Mystic vs other healers

[Ryik]

I am curious how Mystics stack up against the other healer classes.  I have a lvl 70 Warden (speced for crit heals, not melee) and can pretty much keep my entire group alive in most situations and instances (unrest is another story) as the only healer. My normal group and I are now creating new toons and everyone is trying out new classes and I am switching to Ranger for this run. The questions is..... If one of our group members goes with a mystic are they going to be able to heal as well as I was able to as a warden?

[rumblepants]

<p>All healers can heal well. Players who don't understand their class won't heal well. </p>

[Ordate]

<p>What rumble said <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  Plus I've solo healed unrest.  Of course I'm a raider and have all masters... so I do have advantage over a more casual mystic. (aka Ill sometimes pull agro off a pug tank and tank the mob myself)</p>

[Ryik]

Props on the solo healing unrest.  that place can get hairy.  I have 1/2 fabled, 1/2 legendary gear on my warden and Most heals are master2, Master 1, if not they are Adept3, and I had problems when got more than a few ads. I may have our group member (aka my wife) try the mystic out. Are mystics more ward driven, where wardens are more direct heals?

[Karlen]

I think that wardens generally do a better job at healing than mystics because mystic heals are so slow to cast.  However, mystics are much better at preventing damage from occuring in the first place (using wards) so that mystics only should only rarely need to actually use their heals. Mystics tend to like to keep everyone's health as close to full as possible at all times.

[rumblepants]

<p>Hmm, I'm not sure how one can do a better job, all things being equal. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> A druids healing function is completely different than a shaman. We don't do a whole lot of direct healing, per se. In fact, I rarely ever use my direct heals. We cast wards which prevent a lot of damage (with a heal at the end). Now due to this the biggest detriment I have seen is if we group with paper tanks who can't avoid and take monster hits each time so our wards run out quicker and forces a shaman to toss a patch direct heal in between wards cycling. </p><p>Now this is just the healing side. Mystics are also great debuffers which helps out when we're tackling big named encounters. A fully debuffed named is going to do less damage and so our wards last longer and so we get to go melee crazy (and a melee spec-ed Mystic can do a whole lot of DPS in bursts).</p>

[Ryik]

So.... If you were not going to make a warden, just because we have one already (trying new classes so when all new toons hit 70 we have a more diverse set of toons) what healer would you recommend? Would it be a mystic? Our tank generally does not like Furys, he said he dies more with 2 furys than with 1 warden, I wasnt there so no idea what the situation was. I am open to any suggestions.

[rvbarton]

depends on the playstyle you want.  If you want to heal purely, play a templar.  If you want to prevent damage, play a mystic.

[rumblepants]

<p>Since a druid is out of the picture, I'd give a Mystic or Templar a whirl (or their evil counterparts) and see if you "like" that sort of healing. Preventive or reactive? I duo exclusively with a plate tank and really we have had no issues with anything not labeled epic by ourselves so that shows you how well a Mystic can stack with a plate tank.</p>

[Ryik]

I think we will give the mystic a go. Our tank is a Guardian this go around. Thanks for all the input.

[Ryik]

Do mystics get a root or chain spell? I didnt see one.

[rumblepants]

We don't get a root spell. We do get a combat ability to root (second ability, AGI line).

[Karlen]

>>>Do mystics get a root or chain spell? I didnt see one.<<< When soloing, I usually just tank whatever I am fighting with wards.   Cast a group ward before you pull, then pull with an encounter stamina debuff and single ward yourself.   If necessary you can use DPS debuffs to reduce the damage you take. In groups, someone else will have to do the rooting if its necessary. We do get a root as the 2nd ability in the Agility AA tree (which tree also later has your 100% melee crit ability).  It isn't very long (just a few seconds -- around 11 I think with 5 or 6 points in it) but it is enough to let you back away and cast a ward on yourself. We also get a short encounter mezz (which includes a detaunt) but I have to admit that I've never really tried it and usually forget that I have it anytime that it would be useful. Also note that mystics don't buff for int.  So if you are going to be using your damage spells, you are going to want to locate some equipment with +INT.   Mystics do buff for STR, so if you decide to do the EoF Combat AA tree to replace your damage spells with combat abilities, you will greatly benefit from having high STR.   Combat AA tree plus the AGI AA tree can give you some pretty good DPS without taking away from your healing ability.  It does have the disadvantage of not having any range so your need when in a group to get close to the mob (you can stand back and cast with spells) -- on the other hand, combat abilities have very little cast time, so you don't get caught casting spells when you need to emergency heal.

