Howdy, Stranger!

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

So who decided that the Holy Trinity of class dynamics was a bad thing?

1356714

Comments

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,807
    Originally posted by Volkon
    Originally posted by Brenelael
    Originally posted by botrytis

    Sorry - has nothing to do with solo-friendly (that is a red herring argument). It has to do with the AI getting more complex with mobs and the set roles of the Trinity being limiting (play-wise for players). There is noting inherently wrong with the Trinity except players do prefer what is more comfortable to them rather than trying something new.

     

    The trinity was of a time when the MOB AI was limited (all they could do was increase XP of the mob or give them one strong attack, buff, debuff, etc). AI's can be more complex and there are fights in GW2, for example in higher  level Fractals, where a Trinity group would be absolutely wiped out with one hit.

    Um... No, it's called a personal opinion.

     

    I find it very hard to believe that a mob that could wipe a trinity group in one hit wouldn't do the same to any other type of group. This has nothing to do with mob AI and everything to do with making group dynamics a thing of the past.

     

    Bren

     

    I'm afraid he's right Bren. Let's put it this way... if the AI is smart enough to not be taunted and kill the "healer" first, what happens to your trinity?

    This of course introduces another set of issues, where the mobs have to be able to account for the weakest member of a group. Which usually means toning down the bosses or introducing other mechanics such as in GW2 having the boss stay back sending out wave after wave of trash mobs while the boss uses AOEs and fears. You have this baddass looking boss who fights pathetically. Because you can't have a badass boss that actually hits like one. But Let's look at your question a bit. What if the mobs can start taking down specific players? This is going to hurt player's ability to coordinate and come up with strategy ahead of time. How can you anticipate the unknown?  I think MMO AI technology has always been better than what we have seen for years. I think the weakest link in the chain, are the players. I seriously doubt players will adapt well to AI without the encounter degrading into a free for all zerg fest. If you remove the Trinity, you still need a way for players to be able to adapt to the dynamic flow of the NPCs and for the players to be able to take control over the situation and handle it in an orderly fashion. But that brings up the next issue. Appealing to the masses. SoE wants to branch out into new demographics with EQN. And by the looks of it, quite possibly the PS4 markets. Which is fine. But millions of players means more tuning for the lower end of the skill sets. Make it to hard and they won't play. So where does this leave SoE? Let's hope their AI is really REALLY good and can account for all this.

     

  • FoomerangFoomerang Member UncommonPosts: 5,619

    I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but honestly I think half of it was pc gamers who had no clue what action combat was up until about 2 years ago. It was new and exciting to them and so proclaimed anything else as awful. The other half was console gamers who never played an mmo before and were unwilling to let go of their twitchy habits and demanded an entire genre be changed to fit their preferences.

  • UmbroodUmbrood Member UncommonPosts: 1,809

    Come on people, you do not need to be a master observer of the human nature to realise why these things are as they are!

     

    Easily accessible roles?

    Check!

    Easily accessible career paths?

    Check!

    Easily understood gear progression?

    Check!

     

    Nothing wrong with none of the above, certainly not if your aim is to adher to the most amount of people you possibly can!

     

    But, given that the price to develop is the same, ( and that is 100M$+ at this point ), you can not fault companies for trying to get a refund on their investment.

     

    Not to say that an completely outside the box MMO would not work, but none would risk that.

     

    Minecraft is a splendid example, tweak that into an MMO, ( NOT FKING JAVA ), give the power to the players, US!

     

    You can not have complexity when you have cyber Cheldons doing all the math for you, separate Pv'E and PvP entirely, let the best man win, always!

     

    Sorry for spelling errors and whatnot, I are intoxicated!

     

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Originally posted by Jerek_

    I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by maplestone
    Originally posted by cheyane

    I hate to say this even though I have loved playing a healer in many games but in Everquest I remember enchanters in guilds would hold them hostage.

    Thank you for this - I'm curious about the moments/events people experienced where they first started to notice they didn't like trinities.

