The problem is that the AI is todays mmos is so bad. The monsters behaviour is so predictable that one can hardly call that an AI.
Just consider if the tank-dps-healer tactic would work in any way in a pvp situation. No, it wouldn’t because players just refuse to attack the character you want them to attack. Of cause they would go for the guys in the cloth-armour first.

It all started with exploiting the simplicity of the AI that turned into some kind of mmo-tradition, and the developers stuck to it, because they thought that’s the way people want to play, bedsides they didn’t need to invest into a better AI.

Just imagine a medieval battle where on guy, all dressed in armour so that he barley can walk, would step to the front calling out to the enemy: “C’mon shoot all your arrows at me and forget about all my friends.” …

So if the AI would be better, the whole tank-dps-healer tactic would become obsolete and one would have to figure out different and more alterable tactics.
 

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

How to make a game that doesn't rely on the holy trinity of tank/dps/healing:

1. Concentrate on many-vs-many fights rather than many-vs-boss.
2. Give every class balanced survivability, damage and healing abilities.

I'd change number two to:

2) Give every character access to skills, items and resources that allow them to define and manage the way they choose to engage in battle.

In most MMOs, there are two aspects that create the need for the trinity

• - class restrictions
• - the engagement or war does not start until someone draws aggro.

Changing those two aspects expands the roles and options in combat by introducing the need for good leadership and strategic gameplay. Now, before anyone craps on me for daring to downplay the importance of a raid leader... I agree it is a role that takes genuine personal skill to pull off effectively, however it is nothing compared to the on-the-fly decision making necessary for a leader in an arena where hostiles can come from anywhere and can be using any number of tactics in their defense, ambush, espionage attempts, etc.

Imagine a level-based system with highly specialized classes. There's got to be one or two out there, although I am not familiar with them. It would allow for some amazing intel, support, and stealth classes. However, it's extremely difficult to do solely because if a player has zero option to level by himself or in unoptimized groups, the players are going to demand that the class gets 'fixed'.

---

Originally posted by BioNut

---

Originally posted by Korvenus

I like the Tank, Healer and DD concept. I like being in a party were people have roles and have to play there role for the party to be successful.

---

Believe it or not, you can have "roles" outside of tank,dps, heal.
 
The US military has plenty of them and does many raids. In fact their roles are support, dps and more dps. 
 
(While there are healers they usually don't go on the raids)
 

---

The US military will need a "tank" once it faces off against the decepticons. That will be in 2085.

Cryomatrix
I'll be 104 years old and still no viagra needed

Mass Effect does it right.

Although it's a single player game you do have a group of 3. And I think what they do could work for a MMO.

There's more hit and run, using cover and movement, not just sitting in one place.  Also helps that everyone is range.

Keep talking, I'm seeing so many fun concepts in here, although they've all been seen in single-player or non-MMO multi-player games the idea of seeing some of these in MMOs is great =)

I remember some good old times when I'd call a few friends over once a weekend to have fun in one of the 900 star wars games out there, the game mode in question was about incoming enemy waves after waves progression.

The wonders of good forum discussions.

Originally posted by GreenChaos

Mass Effect does it right.

I agree that Mass Effects combat and character advancement is what needs to be adapted into an MMO. I would rather move to a classless system and let players use their imagination but Mass Effect MMO would be a step in the right direction.

This is funny cause anyone who played Anarchy Online remembers the multiple setups that were possible to run missions (essentially mini-dungeons).  You did not need a pure healer or a pure tank.  You were able to substitute via using pets or CC or multiple heals or fast dps.

So if you're tired of the cookie cutter style for groups that WoW promotes, try other MMOs.

Originally posted by EricDanie

Keep talking, I'm seeing so many fun concepts in here, although they've all been seen in single-player or non-MMO multi-player games the idea of seeing some of these in MMOs is great =)

I remember some good old times when I'd call a few friends over once a weekend to have fun in one of the 900 star wars games out there, the game mode in question was about incoming enemy waves after waves progression.

The wonders of good forum discussions.

Believe it or not:

The future of MMOs can be found in Multiplayer game mechanics.

The future of Multiplayer games are MMOs.

Soon the lines will blur. Its starting with M.A.G. and once  internet 2 drops the floodgates will open.

/hope

One of the biggest problems of games trying to get rid of specific roles is balance.