[zaneluke]

I have always viewed my mystic as a preventer of damage through wards and debuffs. Thus the actual heal is not a first line but a third line solution to damage. Ward,pull,debuff,ward,heal.  Next mob please.

[Triyton]

<p>When it comes to soloing and roots think of it like this:</p><p>Templars would  be the best "pure healers".  They don't need roots because they have plate armor plus the healing to keep themselves alive, but with low DPS (now correctable with the right AAs I suppose)the fight may go on a long time.</p><p>Mystics can still take a lot of damage with chain armor and good HP and mitigation buffs so they can also tank the mobs themselves.  Combined with debuffs an ddecent DPS they don't need roots.</p><p>Wardens are stuck with leather armor so despite good DPS they need roots to get through the fight.</p>

[Formangenavn]

<p>Having a decent not raiding equiped 70 Warden and a brand new poorly equiped 70 Mystic, trust me on this. Wardens do NOT have good dps, unless of course Mystics have very good dps.</p><p>Wardens have (with right AA and master 1 wolf form buff) very decent mittigation. This combined with roots, good power regen and good power efficiency means they can go up against very though mobs, melee or ranged. They do NOT have good dps though. That is a missconception.</p><p>The only exception I can think of is a raid equipted Warden. If you can self buff str (very difficult) and/or int (not too difficult for a raider) to 500 or even 600+ then maby they can get good dps. Having 600+ str for my poorly equiped Mystic at lev 68 was easy. Getting higher then 300 str on my melee speced Wared at lev 70 was quite hard. </p>

[xandez]

<cite>Formangenavn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Having a decent not raiding equiped 70 Warden and a brand new poorly equiped 70 Mystic, trust me on this. Wardens do NOT have good dps, unless of course Mystics have very good dps.</p><p>Wardens have (with right AA and master 1 wolf form buff) very decent mittigation. This combined with roots, good power regen and good power efficiency means they can go up against very though mobs, melee or ranged. They do NOT have good dps though. That is a missconception.</p><p>The only exception I can think of is a raid equipted Warden. If you can self buff str (very difficult) and/or int (not too difficult for a raider) to 500 or even 600+ then maby they can get good dps. Having 600+ str for my poorly equiped Mystic at lev 68 was easy. Getting higher then 300 str on my melee speced Wared at lev 70 was quite hard. </p></blockquote>what is in your opinion good DPS? (1k zonewide decent for priest? not RAID DPS since those numbers are usually much higher due to massive debuffs of the mobs get). How will eg. 100 STR more or less affect wardens/mystics DPS? Is the 400 STR compared to 600 STR that bad? (saying 400 here, since i have 50% treasured geared warden with ~400 STR after using a potion, so not that hard to get) Could you compare the melee mystic and melee warden (warden 300 STR and mystic 600 STR) and post the results here... i could do it myself, but my warden is only lvl 50, so cant do it yet. Im not saying that you are wrong, on the contrary you are propably right, just would like to see the difference. ++Xan

[Formangenavn]

<p>Fighting the same lev 67 Heroic grp (2 mobs) My Warden put out 530 dps and my mystic 640 dps.</p><p>All equipment equal, my mystic buffs str with 289, and another 120 or so with bolster. My Warden doesnt buff str at all. You probably can get into deminishing return on str with raid buffed Warden, but its just that much easier for a mystic. Since I am not a big raider, It's possible to get high str and therefore better dps with a mystic, and thats one of the reasons I like mine.</p><p>All I am saying is, IMHO dps is not the strong point of Wardens, and I dont think it should be.</p>

[xandez]

your right, DPS should not be the strong point of any priests, but they really do decent DPS (imo) considering they are healers. ++Xan

[Prrasha]