    I think there's a greater appreciation for the healer in some non-trinity alternatives because, based on the design of the game, it was important to know where the healer was and keep them safe. Here are some examples from older MMOS:

    In UO, the healer of note in larger battles was the one who was able to resurrect team mates. The NPC healers would almost certainly be camped, so without your own healer, you could end up in a wipe where everyone loses everything, in PvP, PvE, or (in the case of dungeons) both at the same time. Many times, that person would be well beyond the enemy's range or safely tucked away in a house somewhere.

    In AC, with player collision detection, you have to actively block the mobs from getting to your back ranks, and the more that back rank is helping, the more mobs want to tear them apart. :)

     

    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

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Member RarePosts: 14,247
    Originally posted by Foomerang

    I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but honestly I think half of it was pc gamers who had no clue what action combat was up until about 2 years ago. It was new and exciting to them and so proclaimed anything else as awful. The other half was console gamers who never played an mmo before and were unwilling to let go of their twitchy habits and demanded an entire genre be changed to fit their preferences.

    You're overlooking all the people that have played MMO other than Everquest prior to WOW's release and non-EQ/WOW's after who have tried and like other combat/mob alternatives.

     

    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

  • VengerVenger Member UncommonPosts: 1,309

    The core idea behind the trinity isn't bad.  There will always be classes that take hits and those that heal hits.  What went wrong is developers lacked any true imagination used the trinity as a crutch when designing classes.  

  • FoomerangFoomerang Member UncommonPosts: 5,619


    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by Foomerang I know I'm gonna get flamed for this, but honestly I think half of it was pc gamers who had no clue what action combat was up until about 2 years ago. It was new and exciting to them and so proclaimed anything else as awful. The other half was console gamers who never played an mmo before and were unwilling to let go of their twitchy habits and demanded an entire genre be changed to fit their preferences.
    You're overlooking all the people that have played MMO other than Everquest prior to WOW's release and non-EQ/WOW's after who have tried and like other combat/mob alternatives.

     



    that and all the people who hate looking for groups
  • aesperusaesperus Member UncommonPosts: 5,135
    Originally posted by Pr0tag0ni5t

    I have been reading a lot recently about how the 'holy trinity' needs to disappear from mmo's. I know the idea has been tossed around for years but never in such force. Now, developers and games have started to make the shift. 

    I guess my question is: Is this the problem with MMO's today, the Holy Trinity, and by eliminating it will the MMO's be better?

    It's been explained to death, but here goes round.. what round of this discussion are we on? Anyways.

    First off, there's no need to find blame on this. This isn't something that you can just point to someone and say 'it's that guys fault! He's the reason people don't wanna make trinity games anymore!' Doesn't work like that.

    That said, developers & players alike have been discussing the many problems with the trinity system for almost a decade. It's only recently (within the passed year) that we are finally getting some games that don't involve a trinity, and it's being blown way out of proportion. Trinity games are still (currently) the dominant MMO on the market, by quite a large margin. And yet, some people are treating this like the 'last stand' of the trinity mindset.

    So what are the problems with the trinity?

    1) It caters to fairly simplistic combat. Fights revolve around a very 1-dimensional mechanic (threat), and this limits the class dynamic by quite a bit.

    2) It puts far too much emphasis on the 2 least played classes. The tank, and the healer. While the trinity is great for people who enjoy playing a tank or healer, most players don't. These two classes practically get treated like royalty, because you simply can't progress in the game without them. They are essential, and often can be hard to get in your group. Yes there have been progression guilds that make this easier, but it just puts even more pressure on the tank / healer. He HAS to be there for the big raid, everything else (real life or not) is secondary!

    3) The trinity is based off primitive / dated AI. This goes back to the 1-dimensional threat mechanic. People are tired of fighting enemies that behave, well, like idiots. Anyone with half a brain knows that if you were the raid boss, you would say 'to hell with the tank, I'm taking out that guy shooting meteors at my face!' or 'that healer's gotta die first'. Something along those lines. However that's exactly the opposite of how trinity combat works. Because it can't. This also leads to the next problem:

    4) PvP. With a trinity system, tanks are often left out in the cold when it comes to PvP. This is because they are mostly useless outside of their extremely artificial threat mechanic. Which doesn't work in PvP. A few games (like WAR) have experimented with ways to fix this, but it's always been a problem. Another one being that often the team w/ the healers wins, because of how powerful the heals get. It's also not uncommon to run into extremely boring fights, where no one dies, because you just can't outdamage the healing.

