Right. The reason I argue so hard for clarity on the definition of the trinity is because I think understanding what isn't a trinity based game is very important in understanding the arguments against the trinity.
When the industry is moving past the trinity you get people upset that games are violating sacred institutions that have been in place since D&D and define the RPG genre. But they haven't, and they don't. What you are instead seeing is a turn back toward the incredibly rich character diversity that characterized early RPGs.
While games like WoW double down on the trinity model by completely removing the possibility of any kind of hybrids through skill tree removal, games like Crowfall are branching out from the trinity by reintroducing non-trinity roles.
People from @Moirae 's generation didn't pioneer the idea of the trinity. The pioneered the idea of rich worlds filled with diverse character concepts which only included elements of the trinity in their raw forms. It's not trinity based games millennial's are claiming credit for when they didn't invent them. It's trinityless games we're claiming credit for when we didn't invent them.
But some people are just too angry to see when they're claiming credit for something they really shouldn't want to own.
Were not debating on what was the first Trinity based game. We're debating the origins of the trinity. Nobody is claiming that D&D was the first *Trinity Based* game. We are saying that some used trinity styled tactics.
Ask @filmoret to change the topic to "Did MMO's Create the Trinity Based Game"
This thread seems to have some who want to forbid the use of the trinity metaphor for any use of a very similar style of play that happened before the term became an MMORPG cliche. Like revisionist verbal censorship or something like that
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
This thread seems to have some who want to forbid the use of the trinity metaphor for any use of a very similar style of play that happened before the term became an MMORPG cliche. Like revisionist verbal censorship or something like that
I think it would mean more then taking, healing and dealing damage. It is a very rigid style of gameplay that devolved from this basic structure in which nearly all rpg's evolve around. So yes when we use the word trinity I would think it means much more then that basic definition.
"it was just a very simple way to handle group dynamics" hence why i said it was a logical progression when placed into a party setting :P... In that case logical being easiest representation.
Of course combat was different in old Jrpgs, yet i was referring to the roles classes played in a party which in many Jrpgs was purely automated to be that way. IE healers, tanks and Damage dealers.
The JRPGs I played had a huge loads of different roles (like Suikoden) and while you certainly can see likenesses with them they were not really the same as the regular trinity roles.
As for the most logical way to translate pen and paper experience into a computer RPG would actually be using a duo instead of a trinity, with offensive and defensive classes (say 3 of and 2 def in a standard party). That still would be a simplification but easy and far closer to the P&P combat. Defensive players would perform heals, buffs and body blocking while offensive classes would DPS and debuff, each class being able to do the multiple functions in the same combat.
The trinity isn't as logical as you think it is, pen and peper RPGs don't have such static combat as many MMOs and you certainly wont rotate skills in PnP games. It is a simple but unique idea someone got for specific small groups in multiplayer games but it have nothing to do with PnP roleplaying (again, possibly except D&D 4th edition who actually was influenced by Wow).
Looking on old D&D 1st edition or AD&D classes and seeing them as MMO classes is a mistake, you will see some parallels since most MMOs classes are loosely based on them but they work rather differently in those games.
I don't think it began as a trinity. When MMO's like EQ launched with the concept, you needed a tank, a healer, and a dps (the trinity), but you also needed support.... CC's and a mana battery. Back then, it wasn't a trinity. There was strategy to team composition, and it had much more complexity.
I think the trinity has just become the norm because it is a homogenized, dumbed down version that is easy for everyone to understand....
Right. The reason I argue so hard for clarity on the definition of the trinity is because I think understanding what isn't a trinity based game is very important in understanding the arguments against the trinity.
When the industry is moving past the trinity you get people upset that games are violating sacred institutions that have been in place since D&D and define the RPG genre. But they haven't, and they don't. What you are instead seeing is a turn back toward the incredibly rich character diversity that characterized early RPGs.
While games like WoW double down on the trinity model by completely removing the possibility of any kind of hybrids through skill tree removal, games like Crowfall are branching out from the trinity by reintroducing non-trinity roles.
People from @Moirae 's generation didn't pioneer the idea of the trinity. The pioneered the idea of rich worlds filled with diverse character concepts which only included elements of the trinity in their raw forms. It's not trinity based games millennial's are claiming credit for when they didn't invent them. It's trinityless games we're claiming credit for when we didn't invent them.
But some people are just too angry to see when they're claiming credit for something they really shouldn't want to own.
Were not debating on what was the first Trinity based game. We're debating the origins of the trinity. Nobody is claiming that D&D was the first *Trinity Based* game. We are saying that some used trinity styled tactics.
