In DnD, there was no trinity. A fighter was not a tank and his taunt did not do what most MMO studios have turned it into. The cleric could also be a major damage power house when fighting anything undead related. The rogue was great when traps were actually in a game, however they have also always been great damage dealers too.
So in DnD, which MMOs were mostly based off of was more like, DPS-DPS/healer-DPS/support and the dungeon master decided who the monster attacked. Taunt or healing had nothing to do with it unless the dungeon master chose it. Not the system that is considered the standard now a days. I have only seen one game recently try to get back to something more similar to the original DnD party set up and the people who didn't know any better of course are crying about it. Even those that don't even play said game. /shrug
Trinity doesn't exist in a tabletop situation because you have a DM who will prepare and customize sessions based on group make up. I've seen games without healers and nothing else than out of combat heals work, but if the DM did something differently we would all be dead.
You can't program a computer to that yet. A computer has to have rules set up, also know as the AI. Based on those rules, he will engage and execute pre-programmed commands. Now in GW2 he doesn't follow the old taunt to determine who he should hit, he follows another set of rules, don't know the rules, but they are something like every ability adds x amount of hate, when x greater than eeveryone else x, he will swing at you. He might have a random swing at another person programmed in there somewehre, or a completely random swing rotation, but nothing changes, except they didn't add a taunt ability.
Roles even exist in GW2, they are just watered down to a point where everyone can fill the role, but also removes identity to class roles. Who is the healer, everyone is the healer, so I just dps and when I need a heal, I'll heal. Oh wait my health is going down, oh no problem the mage heals me, oh low again, now the .... heals me. Everyone heals, everyone dps and everyone tanks. I don't like that system. I stopped playing GW2. I told my guild it was mostly because of the lack of trinity. I'm not demanding trinity to be inserted or whatever system that might work there. If the devs feel they can fix the game without trinity, by all means, go for it. I just think that trinity is what's lacking in GW2 for me. Now if you like it, go play it. I'm not stopping anyone from playing the game they enjoy. I just strongly believe that a system like the trinity system is required to play a group based game that doesn't end up being a dps zerg fests.
For me trinity is very important. Any multiplayer game with team content should have it imo. I enjoy filling a specific role that has synergy with another. It is the backbone in every efficient team regardless if its in game or real life.
Cant see any downside to it that trinity itself does not solve by itself or comes from design that is tied directly to the trinity.
Originally posted by CorvusCorax For me trinity is very important. Any multiplayer game with team content should have it imo. I enjoy filling a specific role that has synergy with another. It is the backbone in every efficient team regardless if its in game or real life. Cant see any downside to it that trinity itself does not solve by itself or comes from design that is tied directly to the trinity.
... when you say 'trinity' here, do you mean 'roles'?
Because I think people are using the two interchangeably, and that's a little confusing.
When I complain that MMOs seem endlessly stuck following the holy trinity lately (As in heal, dps and tank), I specifically mean that particular puzzle set is overused.
Can have lots of ways of setting up roles that doesn't use those specific three roles.
Never seen a battle healer in any team sports game RL I can remember. :T
Trinity doesn't exist in a tabletop situation because you have a DM who will prepare and customize sessions based on group make up. I've seen games without healers and nothing else than out of combat heals work, but if the DM did something differently we would all be dead.
What a wussy DM.
DM should throw puzzles at the party, and they should figure out how to solve them with the tools they have. Look at all those pre-made modules out there, they're not filled with 80 pages of 'If you have this party makeup you need to remove this and add this'. When I was running my campaign I created maps and puzzles and enemies ahead of time, and let the players use their skills and imagination to combat them. I didn't say 'Oh, they have a cleric so I need a specific amount of undead so he can utilize his turn undead skills'. The only concession I did to party makeup was to adjust the challenge rating to match the amount of players.
Originally posted by CorvusCorax For me trinity is very important. Any multiplayer game with team content should have it imo. I enjoy filling a specific role that has synergy with another. It is the backbone in every efficient team regardless if its in game or real life. Cant see any downside to it that trinity itself does not solve by itself or comes from design that is tied directly to the trinity.
... when you say 'trinity' here, do you mean 'roles'?
Because I think people are using the two interchangeably, and that's a little confusing.
When I complain that MMOs seem endlessly stuck following the holy trinity lately (As in heal, dps and tank), I specifically mean that particular puzzle set is overused.
Can have lots of ways of setting up roles that doesn't use those specific three roles.