Lets say you have a game where you got 4 roles: Tank, Heal, Damage, Control. You got 12 classes, split evenly.

Now, even in the worst case, in which every role has one clearly best class and there are no situational advantages to playing any other, you end up with 4 different classes in every group at the very least.

In a game where there is no real role, things get far more ugly. Same situation as above, but there is one or two best classes, whether they really ARE best, or are just reputed to be, doesnt matter. People will try and put together groups of only one class, the best one, stacked to the max.

You end up having to balance 12 classes against each other, instead of just 3, which makes this a rather bad idea from the start.

Then, you have class-less systems. Now in these, a lot depends on how you get and raise skills. SWG pre-NGE had a system which was basically just an adaptable class system in disguise, and it subsequently had a lot of problems getting some professions to be useful. In many cases, they never were.

The problem is the min/max mentality, along with the impossibility of perfect perceived balance, and the way people play MMORPGs. The less roles you have, the harder it becomes to actually design the game.

Also, the less roles you have, the less you can assume that certain abilities are present in a group for any given encounter. If you dont make a healer class mandatory, can you still create encounters that NEED a character capable of healing? If you do so, havent you just implemented a highly unfair class-restriction?

To be honest, I think there is no perfect solution to this dilemma. If I ever were to design a system, I would, from the start, not create "pure" classes. I would try and outline 4 class roles, likely those mentioned above, though I might replace Tank with something else, for example a debuff/buff, and then give every class 2 different roles, depending on how you decided to build your character, and you can switch between them at a reasonable cost or effort every couple days or so.

Every class would have the role of damage dealer (as most people consider this the most fun role), and ALSO have a pick for their second role from generic, broad skill trees. So, you could have a Paladin, dual wielding flame swords and smiting the enemy for good DPS, and at the same time having access to the generic "heal" skillset, or the "tank" skillset. These skillsets would be reasonably diverse to create different flavors, but the key element of my system is that the key roles can be fulfilled by anyone who wants to do so, and there is no one better healer, or tank, than the other in terms of sheer game mechanics.

Then i would primarily have to balance the classes in their DD role, which is the easiest aspect to balance, as Damage Dealing is mostly science, while Healing and Tanking are more of an artform in a way, far harder to test and tune.

Its still not a perfect system, but it gives me as a designer the power I need to design content, and it loosens a lot of the stringency of "bring class X or you die" problems.

Unfortunately, so far I havent really seen games which completely did away with class roles become anything other than a big Zerg or DPS race.

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

How to make a game that doesn't rely on the holy trinity of tank/dps/healing:

1. Concentrate on many-vs-many fights rather than many-vs-boss.
2. Give every class balanced survivability, damage and healing abilities.

As someone mentioned, TOR is (currently) approaching things from this perspective and I personally think it's a very viable alternative to the trinity. It may also lead to a game that has better balance in terms of PvP, more accessible group mechanics and a much, much overdue removal of the "LFG: Need Tank!" spam that we all are so very fond of.

If I can also play a wookiee I might never buy another game ever.

Very well said.

Create the "epic-ness" of group/large group vs. solo play by adding tons of mobs. If everyone can fight and survive a fight, then your party of 5 or 10 or 25 whatever should fight against a dozen, dozens, or even hundreds of mobs... problem is in a online game even with only 25 or so players in an instance can you have a hundred mobs on screen at once? 

I dunno... there are good ideas, but implementation is the key. Without too much coordination it just becomes a mad brawl, a big rumble. There is a certain degree of satisfaction with a group that is running like a fine oiled machine where everyone plays there role up to a high standard.

The only real way to do it is to have everyone DPS with self-heal abilities. Some classes can have more healing, less DPS, and some classes can have more DPS, less healing.

Originally posted by heerobya

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

How to make a game that doesn't rely on the holy trinity of tank/dps/healing:

1. Concentrate on many-vs-many fights rather than many-vs-boss.
2. Give every class balanced survivability, damage and healing abilities.

As someone mentioned, TOR is (currently) approaching things from this perspective and I personally think it's a very viable alternative to the trinity. It may also lead to a game that has better balance in terms of PvP, more accessible group mechanics and a much, much overdue removal of the "LFG: Need Tank!" spam that we all are so very fond of.

If I can also play a wookiee I might never buy another game ever.

 

Very well said.

