Healers need an overhaul

[Fendred]

On the shield healer side, isn't this a pretty milk toast issue? The core of scholar's toolkit is a two-second hard cast shield while sage's core toolkit is a pure heal that transforms into an instant cast shield of the same potency. Sage can just mitigate a lot more stuff than scholar due to being faster, and at the same potency to boot. Its the same thing on the cooldown side of things. Either its cooldowns are linked to adloq/succor and thus are slower by relation or the cooldown requires extraneous input (ground targeting, summoning seraph to use seraphic veil, having to dismiss a status effect to get your fairy back, etc).

People get bored of playing the same job all the time. When the only other option in a role is a downgrade, people are going to start playing another role.

[ty_taurus]

My main issue is that it seems an unnecessary overcomplication (or, more "convolution" than identity- or depth-adding). And overall it would seem to have a net negative effect on SGE's kit.

Overall, I feel that you're giving the concept a very un-charitable take. There are elements that I recognize some players might not enjoy, "what if I'm in a burst window, but I want to prioritize this OGCD damage now and thus I can't heal if without cutting into my burst output?" But most of your response just seems to be "it's complicated, therefore it's bad." And I don't really feel like that's a fair take, especially when, in my mind, the solution is ultimately making the healers actually different rather than them being 4 shades of green, each with a different flower on top, so even if you might not find that healer fun, there's a chance you could find a different healer more fun. I also feel quite strongly that SGE should be like GNB--as in they are the healer that should feel like a DPS because that's something people want but sorely lack.

I'll also note that I only talked about 2 components and not the rest of the kit which would also develop changes to compliment this, nor what we'd get beyond level 90 in 7.0. For example, given the special barriers used by Alphinaud and Fourchenault in different examples, you could perhaps get a Passage of Arms-like channeled barrier that also adds to your Kardia gauge during downtime to resolve your downtime concern.

Also I never said Eukrasian Diagnosis was gated behind this gauge. Only the Addersting generation component is gated. You can cast vanilla barriers as much as you want, you just won't be reimbursed for that effort without having enough gauge, which is exactly how barriers work now since Addersting is not a reimbursement since you still lose 100% DPS for your cast. Really, all the change is is breaking up Toxikon and giving it a soft Continuation-style mechanic, and making Addersgall generation manual rather than passive, which is much healthier for game. Note also that cooldowns do still tick while experiencing downtime, so a good SGE would make sure their stacks of Addersgall/Addersting generation were spent going into a phase change.

On the shield healer side, isn't this a pretty milk toast issue? The core of scholar's toolkit is a two-second hard cast shield while sage's core toolkit is a pure heal that transforms into an instant cast shield of the same potency. Sage can just mitigate a lot more stuff than scholar due to being faster, and at the same potency to boot. Its the same thing on the cooldown side of things. Either its cooldowns are linked to adloq/succor and thus are slower by relation or the cooldown requires extraneous input (ground targeting, summoning seraph to use seraphic veil, having to dismiss a status effect to get your fairy back, etc).

People get bored of playing the same job all the time. When the only other option in a role is a downgrade, people are going to start playing another role.

Discussing barrier tools is more milk toast than the lack of gameplay that the healers suffer from. SCH gets Recitation and Deployment, SGE gets instant cast barriers, and neither of them actually even use their barriers in most content because they're an excessive waste of MP and DPS outside of lower ilvl Savage raiding. People already are bored of SCH and SGE and have been leaving ever since Shadowbringers.

[Shurrikhan]

Overall, I feel that you're giving the concept a very un-charitable take. There are elements that I recognize some players might not enjoy, "what if I'm in a burst window, but I want to prioritize this OGCD damage now and thus I can't heal if without cutting into my burst output?" But most of your response just seems to be "it's complicated, therefore it's bad."

No, I just don't see how what you'd suggested have any more layers of complexity, necessarily, than what we have presently; they'd just be routed more forcibly through the systems replacing our current more flexible systems. That's why I clearly differentiated between what I saw as "complexity" and what seemed more a matter of "convolution".

Adding a new attack would offer it some complexity, especially if it synergized with, rather than simply gated, other elements of the kit. On the other hand, replacing a 60s banking period (current Addersgall) with a 40s banking period that requires GCDs seems a convolution that would get in the way of more natural synergies to --imo-- no real gain.

