The whole concept of "tank" the mobs focus on is quite irrealistic to the point of being silly. And this comes from someone who played WoW since it's release in 2004. Some of the most fun encounters in WoW were those without a threat table.
Games like Asheron's Call had "tanks" too. But the mobs were not focusing on them following a threat table, you had to line up tanks to block the way if you didn't want the mob to pass and smash the more squishy characters without melee defense. This said, the mob AI in AC1 was quite primitive. GW2 is trying to reintroduce that mechanic, but with way smarter mob AI. For instance, my guardian in GW2 has skills that permit him to control a mob and eventually "pull" him away from a more squishy ranged character, but that doesn't mean the mob will automatically focus on him. Some of the smartest mobs will actually try to go for the weakest or most wounded character of those which are attacking it. That's a way more "natural" behaviour than the silly threat table mechanism.
Actually, PvE in games like AC1 or GW2 becomes closer to PvP than to the classic threat based EQ clone PvE model.
I spent hours yesterday in WvW "tanking" other players during the stress test.
Seriously pissing people off! So much fun.
Stun, cripple, interupt, apply vulnerability, physically step in between player and my team and box them out (attack won't go through another enemy standing right in front of you) as well as all kinds of other tricks.
I was a Guardian, but level 15 so no traits to make me a "better" defensive/protection role, just smart play and weapon sets designed to harrass and aid.
Actually my 5 trait points I had were in Power lol about as anti-defensive as you can get.
Mace+Focus, Scepter+Shield.
Mace or sword + shield is fun too, the two shield abilities are very annoying for the opponent
I was doing mace/sword + shield and greatsword for when I had to bash some skulls. The "grip" greatsword skill is fun too, the last one, don't remember the name (edit: it's "Binding Blade").
To those who never tried AC1 or GW2 - just imagine that PvE in WoW works just as PvP - you have no threat, to stop the baddies from crushing your squishy priest or mage, you have to get them away from them - and your priest/mage has of course to move/dodge too, he can't just stand there spamming spells.
Respect, walk, what did you say? Respect, walk Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me? - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
I spent hours yesterday in WvW "tanking" other players during the stress test.
Seriously pissing people off! So much fun.
Stun, cripple, interupt, apply vulnerability, physically step in between player and my team and box them out (attack won't go through another enemy standing right in front of you) as well as all kinds of other tricks.
I was a Guardian, but level 15 so no traits to make me a "better" defensive/protection role, just smart play and weapon sets designed to harrass and aid.
Actually my 5 trait points I had were in Power lol about as anti-defensive as you can get.
Mace+Focus, Scepter+Shield.
Mace or sword + shield is fun too, the two shield abilities are very annoying for the opponent
I was doing mace/sword + shield and greatsword for when I had to bash some skulls. The "grip" greatsword skill is fun too, the last one, don't remember the name.
To those who never tried AC1 or GW2 - just imagine that PvE in WoW works just as PvP - you have no threat, to stop the baddies from crushing your squishy priest or mage, you have to get them away from them - and your priest/mage has of course to move/dodge too, he can't just stand there spamming spells.
I still haven't figured out what weapon combo for Guardians is best for "burst" damage.
One of the biggest issues with the holy trinity isnt necessarily the trinity itself but the limitted ai involved in the games. The trinity is set up to combat scripted ai with a finite set of moves/abilities. The trinity will evolve the more ai evolves in game.
As someone who preferred tanking and healing i will tell you that you see some retarded dpsers. People hate dealing with the dpsers making stupid excuses for poor play and blaming it on a tank/healer. No one wants to listen to have to heal or protect damage meter mongers. They have tunnel vision. On a side note. I believe this is a big reason most mmorpgs have been dumbed down.
There's a Youtube video out there somewhere that basically says "one job is easier than three jobs" . So, with the Holy Trinity you have one job: Tank, Heal or DPS. If you tank, your only job is to get the boss to attack you. Nothing in the dugneon is going to change this. Same with heals and dps. If something goes wrong, you cannot switch roles mid-fight because the game says you must have the gear/skills/stats for that one job. The argument against this is that it's too limiting for both the players and the developer. Every dungeon must be created to assume there is a tank, healer and dps and it just gets boring after a while.
