Originally posted by Rhazmuz Only thing I know is that if GW2 represents the "alternative" to this trinity, I will take the trinity any day, any time.
I think the only way to remove trinity in MMOs is to have collision detection. It would have to be modified in some fashion as CD can lead to griefing if exploited but it is necessary if devs want to remove taunting from the game mechanic.
You're not alone in that view. See the Bartle link posted earlier in this thread.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Jemcrystal Everyone hates trinity but no one is offering an alternative thought.
...other than all the people in this thread that already have.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Rhazmuz Only thing I know is that if GW2 represents the "alternative" to this trinity, I will take the trinity any day, any time.
I think the only way to remove trinity in MMOs is to have collision detection. It would have to be modified in some fashion as CD can lead to griefing if exploited but it is necessary if devs want to remove taunting from the game mechanic.
You're not alone in that view. See the Bartle link posted earlier in this thread.
Because they dont want to be pidgeonholed? because they want to tank sometimes, heal sometimes etc?
Well isnt that more down to how character design and advacement is done, more than it is down to combat mechanics?
Look at a game like TSW where you can branch out and gain specs and abilities suited for different roles, in different situations?
Having tried both GW2 and normal "trinity" based games, I must admit I prefer games where I can understand the underlying mehcnaics, and learn how to control these steadily, as a tank for example, as compared to GW2 which for me always felt like agame where I had no clue what was going, who was targeted by the mob, and why I often would seem to lose half of my 26k hp as a somewhat beefy warrior.
Originally posted by Rhazmuz Only thing I know is that if GW2 represents the "alternative" to this trinity, I will take the trinity any day, any time.
I think the only way to remove trinity in MMOs is to have collision detection. It would have to be modified in some fashion as CD can lead to griefing if exploited but it is necessary if devs want to remove taunting from the game mechanic.
You're not alone in that view. See the Bartle link posted earlier in this thread.
Oh neat, I will. Thanks.
DDO has collision detection - it still has plate wearing classes with taunt skills, though. It's a 4 class game (heal, tank, damage, traps and doors).
I disagree that taunting isn't a real life mechanic. Taunting has started fightes for thousands of years. It's an assinine argument that "healing spells and fireball spells are realistic, but taunting that's crazy" anyway.
Some people are very comfortable with the trinity paradigm. But I will try to answer your question personally.
It makes forming a group harder. No matter how many specs you give people, some people just don't want to tank or heal. By forcing groups to have a tank and healer, you make it harder to find groups. I don't think I need to show evidence of this. Look at every MMO that uses the trinity as it's core mechanic; there is always a shortage of tanks and healers (especially tanks).
It's also unrealistic. Taunts are unrealistic. Enemies should target the players that are the largest threat to them, meaning the guy who is killing them the most. Tanks do the least damage and therefore are the weakest threat yet taunts can keep mobs off the true threats. It is an unrealistic mechanic to unrealistic combat.
It's limiting. There are some variations but pretty much every encounter is a form of tank and spank. Remove the taunt and heal mechanic and then players would have to use tactical positioning and strategic resource management to fight. I think there would be more variations to combat.
DDO has collision detection - it still has plate wearing classes with taunt skills, though. It's a 4 class game (heal, tank, damage, traps and doors).
I disagree that taunting isn't a real life mechanic. Taunting has started fightes for thousands of years. It's an assinine argument that "healing spells and fireball spells are realistic, but taunting that's crazy" anyway.
DDO didn't go far enough because there is an expectancy for healers to mititage damage for the fighter. I just read the Bartle blog, he's right, healers are just an extension of the tank's armor and is redundant.
Relative realism. Are you telling me you'd attack the guy shouting "your momma" jokes instead of the guy tossing fireballs that are incinerating your group?
Some people are very comfortable with the trinity paradigm. But I will try to answer your question personally.