Never seen a battle healer in any team sports game RL I can remember. :T
Yah thanks Meowhead, just to clarify...Trinity, in the context of this thread means the very specific healer/DPS/tank formula that can be seen in WoW, FFXI and XIV, Rift, etc...
Roles are something that I think are VERY important in a team game, but should NOT be restricted to only the holy trinity. The holy trinity is a very specific way to implement roles.
It was a very good read OP. Looking back at good ole' EQ 1. A group usually had a tank, healer, puller, cc and then two dps. I enjoyed that grouping quite a-lot. However it does not make it the perfect grouping mechanism nor is the holy trinity perfect.
For me I would like to see a game that allows players to be two roles at once, but never being able to fill both without losing focus or balance for the group. Kind of like DOTA 2, where characters can fill different roles based on the group. A carry may want to switch be a support based on the other characters in the group.
I am not talking about the WoW talent system where you could switch between different gear sets and talent trees to make your role superior for the raid, but already having the capability to do so. Maybe a simplified version of that, but without having to trade out gear sets or talent trees to do so.
Thanks Burdoc . And I agree that DOTA 2 is a good example of how a game can have team roles that are dynamic and do not fall into just one combat model every fight (tank and spank).
I would like to see a game where you can choose from many different specialties, and the players need to figure out how to make their specialties work together in different encounters.
For example, maybe one player has amazing melee AoE DPS, and another player has the ability to suck the enemies into one place with a vacuum. Clearly, you can see how these would work together. But if you imagine that the vacuum player is replaced by a player that can put down a "cage" that traps monsters...the two will need to change their strategy a bit, but it's still very viable (trap melee DPS in a cage with all the monsters).
And like you say, I think it's important for players to be able to change their specialties as needed. Because every team make-up should not be able to conquer every encounter. If they can, then the encounters were designed too easily, or the character builds are allowed to be too independently powerful, which removes the need for team play.
Personally, I think it would be a lot of fun to analyze a potential fight with friends and then decide on roles for everyone and how the whole thing is going to play out.
Originally posted by CorvusCorax For me trinity is very important. Any multiplayer game with team content should have it imo. I enjoy filling a specific role that has synergy with another. It is the backbone in every efficient team regardless if its in game or real life. Cant see any downside to it that trinity itself does not solve by itself or comes from design that is tied directly to the trinity.
... when you say 'trinity' here, do you mean 'roles'?
Because I think people are using the two interchangeably, and that's a little confusing.
When I complain that MMOs seem endlessly stuck following the holy trinity lately (As in heal, dps and tank), I specifically mean that particular puzzle set is overused.
Can have lots of ways of setting up roles that doesn't use those specific three roles.
Never seen a battle healer in any team sports game RL I can remember. :T
Yah thanks Meowhead, just to clarify...Trinity, in the context of this thread means the very specific healer/DPS/tank formula that can be seen in WoW, FFXI and XIV, Rift, etc...
Roles are something that I think are VERY important in a team game, but should NOT be restricted to only the holy trinity. The holy trinity is a very specific way to implement roles.
Your original post was rather confusing because it spoke about the benefits of roles in general, not about the benefits of the trinity. Roles arise in every game where you can specialize, be that through a class, set of abilities or equipment.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
In DnD, there was no trinity. A fighter was not a tank and his taunt did not do what most MMO studios have turned it into. The cleric could also be a major damage power house when fighting anything undead related. The rogue was great when traps were actually in a game, however they have also always been great damage dealers too.
So in DnD, which MMOs were mostly based off of was more like, DPS-DPS/healer-DPS/support and the dungeon master decided who the monster attacked. Taunt or healing had nothing to do with it unless the dungeon master chose it. Not the system that is considered the standard now a days. I have only seen one game recently try to get back to something more similar to the original DnD party set up and the people who didn't know any better of course are crying about it. Even those that don't even play said game. /shrug
Thats pure comedy gold 10/10.
Not going to teach you how to play Dungeons and Dragons since you never played it.
But there is simple things like constitution which gives more hp,hp is good for tank its also good against paralyzation etc..
also fighter with 14+ dex can parry and dodge ,not going to explain this either what does it mean.
I really dont know which movies or books you know where peeps presses taunt button,like there is somekind of taunt button.
I assume you understand what it means to make someone angry or calm,you can call it taunting/detaunting from now on .
Rogues great dmg dealers,ok,maybe with dagger +500.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
While DDO has some problems (and according to some in the community it is blasphemy to even associate it with D&D) one aspect of the combat system that I like is that a character using a shield can actively/physically block an attack. The quality and size of the shield will absorb a corresponding level of punishment. If you raise your shield in time you can block projectile attacks, protect another character behind you or effectively seal off a doorway. While aggro mechanics still exist it is fun that decent shield-work can slow down a giant.