Create the "epic-ness" of group/large group vs. solo play by adding tons of mobs. If everyone can fight and survive a fight, then your party of 5 or 10 or 25 whatever should fight against a dozen, dozens, or even hundreds of mobs... problem is in a online game even with only 25 or so players in an instance can you have a hundred mobs on screen at once? 

I dunno... there are good ideas, but implementation is the key. Without too much coordination it just becomes a mad brawl, a big rumble. There is a certain degree of satisfaction with a group that is running like a fine oiled machine where everyone plays there role up to a high standard.

Agreed.

As much as people hate WAR, the PQs were set up sort of like this. Many mobs followed by semi-elite, let's say, lieutenants that dropped average loot, followed by a General or Captain that is pissed off because you destroyed his army, and he'd obviously have the best loot. The difference here would be that the mobs would be aggressively attacking, unlike WAR PQs, all at once or in controlled waves (to allow time for rez/healing  by the more healing-oriented classes that has to be done out of combat). Also, the lieutentants and the General could have certain abilities, like WoW bosses, that prevent it from turning into a mad brawl or big rumble. Combine the fun of slaying hundreds of mobs with the strategy necessary to take down a cunning opponent near the end.

Raids are basically fast, furious attacks by many people at once. Not in MMOs, though. Trash mobs take a while to wade through and the Bosses can be very time-consuming if they're not fought correctly. With the system mentioned above, you can still wipe and whatnot if you're not careful, but the whole thing has a more "epic" feeling.

I think people like large battles, but right now, the only way to really get them is through PvP, and that comes with many unpleasant factors like class balance, gear dependancy, griefing, etc. With PvE, everyone can enjoy it more easily.

Originally posted by Comnitus

The only real way to do it is to have everyone DPS with self-heal abilities. Some classes can have more healing, less DPS, and some classes can have more DPS, less healing.

This is how Mass Effect does it.  Add it some CC and debuffs to.

I do like the idea of Raids and group dungeons being more like carefully crafted public quests ala WAR.

However, in terms of design, they've fallen short but I think of something like SFK in WoW where you start out at the gate of the castle and battle through the ENTIRE castle until you scale the tower and slay the final boss. That is cool.  There were even optional bosses and multiple paths through the instance.

Now, it's all too free-form and stupid caves and such. Either give me lairs or actual castle/dungeon feeling sieges for PvE.

Oh, and the music in the courtyard of SFK was awesome.

Originally posted by Dewm

 I hear alot of people saying they are tired with the old set up of "tank dps heal" that whole situation. Well i've been thinkin about it for a while. and honestly I can't think of any other way to do it. So would some of you like to tell me what you had in mind?

(Keeping in mind it has to work in a grouping enviroment)

Uhm, there are actually games that have working ways of solving this.

Try play Guildwars, there the mobs always go for the easiest kills, there is no tanks there.

Neverwinter nights didn't work that way either and still work very good in small groups, I did my share of the group playing there and it worked well.

In pen and paper RPGs the game master usually try to kill the cloth users first, forcing the armored ones to jump in front of them and bodyblock. Actuall tanking skills have only shown up there since Wow got so big.

As I see it, better AI so that the mobs select their targets more intelligently based both on damage, armor and on how easy they look to kill. Give all classes high DPS capability, and make it propational to how good armor you were. And no taunts.

Originally posted by Dewm

 

 

 I hear alot of people saying they are tired with the old set up of "tank dps heal" that whole situation. Well i've been thinkin about it for a while. and honestly I can't think of any other way to do it. So would some of you like to tell me what you had in mind?

(Keeping in mind it has to work in a grouping enviroment)

I saw we make it like old RPGS.......I used to play Final Fantasy/ Chrono Cross/ Legend of Dragoon when I was like 10, and not taking the time to read tutorials I actually would beat those games using just the "Attack", "Defend", and Potions. Ignoring magic and other special shit >.< Well when I could.....just give every character an attack button, a defend button, and a items list and let em go at it :P Noone would like it, but that would be different.......in a nostalgic way >.< Or maybe make the fighting like Fight Night game and have it gamepad and headset compatible. Just use the thumb sticks to hit/swing in different ways, and use another button combo to roll/dodge/parry and have the chars duke it out and use headsets instead of keyboards to communicate.

Or..

Just get rid of this idea that players should take damage that requires healing.

I know if I was a bad-ass fighter or mage whatever I'd try and win all my battles without getting a scratch on me.