It makes forming a group harder. No matter how many specs you give people, some people just don't want to tank or heal. By forcing groups to have a tank and healer, you make it harder to find groups. I don't think I need to show evidence of this. Look at every MMO that uses the trinity as it's core mechanic; there is always a shortage of tanks and healers (especially tanks).
It's also unrealistic. Taunts are unrealistic. Enemies should target the players that are the largest threat to them, meaning the guy who is killing them the most. Tanks do the least damage and therefore are the weakest threat yet taunts can keep mobs off the true threats. It is an unrealistic mechanic to unrealistic combat.
It's limiting. There are some variations but pretty much every encounter is a form of tank and spank. Remove the taunt and heal mechanic and then players would have to use tactical positioning and strategic resource management to fight. I think there would be more variations to combat.
I understand the notion of constraints or issues in relation to forming groups.
However, Im not sure how a thing like collision solves this. In my mind, removing stuff like healing and taunting, and the effects on possible mob/boss mechanics gives me visions of heavy kite fights or mass chaos in relation to getting people in and out from in front of the boss.
Other suggestions than collision might work better, but I think collision and trying to emulate "real life" combat mechanics might sound better than how they will actually pan out in a game.
And as for taunting being unrealistic, well someone else said it, in any game where magic or fanatasy is present, the notion that taunt is not realistic seems silly.
Some people are very comfortable with the trinity paradigm. But I will try to answer your question personally.
It makes forming a group harder. No matter how many specs you give people, some people just don't want to tank or heal. By forcing groups to have a tank and healer, you make it harder to find groups. I don't think I need to show evidence of this. Look at every MMO that uses the trinity as it's core mechanic; there is always a shortage of tanks and healers (especially tanks).
It's also unrealistic. Taunts are unrealistic. Enemies should target the players that are the largest threat to them, meaning the guy who is killing them the most. Tanks do the least damage and therefore are the weakest threat yet taunts can keep mobs off the true threats. It is an unrealistic mechanic to unrealistic combat.
It's limiting. There are some variations but pretty much every encounter is a form of tank and spank. Remove the taunt and heal mechanic and then players would have to use tactical positioning and strategic resource management to fight. I think there would be more variations to combat.
I understand the notion of constraints or issues in relation to forming groups.
However, Im not sure how a thing like collision solves this. In my mind, removing stuff like healing and taunting, and the effects on possible mob/boss mechanics gives me visions of heavy kite fights or mass chaos in relation to getting people in and out from in front of the boss.
Other suggestions than collision might work better, but I think collision and trying to emulate "real life" combat mechanics might sound better than how they will actually pan out in a game.
And as for taunting being unrealistic, well someone else said it, in any game where magic or fanatasy is present, the notion seems silly.
CD isn't the solution to everything but I think it would be a start.
Yeah, I could see kiting and chaos but I could also see complex strategy. I'll use PnP as an example again. The problem with MMOs is that constant healing is expected; it's part of damage mitigation. That wasn't the case in PnP. Fighters often completely avoided damage because their armor completely deflected the blow. If the blow went through, it usually did full damage. Healing was done in crisis situations; it was never used as a simple resource because healing was a scarce power. If you had to heal, you had to heal at the right times.
Mages and clerics could also take on mobs head on in PnP because they also had tools to beef up their defenses so even if the fighter went down, the rest of the party could keep fighting. In essence, everyone had off tank ability. I find it odd that if your tank gets killed in a fight, the party wipes. I'd love to see more encounters where even if some people fall in battle, there is still a reasonable chance to come out in victory.
Realism and unrealism is relative to the world. Sure it's unrealistic to cast fireballs but in a fantasy world, we assume it is realistic. I have yet to find any fantasy world where screaming insults grab more attention than someone tossing a deadly fireball at you.
Some people are very comfortable with the trinity paradigm. But I will try to answer your question personally.
It makes forming a group harder. No matter how many specs you give people, some people just don't want to tank or heal. By forcing groups to have a tank and healer, you make it harder to find groups. I don't think I need to show evidence of this. Look at every MMO that uses the trinity as it's core mechanic; there is always a shortage of tanks and healers (especially tanks).
