Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

If the trinity were to expand ...

24

Comments

  • GoresonGoreson GlasgowPosts: 122Member

    I think the biggest mistake people are making with the "trinity" is look at it from a combat-centric angle.

    Yes, like certain other people I love DAoC and love to reference it.

    Especially when looking at a game like GW2 ;-)

    But the thing is that both the PvP maps as well as the EB cry for a stealth class!

    Not a stealth killer but a guy (or gal) able to sneak in and then... well, do things. Whether it is capturing a point, opening a door, disarming defenses, the list goes on and on.

    Yeah, he might just be easy slush in combat, but heck, use him as a scout and you can avoid nasty mobs/player hordes on the prowl.

    And again, if you expand him to good old D&D roles, yes, make him the Thief and let him do the detect traps, let him do the open locks, I mean c'mon, wouldn't it be too much fun if your "trinity" group just mastered The Dungeon Of Dooooooooom! and now sits in front of a nice big chest of goodies and nobody's there to open it? :-D

    And yes, the "general supporter/utility guy": ever thought that everything is just too easy to access? Well, how about changing that?

    Hey, look, we have reached The Chasm Of Eternity, now all we need to find is the bridge that leads across. - Oh, you mean that half-worn rope/piece of rubble? - Err...

    Bring on the sup/util guy: cast a "repair" spell (maybe also good for those moments when your armour is down to 50%) and that rope looks much better. Or if the bridge is gone, well, bridge spell, flight spell, levitation spell, teleport spell, you pick, you choose, all there to get your party over.

    Somebody already mentioned the Minstrel from DAoC and his speed buff, well, perfect for both PvE and PvP: "man, dem enemies are coming... *woosh* ...and are gone again... dang speed buffs!

    You can come up with the weirdest (and smartest) concepts for tricks a sup/util guy may have up his sleeve, maybe even some for combat - like a money drop/xp boost due to a bard's singing of the heroics of the group, the ability to set up camp incl. defenses, item transportation obviously, etc.

    Yes, again he is mushy in combat but, well, let's be fair: so is a healer... and a healer's role is by far more limited than that of a sup/util guy. ;-)

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,823Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by SkullyWoods

    Well here's my two cents, forgive me if it's been said already, I kinda just skimmed the posts. But shouldn't the idea be to get rid of the trinity? It's good to have a role to play in combat but any system that requires your characted to be confined to that role permanently is a recipe for boredom...right? I was excited to see gw2 going in that direction though I haven't gotten to play any beta so I'm not sure how well they pulled it off but I do believe the idea was right. I personally disliked playing the same roles in combat over and over again.

     

    No, role based combat IMO is an excellent thing. It encourages co-operation, communication, and tactics.

    The trick, as you touch on, is to get rid of the enforced roles... give each player the ability to take any that needs taking on the fly.

     

    The only thing that was annoying about the Trinity was searching for the needed class for a million hours. Remove that and you're golden.

    GW2 has roles, but those roles are situational - situational combat also requires coordination, communication and tactics.

    The problem is AI.

    Trinity allows AI to act dumb as hell and still be (somewhat) challenging.

    It also desguise the numbers and formula combat.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,007Member Uncommon

    Many games have had a lot of lesser roles, like buffers, CC and other utility classes.

    But lets face it, the thing we should start with should really be discussing a new aggro system because in a trinity combat system all other classes besides the 3 are optional while you must have those 3, and the trinity classes all uses a rather boring and uninspiring combat mechanics where you rarely need to think at all.

    There must be more interesting ways to handle aggro and group dynamics that trinity or the other few systems we seen so far. The trinity system is from Meridian 59 and I don't buy that they just stumbled on the perfect system at first try.

  • maplestonemaplestone Ottawa, ONPosts: 3,099Member

    If you add a role, will the metagame actually keep it?

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,747Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Creslin321

    I actually think that the trinity has been dumbed down in the current "WoW-era."  In EQ, the "trinity" actually had four necessary roles:

    Tank, Healer, DPS, and CC

    CC was just as vital as the "main" trinity later on in the game, and there was an entire class dedicated to it (Enchanter).

    Anyway, if you define a "trinity system" as a system wherein players must take different specialized roles in order to succeed in combat...then I would personally not want the trinity to expand.  Expanding the trinity would mean more specialization, which would mean that each player gets stuck in a narrower niche. 

