What healer would you rather have?

[MrCAP]

I am curious to see which healer you would rather have? an Inquisitor or a Templar. Keep in mind the templars buff the defense of te group and inquisitors debuff everything of the mob. they also buff ac of the group. Any insight would be appreciated. Thank you

[RafaelSmith]

<div></div>Neither =P Ide take a Fury/Warden any day for 99% of the games content.  Cleric types seem give up alot for "better" heals which we as Guardians dont really need most of the time. Besides aggro managment with a Druid healer is alot more challenging and fun =P <div></div><p>Message Edited by RafaelSmith on <span class=date_text>04-11-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:49 AM</span>

[nuz]

I'd rather have a warden... Templars and inquistors well least the ones i group with, seem like they don't have any sort of direct heal  that or they expect there Reactives to do all the work. I find i die alot less with a warden who is constantly healing me, not tryin to ward or what ever. WArds are probley my least favriot of any type of heal.. any way my pick thus far goes Warden-Templar-Inq-fury then after that the other to can go solo. Maybe mine have just been *$%#&! latly <div></div>

[Ashtaro]

In what situation?  In our guard/temp/swash trio, my wife heals just fine.  We don't do anything insane, but manage yellow ^^'s and the like fair enough.

[MrCAP]

just in general. who do you think is beter. any situation, who would you like to have healing you?

[Uumuuanu]

Personally,  I think Defiler and Warden combo work the best for me.  Defilers wards are awesome against nonstop melee attacks, wardens direct and over times make for amazingly effecient use of power by both healers.   

[Tomanak]

<P>One who knows what the hell they are doing. </P> <P>Personally I prefer Templars, but have also had good experiences with the others. </P>

[Aren]

<DIV>If the mob has AE or Barrage, templar</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If the mob has focused 1 target damage inquisitor</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In a Raid, I want the Templar and Mystic in my group, because the inquisitor can heal me effectivly from outside the group.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But my guilds main templar has all his heals Master 1 or Adept 3, so pretty much 'he>anything else'</DIV>

[SageMarrow]

<P>since im a level 50 guardian with uber defense and such, im gonna have to say shamen for teh win!!!!</P> <P>naw im just kidding, im a bruiser what do i know...</P> <P>At present, templars have the best direct heals and thier reactives stack. dont place your bets on any one healer until priest balancing.</P>

[Oakwood]

<P>so far, i have had bad luck with shaman types, but that may be the player rather than the class.  I have also been with a few truly useless inquisitors and furies.  It seems to be more on the skill of the player than on the class.</P> <P>That said, since priests are getting a full overhaul in a few weeks, all our current experiences will have to be thrown out while we figure out how to defork what sony is about to do to healing (and tanking, but that's a different thread)</P>

[Khal]

Under the current build: I prefer Templars as their aggro is broken and I rarely ever have to get a mob back off them. Once that's all fixed, who knows.  We will have to see which Priest class  generates the least amount of aggro during normal combat.

[Arielle Nightshade]

<DIV>I would think that for awhile, cleric types (Templar, Inquisitor)  are going to be annoyed at getting aggro when they never did before.  As a Warden, a guaranteed butt kicking occurs when I ward or regen close to the pull (ward as the tank is pulling..I'm dead, ward or heal shortly after..mayyybe)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Cleric types are accustomed to doing this...so their part of aggro management will change, and might be a suprise to them...and us as Tanks.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm biased, but I'd rather have a Warden ..<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  As the other posts say, though..we'll see what happens to a few of our direct heals after the nerf.  (I have not noticed that I am 'overpowered' as a healer ...but../shrug)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Darkstu]

<DIV>When I am grouping I prefer to have the templar class as the main healer because I am usually 2boxing my Guardian and my Mystic, so aggro control is very important.  I have 2boxed both a warden and mystic with my Guardian and find they equal in comparsion if they use their main source of healing or wards.  As far as direct heals go mystic lose out majorly.  Very inefficient if a mystic uses direct heals constantly if he/she is main healer.   Since Mystics' and Templar ward/reactive healing doesn't stack...debuffing and slows for the win <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Kryog]

Every healer has its advantages.   My brother plays a Mystic, my wife a Templar.   Having reactives AND wards on me pretty much guarantees me that I will live.  And that I have buffs coming out of my ears. <div></div>

[-Aonein-]