Ask @filmoret to change the topic to "Did MMO's Create the Trinity Based Game"
That is what you're arguing.
And the answer is that the trinity as it's known came about with trinity based games.
In D&D while building a party you don't go. "Do we have a DPS? Do we have a tank? Do we have a healer? OMG!!! Someone needs to play a tank or this party is doomed!"
The real questions asked are. "Do we have an arcane caster?" "Do we have a divine caster?" "Do we have a skill based character?" "Do we have a martial character."
First off, incase anyone can't count that's four roles. Second off, in distinct opposition to the trinity one character can fulfill more than one of those roles. For instance the bard both uses arcane magic and is skill based, or the druid is a divine caster that through wildshape can fulfill the need for a martial character. Third, none of those roles are 100% essential. For instance a party that just wants to slaughter their way through anything in their path doesn't really need a skill based character. Arcane characters are not all that needed at lower levels, and martial characters are not all that needed at higher levels. Fourth, none of those roles correlate perfectly with trinity roles. Arcane casters are first and foremost a utility role and secondarily a damage role. If you were to give me the option between an arcane caster with dimension door and other teleport/utility spells but no fireball/damage spells I'd take the dimension door one every single time. Magic missile's ability to hit anything no questions asked has also come in handy quite a few times despite it's relatively light damage. Divine casters are the source of most healing (with some exceptions such as bards) but more than that they are a fairly heavily armored class with some martial ability, buffing, utility spells and even damage. They are not simply "healers" or even primarily focused on healing. They just have it. Skill Based characters fit none of the three roles to any degree at all. Their healing, damage, and tanking abilities are all sub-par if they are very focused on skills. Sneak attack may hurt in the right circumstances but any well built martial character can do sneak attack level damage every single round with no special circumstances needed. Martial characters are strong combination of damage and survivability. They are both your heaviest hitters at early levels and generally the hardest to kill.
So even if you bastardize what martial characters represent and divine casters represent in order to classify them as your tank and healer there is still no distinct DPS role, more than three roles, and no incredible need for any single role. Where is the trinity?
And modern humans didn't exist before either. But humans still existed. The modern version of the trinity may not have existed before. But the trinity still existed.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I don't think it began as a trinity. When MMO's like EQ launched with the concept, you needed a tank, a healer, and a dps (the trinity), but you also needed support.... CC's and a mana battery. Back then, it wasn't a trinity. There was strategy to team composition, and it had much more complexity.
I think the trinity has just become the norm because it is a homogenized, dumbed down version that is easy for everyone to understand....
Just my 2 cents.
The early trinity had more roles, yes. But there were only 3 roles you had to have, the rest of them were optional (we discussed this earlier). Raids more or less always had all of them but regular 6 man dungeons (I think Wow was the first with 5 but I can be wrong, was a long time ago) often just had the 3 basic roles, most dungeons were close to impossible to clear without a tank and healer even if a few people replaced the tank with CC for the increased challenge.
EQ2 have a slightly dumbed down system but still have those optional roles and we still count them as trinity games.
One thing to ponder is when the phrase was coined though, we did already speak of it 9 years ago when I started on this forum but I have to admit I didn't heard it before even though I been playing MMOs since M59 in '96.
And the answer is that the trinity as it's known came about with trinity based games.
In D&D while building a party you don't go. "Do we have a DPS? Do we have a tank? Do we have a healer? OMG!!! Someone needs to play a tank or this party is doomed!"
The real questions asked are. "Do we have an arcane caster?" "Do we have a divine caster?" "Do we have a skill based character?" "Do we have a martial character."
First off, incase anyone can't count that's four roles. Second off, in distinct opposition to the trinity one character can fulfill more than one of those roles. For instance the bard both uses arcane magic and is skill based, or the druid is a divine caster that through wildshape can fulfill the need for a martial character. Third, none of those roles are 100% essential. For instance a party that just wants to slaughter their way through anything in their path doesn't really need a skill based character. Arcane characters are not all that needed at lower levels, and martial characters are not all that needed at higher levels. Fourth, none of those roles correlate perfectly with trinity roles. Arcane casters are first and foremost a utility role and secondarily a damage role. If you were to give me the option between an arcane caster with dimension door and other teleport/utility spells but no fireball/damage spells I'd take the dimension door one every single time. Magic missile's ability to hit anything no questions asked has also come in handy quite a few times despite it's relatively light damage. Divine casters are the source of most healing (with some exceptions such as bards) but more than that they are a fairly heavily armored class with some martial ability, buffing, utility spells and even damage. They are not simply "healers" or even primarily focused on healing. They just have it. Skill Based characters fit none of the three roles to any degree at all. Their healing, damage, and tanking abilities are all sub-par if they are very focused on skills. Sneak attack may hurt in the right circumstances but any well built martial character can do sneak attack level damage every single round with no special circumstances needed. Martial characters are strong combination of damage and survivability. They are both your heaviest hitters at early levels and generally the hardest to kill.
