WHM or SCH for you..?

[Rydia13]

And hard-casting Stone II with a couple of Aeros is supposed to be less lazy than managing SCH DoTs? Because hitting the same button over and over is more challenging? WHM is extremely easy and straight-forward to pick up, but takes skill to play well in end-game content

I think that the point that was trying to be made was that it takes more skill from a player to be an excellent, multitasking WHM. It comes pretty easily for SCH. My main is SMN and trust me, keeping an eye on DoTs while I'm free to do other things isn't too hard. WHM has to stance dance A LOT more than SCH to be as effective when it comes to DPS output because we simply cannot stay Cleric Stanced and still hand out cures like candy. WHM is easy to play if all you do is cure spam, but to do what SCH does, you need someone with know-how to be playing WHM.

[Cynfael]

I think that the point that was trying to be made was that it takes more skill from a player to be an excellent, multitasking WHM. It comes pretty easily for SCH. My main is SMN and trust me, keeping an eye on DoTs while I'm free to do other things isn't too hard. WHM has to stance dance A LOT more than SCH to be as effective when it comes to DPS output because we simply cannot stay Cleric Stanced and still hand out cures like candy. WHM is easy to play if all you do is cure spam, but to do what SCH does, you need someone with know-how to be playing WHM.

I see the point, but I don't agree that DPSing as WHM takes more skill. The principle remains the same; it's just that SCH are able to DPS more often and more consistently due to how their mechanics work. Neither way of doing it is particularly challenging or particularly lazy. It's what the player makes of it.

[Lemuria]

I see the point, but I don't agree that DPSing as WHM takes more skill. The principle remains the same; it's just that SCH are able to DPS more often and more consistently due to how their mechanics work. Neither way of doing it is particularly challenging or particularly lazy. It's what the player makes of it.

With Eos shouldering the burden of heals while you DPS, there's no major risk involved as a Scholar. White Mage, on the other hand, needs to swap back out to be effective so there's a lot of extra work involved in keeping the party alive while still being able to attack.

The real point is that a scholar's pet covers up any shortcomings that the scholar might have in terms of skill, simply because it's autonomous. You don't need to manually tell Eos to cure the tank, as she'll do so automatically. You can tell her, and good scholar's will macro it in, but it's not needed, and that's really my point. You notice a bad white mage a lot more than you'll notice a bad scholar.

[Cynfael]

...You notice a bad white mage a lot more than you'll notice a bad scholar.

I agree with this. However, my point about WHM is that I don't find the style more difficult, just different. Pet support definitely makes SCH more forgiving to a degree (i.e. I would rather have a bad SCH than a bad WHM since I can at least rely on the pet to heal even if the player is awful), but at the same time I find WHM very straightforward in comparison. It's easier for bad players to mess up on the healing end with WHM, but the class mechanics don't particularly encourage WHMs to be flexible. Have your heals under control and want to DPS in Second Coil? Fine, but watch that MP. Want to heal two players simultaneously without blowing an AoE? Sorry, no pet to micromanage.

It makes it difficult for me to understand how players can sometimes be so BAD at WHM when the basic responsibilities and tools of the role are very uncomplicated. Even when we talk about WHM DPS contribution, it's not rocket science to estimate your safe window for DPS and how much you can afford to contribute throughout the fight, MP-wise. The pet support makes SCH easier in some ways, but the WHM's focus on a single toolbox and straight-up healing mechanics makes it easier in others.