I hate the typical tank/heal/dps model until I play a game that doesn’t have it. Games that have heals for all turns into everyone soloing wich becomes incredibly boring to me and I soon find myself missing the tank/heal/dps model.
Exactly how i felt. Gameplay becomes bland after a while.
Tank, Healer and DPS is not enough for me. What I want is Tank, Healer, DPS, Debuffer, Buffer, Crowd Control, Puller, Snarer. The more roles you add, the better. Some classes can do more than one role (Buffer + Healer, CC + DPS, Tank + Snarer, Debuffer + Puller). I agree the Tank, Healer, DPS is shallow. I remember in EQ when in some palces a Puller was important, and CC too. Now it's just tank, heal and spank.
But why do you want Tank, Healer and DPS go away? it's just like saying First Person Shooters should go away. The grouping aspect of MMORPGs requires different roles and if you remove these roles you end up with a boring class system (like Champions Online, Darkfall and others). But unless your game direction is different than PvE content (like Darkfall being aimed for PvP so it works for them). But if you aim for PvE you need Roles and I've been playing this Tank, Healer, DPS thing for 10+ years now and never got bored.
The problem is with the boring PvE content and not-challenging dungeons. Also, the simplicity of the roles. They should add more as I described above.
I think the game design of tanks heals and dps has been played out for too long. It is a very boring and uncreative way to design classes and gameplay. It makes players way too specialized and thus very dependent on the other roles. The main flaw is that some roles (mostly healer) are not very popular and is very difficult to find for a group . On the other hand dps roles seem to be most popular, and they have more trouble finding a spot in a group.
Diablo 2 was a game which did not utilize this system and I enjoyed the group combat very much. Everyone just focused on dealing damage, which ended up with utter destruction and undeniable fun. The diablo 2 classes can perform much better independently but each character still brings something to the table when in groups, such as buffs (barbarian warcries, paladin auras), crowd clearing abilities, or minions for meat shields.
So I say NO to a tank class that cannot tank anything without a healer, a healer who doesnt even attack the boss once, life leech which heals u for 10hp when you have over 2000hp.
I just wanted to point out one thing in the red part. notice how that holy trinity makes you rely on others? Isn't that suppose to be the point of an MMO to need to rely on others so that way you have to interact with the people in that world? I know the point your trying to make is that some classes are not fun to play therefore the trinity should be removed
However i think the problem lies in where the yellow is. It's not the trinity that may be the problem but how the class is designed, some people simply don't find the cleric fun and therefore play another class. However if you were to improve the clerics fighting ability or make them more interactive in the fight, then i could see more people playing them.
Take ToR (yes i had to do it GW2 peeps :P ) they made the cleric type class able to also do some CC and DPS, thus making it more attractive. If this works, we will have to see, but i'm not so much sure its the holy trinity itself that is the problem but how certain classes are implemented are the problem.
Making the classes interdependent is a must really, perhaps it is seen as being traditional roles, but it does work, and encouraging people to work together, how is that a bad thing? too many roles though would just overcomplicate things, and it might just create more 'random bickering' at the moment i'd say WoW has group sizes about right, though i do prefer the 25 man raids to the 10 man ones, as it always seems to introduce the 'chaos effect' as for GW2 and ToR... at the moment we have no real idea how those will pan out, so until their released and we see how they work, we can only speculate as to how the roles integrate, and i suspect it will be along the more 'traditional' lines of the tank, healer, dps... it does work after all.
It's quite possible to have roles without those roles having to be tank, healer, and damage dealer. See Puzzle Pirates, for example, where the roles at a particular stage of combat are sailing, carpentry, bilging, gunnery, and navigation.
The trinity is just being done wrong in most cases. Almost all games with the trinity will have an over powered healer. Say you have 8 classes and one can heal. That one healing class also does damage. That means EVERY class can damage, but only one can heal. That's why if a game has a trinity, it has to be balanced FOR trinity, or the game will be too easy. If a healing class can do low-average damage, than the other classes should be able to do low-average healing.