So even if you bastardize what martial characters represent and divine casters represent in order to classify them as your tank and healer there is still no distinct DPS role, more than three roles, and no incredible need for any single role. Where is the trinity?
Wow, you people were twinks. We only made one player run a thief or bard to handle thief skills, detecting & disarming traps, lockpicking and appraising loot mainly. Climbing was pretty useful as well.
All the rest played whatever they felt like, if that made a group with 2 wizards, a warrior and a bard that was fine, a good DM know Wheatons law ("Don't be a dick") and set the difficulty to be challenging but not impossible anyways.
A roleplaying game should be fun and forcing everyone to play specific classes isn't. If I want to play a ranger I will even if someone say that the group sure could use an arcane spellcaster.
This is also one of the main problem with the trinity mechanics, particularly healers tend to be hard to find forcing some people to play them who probably shouldn't.
One thing to ponder is when the phrase was coined though, we did already speak of it 9 years ago when I started on this forum but I have to admit I didn't heard it before even though I been playing MMOs since M59 in '96.
Same, I hadn't heard the term trinity being used until at least 2006 or so. No one used that term in DAOC or SWG that I recall.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
One thing to ponder is when the phrase was coined though, we did already speak of it 9 years ago when I started on this forum but I have to admit I didn't heard it before even though I been playing MMOs since M59 in '96.
Same, I hadn't heard the term trinity being used until at least 2006 or so. No one used that term in DAOC or SWG that I recall.
First mentions of holy trinity I heard spoke of classes instead of roles. You had the everquest warrior, cleric, enchanter, it was the WoW-arena rogue, mage, priest, it was the PvE warrior, priest, mage. The whole talk of holy trinity as roles came later when dungeons were dumbed down so there was no longer any need for CC.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
The roles did the same thing. Who cares what they were called.
But they didn't do the same thing at all. A front line D&D fighter has a DPS output most tanks would consider massive but would be considered very squishy in terms of survivability.
I have NEVER seen in instance in D&D where a single character goes and is wailed on by the majority of the enemy force for more than five rounds and lived to talk about it. But I've also never seen an instance where an at CR enemy that wasn't the boss stood up to a well built fighter or barbarian for more than 2-3 rounds.
Why confine this to D&D P&P though? I remember playing video games during the 90's (RPGs Jrpgs) where companion NPCs had taunt like mechanics and damage mitigation... Healers healed and DPS did DPS... Those roles were not birthed by MMORPGs. It's just how it's translated in video game RPG format over the years because it was a natural translation of those abilities when put into a multi character party be it players or NPCs. It's essentially the rock paper scissor principle.
Thats the point of the thread. To find out where we saw it first. Someone claimed that Final Fantasy 1 had it. I couldn't support that but I did find it was in FF4 very clear.
Lost in the flood, but has been pointed out twice Pool of Radiance in 1988 had a very clear healer, tank, dps role.
My 6 man groups usually contained one pure warrior or barbarian, a paladin for secondary heals, a cleric for primary heals and resurrection. All 3 wore either plate or chain and were front line fighters.
DPS consisted of 2 spell casters and either an archer or thief. All three fought from the back initially, though the ranger/ thief would close for backstabs or hand to hand.
I can't recall but early Might and Magic, Ultima or Wizardry titles may have had similar set ups in the mid 80s
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Moirae you accuse everyone of not being able to read but you apparently can't read yourself.
In actual trinity based games I know that if I run a dungeon with a dedicated DPSer who has min-maxed to get the most DPS possible, a dedicated healer who has min-maxed to get the most HPS possible, and a dedicated tank who has min-maxed aggro and defensive stats (mitigation, HP pool etc.) that I have to adjust for that with higher gearscore and higher levels than if I did have that perfect trinity.
That simply isn't the case in D&D.
How is a game in which you can make an effective party using only two character classes trinity based? It isn't, plain and simple. You don't have three distinct roles if only 2 builds can cover them and if you don't have three distinct roles it isn't a TRInity.
You are clinging on to the fact your generation invented the trinity as though the trinity is a good thing. I take about as much pride in the fact that we invented the trinity as the fact we invented Justin Bieber, selfies, and college safe spaces.
