How many direct heals

[Stjarna Kvar]

<P>How many direct single target heals do we have on separate timers? </P><P>I count 2. Please correct me if I'm wrong.  I would love to be wrong!</P><P><STRONG>Small Direct Heal</STRONG> -- Minor Healing > Combat Healing > Bounty of Virtuous > Ameliorate > Greater Amelioration > Grand Amelioration </P><P><STRONG>Large Direct Heal</STRONG> -- Minor Arch Healing > Improved Arch Healing > Arch Healing > Bestowal of Vitality > Restoration > Greater Restoration > Grand Restoration</P><P> </P><P> </P>[Edit] Fixed spell progression<p>Message Edited by Stjarna Kvarco on <span class=date_text>11-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:59 AM</span>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Stjarna Kvarco wrote:<BR> <P><STRONG>Large Direct Heal</STRONG> -- Minor Arch Healing > Improved Arch Healing > Arch Healing > Bestowal of Vitality > Supplicant's Prayer > Greater Intercession > Grand Intercession</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You switched from the direct heal line to a reactive line.  You meant to jump to Restoration.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[cadrach]

<DIV>Your right only 2. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Though it is not as bad as it sounds.  In all reality you should only have to use your single target direct heals to supliment your reactives.   Keep your reactive heal up and your all set, if the mob hits for harder than your reactive can heal for you can cast a direct to help. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Trust me, we rock at healing. (well that is my opinion)   </DIV>

[Stjarna Kvar]

I thought I saw in another post that we had three and I wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy.

[Bjerde]

They may have been referring to the Splitpaw heal which I believe is on a seperate timer. I don't think two heals is enough personally. I used to keep a lot more out on my hotbar. I find myself waiting for heals to recycle a lot. Yes, that is with using reactives that don't heal for nearly enough on heroics....so you need to use instant heals a lot more than before. And having less than before makes it harder to heal than before. <div></div>

[bigmak20]

Splitpaw heal is on same timer as small single target direct heal. Keeping reactives up is NOT the solution.  There are many cases (moreso higher into the game) that the MoBs hit for more then reactives heal.  You MUST constantly supplement with direct heals.  Templars are weak in this compared to other priests due to our extreme cast times.  This problem is magnified yet again at 52+ as other priests get ancient spell heals on seperate timers and we do not.

[Jida]

<DIV>Reverance is on a seperate timer.. I know the duraion is crappy.. but, with a tell (macro) anyone will burn the mana =)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Elder</DIV>

[Kendricke]

<P>Reactive heals, Direct heals, Investment Heals, Reverence, Utility Heals, Atoning Fate, and other heals give us much more options than any other priest.  </P> <P>Reactives aren't a trick heal or secondary heal.  It's our primary specialty.  It's not designed to halt damage outright, but to slow it down while you utilize other tools to accomplish the goal.  </P> <P>Right now, against most reactives, it's fairly standard that I cast a Master II Group reactive followed by a Master II Single Reactive.  If I believe we're going to get a spell caster, I'll drop a Shielding Faith pre-bull as well.  During the fight, I'll continue to rotate through my primary 3 single target heals, using other heals and debuffs as needed.  If it's a tough heroic or named that looks like it's going to last longer than a minute or more, I'll drop an Involuntary Healer on the pull.  If I'm grouped with other priests or paladins, I'll use Mark of Kings.  If I'm grouped with a fair amount of melee, I'll use Admonishment (or Rebuke/Reproach, whatever you have).</P> <P>Keep a reactive up at all times, and any time you have a situation where none of those three heals are up, use Reverence (at higher levels).  At lower levels, I would use that time to drop a quick Sign (if we're fighting multiple targets) or Prostrate.</P> <P>Obviously different situations call for different healing, but for the most part, that's a pretty standard Template of most of my fights.  </P> <P> </P>

[Stjarna Kvar]

Off topic much? LOLWhy is it if any real question about a spell always ends up in a debate over 1. Whether or not Templars are broken2. Whether or not our Lotto heals etc. are usefulCheezeness, guys? It was a simple question about Direct Heals and their timers, not an excuse to banter about how totally useless/useful our spell lineup is./Thanks for playing, come again.