Having an AI forced into attacking one person is not teamwork... at all. Team work is everyone interacting with the team, not one person.
The only way to have a balanced trinity is to blend it into something that is not a trinity. If every class can do some form of dps, than every class should be able to some form of healing/support. It only makes sense. Healers are always too powerful, simply because they are the only support/healer. They need skills ranging from healing to prevention to cleansing to protection and all that. While the other classes only need... well damage.
That's why games like GW2 should be a bit more interesting (Opinion from a player ). Because every class can specc into any role, but only one role at a time. Those roles being damage, control, and support. Similar to trinity, the only difference is that the roles overlap eachother.
The biggest problem is, that you can't have a team-based game, else the solo players will be too weak. And you can't have a solo game, else teams are too powerful. So a good game should be something like, a good team is only a bit better than a good solo player. So teams are good, but not required. Instead of having this blend, most games just say "this is a solo area, this is a team area and blah blah." Which are nice things to say, but the entire game should not be split between these two modes.
I am sick of the holy trinity. I want to see more roles being played, such as CC, puller, buffer, debuffer to name a few.. I like the idea that roles can be detailed even further such as "single target tanking or AOE tanking".. The same applies to healing.. You can have single heals, regen and AOE heals.. In my opinion, I would like to see each class be defined by their unique primary role.. To add flavor and variety each class should have a secondary role as well, with other mini roles on the side.. Example: (using WoW for example)
Warrior (Best single target tank) secondary = AOE tank
Death Knight (Best AOE tank) secondary = debuffer
Paladin (Best buffer) secondary = AOE heals
Druid (Best regen heals) secondary = single target tank
Priest (Best instant heals) secondary = CC
Shaman (Best AOE heals) secondary = instand heals
Warlock (Best debuffer) secondary = regen heals
Rogue (Best puller) secondary = dps
Hunter (Best dps) secondary = puller
Mage (Best CC) secondary = buffer
As you can see, there are 10 classes, and 10 primary roles.. which would give each class a secondar role as well.. This does not mean that each class is restricted to only those 2 roles.. Each class would have mini roles as well, they just wouldn't be strong enough to sustain that role as long or as good.. Each primary role would be 100% effective, each secondary role would be about 80% effective, and all mini roles would be around the 20% area.. It sure would give each group a unique line up.. BTW, the above example only applies to group activities like dungeons and raids.. as the rest of the game can be solo'd regarless of your class.. it remains as is.. However, there goes your "LFD" toon, as it would no longer apply.. And it was only for example purposes.. You can mix up your 10 roles anyways you want, or even make up hybrids.. Such as instead of giving a class 1 primary role and 1 secondary role, you could give that class or a NEW class 3 secondary roles.. This could even be an option in the talent trees.. One branch could be your PvP branch, one could be the "Primary" branch and the last could be the "hybrid" branch.. Therefore giving every class the ability to give up their primary role for 2 more secondary ones..
I think the game design of tanks heals and dps has been played out for too long. It is a very boring and uncreative way to design classes and gameplay. It makes players way too specialized and thus very dependent on the other roles. ...
And that's why I think the trinity is a good concept. When you design the roles in a way that players depend on each other you have a good basic recipe for community and teamwork. If you give all players all abilities you create the solo-centric games we see today.
Most games I enjoyed even expanded on the trinity, by adding melee-dps, ranged-dps, buffers, debuffers, utility and crowd control roles to the trinity. The trinity and the expanded roles work well for PvE and group-centric PvP games. Sure, it doesn't work well for 1vs1 PvP - but then I'm not interested in that playstyle anyway.
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
It's relatively easy to come up with different roles that aren't the trinity.