This type of interaction only occurs in this active fashion because of collision detection/body blocking which is typically explained away due to player abuse or griefing possibilities. Of course their combat system, which has a number of other great features imo, is also defined by the heavily instanced nature of the DDO world.
At any rate, when talking about roles or trinity (or whatever) I think many games should integrate some form of collision detection to go along with a lessened aggro mechanic. Nothing says combat positioning like a phalanx of plate-wearing tower shield wielding dwarves simply standing in your way. Of course that same CD works for your opponents and presents some interesting battle possibilities.
Thing is without taunts, stuff gets really chaotic real fast. unless your doing evrything with stuns and cc's but then you might asswell scrap your healer asswell because hes scratching his ass until someone occasionally gets hit.
So you have dps classes wich can CC but during fights people will stop CCing at some point or hit wrong targets etc. i see more problems arising then it solves.
Chaos is not a bad thing as far as fight dynamics go. It means unpredictability, less repetitiveness. The best, most memorable fights in trinity MMOs were always those where the trinity broke for some reason, and everyone had to play outside of the familiar route that his role dictated.
Yeah, I can sign that. The greatest fault of the trinity is that if everything goes according to plan, virtually every encounter is the same. It gets boring really fast.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
The anti-trinity stuff is a bit oversimplified. In games with well designed trinity systems (EQ, EQ2 are my primary experience) having high DPS is essential for more challenging fights. Granted EQ2 isn't really in that place anymore, but in its golden years crowd control and high DPS players were essential to beat hard zones like Palace of Ferzhul. Many fights had high DPS checks with increased chance of failure if you took too long to finish a fight. Not to mention all the failure conditions placed on random players to make sure they are paying attention and contributing.
There are plenty of ways to spice up fights without removing the trinity.
That being said, my biggest gripe with tanking these days, is that its too damn easy, and if the tank loses aggro its usually game over. Tanks shouldn't be the only class that can take a hit, they should just be the easiest to keep up (and most mana efficient for the healers). Also they should have to work a lot harder to hold aggro. Playing EQ2 or WoW these days, as long as you are a tank and you hit your buttons on cooldown... you have guaranteed aggro. That wasn't how it used to be, it used to be a struggle getting enough threat to let DPS fully unleash.
I guess that means I like a light trinity, rather than heavy trinity. I like roles to be adaptable rather than set in stone, but still have optimal roles that they can play.
The anti-trinity stuff is a bit oversimplified. In games with well designed trinity systems (EQ, EQ2 are my primary experience) having high DPS is essential for more challenging fights. Granted EQ2 isn't really in that place anymore, but in its golden years crowd control and high DPS players were essential to beat hard zones like Palace of Ferzhul. Many fights had high DPS checks with increased chance of failure if you took too long to finish a fight. Not to mention all the failure conditions placed on random players to make sure they are paying attention and contributing.
There are plenty of ways to spice up fights without removing the trinity.
That being said, my biggest gripe with tanking these days, is that its too damn easy, and if the tank loses aggro its usually game over. Tanks shouldn't be the only class that can take a hit, they should just be the easiest to keep up (and most mana efficient for the healers). Also they should have to work a lot harder to hold aggro. Playing EQ2 or WoW these days, as long as you are a tank and you hit your buttons on cooldown... you have guaranteed aggro. That wasn't how it used to be, it used to be a struggle getting enough threat to let DPS fully unleash.
I guess that means I like a light trinity, rather than heavy trinity. I like roles to be adaptable rather than set in stone, but still have optimal roles that they can play.
Thats pretty much the problem these days ,everything is too easy.
But if we go back in time few years and think about really simple game like WoW.
Where cc also was actually needed and rogues skill to sneak,we have pretty damn good multiplayer addition.
And thats exactly what Thiefs did in for example D&D ,they hide in shadows,moves silently and listens noises (if possible) and party can act the best way possible.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
I think it is the dps portion that is killing the trinity. The dps should be spread pretty evenly throughout all classes. Turn the dps only classes into CC, off tanks, support (buffers/debuffers), or off healers. You would need a synergy system that allowed to off tanks or off healers to fill the main role plus static group sizes really needs to be looked at again.
Not going to teach you how to play Dungeons and Dragons since you never played it.
But there is simple things like constitution which gives more hp,hp is good for tank its also good against paralyzation etc..
also fighter with 14+ dex can parry and dodge ,not going to explain this either what does it mean.