At most the complexity is that you have to sacrifice dps tools early, to less potential synergy, to get access to those Addersgall heals that might not be used until a minute later anyways. That, even in isolation, seems a slightly net negative change to me, since it wouldn't feel like those skills are sourcing healing (unlike, say, if their Kardia healing scaled with their damage) so much as simply being muddled in their purpose, or even a resource CD first and a damage CD second.

And I don't really feel like that's a fair take, especially when, in my mind, the solution is ultimately making the healers actually different rather than them being 4 shades of green, each with a different flower on top, so even if you might not find that healer fun, there's a chance you could find a different healer more fun.

Again, not arguing that healer should remain simple. I've been arguing for greater available depth for healers since re-launch. I just don't care for that degree of system interdependence. Much like I don't care for the way the Fairy Gauge works but do want far more going on with SCH Faeries.

Not liking a particular iteration =/= not liking the direction that iteration was meant to pursue.

Also I never said Eukrasian Diagnosis was gated behind this gauge.

My mistake, then. Since you said EuD and EuP would "consume 50 gauge", I assumed they would also require 50 gauge.

In that case, though, you end up with a whole gauge, until later expansions of that system, devoted entirely to just... doubling Addersting generation per EuD, per X Dosis/Toxicon/EuDosis casts? That seems pretty wasteful, especially as a replacement for SGE's flexible resource system (Addersgall). Even once you expand it, since the gauge spending would be automatic on EuD/EuP, you'd have to balance its other spenders against the value of a mere extra Toxicon cast or you'd be effectively obliged to use those spenders before ever casting EuD/EuP at 50+ gauge.

I just don't get the appeal to the gauge. It seems very reminiscent of the single-spender version of the Fairy Gauge, which doesn't seem a good thing to me. Add to that its slight cost to general fluidity (gating Addersgall behind your burst attack and at least part of [descriptor still a bit ambiguous] Addersting generation behind Kardia gauge) and I don't see how that's supposed to be a net improvement.

To me, a large part of SGE's identity is supposed to be fluidity. I'd rather keep to that than try to lock more tools behind recuperation.

I wouldn't feel more "DPS Healer" for having Addersgall locked behind an attack; that just means I'm a healer whose attacks are now muddled by incoming healing requirements, which in turns means they couldn't fully benefit from Kardia scaling with damage if that were ever permitted.

Really, all the change is is breaking up Toxikon and giving it a soft Continuation-style mechanic

Is a trio of lackluster oGCDs really giving it "Continuation-style" mechanic, though? Moreover, since each Toxicon already gives the capped amount of follow-up oGCDs that will take at least 2 GCDs to fully spend, you can't chain them for AoE burst now. I don't think there's any need to "discourage" dumping Addersting in controlled burst over forcing them apart.

Meanwhile, if "crit variance" of all things were a reason to take up 4 animations' weave space per Toxicon cast... you could get that effect by just having Toxicon hit 4 times (each potentially triggering Kardia, since it'd be on a spell) for a quarter each, more reminiscent of its animation.

___________________________________________
EDIT:

To summarize:

• I'd rather see Kardia scale with damage dealt and see SGE better able to bank damage burst (especially, in synergy with Soteria) than see its healing resources be outright locked behind damage casts otherwise bankable for damage / Kardia-healing.
• By all means, let's have some flexible burst options via a new two-charge spell; I'd just take almost any other additional effect or synergy over resource generation.
• I don't yet see the appeal to the Kardia gauge. It just doesn't feel like a system I'd want to attach generation to, seeing as Kardia is already, itself, a way of creating a rather huge lead in no-opportunity-cost healing.
• Addersgall present iteration seems totally fine to me. It's just a shared secondary CD across multiple abilities; it's never pretended to be more, nor need it be.
• I would be open to far more complexity on SGE; I just think they should build first from improvements/rehauls to SGE's currently lackluster/unimaginative CDs and should keep fluidity as a central focus.

[ty_taurus]

That's quite a strawman.