With characters being able to change roles mid fight, it adds to the diversity in which the dungeons can be made. There are times when ALL will be tanking, healing or dpsing or there are times when multiple players must switch roles throughout the fight. It's a much more interesting and creative system.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
The tank cannot avoid from getting hit in the face and the healer has to heal it or else it's over. The DPS has to do what? DPS fast enough or else the boss gets angry and 1 hits the tank? Where does the teamplay come in?
Yeah I guess you're right. You don't understand teamplay.
If you don't see three players cooperating to beat an encounter they couldn't beat on their own, by maximizing their strengths to offset each others' weaknesses as "teamplay", I don't know what to say.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Human factor and recent average player base mentality catered with lazy game design spoiled your role, you become just a healing bot, someone they are waiting in LFG, an obstacle.
My most frequent role is healer or some healing hybrid, so I understand your pain perfectly. I'm afraid that distinctive role and complex encounters/environment game design became niche domain.
Nah, that is just because MMOs just like most other computer games have become a lot easier the last 12 years or so.
In most games you can play your healer more, but you don´t have to so few ever do.
But distinct roles and complex encounters are 2 very different things, you can easily have one without the other.
Let's say, no distinct roles, you got five sword soldiers and complex encounter: one mammoth with two poisonous cubs. Aggro on pull, poisonous cubs should not touch anyone.
How many scenarios of fight you have?!
Now, with different roles/abilities, suddenly you have countless possibilities. Distinct roles and complex encounters are two different things but they coexist with each other.
Your hope for countless Possibilities have not occurred for this generation of Trinity implementation.
Currently, by having Healer, Tank and Dps roles, all you got is 1 full tank to take all the hits, 1 Full Healer for the main tank, 1 off healer incase the full healer is Out of Mana, then DPS to wack the Mob as quickly as possible without getting the Aggro. And maybe an off tank incase Mob goes toward the Healer.
That is the only combination of game play that is currently available.
There are no other Possibilities that you hoped would occur, because you can not attempt any dungeon or raid content without a Tank and a Healer. Without both together, there is no Dungeon or Raid group.
And with Both, the only possibilities is what I have just described.
Without the Trinity, the possibilities becomes possible, not only will 5 sword Soldiers be possible, you can have 5 Thiefs, 5 Mages, 5 Healers and any combinations there of, it all depends on the skills they have.
Currently, system is completely broken, dumbed down encounters, indefinite threat/aggro system, tank invincibility, indefinite healing abilities, absence of control variety, trivializing whole thing and then you got exactly what you explained.
Different schools of magic in majority of recent games stand just for different animation/color. Every role should have strength and weakness, there is no need for tank to be invincible, tough and designed to be in the front line sure yes, but vulnerable on certain magic dmg. Healer should not be able to save tank in situation where he is taking dmg not suppose to take.
DPS/Tank/Healer exists because it's the easiest way to design an MMORPG (assuming it's not a single player MMORPG). One person takes damage, another deals damage, another heals the person taking damage. As long as everybody plays their game of Dance Dance Hotkeys correctly they will win the battle, if they fail to press the keys at the correct time they lose. This makes it very boring, since every single encounter will always work the same way. The only way to make encounters different are through gimmicks that kill players that have yet to play the encounter yet. Add in gear requirements and it's even more boring because now you have to kill the same monsters multiple times before you're allowed to kill the next group of monsters multiple times.
For me its because with a trinity set up we move out of the realm of fantasy and into the realm of the rediculous. Why?
The mobs are SO stupid they ignore all the guys shooting them full of arrows, stabbing them in the back and flinging fireballs at them and carry on hitting the shield being held up in front of them by the big, butch, heavily armoured warrior dude. The one they can't seem to kill, no matter how hard they try, because of the other dude in the dress who keeps healing him.
Yeah, great idea that.