    For example, healers right now can flash heal, shield, regenerate, buff, etc...  But if you expand the "trinity" to have roles like "regenerator" and "buffer."  Then you would have classes or specs devoted solely to a subset of what a healer used to be able to do.

    Now I am totally in favor of adding different kinds of abilities to the game, but I would not want to make the narrow niche that trinity classes are put into even narrower.

    Nothing about reducing the core roles is "dumbed down".

    The fact that someone points out Shaman's purge ability brings up just one of many ways that each WOW class had plenty of little sub-roles they were playing in addition to their primary task.

    The trinity itself is just slapping big simplified labels onto classes which in many cases can provide a variety of benefits (my shaman wasn't just a healer, but could also be an interrupter, a kiter, a purger, a cleanser, and/or a buffer.)

    So really whether a game has a trinity or not says nothing about the true depth of a given class' playstyle.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,007Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Nothing about reducing the core roles is "dumbed down".

    The fact that someone points out Shaman's purge ability brings up just one of many ways that each WOW class had plenty of little sub-roles they were playing in addition to their primary task.

    The trinity itself is just slapping big simplified labels onto classes which in many cases can provide a variety of benefits (my shaman wasn't just a healer, but could also be an interrupter, a kiter, a purger, a cleanser, and/or a buffer.)

    So really whether a game has a trinity or not says nothing about the true depth of a given class' playstyle.

    Not really, but it does tell us that the mobs are dumb as doorknobs all of them. All trinity games have really stupid AI.

    My issue with trinity is tanking, it makes the game dumber and more predictable. Add a better mob AI and remove all taunts and CC and the combat will become very different even if you keep everything else the same.

    Aggro should be set on who the mobs easiest kill and who is most dangerous in the group, not on silly taunts. Do you really think a smart dragon or liche would be that dumb?

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,823Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Nothing about reducing the core roles is "dumbed down".

    The fact that someone points out Shaman's purge ability brings up just one of many ways that each WOW class had plenty of little sub-roles they were playing in addition to their primary task.

    The trinity itself is just slapping big simplified labels onto classes which in many cases can provide a variety of benefits (my shaman wasn't just a healer, but could also be an interrupter, a kiter, a purger, a cleanser, and/or a buffer.)

    So really whether a game has a trinity or not says nothing about the true depth of a given class' playstyle.

    Not really, but it does tell us that the mobs are dumb as doorknobs all of them. All trinity games have really stupid AI.

    My issue with trinity is tanking, it makes the game dumber and more predictable. Add a better mob AI and remove all taunts and CC and the combat will become very different even if you keep everything else the same.

    Aggro should be set on who the mobs easiest kill and who is most dangerous in the group, not on silly taunts. Do you really think a smart dragon or liche would be that dumb?

    Add passives to the list of stuff to remove.

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • Asuran24Asuran24 St. pual, MNPosts: 517Member

    THe biggest issue in the trinity is the mechanics, and reliance on a role that is really only proformed thru a single style of play, compared to the other roles that have between two an five different styles of playing the role. So first i would find several more unique methods of a character's class/build  being able to preform the role of a tank in a group. Another thgin would be to make mobs have a tendency to favor a certain role or class by multiplying the threat that class generates by several time the normal value to make them seem like they are actually gunning for that characgter/class, which could even be taken to racial choices and even classes based threat modifiers too. With the taunts i hated how they forced the mob to look at you or target you, where as to me a taunt should increase yoru threat generration on the target at best for a short period of time. One of the last thigns is making dps a secondary role, while putting cc/debuff/bufff based roles as primary in the trinity, that way the dps of a group is not as huge as the tools the group has to work with, although you could have a pure dps class/role it would faulter in groups as you lose many of the cc/buff/debuff tools for that increased damage they produce.

  • GoresonGoreson GlasgowPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Nothing about reducing the core roles is "dumbed down".

    The fact that someone points out Shaman's purge ability brings up just one of many ways that each WOW class had plenty of little sub-roles they were playing in addition to their primary task.

    The trinity itself is just slapping big simplified labels onto classes which in many cases can provide a variety of benefits (my shaman wasn't just a healer, but could also be an interrupter, a kiter, a purger, a cleanser, and/or a buffer.)

    So really whether a game has a trinity or not says nothing about the true depth of a given class' playstyle.

    Not really, but it does tell us that the mobs are dumb as doorknobs all of them. All trinity games have really stupid AI.

    My issue with trinity is tanking, it makes the game dumber and more predictable. Add a better mob AI and remove all taunts and CC and the combat will become very different even if you keep everything else the same.