[Vylo]

<P><STRONG>Small Direct Heal</STRONG> -- Minor Healing > Combat Healing > Bounty of Virtuous > Ameliorate > Greater Amelioration > Grand Amelioration</P><BR> <P><STRONG>Large Direct Heal</STRONG> -- Minor Arch Healing > Improved Arch Healing > Arch Healing > Restoration > Greater Restoration > Grand Restoration</P> <P><STRONG>Group Direct Heal</STRONG> - Healing Touch > Word of Restoration > Word of Atonement </P> <P><STRONG>Single Target Reactive</STRONG> - Bestowal of Vitality > Supplicant's Prayer > Greater Intercession > Grand Intercession</P> <P><STRONG>Group Reactive - </STRONG>Intercession > Crucial Intercession > Beneficence > Focused Benefaction > Fateful Intercession</P> <P><STRONG>Fate Heal (when stuff dies) </STRONG>- Amending Fate > Redemptive Fate > Atoning Fate</P> <P><STRONG>Mark Heal (when stuff is hit) </STRONG>- Mark of Princes > Mark of Kings > Mark of the Celestial</P> <P> </P> <P>This is our full arsenal of heals...  if you arent using all of them you are doing your class harm and IMHO have no right to whine about how "broken" we are <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  i am sure i have missed something but this is pretty complete from what i can tell <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  flame away fellow Templars... i know its what you like to do<BR></P>

[bigmak20]

The utility healing spells Fate and Mark lines all priest classes have in one form or another.  By all means use them.  They are not in SOE's healing comparisons ... hard to say why.  If you took a look at the other priests healing utility you would see theirs is very nice too. I think this inquiries origin may have to do with the Fury who get 2 additional heals on seperate timers (at 52 and 5<img src="/smilies/b2eb59423fbf5fa39342041237025880.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> to add to their core healing arsenal.  Not trick heals on long timers, not lotto.  We get.. hmm.. zero additional core heals.  So we have our 4 basics and heal utilities; Furies have 6 basics and heal utilties.  Just the 2 additional timers alone is a huge benefit.  HUGE benefit. The Furies coming in here saying it isn't a big deal are liars trying to stay the uber best healers in the game.  Even on their own boards they are happy as larks about the heal timers not being a problem to manage healing any longer.  Whereas Templars have the timer problem.. period.  No solution.

[quetzaqotl]

<P>You can call everyone a liar except yourself Big furies have the fastest heals as was said by the devs so yes timers arent our problem we do have the smallest heals and not the most power effecient ones.</P> <P>Hibernation is NOT a core healing spells as it is a direct group heal with a 10 second delay when will this spell be useful? When your group gets hit for a lot and you know it in advance, situational? Yes I Think so.</P> <DIV>Also bitf is on its own timer but as has been ssaid by quite a few furies noone will mind it sharing the same timer with our small direct heal as noone uses that spell in your normal heal line up if above 50% I wont cast bitf+smal direct heal bitf will only be used in situations when the tank is below 50% and thats where it shines and is very useful I agree (its our spike dmg heal furies should be able to deal with dmg fast as has been said by the devs).</DIV> <DIV>When the tank is below 50% yes furies have an extra heal but if the target is above 50% i rely on my small/big direct heal + regen.</DIV> <DIV>And thats the truth no lying here not even exaggarating things like some other people like to do.</DIV> <DIV>Also which utility of furies is superior to all the other healers'utility?</DIV> <DIV>I posted a bit more on another thread but offensive utility wise (not counting our personal dmg) furies actually got a decrease in that dept (in your normal group setup). </DIV><p>Message Edited by quetzaqotl on <span class=date_text>11-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:35 PM</span>