The challenge comes with making those roles accessible (part of which is based on player expectations: in a fantasy RPG players expect warriors and fire-flinging spellcasters.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I'm not sick of the holy trinity, but I am sick of the lack of imagination when it comes to most classes. City of Heroes is an example of a game that gets it right, without the need to enforce the holy trinity in all aspects of the game. You have tanks, you have dps. You even have healers. But you also have those who lockdown, buff, and debuff. The end result is that you have plenty of groups that have neither a healer or a tank, and work just as well. You don't need either if your enemies can't hit your group, can't stand up at all, can't move, or can't do any damage when they land a hit.
Unfortunately, CoX is the only game that does this really well. Eve has some interesting set ups, but I'm not really familiar enough with the game to say. WoW, LotRO, and Aion are all examples of games that pretty much force you to live and die by the trinity setup. They're fun games, but they could be so much more.
Id like to see more done with it. I would like to see a larger need for sub classes like off tanking very few games require it and I would like to see CC needed also rogues should have some utility and be able to disable traps like they can in ddo i think more instances need traps.
If your going to ban the trolls please for our sake ban the Fan Boys too.
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
I think the game design of tanks heals and dps has been played out for too long. It is a very boring and uncreative way to design classes and gameplay. It makes players way too specialized and thus very dependent on the other roles. The main flaw is that some roles (mostly healer) are not very popular and is very difficult to find for a group . On the other hand dps roles seem to be most popular, and they have more trouble finding a spot in a group.
Diablo 2 was a game which did not utilize this system and I enjoyed the group combat very much. Everyone just focused on dealing damage, which ended up with utter destruction and undeniable fun. The diablo 2 classes can perform much better independently but each character still brings something to the table when in groups, such as buffs (barbarian warcries, paladin auras), crowd clearing abilities, or minions for meat shields.
So I say NO to a tank class that cannot tank anything without a healer, a healer who doesnt even attack the boss once, life leech which heals u for 10hp when you have over 2000hp.
You are trying to compare MMORPG's with action RPG's,, why? They are different types of games. In fantasy themed MMO's, you must have different class archtypes set up, "If the game uses a class based system." Now, in games like Ultima Online, it's skill based.. All the classes are pretty much there, but you can choose to skill up whatever you wish to be, whether its a healer/mage/archer/bard/fighter/thief, etc..
Diablo is an action rpg with online capabilities. It's NOT a MMORPG.. The game has classes but doesn't make you group with specified role classes like tanks/healers/rogues, etc to complete dungeons. But remember, the game is not a mmorpg... So please stop trying to compare the two as if one should play like the other..
Rallithon Oakthornn (Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
And there can't be other roles that are not Tank/healer/dps ?
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
And there can't be other roles that are not Tank/healer/dps ?
Different roles doesn't mean no roles.
A) Why change a functioning system?
I have not yet seen any single convicing alternative to the Holy Trinity. If you present one, fine.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
And there can't be other roles that are not Tank/healer/dps ?
Different roles doesn't mean no roles.
A) Why change a functioning system?
I have not yet seen any single convicing alternative to the Holy Trinity. If you present one, fine.
EQ1 pre-PoP was great.. better then the holy trinity in my opinion..
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
And there can't be other roles that are not Tank/healer/dps ?
Different roles doesn't mean no roles.
A) Why change a functioning system?
I have not yet seen any single convicing alternative to the Holy Trinity. If you present one, fine.
You have to change the npc AI to go along with it. The whole system would need to be changed. So you design a game with all of this in mind. As it is right now, the whole holy trinity system is designed by threat mechanics. Get rid of those threat mechanics or make it more realistic. Right now most games have the holy trinity and it's boring and dumb gameplay.
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
And there can't be other roles that are not Tank/healer/dps ?
Different roles doesn't mean no roles.
A) Why change a functioning system?
I have not yet seen any single convicing alternative to the Holy Trinity. If you present one, fine.
A. Fire grants lighting, somehow electricity seems better.
B. Just because it hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be done.
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
And there can't be other roles that are not Tank/healer/dps ?
Different roles doesn't mean no roles.
A) Why change a functioning system?
I have not yet seen any single convicing alternative to the Holy Trinity. If you present one, fine.