<cite>Formangenavn wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Fighting the same lev 67 Heroic grp (2 mobs) My Warden put out 530 dps and my mystic 640 dps.</p><p>All equipment equal, my mystic buffs str with 289, and another 120 or so with bolster. My Warden doesnt buff str at all. You probably can get into deminishing return on str with raid buffed Warden, but its just that much easier for a mystic. Since I am not a big raider, It's possible to get high str and therefore better dps with a mystic, and thats one of the reasons I like mine.</p><p>All I am saying is, IMHO dps is not the strong point of Wardens, and I dont think it should be.</p></blockquote> You're correct that DPS is not the strong point of wardens.  You're incorrect that you "don't think it should be." The "big picture" for priests is "supposed to be" something like: 1) Shamans: big debuffs, moderate buffs, weak DPS 2) Clerics: big buffs, moderate debuffs, weak DPS 3) Druids: big DPS, moderate buffs, weak debuffs ...and, without AAs, that about how they would line up. The reality is for DPS after AAs is: 1) big DPS: Furies 2) pretty-big DPS: mystics, inquisitors, wardens who have access to all sorts of +STR raid gear 3) moderate DPS: wardens who are stuck with mere-mortal gear 4) weak DPS: defilers, templars I have both a mystic and warden alt (and will be making a sarnak inquisitor this winter).  The mystic, 10 levels younger than the warden, out-DPSes him.  The warden has no debuffs to speak of (single target heat/cold debuff attached to cold DoT spell, duration==recast, so only maintainable on one mob... and AGI debuff attached to group root... so the mob is easier to hit, until you hit him and break the root, which ends the debuff).  I wouldn't say his buffs are better than a mystic's, either (it seems most raid MT groups are templar/defiler, and no druid at all).  So the mystic has the best of all 3 worlds, between the two of them.  I think, based on my paladin's experience with them and reading the boards here and at that other place, that 5 of the 6 healers are pretty well balanced.  Wardens are left behind, and the problem is all on the Warden AA page versus everyone else's AA page.

[Formangenavn]

<cite>Prrasha wrote:</cite><blockquote>You're incorrect that you "don't think it should be." </blockquote><p>LOL. I am incorect in having an opinion? I think (again) you are a bit out of line on this one. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>I have very little knowledge about the defiler, but I am pretty sure a dps geared Templar with the right AA can more then match a Warden, or a mystic for that matter. Just read their forums. And where does it say Druids should have big dps exactly? I have never seen that from a dev. Feel free to throw in a link, or perhaps its just the way you think it should be? </p><p>Remember, Wardens was a very good healer once (compared to the other healers), only beaten by the Templar (pre lu 13 I belive). Had decent buffs, especially with duststorm. They where defencive healers. Well, thats how I looked at them anyway.</p><p>How they should or should not be is not for me to decide though. All I said was Wardens do not have great dps, and I was comparing them to the other healers. They are not bad, but they are not great either. Becouse of the Fury class, the other healers think Druids have great dps though, its been like that for ages.</p>

[xandez]

oh well, what comes to wardens sucky DPS, just forget it. They are fine and dandy. Atleast melee wardens. Or i have always liked my DPS. I used to trio alot with my RL buddies (monk and SK). The fun part was that in some instance runs i did the tanking <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> heh... was fun i can tell ya that. What was also weird was that i was usually top 1 in DPS parses. Heal parses too, but that was no surprise. What was a surprise was that the SK was very close behind me in heal parses and that the majority of my healing had came from triggered effects, such as natural boon. Im building a mystic myself atm to test things out, also started a new fury just to see how things really are <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> heh... im not saying that you guys are wrong. I just want to see if those other priest classes really can outshine my warden. I doubt it, but... love can blind, cant it? <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> *edit* granted, none of use a "real" DPS class to compete with, but we sure did have fun <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> ++Xan

[Prrasha]