    5) Que times. In trinity games most people (non tank / healers) have to wait a LONG time to get into a group if they wanna run a dungeon or something. This just gets worse as games age and people leave to play other games.

    I could go on, but I think you get the idea. And this post is already passed the length, where most people stop reading.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 7,979

    Yes, trinity is very "basic" and "easy" in the most simple of encounter designs:

    Tank holds aggro, prevents other players from taking damage, uses skills to reduce the damage they take.

    Healer heals tank, heals random damage to others and self.

    DPS nukes down the mob(s), tries to avoid taking damage so the healer can focus on the tank and not OOM.

     

    But beyond a few encounters here and there in low level instances or specific "gear check" tank n' spank fights - how often is a boss fight a simple tank n' spank?!

    Have predictable roles and situations allows the encounter designers to invent and implement crazy complex and  fun challenges that play to the strengths of the system, testing both the individual players skill at playing their chosen role, and the overall communication and coordination of the group as a whole.

    Or, they can specifically design mechanics that change or alter these predictable roles and situations, adding further variety and enjoyment to an encounter.

     

  • GregorMcgregorGregorMcgregor Member UncommonPosts: 250
    Originally posted by Pr0tag0ni5t

    I have been reading a lot recently about how the 'holy trinity' needs to disappear from mmo's. I know the idea has been tossed around for years but never in such force. Now, developers and games have started to make the shift. 

    I guess my question is: Is this the problem with MMO's today, the Holy Trinity, and by eliminating it will the MMO's be better?

     

    It's okay. There was a poll on here some months back over the Trinity's popularity or not... the For votes won by about 65%, the other 35% went back to Mario Wars 2. ;)

    No trials. No tricks. No traps. No EU-RP server. NO THANKS!

    image

    ...10% Benevolence, 90% Arrogance in my case!
  • KuppaKuppa Member UncommonPosts: 3,292
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    image


    image

  • maplestonemaplestone Member UncommonPosts: 3,099
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    I think there's a greater appreciation for the healer in some non-trinity alternatives because, based on the design of the game, it was important to know where the healer was and keep them safe.

     

    Was noticing you didn't care where the healer was the very first time you uncomfortable with a trinity?  Or is it a conclusion you've come to later?

    ( none of the arguments popping up or examples point to in any of these threads are news to me and I have no strong opinions about trinities one way or another ... if I'm going to understand the subject more, I feel I need to better understand the range of individual preferences and those first raw moments where people notice they are not entirely comfortable with the status quo in whatever games they are playing )

  • BadSpockBadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 7,979
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    Their reward is usually much, much faster and easier time questing.

    Also-

    People complain about having to wait for a tank or healer - roll a tank or healer!

    But, then they might actually have to pay attention, know how to play their class, and not be terribad?

    DPS tends to draw in the "wheee pew pew big numbers and phat loots!" types.

    They could use a lesson or two in patience, IMO.

    It was never really a problem back in the day when DPS was expected to do things like buff, debuff, CC, pull, kite, offheal, offtank etc. - it was much more of a defined role - almost a support role in itself.

    Most people only know Trinity in terms of WoW, which ruined their own mechanics a long, long time ago.

    Real, actually GOOD trinity based combat mechanics are still awesome and challenging / rewarding and fun.