It's also unrealistic. Taunts are unrealistic. Enemies should target the players that are the largest threat to them, meaning the guy who is killing them the most. Tanks do the least damage and therefore are the weakest threat yet taunts can keep mobs off the true threats. It is an unrealistic mechanic to unrealistic combat.
It's limiting. There are some variations but pretty much every encounter is a form of tank and spank. Remove the taunt and heal mechanic and then players would have to use tactical positioning and strategic resource management to fight. I think there would be more variations to combat.
In todays MMO's I'd have to say that the tools are already in place where grping is either done automatically via a dungeon finder tool or the system changes the gameplay to allow for a mishmash of classes to grp together to complete a task, where it isn't important that you have a tank/healer/dps or crowd control, so long as you have the numbers to fill the grp.
I don't believe the Holy Trinity is the problem at all, players are becoming more focused on thier own gameplay rather than community gameplay, ppl want to play an MMO on their own, and becuase of this they want to have all class abilities rolled into 1 character, thus bringing about the cries that the Holy Trinity isn't working.
I want to know my place in he game world, I NEED it to define my character, I don't want to do it all, I want my character to have limits, it's what drives me to find a grp to play alongside with, without that class definition I no longer need anyone else to support me or for me to support them, the only good that then comes from a grp would be the fact I can kill faster and perhaps have some conversation, but thats becoming a dying trait in grps aswell.
Hmm, I see your point but could "taúnting" not be seen as a form of magic, albeit in a more primal/rough sense?
In regards to relating to PnP, I must admit I dont have much experience in that area, but are most actions not determined by dice rolls?
If taunting is magical, then it is basically like a crowd control spell that mages use. But in the context of the games I've played with taunt, it's always described as yelling at the mob to acquire attention. It just seems silly to me. I understand it doesn't bother you but it always seemed contrived to me.
Well, MMOs use dice rolls to some degree. Like PnP though, you can alter the outcome by adding bonuses and penalties to your rolls. And I'm only citing PnP to offer up an alternative method.
In todays MMO's I'd have to say that the tools are already in place where grping is either done automatically via a dungeon finder tool or the system changes the gameplay to allow for a mishmash of classes to grp together to complete a task, where it isn't important that you have a tank/healer/dps or crowd control, so long as you have the numbers to fill the grp.
The tool is nice but there's still a problem. In WoW, tanks queue up instantly. Healers take about 5 minutes. DPS takes anywhere to 30 minutes to an hour. And WoW is a game that allows classes to have multiple specs (which doesn't really help unless you have the gear for that spec). So grouping is still an issue. People just don't like to tank and heal. Why keep it, especially since the mechanic is artificial?
Hmm, I see your point but could "taúnting" not be seen as a form of magic, albeit in a more primal/rough sense?
In regards to relating to PnP, I must admit I dont have much experience in that area, but are most actions not determined by dice rolls?
If taunting is magical, then it is basically like a crowd control spell that mages use. But in the context of the games I've played with taunt, it's always described as yelling at the mob to acquire attention. It just seems silly to me. I understand it doesn't bother you but it always seemed contrived to me.
Well, MMOs use dice rolls to some degree. Like PnP though, you can alter the outcome by adding bonuses and penalties to your rolls. And I'm only citing PnP to offer up an alternative method.
I understand, Im just trying to understand alternative viewpoints.
So far, my only experience outside of "trinity" mechanics, is GW2 and I do not find that in any way, shape or form enjoyable, only more confusing and irritating.
However there could be interesting alternatives utilizing collision, but I really has to be done well, and may only work in a specific setting. Hopefully advacement in technology will give us playable examples sooner rather than later.
I understand, Im just trying to understand alternative viewpoints.
So far, my only experience outside of "trinity" mechanics, is GW2 and I do not find that in any way, shape or form enjoyable, only more confusing and irritating.