I really dont know which movies or books you know where peeps presses taunt button,like there is somekind of taunt button.
I assume you understand what it means to make someone angry or calm,you can call it taunting/detaunting from now on .
Rogues great dmg dealers,ok,maybe with dagger +500.
I wonder what DnD you have played since I found rodingo's post to be fairly accurate. There is no tank in the similar sense there is one in MMORPGs. It is recommended to have a front line, but no need for a "tank" in particular. You can make one, but since the Taunt skill is rather weak, and depending on the GM, it is useful only in a very specialized situation.
Generally you can block enemies by moving in their way but if you don't have Combat Reflexes feat and a high Dexterity, you only get one Attack of Opportunity per enemy. That is if your enemies don't have Mobility, Spring Attack or one doesn't simply grapple you when others move past you freely. And you can't always fight in a 1-square-wide corridor.
It doesn't matter if you build your defense from armor or other AC bonuses, HP or other means, the fact remains, D&D had no tank in the similar sense that MMORPGs have it. Then again, your DM might have run a much different game than I did. Perhaps your D&D combat encounters did resemble trinity combat. Mine didn't.
Also, a Rogue is a utility/burst damage character although highly situational. A high level Rogue is a very powerful thing with high damage if you use it right.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Not going to teach you how to play Dungeons and Dragons since you never played it.
But there is simple things like constitution which gives more hp,hp is good for tank its also good against paralyzation etc..
also fighter with 14+ dex can parry and dodge ,not going to explain this either what does it mean.
I really dont know which movies or books you know where peeps presses taunt button,like there is somekind of taunt button.
I assume you understand what it means to make someone angry or calm,you can call it taunting/detaunting from now on .
Rogues great dmg dealers,ok,maybe with dagger +500.
I wonder what DnD you have played since I found rodingo's post to be fairly accurate. There is no tank in the similar sense there is one in MMORPGs. It is recommended to have a front line, but no need for a "tank" in particular. You can make one, but since the Taunt skill is rather weak, and depending on the GM, it is useful only in a very specialized situation.
Generally you can block enemies by moving in their way but if you don't have Combat Reflexes feat and a high Dexterity, you only get one Attack of Opportunity per enemy. That is if your enemies don't have Mobility, Spring Attack or one doesn't simply grapple you when others move past you freely. And you can't always fight in a 1-square-wide corridor.
It doesn't matter if you build your defense from armor or other AC bonuses, HP or other means, the fact remains, D&D had no tank in the similar sense that MMORPGs have it. Then again, your DM might have run a much different game than I did. Perhaps your D&D combat encounters did resemble trinity combat. Mine didn't.
Also, a Rogue is a utility/burst damage character although highly situational. A high level Rogue is a very powerful thing with high damage if you use it right.
Sure you can play with taunt skill if you want to but i prefer to kicking someone in the balls or cut their legs and also i would like to tell my team to stay back ,also charisma ,int or wis or characters race can be a deciding factor who is getting attacked,and my party might know it.sure you can play with your taunt button,theres plenty of things that i can use to hold aggro also theres hold persons ,monsters (cc) which can help me even further.
And there is a tank in this game,its not needed if you play against -500 level monster i think.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
@OP, I agree to your reply. Like anything it would require a balancing act. But the potential for characters having unique abilities, changing the strategy of the encounter, would be awesome.
The Trinity works well enough for what it is. However, it is a very simplistic dynamic, not allowing for much depth in strategy and it's rather done to death. It's one thing to have the same dynamic repeated in a few games but to have it repeated in every single game pretty much regardless of theme gets old quick.
For example, if we look at a FPS style game. We can see a much wider variety of roles and many roles have multiple different applications depending upon situation.
In the broad sense we have.... infantry, armor, artillery, air,
However each of these arms breaks down even much further into sub functions with an individual unit being able to fulfill one or more.... recon, fire suppresion, assault, area denial, area control, anti-armor, anti-air, anti-personnel, force protection, transport, combat engineering, medical, command and control, etc
There is alot more going on there then the typical Trinity Tank and Spank because there are entirely new important functions not really considered in the Trinity (movement, spotting, etc) and strong variation in HOW each unit attacks, defends and performs it's roll (a flamethrower, a machinegun, a howitzer and a dive-bomber all can do a good amount of damage, but they do it in VERY different ways).
So yes, definately I agree with the OP....that the Trinity is not neccesarly the only way or the best way for an MMO to do combat roles. Though it does work on a basic level.
Not going to teach you how to play Dungeons and Dragons since you never played it.