    Aggro should be set on who the mobs easiest kill and who is most dangerous in the group, not on silly taunts. Do you really think a smart dragon or liche would be that dumb?

    Well, I don't quite agree with you there because you look at it from a stats point, not from a "reality" point of view.

    Think about RL for a sec: you are out at night, and a bunch of guys start shouting trash your way. For the sake of it, let's say they are kids so you assume you may be able to take them on.

    On whom do you focus?

    The "loudmouth" who is taunting you? The big fella who is quite but looks like he could land a good punch? The thing guy in the back who seems rather cool? Add what other characters you like... I'm sure you'd go for the loudmouth.

    Just because you don't go rational about this but rather follow your hurt ego.

    And yes, even dragons and liche have egos. So taunts make perfect sense. I mean c'mon, think Braveheart: showing your arse does very little damage to you (well, it could probably blind you or cause nausea...) but it's a perfectly effective taunt.

    We players live in a MMORPG world of all information provided, level, class, etc. Imagine this were not the case! You feel like taking on that guy in robes? Oooops, happens to be a "kensai", a swordmaster who is so skilled with his sword that he'd see the use of armour as an insult to his craft. Dang!

    You get where I'm coming from?

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,823Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Goreson
    Originally posted by Loke666
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Nothing about reducing the core roles is "dumbed down".

    The fact that someone points out Shaman's purge ability brings up just one of many ways that each WOW class had plenty of little sub-roles they were playing in addition to their primary task.

    The trinity itself is just slapping big simplified labels onto classes which in many cases can provide a variety of benefits (my shaman wasn't just a healer, but could also be an interrupter, a kiter, a purger, a cleanser, and/or a buffer.)

    So really whether a game has a trinity or not says nothing about the true depth of a given class' playstyle.

    Not really, but it does tell us that the mobs are dumb as doorknobs all of them. All trinity games have really stupid AI.

    My issue with trinity is tanking, it makes the game dumber and more predictable. Add a better mob AI and remove all taunts and CC and the combat will become very different even if you keep everything else the same.

    Aggro should be set on who the mobs easiest kill and who is most dangerous in the group, not on silly taunts. Do you really think a smart dragon or liche would be that dumb?

    Well, I don't quite agree with you there because you look at it from a stats point, not from a "reality" point of view.

    Think about RL for a sec: you are out at night, and a bunch of guys start shouting trash your way. For the sake of it, let's say they are kids so you assume you may be able to take them on.

    On whom do you focus?

    The "loudmouth" who is taunting you? The big fella who is quite but looks like he could land a good punch? The thing guy in the back who seems rather cool? Add what other characters you like... I'm sure you'd go for the loudmouth.

    Just because you don't go rational about this but rather follow your hurt ego.

    And yes, even dragons and liche have egos. So taunts make perfect sense. I mean c'mon, think Braveheart: showing your arse does very little damage to you (well, it could probably blind you or cause nausea...) but it's a perfectly effective taunt.

    We players live in a MMORPG world of all information provided, level, class, etc. Imagine this were not the case! You feel like taking on that guy in robes? Oooops, happens to be a "kensai", a swordmaster who is so skilled with his sword that he'd see the use of armour as an insult to his craft. Dang!

    You get where I'm coming from?

    Then why do players ignore tanks in PvP, even if they call names to their mothers?

    What about the natural reaction to hit those that hurt you?

    What about the fact no one can shrug a axe hit on their heads as if it was nothing?

    And will that kensai do much with an arrow or bullet in his eye?

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,747Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loke666

    Not really, but it does tell us that the mobs are dumb as doorknobs all of them. All trinity games have really stupid AI.

    My issue with trinity is tanking, it makes the game dumber and more predictable. Add a better mob AI and remove all taunts and CC and the combat will become very different even if you keep everything else the same.

    Aggro should be set on who the mobs easiest kill and who is most dangerous in the group, not on silly taunts. Do you really think a smart dragon or liche would be that dumb?

    Having abilities which always do what they say makes the game more predictable too, but that doesn't necessarily make a game "dumb".

    For any given game, many game rules need to be predictable.  Otherwise the game is just a bunch of random happenings you have no control over.

    Other stuff can be unpredictable, but that's not exactly required for an amazing game (Portal.)