[bigmak20]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> quetzaqotl wrote:<BR> <P>You can call everyone a liar except yourself Big furies have the fastest heals as was said by the devs so yes timers arent our problem we do have the smallest heals and not the most power effecient ones.</P> <P>Hibernation is NOT a core healing spells as it is a direct group heal with a 10 second delay when will this spell be useful? When your group gets hit for a lot and you know it in advance, situational? Yes I Think so.</P> <DIV>Also bitf is on its own timer but as has been ssaid by quite a few furies noone will mind it sharing the same timer with our small direct heal as noone uses that spell in your normal heal line up if above 50% I wont cast bitf+smal direct heal bitf will only be used in situations when the tank is below 50% and thats where it shines and is very useful I agree (its our spike dmg heal furies should be able to deal with dmg fast as has been said by the devs).</DIV> <DIV>When the tank is below 50% yes furies have an extra heal but if the target is above 50% i rely on my small/big direct heal + regen.</DIV> <DIV>And thats the truth no lying here not even exaggarating things like some other people like to do.</DIV> <DIV>Also which utility of furies is superior to all the other healers'utility?</DIV> <DIV>I posted a bit more on another thread but offensive utility wise (not counting our personal dmg) furies actually got a decrease in that dept (in your normal group setup). </DIV> <P>Message Edited by quetzaqotl on <SPAN class=date_text>11-22-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:35 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>So to utilize hibernation you have to plan ahead... kind of like reactives?  or regens? etc, etc.. lol</P> <P>It's a core heal on a seperate timer.  That's a big deal.  Getting two of them when other classes get zero is very unbalancing to the priest classes.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[Vylo]

<DIV>i think what Big is saying is...  NERF THE FURIES...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>haha jk</DIV>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> bigmak2010 wrote: <P>So to utilize hibernation you have to plan ahead... kind of like reactives?  or regens? etc, etc.. lol</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>On paper, a regeneration and a reactive of the same level do the same healing.  In practice, my reactives adjust to incoming damage, while the regeneration only assists after the fact.  While my reactives are firing, I'm able to better deal with spike damage than a regeneration which isn't even aware that damage is occuring. </P> <P>My reactives do just that - they react.  If the fighter gets hit nine times at 200 points per hit within the first round, my group reactive can fire off nine times at 300 health to compensate.  The fighter takes no damage...and I'm already casting my single cast reactive in the meantime.  In an identical group, a Fury using a comparable group regeneration has only healed 300 damage out of 1800 points.  The fighter's sitting on another 1500 points of hurt waiting for the Fury to do something quickly.  Now, if the targets we're fighting decide this is a good time for a time out, the Fury's got it covered without casting another heal.  Meanwhile, I'm able to chill with the targets for a minute while we wait for the Fury's regeneration to catch up.  In another 10 seconds, it will. </P> <P>THAT's why Furies need more direct healing than Templars.  Most fights - most fights aren't against Uberzilla the Hamfisted who slams your fighter once every 15 seconds for 8,000 points of damage.  Most encounters are against multiple targets or single targets which hit more often for less damage.  Reactives do wonderfully in those situations.  They aren't afterthoughts.  Frankly, I'm amazed that any Templar would downplay them as such.</P> <P>I realize that a big deal is being made of how well regenerations are at dealing with damage after the fact.  I'm of the opinion that it's better to not have to have a fighter taking as much damage in the first place.  Color me crazy, but I'd much rather have a fighter taking half the damage up front than taking the full brunt...but being assured that if he can hold out for another 5,10, or 15 seconds he'll be much more efficiently healed by those regenerations and delayed direct specialty heals. </P> <P><BR> </P>

[Mor]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> bigmak2010 wrote:<BR> <P>So to utilize hibernation you have to plan ahead... kind of like reactives?  or regens? etc, etc.. lol</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I don't have a Fury, but if I understand how this spell works, it's unlike reactives, regens or any other heal that I'm aware of.  My understanding is that this is, essentially, a delayed direct heal.  A "back-loaded" regen if you will.  It must be very difficult to use effectively.</P> <P> </P> <P><BR> </P>

[Dalchar]