But there is simple things like constitution which gives more hp,hp is good for tank its also good against paralyzation etc..
also fighter with 14+ dex can parry and dodge ,not going to explain this either what does it mean.
I really dont know which movies or books you know where peeps presses taunt button,like there is somekind of taunt button.
I assume you understand what it means to make someone angry or calm,you can call it taunting/detaunting from now on .
Rogues great dmg dealers,ok,maybe with dagger +500.
I wonder what DnD you have played since I found rodingo's post to be fairly accurate. There is no tank in the similar sense there is one in MMORPGs. It is recommended to have a front line, but no need for a "tank" in particular. You can make one, but since the Taunt skill is rather weak, and depending on the GM, it is useful only in a very specialized situation.
Generally you can block enemies by moving in their way but if you don't have Combat Reflexes feat and a high Dexterity, you only get one Attack of Opportunity per enemy. That is if your enemies don't have Mobility, Spring Attack or one doesn't simply grapple you when others move past you freely. And you can't always fight in a 1-square-wide corridor.
It doesn't matter if you build your defense from armor or other AC bonuses, HP or other means, the fact remains, D&D had no tank in the similar sense that MMORPGs have it. Then again, your DM might have run a much different game than I did. Perhaps your D&D combat encounters did resemble trinity combat. Mine didn't.
Also, a Rogue is a utility/burst damage character although highly situational. A high level Rogue is a very powerful thing with high damage if you use it right.
Sure you can play with taunt skill if you want to but i prefer to kicking someone in the balls or cut their legs and also i would like to tell my team to stay back ,also charisma ,int or wis or characters race can be a deciding factor who is getting attacked,and my party might know it.sure you can play with your taunt button,theres plenty of things that i can use to hold aggro also theres hold persons ,monsters (cc) which can help me even further.
And there is a tank in this game,its not needed if you play against -500 level monster i think.
not sure why you guys are comparing video game mechanics to table top role playing games
aggro in those games are determined by one factor alone, the DM
Originally posted by CorvusCorax For me trinity is very important. Any multiplayer game with team content should have it imo. I enjoy filling a specific role that has synergy with another. It is the backbone in every efficient team regardless if its in game or real life. Cant see any downside to it that trinity itself does not solve by itself or comes from design that is tied directly to the trinity.
... when you say 'trinity' here, do you mean 'roles'?
Because I think people are using the two interchangeably, and that's a little confusing.
When I complain that MMOs seem endlessly stuck following the holy trinity lately (As in heal, dps and tank), I specifically mean that particular puzzle set is overused.
Can have lots of ways of setting up roles that doesn't use those specific three roles.
Never seen a battle healer in any team sports game RL I can remember. :T
Yah thanks Meowhead, just to clarify...Trinity, in the context of this thread means the very specific healer/DPS/tank formula that can be seen in WoW, FFXI and XIV, Rift, etc...
Roles are something that I think are VERY important in a team game, but should NOT be restricted to only the holy trinity. The holy trinity is a very specific way to implement roles.
Your original post was rather confusing because it spoke about the benefits of roles in general, not about the benefits of the trinity. Roles arise in every game where you can specialize, be that through a class, set of abilities or equipment.
My point was that the thing that makes the Trinity an attractive and fun concept is the fact that it allows people to play a specialized role in a team. Also, I wouldn't say that roles (meaning roles in a team) necessarily arise in any game where you can specialize.
They only arise when the problems of the game demand them. For example, in GW2 you can make a warrior that is very specialized toward crowd control with tons of stuns, or an elementalist with lots of AoE healing. Yet...you don't really see these roles playing a big part in the team dynamic of GW2 PvE. Most GW2 PvE is just a bunch of random, self-sufficient classes rolling through a dungeon.
Why?
Because the team dynamic of the game does not require that kind of specialization. Why have a dedicated healer when everyone can heal? And what is the point of all that CC when you can just lift someone up if they get downed?
The point is that just because you can specialize in a game, does not mean that the team dynamic of choice will necessarily involve specialization.
I personally love games with the holy trinity, Tank, Healer, DPS.
I think all games need this to function properly PVE wise, another thing people seem to forget is sub categories of the holy trinity like the support classes(Buffing/ Debuffing), Off-tanks, different types of DPS (melee,stealth,burst,DoT,caster,ranged).
There is alot of room for unique things within the trinity but not having a tank or healers in a game just seems wrong.
Also, a Rogue is a utility/burst damage character although highly situational. A high level Rogue is a very powerful thing with high damage if you use it right.