I don't see how what you'd suggested have any more layers of complexity than what we have presently; they'd just be routed more forcibly through the systems replacing our current more flexible systems. That's why I clearly differentiated between what I saw as "complexity" and what seemed more a matter of "convolution".

I'm not trying to strawman you, it's just that most of your points were "it is convoluted" rather than "here's why." That, to me, just comes across more as "I don't personally like it" rather than discussing what doesn't work about it on a functional level.

I want to follow up on me discussing that I only talked about 2 components... I've written out my own take on an entire SGE rework including changes like that, so there's more that would go into complimenting this system, but no one wants to read a thesis on a job rework, and I mainly was trying to communicate the approach I took to making Toxikon neutral without encouraging E. Diag spam. So for example, this Addersgall generating spell could be Eukrasiad into one that sacrificed your Addergall for MP restoration on yourself while still generating the Addersting, and you also gained Addersting from applying your DoT, so you had mutliple ways of maintaining Toxikon and managing your OGCD stacks, which would give it a fair amount of depth due to the frequency at which you'd engage with it (Up to 6 Addersting per minute) so you'd actually be doing quite a fair amount of weaving in this concept.

Also, to fully clarify the Kardia gauge aspect. Eukrasian Diagnosis does not produce Addersting when the barrier breaks in this concept. Both Eukrasian Diagnosis and Eukrasian Prognosis will generate exactly 1 Addersting when cast at 50 gauge or more. I feel the intention here was getting muddled since you mentioned double Addersting generation per Eukrasian Diagnosis which I didn't understand what you meant.

[Nizzi]

On the shield healer side, isn't this a pretty milk toast issue? The core of scholar's toolkit is a two-second hard cast shield while sage's core toolkit is a pure heal that transforms into an instant cast shield of the same potency. Sage can just mitigate a lot more stuff than scholar due to being faster, and at the same potency to boot. Its the same thing on the cooldown side of things. Either its cooldowns are linked to adloq/succor and thus are slower by relation or the cooldown requires extraneous input (ground targeting, summoning seraph to use seraphic veil, having to dismiss a status effect to get your fairy back, etc).

This isn't true at all, SCH is by far better at mitigation than SGE is, which is why SCH is overwhelmingly picked for DSR over SGE because DSR is a mitigation intensive encounter.

[Shurrikhan]

I'm not trying to strawman you, it's just that most of your points were "it is convoluted" rather than "here's why." That, to me, just comes across more as "I don't personally like it" rather than discussing what doesn't work about it on a functional level.

Fair enough. Let me break the prior comments down further then, hopefully with a bit better organization this time.

<Addersgall locked behind a new 20s 2-charge attack>

• The Good: The new attack.
• The Bad: Attaching the resource generation to the attack makes it feel less like an attack and muddles synergies that would otherwise come naturally to it (say, with small changes to how Kardia works). It does not, to me, make it feel more like healing and damage are intertwined.

<Toxicon II grants 3 stacks of Toxicosis, an oGCD of 110 potency (1/3 Dosis III)>

• The Good: More apm?
• The Neutral: A spammable partial-potency-recovery tool is replaced by a 20s-recharge-gated full-potency-recovery tool. It therefore offers less mobility but increases Sage's advantage in healing generated at no damage opportunity cost. (I am not, however, sure it'd remotely need to increase that lead, and if it did, there are other places I'd prefer to spend that budget.)
• The Bad: That APM comes with weave cost and prevents chained Toxicon casts. I do not see any need or reason to "discourage" chained Toxicon casts. The cost to weave space also discourages other APM-increasing additions; since this route seems to me unlikely to be particularly entertaining beyond its simply increasing APM, that seems a negative. Also, the suggested tuning for the Kardia Gauge (below).
  
  :: Given the interrelation with the Kardia system (below), you might be better off with 2 oGCDs per cast, at half a Dosis each, in order to retain resource-generation parity (assuming you allow each follow-up ability to trigger Kardia).