  • Ramonski7Ramonski7 Member UncommonPosts: 2,662
    Originally posted by Brenelael

    It has to do with making MMOs even more solo friendly. If there is no interdependence between classes than there is no need to group at all except for raiding. This has taken MMOs even further down the road to single player games. The really sad part of it is it seems to be what the majority of today's MMO gamers want so they will continue to add mechanics that will make MMO even more single player. In today's MMOs the vast majority of the content is designed for a single player to accomplish. Isn't that the very definition of a single player game? image

     

    Bren

    FALSE

    Elimination of select class dependency is one thing, this is the whole basis of me wanting to see the end of the traditional trinity. But anyone who is for the traditional trinity seems to sees it as calling for the elimination of group dynamics. Which is utterly false! I want party dynamics, I love group play. Hell FFXI used the trinity on a scale that allowed players to bring more than one set of skills to the table. What if EQN's system played out accordingly:

     

    You have 4 players with various classes and weapons at their disposal. Each has a sword and shield set, a bow, a mace and a staff. Players 1-3 all have warrior, paladin, ranger and cleric classes unlock. Player 4 has druid, ranger, warrior and mage unlocked. So they have to determine who going to play what roles.

     

    • Player 1---->sword/shield + warrior = tank
    • Player 2---->bow + ranger = dps
    • Player 3---->mace/shield + paladin = support
    • Player 4----> staff + druid = healer

    So say everyone is doing fine and player 4 decides to leave. Players 1-3 start looking for a replacement and find that healers are in short supply so player 2 decides to switch to cleric. So they find another player with the same sets of classes and weapons as player 4 and they switch the new party as follows:

     

    • Player 1--->sword/shield + paladin = tank
    • Player 2---->mace/shield + cleric = healer
    • Player 3--->staff + cleric = support
    • Player 5---->staff + mage =dps
    In both scenarios what we have is a elimination of class dependency but a strong need for all players, especially those that are versatile.

     

     

    ***PS this is just a example of how things could be...there could be many roles for players to play.

    image
    "Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas."

  • PAL-18PAL-18 Member UncommonPosts: 844
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    Naah game just needs more depth.

    For example 1st dungeon in Anarchy Online called Subway (lvl limit 24) used to be quite hard place for tank healer and dps who were not really prepared and still level 1 trader soloed it who was prepared.

    Its not pure trinity game,its improved trinity ,can drain monsters skills,drain health,root,snare,calm,charm,damage shields ,damage absorbs,movement speed,attack speed,dodges,evades and all that kind of cool things.

     

     

    So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
    **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **

  • KuppaKuppa Member UncommonPosts: 3,292
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    Their reward is usually much, much faster and easier time questing.

    Also-

    People complain about having to wait for a tank or healer - roll a tank or healer!

    But, then they might actually have to pay attention, know how to play their class, and not be terribad?

    DPS tends to draw in the "wheee pew pew big numbers and phat loots!" types.

    They could use a lesson or two in patience, IMO.

    It was never really a problem back in the day when DPS was expected to do things like buff, debuff, CC, pull, kite, offheal, offtank etc. - it was much more of a defined role - almost a support role in itself.

    Most people only know Trinity in terms of WoW, which ruined their own mechanics a long, long time ago.

    Real, actually GOOD trinity based combat mechanics are still awesome and challenging / rewarding and fun.

    Forcing people to play tank or healer is not the answer. Some people do want to play a dps and having to put up with the elitism of the trinity is ridiculous.

     

    The trinity is fun and well defined but it causes this problem which I think is the main reason why it's getting looked at. It's not perfect.

    image


    image

  • nolic1nolic1 Member UncommonPosts: 715
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by Pr0tag0ni5t

    I have been reading a lot recently about how the 'holy trinity' needs to disappear from mmo's. I know the idea has been tossed around for years but never in such force. Now, developers and games have started to make the shift. 

    I guess my question is: Is this the problem with MMO's today, the Holy Trinity, and by eliminating it will the MMO's be better?

    It's been explained to death, but here goes round.. what round of this discussion are we on? Anyways.

    First off, there's no need to find blame on this. This isn't something that you can just point to someone and say 'it's that guys fault! He's the reason people don't wanna make trinity games anymore!' Doesn't work like that.

    That said, developers & players alike have been discussing the many problems with the trinity system for almost a decade. It's only recently (within the passed year) that we are finally getting some games that don't involve a trinity, and it's being blown way out of proportion. Trinity games are still (currently) the dominant MMO on the market, by quite a large margin. And yet, some people are treating this like the 'last stand' of the trinity mindset.