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • MeowheadMeowhead New Carlisle, INPosts: 3,716Member

    It's weird.  When people talk about expanding the trinity, by and large, almost everybody goes with things that already exist, or existed.

    It's perfectly possible to add things that have never really been done in an MMORPG.

    I designed a whole MMORPG concept around this, but what about a class that can see things differently than other people?

    Imagine how different it could be if there was a class that could, for example, see magical effects differently.

    Like somebody who could see an enemy's hands glow different colors, and thereby be able to tell what spell they're about to cast.

    Or who could see a leyline attached from an enemy to a power source, and rather than attacking the enemy directly, also has the option of attacking the leyline or attacking the power source (Or stealing the power source for yourself)

    Somebody who could see the weak spot in a magical field (Aim for the head!), who could identify illusions, who... whatever.

    That's just one possibility, too, but just by being able to see magic on a deeper level than other characters, that gives tons of possibilities.

    ... or what about a character who can see the future?  A couple seconds ahead of time, be able to tell if an enemy is about to start casting a big spell, or if they're going to block, or run away, or whatever. (Obviously this latter one  would only work in PvE, not PvP)

  • GoresonGoreson GlasgowPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

    Then why do players ignore tanks in PvP, even if they call names to their mothers?

    What about the natural reaction to hit those that hurt you?

    What about the fact no one can shrug a axe hit on their heads as if it was nothing?

    And will that kensai do much with an arrow or bullet in his eye?

    Sorry but I don't really get your point?!

    Taunts and players, that depends quite a bit on the skill/ability and how it works in PvP. In some games it may have little gaming effect which of course gives the player the choice to "overwrite" what would be the "correct" response, while in other games taunt cause more sever restrictions forcing the player to make the choice of whether he wants to go against the taunter full force or against another character with half his power.

    Interesting would also be the aspect of actual roleplaying: the first thing (okay, one of the first things) is that in a RPG you are not playing yourself but a character, and depending on how that character is defined you may be "forced" to act in ways that you wouldn't e.g. stay silent/say dumb things if you are smart enough to have figured out that riddle but your character happens to be dumb as a bag of beans, etc.

    So, any player ignoring a taunt would potentially very much play out of character.

    Which obviously is not punished in MMORPGs but it's something to consider for your gaming experience. ;-)

    The natural reaction to defend you against an attacker (potentially at the same time as being taunted - I assume that's what you were going for?) - see, as such we are talking game mechanics and they can only do so much.

    Now, I'm sure you have seen action movies where this strongman gets attacked by a bunch of guys while mister super bad goon stays in the back taunting him.

    The hero plows thru the mob not really caring about those "little pests" will maybe only start plugging them off when he is actually standing before mr big goon.

    Why? Is that realistic? Not really... though one could argue that the adrenaline the body produces make you less rational and also reduces pain.

    Your last 2 points, sorry, but they have nothing to do with what I said.

    So... I'm not really sure what you are trying to say?

    Of course would a Kensai have problems fighting with a bullet/arrow in his eye. Just as everybody else. So, you'd go around the attacking force and try to shoot out everybody's eye?

    Of course, a game like GW2 is using miracle rifles, but try doing that with Brown Bess where you probably didn't get more than 3 shots of per minute against potentially fast moving targets... ouch. More likely it would be they dagger thru your eye than the other way round.

    But the point I was trying to make with the Kensai was just that if we didn't know class and level but just went but "looks" i.e. armour we may easily get fooled.  

  • Originally posted by XAPGames

    Just knocking off a list.

     

    Tanks

    Off tanks (wouldn't cut it as main tank but can pull aggro off of back line)

    Magic DPS (effective against heavily armored)

    Melee DPS (effective against mobs resistant to magic)

    Heals (actually 2 types, bursty and mana efficient)

    Off heals (heal over time that augment normal healing)

    Buffers Regenerators (usually healers or off healers)

    Pullers (also used to pick off runners)

     

    I'll add Debuffers/DOTs

  • ToxiaToxia Lake Charles, LAPosts: 1,319Member Uncommon

    Pretty interesting concept, and one I myself haven't played in an mmo before to my knowledge. Are there any games similar to to this out there already that I might be able to look into?

    THANKS

    The Deep Web is sca-ry.

  • bishboshbishbosh SydneyPosts: 388Member

    i dont know why there even needs to be roles. freeform class system + do w/e u want FTW

  • agriffin85agriffin85 West Frankfort, ILPosts: 64Member
    Originally posted by Toxia

    Pretty interesting concept, and one I myself haven't played in an mmo before to my knowledge. Are there any games similar to to this out there already that I might be able to look into?