<Kardia Gauge can be used to generate Addersting>

• The Good: <Not sure>
• The Neutral: It's another gauge, on a barebone class. If it were used well, it'd be positive.
• The Bad: It seems a really poor choice of resource generator. Conflicts with itself in that the more potency-recovery EuD's it allows for, the less time you spend on Kardia-generating attacks (unless you have the follow-ups each generate at least 1 gauge apiece). Unless you make significant changes to Kardia, the tuning (2 per attack) would require it to take a little over 2 minutes to fill at base GCD speed, assuming perfect offensive uptime. You mentioned wanting this once per minute (as compared to WHM's thrice per minute, though ofc WHM loses free-healing sources elsewhere in turn), so I'm assuming you want more than what would be .8 gauge per second in pure attack-spam uptime. Finally, because the automatic spending on EuD/EuP forced undue constraints on future applications of the gauge.

<Overall>

• The Good: The new actions, mostly (would rather see SGE's no-damage-loss combined output lead increased by other means, if at all, and would prefer other sources of APM increase than just a trio of modest attacks after each Toxicon).
• The Bad: I don't like the reduced flexibility on Toxicon timing, the new damage CD being (imo) muddled by its resource generation component, the loss to a mobility and pre-combat tool (especially important in dungeons) due to having no base recuperation on EuD, the downtime limitations (or needing bloat actions just to correct it) on the Kardia gauge and reduced lossless downtime period on Addersgall (60s -> 40s), the increased effective fixation on Dosis uptime or its effect in increasing SGE's no-opportunity-costs healing+damage while worsening its decline as healing intensity (especially ST) increases, nor the double-gating in general (EuD interaction locked behind a slow-to-ramp attack-based gauge, which then takes 4 actions apiece to pay off).

Also, to fully clarify the Kardia gauge aspect. Eukrasian Diagnosis does not produce Addersting when the barrier breaks in this concept.

Ahh, got it. That still has its own issues, imo, mentioned above, but thank you for the clarification.

I want to follow up on me discussing that I only talked about 2 components... I've written out my own take on an entire SGE rework including changes like that, so there's more that would go into complimenting this system, but no one wants to read a thesis on a job rework, and I mainly was trying to communicate the approach I took to making Toxikon neutral without encouraging E. Diag spam.

Likewise fair. Sorry to have placed undue pressure on isolated components.

I really do think there are some fundamental issues with any sort of Kardia gauge, though, just by nature of what generator you've chosen to base that gauge on and that it's a builder-spender gauge instead of a spender-rebuilder gauge, and I do feel like gating is a bit excessive under the earlier iteration would be excessive (in that it adds to SGE's lead at cost to general QoL and a core, if middling, mobility/banking feature).

I suspect those two areas, especially Kardia gauge, may need revision rather than just fleshing out, but I look forward to seeing the full rework idea(s). o/

[ty_taurus]

I look forward to seeing the full rework idea(s). o/

If you are genuinely curious to see the entire thing, there's a link to it under the spoilers tag over here in this thread along with reworks to the other healers as well. SCH's is probably the most out there. I will state though that these builds include a highly experimental rework to how MP functions, but without actually being able to test the MP rework, I can't actually speak on how healthy it would be. Know that if I were in charge of job design, this is basically what I'd take into testing and see how it plays out (along with everything in these builds, naturally.) That said, the concepts could easily work within the existing MP system as well, perhaps cutting the GCD MP spells on each healer and just keep Lucid Dreaming in that mindset.

The Good: The new attack.
The Bad: Attaching the resource generation to the attack makes it feel less like an attack and muddles synergies that would otherwise come naturally to it (say, with small changes to how Kardia works). It does not, to me, make it feel more like healing and damage are intertwined.

I don't really understand where you're coming from on the point of muddling synergies and not feeling like healing and damage are intertwined. It's taking something that generates based on 0 interaction and expanding on your rotation by having you manually generate Addersgall instead. Is that not the definition of intertwining DPS and healing gameplay--generating healing resources through attacking?

One argument that I can understand is that you can't generate Addersgall during downtime. I think that's a valid critique, but I personally don't think is an objective negative. I myself would rather generate resources intentionally rather than have them given to me. And as I mentioned, you can always make an effort to go into phase changes after having spent your cooldowns on this spell.