However there could be interesting alternatives utilizing collision, but I really has to be done well, and may only work in a specific setting. Hopefully advacement in technology will give us playable examples sooner rather than later.
I wish GW2 grabbed my attention longer to try out their dungeons but I was utterly disappointed with the game. I have noticed a lot of complaints about the lack of structure in grouping. I don't know too much about how they did it other than knowing everyone can heal and help fallen comrades.
Bottlenecking, holding formation are just two off my head that could be utilized. But CD without taunts and limited healing might get too complex in today's MMO culture.
People are comfortable with the trinity design. People rarely enjoy change. So I understand why it dominates the market.
In adnd you relied on the GM not to focus fire on the clothies.
The mages also had person buffs spells, like Protection from arrows to help. Then at higher levels the mages became god-like.
In an mmo there isn't a person contoling the game, so you needed a taunt mechanic.
I get the feeling that the EQ/WOW combat system is so embedded in player thinking at this point that anything outside those game mechanics is simply alien.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Rhazmuz Only thing I know is that if GW2 represents the "alternative" to this trinity, I will take the trinity any day, any time.
I think the only way to remove trinity in MMOs is to have collision detection. It would have to be modified in some fashion as CD can lead to griefing if exploited but it is necessary if devs want to remove taunting from the game mechanic.
You're not alone in that view. See the Bartle link posted earlier in this thread.
Oh neat, I will. Thanks.
DDO has collision detection - it still has plate wearing classes with taunt skills, though. It's a 4 class game (heal, tank, damage, traps and doors).
I disagree that taunting isn't a real life mechanic. Taunting has started fightes for thousands of years. It's an assinine argument that "healing spells and fireball spells are realistic, but taunting that's crazy" anyway.
No one said provocation and goading wasn't real.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Personally, I dislike the trinity because it's an artificial construct. It's gamey and it breaks my sense of immersion. But I could say that about a great many tropes that MMO players have grown accustomed to. The whole genre needs rethinking, IMO. Hate on Guild Wars 2 if you like -- it's far from perfect -- but at least it tried something different.
In adnd you relied on the GM not to focus fire on the clothies.
The mages also had person buffs spells, like Protection from arrows to help. Then at higher levels the mages became god-like.
In an mmo there isn't a person contoling the game, so you needed a taunt mechanic.
Really? Hehe, my GMs always targeted the most dangerous and most vulnerable first.
Happened the same in every campaign I have played in, unless the enemies were dumb as a box of rocks and it would attack the nearest player. For the vulnerable to stay alive, it took them to use their ingenuity and the abilities they had. There have been many 1st level wizards that never made it to 2nd level.
I think the idea that you need some artificial taunting mechanic is ridiculous. Make the mobs go after who they would most likely go after based on hit points, damage output, heal output, and how close they are. Then give squishy characters like the rogue and wizard abilities that let them avoid getting hit. Whether it is a rogue's stealth, tumble, and climb walls, or a wizard's invisibility, levitation, and protection spells.
This is also where the idea of crowd control comes in. Give the ability to temporarily subdue multiple mobs and root and snare other mobs in place so the mobs are forced to attack those close by.
In adnd you relied on the GM not to focus fire on the clothies.
The mages also had person buffs spells, like Protection from arrows to help. Then at higher levels the mages became god-like.
In an mmo there isn't a person contoling the game, so you needed a taunt mechanic.
Really? Hehe, my GMs always targeted the most dangerous and most vulnerable first.
Happened the same in every campaign I have played in, unless the enemies were dumb as a box of rocks and it would attack the nearest player. For the vulnerable to stay a live, it took them to use their ingenuity and the abilities they had to stay alive. There have been many 1st level wizards that never made it to 2nd level.
I think the idea that you need some artificial taunting mechanic is ridiculous. Make the mobs go after who they would most likely go after based on hit points, damage output, heal output, and how close they are. Then give squishy characters like the rogue and wizard abilities that let them avoid getting hit. Whether it is a rogue's stealth, tumble, and climb walls, or a wizard's invisibility, levitation, and protection spells.