Sure you can play with taunt skill if you want to but i prefer to kicking someone in the balls or cut their legs and also i would like to tell my team to stay back ,also charisma ,int or wis or characters race can be a deciding factor who is getting attacked,and my party might know it.sure you can play with your taunt button,theres plenty of things that i can use to hold aggro also theres hold persons ,monsters (cc) which can help me even further.
And there is a tank in this game,its not needed if you play against -500 level monster i think.
not sure why you guys are comparing video game mechanics to table top role playing games
aggro in those games are determined by one factor alone, the DM
Bingo.
The Trinity, as we know it in MMORPGs works ONLY because there is an artificial and predictable aggro mechanic that allows the tank to consistently keep aggro. If you remove aggro management from a trinity game like WoW, the trinity is gone.
I don't care how tanky you are, if the monster attacks the healer, and you can't stop him...there is no trinity.
I personally love games with the holy trinity, Tank, Healer, DPS.
I think all games need this to function properly PVE wise, another thing people seem to forget is sub categories of the holy trinity like the support classes(Buffing/ Debuffing), Off-tanks, different types of DPS (melee,stealth,burst,DoT,caster,ranged).
There is alot of room for unique things within the trinity but not having a tank or healers in a game just seems wrong.
Only if you cannot imagine a world where everyone can do everything and people need to work together compensating each other's weaknesses in a non-linear way ... I know, shocking.
not sure why you guys are comparing video game mechanics to table top role playing games
aggro in those games are determined by one factor alone, the DM
Bingo.
The Trinity, as we know it in MMORPGs works ONLY because there is an artificial and predictable aggro mechanic that allows the tank to consistently keep aggro. If you remove aggro management from a trinity game like WoW, the trinity is gone.
I don't care how tanky you are, if the monster attacks the healer, and you can't stop him...there is no trinity.
Problem is that its not possible to remove "aggro management"
Its like saying ,we removed anger,hate and love from world.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
not sure why you guys are comparing video game mechanics to table top role playing games
aggro in those games are determined by one factor alone, the DM
Bingo.
The Trinity, as we know it in MMORPGs works ONLY because there is an artificial and predictable aggro mechanic that allows the tank to consistently keep aggro. If you remove aggro management from a trinity game like WoW, the trinity is gone.
I don't care how tanky you are, if the monster attacks the healer, and you can't stop him...there is no trinity.
Problem is that its not possible to remove "aggro management"
Its like saying ,we removed anger,hate and love from world.
You can if you add in systems to compensate for it (players being able to physical manhandle monsters away from healer if needed or block doors with their shields, etc )
Comments
Trinity doesn't exist in a tabletop situation because you have a DM who will prepare and customize sessions based on group make up. I've seen games without healers and nothing else than out of combat heals work, but if the DM did something differently we would all be dead.
You can't program a computer to that yet. A computer has to have rules set up, also know as the AI. Based on those rules, he will engage and execute pre-programmed commands. Now in GW2 he doesn't follow the old taunt to determine who he should hit, he follows another set of rules, don't know the rules, but they are something like every ability adds x amount of hate, when x greater than eeveryone else x, he will swing at you. He might have a random swing at another person programmed in there somewehre, or a completely random swing rotation, but nothing changes, except they didn't add a taunt ability.
Roles even exist in GW2, they are just watered down to a point where everyone can fill the role, but also removes identity to class roles. Who is the healer, everyone is the healer, so I just dps and when I need a heal, I'll heal. Oh wait my health is going down, oh no problem the mage heals me, oh low again, now the .... heals me. Everyone heals, everyone dps and everyone tanks. I don't like that system. I stopped playing GW2. I told my guild it was mostly because of the lack of trinity. I'm not demanding trinity to be inserted or whatever system that might work there. If the devs feel they can fix the game without trinity, by all means, go for it. I just think that trinity is what's lacking in GW2 for me. Now if you like it, go play it. I'm not stopping anyone from playing the game they enjoy. I just strongly believe that a system like the trinity system is required to play a group based game that doesn't end up being a dps zerg fests.
Cant see any downside to it that trinity itself does not solve by itself or comes from design that is tied directly to the trinity.
... when you say 'trinity' here, do you mean 'roles'?
Because I think people are using the two interchangeably, and that's a little confusing.
When I complain that MMOs seem endlessly stuck following the holy trinity lately (As in heal, dps and tank), I specifically mean that particular puzzle set is overused.
Can have lots of ways of setting up roles that doesn't use those specific three roles.
Never seen a battle healer in any team sports game RL I can remember. :T
Yah thanks Meowhead, just to clarify...Trinity, in the context of this thread means the very specific healer/DPS/tank formula that can be seen in WoW, FFXI and XIV, Rift, etc...