Mr.Cap has this debate going on a number of forums. I feel he is just trying to make some sort of point when we all know reactive healers go best with a mitigation tank and the Berserkers didnt fall into his little one sided view. Isnt there some rule about having numerous debates about the same topic on more then one forum? <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>04-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>07:29 PM</span>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<div></div>Mr.Cap has this debate going on a number of forums. I feel he is just trying to make some sort of point when we all know reactive healers go best with a mitigation tank and the Berserkers didnt fall into his little one sided view. Isnt there some rule about having numerous debates about the same topic on more then one forum? <div></div><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class="date_text">04-15-2005</span> <span class="time_text">07:29 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Mr. Cap is actually Gage =P </span><div></div>

[Plexar_Vari]

I often times wonder this.  I honestly think that for duo situations fury / warden would be the best (because they have greater dps than templar / inq) but if you are talking about grouping on where there is enough damage output by the other members then a templar would be my choice.  (that is until they change the reactives to aggro list the templar)

[SilvanE]

<P>There really is no argument. Templar is by far the most mana efficient healer with a Guardian. If you dont think so you dont play a Guardian or you have never grouped with a Templar.</P>

[Silvani]

<DIV>I would have to go with Silvan on this one.  I've grouped with excellent Furies, Mystics, Defilers, whatever, but the Templar/Inquisitor is noticably more mana efficient when it comes to keeping me, the guardian alive.  The other are great with buffs and debuffed, and spells like that.  But I am very confident with templars as my main healer, and would always take them first over the others.  (unless there is already a druid/shaman in the group, then another healer is just sugar on the cookie, no matter the class)</DIV>

[Banditman]

So, bottom line seems to be that a Templar is the shiz . . . but any two healers can take the place of one Templar. I'm not sure that's very balanced.  Accurate perhaps, but hardly balanced. <div></div>

[RafaelSmith]

I dont always just look for the most "efficient healer"....Most of the time healing takes a backseat to DPS, buffs, debuffs, etc.   Of course after the upcomming changes to tanking this will probably all change and we will require a chain of clerics =P <div></div>

[Banditman]

I was under the impression we were discussing healing, not DPS and Utility. <div></div>

[RafaelSmith]

<span><blockquote><hr>Banditman wrote:I was under the impression we were discussing healing, not DPS and Utility. <div></div><hr></blockquote> yeah true but its all related..  The question was which healer would we rather have... The simple answer is whichever keeps as alive...depending on the situation that snt always the most efficient "healer". But I digress....=P  The fact that questions like this are even being asked shows the failure of the Archetype system..  I know from personal experience that balance wise the priests are in pretty bad shape... Noone would argue that for EXP groups 1-50 there is no "best tank"...but many would argue there is a best "healer". </span><div></div>

[Banditman]

I'm trying to think of a situation where function doesn't follow efficiency . . . coming up blank. A lil help ? <div></div>

[Sokolov]

<P><BR> </P> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>I'm trying to think of a situation where function doesn't follow efficiency . . . coming up blank.<BR><BR>A lil help ?<BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR> </P> <DIV> <P>The OP was asking the question of which healer, in general, do we prefer.</P> <P>Power efficiency for heals is but one of a number of factors that determine the overall usefulness of a particular healer in a generic situation.</P> <P>The nature of the heals, for instance.</P> <P>And while a Priest's primary role is viewed as healing, a healer's ability to provide additional DPS as well as the healer's buffs and debuffs, should also be considered.</P> <P>That's all, Bandit, and I am sure you realize that this is all interrelated with how efficiently a group as a whole will deal with a mob.  The question of "Who is the most efficient healing Priest?" is siginificantly easier to answer by using some simple math, but the question of "Which healer would you rather have?" is far more involved and changes depending on a lot of factors, and is, ultimately, a matter of opinion.</P> <P>I do not know why you are being difficult.  Maybe you did not mean it that way, but I feel that your follow up post here was intended, for the most part, to simply be rude.</P></DIV> <P><BR> </P>

[Banditman]

You can take it however you want.  I'll let you know when I'm being rude.  <== Look, there it is!  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> /rude off I was asking a serious question. I can tell you Priest DPS, with the possible exception of a Fury, is inconsequential to a full group.   You don't invite a Chanter because they are going to produce DPS for your group, and Priest DPS falls below that of Enchanters. Therefore, as healing goes, what situations do you perceive that the healing function cannot be boiled down to raw efficiency ? Really. <div></div>

[RafaelSmith]

Hmm Ok the question in this thread was "...would you prefer".    I prefer a Fury.   Thats how i should have answered in the first place =P <div></div>

[Sokolov]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR>You can take it however you want.  I'll let you know when I'm being rude.  <== Look, there it is!  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR><BR>/rude off<BR><BR>I was asking a serious question.<BR><BR>I can tell you Priest DPS, with the possible exception of a Fury, is inconsequential to a full group.   You don't invite a Chanter because they are going to produce DPS for your group, and Priest DPS falls below that of Enchanters. <BR><BR><BR>Therefore, as healing goes, what situations do you perceive that the healing function cannot be boiled down to raw efficiency ?<BR><BR>Really.<BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR>You are right!  None.  If you are asking "how well does a class heal?" then in all situations raw efficiency is most important.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But as I said, NO ONE ELSE is talking about solely healing - we are talking about which healer we prefer.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I play a Defiler alt, and the significance of debuffs cannot be overstated.  The extra power one expends on healing without debuffs is quite silly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In a duo, the healer must also supplement damage for maximum efficiency.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><BR>In conclusion, your "impression" that we were talking about healing and not DPS and utility... is just that.  Your impression.  It doesn't make us wrong, thanks.</DIV>

[Arielle Nightshade]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I play a Defiler alt, and the significance of debuffs cannot be overstated.  The extra power one expends on healing without debuffs is quite silly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In a duo, the healer must also supplement damage for maximum efficiency.</DIV> <DIV><BR> <HR> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>From the Warden standpoint, I agree completely with this.  The Warden/Mystic (or Defiler) duo rocks.  If I'm teamed with a Mystic/Defiler, healing is  lot easier..plus I can sit back and let loose with damage cause I know I'll have enough mana even in tight situations.</P> <P>I also have a Templar...just to compare.  The reason that a Templar is so 'efficient' is because they are not doing anything else.  Just healing.  They can't damage much, they don't have a ton of debuffs...and their heals are not significantly larger than, say, Warden ones.  If I'm healing, damaging, debuffing, regenning - yeah, mana is going to be lower at the end of a fight than a Templar who has only been casting chain heals.</P> <P>Sure, healing is nice with a Templar, but boy is that toon boring...even if she does look cute in Plate Armor  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P><BR> </P>

[[sp00k]]

<P>Okay, time for me to step in here.  Some of you have the wrong idea of what alot of us healers do and are.</P> <P>I am a 50 inquisitor.  First off, Inquisitor's if played correctly are by far the most mana efficent of all healer types.  I will maintain 85% of my mana through almost any fight.  Exceptions are raiding or the new Nek Castle instance where you get like 500 add's due to bugs.  My debuffs, and stifle make te DPS of npc's drop dramtically.  Granted Templar's have better reactives but not so much so that it makes them god like.  Our debuff's blows theirs out the water.  </P> <P>Alot of you are implying whoever is more mana efficent is the best.  While you can have all the mana in the word but if you don't know how to use it, then well...your dead...Wardens are by far the best direct healers in game, hands down.  They are also getting nerfed so until then....Furys, Mystics heals suck but their utility is awesome.  Its also about combination of healer types in groups.  Or if your talking about 1 healer to a group I would go inquisitor because I am theshizznit.  </P> <P>So there are a lot of things you need to think about before saying who is who and what is what about the different healing classes.  </P> <P>Whipem of Oggok</P>

[Arielle Nightshade]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> [sp00k] wrote:<BR> <P> Or if your talking about 1 healer to a group I would go inquisitor because I am theshizznit.  </P> <P>So there are a lot of things you need to think about before saying who is who and what is what about the different healing classes.  </P> <P>Whipem of Oggok</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>::rolls eyes heavenward::: </P> <P>Ok. I admit.  Whipem is pretty good.  Usually.  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><BR></P>

[Ferledon]

<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" color=#3333ff size=3>My main is a 26 Templar. And I have a 2nd account that I play thats a Guardian. As far as I can ever see, I prefer my Templar to heal for my guardian over any others. But, I would have to say I like having a Druid sub-class as a 2nd healer jus to keep that top-notch health there.</FONT></DIV>

[Banditman]

<span><blockquote><hr>[sp00k] wrote:<p>....Furys, Mystics heals suck but their utility is awesome. </p><div></div><hr></blockquote> Dear me.  What utility would that be ?</span><div></div>

[RafaelSmith]

Not sure about Mystics since ive never grouped with one BUT I am farmilar with Furies. All those little proc buffs they can give you add up nicely...especially in a DUO situation where every bit of DPS helps. <div></div>

