Endwalker Sch Question

[Brandedblade]

I don’t think that being too powerful is really a good criticism, especially when it comes to dps. The Heavensward SCH felt good to play. They could have nerfed the dps potencies significantly and it would have felt the same to play, healing always comes first, and you always do as much damage as you can around the healing, however much that is. When it comes to healing potencies, it’s a bit more complicated because changing the healing potencies will change the way you use your kit, but generally speaking I think that if a kit is fun but the numbers aren’t right, you change the numbers, not the kit.

I disagree here. When dps is the main worthwhile metric in this game it means that if one of the healers had a significant edge in dps it will be far and away the best option. SCH was dealing significantly more damage then AST and SCH in that era.

And no, I agree, heavensward sch was FUN, but you know what else it was? needlessly complex and prone to discouraging good play in less skilled players, all those memes about SCH's just dpsing while putting the strain on their co-healers, while not accurate to high skill levels, existed for a reason. No to mention cleric stance was just so...unnecessarily convoluted and punishing. I understand, it feels good to overcome these challenges and know you're contributing on both the offense and defensive front, but this is not something I think we need to go back to.

This is why for the most part I prefer stormblood, it wasn't needlessly convoluted, but it also wasn't just spamming Broil the whole time. It was a compromise, it with a few more system tweaks to make the overall experience smoother is my 'ideal' version of SCH.

[Hatstand]

I disagree here. When dps is the main worthwhile metric in this game it means that if one of the healers had a significant edge in dps it will be far and away the best option. SCH was dealing significantly more damage then AST and SCH in that era.

I think you’ve misunderstood my point. My point was not that it is not an issue if one healer does more damage than the others. While healing is the main job of a healer, it’s a pass or fail job, so dps numbers is what will differentiate adequate healers. My point was that you can change how well a healer performs at dps by changing the potencies of their skills, rather than changing the function or number of skills. (Although it’s true that here you can only tune for best case, average case, or worst case, which means a healer with difficult dps may end up doing worse dps on average than a healer with easy dps, due to a smaller number of players getting it right. I’d consider that to be worth it to have a healer with something interesting to do in downtime).

If you can find a way of making healers fun for players like me, who enjoy trying to eke that little bit more out of their kit, (in their downtime as well as their uptime) without making them complex in a way that cause worse players to make mistakes, then go for it. But I don’t accept the argument that healers can’t be complex, fun, and punishing to those who make mistakes. BLM is also punishing to those who mess up, and the group is will die because a BLM messed up and the group failed a dps check just as they will if the healer was too caught up in dpsing to push their healer buttons. No one is saying that BLM needs to be simplified so that bad BLM players don’t cause problems for their groups.