I completely agree with this. Group encounters are not really epic when you think about what it takes to complete them. It would be nice if it were feasible for a game to make a fight more engaging and random, where you would talk about it after it was done rather than, "Well, that's finally over, let's roll for the loot."
The Holy Trinity is to blame, not just because there are roles, but the roles are usually one action -- tank taunts, healer heals. That would be really boring if made into a book or a movie, so why do we want to continue playing MMORPGs that way? At least make the roles more situational -- for example, the tank can taunt or knock down a target but it takes a lot of stamina, so it can't just be spammed. And a healer can heal but it also take a lot of power. If a game can be rebalanced so that its not anticipating that one player always has aggro, then I think the combat will end up being more "epic".
You don't have to completely remove roles, but what if your boss fight was more like a great movie scene and less like a job. The problem is a game actually creating this feeling... maybe it can't be done, but I'm willing to give games like GW2 a try because they're willing to attempt something different.
Its one type of mmo combat that somehow became the ONLY type of combat.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
I have nothing against the trinity other than i personally am burned out on the aged mechanics that have been around since the beginning..
The trinity has served the mmorpg industry well but in 2012 it isnt and should not be the only way it can be done and there are many of us that are ready to move beyond the holy trinity and stale combat systems of the traditional mmorpg..
On the player front it means your role is defined from the moment you create your character, and unless you want to reroll or, in some cases, pay real money for class change you are stuck with it. Sure, recently MMOs offer a bit more variety within class through various "talent" builds and you can build damage oriented cleric or warrior, but more often than not you will find yourself forced into playing "accordingly" because everyone else can be damage dealer already.
On the design front it does put certain constraints on content and mechanics. You must build everything with the role of tank and healer in mind which tends to have the side effect of putting the most strain on players playing those classes. If you mess up as tank your group wipes, if you mess up as healer, your team wipes, if you mess up as dps...it just takes a bit longer to kill stuff. The solution the developers came up with are all the DPS race encounters, but same time those have tendency to be moslty rather gear depndant rather than actual challenge. It's the case of "You must grind for 2 months before you can progress further". It's an artifical barrier.
On the numbers front, it makes it much harder to balance PvP, you have to account for turtling, so the damage needs to be high enough to go through the heals, so in turn someone not specced super defensive gets killed very quickly and that in turn is another problem in PvP. It's much harder to balance PvE versus PvP with the tirnity involved, hence the rather underwheming PvP in MMOs lately.
As much as trinity isn't really the biggest issue of MMO market, the problem is develoeprs rarely can do something interesting with it. There is too much focus on using those roles over the possibility of roles being optional and merely beneficial in certain situations. It's just a very rigid system that doesn't add much by itself and it's been around for so long it's simply not interesting anymore for many people.
Meh, I prefer the trinity combat. To me, I think it's better to have to be dependent on others to accomplish things. I've always enjoyed group content for that very reason, because you need your buddies to take it on.
It's not simply a matter of inserting random face #109232 out of everyone that is highly self-sufficient in a group of interdependent individuals.
I miss the days where having a specific class completely changed the dynamic of your group and how it would work.
So.. What's raid going to be like without holy trinity?
Try to kill the boss before everyone wiped? I'm not bashing either case. Just curious in games without the holy trinity, how are the raids play like. Since only games I ever raided have holy trinity.
There is nothing wrong with the trinity, I even like it. But there is a problem with having only one group composition scheme. GW2 brings something new and refreshing to the table imo.
So tell me your reason against holy trinity, real reason pls?
Its an old outdated idea taken from a board game and stuck into a videogame. Its vastly limited and handicaps the entire game creating more dependency group structure than needed in a game.
So tell me your reason against holy trinity, real reason pls?
Its an old outdated idea taken from a board game and stuck into a videogame. Its vastly limited and handicaps the entire game creating more dependency group structure than needed in a game.
So do you think raids or dungeon become more strategical without holy trinity?
Some people feel the reliability of having a specific role is either unexciting, or just not worth waiting around/twisting arms to make sure those roles are filled.