Roles are something that I think are VERY important in a team game, but should NOT be restricted to only the holy trinity. The holy trinity is a very specific way to implement roles.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Thanks Burdoc
. And I agree that DOTA 2 is a good example of how a game can have team roles that are dynamic and do not fall into just one combat model every fight (tank and spank).
I would like to see a game where you can choose from many different specialties, and the players need to figure out how to make their specialties work together in different encounters.
For example, maybe one player has amazing melee AoE DPS, and another player has the ability to suck the enemies into one place with a vacuum. Clearly, you can see how these would work together. But if you imagine that the vacuum player is replaced by a player that can put down a "cage" that traps monsters...the two will need to change their strategy a bit, but it's still very viable (trap melee DPS in a cage with all the monsters).
And like you say, I think it's important for players to be able to change their specialties as needed. Because every team make-up should not be able to conquer every encounter. If they can, then the encounters were designed too easily, or the character builds are allowed to be too independently powerful, which removes the need for team play.
Personally, I think it would be a lot of fun to analyze a potential fight with friends and then decide on roles for everyone and how the whole thing is going to play out.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Your original post was rather confusing because it spoke about the benefits of roles in general, not about the benefits of the trinity. Roles arise in every game where you can specialize, be that through a class, set of abilities or equipment.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Thats pure comedy gold 10/10.
Not going to teach you how to play Dungeons and Dragons since you never played it.
But there is simple things like constitution which gives more hp,hp is good for tank its also good against paralyzation etc..
also fighter with 14+ dex can parry and dodge ,not going to explain this either what does it mean.
I really dont know which movies or books you know where peeps presses taunt button,like there is somekind of taunt button.
I assume you understand what it means to make someone angry or calm,you can call it taunting/detaunting from now on .
Rogues great dmg dealers,ok,maybe with dagger +500.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
While DDO has some problems (and according to some in the community it is blasphemy to even associate it with D&D) one aspect of the combat system that I like is that a character using a shield can actively/physically block an attack. The quality and size of the shield will absorb a corresponding level of punishment. If you raise your shield in time you can block projectile attacks, protect another character behind you or effectively seal off a doorway. While aggro mechanics still exist it is fun that decent shield-work can slow down a giant.
This type of interaction only occurs in this active fashion because of collision detection/body blocking which is typically explained away due to player abuse or griefing possibilities. Of course their combat system, which has a number of other great features imo, is also defined by the heavily instanced nature of the DDO world.
At any rate, when talking about roles or trinity (or whatever) I think many games should integrate some form of collision detection to go along with a lessened aggro mechanic. Nothing says combat positioning like a phalanx of plate-wearing tower shield wielding dwarves simply standing in your way. Of course that same CD works for your opponents and presents some interesting battle possibilities.
Yeah, I can sign that. The greatest fault of the trinity is that if everything goes according to plan, virtually every encounter is the same. It gets boring really fast.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
The anti-trinity stuff is a bit oversimplified. In games with well designed trinity systems (EQ, EQ2 are my primary experience) having high DPS is essential for more challenging fights. Granted EQ2 isn't really in that place anymore, but in its golden years crowd control and high DPS players were essential to beat hard zones like Palace of Ferzhul. Many fights had high DPS checks with increased chance of failure if you took too long to finish a fight. Not to mention all the failure conditions placed on random players to make sure they are paying attention and contributing.
There are plenty of ways to spice up fights without removing the trinity.
That being said, my biggest gripe with tanking these days, is that its too damn easy, and if the tank loses aggro its usually game over. Tanks shouldn't be the only class that can take a hit, they should just be the easiest to keep up (and most mana efficient for the healers). Also they should have to work a lot harder to hold aggro. Playing EQ2 or WoW these days, as long as you are a tank and you hit your buttons on cooldown... you have guaranteed aggro. That wasn't how it used to be, it used to be a struggle getting enough threat to let DPS fully unleash.
I guess that means I like a light trinity, rather than heavy trinity. I like roles to be adaptable rather than set in stone, but still have optimal roles that they can play.
Thats pretty much the problem these days ,everything is too easy.
But if we go back in time few years and think about really simple game like WoW.
Where cc also was actually needed and rogues skill to sneak,we have pretty damn good multiplayer addition.
And thats exactly what Thiefs did in for example D&D ,they hide in shadows,moves silently and listens noises (if possible) and party can act the best way possible.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
I wonder what DnD you have played since I found rodingo's post to be fairly accurate. There is no tank in the similar sense there is one in MMORPGs. It is recommended to have a front line, but no need for a "tank" in particular. You can make one, but since the Taunt skill is rather weak, and depending on the GM, it is useful only in a very specialized situation.