    So what are the problems with the trinity?

    1) It caters to fairly simplistic combat. Fights revolve around a very 1-dimensional mechanic (threat), and this limits the class dynamic by quite a bit.

    2) It puts far too much emphasis on the 2 least played classes. The tank, and the healer. While the trinity is great for people who enjoy playing a tank or healer, most players don't. These two classes practically get treated like royalty, because you simply can't progress in the game without them. They are essential, and often can be hard to get in your group. Yes there have been progression guilds that make this easier, but it just puts even more pressure on the tank / healer. He HAS to be there for the big raid, everything else (real life or not) is secondary!

    3) The trinity is based off primitive / dated AI. This goes back to the 1-dimensional threat mechanic. People are tired of fighting enemies that behave, well, like idiots. Anyone with half a brain knows that if you were the raid boss, you would say 'to hell with the tank, I'm taking out that guy shooting meteors at my face!' or 'that healer's gotta die first'. Something along those lines. However that's exactly the opposite of how trinity combat works. Because it can't. This also leads to the next problem:

    4) PvP. With a trinity system, tanks are often left out in the cold when it comes to PvP. This is because they are mostly useless outside of their extremely artificial threat mechanic. Which doesn't work in PvP. A few games (like WAR) have experimented with ways to fix this, but it's always been a problem. Another one being that often the team w/ the healers wins, because of how powerful the heals get. It's also not uncommon to run into extremely boring fights, where no one dies, because you just can't outdamage the healing.

    5) Que times. In trinity games most people (non tank / healers) have to wait a LONG time to get into a group if they wanna run a dungeon or something. This just gets worse as games age and people leave to play other games.

    I could go on, but I think you get the idea. And this post is already passed the length, where most people stop reading.

    I have to agree here with the above this is one of the main reasons besides it became a comfort zone to players to want this who wouldn't. But its time for change yeah GW2 has a zergy feel but now that players have panned out and you dont have a  zerg army leading you I find the game to be at the right difficulty for new and vet players and it works for the most part. But its not perfect and no game will be not to every one and this is where another factor comes to play everyone is different so everyones opinion is to so to alot GW2 is lame to others its not. To some Wow is candy land while to others not. To many UO is just super atari and lame but to some its not point is with so many more players then in the past you can not make everyone happy so you have to find a medium to make it feel ok for all. And thats what I see happing in todays mmo's companys trying to find that medium that works for all but it still wont work for some. So now we have alot of old timers or vets who have grown accustom to the trinity but they want change but when change happens they dont like it cause it takes them out of there comfort zone of what they feel is right but its really not right why cant the boss attack someone who just crit him causing his life to drop faster I know if I was that boss I would then if I seem someone try to heal someone to keep that one in a fight he would have to be hurt to and so on.

    Point is no one like change cause change is different and it takes people out of there comfort zone. It no different in real life take someone out of what there used to and put them in something new and the change can drive then to insanity. And most here have been in that comfort zone for 20 years some less but its still that same.

    Sherman's Gaming

    Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online

    Channel:http://https//www.youtube.com/channel/UCrgYNgpFTRAl4XWz31o2emw

  • MothanosMothanos Member UncommonPosts: 1,910


    Originally posted by Volkon
    Originally posted by Brenelael Originally posted by botrytis Sorry - has nothing to do with solo-friendly (that is a red herring argument). It has to do with the AI getting more complex with mobs and the set roles of the Trinity being limiting (play-wise for players). There is noting inherently wrong with the Trinity except players do prefer what is more comfortable to them rather than trying something new.   The trinity was of a time when the MOB AI was limited (all they could do was increase XP of the mob or give them one strong attack, buff, debuff, etc). AI's can be more complex and there are fights in GW2, for example in higher  level Fractals, where a Trinity group would be absolutely wiped out with one hit.
    Um... No, it's called a personal opinion.   I find it very hard to believe that a mob that could wipe a trinity group in one hit wouldn't do the same to any other type of group. This has nothing to do with mob AI and everything to do with making group dynamics a thing of the past.   Bren
     

    I'm afraid he's right Bren. Let's put it this way... if the AI is smart enough to not be taunted and kill the "healer" first, what happens to your trinity?