I don't hate the trinity; I just hate when it's the only onption in a game. The problem is that monsters are too generic, and the trinity is often the most effective way to play. It's much more manageable when dealing with large groups. Games without specific roles often just turn into zergfests... which can be fun from time to time, but I don't think it would hold up for the meat of the game. Back to my point; a big problem that often gets overlooked is the monsters, themselves. Most games really have nothing to distinguish them (other than some boss mechanics). In most cases, everything you have is just damage and it turns into a numbers game. Whether you're talking about healing or damage, it all boils down to number/time. Well, say for instance that your sword, and the skills associated with it were more, or less, effective depending on what you were fighting. Or what if there were other facets to healing, rather than just straight HP. It wouldn't really be all that hard to make each encounter fairly unique. Just give monsters more properties, like elements, size, race, strengths/weaknesses. That way, if a party is going through a dungeon (or even just roaming around), people's roles would dynamically change depending on what they were fighting.
Another problem is customization. Players aren't given very much wiggle room in what they can make. You pick a class, then you can do [insert role]. Between that and the crippling balance that most games strive for, there's not very much room left for creative builds or alternate ways to approach a situation. Even though boss fights change up the hum-drum trash mob fight, they still have pretty set mechanics, and there are very few, if only one, way to do about it. It might be interesting if a game had encounters that couldn't really solved by simply looking at a youtube video, becuase what would for one player/group may not work for you, and vise versa.
The funny thing is that I'm not even talking about something that's not been done before. DAoC had different types of physical damage and armors, and Ragnarok Online had a plethora of features that distinguished monster types. I know these examples are older games, and I'm not calling for a mass regressing. I'm just saying that these are pretty good features that are simple and keep combat fresh. Both games I mentioned had the trinity in them, but were more flexible because the game actually allowed it. Regardless whether there's a trinity imposed or not, there's going to be issues with combat roles if the monsters aren't improved.
So do you think raids or dungeon become more strategical without holy trinity?
Well it's certainly possible.
Go achieves strategic gameplay without roles (although I'm sure different placements of pieces are given "role"-like names in Go.)
But a ton of strategic things (in real-life and in games) involve a wide variety of roles being employed (which is really what makes the trinity the trinity to me; clearly we're not talking about the original EQ trinity when we refer to it anymore, so we may as well zoom out to the abstract concept it's really describing: different players in different roles.)
Even in Halo, a game I don't exactly hold to be all that strategic, involves roles if you're playing a gametype like CTF (attackers, defenders, maybe some skirmishers to disrupt defense.) And despite everyone basically being identical when that defender picks up a sniper rifle he's dynamically choosing a different role.
So nobody should suggest getting rid of the trinity if they happen to dislike it, since it's not really role definition which is the problem. Something else would be the problem. I'm not totally qualified to say what that is, since I enjoy the trinity in games, but I would guess it revolves a lot more around specific game rules being re-used than any objection to defined roles. Most specifically threat-based AI seems to be what a lot of players object to.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What I have read from this forums, in majority of posts, main reason against holy trinity is LFG?! IMHO this is not argument at all, it's pure convenience. Majority of players hate to take group responsibility to heal or are scared to take lead and tank, to learn every dungeon and encounter, what they really want is easy run without any responsibility and secure shiny loot.
I'm not against trinity, also not against any other system as long as such provides diversity and distinctive role/profession, but I’m really confused when some players hate trinity and don’t have any real argument aside subjective ones.
After mass popularization of MMO-s, every new game tends to minimize those roles, it's the natural process if you want to reach mass mediocrity population, at the end of this process, mainstream MMO-s will only have jack of all trades and master of none type of role/professions. Something when you have left only pawns and than pretend to play chess, with only two options: move and capture.
So tell me your reason against holy trinity, real reason pls?
I'm not really against the trinity, but I do see the reasons why MMOs are moving away from it. Every new game does tend to change the norm around, because every new game, or the games that came out within the past 1/2 a decade or so, try to either compete with the standard MMO ruleset, or try to be the next big sensation. MMOs have been around 20+ years or so, and I don't think redoing the trinity over and over again is quite cutting it nowadays, especially with how far MMOs have changed, along with how much their audiences have grown and changed.