Generally you can block enemies by moving in their way but if you don't have Combat Reflexes feat and a high Dexterity, you only get one Attack of Opportunity per enemy. That is if your enemies don't have Mobility, Spring Attack or one doesn't simply grapple you when others move past you freely. And you can't always fight in a 1-square-wide corridor.
It doesn't matter if you build your defense from armor or other AC bonuses, HP or other means, the fact remains, D&D had no tank in the similar sense that MMORPGs have it. Then again, your DM might have run a much different game than I did. Perhaps your D&D combat encounters did resemble trinity combat. Mine didn't.
Also, a Rogue is a utility/burst damage character although highly situational. A high level Rogue is a very powerful thing with high damage if you use it right.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Sure you can play with taunt skill if you want to but i prefer to kicking someone in the balls or cut their legs and also i would like to tell my team to stay back ,also charisma ,int or wis or characters race can be a deciding factor who is getting attacked,and my party might know it.sure you can play with your taunt button,theres plenty of things that i can use to hold aggro also theres hold persons ,monsters (cc) which can help me even further.
And there is a tank in this game,its not needed if you play against -500 level monster i think.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
The Trinity works well enough for what it is. However, it is a very simplistic dynamic, not allowing for much depth in strategy and it's rather done to death. It's one thing to have the same dynamic repeated in a few games but to have it repeated in every single game pretty much regardless of theme gets old quick.
For example, if we look at a FPS style game. We can see a much wider variety of roles and many roles have multiple different applications depending upon situation.
In the broad sense we have.... infantry, armor, artillery, air,
However each of these arms breaks down even much further into sub functions with an individual unit being able to fulfill one or more.... recon, fire suppresion, assault, area denial, area control, anti-armor, anti-air, anti-personnel, force protection, transport, combat engineering, medical, command and control, etc
There is alot more going on there then the typical Trinity Tank and Spank because there are entirely new important functions not really considered in the Trinity (movement, spotting, etc) and strong variation in HOW each unit attacks, defends and performs it's roll (a flamethrower, a machinegun, a howitzer and a dive-bomber all can do a good amount of damage, but they do it in VERY different ways).
So yes, definately I agree with the OP....that the Trinity is not neccesarly the only way or the best way for an MMO to do combat roles. Though it does work on a basic level.
not sure why you guys are comparing video game mechanics to table top role playing games
aggro in those games are determined by one factor alone, the DM
My point was that the thing that makes the Trinity an attractive and fun concept is the fact that it allows people to play a specialized role in a team. Also, I wouldn't say that roles (meaning roles in a team) necessarily arise in any game where you can specialize.
They only arise when the problems of the game demand them. For example, in GW2 you can make a warrior that is very specialized toward crowd control with tons of stuns, or an elementalist with lots of AoE healing. Yet...you don't really see these roles playing a big part in the team dynamic of GW2 PvE. Most GW2 PvE is just a bunch of random, self-sufficient classes rolling through a dungeon.
Why?
Because the team dynamic of the game does not require that kind of specialization. Why have a dedicated healer when everyone can heal? And what is the point of all that CC when you can just lift someone up if they get downed?
The point is that just because you can specialize in a game, does not mean that the team dynamic of choice will necessarily involve specialization.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
I personally love games with the holy trinity, Tank, Healer, DPS.
I think all games need this to function properly PVE wise, another thing people seem to forget is sub categories of the holy trinity like the support classes(Buffing/ Debuffing), Off-tanks, different types of DPS (melee,stealth,burst,DoT,caster,ranged).
There is alot of room for unique things within the trinity but not having a tank or healers in a game just seems wrong.
Bingo.
The Trinity, as we know it in MMORPGs works ONLY because there is an artificial and predictable aggro mechanic that allows the tank to consistently keep aggro. If you remove aggro management from a trinity game like WoW, the trinity is gone.
I don't care how tanky you are, if the monster attacks the healer, and you can't stop him...there is no trinity.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
There is also morale rolls and monstas might surrender of course depending on DM they also might freeze or run away and such.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Only if you cannot imagine a world where everyone can do everything and people need to work together compensating each other's weaknesses in a non-linear way
... I know, shocking.
Problem is that its not possible to remove "aggro management"
Its like saying ,we removed anger,hate and love from world.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
You can if you add in systems to compensate for it (players being able to physical manhandle monsters away from healer if needed or block doors with their shields, etc )