    You do all that you can to protect your healer, as he is your life line.
    Without healers and tank it becomes single player faceroll dps.
    What tactics do you need without a healer tank ?

    dodge ?
    Stun ?
    Cooldown management ?

    All those things work in both trinity / non trinity.


    I have seen the mess without healers and tanks in GW2 hardmode dungeons.
    Its was a horrible system that once again created fotm or you woulnt be accepted in a group for hardmore dungeons.

    So far EQN doesnt have raids / dungeons ?
    All dynamic events....just like Guildwars 2, even if they managed to improve mob AI significantly to the point noobs cant solo mobs, becuase lets face it thats what Advanced AI needs to do, it needs to beat you ! right ?

    Now without healers or tanks you might pull off a kill on a orc if you can play action rpg's on a good level.
    Like PvP for example, but what about the poor people who plain suck at this twitch action rpg combat ?

    personaly i dont give a damn about them, i can pull my own weight, i learned alot when playing mmo's and have decent pvp skills.
    I prefered to play healer or tanks in pve and pvp.

    But as EQN doesnt have defined classes and all classes are basicly dps like in GW2, but with advanced AI i am realy curious to see how this is going to pan out.

    I can tell you this, if its to hard people quit, if its similar to GW2 people quit, if its to easy people quit,

    A good tank or healer could carry groups and raids.
    even the noob player standing in the back spamming 1 or 2 skills.

    EQN is blazing from the empire state building they have extremely advanced AI, never seen before, smart decision making AI.

    I do not believe this claim, seriously.....
    It means you will be facing "pvp players" with good and or bad skills and decision making.

    It wont work in a game with no healer or tank.

    I can be wrong, but i believe it when i played it.
    But in the meantime i see GW2 version 2.0 event zerging.

  • eric_w66eric_w66 Member UncommonPosts: 1,006
    Originally posted by aspekx

    exactly, i keep hearing this 'solo friendly' line which just seems to be pure silliness.

     

    i typically do not play an mmo anymore unless i have people to play with and by with i don't mean VOIP.

     

    and yet! i am opposed to a trinity system being the sole means of dealing with a combat encounter.

     

    for me this is due to two reasons:

    1. boredom.

    2. being old school. and by old school i mean older than EQ1 school. like tabletop rpgs where there were no such things as 'taunts' or 'aggro management'; where a combat encounter had to do with a group's ability to strategize and work together and the "AI" was an actual human roleplaying the opposite side of the encounter.

     

    i just find the previous Trinity system restricting. yes it has its uses in game mechanics, but as mentioned by the EQN team it is based in the concept of extremely limited means of dealing with online, ingame combat encounters. and finally, this is beginning to change, the technology as well as the coding power is catching up.

    I have played played tabletop RPG's since about 1980, and in every one, the trinity has existed. Some more obvious than others, but the tank/healer concept is still there.

    D&D: Fighter/Cleric/Rogue(or mage) was the base you had to start with, or you had a DM that was super nice and never wounded your characters, or handed out healing potions like candy.

    Shadowrun: While DocWagon existed, that was a last resort. Shamans/mages were both DPS and heals, and everyone could carry little med packs, but you still had the street samurai as tanks, and the squishies as damage/heals.

    Earthdawn... Rifts.... Rolemaster....  Danger International...

     

    And as for "taunts", D&D has them right now, and in the original, the warrior taunted by virtue of being in front. You try to pass him by to get at the cleric, you get chopped into bits (hopefully). And of course, Clerics in D&D were mail/plate clad as well, and could take a beating nearly as well as the warrior. Mages... well... they were squishy until they got a few levels into them.

  • BadSpockBadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 7,979
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    Originally posted by BadSpock
    Originally posted by Kuppa
    The big problem with the trinity is not the trinity itself. It's how it creates issues for grouping. LF Healer, LF tank. With the trinity you get the issue that most want to play dps and only some like to play healer and tank. Since most players are dps you get a ton of people that complain about this approach. 