[Padi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Banditman wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> [sp00k] wrote:<BR> <P>....Furys, Mystics heals suck but their utility is awesome. <BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Dear me.  What utility would that be ?<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>I play a zerker, also a plate tank and I frequently trade off between an inquisitor healer and mystic healer.  Many times both.</P> <P>You know what I've found?  I've found the inquisiter and mystic are about equal as sole healer, they just get the job done differently and have different strong points.</P> <P>One important note, it wasn't until I reached my late 30's that I started seeing mystics do so well, until then I felt they were weak.  Perhaps the mystics I group with learned how to play their class better, or it just takes a bit for them to mature into good healers.</P> <P>Mystics have this going for them: They have a nice +defense buff (not 100% they had this, was thinking he buffed me with it once), they have good stat buffs, and they have a nice attack debuff.  All used together and I get hit a lot less than when I play with the inquisitor alone.</P> <DIV>I notice that when fighting an area with lots of ^^ the mystic out performs the inquisitor.  In these situations, it's easy for him to keep the mobs debuffed and his heals and wards do just fine keeping me up and alive.  This is assuming we aren't fighting over our heads and I'm dodging a fair amount of attacks, if a mob is too high level for me, all the buffs and debuffs do have much effect as I'm still getting crushed (not common since my 40's).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I've noticed when fighting an area with lots of groups, the inquisitor out heals my mystic friends.  His reactives work beautifully against multiple mobs hitting for less damage but more often, giving the reactives a lot of opertunities to keep me alive.  When fighting against mobs that just don't miss and are over our heads, then pure healing is all that matters, and the inquisitor again does better.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>These are examples of how situation plays a large role on which does better.  When going through Sol Eye, I can tell a difference between both healers as our only healer, and both get the job done equally well in the end.  On group fights I find our mystic struggles, and on ^^'s our inquisitor struggles more.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Padien on <span class=date_text>04-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:29 AM</span>

[Despa]

<P>Just a thought from a healer's perspective.  Templar's and Inquisitors are the most power effecient healers only because healing is their main focus and they don't get alot of other DD's and DoT's in comparison to other classes.  All the other healer classes get so many other dd's/dot's that in many cases their power gets wasted on the Dmg spells in which case doesn't help the tank at all.  All healers can heal effectively if they know its okay to throw in DoT's and DD's ON OCCASION and not spam them...leaving no power for their true use, healing.</P> <P>Despaired<BR>45 Fury - Befallen<BR>Co-Leader of the 'The Underlords'</P>

[laddich]

<P>To me whoever heals and doesn't let me die is best. As a Guardian I burn a lot more mana then they do, and thus they always have to wait for regen between fights. I like healers that keep my hp out of the red. Templars/Inquisitors have my preference, since Fury/Warden aren't that powerful. </P> <P>Still I don't mind whatever healer throws his love my way, one that knows what he is doing is just fine. </P>

[bigmak20]

laddich is on the money <b>One that knows what they're doing!</b> of-course; that's ME ! haha Add after add after add my group is standing.   I can't remember the last time we ran from anything unless was a named. Fury in my guild says when we're teamed in a group we totally rock.  I have to agree -- that's a real nice combo in group -- Fury and Templar. Last night had a full group going thru Cazic Thule lower levels.  MANY all red MoBs; lot's of 2 or 3 group MoBs all red.  2 healers (inquis and templar) 2 casters (wizards) and 2 fighters (berzerker and paladin).  Would like to have that group every night.... there's new lore being written about it  <span>:smileytongue: And my debuffs are very good too.  Maybe not as strong as inquis; but I keep them on and they don't cost much so very substantial difference over the course of a fight.  Not as instantaneous as inquis but -very- nice over time.  It's how you play it. </span> There's tons of debate about what class is better in every archetype.   <b>It's the player -- knowing how to play to your strong suit</b>.

[Nibbl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> [sp00k] wrote:<BR> <P>Okay, time for me to step in here.  Some of you have the wrong idea of what alot of us healers do and are.</P> <P>I am a 50 inquisitor.  First off, Inquisitor's if played correctly are by far the most mana efficent of all healer types.  I will maintain 85% of my mana through almost any fight.  Exceptions are raiding or the new Nek Castle instance where you get like 500 add's due to bugs.  My debuffs, and stifle make te DPS of npc's drop dramtically.  Granted Templar's have better reactives but not so much so that it makes them god like.  Our debuff's blows theirs out the water. </P> <P>Alot of you are implying whoever is more mana efficent is the best.  While you can have all the mana in the word but if you don't know how to use it, then well...your dead...Wardens are by far the <FONT color=#ff0000>best direct healers</FONT> in game, hands down.  They are also getting nerfed so until then....Furys, Mystics heals suck but their utility is awesome.  Its also about combination of healer types in groups.  Or if your talking about 1 healer to a group I would go inquisitor because I am theshizznit. </P> <P>So there are a lot of things you need to think about before saying who is who and what is what about the different healing classes. </P> <P>Whipem of Oggok</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Most of the wardens heals are Heals over Time (HoT), which dont stack either... They have very limited direct heals, usally less then 450 points... not sure what you are talking about.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Edit:  BTW, when I play my guard I like to have a templar if in small group (2-3 ppl).. if i have two healers then fury and mystic, great combo for a large group of six </DIV><p>Message Edited by Nibblar on <span class=date_text>04-29-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:46 PM</span>

