Clerics or druids which is the better healerFollow

I've never played a Cleric, but my druid's good. Heal for 100 at lvl 24, which isnt bad. I dont know if you consider this off topic, but the buffs make healing easier, such as a DS, whereas you don't have to heal as much. Versatility is a factor as well, if you can tank, you don't need to heal the other people until they're low. Just my 2 cents.

Clerics are better healers.

a) They can cast faster heals for less mana than druids.
b) They have more versitility in which spells to cast.
c) They can use Heals over Time which draws them little aggro compared to a druid.
d) They have the group balancing health AA.
e) The equipment they can purchase provides specific heal clickies, heal boosts etc etc.
f) Cleric gain Complete heal. They can heal a tank to their full hitpoints be that 5k or 10k hps for the same mana. A druid would need to spend double the mana to heal a 10k tank as they need to cast 2 heals.

Druids can heal for 4680hps maximum and 2960hps, both 10 second cast times. Druids have one fast heal spell which can also heal 1750hps in 3.8 seconds, hardly stellar. There is a few hundred hp spell that druids have, but lets face it, a few hundred hps on a tank is ... useless!

Though the subject does not state shammies, I'm going to bring them up solely because your post does.

If you want pure healing ability then its going to be cleric - plain and simple. Anyone can do a search for spells and just look at the numbers. Healing lots of hitpoints is the clerics job and they do it at lower levels then anyone else. No one else can do it better (using only the numbers), and no one can disagree with that. If others could heal better, would people still play clerics?

Yes at some points a shaman or druid might have the same heals as a cleric. But the Cleric will always beat them out in a couple of levels.

But your limitaions put on this post is the same as saying you want proof that a shadowknight or a paladin can hold agro better than a warrior but only if its without their other abilities (namely their spells).

But thats the reason why shamans can be better (or rather more effective) healers than clerics *is* because of their other spells - namely their slow and weaken spells, and to a lesser extent their haste spells. If a mob isn't hitting so often, or not as hard, or dies before it has a chance to do a lot of damange then you won't *need* more than a 300 hp heal as long as the group is doing their job (i.e. not breaking mez, only pulling one or two mobs, etc).

Unfortunately I cannot really speak for druids - however looking at their spell list they really have no way to reduce the effectiveness of the mobs in the same way that shamans can. They can however, root mobs and plop a dot on them so by the time the group gets to it, its greatly weakened, so they won't need to heal as much.

So if you want numbers, your absolutely right, your cleric will out-heal me hands down forever and ever and ever. But in practice I might not need to heal so much if I'm using my other advantages.

Yep, clerics.

The reason i said to keep Haste/Slow etc out of it is because that what i want the shammy in my group doing while the cleric does the healing thing.


/gasp i would just find a real tank. at 59 i run at 4.5-5.5k hitpoints with no AA with basic Temp -> Virtue.

I never said you were an idiot you just didn't say anything in that other thread that was relevent. here you have so thats good

Your also much higher levels - I would like people to know that at most levels (post 50) that a shaman would be as effective as a druid if a cleric was not available (gotta defend my class).



This I completely agree with - in a perfect world, my ideal group is:

1. Main Tank (Pally/SK/Warrior)
2. DPS/assist (ranger/rogue)
3. Crowd Control (Enchanter/Bard)
4. Main Heal (Cleric)
5. Debuffer/Buffer (myself)
6. Additional DPS (usually try to fill with something like a Necro or Mage - who adds pet and magic).

However, I rarely get into the perfect group. In fact it seems (on stromm at least) that clerics my level are rare. So many times I do have to main heal.

side note: As a result I have started a new dwarven cleric (go battle cleric!).

Up until I was able to get Kei - I hated having to buff, debuff, and heal. But it is possible.

after my last post I started working with the numbers a bit - and I wanted to add something, even if it hurts my argument

And for any newer players who are reading this, this is also for you.

At level 39 a shaman has a slow spell that slows a mob by 49%.

If in a given battle, Mob A consistently attacked and hit for 75 damage a hit - and hit 20 times before it died.

Its damage potential is 1500 damage (75 x 20 = 1500).

A cleric would have to heal that (most likely with Superior healing) - a total of about 3 castings for a total of 750 mana.

A shaman on the other hand would start by slowing the mob down - which means that it would hit about 1/2 as many times - for a total of 750 damage (75 x 10 = 750).

To do this the shaman would have to cast Togor's insects (150 mana) and about 2 castings of greater healing (300 mana) for a total of 650 mana. The player is still short 150 hp though.

So in this situation the shaman is in the hole if he's to heal to 100% (which I rarely do as a shaman) - and the cleric is a little more effective - however I don't feel in that case the shaman did a "bad" job.

Now lets take mob B, he hits much harder, but is a little slower. He hits for 250 damage, and hits 10 times.

Damage potential = 2500 (250 x 10)

The cleric will need to heal 2,500 hp - again assuming about 250 mana a cast = about 4 castings = 1,000 mana.

The shaman slows (150) mana, and reduces the damage to 1,250. Which needs to be healed for 150 mana per 300 pts (4 castings) = 750 mana

In this situation - the shaman took 250 less mana to heal all but 50 pts of damage. So I will say that he was a little more mana effective.

BUT, and this is a big but, Togors + Direct Heals = Very angry mob. And as shamans can't wear plate, and don't have spells quite as good as temp. This could easily be bad for the shaman. and since Shamans have traditionally a lower wis then clerics, they will have a smaller mana pool to heal up after. And you can't canni without HP.

So it will depend on the damage the mob does and the speed of its attacks, followed by how the group holds aggro.

Not that anyone's insane enough to sit here and do the math...

OMG, A Tank at level 60 with only 3900 hp. You better have a cleric otherwise your tank is going to be very dead.

In this scenario that you describe, the cleric better be starting CHeal at 40%-50%. With mobs that hit for 400+ per attack, Even then it may too late to get Cheal off in time.

First of all that scenario is not realistic. No Tank class at level 60 would ever have only 3900 hp. Now assuming that that number includes at least Temperance, which is 800 hp, that means unbuffed the tank has only 3100 hp. MY FRIGGIN CLERIC HAS MORE HITPOINTS THAN THAT AT LEVEL 58.

Next time you describe a situation, make sure it is realistic.

Oh ... just to add.

I only said clerics are the best healers. Being the best does not mean being the only one good at the task

Druids are very capable healers and can heal in groups just fine, even some hard ldons where a well equipped tank is tanking or difficult xp zone.

Shamens are not good but are capable healers. I often tank ldons with a shamen both slowing AND healing me with no issues at all, no downtime.

Clerics are by their class definition and setup the best healers and should be, otherwise ... why play a cleric?

No offence but when someone says that a 10 hp a tick spell is usefull in a healing discussion they are missing the point.

and Rubin your points would be far better presented in Paragraph form. Not a flame it's just hard to read thats all.

The Method in my madness when i look for a healer for LDoN at 59 is to /lfg and hit get matches

I then send tells first to the Clerics, then to the druids that are 58+ if there is no clerics or they are looking for something else then i look for Shammies 58+, i would not take a sub 58 Druid/Shammy as main healer unless i had 2 spots open so they could share the load by working as a duo.

If that seems over the top well lets just say i don't die very often so i can't be doing that much wrong. And the 2 LDoN i have lost recently where because the druid healer was OOm alot because of his versitlity and was being asked to play to many roles <Not his fault and he was a good healer.>

I keep seeing Shaman list after druids in the healing department, but you can't look at a class and say "let's not count their other spells." because if you say that about any class you can make them look like less than they are. BECAUSE of slows and debuffs Shaman are better than Druids and on par with Clerics as far as heals. No, NOT in ALL areas, nothing is an absolute, but a Shaman that knows how to play their class properly is about as effective as a Cleric. Druids can do well too, Both Shaman and Druids have abilities that cause more damage to be done to critters faster, and/or makes critters less effective in combat that the cleric lacks.

Over-all most people prefer to have a Cleric, myself included, but the Shaman and Druid CAN be as effective or nearly so. The biggest problem though is the PLAYER! The abilities of the player behind the toon is a bigger factor than what the classes are capable of. Because of this the cleric is the way to go. Too many players don't play their classes well enough to make these statements a rule but an exception. The cleric is the easier of the three to play, no offense intended, but it's true. Yes, I know their are tricks and tips to know and aggro management and such, but all classes have such things to learn.

In the end the Cleric wins as healer. I'd go with a well played Shaman or Druid as well, but too often you don't know who the well played ones are.

If you are in a post-50 group and you don't have someone else to be either a healer or slower, you need a new group.
Number one healer: Cleric
Number two healer: Druid
Number three healer: Shaman

If you are both slowing and healing as a shaman, your group needs help. Druids are better at PURE HEALING anyway which is what this discussion is about. Did you read the first post?

Not meaning to hijack but I think it is the wrong question.

You are asking about whether clerics or druids or shaman are the better healers. This breaks into 2 very different pieces.

1. What they have in their spellbook.
2. Whether they have any idea how to use it.

Unfortunately 2. is the major consideration. I know clerics I wouldn't trust to heal a 10k tank fighting orc pawns and druids who I would happily take on an adventure as main healer.

Speaking as a cleric I have a better ******* of healing than either shaman or druid. Used properly this makes a cleric the better healer. However in most circumstances the druid/shaman spells will work fine and achieve the same end result.

I don't think the "Shaman are better because they can slow" argument is particularly valid because several other classes can slow and in 50+ groups you are usually looking at someone doing some slowing. This means that your cleric or druid also has the advantage of reduced damage because of slow. I know that when I am playing my shaman I am constantly struggling to keep enough mana to slow, debuff and haste without trying to heal as well. And when I do heal 600hp sinks very fast.

Finally there is the point that clerics are a plate class who can take a couple more knocks than shaman or druids. They also have Divine Aura which gives them a way out of healing aggro.

There is a very definite spell from 29-34 when people actively prefer druid/shaman over clerics because they have the same heals and many more useful spells as well. Long,long ago I remember sitting in HHK and being passed over in favour of druids "because they can SoW us". Wonderful vote of confidence in the group that is

However it all boils down to the player not the class.

From 1-40 Cleric's and Druid's are about equal, they both get their spells at simaler levels, and can heal equally. From 40-58 Cleric's can simply own Druid's in every way, espically since Druid's have to use their 300hp heal until 51. Once at 58 when druid's get their CHeal, Clerics and Druids are almost equal, toss some AA's in and you have a Druid MH.

Edited, Sat Mar 13 22:40:58 2004 by TunareDefender

Edited, Sat Mar 13 22:42:30 2004 by TunareDefender