<span><blockquote><hr>Morie wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> bigmak2010 wrote: <div></div> <p>So to utilize hibernation you have to plan ahead... kind of like reactives?  or regens? etc, etc.. lol</p> <hr> </blockquote> <p>I don't have a Fury, but if I understand how this spell works, it's unlike reactives, regens or any other heal that I'm aware of.  My understanding is that this is, essentially, a delayed direct heal.  A "back-loaded" regen if you will.  It must be very difficult to use effectively. </p><hr></blockquote>It's almost impossible to use effectively really.  It's used for 3 things in my experience, and seems similar for other furies-- 1. The most common use... being lazy and just casting it just because... I know the tank's going to take damage, it's an easy fight and well, I didn't even need to cast a regen... One button press instead of 2-3 and I wanted to see trees... I could have casted anything and actually achieved the same effect. 2. Pre-porcupine.  This (I imagine) is the primary reason this spell exists.  However, for it to be effective pre-porcupine-- the delay would need to be more like 15-20s, as the tank (or anyone else) generally hasn't taken enough (if any) damage for this to make a difference. 3. When you just start spamming group heals, everyone's getting walloped on.  This is the rarest instance and also proving to be where it's of questionable potency.  Generally I'd hit this, then group heal, then group regen.  90% of the time, that's taken care of all the damage the group has taken or will by the time Hibernation actually goes off.  I generally am finding it to be a waste of power... about the only time it seems to be effective in any reasonable manner, has been when there's 3+ encounters with lots of mobs and things are just haywire... This has happened to me... approximately 4x since release of DOF... three of those in the MajDul Towers and someone hit a true AOE effect, the other time was in the x2 room in CORujark. It's not the same as "planning ahead" as in reactives or regen, as those take care of incoming damage as it happens, you can check the hp of your group/targets seconds before casting for a rather pre-determined result and determine what abilities are best suited to adjust to a situation.  Hibernation... you don't generally know what the hp of the rest of your group is going to be 10s from the time you cast it.  Maybe on a non-random timed AOE on a raid encounter, but, that'd require extreme coordination and time-keeping, and generally seem few and far between.</span><div></div>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Morie wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> bigmak2010 wrote:<BR> <P>So to utilize hibernation you have to plan ahead... kind of like reactives?  or regens? etc, etc.. lol</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>I don't have a Fury, but if I understand how this spell works, it's unlike reactives, regens or any other heal that I'm aware of.  My understanding is that this is, essentially, a delayed direct heal.  A "back-loaded" regen if you will.  It must be very difficult to use effectively.</P> <P><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>That's exactly what it is.  You take 1.5 seconds to cast.  Once you cast, a buff is placed upon the group.  10 seconds later, the buff expires and your entire group is hit for the full heal at once (1118-1367 at Adept III).  If you know damage will be coming in (say, in an AE situation), it's a great spell.  If you don't, then it's overkill...and the 233 power cost isn't exactly condusive to just firing it off for no reason.</P> <P> </P> <P><BR> </P>

[Timaarit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Kendricke wrote:<p>Reactive heals, Direct heals, Investment Heals, Reverence, Utility Heals, Atoning Fate, and other heals give us much more options than any other priest.  </p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>Well fact is that templar is a class for the optimist who hopes that he wins in lottery and that the target can actually read the macros. Otherwise all our utility is junk and Reverence just waste of power. Funny thing is that no one has reported actual deaths with the proc bug in atoning fate, so even that is just a minor heal. And by the way, what exactly are the 'much more options'? As it is, furies have 4 direct heals while we have two. So instead of we having 'more options', we have to use everything we have to match that and even then our success depends on the random number generator. This means that our healing is <b>random</b>. Who wants a healer you cant rely on? Of course those who dont know how we 'heal' and think that we are eq1 clerics.</span><div></div>

[Timaarit]

<span><blockquote><hr>Kendricke wrote: <p>That's exactly what it is.  You take 1.5 seconds to cast.  Once you cast, a buff is placed upon the group.  10 seconds later, the buff expires and your entire group is hit for the full heal at once (1118-1367 at Adept III).  If you know damage will be coming in (say, in an AE situation), it's a great spell.  If you don't, then it's overkill...and the 233 power cost isn't exactly condusive to just firing it off for no reason.</p><div></div><hr></blockquote>But you still think that atoning fate, that fires after mob is dead, is a GREAT spell....</span><div></div>

[kenji]