This is also where the idea of crowd control comes in. Give the ability to temporarily subdue multiple mobs and root and snare other mobs in place so the mobs are forced to attack those close by.
Yup. If the monster was just a beast, they just attacked what was in front of them unless someone was doing crazy damage and it hurt. Smarter monsters used tactics just like the players.
Heh, yeah, early levels were tough on wizards. And they didn't have a whole lot of spells. So many times I recall them just using their slings because that's all they could do. So sad. Early edition D&D thieves were also very squishy.
CC was critical. I mean how important was Sleep and Hold Person? Man, those were staples of magic users and clerics early on.
In todays MMO's I'd have to say that the tools are already in place where grping is either done automatically via a dungeon finder tool or the system changes the gameplay to allow for a mishmash of classes to grp together to complete a task, where it isn't important that you have a tank/healer/dps or crowd control, so long as you have the numbers to fill the grp.
The tool is nice but there's still a problem. In WoW, tanks queue up instantly. Healers take about 5 minutes. DPS takes anywhere to 30 minutes to an hour. And WoW is a game that allows classes to have multiple specs (which doesn't really help unless you have the gear for that spec). So grouping is still an issue. People just don't like to tank and heal. Why keep it, especially since the mechanic is artificial?
I don't think people really like to DPS as a role any more than tanking (maybe more than healing). I think the games' single player design rewards DPS classes and penalizes the other classers, so players gravititate towards DPS classes.
The solutions are simple to conceive. The first solution, is what EQ did to fairly good success - remove the ability to solo. This causes people to "force group" but allows them to play the playstile they like. EQ never did strike a balance though, there were too few clerics (not too few tanks, though, because people like to put on plate armor and beat the hell out of things). The problem was that clerics were basically heal bots.
The more elegant solution, is to make solo content that is designed to be conquered by the healers and tanks, and that the DPS cannot handle.
As long as you have a situation in which DPS classes can solo twice as fast to max level as tanks and healers, the vast majority of players are going to take the easy path and play DPS classes. I doubt it has anythig at all to do with "liking" the role. This can be quite clearly seen in WoW.
In EQ,the most popular classes were druids - because they could solo and teleport and run fast. The 2nd was probably necro, because they could solo the best. The third most popular class was warrior - because it's cool to be a warrior, despite their inability to solo.
The solutions are simple to conceive. The first solution, is what EQ did to fairly good success - remove the ability to solo. This causes people to "force group" but allows them to play the playstile they like.
*saddened*
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Comments
You're not alone in that view. See the Bartle link posted earlier in this thread.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
...other than all the people in this thread that already have.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Oh neat, I will. Thanks.
But why are people so averse to this "trinity"?
Because they dont want to be pidgeonholed? because they want to tank sometimes, heal sometimes etc?
Well isnt that more down to how character design and advacement is done, more than it is down to combat mechanics?
Look at a game like TSW where you can branch out and gain specs and abilities suited for different roles, in different situations?
Having tried both GW2 and normal "trinity" based games, I must admit I prefer games where I can understand the underlying mehcnaics, and learn how to control these steadily, as a tank for example, as compared to GW2 which for me always felt like agame where I had no clue what was going, who was targeted by the mob, and why I often would seem to lose half of my 26k hp as a somewhat beefy warrior.
DDO has collision detection - it still has plate wearing classes with taunt skills, though. It's a 4 class game (heal, tank, damage, traps and doors).
I disagree that taunting isn't a real life mechanic. Taunting has started fightes for thousands of years. It's an assinine argument that "healing spells and fireball spells are realistic, but taunting that's crazy" anyway.
Some people are very comfortable with the trinity paradigm. But I will try to answer your question personally.
It makes forming a group harder. No matter how many specs you give people, some people just don't want to tank or heal. By forcing groups to have a tank and healer, you make it harder to find groups. I don't think I need to show evidence of this. Look at every MMO that uses the trinity as it's core mechanic; there is always a shortage of tanks and healers (especially tanks).