I'm not sure if comparing the current skillset to a chess pawn is exactly the way to put it, but I do see what you are getting at. I think most feel the trinity is becoming a lather, rinse, repeat cycle in most cases, and can be quite a chore, rather than an enjoyable experience. If this were a decade or 2 ago, where MMOs were more fresh, basic, and the complexity was at best to a minimum (The Shadow of Yserbius, for example), I think the trinity would still be accepted as a regular standard, with little complaints, but since times have evolved, games are more dynamic, and the MMO franchise is aging, I can see a need for a new concept of group standards,outside the trinity.
I wonder how many people citing "hating waiting around for healers/tanks" in this thread and others like it have bashed wow or wow players for being part of the "instant-gratification" crowd when that hype was going around.
I personally like playing tanks. My gf actually likes playing healers. We enjoy playing those roles for various reasons. I don't see how turning everyone into a hybrid dpser is the solution that's going to save MMOs from this current stalemate that it's in.
The trinity is a terrible import from single player video games. If you look at pnp d&d all classes did similar damage, then you had classes that could absorb or dodge damage and those that healed it. No one wants to play the class that can't fight their way out of a wet paper bags. You either built your character to be a front line fighter, back line versitle support or a healer, damage was a group effort.
Comments
Mace or sword + shield is fun too, the two shield abilities are very annoying for the opponent
I was doing mace/sword + shield and greatsword for when I had to bash some skulls. The "grip" greatsword skill is fun too, the last one, don't remember the name (edit: it's "Binding Blade").
To those who never tried AC1 or GW2 - just imagine that PvE in WoW works just as PvP - you have no threat, to stop the baddies from crushing your squishy priest or mage, you have to get them away from them - and your priest/mage has of course to move/dodge too, he can't just stand there spamming spells.
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
I still haven't figured out what weapon combo for Guardians is best for "burst" damage.
Sword+Torch?
As someone who preferred tanking and healing i will tell you that you see some retarded dpsers. People hate dealing with the dpsers making stupid excuses for poor play and blaming it on a tank/healer. No one wants to listen to have to heal or protect damage meter mongers. They have tunnel vision. On a side note. I believe this is a big reason most mmorpgs have been dumbed down.
See ya all in guild wars 2
The thread is about the trinity
let's not take over!
Make a thread on the GW2 forums!
Respect, walk
Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
- PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
There's a Youtube video out there somewhere that basically says "one job is easier than three jobs" . So, with the Holy Trinity you have one job: Tank, Heal or DPS. If you tank, your only job is to get the boss to attack you. Nothing in the dugneon is going to change this. Same with heals and dps. If something goes wrong, you cannot switch roles mid-fight because the game says you must have the gear/skills/stats for that one job. The argument against this is that it's too limiting for both the players and the developer. Every dungeon must be created to assume there is a tank, healer and dps and it just gets boring after a while.
With characters being able to change roles mid fight, it adds to the diversity in which the dungeons can be made. There are times when ALL will be tanking, healing or dpsing or there are times when multiple players must switch roles throughout the fight. It's a much more interesting and creative system.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
Yeah I guess you're right. You don't understand teamplay.
If you don't see three players cooperating to beat an encounter they couldn't beat on their own, by maximizing their strengths to offset each others' weaknesses as "teamplay", I don't know what to say.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Currently, system is completely broken, dumbed down encounters, indefinite threat/aggro system, tank invincibility, indefinite healing abilities, absence of control variety, trivializing whole thing and then you got exactly what you explained.
Different schools of magic in majority of recent games stand just for different animation/color. Every role should have strength and weakness, there is no need for tank to be invincible, tough and designed to be in the front line sure yes, but vulnerable on certain magic dmg. Healer should not be able to save tank in situation where he is taking dmg not suppose to take.
---
"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
Trinity makes the fights statics and DPS plays in single player mode
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xGDL6QVL-8 a video about how the trinity is boring
I completely agree with this. Group encounters are not really epic when you think about what it takes to complete them. It would be nice if it were feasible for a game to make a fight more engaging and random, where you would talk about it after it was done rather than, "Well, that's finally over, let's roll for the loot."