    THANKS

     

    Like I said in a previous post, EQ1 is exactly what the OP is describing.  Chanters for batteries and cc, Shamans for buff/debuff bots, Monks for pulling, Bards for a little of all 4.

    Paladins for stun tanking mobs and magic tanking, Warriors for physical and better sustained agro controll, SK's for leech tanking and snap agro.

  • GTwanderGTwander San Diego, CAPosts: 6,035Member

    You can look at the current trinity as;

    HP goes up (healers)

    HP goes down (DPS)

    HP sits still (Tank)

     

    The only other option is "divert efforts" (CC)

    If every class didn't have their own forms of CC, they could slam them all into a seperate 4th on that specializes in forcing a change in tactics though hindered movement, output, etc.

    Writer / Musician / Game Designer

    Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
    Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,747Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GTwander

    You can look at the current trinity as;

    HP goes up (healers)

    HP goes down (DPS)

    HP sits still (Tank)

     The only other option is "divert efforts" (CC)

    If every class didn't have their own forms of CC, they could slam them all into a seperate 4th on that specializes in forcing a change in tactics though hindered movement, output, etc.

    Eh, that's hardly the "only" other option.

    There's seriously a ridiculous amount of possible roles any given game can offer.  The only reason games latch onto those three roles in particular is they're the most easily understood and/or logical.

    Honestly if you had a ballistic warfare (archery, modern war, future wars) MMORPG then the "regenerator" class the OP suggests ends up being the Support soldier (like in a FPS,) whose job it is to lay down suppressing fire while supplying teammates with ammunition.  Which ends up being easily understood and logical, and also a distinctly important role.

    But that's just one example of alternate types of class focuses that could exist.

    Although honestly most of what players care about isn't the role itself, but the details of how the role works.

    I was thinking the other day it might be interesting to have a pet-heavy healer class who spends most of their time summoning healing spirits with few direct heals.

    Another seldom-used role is the mitigator (CoX is the only MMORPG I think I've seen this in) where they're basically a Tank-Maker class who massively shields an ally, turning any class into your group's tank.

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • GTwanderGTwander San Diego, CAPosts: 6,035Member

    Yeah, I seen points including DoT healers and Burst healers, but they pretty much serve the same purpose, but just as a different utility. I personally do not believe that a specific situation defines a role, only the specfic expectation from one.

    Stealth can define a role, but would you break it down into who has it permanently/temporarily? Or in varied degrees of opacity? I think not.

    Writer / Musician / Game Designer

    Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
    Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture

  • GoresonGoreson GlasgowPosts: 122Member
    Originally posted by bishbosh

    i dont know why there even needs to be roles. freeform class system + do w/e u want FTW

    That may be a working concept in an established group but in randomer groups it's going to cause huge issues.

    What you'll end up with is either having to take each person's word for what his character can do ("yes, of course I have healing abilities." - later: "well, you never said that you need area healing abilities, I only have some light to mid healing spells for individuals...")

    or you have to run each character thru a screening process: "now, please, list all your abilities. thanks. we will get back to you once we have checked out all the other applicants."

    And worst of all the gamer may not even be good with the abilities he is "hired" for...

    I know, same can be true with a class character if said class allows multi-branching for the skills but at least you have an idea what you are getting yourself into bed with.

  • Gaia_HunterGaia_Hunter BristolPosts: 2,823Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Goreson
    Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

    Then why do players ignore tanks in PvP, even if they call names to their mothers?

    What about the natural reaction to hit those that hurt you?

    What about the fact no one can shrug a axe hit on their heads as if it was nothing?

    And will that kensai do much with an arrow or bullet in his eye?

    Sorry but I don't really get your point?!

    Taunts and players, that depends quite a bit on the skill/ability and how it works in PvP. In some games it may have little gaming effect which of course gives the player the choice to "overwrite" what would be the "correct" response, while in other games taunt cause more sever restrictions forcing the player to make the choice of whether he wants to go against the taunter full force or against another character with half his power.

    Interesting would also be the aspect of actual roleplaying: the first thing (okay, one of the first things) is that in a RPG you are not playing yourself but a character, and depending on how that character is defined you may be "forced" to act in ways that you wouldn't e.g. stay silent/say dumb things if you are smart enough to have figured out that riddle but your character happens to be dumb as a bag of beans, etc.