It's also unrealistic. Taunts are unrealistic. Enemies should target the players that are the largest threat to them, meaning the guy who is killing them the most. Tanks do the least damage and therefore are the weakest threat yet taunts can keep mobs off the true threats. It is an unrealistic mechanic to unrealistic combat.
It's limiting. There are some variations but pretty much every encounter is a form of tank and spank. Remove the taunt and heal mechanic and then players would have to use tactical positioning and strategic resource management to fight. I think there would be more variations to combat.
DDO didn't go far enough because there is an expectancy for healers to mititage damage for the fighter. I just read the Bartle blog, he's right, healers are just an extension of the tank's armor and is redundant.
Relative realism. Are you telling me you'd attack the guy shouting "your momma" jokes instead of the guy tossing fireballs that are incinerating your group?
I understand the notion of constraints or issues in relation to forming groups.
However, Im not sure how a thing like collision solves this. In my mind, removing stuff like healing and taunting, and the effects on possible mob/boss mechanics gives me visions of heavy kite fights or mass chaos in relation to getting people in and out from in front of the boss.
Other suggestions than collision might work better, but I think collision and trying to emulate "real life" combat mechanics might sound better than how they will actually pan out in a game.
And as for taunting being unrealistic, well someone else said it, in any game where magic or fanatasy is present, the notion that taunt is not realistic seems silly.
CD isn't the solution to everything but I think it would be a start.
Yeah, I could see kiting and chaos but I could also see complex strategy. I'll use PnP as an example again. The problem with MMOs is that constant healing is expected; it's part of damage mitigation. That wasn't the case in PnP. Fighters often completely avoided damage because their armor completely deflected the blow. If the blow went through, it usually did full damage. Healing was done in crisis situations; it was never used as a simple resource because healing was a scarce power. If you had to heal, you had to heal at the right times.
Mages and clerics could also take on mobs head on in PnP because they also had tools to beef up their defenses so even if the fighter went down, the rest of the party could keep fighting. In essence, everyone had off tank ability. I find it odd that if your tank gets killed in a fight, the party wipes. I'd love to see more encounters where even if some people fall in battle, there is still a reasonable chance to come out in victory.
Realism and unrealism is relative to the world. Sure it's unrealistic to cast fireballs but in a fantasy world, we assume it is realistic. I have yet to find any fantasy world where screaming insults grab more attention than someone tossing a deadly fireball at you.
Hmm, I see your point but could "taúnting" not be seen as a form of magic, albeit in a more primal/rough sense?
In regards to relating to PnP, I must admit I dont have much experience in that area, but are most actions not determined by dice rolls?
In todays MMO's I'd have to say that the tools are already in place where grping is either done automatically via a dungeon finder tool or the system changes the gameplay to allow for a mishmash of classes to grp together to complete a task, where it isn't important that you have a tank/healer/dps or crowd control, so long as you have the numbers to fill the grp.
I don't believe the Holy Trinity is the problem at all, players are becoming more focused on thier own gameplay rather than community gameplay, ppl want to play an MMO on their own, and becuase of this they want to have all class abilities rolled into 1 character, thus bringing about the cries that the Holy Trinity isn't working.
I want to know my place in he game world, I NEED it to define my character, I don't want to do it all, I want my character to have limits, it's what drives me to find a grp to play alongside with, without that class definition I no longer need anyone else to support me or for me to support them, the only good that then comes from a grp would be the fact I can kill faster and perhaps have some conversation, but thats becoming a dying trait in grps aswell.
If taunting is magical, then it is basically like a crowd control spell that mages use. But in the context of the games I've played with taunt, it's always described as yelling at the mob to acquire attention. It just seems silly to me. I understand it doesn't bother you but it always seemed contrived to me.
Well, MMOs use dice rolls to some degree. Like PnP though, you can alter the outcome by adding bonuses and penalties to your rolls. And I'm only citing PnP to offer up an alternative method.
