be it through shields, mitigation, or other preventative means. This is especially true at the Savage level and Ultimate level, where shields and mitigation is very much an integral core of shield healer gameplay in surviving against damage that is very much lethal at min ILVL. While it may not be your intention, you pretty much provoked everyone who plays SCH and SGE with that statement because their roles from their very inception was suddenly deemed as "not a healer" through your choice of words.

I asked for confirmation to give you the benefit of the doubt that this is not what you meant so you can clarify the misunderstanding, but instead of answering to this response, you provoked others by continuously bringing up the point of why your post wasn't acceptable in a thread about things healers enjoyed and doubled down on the idea that those healers are "supports" rather than healers. This is not any indication of good faith in a positivity thread about what people like about healers. Your response is in direct challenge to the topic when you state "those aren't healers", which means even if people liked SGE, SCH, or PvP WHM, you indirectly attempted to kick them out of the discussion and told them "I asked for what you enjoy about 'REAL healers', not supports". People replied in this thread under the assumption you were referring to what a healer represents as it is now in game (PvP, PvE, Pure & shield healers), not what a healer represents in your definition, and people definitely did not expect you to exclude certain healers by going "AST is the only healer in PvP, the others are supports".

The fact that RDM is more of a Healer than at least half (and as much as 3/4ths) of the "Healers" is just ridiculous, honestly.

Even to the point where you say RDM is possibly more of a healer in white shift, thereby really cementing the idea that you are excluding the idea of healers using preventative means as a form of healing should be considered as healers.

While it may be offputting for someone who doesn't see eye to eye on certain aspects they like on healers that another person may not agree with, it's another thing entirely to talk about other healers not being real healers in a thread aimed for positivity. As the original poster that made this thread who brought that point up, the implications are worse, as your actions has a bigger impact and instead speaks volumes to your intentions are in making this thread when your reply sows chaos and negativity through the exclusion of certain healers. It's almost as if you were intentionally trying to create toxicity and drama on the forums in what was supposed to be a 'positive' space, so to speak. Those are not the actions of any person wanting to start a discussion in good faith.

Don't get me wrong:

I'm absolutely HAPPY that the Healers feel distinct in PvP.

I'm absolutely HAPPY that there are Support DPS Jobs in PvP for people that like playing Support. I'd be MORE happy if SE would just admit that's a Role already and embrace it, but baby-steps.

Me making this distinction isn't saying they suck and are unfun to play (other than SGE), but it IS me saying they aren't Healers other than AST and at a stretch possibly WHM...but probably not (ironic, that...). And me pointing out that they're more liked by people who want to play a Support DPS also isn't somehow beyond the pale. I'm just stating reality as I see it, complete with supporting arguments and consistent positions. I also don't understand why people find the truth so unwelcome; I'm not saying it's BAD to want a more offensive or support focused playstyle. I've said it's good and that the game should embrace that.

I think if it did, there'd be way less friction and way more happy people.

While you might have said that in good intentions, this isn't the right thread to bring that up. Sure, you can say you are happy that healers feel distinct in PvP, but now you brought up the distinction that RDM and AST being the 'healers' and the other 3 PvP healers not being 'healers' in this thread. Do you think that's going to go very well when you took a stance to indirectly exclude the other 3 PvP healers in this discussion as the thread starter?

While it is well in your opinion to not like the other 3 PvP healers and not consider them as such, making it known on this thread and doubling down with constantly explaining your rationale has different implications in the healer subforum, which does categorize those healers as actual healers.

[ASkellington]

"The themes and that's it. "

Excuse you, that's a legit response. You asked what I liked about CURRENT healers.

I like that SCH is supposed to be a pet healer with the fairy.

I like AST's theme around space and the cards.

SGE Idgaff about but its interesting to see some of its flashy abilities.

And while I prefer WHM before Shb+ I can say that I like its theme of being tied to nature and the elements of which, if we want to, can say that they went to Light because of the First.

Just because YOU DON'T LIKE my answer doesn't mean that it isn't a true one.

I shouldn't have to go into a full depth explanation just because YOU feel that "themes" isn't a good one.