are WHMs hard to come by?

[TunaTime]

Imo whm is the healer of duty finder and pugs while sch is the healer of the statics and organised / very functional groups.

Whm can easily heal and compensate bad players due to burst heals while sch can maintain good groups with their shields and sustains.
I guess its just tht since there r a lot of statics and LS farm groups now, a lot of ppl just need a healer who can sustain the party with little effort rather than a healer who can save them from the brink of wiping.

That makes no sense.

But are equally equipped to "save" both pugs and organized groups. They have different tools both equally useful.

[Velox]

Imo whm is the healer of duty finder and pugs while sch is the healer of the statics and organised / very functional groups.

Whm can easily heal and compensate bad players due to burst heals while sch can maintain good groups with their shields and sustains.
I guess its just tht since there r a lot of statics and LS farm groups now, a lot of ppl just need a healer who can sustain the party with little effort rather than a healer who can save them from the brink of wiping.

That was mostly true when 2.0 was launched, as there was very little AoE damage and SCH excelled at 99% of the fights in the game (even coil 1-5 had mechanics that favored SCH/SCH instead of WHM/SCH).This lead to a huge discrepancy in overall healing effectiveness, as SCH also had the benefit of bringing unique buffs/debuffs to parties that WHM don't have. Basically it became a question of "If both jobs can do it, but one has better utility and no mana issues, it'd be better to go with that one."
You can tell SE took notice to the increasing amount of SCH/SCH parties. Once Labyrinth of the Ancients hit, we started seeing a ton more AoE damage skills coming from enemies. Syrcus Tower and 2nd Coil expanded on this even further, and now there are some really hard hitting AoE abilities that purposely play to WHM's strengths.

When 2.0 launched WHM was really only good for pugs and DF, as a coordinated party would make better use out of a SCH/SCH pairing in end-game. As of 2.4 SCH/WHM pairing is the more efficient option for end-game, and I hope SE keeps that balance (at least until 3.0 when we see the next healing job).

[Ashkendor]

Imo whm is the healer of duty finder and pugs while sch is the healer of the statics and organised / very functional groups.

Whm can easily heal and compensate bad players due to burst heals while sch can maintain good groups with their shields and sustains.
I guess its just tht since there r a lot of statics and LS farm groups now, a lot of ppl just need a healer who can sustain the party with little effort rather than a healer who can save them from the brink of wiping.

This makes no sense at all... SCH has a huge advantage in burst healing in the form of Lustrate. Yes, WHM has the ultimate 'oh shit' key with Benediction but that has a 5 minute cooldown. Lustrate can be used 3 times per minute. I honestly have a much easier time healing big pulls with SCH than WHM because you can weave those Lustrates in between your Physick/Adloquium where needed. Not to mention the pet. Eos has some really powerful buffs, plus she helps keep people topped off or helps you heal them back from the brink.

I DF'ed high level roulette with a BLM friend yesterday and got Hullbreaker Isle; for some reason that will probably never make sense to me, our tank just up and left after the first boss. We all sort of looked at each other and shrugged, then slogged through the entire rest of the dungeon and finished it without a tank. It wasn't fast and it wasn't pretty but we got it done. I really don't think I personally could've done it on WHM because a lot of those mobs just hit too damn hard to keep up with when you have a caster tanking almost everything. The damage mitigation made it somewhat manageable, though there were still some close calls.

[Lyrica_Ashtine]

snip

Pro-tip: Don't take the vit-specced healers seriously

[Thistledown]

I think SCH is still rarer but WHM is a lot easier to work with if people don't know how well a healer will perform.

[Cassandaria]

I have both jobs leveled and I favor whm. Mostly this is because I have a friend who works with me that is a fantastic sch. Both are fine jobs, both are (to me) equally interesting and diverse. They excel at specific things and have difficulty in others. You can complete content with either, but it's pretty good to have both available. Many ask for whm over scholar because it's like asking for paladin over warrior. Is either class superior? no, but you know what you are getting into with a paladin or white mage. the classes are simple, straight forward, far more depth to them if you care to look, but to be efficient at the class takes little investment. To be a good scholar takes so much investment and understanding, the value of your skills are not immediately obvious. I will always lean towards white mage, but not because of its simplicity, I find the little nuances a bigger challenge. For example, scholars don't really need to worry about overhealing, in fact, overhealing for a scholar is a benefit, not a detriment. Now as a whm, you can easily overheal and all you get is additional agro from it and no real benefit. Learning to heal just the right amount, how to balance your regens, when to wait, when to dps, when to use shroud, when not to. Scholar is like a juggernaut once you get the class you bull through it, but white mage is like a dance. Versatile in ways people don't always realize, but graceful when used right.

[IveraIvalice]

I don't know if I'm hard to come by, I deal with myself on a regular basis..
(I'm a whm)


Bad joke kthxbai

[Ignnis]

I seem to see more WHM in raids/trials than SCH. I really wish DF would mix the classes among alliances, keep seeing Alliance A: WHM WHM, Alliance B: WHM WHM, Alliance C: SCH SCH >>

I keep with WHM, suppose its personal preference, I like just 'straight forward' healing (think thats the best term to describe my feeling between the two?). I did play SMN and pet management on the PS4 is a NIGHTMARE and SCH has to micro manage and macro pets etc and that just doesn't sit well with me.

As far as advantages/disadvantages go id say both played well do equally as well but ofc theres factors in the background all the time. WHM can OOM easily without constant MP management and even with management in a long drawn out fight or solo healing 8 mans can burn that MP up. SCH doesn't have MP issues and has the fairy too.

WHM has better buffs (protect and stone skin), SCH has better virus and eye however, if theres a SMN or SCH in the party I let them handle virus.

Only thing that makes me worry if I'm with a SCH in DF is 'that cleric stance SCH', you know, "lets camp clerics and force the WHM to solo heal" SCH (although few and far between I still worry). Hate people that do this, 90% of the time I'm fine but you always get those special parties that require a lot more healing than normal and when Im almost OOM from keeping people up and the party is getting smashed by aoes in for example ST and the SCH is STILL in cleric stance I just scream internally. If you are going to camp clerics ask the other healer if they're ok with solo healing, communication is key.

[Cynfael]

The comments about SCHs camping CS are funny because I ran ST yesterday with a SCH who didn't seem to understand that they could do all parts of their role while using CS as appropriate.

Player: "I can DPS if you want me to. That's what I usually do, anyway."
Me: "I just do both. Stance-dancing."

The poor thing spent the rest of the raid looking dazed and confused, not really healing much or DPSing, either. The concept of DPSing while healing by managing the fairy and toggling CS on/off as necessary was an unfamiliar one.

[Ignnis]

Might be a confidence issue. Confidence with the boss fight and confidence with the party. If I'm not confident in the fight I will barely or never stance dance or if I see the tank failing hard at basic trash pulls ill baby them through the run rarely DPSing.