What if Tanks were treated like Healers?

[MistakeNot]

I'd put "you pull, you tank" as a tank equivalent of a Sylphie; namely it comes about because of some puritanical view on the trinity roles, where someone gets upset that someone else pulled, after all, "they're not a tank".

And you'd be completely wrong. "you pull, you tank" has nothing at all to do with some imagined puritanical of view of the roles, but comes about simply because when someone else pulls it makes the tank's job harder, and can disrupt their plan for the fight.

[aodhan_ofinnegain]

In a dungeon? Plan for the fight? Bruh it's AoE spam and rotate cooldowns, only over-sensitive people with inflated egos adopt "you pull you tank" lmao so sure not puritanical in nature, but generally any "you pull, you tank" type of tanks aren't very bright either.

In raids more often than not it's a physical ranged accidentally auto'd, and in most cases it's a wipe and go again.

[TheDustyOne]

In a dungeon? Plan for the fight? Bruh it's AoE spam and rotate cooldowns, only over-sensitive people with inflated egos adopt "you pull you tank" lmao so sure not puritanical in nature, but generally any "you pull, you tank" type of tanks aren't very bright either.

In raids more often than not it's a physical ranged accidentally auto'd, and in most cases it's a wipe and go again.

What Aodhan said, the only thing adopting YPYT does is cause wipes and is against ToS for a reason. At worst someone else pulling first is rude, and in extreme cases dangerous for the puller, but a melee that knows what they're doing can actually help with the mitigation and provide their Arms Length and Bloodbath cooldowns while the tank grabs aggro back with, you know, a single AoE. It'd be one thing if we were still talking about Stormblood and actually had to work for enmity, but we don't, so intentionally killing the DPS for DARING to use their sprint while the tank is leisurely taking their time to sniff the flowers in expert roulette for the 1000th time is the tank being the problem.

The only time I'd be completely against a DPS pulling ahead of a tank is in lower level dungeons when new tanks are still getting their bearings. Once you've tanked lvl 70 dungeons however, you've effectively tanked them all.

[Renathras]

Rene read the post again you missed the point buddy. It is not what the term is but what it represents that is important here, everyone knows the story of Sylphie but when the term is used it's not the fact of Sylphie's story that is important,...

Was NOT that she was "bad". It was that her heart was in the right place but she didn't really understand how things were in reality and was harming herself (not others) in the process.

IN GENERAL, people shouldn't look for insults to call other people. Ad hominem is a logical fallacy and is almost always destructive to conversations. There's no time that bringing up the Sylphie insult is constructive. Not one. At best, you're talking with like minded people who agree with the insult and love using it against people, in which case all you're doing is furthering hate. At worst, you use it in a conversation where someone takes great offense to it, and it completely destroys the conversation.

Just as it did here.

Indeed, people using it ARE ignorant AND rude to use it. If you didn't want the conversation side-lined, then I'd recommend you avoid use of insults. It's not a "high ground", it's people using insults. You could be using other insults and the result be the same, of course, but using a term incorrectly adds the technicality on top of everything else.

No? She didn't want to learn to listen to the elementals because it was a fat lot of extra homework just to be able to do something she thought she was already great at doing.

People do twist the moral to make it align with whatever their pet cause is, but it's only a tale about an apprentice learning why the workshop has those safety rules.

From the story, she did listen to them. Indeed, as E-Yuni points out, she's very good at hearing the Elementals. If you do the quest again or read through it/watch all the cutscenes and dialogue, the full story is that her mother raised her, and her mother also heard from the Elementals. The thing is, she misinterpreted them being in pain from other things (Calamities and such) as them being in pain because of CNJ's robbing their powers. Because of this confusion, she came up with the idea that using Conjury harmed the Elementals, something she then taught her daughter. The mother ended up dying because she used her own life force to heal others instead of the Elementals' powers. It'd be like casting the BLU spell Transfusion that kills the BLU while reviving an ally and giving them HP/MP.