    So, any player ignoring a taunt would potentially very much play out of character.

    Which obviously is not punished in MMORPGs but it's something to consider for your gaming experience. ;-)

    The natural reaction to defend you against an attacker (potentially at the same time as being taunted - I assume that's what you were going for?) - see, as such we are talking game mechanics and they can only do so much.

    Now, I'm sure you have seen action movies where this strongman gets attacked by a bunch of guys while mister super bad goon stays in the back taunting him.

    The hero plows thru the mob not really caring about those "little pests" will maybe only start plugging them off when he is actually standing before mr big goon.

    Why? Is that realistic? Not really... though one could argue that the adrenaline the body produces make you less rational and also reduces pain.

    Your last 2 points, sorry, but they have nothing to do with what I said.

    So... I'm not really sure what you are trying to say?

    Of course would a Kensai have problems fighting with a bullet/arrow in his eye. Just as everybody else. So, you'd go around the attacking force and try to shoot out everybody's eye?

    Of course, a game like GW2 is using miracle rifles, but try doing that with Brown Bess where you probably didn't get more than 3 shots of per minute against potentially fast moving targets... ouch. More likely it would be they dagger thru your eye than the other way round.

    But the point I was trying to make with the Kensai was just that if we didn't know class and level but just went but "looks" i.e. armour we may easily get fooled.  

    Miracle rifles opposed to miracle plate armor that doesn't tire you and allow you to actually move?

    My point is: it is a game.

    If it is a master Kensai, maybe he is known by reputation.

    If we go by realism all the concept of hit points and instant healing is silly.

     

     

    Currently playing: GW2
    Going cardboard starter kit: Ticket to ride, Pandemic, Carcassonne, Dominion, 7 Wonders

  • AxehiltAxehilt San Francisco, CAPosts: 8,747Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GTwander

    Yeah, I seen points including DoT healers and Burst healers, but they pretty much serve the same purpose, but just as a different utility. I personally do not believe that a specific situation defines a role, only the specfic expectation from one.

    Stealth can define a role, but would you break it down into who has it permanently/temporarily? Or in varied degrees of opacity? I think not.

    Well if we agree that last part is true, why would it matter?

    Stealth is still something which could be mandated by game design.  Dungeons could frequently involve overwhelming odds (literally impossible to defeat via standard combat) which can be solved only with someone in the Stealth role.  The rogue stealths past the unbeatable skeletal legions to assassinate the Necromancer in single combat; the army outside crumples to the ground, allowing the party to pass.  The saboteur stealths past the unbeatable 5-story-tall monster to detonate the cliffside over its head, killing it in the avalanche.

    And of course we've already seen rogues fill another rather crucial role in games (DDO's rogues filling the Disarm role.)

    Any number of non-typical roles can be made into a requirement.  It's just a matter of designing the role correctly (you'd want the rest of the party to be busy with the combat portions while the rogue stealths to kill that Necromancer, most likely, so that overall dungeon pacing feels right)

    "Joe stated his case logically and passionately, but his perceived effeminate voice only drew big gales of stupid laughter..." -Idiocracy
    "There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance." -Socrates

  • QuirhidQuirhid TamperePosts: 5,969Member Common
    Originally posted by Axehilt

    Another seldom-used role is the mitigator (CoX is the only MMORPG I think I've seen this in) where they're basically a Tank-Maker class who massively shields an ally, turning any class into your group's tank.

    Surely you remember prot-monk and boon monk from GW1.

    I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky

  • ChicagoCubChicagoCub Chicago, ILPosts: 301Member
    Originally posted by GTwander

    Yeah, I seen points including DoT healers and Burst healers, but they pretty much serve the same purpose, but just as a different utility. I personally do not believe that a specific situation defines a role, only the specfic expectation from one.

    Stealth can define a role, but would you break it down into who has it permanently/temporarily? Or in varied degrees of opacity? I think not.

    Buff/Debuff specialist.  Not a tank, not a healer, not a dps, and not a crowd control.  Can increase the tanks health regen, can increase the healers power regen, and increase the dps damage, can increase the tanks armor, can improve the healers heals, can decrease the opponents attack speed, attack power, movement rate, etc.

    EQ mastered grouping like no other game and allowed for classes like the Enchanter and Shaman to flourish as viable group members while lying outside the trinity.  A good group in EQ was hard to find but when you did it operated like a finely tuned machine.

Sign In or Register to comment.