The Good: More apm?
The Neutral: A spammable partial-potency-recovery tool is replaced by a 20s-recharge-gated full-potency-recovery tool. It therefore offers less mobility but increases Sage's advantage in healing generated at no damage opportunity cost. (I am not, however, sure it'd remotely need to increase that lead, and if it did, there are other places I'd prefer to spend that budget.)
The Bad: That APM comes with weave cost and prevents chained Toxicon casts. I do not see any need or reason to "discourage" chained Toxicon casts. The cost to weave space also discourages other APM-increasing additions; since this route seems to me unlikely to be particularly entertaining beyond its simply increasing APM, that seems a negative. Also, the suggested tuning for the Kardia Gauge (below).

:: Given the interrelation with the Kardia system (below), you might be better off with 2 oGCDs per cast, at half a Dosis each, in order to retain resource-generation parity (assuming you allow each follow-up ability to trigger Kardia).

One thing I'll note is I reworked Dyskrasia into a different AoE filler spell that doubles as a mobility tool at increased MP cost. This is something I'd do for every healer, and it reflects in the build ideas--adding functionality to AoE buttons in single target. These buttons exist but go unused, and I think there's value in making them work in all environments rather than just dungeon trash. For SGE, this changes their AoE to a ranged, instant cast mobility tool that heals your Kardia target and all allies around them in a fairly small radius, meaning it also works as a way to heal while the party is stacked, or perhaps helps you heal up the healers/DPS after a raidwide, then switch your Kardia back to the tank.

I bring this up because it would resolve the concern you mention about losing Toxikon's mobility function.

Ultimately on the number of OGCD weaves, that's something that would also be better resolved through testing.

Good: <Not sure>
Neutral: It's another gauge, on a barebone class. If it were used well, it'd be positive.
Bad: It seems a really poor choice of resource generator. Conflicts with itself in that the more potency-recovery EuD's it allows for, the less time you spend on Kardia-generating attacks (unless you have the follow-ups each generate at least 1 gauge apiece). Unless you make significant changes to Kardia, the tuning (2 per attack) would require it to take a little over 2 minutes to fill at base GCD speed, assuming perfect offensive uptime. You mentioned wanting this once per minute (as compared to WHM's thrice per minute, though ofc WHM loses free-healing sources elsewhere in turn), so I'm assuming you want more than what would be .8 gauge per second in pure attack-spam uptime. Finally, because the automatic spending on EuD/EuP forced undue constraints on future applications of the gauge.

Note that the only GCD spells that don't have Kardia effects are Diagnosis, Prognosis, and the new Holos (it's not important for the purpose of this discussion). With no spellspeed, there are 24 GCDs in a minute, and with spellspeed, that number can increase. If you are able to maintain DPS uptime, you generate 48 gauge per minute and need 50 to cast E. Diagnosis/E. Prognosis. The gauge goes up to 100 as well to allow you time to find the right moments for E. Diagnosis/E. Prognosis, and because these resources are generated in other ways as well, there's less pressure to just use these heals for burst window DPS gains, a problem WHM faces. It's true that both Diagnosis and Prognosis will not add to your Kardia gauge, but I don't know of any gauge spender that also increases its own gauge.

I don't really feel like comparing them to the lilies is the right comparison, because I see Addersgall as comparable to the lilies instead, it's just you use them off the GCD rather than on it. The Kardia gauge here is more about making it feel as though occasional barrier usage is rewarded rather than always coming at a DPS opportunity cost. You still of course have your Addersgall heals which are meant to be your primary source of healing like they are currently. Having said that though, I do agree that it's much better having gauges with options rather than specifical for individual actions. I ended up feeling content with this Kardia gauge concept for the sake of justifying your GCD barrier heals, and I do think it functions more effectively than you might, but it's not the absolute best option available either, I'm sure.

Ultimately, I do recognize some of your concerns. At the end of the day, theorycrafts like these are limited in that they have to be created entirely on paper and cannot be put in a testing environment, so I have no doubt there are areas that would inevitably need development, but some concerns are also issues that we can't actually no are issues without testing either, like if the Toxikon followups being 3 weaves would actually feel like too much when put into practice. It's more about creating core ideas and concepts to communicate a design.

[tearagion]

Please, it's milquetoast not milk toast. I beg you.

[Shurrikhan]

Is that not the definition of intertwining DPS and healing gameplay--generating healing resources through attacking?