Raised in such a way, Sylphie also thought that using Conjury would harm the Elementals, so she did what her mother did. The Guildmaster's fear was that she would also die by expending her life force, especially once she told him she had discovered how to use the Raise spell, with him remarking that, from everything he knew of Conjury, it shouldn't even be POSSIBLE for her to cast it the way she would be doing so (again, BLU Transfusion spell), and his fear was that she was going to die, not that she wasn't "being a good CNJ". And likewise, her abilities using her own life force were what her mother taught her combined with her own natural aptitude towards curative magics. Without any training in Thaumaturgy (using one's personal Aether for offensive spellcasting) or Red Magicks (which is an even more complex way of doing the same), she was largely unable to cast Earth or Wind magics, since people's native life force likely tends towards vital essence/healing, which is why she points out that she's not good at those forms of magic; a Hyur's body and Aether isn't generally aspected towards using those spells.

In the end, the breakthrough you have with her in the questline isn't "why it's important to follow the rules". Rather, it's when she finally manages to commune with the Elementals during a battle with a lot of CNJs, and the Elementals are able to tell her they want her to use their magic and that it won't hurt them. Once she was aware she wouldn't be hurting the beings she loved, she's more than capable of learning and mastering Conjury, and does so without issue. The breakthrough is "This isn't hurting the Elementals you love", not "the importance of following the rules".

Agree with you, though, about people twisting it to align with their pet cause.

They don't need to make the game even easier that it already is, it's the easiest gameplay I ever seen you got skill button you press those button in order, there is just one way to play your job with no built or customization what so ever. I would love healer with an actual dps rotation

I wouldn't personally want to play it, but I agree there should be one. SGE is the obvious choice because Kardia. Instead of giving it SCH oGCDs to heal with, they should have just made its healing almost exclusively via Kardia, with Kardia being much stronger, and its oGCDs should have been emergency stopgaps. Look at PvP SGE. Other than Panhamia's heal when it expires, the rest of PvP SGE's healing comes exclusively from Kardia.

And you'd be completely wrong. "you pull, you tank" has nothing at all to do with some imagined puritanical of view of the roles, but comes about simply because when someone else pulls it makes the tank's job harder, and can disrupt their plan for the fight.

Agreed. The concept largely comes from people who aren't Tanking being impatient and wanting to control the pace of a pull, ignoring completely what anyone else in the party wants and if it's good for the party. This had more pull in older games where things like Healer MP mattered, but it's generally rude to pull when you aren't the Tank. Even as a Healer main, I instinctively feel bad if I accidentally pull something. It's Bizzaro-World turning everything on its head backwards to suggest Tanks with the YPYT attitude are the ones that are rude or problematic.

My general opinion is if you want to pull, be the Tank. Don't want to be the Tank and think the pulls are too slow? There's /party chat. If you want to insist the Tank shouldn't decide for the party how fast or slow they pull, AND want to ignore that's the convention everyone else agrees with, then you as a DPS ALSO don't have the right to decide for the party how fast or slow they pull and should have to talk to the party before you go rogue.

[vetch]

Ad hominem is a logical fallacy and is almost always destructive to conversations. There's no time that bringing up the Sylphie insult is constructive. Not one.

Yes, that's on purpose. The people who are blowing up this discussion, or any discussion, with insults are doing so because they don't want to have it. They want the argument that 'healers should only heal' to stop, and for the people making it to go away.

You're framing 'constructive' as a universal good and 'destructive' as oppositely bad, but that's an incomplete, sometimes harmful way to think about discussions, and it should be unlearned. They're both morally neutral. Scorn, insults, and social shaming are how communities keep disturbing, disruptive, or gross suggestions from serious consideration, not by discussing them, because that leads to them being perceived as worthy of discussion, which emboldens the people making the bad arguments.