The tool is nice but there's still a problem. In WoW, tanks queue up instantly. Healers take about 5 minutes. DPS takes anywhere to 30 minutes to an hour. And WoW is a game that allows classes to have multiple specs (which doesn't really help unless you have the gear for that spec). So grouping is still an issue. People just don't like to tank and heal. Why keep it, especially since the mechanic is artificial?
I understand, Im just trying to understand alternative viewpoints.
So far, my only experience outside of "trinity" mechanics, is GW2 and I do not find that in any way, shape or form enjoyable, only more confusing and irritating.
However there could be interesting alternatives utilizing collision, but I really has to be done well, and may only work in a specific setting. Hopefully advacement in technology will give us playable examples sooner rather than later.
I wish GW2 grabbed my attention longer to try out their dungeons but I was utterly disappointed with the game. I have noticed a lot of complaints about the lack of structure in grouping. I don't know too much about how they did it other than knowing everyone can heal and help fallen comrades.
Bottlenecking, holding formation are just two off my head that could be utilized. But CD without taunts and limited healing might get too complex in today's MMO culture.
People are comfortable with the trinity design. People rarely enjoy change. So I understand why it dominates the market.
In adnd you relied on the GM not to focus fire on the clothies.
The mages also had person buffs spells, like Protection from arrows to help. Then at higher levels the mages became god-like.
In an mmo there isn't a person contoling the game, so you needed a taunt mechanic.
Really? Hehe, my GMs always targeted the most dangerous and most vulnerable first.
I get the feeling that the EQ/WOW combat system is so embedded in player thinking at this point that anything outside those game mechanics is simply alien.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
No one said provocation and goading wasn't real.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Happened the same in every campaign I have played in, unless the enemies were dumb as a box of rocks and it would attack the nearest player. For the vulnerable to stay alive, it took them to use their ingenuity and the abilities they had. There have been many 1st level wizards that never made it to 2nd level.
I think the idea that you need some artificial taunting mechanic is ridiculous. Make the mobs go after who they would most likely go after based on hit points, damage output, heal output, and how close they are. Then give squishy characters like the rogue and wizard abilities that let them avoid getting hit. Whether it is a rogue's stealth, tumble, and climb walls, or a wizard's invisibility, levitation, and protection spells.
This is also where the idea of crowd control comes in. Give the ability to temporarily subdue multiple mobs and root and snare other mobs in place so the mobs are forced to attack those close by.
Yup. If the monster was just a beast, they just attacked what was in front of them unless someone was doing crazy damage and it hurt. Smarter monsters used tactics just like the players.
Heh, yeah, early levels were tough on wizards. And they didn't have a whole lot of spells. So many times I recall them just using their slings because that's all they could do. So sad. Early edition D&D thieves were also very squishy.
CC was critical. I mean how important was Sleep and Hold Person? Man, those were staples of magic users and clerics early on.
I don't think people really like to DPS as a role any more than tanking (maybe more than healing). I think the games' single player design rewards DPS classes and penalizes the other classers, so players gravititate towards DPS classes.
The solutions are simple to conceive. The first solution, is what EQ did to fairly good success - remove the ability to solo. This causes people to "force group" but allows them to play the playstile they like. EQ never did strike a balance though, there were too few clerics (not too few tanks, though, because people like to put on plate armor and beat the hell out of things). The problem was that clerics were basically heal bots.
The more elegant solution, is to make solo content that is designed to be conquered by the healers and tanks, and that the DPS cannot handle.
As long as you have a situation in which DPS classes can solo twice as fast to max level as tanks and healers, the vast majority of players are going to take the easy path and play DPS classes. I doubt it has anythig at all to do with "liking" the role. This can be quite clearly seen in WoW.
In EQ,the most popular classes were druids - because they could solo and teleport and run fast. The 2nd was probably necro, because they could solo the best. The third most popular class was warrior - because it's cool to be a warrior, despite their inability to solo.
*saddened*
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre