Originally posted by Nitth

 

---

Originally posted by Volkon
GW2 doesn't use the trinity.

---

    

---

GW2 does not use the trinity. No character plays a specific role. You can shift the balance of your character to be a little heavier in control, or support, or damage, but you simply can't be only one. It's all skill dependant.

---

 

Sounds to me like they are just redefining and reshuffling "roles".

 

---

control, support, damage

---

 

You are correct that they pretty much just shuffled teh roles around. No dedicated aggro holder, no dedicated healer. Now EVERYONE is responsible for killing teh mosnter, and everyone must work together to use buffs/debuffs/CC to succeed.

No more "The tank stands there and spams a threat rotation, the DPS stand a distance away and spawm their rotation, and the healer plays whack-a-mole with health bars". 

Originally posted by Axehilt

Some games will come out without the trinity, just like there have always been new/different games, but the concept of team-based gameplay where each player brings specific strengths/weaknesses to the group is not something which will ever disappear from the landscape entirely.

So it feels rather baseless to claim the trinity is "dead" or even on the decline.

I think this nails it. As others have pointed out, the "Trinity" is simply a WoW-clone thing - at various times in EQ's life you also needed a mezzer or slower in addition to a tank and healer. What would that be, the Holy Quartet?

Unless your classes are completely identical, certain combinations are going to have better syngery than others. Players will discover and exploit these synergies, and then BOOM you have Required Classes.

Case in point: In the original EQ, Clerics had a spell called Complete Heal, which would heal someone to full health - but it took 10 seconds to cast. From the designer's perspective, this would mainly be an efficient downtime healing spell, since it took too long to cast in combat.

We all know what happened right? Players realized that if you had a bunch of people cast Complete Heal 2 seconds apart, the tank would be healed to full every 2 seconds. The Complete Heal Chain was born, and it defined raid combat for the next half-decade (until WoW, ironically).

Whenever I see a game say it won't have required classes, or required builds, I shake my head. Required classes/builds are never something the designers add on purpose...it's the result of millions of people min-maxing a system. It's one of the reasons something like GearScore is so polarizing, and it will never go away.

Originally posted by Darkmoth

Originally posted by Axehilt

Some games will come out without the trinity, just like there have always been new/different games, but the concept of team-based gameplay where each player brings specific strengths/weaknesses to the group is not something which will ever disappear from the landscape entirely.

So it feels rather baseless to claim the trinity is "dead" or even on the decline.

I think this nails it. As others have pointed out, the "Trinity" is simply a WoW-clone thing - at various times in EQ's life you also needed a mezzer or slower in addition to a tank and healer. What would that be, the Holy Quartet?

Unless your classes are completely identical, certain combinations are going to have better syngery than others. Players will discover and exploit these synergies, and then BOOM you have Required Classes.

Case in point: In the original EQ, Clerics had a spell called Complete Heal, which would heal someone to full health - but it took 10 seconds to cast. From the designer's perspective, this would mainly be an efficient downtime healing spell, since it took too long to cast in combat.

We all know what happened right? Players realized that if you had a bunch of people cast Complete Heal 2 seconds apart, the tank would be healed to full every 2 seconds. The Complete Heal Chain was born, and it defined raid combat for the next half-decade (until WoW, ironically).

Whenever I see a game say it won't have required classes, or required builds, I shake my head. Required classes/builds are never something the designers add on purpose...it's the result of millions of people min-maxing a system. It's one of the reasons something like GearScore is so polarizing, and it will never go away.

Yeah, the problem is less the game, than it is people's mindsets. However, GW2 seems to allow for some flexibility in this, as nearly every class has nearly every ability to some extent.

Another example is City of Heroes. You don't need dedicated healers for ANYTHING. ANY kind of defender is a game changer, but oft times challenges can be beaten even without them. Scrappers, Tankers, Brutes, and sometimes properly equipped defenders and blasters can tank certain elements. Both CoX and GW2 do something that Blizzard has often quoted as a goal but NEVER made work: "Bring the player, not the class".

Hopefully that trend will continue.

Originally posted by terrant

Yeah, the problem is less the game, than it is people's mindsets. However, GW2 seems to allow for some flexibility in this, as nearly every class has nearly every ability to some extent.

Another example is City of Heroes. You don't need dedicated healers for ANYTHING. ANY kind of defender is a game changer, but oft times challenges can be beaten even without them. Scrappers, Tankers, Brutes, and sometimes properly equipped defenders and blasters can tank certain elements. Both CoX and GW2 do something that Blizzard has often quoted as a goal but NEVER made work: "Bring the player, not the class".

Hopefully that trend will continue.

Let's not pretend that just because CoX was a little looser with class comp that it didn't matter.  As someone who frequently pieced together parties, it totally mattered.  It's just that now when your party has a tank and some DPS you could alternatively look for a controller OR a healer OR a defender, rather than just a healer.

You were still bringing the class in that game, it was just a little more loose with who you were forced to bring.

Originally posted by Darkmoth

Whenever I see a game say it won't have required classes, or required builds, I shake my head. Required classes/builds are never something the designers add on purpose...it's the result of millions of people min-maxing a system. It's one of the reasons something like GearScore is so polarizing, and it will never go away.

'That isn't true.

Certainly games have been designed with certain classes being required for A or B.

Can you not bring a tank or a healer in a game as WoW to do a dungeon/raid (that you don't out level/out gear)?

There are other aspects in GW2 that contribute for profession flexibility such as weapon swapping and environmental weapons.

You need knocks to fight "The lovers".  In most games that would mean certain classes with access to knocks were required - in GW2 it just means someone needs to go pick up one of the rocks scattered around so you can knock them.

Or there is boss A that is really good vs meelee or boss b that is really good vs ranged attacks - in some games that would mean certain classes wouldn't be taken for those encounters. In GW2 it just means the warrior equip a rifle or the ranger equips a greatsword.

In the end is up to the developers to keep it up - if chain heal allows something not desired, changing it to "out of combat only" would solve it.

Originally posted by Nitth

 

---

Originally posted by Volkon
GW2 doesn't use the trinity.

---

    

---

GW2 does not use the trinity. No character plays a specific role. You can shift the balance of your character to be a little heavier in control, or support, or damage, but you simply can't be only one. It's all skill dependant.

---

 

Sounds to me like they are just redefining and reshuffling "roles".

 

---

control, support, damage

---

 

It only sounds like that because you're not listening.   They've done more than remove the roles of the trinity... they've taken the actual roles away from the players and applied the d/c/s aspects to the skills you bring. That's more significant than people realize. You can't spec yourself as a "control" guy. There's always a blend involved, even if you try to do so. You'll always have skills with damage and supporting aspects to them as well. The very skills attached to the weapons makes sure of that. That's the biggest mental hurdle people need to make... realizing that the tank/heal/dps roles are gone in GW2 and the different aspects are now a part of your weapons and skills, not a part of the character's definition. It makes better sense once that sinks in.

It's truly sad people can't make the transition from the older models. It's just like religion or the current extrovert requirement in the workplace, people just can't seem to let go of outdated ideas that just don't work well.

the old trinity is on it's way out and it's not just in GW2, some other games have made it so multiple roles can be filled by the multiple types of characters like having a dps/healing role, no more dedicated healer, or having a dps/tank role for games that just can't seem to let go.

Dunno what the future of this is either but i have to say that being someone who doesn't like fewer choices, this makes for a better game experience when one isn't limited to where one can go or what one can do just because of a game design flaw, and that essentially is what the trinity is a design flaw. It's the reason why companies had to incorporate a dungeon finder tool, or a role switching mechanic, or classes like the druid in WoW that could be anything. Look at all the things that people have complained about companies including in games just to keep this archaic model.

I just like how trinity stopped being a tank that takes all the damage, a healer that heals all the damage the tank takes and a (or a few) dps that need to kill the mobs/bosses before the mobs/bosses overpower the healer ability to heal damage and the tank ability to sutain damage and became any damage dealt, any heal done, any damage sustained.

Holy trinity is, with a few exceptions (with 0 being trivial, 6 being non-trivial and 10 being unmatched):

Healer:

Damage ....... 0/10 to 3/10

Healing..... 10/10

Ability to sustain damage... 0/10 to 3/10

DPS:

Damage ....... 10/10

Healing..... 0/10 to 3/10

Ability to sustain damage... 0/10 to 3/10

Tank

Damage.... 0/10 to 3/10

Healing... 0/10 to 3/10

Ability to sustain damage... 10/10

Incoming games "character":

Damage.... 6/10 to 8/10

Support/Crowd Control.... 6/10 to 8/10

Ability to waste mob damage.... 6/10 to 8/10

Originally posted by itgrowls

It's truly sad people can't make the transition from the older models. It's just like religion or the current extrovert requirement in the workplace, people just can't seem to let go of outdated ideas that just don't work well.

the old trinity is on it's way out and it's not just in GW2, some other games have made it so multiple roles can be filled by the multiple types of characters like having a dps/healing role, no more dedicated healer, or having a dps/tank role for games that just can't seem to let go.

Dunno what the future of this is either but i have to say that being someone who doesn't like fewer choices, this makes for a better game experience when one isn't limited to where one can go or what one can do just because of a game design flaw, and that essentially is what the trinity is a design flaw. It's the reason why companies had to incorporate a dungeon finder tool, or a role switching mechanic, or classes like the druid in WoW that could be anything. Look at all the things that people have complained about companies including in games just to keep this archaic model.

From a game design '50 km above ground' level point of view, this post doesn't really make sense.

Unless they changed from the last beta, GW2 doesn't get 'rid' of the trinity model. It gives every class all 3 roles and lets the player decide which one they want at a certain time.

A warrior picking up a rifle to turn into a 'range dps' still means a player is a 'dps'.

Trinity is not a 'design flaw'. That's like saying bicycles are a design flaw cause we have cars now.

It is an old model that gets modification (depending on the game) but at its core, it is a sound design.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by itgrowls

It's truly sad people can't make the transition from the older models. It's just like religion or the current extrovert requirement in the workplace, people just can't seem to let go of outdated ideas that just don't work well.

the old trinity is on it's way out and it's not just in GW2, some other games have made it so multiple roles can be filled by the multiple types of characters like having a dps/healing role, no more dedicated healer, or having a dps/tank role for games that just can't seem to let go.

Dunno what the future of this is either but i have to say that being someone who doesn't like fewer choices, this makes for a better game experience when one isn't limited to where one can go or what one can do just because of a game design flaw, and that essentially is what the trinity is a design flaw. It's the reason why companies had to incorporate a dungeon finder tool, or a role switching mechanic, or classes like the druid in WoW that could be anything. Look at all the things that people have complained about companies including in games just to keep this archaic model.

From a game design '50 km above ground' level point of view, this post doesn't really make sense.

Unless they changed from the last beta, GW2 doesn't get 'rid' of the trinity model. It gives every class all 3 roles and lets the player decide which one they want at a certain time.

A warrior picking up a rifle to turn into a 'range dps' still means a player is a 'dps'.

 

Trinity is not a 'design flaw'. That's like saying bicycles are a design flaw cause we have cars now.

It is an old model that gets modification (depending on the game) but at its core, it is a sound design.

Incorrect, still. You don't decide which role to play at a given time. You have skills that have one or more damage, control or support aspects associated with them, and you use the right skills as needed. Let's look at your warrior with a rifle as an example:

Rifle	Burst skill*	Kill Shot	10	Fire a powerful shot. Damage increases with adrenaline level.
	Both hands	Bleeding Shot		Fire a shot that bleeds your target.
		Aimed Shot	10	Fire a precise shot that cripples your foe.
		Volley	10	Fire a volley of shots at your foe.
		Brutal Shot	15	Shoot your foe and make them vulnerable.
		Rifle Butt	20	Push your foe back with your rifle butt.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by itgrowls

It's truly sad people can't make the transition from the older models. It's just like religion or the current extrovert requirement in the workplace, people just can't seem to let go of outdated ideas that just don't work well.

the old trinity is on it's way out and it's not just in GW2, some other games have made it so multiple roles can be filled by the multiple types of characters like having a dps/healing role, no more dedicated healer, or having a dps/tank role for games that just can't seem to let go.

Dunno what the future of this is either but i have to say that being someone who doesn't like fewer choices, this makes for a better game experience when one isn't limited to where one can go or what one can do just because of a game design flaw, and that essentially is what the trinity is a design flaw. It's the reason why companies had to incorporate a dungeon finder tool, or a role switching mechanic, or classes like the druid in WoW that could be anything. Look at all the things that people have complained about companies including in games just to keep this archaic model.

From a game design '50 km above ground' level point of view, this post doesn't really make sense.

Unless they changed from the last beta, GW2 doesn't get 'rid' of the trinity model. It gives every class all 3 roles and lets the player decide which one they want at a certain time.

A warrior picking up a rifle to turn into a 'range dps' still means a player is a 'dps'.

 

Trinity is not a 'design flaw'. That's like saying bicycles are a design flaw cause we have cars now.

It is an old model that gets modification (depending on the game) but at its core, it is a sound design.

Here we go.

Can you, in the middle of a fight, turn your healer into a dps for the next 5 seconds, then turn into a healer for the next 6 seconds and then be a tank for the next 10 seconds?

If you can, why the hell do people search for healers, dps and tanks?

Originally posted by Volkon

Incorrect, still. You don't decide which role to play at a given time. You have skills that have one or more damage, control or support aspects associated with them, and you use the right skills as needed. Let's look at your warrior with a rifle as an example:

 

 

Rifle	Burst skill*	Kill Shot	10	Fire a powerful shot. Damage increases with adrenaline level.
	Both hands	Bleeding Shot		Fire a shot that bleeds your target.
		Aimed Shot	10	Fire a precise shot that cripples your foe.
		Volley	10	Fire a volley of shots at your foe.
		Brutal Shot	15	Shoot your foe and make them vulnerable.
		Rifle Butt	20	Push your foe back with your rifle butt.

As you can see, not a pure dps character. You're applying damage, yes, but there's also a fair share of control as well with cripples and knockbacks. You can add vulnerability, which is something you'd want to do before, say, unleashing a kill shot. Combines with utility skills, traits, etc. you can actually wind up with an extremely balanced character that buffs allies, controls enemies and brings the pain, all on a single build and used when best needed.

And that doesn't even include the utility skills and heal skill or the dodge (basically a "tanking" skill).

Originally posted by grogstorm

Myself and many others never saw this coming.  But the trinity that we loved is finally showing its age.  And I think it may be bound to obsolescence. 

 

Example: Once upon a time there was a game called Pong and we (at least those of us who remember B&W TV’s) all loved it.  It showed us a way to entertain ourselves other than what we already had and the industry told us we need more of.  Well we moved on and found better forms of entertainment usually offered as something new and different.  We the consumer, then decided what we need more of and Pong went by the wayside.

 

No one is saying Pong is dead, but only that its model of entertainment is obsolete and the mainstream have moved on with their wallets to a better model.

 

After many cycles of the “in” thing all models eventually run their course and we as consumers find the next model to entertain us.

 

In the world of MMO’s the current and dated model of the trinity has not only reached its zenith but is currently on the decline.

So the question is what will the next model look like?  I do not know for sure but I feel the wheels of change turning.

 

As I am not a prophet, I can’t speak on things about the future.  But from the reading and research I have done, one can deduce a few things.  The next “BIG” MMO will somehow abolish the limited parameters of the trinity and the constraints placed on gamers using this form of entertainment.  And this new model, in some form, will be the next sensation that future MMO’s will be modeled after.

 

Understanding that with each “new” model, they build of the old and only make it better.

 

Just my thoughts.  Let me know what you think.

So basically what you are telling us is that 'things will change in some unspecified way'. Ok.

Originally posted by Volkon

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by itgrowls

It's truly sad people can't make the transition from the older models. It's just like religion or the current extrovert requirement in the workplace, people just can't seem to let go of outdated ideas that just don't work well.

the old trinity is on it's way out and it's not just in GW2, some other games have made it so multiple roles can be filled by the multiple types of characters like having a dps/healing role, no more dedicated healer, or having a dps/tank role for games that just can't seem to let go.

Dunno what the future of this is either but i have to say that being someone who doesn't like fewer choices, this makes for a better game experience when one isn't limited to where one can go or what one can do just because of a game design flaw, and that essentially is what the trinity is a design flaw. It's the reason why companies had to incorporate a dungeon finder tool, or a role switching mechanic, or classes like the druid in WoW that could be anything. Look at all the things that people have complained about companies including in games just to keep this archaic model.