However we DID invent the trinity. RPG characters were never as one dimensional as they are now before MMOs. You can rage against the millennials for claiming the pile of crap that is their own as their own as much as you want.
But you can't claim the trinity without turning it into something that it's not. And claiming the trinity was invented in D&D gives that term a heritage it doesn't deserve.
Also, I am superior to you. I back my position with actual reason and logic. You have nothing but rage and insults. You have yet to elaborate or adequately explain any of your positions.
No, because you are trying to cause trouble. I responded to your first post. Just stop already. MMO's did NOT invent the trinity, D&D did. You just don't like it.
No, because you are trying to cause trouble. I responded to your first post. Just stop already. MMO's did NOT invent the trinity, D&D did. You just don't like it.
Got it. D&D invented the trinity because Moirae said so and... respect your elders.
Well boys, I guess that's it. Time to pack up and go home.
No it didn't exist before MMO's. It took a special kind of disregard to pretend that it was even remotely realistic that anything smarter than a rat would endlessly and continuously beat on a heavily armored foe while a puny caster in robes spam healed him and one or more lightly clad foes stabbed him in the back or peppered him with arrows.
No, because you are trying to cause trouble. I responded to your first post. Just stop already. MMO's did NOT invent the trinity, D&D did. You just don't like it.
Got it. D&D invented the trinity because Moirae said so and... respect your elders.
Well boys, I guess that's it. Time to pack up and go home.
Wow, just wow. You aren't the first generation on the planet. Maybe, just maybe, someone knows something YOU don't.
TLDR, but pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons created the trinity of reliance of other group members to succeed...
I think cave men created that. Except it wasn't a trinity. Just like D&D had more than three roles.
Riddle me this, if the trinity is a dumbed down version of something else (put into 3 roles rather than more) how is it an original creation to begin with?
in simple terms... If the 1/2lb pound burger is a new invention, does that make the 1/4lb burger another new invention?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
This is like which came first the chicken or the egg, mmos by no means created it but mmos certainly coined it in eq days. Debate all you will roles existed before mmos, just when you get mass amounts of people together we sometimes come up with cool names to call stuff other then class/role a, b and c work good together.
TLDR, but pen and paper Dungeons and Dragons created the trinity of reliance of other group members to succeed...
I think cave men created that. Except it wasn't a trinity. Just like D&D had more than three roles.
Riddle me this, if the trinity is a dumbed down version of something else (put into 3 roles rather than more) how is it an original creation to begin with?
in simple terms... If the 1/2lb pound burger is a new invention, does that make the 1/4lb burger another new invention?
It's not a 1/4 pounder if it's got the tomato lettuce and bacon. Those items make it a hybrid
I don't think it began as a trinity. When MMO's like EQ launched with the concept, you needed a tank, a healer, and a dps (the trinity), but you also needed support.... CC's and a mana battery. Back then, it wasn't a trinity. There was strategy to team composition, and it had much more complexity.
I think the trinity has just become the norm because it is a homogenized, dumbed down version that is easy for everyone to understand....
Just my 2 cents.
One thing to ponder is when the phrase was coined though, we did already speak of it 9 years ago when I started on this forum but I have to admit I didn't heard it before even though I been playing MMOs since M59 in '96.
It came from Everquest. There was 3 very strong classes that could easily find groups and they were called the holy trinity because of how powerfull they were. It was from this that the rest of the mmo world fell in line and decided to copy these 3 roles and make them necessary in gameplay.
It came from Everquest. There was 3 very strong classes that could easily find groups and they were called the holy trinity because of how powerfull they were. It was from this that the rest of the mmo world fell in line and decided to copy these 3 roles and make them necessary in gameplay.
A lot of Eqers made their way to SWG, especially in the beginning when it still had corpse runs and things like that, I never heard that term in SWG, so i'm not sure it was coined that early. I don't think the term saw wide spread usage until after WOW was a major success.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
It came from Everquest. There was 3 very strong classes that could easily find groups and they were called the holy trinity because of how powerfull they were. It was from this that the rest of the mmo world fell in line and decided to copy these 3 roles and make them necessary in gameplay.
A lot of Eqers made their way to SWG, especially in the beginning when it still had corpse runs and things like that, I never heard that term in SWG, so i'm not sure it was coined that early. I don't think the term saw wide spread usage until after WOW was a major success.
For the life of me I cannot find that article which stated this. OH well.