To me, no, because nothing about the latter effect scales or synergizes with that damage. You simply took something SGE already had and then gated it behind something else such that the new position provides no advantages over the old despite having a smaller banking margin.

For a similar reason I wouldn't say that Misery is generated by healing so much as simply by particular generators that, among other things, happen to allow for recouped healing costs. In dungeons, it's most often used between pulls, where the healing (like the damage of your above generator) is irrelevant to the additional effect.

You might as well say that AST gets its MP through card usage *(because of the appended 5% MP per Draw) or WHM through Water magic (Assize) as say that locking Addersgall behind (rather than it having scale or synergize with) an attack entwines damage and healing.

Now, if a portion of healing potency was then wrapped into WHM's next attack spell, sure, I'd call that entwinement. If AST's only way to regenerate additional mana was through self-casts of the Ewer card, yeah, I'd say they're entwined.

I myself would rather generate resources intentionally rather than have them given to me.

Fair. And I could agree with that. I just don't think this adds any meaningful degree of intent. You would already follow identical behavior (don't let your nuke attack overcap its charges) with or without gating Addersgall generation behind it.

In fact, you'd be even less able to use it situationally (much like holding for future burst Assize or --a more powerful-- Draw due to their MP generation). Since you're then giving yet more weight behind using it in the most normal and least fight-awareness-rewarding way, I'd possibly go so far as to say it's reducing the space for intention in that ability. You've reduced the space for alternatives, after all.

One thing I'll note is I reworked Dyskrasia into a different AoE filler spell that doubles as a mobility tool at increased MP cost. This is something I'd do for every healer, and it reflects in the build ideas--adding functionality to AoE buttons in single target.

Oh, nice. Okay, that reduces the would-be costs quite a bit then.

If you are genuinely curious to see the entire thing, there's a link to it under the spoilers tag over here in this thread along with reworks to the other healers as well.

Alrighty. Will check it out.

[AnotherPerson]

I don't really understand where you're coming from on the point of muddling synergies and not feeling like healing and damage are intertwined. It's taking something that generates based on 0 interaction and expanding on your rotation by having you manually generate Addersgall instead. Is that not the definition of intertwining DPS and healing gameplay--generating healing resources through attacking?

One argument that I can understand is that you can't generate Addersgall during downtime. I think that's a valid critique, but I personally don't think is an objective negative. I myself would rather generate resources intentionally rather than have them given to me. And as I mentioned, you can always make an effort to go into phase changes after having spent your cooldowns on this spell.

Imo, addersgall regeneration shouldn't be affected since that's unique to sage and works well with Kardia itself (1 per 20 sec natural regeneration allows good sustain over time). When you're forced to decide between GCD healing with Eukrasian shields or charge addersgall because the tank is taking far too much damage (applicable at lower levels when tank's undergeared), not having addersgall generate naturally is a huge detriment since it's tied to the GCD - which directly limits the sage's healing throughput when damage greatly exceeds what Kardia can heal in the next GCD. I would actually have the tank die more times in Stone Vigil and Aurum Vale if addersgall generation is tied to a GCD spell and the tank isn't exactly great at mitigating, but chooses to do big pulls anyway.

On the other hand, I would be fine if addersting generation is tied to a DPS GCD spell since addersting generation is something you do when you have the time to charge resources (instead of using Dosis). It would be more preferrable to make addersting skills activate Kardion multiple times and keep addersgall generation separate. If there needs to be a connection between addersgall and DPS-to-heal, it would be more preferrable to have addersgall skills apply Kardion to the affected targets instead.



That being said, if they add more DPS skills with additional effects to our healing output, I would definitely prefer if there would also be a skill the sage can use to summon a mini target dummy during downtime or transitions. Hitting the target dummy will activate said skills' effects and also activate Kardion - which helps prevent any inconsistencies with not being able to use DPS spells that heals (example: Pneuma) for long periods of time if we ever get a case where the enemy becomes untargetable but is still inflicting damage. It would be even better if said dummy will also restore MP to the sage based on the number of hits it received at the end of its duration, making it a dual purpose skill that can be used during combat as well. Depending on how many more skills sage gets for DPS, it can open up a variety of MP-expensive spells to heal/shield as a caveat, and being able to hit a target at any point in time would fit in-line with this kind of playstyle.