<cite>Formangenavn wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Prrasha wrote:</cite><blockquote>You're incorrect that you "don't think it should be." </blockquote><p>LOL. I am incorect in having an opinion? I think (again) you are a bit out of line on this one. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p><b>Of course opinions can be incorrect.  "I think flying is a more dangerous way to travel than driving."  "I think violent video games cause kids to go crazy and blow up schools."  Both are incorrect opinions held by a great many people.  If you think the secondary job of a druid isn't DPS, then what do you think it <i>is</i>?  The have zero effective debuffing ability, and even though their buffs are all designed for "place this buff on the main tank", they're the 5th most wanted main tank healer, only ahead of a Fury.  Their damage spells hit harder than other priests (save furies), but the melee options between warden/mystic/inquis all have near-identical base DPS.  I think that means job 1 is healing, and job 2 is DPS, and AAs messed that up, so wardens need an AA boost.</b> </p> <p>I have very little knowledge about the defiler, but I am pretty sure a dps geared Templar with the right AA can more then match a Warden, or a mystic for that matter. Just read their forums. </p> <p><b>And that's the problem.  If you can have Templar buffing or Mystic debuffing along with equal-to-Warden DPS (or, more realistically, better-than-warden DPS), why are wardens considered balanced?  I know my mid-40s Mystic alt could bring more to a group than my low-60s Warden alt (discounting spell resists versus red-cons, of course).  Once she's levelled up to the low 60s, it won't even be a contest as to who's the best DPSer, buffer, <i>and</i> debuffer.  And that would be true if my lower-level priest was any of the other 4 classes, also.  Even furies buff (more usefully) and debuff (at all) better than wardens.</b> </p> <p>And where does it say Druids should have big dps exactly? I have never seen that from a dev. Feel free to throw in a link, or perhaps its just the way you think it should be? </p> <p><b>Me and a few <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> other people... it's the answer to question #1 on the stickied "Warden FAQ" thread in their forums. </b></p> <p><b>There's only a few roles to play in the game: tanking, healing, DPS, buff, debuff, crowd control, and the nebulous "utility".  CC and "utility" are pretty well useless in most of the game, so the first 5 are the roles you get to play.  If all healers are supposed to heal equally but differently, where's the warden balance if they can be beat in every other category by every other priest, except maybe DPSing better than a stock defiler or templar? </b></p> <p>Remember, Wardens was a very good healer once (compared to the other healers), only beaten by the Templar (pre lu 13 I belive). Had decent buffs, especially with duststorm. They where defencive healers. Well, thats how I looked at them anyway. </p> <p><b>And, historically, the thrown rock was the height of ranged warfare.  In the GU37 world, wardens are very weak compared to the other 5 priest classes.  The best they can say is that they're the most power-efficient healers, but that doesn't help with Inquisitors' and Defilers' ability to regen power (inquest and cannibalize-related abilities), as they can do the most healing for the longest time.</b> </p> <p>How they should or should not be is not for me to decide though. </p> <p><b>Me either.  But this is a "Mystic versus other healers" thread, and Wardens were brought up, so I feel it's my duty to warn people away from them until they're fixed, if they're people who care about balance.  My warden is still "fun", but in no way balanced.  (I tend to not play the over-balanced classes.  My main's a paladin, after all... and my conjuror, who betrayed in the days of "kill 500 gnolls to show your dedication to Qeynos", is still level 25.)</b> </p> </blockquote>

[Formangenavn]

<p>It's stupid just discussing this, but if I dont think Wardens should have high deps, if I rather prefer they had great buffs, then thats my shoice. And this isnt written in stone. Water will be wet no matter what I think, but in a computer game like this things change, and so can the dps of wardens. Therfore I am entitled to my own oppinion on the matter. SOE can actually change the dps based on what the players think, look what happened to the Templars!</p><p>Weither Wardens should be high dps. Just because some Wardens want high dps doesnt make it so. It might be true if the devs listen to you, but for now it isnt, and in IMO never have been like that.</p><p>I do agree with you on some things. I dont play my Warden anymore. I like my Mystic mutch better. IMO Wardens have on par healing and dps but weak buffs and debuffs. They do have other qualities like roots, best movement (runspeed, evac and ports), very good self mitt and power (in total, regen and efficiency). For me personally buffs and debuffs is more important then the qualities Wardens have. The problem as I see it is that Wardens have these spells, that I find less usefull. If Wardens where to be as good a buffer and debuffer as everyone else other classes would complain like mad about lack of utility, compared to Wardens. Therfore I dont think Wardens will be given any extra treatment. </p><p>Thats why I wont play my Warden anymore. Read my post history and you should see that I have done my part on trying to get weaknesses in the Warden class known and fixed, but many play and like their Warden, so perhaps it was just not the class for me.</p>