<P>Please dont say Reverence is waste of power... u can try this... get yourself to half HP by taking AoE, cast Reverence on SELF, then cast RH , GRH  on MT. AC debuff, Mark, DoT, DD on mob, and u can feel the uberness of it. u will regen 1.5k hp in 15 sec... by using 1kish power /giggle but still it's an extra</P> <P> </P> <P>other than it... useless i agree <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Timaarit wrote:<BR><SPAN> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Kendricke wrote: <P>That's exactly what it is.  You take 1.5 seconds to cast.  Once you cast, a buff is placed upon the group.  10 seconds later, the buff expires and your entire group is hit for the full heal at once (1118-1367 at Adept III).  If you know damage will be coming in (say, in an AE situation), it's a great spell.  If you don't, then it's overkill...and the 233 power cost isn't exactly condusive to just firing it off for no reason.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>But you still think that atoning fate, that fires after mob is dead, is a GREAT spell....<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Yes, and it's apples or oranges.  Atoning Fate costs a fraction of the cost for a lot more healing power...and it's fairly easy to time when it's going to hit (target's at 5-10% life and falling fast...I bet that it dies soon).  In fact, it would be difficult to find a more efficient heal to power ratio than the Fate line. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Then again, I don't argue that the Fate line is a primary healing line.  I use it to "top off" my groups when multiple members have taken some moderate damage. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Frankly, I fail to see how the consistent animosity toward me is serving your arguments well.  Whether or not I feel Atoning Fate is a great spell is irrelevant to the points being raised here in any regards. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Timaarit wrote:<BR><SPAN>Well fact is that templar is a class for the optimist who hopes that he wins in lottery and that the target can actually read the macros.</SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>This is a perfect example of what a fact is not.</P> <P><BR> </P>

[Stjarna Kvar]

Raj, please close this thread. My question was answered and I'm tired of honest questions being hijacked by people who want to argue.

[Nari]

<span><blockquote><hr>Stjarna Kvarco wrote:Raj, please close this thread. My question was answered and I'm tired of honest questions being hijacked by people who want to argue.<hr></blockquote>Thank you.</span><div></div>

[Timaarit]