From a game design '50 km above ground' level point of view, this post doesn't really make sense.

Unless they changed from the last beta, GW2 doesn't get 'rid' of the trinity model. It gives every class all 3 roles and lets the player decide which one they want at a certain time.

A warrior picking up a rifle to turn into a 'range dps' still means a player is a 'dps'.

 

Trinity is not a 'design flaw'. That's like saying bicycles are a design flaw cause we have cars now.

It is an old model that gets modification (depending on the game) but at its core, it is a sound design.

Incorrect, still. You don't decide which role to play at a given time. You have skills that have one or more damage, control or support aspects associated with them, and you use the right skills as needed. Let's look at your warrior with a rifle as an example:

 

 

Rifle	Burst skill*	Kill Shot	10	Fire a powerful shot. Damage increases with adrenaline level.
	Both hands	Bleeding Shot		Fire a shot that bleeds your target.
		Aimed Shot	10	Fire a precise shot that cripples your foe.
		Volley	10	Fire a volley of shots at your foe.
		Brutal Shot	15	Shoot your foe and make them vulnerable.
		Rifle Butt	20	Push your foe back with your rifle butt.

As you can see, not a pure dps character. You're applying damage, yes, but there's also a fair share of control as well with cripples and knockbacks. You can add vulnerability, which is something you'd want to do before, say, unleashing a kill shot. Combines with utility skills, traits, etc. you can actually wind up with an extremely balanced character that buffs allies, controls enemies and brings the pain, all on a single build and used when best needed.

There are plenty of games were DPS have control skills, wow you GW2 guys are disillusioning yourselves to believe you aren't going to need someone to soak damage or maintain aggro, whilst everyone else wails away at the mobs......

Oh yeah, and the idea of no dedicated healer......either the mobs are paper easy, or you are going to be potion spamming.....equally ridiculous....might as well play diablo.

Originally posted by Alphamojo

Originally posted by Volkon

Incorrect, still. You don't decide which role to play at a given time. You have skills that have one or more damage, control or support aspects associated with them, and you use the right skills as needed. Let's look at your warrior with a rifle as an example:

 

 

Rifle	Burst skill*	Kill Shot	10	Fire a powerful shot. Damage increases with adrenaline level.
	Both hands	Bleeding Shot		Fire a shot that bleeds your target.
		Aimed Shot	10	Fire a precise shot that cripples your foe.
		Volley	10	Fire a volley of shots at your foe.
		Brutal Shot	15	Shoot your foe and make them vulnerable.
		Rifle Butt	20	Push your foe back with your rifle butt.

As you can see, not a pure dps character. You're applying damage, yes, but there's also a fair share of control as well with cripples and knockbacks. You can add vulnerability, which is something you'd want to do before, say, unleashing a kill shot. Combines with utility skills, traits, etc. you can actually wind up with an extremely balanced character that buffs allies, controls enemies and brings the pain, all on a single build and used when best needed.

There are plenty of games were DPS have control skills, wow you GW2 guys are disillusioning yourselves to believe you aren't going to need someone to soak damage or maintain aggro, whilst everyone else wails away at the mobs......

Oh yeah, and the idea of no dedicated healer......either the mobs are paper easy, or you are going to be potion spamming.....equally ridiculous....might as well play diablo.

Ah, you're new here. Welcome to GW2 insights. A few things... no, you cannot, no matter who you are, sit there and soak damage for more than a few seconds at best. The whole "I'll sponge, you heal me" concept has been eradicated entirely. Instead, you avoid damage, mitigate damage, keep the enemy from even being able to do damage, etc. You also can't claim aggro. There are no taunt mechanics at all, and the aggro mechanics vary from mob to mob. Some will choose the weakest (lowest health), some based on armor, proximity, etc.  That being that, no the mobs are not paper easy... pretty much any mob there, especially outside the starter area, can and will gleefully kill you if you screw up. This ties in with the d/c/s aspects all being available simultaneously... you need to do what you can to avoid damage while delivering it yourself. You have your own self-heal, on a cooldown, if you fail to avoid/mitigate as well as you need to, but in and of itself it's not enough to keep you going. And, lastly, there are no potions.