Why change a functioning system? Because innovation actually makes for interesting gameplay, rather than endless WoW clones (which is itself an EQ clone). The tank/heal/dps system has been done. It has been done to death. It's time to actually come up with something new.
I've recently been playing the beta for DC Online, and while it has a number of outstanding issues and isn't, in my opinion, ready to launch, one thing they've done well is moving away from that standard, boring model. Characters do have a 'tank', 'heal' and 'control' role they can use, in addition to the standard 'damage' role that every class has, but as it's a action combat-oriented game, even the 'healer' and 'control' role people have to be continuing in the fight in order to keep their energy high enough to fulfil their role. That's still close to the bog-standard 'tank/heal/dps' model which is so overdone and boring, but it's one way that the system's being innovated a little.
Other ways? Just ditch it entirely. Ditch classes, too, while we're at it. And the concept of 'aggro table.' Freeform character customization, where you're able to directly control how your character grows. With no aggro table, people will have to either devote customization to being sneaky or tough, and can easily gain access to methods to keep themselves alive.
Makes characters a lot more generalist rather than specialist (though specialist can still very much exists, with a solid group of people),
But that's just one idea; the problem is where developers get locked in to 'okay now we have to make it so every encounter needs tanks, heals and dps' and ends up designing encounters which are just endless copies without room for innovation; where tanks just have to tank, healers just have to heal, and dps just have to deal damage. It's a very stale system.
Comments
Exactly how i felt. Gameplay becomes bland after a while.
Tank, Healer and DPS is not enough for me. What I want is Tank, Healer, DPS, Debuffer, Buffer, Crowd Control, Puller, Snarer. The more roles you add, the better. Some classes can do more than one role (Buffer + Healer, CC + DPS, Tank + Snarer, Debuffer + Puller). I agree the Tank, Healer, DPS is shallow. I remember in EQ when in some palces a Puller was important, and CC too. Now it's just tank, heal and spank.
But why do you want Tank, Healer and DPS go away? it's just like saying First Person Shooters should go away. The grouping aspect of MMORPGs requires different roles and if you remove these roles you end up with a boring class system (like Champions Online, Darkfall and others). But unless your game direction is different than PvE content (like Darkfall being aimed for PvP so it works for them). But if you aim for PvE you need Roles and I've been playing this Tank, Healer, DPS thing for 10+ years now and never got bored.
The problem is with the boring PvE content and not-challenging dungeons. Also, the simplicity of the roles. They should add more as I described above.
Get rid of taunt and make a smarter AI. That would make it a lot more interesting.
Hey, Lacroix!
I just slit your throat.... again!
But it's not that hard.
Making the classes interdependent is a must really, perhaps it is seen as being traditional roles, but it does work, and encouraging people to work together, how is that a bad thing? too many roles though would just overcomplicate things, and it might just create more 'random bickering' at the moment i'd say WoW has group sizes about right, though i do prefer the 25 man raids to the 10 man ones, as it always seems to introduce the 'chaos effect' as for GW2 and ToR... at the moment we have no real idea how those will pan out, so until their released and we see how they work, we can only speculate as to how the roles integrate, and i suspect it will be along the more 'traditional' lines of the tank, healer, dps... it does work after all.
Thanks for the mail.. I will CC it to the developers >.>
It's quite possible to have roles without those roles having to be tank, healer, and damage dealer. See Puzzle Pirates, for example, where the roles at a particular stage of combat are sailing, carpentry, bilging, gunnery, and navigation.
The trinity is just being done wrong in most cases. Almost all games with the trinity will have an over powered healer. Say you have 8 classes and one can heal. That one healing class also does damage. That means EVERY class can damage, but only one can heal. That's why if a game has a trinity, it has to be balanced FOR trinity, or the game will be too easy. If a healing class can do low-average damage, than the other classes should be able to do low-average healing.
Having an AI forced into attacking one person is not teamwork... at all. Team work is everyone interacting with the team, not one person.
