Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: The Holy Trinity is Great
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
Many MMOs "require" the Holy Trinity in order to complete end-game content. It's been a hot topic of discussion among players for a long time, most players calling for its banishment. In today's Devil's Advocate, MMORPG.com Community Manager Mike Bitton begs to differ and says that there's nothing wrong with the Holy Trinity and that those in opposition to it are all wet. Check it out and then leave your thoughts in the comments.
The ‘Holy Trinity’ paradigm requires that groups consist of DPS, healers, and tanks. The trinity has long been considered one of the major issues of MMO design, but it became even more prevalent with the launch of games like World of Warcraft. Since then, MMOs have taken a considerable turn towards hybridization, with what seems like every successive game emphasizing the flexibility players can have with their class choices and roles. No longer will we have to focus singularly on DPS, or tanking, or healing.
Read more of Mike Bitton's The Devil's Advocate: The Holy Trinity is Great.
)
Comments
Just because they will maintain the ability to tank doesn’t mean 90% of DPS players will do so. The problem with the trinity is that it is a flawed system in need of replacement. I liked being a tank as much as any other person of the same mental type(slightly insane with a constant need to be at the front keeping everyone safe) but even i admit is was a bitch of a job because eventually people get cross because they exceeded the limits of both the tanks skill & the class he played. That’s not avoidable and eventually that wears down a tank to quit or take a loooooooong break before his next tour of "fuck you". This causes raids and dungeons to grind to a halt because you might not be able to get the tank or off tank ready due to burn out. That limits everyone’s fun by skipping an event. Removal of the trinity or replacement alleviates that issue & as seen in Global Agenda the trinity doesn’t seem to function outside the standard hotkey method.
Want to get past hotkeys? drop the trinity and see where our evolution takes us.
It is best for the industry the MMO throne remains an dusty empty seat never to be filled.
Free your mind and your ass will follow. The unholy trinity is the result of lazy game design that refused to evolve. There's still aggro in GW2, how the players deal with it is changing for the better (IMO). It will be easier to group up because you won't have to wait for a special snowflake to manage aggro or heal.
I remember in the first EQ how we all depended on others to do their job and to do it well. Being a druid (Jack of ll trades in EQ) I was pretty much dependend on my self, but was wanted by everyone for my teleporting skills.
Being a tank, I was infront of the line pulling and depending on the healer to keep me alive and I to keep mosnters of him....
Every class had a role in one way or another. Today in EQ just about everyone can solo blues. Druids ar eno longer needed, they have to many ways for people to get back and forth with..and I lost interest in the game.
I totally agree, they are making games where people pretty much have to depend on them selves instead of the community.
http://imageshack.us/a/img543/1239/feralbanner3.jpg
as far as the other "Evolving" comments....todays gamers want everything done in a snap of their fingers and with out work. They can wait for the healer to get full mana before they start trying to take down the mob, so they call it lazy game design? I think its brilliant to work in teams.
http://imageshack.us/a/img543/1239/feralbanner3.jpg
Your last paragraph points it out: the holy trinity exists merely because of artificial aggro-mechanics for npcs.
the "tank" dude, which in your imagination is supposed to be a mighty warrior, is nothing but a loudmouth (taunttaunttaunt) in a steelcan (mitigation)
--> boring
your dps-guy, which in your imagination is supposed to be a mighty mage or a berserker, is a glass cannon, that falls apart if npcs only scowl at him
--> boring
your healer is service-personell with a masochistic helper-syndrome who is a helpless victim when he get's slapped
--> boring and frustrating
you really want to tell me that this is the very top of the evolution of mmo game design? i beg to differ
that trinity is some sort of artificial bullcrap you see in pvp, since taunt does not work on PCs -> and thus the healer dies first, then the dps and the tank get's ignored because he is not dangerous without the other 2
after so many hours it eventually gets boring to fight against stupid automatons that are driven by an aggrolist and not the slightest notion of AI. no matter how challenging it might be in terms of npc-damage, hp, numbers, loot etc.
i remember from my wow days as a holy priest, how incredibly boring and unrewarding it felt to be in a raid. for hours you don't see anything else than healthbars. for you the game is about making short yellow and red healthbars into longer green healthbars. tetris is more exiting than that.
also you talk about loot drama, if all classes is hybrid. that shows what a narrow tunnel perspective you have on the concept of mmos. to you it's all about raids and gear. pshh. maybe for 13years old. mmos can be much more than that. even blizzard has noticed that mere 5% of their customers are actually doing raids. so if the majority does something else, and there is no need for big raids with utterly specialized individuals that are only able to perform one dimension in a multi-dimensional space of possible activities, then maybe there is no need for stupidified ai and the holy trinity at all?