<span><blockquote>Kendricke wrote: <div>Yes, and it's apples or oranges.  Atoning Fate costs a fraction of the cost for a lot more healing power...and it's fairly easy to time when it's going to hit (target's at 5-10% life and falling fast...I bet that it dies soon).  In fact, it would be difficult to find a more efficient heal to power ratio than the Fate line. </div> <div> </div> <div>Then again, I don't argue that the Fate line is a primary healing line.  I use it to "top off" my groups when multiple members have taken some moderate damage. </div> <div> </div> <div>Frankly, I fail to see how the consistent animosity toward me is serving your arguments well.  Whether or not I feel Atoning Fate is a great spell is irrelevant to the points being raised here in any regards. </div> <hr></blockquote>Fraction? A lot more? You have funny math. Fraction = 1/4 and 'a lot more' is in fact 50% less. And I am not consistently animous against you. But I will post whenever your posts are inconsistent like the one in question. And the fact that you think AF is a great spell but Hibernation is not, is - well, odd at best.  But in any case it shows again that you have a twisted view about templars in particular. Every skill is good when it is templar skill, but when someone else has similar or better, they are not that good...</span><div></div>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Timaarit wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>And the fact that you think AF is a great spell but Hibernation is not, is - well, odd at best.  </SPAN> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>This is not a fact.  I do think Hibernation is a great spell in the right situation.  I even specifically said this:  <EM>"If you know damage will be coming in (say, in an AE situation), <STRONG>it's a great spell</STRONG>."<BR></EM>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>To get back on track here, Templars have access to the following types of spells:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ff6600>Direct Heal:</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <UL> <LI><STRONG>Ameliorate line:<BR></STRONG><FONT size=1><EM>Single Target Quick Heal</EM></FONT><BR>L22: Ameliorate<BR>L29: Amelioration<BR>L43: Greater Amelioration<BR>L57: Grand Amelioration<BR></LI> <LI><STRONG>Restoration line:<BR></STRONG><EM><FONT size=1>Single Target Large Heal</FONT></EM><BR>L32: Restoration<BR>L46: Greater Restoration<BR>L60: Grand Restoration<BR></LI> <LI><STRONG>Healing Touch line:<BR></STRONG><EM><FONT size=1>Group Target</FONT></EM><BR>L28: Healing Touch<BR>L42: Word of Restoration<BR>L56: Word of Restoration</LI></UL> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ff6600>Reactive Heal:</FONT></STRONG></DIV><FONT color=#ff6600> <UL> <LI><FONT color=#ffffff><STRONG>Supplicant's Prayer line:</STRONG><BR><EM><FONT size=1>Single Target</FONT></EM><BR>L26: Supplicant's Prayer<BR>L40: Greater Intercession<BR>L50: Focused Benefaction (stuns caster)<BR>L54: Grand Intercession<BR></FONT></LI> <LI><STRONG><FONT color=#ffffff>Intercession Line:<BR></FONT></STRONG><FONT color=#ffffff><EM><FONT size=1>Group Target <BR></FONT></EM>L28: Intercession<BR>L42: Crucial Intercession<BR>L56: Fateful Intercession</FONT></LI></UL><FONT color=#ff6600></FONT></FONT> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ff6600>Investment Heal:</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <UL> <LI><STRONG>Amending Fate line:<BR></STRONG>L20: Amending Fate<BR>L34: Redemptive Fate<BR>L48: Atoning Fate</LI></UL> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ff6600>Emergency Heals:</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <UL> <LI><STRONG>Salvation line</STRONG><BR>L41: Salvation<BR>L55: Faithful Salvation<BR></LI> <LI><STRONG>Beneficence line</STRONG><BR>L48: Beneficence</LI></UL> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ff6600>Healing Effects:</FONT></STRONG></DIV> <UL> <LI><STRONG>Mark line:<BR></STRONG>L32: Mark of Princes<BR>L46: Mark of Kings<BR>L60: Mark of the Celestial<BR></LI> <LI><STRONG>Involuntary line:</STRONG><BR>L35: Involuntary Healer<BR>L49: Involuntary Curate<BR></LI> <LI><STRONG>Glory line:</STRONG><BR>L47: Glory of Combat<BR></LI> <LI><STRONG>Ancient Spells with Healing:<BR></STRONG>L52:  Reverence<BR>L58: Divine Arbitration</LI></UL> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT color=#ff6600><STRONG>Wards:</STRONG></FONT></DIV> <UL> <LI><STRONG>Faith line:</STRONG><BR>L29: Protective Faith<BR>L43: Shielding Faith<BR>L57: Aegis of Faith<BR></LI> <LI><STRONG>Benediction line:</STRONG><BR>L45: Vigilant Benediction<BR>L59: Unyielding Benediction</LI></UL> <DIV><STRONG><FONT color=#ff6600></FONT></STRONG> </DIV> <DIV><BR></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Kendricke on <span class=date_text>11-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:32 AM</span>

[LostAgain]

<div></div><div></div>Two minor changes, Grand Intercession is L54 in the Supplican't Prayer line, Focused Benefaction would be a third reactive line (you have it listed under Supplicant's Prayer line  and as a Ward). <div></div><p> <span class="time_text"></span></p><p>Message Edited by LostAgain on <span class=date_text>11-23-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:27 AM</span>

[Kendricke]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> LostAgain wrote:<BR> Two minor changes, Grand Intercession is L54 in the Supplican't Prayer line, Focused Benefaction would be a third reactive line (you have it listed under Supplicant's Prayer line  and as a Ward).<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Corrections made.