The only way to have a balanced trinity is to blend it into something that is not a trinity. If every class can do some form of dps, than every class should be able to some form of healing/support. It only makes sense. Healers are always too powerful, simply because they are the only support/healer. They need skills ranging from healing to prevention to cleansing to protection and all that. While the other classes only need... well damage.
That's why games like GW2 should be a bit more interesting (Opinion from a player ). Because every class can specc into any role, but only one role at a time. Those roles being damage, control, and support. Similar to trinity, the only difference is that the roles overlap eachother.
The biggest problem is, that you can't have a team-based game, else the solo players will be too weak. And you can't have a solo game, else teams are too powerful. So a good game should be something like, a good team is only a bit better than a good solo player. So teams are good, but not required. Instead of having this blend, most games just say "this is a solo area, this is a team area and blah blah." Which are nice things to say, but the entire game should not be split between these two modes.
I am sick of the holy trinity. I want to see more roles being played, such as CC, puller, buffer, debuffer to name a few.. I like the idea that roles can be detailed even further such as "single target tanking or AOE tanking".. The same applies to healing.. You can have single heals, regen and AOE heals.. In my opinion, I would like to see each class be defined by their unique primary role.. To add flavor and variety each class should have a secondary role as well, with other mini roles on the side.. Example: (using WoW for example)
Warrior (Best single target tank) secondary = AOE tank
Death Knight (Best AOE tank) secondary = debuffer
Paladin (Best buffer) secondary = AOE heals
Druid (Best regen heals) secondary = single target tank
Priest (Best instant heals) secondary = CC
Shaman (Best AOE heals) secondary = instand heals
Warlock (Best debuffer) secondary = regen heals
Rogue (Best puller) secondary = dps
Hunter (Best dps) secondary = puller
Mage (Best CC) secondary = buffer
As you can see, there are 10 classes, and 10 primary roles.. which would give each class a secondar role as well.. This does not mean that each class is restricted to only those 2 roles.. Each class would have mini roles as well, they just wouldn't be strong enough to sustain that role as long or as good.. Each primary role would be 100% effective, each secondary role would be about 80% effective, and all mini roles would be around the 20% area.. It sure would give each group a unique line up.. BTW, the above example only applies to group activities like dungeons and raids.. as the rest of the game can be solo'd regarless of your class.. it remains as is.. However, there goes your "LFD" toon, as it would no longer apply.. And it was only for example purposes.. You can mix up your 10 roles anyways you want, or even make up hybrids.. Such as instead of giving a class 1 primary role and 1 secondary role, you could give that class or a NEW class 3 secondary roles.. This could even be an option in the talent trees.. One branch could be your PvP branch, one could be the "Primary" branch and the last could be the "hybrid" branch.. Therefore giving every class the ability to give up their primary role for 2 more secondary ones..
And that's why I think the trinity is a good concept. When you design the roles in a way that players depend on each other you have a good basic recipe for community and teamwork. If you give all players all abilities you create the solo-centric games we see today.
Most games I enjoyed even expanded on the trinity, by adding melee-dps, ranged-dps, buffers, debuffers, utility and crowd control roles to the trinity. The trinity and the expanded roles work well for PvE and group-centric PvP games. Sure, it doesn't work well for 1vs1 PvP - but then I'm not interested in that playstyle anyway.
I maintain this List of Sandbox MMORPGs. Please post or send PM for corrections and suggestions.
It's relatively easy to come up with different roles that aren't the trinity.
The challenge comes with making those roles accessible (part of which is based on player expectations: in a fantasy RPG players expect warriors and fire-flinging spellcasters.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
yes we are sick. thats why we wait for gw2!
Guild Wars 2 Youtube Croatian Maniacs
My Guild Wars titles
I'm not sick of the holy trinity, but I am sick of the lack of imagination when it comes to most classes. City of Heroes is an example of a game that gets it right, without the need to enforce the holy trinity in all aspects of the game. You have tanks, you have dps. You even have healers. But you also have those who lockdown, buff, and debuff. The end result is that you have plenty of groups that have neither a healer or a tank, and work just as well. You don't need either if your enemies can't hit your group, can't stand up at all, can't move, or can't do any damage when they land a hit.