[Arielle Nightshade]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nibblar wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>most of the warden's heals are Heal over Time (HoT), which dont stack either... They have very limited direct heals, usally less then 450 points... not sure what you are talking about.</BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Edit:  BTW, when I play my guard I like to have a templar if in small group (2-3 ppl).. if i have two healers then fury and mystic, great combo for a large group of six </DIV> <P>Message Edited by Nibblar on <SPAN class=date_text>04-29-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>01:46 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I have 3 direct heals..for more than 450.   How many do you want??  LOL<BR>

[[sp00k]]

<DIV>I also have a 48 Mystics and I can tell you without a doubt that Mystic's Wards and heals suck the big nut.  What you see in comparsion btw mystics and inquisitors is the fact they can SLOW the mob by almost 50% which makes there less than crappy heals seem like they are worthy of a title Healer.  They also have a AE slow which works on groups.  Mystic's are good for two things.  Defense buffs, AC buffs and Slowing the mob's.  Other than that it is a worthless class.  Granted he an dish out some damage but nothing that can compare to any regular dps class.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Wardens in one heal can do almost 1200 points heal for one cast and you guys have a couple spells like that.  Now I am no expert on Wardens so I can say for sure but from what i've seen they are the best healing class for points healed than any other.   Inquisitors we get: 955 heal direct heal, 576 Directheal, 600 Direct Heal, 325 a tick reactive single target for 4 ticks plus final, 325 a tick group reactive with 8 ticks plus final.  Thats it.  </DIV>

[Thibor24]

<P>I'd like to jump in as a lv 43 warden.</P> <P>I love healing guardians, regens are great on tanks that take frequent small amounts of damage and our instants can handle some spikes.</P> <P>I hate healing monks, they dont get hit often but when they do its for a chunk of damage which a HoT isnt going to cope well with.</P> <P>There is going to be trouble when the healer balancing happens because youve had all these classes except druids happily levelling up without a thought to agro control. </P> <P>When or if they start gaining more agro with their heals there are going to be group wipes and corpses everywhere as they will not have learned to manage their heals versus agro.</P> <P>That being said they really need to drop the agro a bit on us druids its just insane.</P> <P>Also whoever said wardens need to be nerfed should try playing one for a while, I'd happily give up my regen line for a reactive in a second.</P>

[blueduckie]

<P>As a Guardian i have done 90% of my lvling with duoing or trioing. I often hunt with an inquisitor but have templar guildies ive grouped with. So far Inquisitor is my favoritte in any group situations if they know what they are doing. When i trio its often with a troubadar and normally never get hit by mobs including named. The inquisitors boost dps and with the special duantless buff increase str and sta. They increase hp plenty and have just as good of heals. The heals do dmg to mobs and can boost haste if they use thier spot heals. Ive never been in a group needing much defense but more dps to speed up the killing and xp.  Most mobs cant even hardly touch me but i like reactive heals over regens because when it does hit then your healed. You dont lose tics of heals from not needing it. Not to mention those retro heals can stack up to healing around 1k per hit. </P> <P>Any priest class can get the job done if you know how to choose good spots to hunt  and they are well played in their class. To me its not about killing 1 mob but a matter of killing the most in a certain period of time. The troubadar adds plenty of dps and buffs to make it too easy. I have never seen alot of difference in an Inquisitor and Templar except Templars spells seem to have chance at curing while Inquisitors boost dps. Dont see much benefit in cures for xping. Especially if they have a manastone and use it. Also against those casters with AE's the group reactive heals own. Covers each tic the dots do or they can use a literal group heal to cover a dd type AE. Anyways inquisitors for groups pwn IMO =p</P>

[M1A2Tankage]

<P>If am Duoing, defiler or mystic.  </P> <P>If i am in a group, Inq.  Only need one healer.  Any descent Inq with descent lvl spells can debuff the mob enough to allow the other group members to take it down faster.  Much faster then not debuffed.  Shorter life of the mob = less healing needed.</P>