[Timaarit]

<span><blockquote>Kendricke wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Timaarit wrote:<span>And the fact that you think AF is a great spell but Hibernation is not, is - well, odd at best.  </span> <hr> </blockquote>This is not a fact.  I do think Hibernation is a great spell in the right situation.  I even specifically said this:  <em>"If you know damage will be coming in (say, in an AE situation), <strong>it's a great spell</strong>."</em> <div></div><hr></blockquote>But guess what, same applies to Atoning Fate. So the spells are both 'great' in the same situations exept that Hibernation can be scheduled more precisely than AF.</span><div></div>

[Kendricke]

<P>Yes, we were toned back a bit in the revamp.  Yes, other priests were ramped up a bit in the revamp.  However, we're not dramatically different now.  So we lost a STR debuff and gained a half-mez.  Some folks like it...other's don't.  It's not as if Templars were basing their entire strategies around our ability to lower strength from groups of targets...certainly no one that I was aware of.  We were healers.  We are healers.  It's that simple.  Soloing changed slightly.  Grouping changed slightly.  Overall, I truly believe we came through the revamp relatively unscathed though...especially in comparison to other classes that had their primary role significantly altered.  My strategy isn't horribly altered.  Neither are the other Templars in my guild.  We've lost no Templars to the revamp.  We've only lost one paladin and one guardian actually.</P> <P>It all comes down to playstyle really.  Before the revamp, I think we outnumbered other preist classes by a significant amount.  We were very much a "favored" class.  After the revamp, the new perception is that Furies are better.  That's fine by me.  Let some players switch classes.  If it makes them happier to do so...how is that a bad thing?  Honestly, it's a game.  It's an online form of entertainment.  If you don't like it, stop doing it.  If it's not fun, change it up.  </P> <P>I love my Templar.  I also love my Mystic...Monk...Conjuror...Paladin...Swashbuckler. ..  I love each for different reasons.  I'm not having trouble finding groups.  The only reason I'm not in pickup groups more often is because I typically avoid grouping with folks I don't trust too much.  I simply have too many options already from within my guild and other guilds we're already friendly with.  Even then, without ever putting on LFG, I get invited to group.  Other Templars in my guild get invited to groups.  Not one Templar in my guild has complained that groups are not available since the revamp.  If this is happening to others, then I sympathize.  However, it's not like we're pariahs of Norrath suddenly because we have to compete for group slots.  </P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[Timaarit]

<span><blockquote>Kendricke wrote:<p>Yes, we were toned back a bit in the revamp.  </p><div></div><hr></blockquote>And you wonder why I 'harass' you. Your 'a bit' means in fact that 70% of our reactives effectiveness was removed. True, our single target heals got a little more powerful, but also our utility got shafted. So it was not just a bit, the nerf was massive. </span><div></div>

[kenji]

<DIV>.........................................</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>the nerfs from reactive is not biggest....4 hits heal 1600 becomes 5 hits heal 1250 which is 400 per hit becomes 250 per hit... only about 40% nerf</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>.........................................</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>the nerfs from our armor avoidance.. 40% becomes 10%, which is a 75% nerf... but not really matters... all priests the same, due to parry gone</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>.........................................</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>the biggest nerf is our AC buff line... from 1500 becomes 500... which other class dont have any nerfs... but we lost 66%... worst nerfs of all</DIV>

[Timaarit]

<span><blockquote><hr>kenjiso wrote:<div>.........................................</div> <div> </div> <div>the nerfs from reactive is not biggest....4 hits heal 1600 becomes 5 hits heal 1250 which is 400 per hit becomes 250 per hit... only about 40% nerf</div> <hr></blockquote>Well, our reactives lost the ability to buff mitigation also, so that needs to be included...</span><div></div>

[Zabumt]

<DIV>Want to know what's funny?  Back in December 2004 or so, I was arguing with Templars about how our reactives that buffed mitigation might be useful.  All the while, other Templars were going insane about how useless a mit buff on a reactive was.  The more I play mmos, the more I feel that many people who play don't understand a class concept as a whole.  They look at specific number comparisons between separate archetype spell lines and if the other archetype is casting one or two spells more effeciently it's a call for rebalance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It'll be fun to see where we are a year from now with our complaints.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Dalchar]

<div></div>woops <div></div><p>Message Edited by Dalcharis on <span class=date_text>11-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:08 PM</span>

[Timaarit]

Wel lI always considered the mitigation buff a good thing. Also I heard after 5 months of playing that the buff actually stacked giving people massive mitigation for a short while... Propably didn't work as intended and since the devs couldn't fix it, they just removed it. <div></div>

[Raijinn]

Shutting thread down due to flaming.