Healing in AoC

Zkoog

Hi. Do we know yet what type of healing there will be in Ashes, like clicking raid frames like in WoW, or action type healing like in ESO?

McShave

From what we have seen, there will be a bit of both. The cleric archetype, which is the main healing class and the only healing class we have seen abilities for, has some abilities that damage opponents that provide healing to allies over time, and they also have a chain heal type spell that you cast on your allies. I assume you can use spells that heal allies in action or tab-target mode, so you don't have to click on raid frames of you don't want to, but you can if you want.

If I were to build a cleric, i would probably make him a fighting type that debuff allies and provide healing over time and buffs to allies, but you could also build them more of a caster that have some sort of ranged spell attack and casted healing spells.

Yuyukoyay

Cleric and Summoner will be healers. Know nothing about the summoner class other than they will be able to summon things from any class role. That does not mean they will be able to do at the same time or if it locked by your second archetype though.

There is a possibility of some bard skills able to do lesser versions of regen or healing. As they always are able to in pretty much every game that has them.

Your second archetype being a Cleric has the potential to add healing to any skill you have. However, they have stated that most classes with the Cleric as the secondary Archetype will mostly only able to do self healing. So it will be something to experiment with later.

George_Black

I hated healing in ESO.
And to clarify, I mean self healing being available to every character.

George_Black

Having self healing in all characters means that a portion of your gameplay will NOT be playing as a fighter or, as an archer, or as a rogue, or as a mage.

In eso I was playing as a brawler, yet every 5-6s I was boosting my healing power to cast strong self heal. I never signed up to play as a paladin or as a herald or as a high priest or as a druid.

Mind you, pvp combat in eso was all about keeping your HP bar and MP bar up, until you could burst an enemy target.

I hope that with AoC combat we can go back to enjoying our classes (or archetypes; that's besides the point).
I hope that my gameplay will be about enduring in a field of battle, as a fighter.

Let the cleric do the healing, let the bard do the supporting, let the tank do the protecting, let the rogue maintain the sense of fear, let the archer put the pressure on strategic targets, let the summoner give form to the elements and let the mage wear the pijamas and wave a stick.

Yuyukoyay

Ya there is going to be 8 archetypes so a secondary Cleric might be rare enough to where it doesn't feel like everyone has self healing. Also it might not even be reliable or good self healing to the point where you don't need dedicated healers anyway. I think it will probably feel better than ESO which tried their hardest to do away with the class system. This game is just gonna be like how MMO's originally were back during Lineage 2's days. So it will go based on the Tank, DPS, and Healing system. However, there are like 8 party slots so you can throw in buffing classes or whatever else you want into it as well.

George_Black

I understand that many people want self sufficient survivability for all classes, so that they dont have to rely on somebody, while still being able to enjoy the archetype of their choice.
Guess what? Other people want to have CC tools. Other people want to have protection tools.
Other people want to feel like they hit hard, despite the fact that they play a cleric on pijamas.

That means that all classes will become the same.

If you want healing, why dont you play a cleric or a bard? Dont pick rogue or archer.

George_Black

Which leads me to the next point, though a bit offtopic. My fear for the 8x8 class system.

Do we want wholesome, unique classes, with distinct gameplay and uses?
Or do we want jack of all trades, feeling all the same?

Or do we want the archetype combos in order to... play our rogue, with a flavour of healing. Cultist? Wont the cultist healing be lesser than the clerics? Wont the cultist attacks be less dangerous than the assassins?
What will the cultist strengths be? Fight low hp mobs? Oh well, the cultist can deal some dmg and recover some hp. The cultist can keep going.

What about the fighter with a flavour of healing? The highsword. Wont the highsword be equally weak as the cultist?

I think we should start talking about 10-15 unique classes with tools such as dmg+self heal for one class, mobility + survivability for another, or mobility + dmg for yet another, instead of 64 classes, 56 of which might end up being very weak.

Kywildwolf76

i've personally always liked single class types. let the dps be dps, tanks be tanks and healers /casters be their own selves.

Littlekenny21

I would much prefer a healer to heal and the choice of a secondary archetype to allow them to add damage in there or double down on healing.

I know DnD cleric was used as an argument to stop them being pure healers but combat in that is completely different. It's turn based, the frequency and impact of fights are different, spell slots are more restrictive than mana, using AC to, and other classes access to healing (in 5e, druid, bard, ranger, divine domain sorcerer, paladin, mercy monk).

Dygz

George Black wrote: »

Or do we want the archetype combos in order to... play our rogue, with a flavour of healing. Cultist? Wont the cultist healing be lesser than the clerics?

What about the fighter with a flavour of healing?

Yes. Because if you want to primarily be a Cleric, you choose Cleric as your Primary Archetype.
If you want to secondarily be a Cleric, you choose Cleric as your Secondary Archetype.
It's right there in the names.

George Black wrote: »

Wont the cultist attacks be less dangerous than the assassins?
What will the cultist strengths be? Fight low hp mobs? Oh well, the cultist can deal some dmg and recover some hp. The cultist can keep going.

Why would a Cultist inherently be less "dangerous" than an Assassin? They will both be using Rogue active abilities.
How "dangerous" a Cultist is would depend on the augments being used. If a Cultist wants to focus on being as dangerous as an Assassin, they would likely focus on augments from the Death School rather than augments from the Life School.

George Black wrote: »

The highsword. Wont the highsword be equally weak as the cultist?

It's not clear what you are intending weak to refer to.
Like the Cultist, a Highsword who wants to focus on damage would choose augments from the Death School and a Highsword who wants to focus on healing would choose augments from the Life School.
x/Clerics who wish to focus on damage would also likely be using racial, social org, religious and Node augments that grant extra damage.

Neither a Highsword nor a Cultist is likely to be as powerful of a healer as a Cleric Primary archetype because Cleric augments do not replace the need for a Cleric Primary Archetype in an 8-person group.