Unfortunately, CoX is the only game that does this really well. Eve has some interesting set ups, but I'm not really familiar enough with the game to say. WoW, LotRO, and Aion are all examples of games that pretty much force you to live and die by the trinity setup. They're fun games, but they could be so much more.
Id like to see more done with it. I would like to see a larger need for sub classes like off tanking very few games require it and I would like to see CC needed also rogues should have some utility and be able to disable traps like they can in ddo i think more instances need traps.
If your going to ban the trolls please for our sake ban the Fan Boys too.
No, on the contrary. I like it. It gives me a defined role to play both as identity and inside a group for teamwork. The alternative are self-reliant soloers who can do everything a bit but nothing for real.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
The inability of most persons to envision any kind of interactive, group, gameplay other than the trinity scares me.
There's more then the 4 walls in the box you live in.
Exactly +1
Solo gameplay mixed in with zerg group gameplay with no defined roles / strategy.
Velika: City of Wheels: Among the mortal races, the humans were the only one that never built cities or great empires; a curse laid upon them by their creator, Gidd, forced them to wander as nomads for twenty centuries...
You are trying to compare MMORPG's with action RPG's,, why? They are different types of games. In fantasy themed MMO's, you must have different class archtypes set up, "If the game uses a class based system." Now, in games like Ultima Online, it's skill based.. All the classes are pretty much there, but you can choose to skill up whatever you wish to be, whether its a healer/mage/archer/bard/fighter/thief, etc..
Diablo is an action rpg with online capabilities. It's NOT a MMORPG.. The game has classes but doesn't make you group with specified role classes like tanks/healers/rogues, etc to complete dungeons. But remember, the game is not a mmorpg... So please stop trying to compare the two as if one should play like the other..
Rallithon Oakthornn
(Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
And there can't be other roles that are not Tank/healer/dps ?
Different roles doesn't mean no roles.
A) Why change a functioning system?
I have not yet seen any single convicing alternative to the Holy Trinity. If you present one, fine.
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
EQ1 pre-PoP was great.. better then the holy trinity in my opinion..
You have to change the npc AI to go along with it. The whole system would need to be changed. So you design a game with all of this in mind. As it is right now, the whole holy trinity system is designed by threat mechanics. Get rid of those threat mechanics or make it more realistic. Right now most games have the holy trinity and it's boring and dumb gameplay.
A. Fire grants lighting, somehow electricity seems better.
B. Just because it hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be done.
Why change a functioning system? Because innovation actually makes for interesting gameplay, rather than endless WoW clones (which is itself an EQ clone). The tank/heal/dps system has been done. It has been done to death. It's time to actually come up with something new.
I've recently been playing the beta for DC Online, and while it has a number of outstanding issues and isn't, in my opinion, ready to launch, one thing they've done well is moving away from that standard, boring model. Characters do have a 'tank', 'heal' and 'control' role they can use, in addition to the standard 'damage' role that every class has, but as it's a action combat-oriented game, even the 'healer' and 'control' role people have to be continuing in the fight in order to keep their energy high enough to fulfil their role. That's still close to the bog-standard 'tank/heal/dps' model which is so overdone and boring, but it's one way that the system's being innovated a little.
Other ways? Just ditch it entirely. Ditch classes, too, while we're at it. And the concept of 'aggro table.' Freeform character customization, where you're able to directly control how your character grows. With no aggro table, people will have to either devote customization to being sneaky or tough, and can easily gain access to methods to keep themselves alive.
Makes characters a lot more generalist rather than specialist (though specialist can still very much exists, with a solid group of people),
But that's just one idea; the problem is where developers get locked in to 'okay now we have to make it so every encounter needs tanks, heals and dps' and ends up designing encounters which are just endless copies without room for innovation; where tanks just have to tank, healers just have to heal, and dps just have to deal damage. It's a very stale system.