In GW2 everyone is the healer.  Because the way it works is someone tanks then dies then everyone heals them.  Yea yea yea skill and dodging will alliviate some of it, but not nearly as much as people like to make out.  as far as i'm concerened gw2 still has the trinity it's just really funky.

Originally posted by tollbooth

In GW2 everyone is the healer.  Because the way it works is someone tanks then dies then everyone heals them.  Yea yea yea skill and dodging will alliviate some of it, but not nearly as much as people like to make out.  as far as i'm concerened gw2 still has the trinity it's just really funky.

When you understand the connection between "dying" and "trying to tank", then you will have taken your first step towards enlightenment.

Originally posted by jpnz

Originally posted by itgrowls

It's truly sad people can't make the transition from the older models. It's just like religion or the current extrovert requirement in the workplace, people just can't seem to let go of outdated ideas that just don't work well.

the old trinity is on it's way out and it's not just in GW2, some other games have made it so multiple roles can be filled by the multiple types of characters like having a dps/healing role, no more dedicated healer, or having a dps/tank role for games that just can't seem to let go.

Dunno what the future of this is either but i have to say that being someone who doesn't like fewer choices, this makes for a better game experience when one isn't limited to where one can go or what one can do just because of a game design flaw, and that essentially is what the trinity is a design flaw. It's the reason why companies had to incorporate a dungeon finder tool, or a role switching mechanic, or classes like the druid in WoW that could be anything. Look at all the things that people have complained about companies including in games just to keep this archaic model.

From a game design '50 km above ground' level point of view, this post doesn't really make sense.

Unless they changed from the last beta, GW2 doesn't get 'rid' of the trinity model. It gives every class all 3 roles and lets the player decide which one they want at a certain time.

A warrior picking up a rifle to turn into a 'range dps' still means a player is a 'dps'.

 

Trinity is not a 'design flaw'. That's like saying bicycles are a design flaw cause we have cars now.

It is an old model that gets modification (depending on the game) but at its core, it is a sound design.

That's okay, spend five minutes trying to tank an elite or trying to heal a player who has no CC abilities loaded that's trying to tank an elite, better yet try this in an exploration dungeon. You'll see it's dead and so will the toons who are trying to tank only and heal only. That's what we mean by the traditional roles are dead. Just because they still use the "damage" role doesn't mean the damage role can't heal a little or cc a little depending on the situation. Thus the switching of weapons and spell foci.

Oh it is a design flaw, because countless game designers have had to get around the lack of healers and tanks in their game that was designed to require them for YEARS. It's what spawned things like the dungeon finder, the talent tree switching and the ability of a class to fill all three roles when switching between them since this text was missed above, i decided to repeat it.

Originally posted by tollbooth

In GW2 everyone is the healer.  Because the way it works is someone tanks then dies then everyone heals them.  Yea yea yea skill and dodging will alliviate some of it, but not nearly as much as people like to make out.  as far as i'm concerened gw2 still has the trinity it's just really funky.

Exactly, It's worded as if a player can't aquire aggro for any reason, only the mob's AI selects targets based on how they want.....well I'm sure once people learn how a mob selects it's targets...they will specifically plan out a way to exploit that which will in turn either tank or avoid being a primary target inwhich one can dps to hell.

The trinity is a base mechanic in order to be efficient as possible, no one is going to play ineffectively for too long, I'm sure everyone will embrace the idea for a short while, but eventually they will revert to what is most efficient.

Originally posted by Volkon

Originally posted by tollbooth

In GW2 everyone is the healer.  Because the way it works is someone tanks then dies then everyone heals them.  Yea yea yea skill and dodging will alliviate some of it, but not nearly as much as people like to make out.  as far as i'm concerened gw2 still has the trinity it's just really funky.

When you understand the connection between "dying" and "trying to tank", then you will have taken your first step towards enlightenment.

Yeah especially those tho think they can just fill the roles anyways. Have them try that on a boss or in an explore dungeon in GW2 they'll learn about the 20th time of dying. It amazes me how people can't seem to let go.