This is not to put 'healers should only heal' on the same level as genuinely dangerous arguments, of course. But! If you spend enough time in minority opinion groups you will see this sequence happen over and over. There's always an endless stream of new people wandering in who have passively received the prevailing opinion as truth, many of whom will be hostile when presented with opposing minority viewpoints. Because of this, people with minority opinions tend to start out engaging with opposing views politely, then either burn out and disengage or become more hostile and insular.

You can suppose that they shouldn't, that they ought to be prepared to have the same arguments over and over forever, but most people can't live up to that standard and all the harrumphing and pouting you can muster can't give them the energy to do so. You can suppose that they should instead leave, but people need their communities -- people with minority opinions more than most!

So, I don't think the answer is to click your tongue at them when they don't have the time to be polite. That sort of shaming only ever pushes people deeper into an insular out-group. If you want to bring people to the table for a discussion, it's much more effective to be warm and understanding of their circumstances.

the full story is that her mother raised her, and her mother also heard from the Elementals. The thing is, she misinterpreted them being in pain from other things (Calamities and such) as them being in pain because of CNJ's robbing their powers. Because of this confusion, she came up with the idea that using Conjury harmed the Elementals, something she then taught her daughter.

Hm! I didn't remember any of that, but now that you remind me, it starts to ring a bell.

That's a shame. Sylphie was much more narratively interesting when she wasn't yet another Pollyanna-ish character motivated by pure selfless love and caring.

[Renathras]

Scorn, insults, and social shaming are how communities keep disturbing, disruptive, or gross suggestions from serious consideration, not by discussing them, because that leads to them being perceived as worthy of discussion, which emboldens the people making the bad arguments.

Not just here related to this game, but life in general: I ABHOR this argument.

It is anti-freedom, anti-democratic, and anti-intellectual. Scorn, insults, and social shaming are how you get inquisitions, witch trials, and society dig in its heels against needed changes like, say, abolishing slavery or implementing basic Human rights for minorities or underclasses. It's ever the tool of the tyrant - delegitimize so that people don't consider or discuss other options. It's why people saying the world was round were silenced. It's why women accused of being witches were burned at the stake. And such policies have not aged any better into the modern era.

And as you even note "This is not to put ... on the same level as genuinely dangerous arguments", except that is what you just did! And if you don't intend to put it on that level, then perhaps you shouldn't have mentioned it in the same company?

The discussion worth having is what playstyles the game should have. That REQUIRES putting them on an even footing and discussing them fairly, and even considering hybrid options that allow both to coexist. There's nothing "disturbing, disruptive, or gross" about suggesting that a role play like that role has played in gaming for 30+ years. Moreover, as you note, the "healers should heal" is the majority viewpoint (at least, I think that's what you're saying by suggesting opposition to it is a minority viewpoint that started out polite before becoming jaded), meaning if any view should be silenced by the community, it would be the one insisting healers shouldn't just heal and calling people Sylphie, anyway.

.

For my part, I have standards and I keep to them. To me, any idea that isn't outright and directly harmful to people ("healers should heal" clearly is not) should be fair game for discussion. People trying to shut down that discussion, to my way of thinking, are like all tyrants who try to shut down discussion - people deeply afraid they will lose a fair argument.

THAT is why people engage in logical fallacies AND why people try to shut down, stifle, or delegitimize discussion or some topics. They are chiefly the tools of those whose arguments are weak and cannot stand up to confrontation, so they attempt to silence and shun the confrontation, or baring that, attack the character of those presenting the contra position so that others may be less inclined to listen to them.

.

Anyway, my point is also true that people using the terms AREN'T being polite and AREN'T engaging in good faith. What you're asking for is akin to someone being bullied just "man up and take it", and attacking them for daring to speak out in return, when the other side is the one in the wrong.

Perhaps you should ask them to be warm and understanding to bring people to the table? Why did you ask this of me instead of them?

Hm! I didn't remember any of that, but now that you remind me, it starts to ring a bell.