humans want to have challenges in games, yes, but the challenge should come from an unexpected situation and lie in the ability of the players to adapt to that situation in order to prevail and succeed.
todays raid mechanics give you a "groundhog day" feeling, where the challenges lie in the big numbered properties of the opponents (hp, damage, ae-effects) and raidgroups do nothing but empirically (trial and error) approach the optimal solution to the raid by optimizing their group, equipment, etc, and repeat the ever the same raid situation until success.
this is like training a dog to hop through a static sequence of fire rings and obstacles, only here the dogs train themselves. there is no demand for situational creativity because the situation is ever the same and varies only slightly at best. in the end we are all well-trained doggies who flawlessly hop through the molten core parcours and get a shiny purple bone for it - or not :-P
summary: the holy trinity is great for ppl, that want to be a well-trained doggie with lots of purple bones to gnaw on
@Sharook: I loled. Good post and good summary and i agree totally. Could not say it any better.
A very good Devil´s Advocate.
I often read comments like "the Trinity is the root of dumbing down MMOs or make them boring".
IMO this is so wrong.
The Holy Trinity is the logical consequence, if you want to win a fight with your group. Be it PvP or PvE or perhaps even a War.
In any game you put the armies with the thickest armor in front, while artillery and support are behind.
You can name it how you want, you can make a class switch to different roles: the guy with the most hitpoints will always stand in front.
If there is no Tank/Heal/DPS/(CC,Buff), then the battle isn´t tough enough.
Well then again, in real life you have medics, snipers and all sort of specialists, all depending on eachother, I guess we cannot create the ultimate soldier yet.
http://imageshack.us/a/img543/1239/feralbanner3.jpg
I don't like the Trinity because, firstly, it's not logical. The bad guys are really that stupid to just attack the one guy with the most armor? Secondly, chaos is fun. I'm glad GW2 is making everyone responsible for himself. No more blaming the healer. Finally, I'm not a hardcore raider anymore. I don't want to be forced to tank or heal just to find a group within the limited time I have to play.
Global Agenda is an excellent example because it incorperates both trainable talents and physical control skills. Although its pve is lacking the PvP is very fun and teams that find the ability to work together dominate. I am not good at the game but its still fun.
The holy trinity belongs in some games and as long as there are other games that are trying something different its all good.
If not The Holy Trinity then what?
Lots of people can poopoo The Holy Trinity but what system can take its place? Should the MOB spin around damaging every one but not doing to much damage to overwhelm one toon before it dies? Should every toon be super DPS/tanks/healers so they should just solo everything?
I think I would like ti see some ideas on what could replace The Holy Trinity
So... has anyone got a better idea?
Important facts:
1. Free to Play games are poorly made.
2. Casuals are not all idiots, but idiots call themselves casuals.
3. Great solo and group content are not mutually exclusive, but they suffer when one is shoved into the mold of the other. The same is true of PvP and PvE.
4. Community is more important than you think.
I agree with everything you've said, but want to add a point about the above... In good PvP contests, when the healer indeed is the normal target of both teams, I have felt the most effective teams shift their playstyles in a way that still conforms to the holy trinity.
What I mean is this: if the healer becomes the main target in PvP contests, despite their inherent squishiness, they become and play like a de facto tank (if they aren't too squishy, they are like pallys from other games).
Most good groups adjust to this and the healer (with any back up healers) stand ready to keep the healer alive in the same way they would the tank. Many gamers who prefer to play only PvE games find it hard to make this adjustment and frequently ragequit because they expect humans to behave like mobs.
Still, in good PvP, each team's "on paper" tank acts instead as CC/DPS and mainly tries to run interference and provide a distraction, hoping to pull damage spikes from enemy DPS away from their healer (if the devs have given them the correct skills to do so) and putting some DPS pressure on the enemy team if at all possible...
Your point that AI is a woeful replacement for human competitors is correct, of course, but I still think in many random PvP encounters, the holy trinity is still there, it's just different classes/jobs are filling the roles.
In a related sense, some of the best PvP contests are when two teams both effectively protect their healers and are struggling to spike the enemy healer's HP down enough to win. When the sides are even and ppl are playing well, you see a lot of ingenuity and "valor" ... When PvP is all about zerging or gear > skill, yeah... the trinity is bunk. But, it is still there when the groups are even and they understand how to adapt their play...