The Holy Trinity is to blame, not just because there are roles, but the roles are usually one action -- tank taunts, healer heals. That would be really boring if made into a book or a movie, so why do we want to continue playing MMORPGs that way? At least make the roles more situational -- for example, the tank can taunt or knock down a target but it takes a lot of stamina, so it can't just be spammed. And a healer can heal but it also take a lot of power. If a game can be rebalanced so that its not anticipating that one player always has aggro, then I think the combat will end up being more "epic".
You don't have to completely remove roles, but what if your boss fight was more like a great movie scene and less like a job. The problem is a game actually creating this feeling... maybe it can't be done, but I'm willing to give games like GW2 a try because they're willing to attempt something different.
If in 1982 we played with the current mentality, we would have burned down all the pac man games since the red ghost was clearly OP. Instead we just got better at the game.
I have nothing against the trinity other than i personally am burned out on the aged mechanics that have been around since the beginning..
The trinity has served the mmorpg industry well but in 2012 it isnt and should not be the only way it can be done and there are many of us that are ready to move beyond the holy trinity and stale combat systems of the traditional mmorpg..
Playing GW2..
It's one of the limiting factor.
On the player front it means your role is defined from the moment you create your character, and unless you want to reroll or, in some cases, pay real money for class change you are stuck with it. Sure, recently MMOs offer a bit more variety within class through various "talent" builds and you can build damage oriented cleric or warrior, but more often than not you will find yourself forced into playing "accordingly" because everyone else can be damage dealer already.
On the design front it does put certain constraints on content and mechanics. You must build everything with the role of tank and healer in mind which tends to have the side effect of putting the most strain on players playing those classes. If you mess up as tank your group wipes, if you mess up as healer, your team wipes, if you mess up as dps...it just takes a bit longer to kill stuff. The solution the developers came up with are all the DPS race encounters, but same time those have tendency to be moslty rather gear depndant rather than actual challenge. It's the case of "You must grind for 2 months before you can progress further". It's an artifical barrier.
On the numbers front, it makes it much harder to balance PvP, you have to account for turtling, so the damage needs to be high enough to go through the heals, so in turn someone not specced super defensive gets killed very quickly and that in turn is another problem in PvP. It's much harder to balance PvE versus PvP with the tirnity involved, hence the rather underwheming PvP in MMOs lately.
As much as trinity isn't really the biggest issue of MMO market, the problem is develoeprs rarely can do something interesting with it. There is too much focus on using those roles over the possibility of roles being optional and merely beneficial in certain situations. It's just a very rigid system that doesn't add much by itself and it's been around for so long it's simply not interesting anymore for many people.
Meh, I prefer the trinity combat. To me, I think it's better to have to be dependent on others to accomplish things. I've always enjoyed group content for that very reason, because you need your buddies to take it on.
It's not simply a matter of inserting random face #109232 out of everyone that is highly self-sufficient in a group of interdependent individuals.
I miss the days where having a specific class completely changed the dynamic of your group and how it would work.
So.. What's raid going to be like without holy trinity?
Try to kill the boss before everyone wiped? I'm not bashing either case. Just curious in games without the holy trinity, how are the raids play like. Since only games I ever raided have holy trinity.
Its an old outdated idea taken from a board game and stuck into a videogame. Its vastly limited and handicaps the entire game creating more dependency group structure than needed in a game.
So do you think raids or dungeon become more strategical without holy trinity?
I don't hate the trinity; I just hate when it's the only onption in a game. The problem is that monsters are too generic, and the trinity is often the most effective way to play. It's much more manageable when dealing with large groups. Games without specific roles often just turn into zergfests... which can be fun from time to time, but I don't think it would hold up for the meat of the game. Back to my point; a big problem that often gets overlooked is the monsters, themselves. Most games really have nothing to distinguish them (other than some boss mechanics). In most cases, everything you have is just damage and it turns into a numbers game. Whether you're talking about healing or damage, it all boils down to number/time. Well, say for instance that your sword, and the skills associated with it were more, or less, effective depending on what you were fighting. Or what if there were other facets to healing, rather than just straight HP. It wouldn't really be all that hard to make each encounter fairly unique. Just give monsters more properties, like elements, size, race, strengths/weaknesses. That way, if a party is going through a dungeon (or even just roaming around), people's roles would dynamically change depending on what they were fighting.