    Most people only know Trinity in terms of WoW, which ruined their own mechanics a long, long time ago.

    Real, actually GOOD trinity based combat mechanics are still awesome and challenging / rewarding and fun.

    Forcing people to play tank or healer is not the answer. Some people do want to play a dps and having to put up with the elitism of the trinity is ridiculous.

    The trinity is fun and well defined but it causes this problem which I think is the main reason why it's getting looked at. It's not perfect.

    There isn't a problem, is what I'm saying.

    Typical encounter design in a trinity-based system requires more if not usually double or triple the number of DPS as Tanks/Healers - for a reason.

    The reward for playing a less popular yet highly desired role is = easier/faster access to group content

    The reward for playing the more popular yet less desired role = easier/faster access to solo play (and generally also PvP)

    Trade offs are a good thing.

    Choice and opportunity cost are a good thing.

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon Member EpicPosts: 27,773
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

    Only in the old days. Obviously player interdependency is not that desirable for most .. otherwise it would not be eroded through the years.

    MMORPG is progressing, like all other genre. Things change.

     

  • MarkusrindMarkusrind Member Posts: 359
    Originally posted by eric_w66

    I have played played tabletop RPG's since about 1980, and in every one, the trinity has existed. Some more obvious than others, but the tank/healer concept is still there.

    We must have played different games then because there was no tank at all. Healer yes but no tank. In fact the Cleric was often on the frint line side by side with the fighter because they could both use heavy plate armour and had good AC.

    If you had a high dex rogue they could handle a fight same as a fighter.

    If you had a mage with a few good combat spells and defensive spells thhey could handle a fight like any other character.

    Hell for years I have been waiting for MMO's to get to a place where they work similar to a tabletop RPG rather then the forced trinity mechanics...and we might finally be there!

    D&D: Fighter/Cleric/Rogue(or mage) was the base you had to start with, or you had a DM that was super nice and never wounded your characters, or handed out healing potions like candy.

    Shadowrun: While DocWagon existed, that was a last resort. Shamans/mages were both DPS and heals, and everyone could carry little med packs, but you still had the street samurai as tanks, and the squishies as damage/heals.

    Earthdawn... Rifts.... Rolemaster....  Danger International...

     

    And as for "taunts", D&D has them right now, and in the original, the warrior taunted by virtue of being in front. You try to pass him by to get at the cleric, you get chopped into bits (hopefully). And of course, Clerics in D&D were mail/plate clad as well, and could take a beating nearly as well as the warrior. Mages... well... they were squishy until they got a few levels into them.

    So your argument is that in D&D there were taunts...except they were positioning yourself in the way of anyone trying to get the the healer rather then an actual taunt....lol.

    That is exactly what a non trinity system promotes...situational awareness, positional tactics, woking as a group....

  • BadSpockBadSpock Member UncommonPosts: 7,979
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by BadSpock

    Player interdependency is what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG, truth be told.

    Only in the old days. Obviously player interdependency is not that desirable for most .. otherwise it would not be eroded through the years.

    MMORPG is progressing, like all other genre. Things change.

    Hasn't eroded at all.

    They've just moved it from the entire game to just end game for the sake of accessibility.

    PvP, high level PvE, no matter the game, all requires groups and other players.

    GW2, all PvP is group content - SPvP and WvW.

    All high level PvE is group focused, even if not fully structured.

    WoW, end game is still very, very forced group.

    I could go on and on.

    Devs just realized they could sink their teeth into a player through solo content before guiding them into forced grouping.

    Players these days in games like GW2 or WoW with LFR might not know the other group members they are dependent on, but they are just as dependent on them.

  • ArclanArclan Member UncommonPosts: 1,550

    Apparently more than a few poeple lack the social/networking skills to put together a functional group, so they want the ability to group with (and succeed) with any slob they bump into on LFD.

    Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
    In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit

  • Joseph_KerrJoseph_Kerr Member RarePosts: 1,112
    The genre is simply evolving and I dont think that means all mmos will change but I do think it means there will be more variety for players and I dont see that being a bad thing.
Sign In or Register to comment.