Oh, the ultimate soldier did exist. In the past. He had a club (for dps), a shield (to tank) and some bandages (for healing). I really don't know why it was modified....
From my understanding, the system in GW2 attempts to replace the Trinity by removing dedicated healing classes and tank classes, ie: "armored guy with high dodge % that can taunt" and instead makes aggro a snap decision by enemy NPCs that could be very dangerous for players who aren't ready to take action when a boss turns on them. For example, in a video I watched, a thief attacked a boss character as though the game were a WoW-clone, and when the boss turned its attention to that player, it only took one shot to end his stabbing-spree. He couldn't rely on someone with an archaic form of "hate" to save him, he was supposed to move and deal with the problem while a more heavily armored class got between him and said boss.
A lot of hardcore Trinity fans don't like the idea that they can't save or be saved based simply on a percentage bar, but to people like me who have already played most of the popular MMOs for years and realize how truly static this system really is, we welcome the challenge of having to fight instead of relying on statistics and heal spam to win our battles for us.
GW2's system is a step in the right direction, I think, and there will come a day when people don't feel as dependent on the Trinity, as they've been slowly introduced to other forms of managing combat dynamically.
Every class should feel self-reliant, but also useful to the group.
And as mentioned above and in many articles in past months, queue wait times for games with a Holy Trinity system are long, and in my opinion, unnecessarily ridiculous. If people still want to wait, no one's forcing them to try new ideas.
The "Trinity" of RPG online games is NOT GOOD. It's one of the MOST deprecated PVE mechanics in the genre at the moment, and NEEDS to be removed or replaced.
Seriously, the "trinity" does NOT exist in sandbox games, and the ONLY failure of "sandbox" games is the lack of funds for developement && skilled developers.
Why are themeparks the MOST developed for the MMO industry? It's already been shown time & time again that linear themeparks OTHER THAN World of Warcraft are FAILURES. Enough is enough, how about you developers start actually TRYING to produce something worth two damns?!
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Flexibility also causes additional loot drama.
Not in a game like GW2, it shares out gear just like GW1 and also gives you karma which you use for buying gear.
The holy trinity is acceptable, not great. It is the easiest known way to balance PvP and code aggro and it works.
Bit I have an old crappy MP3 player lying somewhere and it works too, even if it is far from great.
I think there are other ways of forming a good community than splitting up classes in combat roles. Good crafting is one as we saw in SWG (Pre-CU). Making the players interact more is another one. Smaller non instanced servers also works.
The holy trinity is a simple solution and it isn't bad but it is far from great.
BTW: Why do the devil need an advocate, I thought he was a lawyer himself?
I like trinity gameplay. With a great group that knows the full set of roles with things like cc, off-tanks, off-heals etc, it's not at all the overly restrictive system some describe. Know your job, do your job.
It's also not an easy system to master. This is proved on a daily basis in PUGs by players who don't know what they are doing, or who refuse to work with the team.
I completely agree with you on this issue.
Not only do I like the trinity, for some of the reasons you mentioned (pride, community), but also I feel that as long as games are designed around hit-point mechanics and not all characters have the exact same defensive capabilities, you can't really shy away from tank mechanics.
I mean, just look at it from this angle: if you have differences in hit points, meaning some characters have more and some less, it's only logical for the ones with more to stand toe to toe with the enemies, while the less durable characters will either stand behind the meatshields, or behind the enemy, stabbing at its weak spots. This is a design that goes WAY back, to even before video-game RPGs were invented.
I do agree that a change in the aggro mechanics could happen, as in using body blocking and collision detection instead of threat management, but as long as games continue to be based around hit points and similar stats, I find a trinity-like design to be nigh unavoidable.
Better? Dunno. In a skill based classless game, characters can build with most or all of the skills normally specialized as tank, dps, cc, and heals.
Put them together and let them fight.
Could go with the logical motions for one thing; with better technology and game design available we CAN get out of the trinity by going with a realistic step. What would an archer do when a horse borne knight is charging him? He fires his last arrow as he gets the fuck out of the way that’s what. If the enemy noticed you shooting arrows his way he will probably go after you so what do you do? You draw a side weapon to defend yourself and fight. Now we would still stick to armored shield bearers/guys equipped for melee up front but when you think of heroes in fantasy you imagine mother fuckers fighting like champions.