Another problem is customization. Players aren't given very much wiggle room in what they can make. You pick a class, then you can do [insert role]. Between that and the crippling balance that most games strive for, there's not very much room left for creative builds or alternate ways to approach a situation. Even though boss fights change up the hum-drum trash mob fight, they still have pretty set mechanics, and there are very few, if only one, way to do about it. It might be interesting if a game had encounters that couldn't really solved by simply looking at a youtube video, becuase what would for one player/group may not work for you, and vise versa.
The funny thing is that I'm not even talking about something that's not been done before. DAoC had different types of physical damage and armors, and Ragnarok Online had a plethora of features that distinguished monster types. I know these examples are older games, and I'm not calling for a mass regressing. I'm just saying that these are pretty good features that are simple and keep combat fresh. Both games I mentioned had the trinity in them, but were more flexible because the game actually allowed it. Regardless whether there's a trinity imposed or not, there's going to be issues with combat roles if the monsters aren't improved.
Well it's certainly possible.
Go achieves strategic gameplay without roles (although I'm sure different placements of pieces are given "role"-like names in Go.)
But a ton of strategic things (in real-life and in games) involve a wide variety of roles being employed (which is really what makes the trinity the trinity to me; clearly we're not talking about the original EQ trinity when we refer to it anymore, so we may as well zoom out to the abstract concept it's really describing: different players in different roles.)
Even in Halo, a game I don't exactly hold to be all that strategic, involves roles if you're playing a gametype like CTF (attackers, defenders, maybe some skirmishers to disrupt defense.) And despite everyone basically being identical when that defender picks up a sniper rifle he's dynamically choosing a different role.
So nobody should suggest getting rid of the trinity if they happen to dislike it, since it's not really role definition which is the problem. Something else would be the problem. I'm not totally qualified to say what that is, since I enjoy the trinity in games, but I would guess it revolves a lot more around specific game rules being re-used than any objection to defined roles. Most specifically threat-based AI seems to be what a lot of players object to.
"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 really against the trinity, but I do see the reasons why MMOs are moving away from it. Every new game does tend to change the norm around, because every new game, or the games that came out within the past 1/2 a decade or so, try to either compete with the standard MMO ruleset, or try to be the next big sensation. MMOs have been around 20+ years or so, and I don't think redoing the trinity over and over again is quite cutting it nowadays, especially with how far MMOs have changed, along with how much their audiences have grown and changed.
I'm not sure if comparing the current skillset to a chess pawn is exactly the way to put it, but I do see what you are getting at. I think most feel the trinity is becoming a lather, rinse, repeat cycle in most cases, and can be quite a chore, rather than an enjoyable experience. If this were a decade or 2 ago, where MMOs were more fresh, basic, and the complexity was at best to a minimum (The Shadow of Yserbius, for example), I think the trinity would still be accepted as a regular standard, with little complaints, but since times have evolved, games are more dynamic, and the MMO franchise is aging, I can see a need for a new concept of group standards,outside the trinity.
I wonder how many people citing "hating waiting around for healers/tanks" in this thread and others like it have bashed wow or wow players for being part of the "instant-gratification" crowd when that hype was going around.
I personally like playing tanks. My gf actually likes playing healers. We enjoy playing those roles for various reasons. I don't see how turning everyone into a hybrid dpser is the solution that's going to save MMOs from this current stalemate that it's in.
The trinity is a terrible import from single player video games. If you look at pnp d&d all classes did similar damage, then you had classes that could absorb or dodge damage and those that healed it. No one wants to play the class that can't fight their way out of a wet paper bags. You either built your character to be a front line fighter, back line versitle support or a healer, damage was a group effort.