And that's yet another of my points; people latched onto this as an insult, but they aren't even using it right, and almost no one actually remembers the story OR the actual moral of the story. They are far more interested in name calling and bad faith arguments on internet forums for that. They wanted a name to call people they don't like, and did the equivalent of searching a speech for a "you didn't build that" soundbite they could use as a cudgel, ignoring the context or the whole story and its resolution. They didn't do this, btw, because the contra position is evil or immortal or gross or any of that. They did it so they could mock and jeer at people they don't like, and later, so they could try and shut people down and lock them out of discussions that involve them, too. Moreover, as I pointed out, at this point it's a ridiculous caricature - there aren't Cure 1 spamming WHMs. Maybe someone can find one in one DF run somewhere in modern FFXIV (e.g. not from a Sasthasha run in ARR) that WASN'T doing it as a meme, but I doubt it.

And there's no shame about that story. The story fit in the lore, explained how Conjury works, and noted how even well meaning people should be mindful that they may have mistaken something important and be open minded rather than quick to insult and disparage others from a presumed position of knowledge they don't actually have. To listen and actually work to talk things out with people, be open to different ways of doing things, and to growth.

...something people using Sylphie as an insult generally get wrong, btw. No irony there, I suppose.

[vetch]

I ABHOR this argument.

It is anti-freedom, anti-democratic, and anti-intellectual. Scorn, insults, and social shaming are how you get inquisitions, witch trials, and society dig in its heels against needed changes like, say, abolishing slavery or implementing basic Human rights for minorities or underclasses.

It is also how society suppresses harmful tendencies like racism and pedophilia. Hence, the technique is morally neutral.

We're getting well away from the topic now, but it's not anti-freedom or anti-intellectual to disallow discussion of whether we should be permitted to violently harm others. "Your freedom to swing your fist ends at my face", etc....

As I suggested, you are focusing exclusively on the negative uses, which enables you to posture and declare that anyone who would stoop to insults must be a villain who's afraid of fair discussion. That is absolutist, reductive, and a caricature. Whereas my explanation (for this case and no other, please note) is much simpler and yet more amenable to nuance: they're kinda tired of talking about it.

And as you even note "This is not to put ... on the same level as genuinely dangerous arguments", except that is what you just did! And if you don't intend to put it on that level, then perhaps you shouldn't have mentioned it in the same company?

Oh, I don't disagree with you that it's bad in this particular case to insult and chase away the discussion -- which people here don't even do very often! They still courteously explain their positions most of the time!

My point is, it's not world-shakingly bad. It's a very very tiny bad, that's also understandable and explicable. And I've been the minority opinion enough to have sympathy for people who have been drained of their energy by constantly defending their positions. It has zero bearing on whose argument is right. It's simply a matter of finite human energy and 'in- versus out-group' social dynamics.

Moreover, as you note, the "healers should heal" is the majority viewpoint ..., meaning if any view should be silenced by the community, it would be the one insisting healers shouldn't just heal and calling people Sylphie, anyway.

Sorry? How is that not anti-democratic? "You're not allowed to express a minority opinion unless you're perfectly polite" doesn't look like any democracy I hope for. It looks like tone-policing, which is another tool that's used when someone has no intent to engage with an argument, except in its case it's more often wielded against 'angry minorities' challenging a status quo.

Moreover, as I pointed out, at this point it's a ridiculous caricature - there aren't Cure 1 spamming WHMs. Maybe someone can find one in one DF run somewhere in modern FFXIV (e.g. not from a Sasthasha run in ARR) that WASN'T doing it as a meme, but I doubt it.

You simply must play the game more, then. When I was re-leveling warrior thru StB dungeons recently, I was running into a Cure1-or-equivalent spammer almost every night. This was within only a few dungeon runs per night!

It was irritating enough that by the time I got toward ShB, and combined with the decrease in gameplay quality of ShB dungeons, I took a break and decided to just use roulette bonuses instead. Much slower but much less irritating than having to pull single packs to accommodate a healer that plays like they're still level 29.

[Katish]

Everyone should be entitled to an option, I'm 100% okay with discussing conflicting viewpoints, that is not the issue here. It's all about tonality, if you express yourself negatively that's what you'll get. That's all there is to it(?)
It's: this is why I think healers should have more healing buttons more VS this is why I think heal healers should have more healing buttons and you're wrong, you're ignorant, you're stupid, are you an idiot? Here's why healers need to heal more (totally neglecting the level at which you play healers and being negative just in general).

There is a difference in these...where a back and forth will come to a conclusion on the first one, the second one: there can be no common ground because the person isn't willing to accept that the healers are in a bad state and/or that a majority of what needs fixing isn't their heals in general. That person in question won't meet even half way on that topic. I see very few people who advocate for much of the sameness anyhow, the ones that do behave flippantly which makes me leap to the logical conclusion of a troll, someone doesn't have the intent of having a rational and logical discussion. I don't look to fight battles but end wars...if a solution can be brought out then that makes the back and forth good. Though, if someone is acting out then there can be no good coming out of that because they just aren't willing to settle and that's where the issues come into play.

Although after the turmoil, no solution has come out of anything tbh. Square doesn't look at the forums or else years of healer cries would not have gone unheard. And I know that sounds negative, but as mentioned above it's been tiring. Healers have remained vaguely unchanged, and Endwalker has made that ever more apparent when reducing cast times so the one button spam is evermore obvious, so obvious it's hard to counter-argue against.

@Rene
Also I haven't met someone who has called a person a Sylphie or if they did it was used to address someone satirically because the term was brought up prior to the discussion. When I see it used, it is used to describe the bigger player group ideology as "Sylphie", and because so, it's not Ad hominem as it is not a personal attack. If someone takes it personally that healing very little and doing damage is what the core game functions off of, that's not our fault but how the game was construed as you're incentivized to do damage to end the fight faster.

Moreover, as I pointed out, at this point it's a ridiculous caricature - there aren't Cure 1 spamming WHMs. Maybe someone can find one in one DF run somewhere in modern FFXIV (e.g. not from a Sasthasha run in ARR) that WASN'T doing it as a meme, but I doubt it.

As mentioned above there ARE, I was just in two separate level 90 dungeons with two WHM spamming cure I, thankfully I was a paladin that could self heal most of it. And earlier a level 80 dungeon and a scholar was spamming physick ---> All of that was just today but I have plenty of other accounts from mentor roulette and mentoring in general. [You see everything there]

[ForsakenRoe]

Sylphie's problem was not that she refused to DPS, but it was that she refused to listen to the elders, the more 'practiced' users of her discipline, and shot down any attempt to teach her 'hey here is how you could be better at healing' with 'no I know how to heal and I'm gonna do it my way'. Some people might use Sylphie as a comparison point because 'healer refusing to dps', I don't use it often but when I do it's 'healer refusing to take any tips on learning to be better at the class'

Whereas my explanation (for this case and no other, please note) is much simpler and yet more amenable to nuance: they're kinda tired of talking about it.

Personally agree, between SE's refusal to do acknowledge the issues, and certain elements insisting that 'actually not only is this design good, it's how healers should be, the quintessential 'healer' experience', I don't know how much energy I have left for it all. I was on raidlog mode from the moment I cleared the tier in week 2, and I keep telling myself that 'if healers are still like this in 7.0, probably look at going back to tank main, or move over to a DPS (probably DNC)'

I'm of the mind that if your house has a repair needed, moving house (swapping to another role) is not the solution. But when the one entity capable of doing that repair, doesn't (or in SE's case, insists that actually, that short-circuiting wire is an intentional design choice, it's feng shui and such), there's not exactly many other options. 7.0 will see more and more people bleed away from the role, and either SE changes course and tries to fix things to bring the veterans back, or they double down on it and try to fill the gaps with more 'fairweather' healers, aka 'bribe DPS players into playing not-DPS'. We've seen several times how that particular strategy doesn't actually work longterm, it's only ever a shortterm influx of players, which then equalizes back out to it's previous level



Wait this is the tank section of the forums, why are we on about healer stuff here? Come on, back to the depression-echo-chambers guys

[Renathras]

It is also how society suppresses harmful tendencies like racism and pedophilia.

It's also how society enshrined harmful tendencies like racism and slavery and some societies to pedophilia, and why it was able to be so resistant to changing away from them.

It is anti-freedom and particularly anti-democracy to rob people of debate where they can evaluate both sides of an argument. When you pick one side to allow and another to disallow, that's the same as having free elections but only allowing a single party to run and to run a single candidate for each position. It's anti-intellectual if the things being silenced are valid topics of discussion (as they are in this case), and generally, if you have the stronger argument, you should be willing to have that debate. I will 100% debate anyone who wants to argue the position the world is flat. I have no fear of that conversation happening, as I know I wouldn't lose that discussion, and I know I can make persuasive and convincing arguments. I know that if I allow that debate, people who listen/watch it will leave better informed and able to make up their own minds correctly based on the information I present.

The anti-democratic part is YOUR position that positions that YOU have deemed unacceptable are not allowed to be presented to the public for consideration. That is anti-democratic, since it robs people of the ability to decide on an issue of contention and make a decision based on access to all viewpoints. Again, having elections where only the candidates you pick are allowed to run is anti-democratic. You can parse this all you want, and I'm not going to go into the weeds with you ("herp derp but felons!!" or some such) to try to get a win by technicality, but democracy is the idea that the people as a whole get to make a choice freely without constraints. The more constraints, the more it isn't a democracy. And when you pick which ideas may and may not be voted on or even heard, that's anti-democratic.

I am ALWAYS less likely to believe people shutting down debate than those wanting to engage in it. History has shown those who seek to censor are never the good guys, and rarely correct (and when the are, often only by the merest technicalities at that).

Can you show me some videos - current content, patch 6.4 EW, of your Cure 1 spammers?

I play this game pretty frequently and I don't seem to run into them. MSQ roulette, Leveling roulette, Alliance Raid roulette...I haven't seen it. Maybe you just have unusual luck to find not only a unicorn but so many of them!

I see people in low level (ARR) dungeons casting Cure 1, but not just that and nothing else. The only time I've seen anything akin to that was Dzamael since...that's really the only way to do it with a lot of Tanks due to them not having many CDs at that point and some of the pulls being pretty gnarly. That's the rare case where that's actually the correct way to deal with the situation. But I honestly haven't even seen that in years other than one case of a SCH and Tank who were clearly friends and the Tank was walking their SCH friend through the dungeon and learning healing for the first time.

.

I'd also agree that "they're kinda tired of talking about it" IF they were, you know, tired of talking about it (e.g. they stopped talking about it).

They tend to engage early and often with any such discussion that comes up, meaning clearly still engaged with it. (This is also, btw, excusing bad behavior. "He had a rough day, so it's okay for him to be a jerk to people" isn't a super great take.)

@Rene
Also I haven't met someone who has called a person a Sylphie or if they did it was used to address someone satirically because the term was brought up prior to the discussion.

Look at the Healer forum. It's used frequently by several posters there. And used derisively. It also is with some frequency on the Reddit, but it's much less prevalent (largely because of the way replies work there, it tends to get drowned out in a sub-sub-reply)

.

EDIT2:

Do I need to put Ad Hominem up on the shelf with the other formal debate terms people bandy about as if blurting out the name of a logical fallacy means the speaker wins by default?

Ad Hominem is: "you're wrong because you're an idiot".

Ad Hominem is not: "You're wrong, and here's why. Also you're an idiot".

People doing the former are doing the former, not the latter. That's why they're called out as such.