Would Gimli shout for the tank to regain Aggro when he managed to piss off the large enemy he was hacking at? Would legolas die like a bitch when an enemy went his way? No they fought and they won. MMOs want free of the trinity they do that by making combat a challenge; about survival on your own as much as killing. The lack of control to your character when in a fight needs to go, the lack of sense needs to go, and the trinity is the train they leave on. The trinity is the born from low technology of the consumer and the developer; its survives on laziness and while it is logical to have everyone fighting metal up front leather in back its not logical for the metal wearing guy to be holding all attention while his friends shoot his enemy and his healer rebuilds him through several inches of steel.
Imagine an MMO where combat was fast, furious, brutal, savage, and as much about survival as it is victory. I would love that game. Yes raids might end sooner if you are good but a single mistake throwing people down, a note of fear as they enter the fray, an daydream of winning throwing them off, and fragile lives. Combat at its most brutal; when you can die as easily as your foe.
It is best for the industry the MMO throne remains an dusty empty seat never to be filled.
Arenanet have some....check Guild Wars 2
The holy trinity is a terribly tiny box that mmos have been shoved into. MMO's could learn a lot from fps games in this regard. There will always be classes/builds that can take(dodge) more hits and those that can heal them, but the idea that if you can do this you can't possible dps is complete stupidity.
Its replacement isn't really that difficult either. Look at pnp dnd character. You have front line characters that could take(dodge) hits based on armor, dex (skill), spells, health and those that couldn't stood behind them. Add flanking damage bonus so that if the rear people pulled aggro the front line could grab it back easier. Then you would have a flowing battle field instead of this unrealistic you take all the hits, you stand in the back and heal and the rest of us will damage it.
I like having different roles in that I think it encourages better teamwork and it makes people take pride in their character in that they can do something the next guy can't do.
My problem is with "taunt" abilities and how they make NPCs act "dumb". Preferring to have the big baddie beating on the guy with a shield and heavy plate armor over the caster wearing a robe and wielding a staff obviously makes sense, but games should, in my opinion, force you to use more creative ways to have mobs preferentially attack your tougher allies, like having archers/casters attack from a long distance, maybe the mob doesn't want to chase after you because it doesn't think it can catch you. Or maybe you attack safely from a ledge or some other location the mob can't easily get to.
Mike,
I think you've got some rather large blinders on here. Your main arguement seems to focus on the merits of specialization vs hybridization and the importance of roles. That is a very valid and interesting discussion to have but it's entirely tangential to the concept of the "Holy Trinity". What you seem to be missing is the concept that the "Holy Trinity" is NOT the only (or even the ideal) way to do specialization or to break down roles. It's ONE way...and it's the one that has been traditionaly (over) used. It works well enough for FANTASY settings but it really doesn't translate very well into other settings.....and it's not even neccesarly that great of a setup for Fantasy. Half of us that moan every time we see a game impliment a "Holy Trinity" combat dynamic aren't moaning because we hate the idea of specialization and well defined roles.....we're moaning because we're getting tired of games using the same exact way to slice up the pie for combat roles.
Let me play Devils Advocate to your Devils Advocate for a moment. Lets suppose we had an MMO based in WWII setting. Lets say we wanted to use historical names for designating the different types of units players might represent. Might we have Infantry, Combat Engineers, Paratroopers, Recon, Anti-Tank Guns, Anti-Aircraft Guns, Artillery, Armor, Tank Destroyers, Assault Guns, Fighters, Torpedo Bombers, Dive Bombers, Strategic Bombers, etc?
Are these not highly specialized combat roles? Are they "Holy Trinity" ? If you tried to break them down into the standard HT "Tank, Healer, DPS" would you not loose about 90 percent of the dynamic of how they actual functioned and worked with each other and the real role they performed. Using a Holy Trinity model would you not end up with a combat dynamic that didn't at all resemble WWII combat?
Heck, lets even look at the combat dynamic of old school DnD pen'n'paper games. Most MMO's have translated Warriors as "Tanks" and while they WERE important for holding the line and keeping the more "squishy" members of the party from getting pounded on.... were they also not VERY GOOD at dealing damage to purely physical targets. If you were facing something with a high magic resistance.....usualy it wasn't going to be the spell-casters bringing it down. "Rogues" usualy get regulated to the DPS role......but 90 percent of what I remember them being useful for had nothing to do with backstab ability.... it was finding out where the bad guys were before the party blundered into them, finding traps and secret passages, unlocking chests and doors and getting the party into places that they couldn't go otherwise. Mages? I can't tell you how many times a Feather Fall or Invisibilty spell proved far more useful then Magic Missle or Fireball.
The problem with Holy Trinity is NOT that it's a form of specialization.....it's that it is a VERY SHALLOW and OVER-USED way to break down player roles that doesn't even fit very well into half the genres developers try to apply it toward.