Comments
Ask @filmoret to change the topic to "Did MMO's Create the Trinity Based Game"
That is what you're arguing.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
As for the most logical way to translate pen and paper experience into a computer RPG would actually be using a duo instead of a trinity, with offensive and defensive classes (say 3 of and 2 def in a standard party). That still would be a simplification but easy and far closer to the P&P combat. Defensive players would perform heals, buffs and body blocking while offensive classes would DPS and debuff, each class being able to do the multiple functions in the same combat.
The trinity isn't as logical as you think it is, pen and peper RPGs don't have such static combat as many MMOs and you certainly wont rotate skills in PnP games. It is a simple but unique idea someone got for specific small groups in multiplayer games but it have nothing to do with PnP roleplaying (again, possibly except D&D 4th edition who actually was influenced by Wow).
Looking on old D&D 1st edition or AD&D classes and seeing them as MMO classes is a mistake, you will see some parallels since most MMOs classes are loosely based on them but they work rather differently in those games.
I think the trinity has just become the norm because it is a homogenized, dumbed down version that is easy for everyone to understand....
Just my 2 cents.
In D&D while building a party you don't go. "Do we have a DPS? Do we have a tank? Do we have a healer? OMG!!! Someone needs to play a tank or this party is doomed!"
The real questions asked are. "Do we have an arcane caster?" "Do we have a divine caster?" "Do we have a skill based character?" "Do we have a martial character."
First off, incase anyone can't count that's four roles.
Second off, in distinct opposition to the trinity one character can fulfill more than one of those roles. For instance the bard both uses arcane magic and is skill based, or the druid is a divine caster that through wildshape can fulfill the need for a martial character.
Third, none of those roles are 100% essential. For instance a party that just wants to slaughter their way through anything in their path doesn't really need a skill based character. Arcane characters are not all that needed at lower levels, and martial characters are not all that needed at higher levels.
Fourth, none of those roles correlate perfectly with trinity roles.
Arcane casters are first and foremost a utility role and secondarily a damage role. If you were to give me the option between an arcane caster with dimension door and other teleport/utility spells but no fireball/damage spells I'd take the dimension door one every single time. Magic missile's ability to hit anything no questions asked has also come in handy quite a few times despite it's relatively light damage.
Divine casters are the source of most healing (with some exceptions such as bards) but more than that they are a fairly heavily armored class with some martial ability, buffing, utility spells and even damage. They are not simply "healers" or even primarily focused on healing. They just have it.
Skill Based characters fit none of the three roles to any degree at all. Their healing, damage, and tanking abilities are all sub-par if they are very focused on skills. Sneak attack may hurt in the right circumstances but any well built martial character can do sneak attack level damage every single round with no special circumstances needed.
Martial characters are strong combination of damage and survivability. They are both your heaviest hitters at early levels and generally the hardest to kill.
So even if you bastardize what martial characters represent and divine casters represent in order to classify them as your tank and healer there is still no distinct DPS role, more than three roles, and no incredible need for any single role. Where is the trinity?
EQ2 have a slightly dumbed down system but still have those optional roles and we still count them as trinity games.
One thing to ponder is when the phrase was coined though, we did already speak of it 9 years ago when I started on this forum but I have to admit I didn't heard it before even though I been playing MMOs since M59 in '96.
All the rest played whatever they felt like, if that made a group with 2 wizards, a warrior and a bard that was fine, a good DM know Wheatons law ("Don't be a dick") and set the difficulty to be challenging but not impossible anyways.
A roleplaying game should be fun and forcing everyone to play specific classes isn't. If I want to play a ranger I will even if someone say that the group sure could use an arcane spellcaster.
This is also one of the main problem with the trinity mechanics, particularly healers tend to be hard to find forcing some people to play them who probably shouldn't.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
My 6 man groups usually contained one pure warrior or barbarian, a paladin for secondary heals, a cleric for primary heals and resurrection. All 3 wore either plate or chain and were front line fighters.
DPS consisted of 2 spell casters and either an archer or thief. All three fought from the back initially, though the ranger/ thief would close for backstabs or hand to hand.
I can't recall but early Might and Magic, Ultima or Wizardry titles may have had similar set ups in the mid 80s
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Well boys, I guess that's it. Time to pack up and go home.
Are you just trolling? You have to be.... lol... D&D is the first game to have a trinity framework.
in simple terms... If the 1/2lb pound burger is a new invention, does that make the 1/4lb burger another new invention?
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Long answer: Yes
Have fun figuring that one out!
This is like which came first the chicken or the egg, mmos by no means created it but mmos certainly coined it in eq days. Debate all you will roles existed before mmos, just when you get mass amounts of people together we sometimes come up with cool names to call stuff other then class/role a, b and c work good together.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson