When is SCH’s turn?

[Icecylee]

I use all caps for emphasis, not shouting, specifically if the medium doesn't have accessible (or easily accessible) bold, underline, or italics, or if those options are not very distinct in the medium. For example, just using italics here is sometimes not very noticeable depending on the word and font/resolution, so using bold or underline or CAPITALIZED ITALICS may work as an alternative for emphasis.

ALL CAPS DOES NOT INHERENTLY MEAN "shouting".

If you've ever wondered why so many people seem to interpret the things you say as aggressive and/or hostile despite your continued reassurances that you are not actively trying to be... well, revisit the part after the backslash.

[Osmond]

Well, now that I’m seeing the results. Uppercase, bold, backslash, and/or even lower case letters is considered extreme, anger, etc. It ends up becoming everything=nothing. I don’t even know anymore, it’s too broad.

[Renathras]

If you've ever wondered why so many people seem to interpret the things you say as aggressive and/or hostile despite your continued reassurances that you are not actively trying to be... well, revisit the part after the backslash.

Well, now that I’m seeing the results. Uppercase, bold, backslash, and/or even lower case letters is considered extreme, anger, etc. It ends up becoming everything=nothing. I don’t even know anymore, it’s too broad.

Icecylee - It's not uncommon, and I've explained it before. The people who want to insist I'm being aggressive are the people who want to insist I'm being aggressive; they'll make any excuse, so stylistic differences don't matter, since I've explained this before. The people that want to keep believing it have chosen to keep believing it. Not to mention I've adapted my style here to where I almost exclusively use underlines at this point anyway. Those same people continue to insist that I'm aggressive and hostile. They don't care about reality, they care about using ad hominem attacks to write off whatever I say.

If Osmond had used bold/underline/italics instead, those same people would (likely) have attacked what she said, too. (They might say now they wouldn't have, but that's just in reply to this at this point, so there's no way to actually know that for sure). Point is, if people are attacking other people's stylistic presentations, they aren't interested in discussing the topics with those people, they're only interested in writing off everything those people are saying and are looking for any excuse.

[AmiableApkallu]

Whatever effort and budget SE put into Astrologians's absolutely beautiful visual and sound effects? Yeah, put that into Scholar, now. kthxbai.

[Sebazy]

If Osmond had used bold/underline/italics instead, those same people would (likely) have attacked what she said, too.

Perhaps the content of the post was the problem rather than the formatting?

[kcj]

Whatever effort and budget SE put into Astrologians's absolutely beautiful visual and sound effects? Yeah, put that into Scholar, now. kthxbai.

And give me Selene back.

[Aravell]

Personally, I would rather not see them rework any of the healers until they admit that the pure healer/shield healer dichotomy isn't working and get rid of it. Also, I definitely do not want to see SCH in particular being reworked right after the director himself said they don't actually know what to do with SCH anymore.

[ForsakenRoe]

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the reason that DRG's getting a rework in 7.0 because 'they have hit the wall on what they can do for it, as it's basically feature complete at this point'? So if they don't know what to do with SCH, a possible, but risky solution, is to go back to the drawing board, clear their minds of what SCH IS, and instead think about what it could be, without being chained down by what it currently is. OK it needs to have certain elements, like 'it has a fairy that helps it heal'. But just because it has Fey Blessing now, does not mean it needs to have Fey Blessing in the reworked form, for example. Or, it CAN have X move remain, but the function can be completely different. For example, Fey Blessing was a 10 gauge cost, now it's free. But they could rework it to become 'pulses AOE healing, costing Fairy Gauge', and make it the AOE equivalent to Fey Union.

And yeh, bin the pure/barrier split, it sucks. If they wanted to be all thematic about it, they could have the SCH be the pure healing part of the kit, and the fairy be responsible for the shielding, or vice versa, so there feels like there's actual interplay between the SCH and their Fairy helper

[AmiableApkallu]

Sometimes, I wonder what Chrono Trigger's Double Tech system would look like when adapted for FFXIV and Scholar + Fairy.

[Renathras]

Personally, I would rather not see them rework any of the healers until they admit that the pure healer/shield healer dichotomy isn't working and get rid of it. Also, I definitely do not want to see SCH in particular being reworked right after the director himself said they don't actually know what to do with SCH anymore.

Largely agree with this.

Imo, the FIRST thing Healers need right now - before anything else - is to revert the "Pure/Barrier" paradigm. It DOES. NOT. WORK. in the modern FFXIV design space. Like, at all. Especially when "haling checks" these days are "mitigation checks", and the Barrier Healers get all the mitigation with AST only having Collective on a 1 min CD and WHM Temperance on a 2 min CD (AST also has Neutral for barriers, but yeah...). Not only that, but the Barrier Healers have ALMOST as much raw healing as the Pure Healers do, and enough to get through encounters. SCH/SGE is 100% viable, moreso than WHM/AST is.

That needs to be reverted first. Can also get AST's stances back at that point.

That needs to happen (and be part of) any rework.

The next thing is that the disjoint between Healer kits and encounter design, AND Tank/DPS mitigation and healing needs to be addressed. The Devs need to decide if they want Healers to exist or not, basically. If they do, they need to strip those tools from non-Healers (or severely cut down and limit them with costs to make them emergency tools instead of go-to freebies), and rework encounter designs to actually need healing. At that point, they can "rework" the Healers, since they'll have a better idea of what their kits need to be to mesh with that design space.

If they alternatively want to remove Healers from the game, then they need to figure out what they want them to be instead - Tanks? an actual dedicated Support role? - and then they can remake the kits to work in THAT design space, instead.

.

Until they do the above, any Healer rework is going to fall flat.

More DPS buttons doesn't fix any of that.
More Healing buttons doesn't fix any of that.
Different Healing buttons doesn't fix any of that.

There's a fundamental break in the Pure/Barrier paradigm that makes one always better than the other, and after that, there's still a fundamental disconnect between encounter design and healing kits.

Until they address those, any "rework" is just going to be adding more fuel to the fire and not actually fixing anything anyway.