Make everyone fight, rezzing happens after the battle is over and any healing done is after the battle, no combat healing magic waving your arms crap.

To do this requires all players to have capable close combat and ranged defenses, stuff like Dodge and Parry and Block being important to all player characters, not just tanks, and easily at 100% total once the players are "really good" but then give the enemy mobs abilities to reduce your defenses or make a basic PPS (procs per second) for all dodge blocks and parries so the only way (if you are really good) you can take damage and get killed is if you are overwhelmed.

Would force teamwork and creating actual formations and helping each other in combat.

I love playing a healer, its not a popular choice by the mmo gamers but I love it.

The Tank/Heal/DPS isn't a product of the developers, but a product of the players.

Nearly every RPG game can be boiled down to two things:

Preservation & Annihilation (Healing and DPS)

Tank is actually secondary (albeit very popular) to the two listed above.

The holy trinity is a result of players trying to simplify the complexity of Preservation and Annihilation.

Each and every character CAN DPS AND HEAL in your general RPG layout. However, when you force each of your pawns (players/models/characters/etc) to do both Preservation and Annihilation... you increase the amount of management that has to take place, thereby increasing the complexity of the encounter.

Over-time, humans tend to try and simplify, in all aspects, and IT (our games/toys/lives) becomes more efficient and progress is achieved at a more rapid pace.

Through simplification, you remove wasted time and chance of error.

Making each character do Damage and Heal themselves has a high risk due to human error and/or damage spikes. The time it takes for a person to realize they need to heal, stop doing damage, then heal themselves can result in death.

Enter the tank. Someone, way back in the beginning of RPGs, decided that if he/she could take the brunt of the damage, it would help reduce the chance of damage spikes and enable the group to continue doing more DPS. All he asked for is that some people throw a few heals his way. He traded off both healing and DPS for a group benefit.

Specializing and wearing armor to take damage, people suddenly realized they had a VERY GOOD IDEA... it was SO GOOD that individuals decided to carry it further and reduce their healing for more DPS... sometimes completely removing healing altogether. By increasing DPS, directing damage at fewer targets, and overall reducing micro-management... the group benefited.

Since the group saw this was improving encounters, reducing deaths and mistakes, and generally making the games better... it began to stick. All that was required was that some people heal more to take on the slack this specializing had created.

What most people are discussing here... has already been done. Even if only in thought...

The "Holy Trinity" was a result of players trying to find a better way for the group.

Now what people propose is to move away from that and back into the roles RPG's started with.

There really isn't a problem with that... but it will depend on people's ability to multi-task more efficiently, keep mistakes low, and be able to react/adjust successfully as a group.

While I believe we have improved greatly on roles, abilities, and cross-class-balancing in a huge way... I believe we have made far less progress in terms of teamwork, communication, and adaptation.

Hence why the "Holy Trinity" is still the "best" approach for the majority of players. 

Just to facilitate discussion, I'd like to list some rpg-genre games off the top of my head that used group based combat without the trinity design (note- these are not all technically mmo's and accomplish it in various ways):

-Diablo 2 : Abilities were skill tree based.  Used large masses of weaker mobs and players could manually dodge most boss attacks, potions used for self healing.  Small player parties were used.

-Monster Hunter: Hordes of creatures or singular very tough boss creatures.  All players dps, ability to mitigate damage based solely on manual dodging and quality/type of armor.  No base stats.  Individual skill sets based on weapon types and everyone was able to draw on a larger pool of tactical abilities through the collection and crafting of items and tools.  Again, small player groups in instanced areas.

-Mass effect (as others already mentioned): all characters dps but could be customized with various unique abilities.

-KotOR series: melee dps tended to do the "tanking" just by virtue of being up front, but that was up to customization through skill allocation.  Important battles were generally quick affairs and often against multiple tougher opponents rather than 1 high hp enemy.

-Star Wars Galaxies (pre-cu): This may be a somewhat poor example for actual combat since it tended to be more zerg based, but stat wise the skill tree progression setup allowed a great deal of role versatility.

There are plenty of other ways to handle customizable stat progression too, such as the skill based system used in Oblivion, but that hasn't quite been tested in a group based setting that I've seen (besides a lame attempt with Two Worlds).  There are others I am forgetting or haven't played, but the point is it can be done.  Sure, it's only really been shown to work well in smaller group settings, but a system that allows for customization and complexity without predefined roles seems very feasible.