Pretty interesting concept, and one I myself haven't played in an mmo before to my knowledge. Are there any games similar to to this out there already that I might be able to look into?

THANKS

i dont know why there even needs to be roles. freeform class system + do w/e u want FTW

Originally posted by Toxia

Pretty interesting concept, and one I myself haven't played in an mmo before to my knowledge. Are there any games similar to to this out there already that I might be able to look into?

THANKS

Like I said in a previous post, EQ1 is exactly what the OP is describing.  Chanters for batteries and cc, Shamans for buff/debuff bots, Monks for pulling, Bards for a little of all 4.

Paladins for stun tanking mobs and magic tanking, Warriors for physical and better sustained agro controll, SK's for leech tanking and snap agro.

You can look at the current trinity as;

HP goes up (healers)

HP goes down (DPS)

HP sits still (Tank)

The only other option is "divert efforts" (CC)

If every class didn't have their own forms of CC, they could slam them all into a seperate 4th on that specializes in forcing a change in tactics though hindered movement, output, etc.

Originally posted by GTwander

You can look at the current trinity as;

HP goes up (healers)

HP goes down (DPS)

HP sits still (Tank)

 The only other option is "divert efforts" (CC)

If every class didn't have their own forms of CC, they could slam them all into a seperate 4th on that specializes in forcing a change in tactics though hindered movement, output, etc.

Eh, that's hardly the "only" other option.

There's seriously a ridiculous amount of possible roles any given game can offer.  The only reason games latch onto those three roles in particular is they're the most easily understood and/or logical.

Honestly if you had a ballistic warfare (archery, modern war, future wars) MMORPG then the "regenerator" class the OP suggests ends up being the Support soldier (like in a FPS,) whose job it is to lay down suppressing fire while supplying teammates with ammunition.  Which ends up being easily understood and logical, and also a distinctly important role.

But that's just one example of alternate types of class focuses that could exist.

Although honestly most of what players care about isn't the role itself, but the details of how the role works.

I was thinking the other day it might be interesting to have a pet-heavy healer class who spends most of their time summoning healing spirits with few direct heals.

Another seldom-used role is the mitigator (CoX is the only MMORPG I think I've seen this in) where they're basically a Tank-Maker class who massively shields an ally, turning any class into your group's tank.

Yeah, I seen points including DoT healers and Burst healers, but they pretty much serve the same purpose, but just as a different utility. I personally do not believe that a specific situation defines a role, only the specfic expectation from one.

Stealth can define a role, but would you break it down into who has it permanently/temporarily? Or in varied degrees of opacity? I think not.

Originally posted by bishbosh

i dont know why there even needs to be roles. freeform class system + do w/e u want FTW

That may be a working concept in an established group but in randomer groups it's going to cause huge issues.

What you'll end up with is either having to take each person's word for what his character can do ("yes, of course I have healing abilities." - later: "well, you never said that you need area healing abilities, I only have some light to mid healing spells for individuals...")

or you have to run each character thru a screening process: "now, please, list all your abilities. thanks. we will get back to you once we have checked out all the other applicants."

And worst of all the gamer may not even be good with the abilities he is "hired" for...

I know, same can be true with a class character if said class allows multi-branching for the skills but at least you have an idea what you are getting yourself into bed with.

Originally posted by Goreson

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Then why do players ignore tanks in PvP, even if they call names to their mothers?

What about the natural reaction to hit those that hurt you?

What about the fact no one can shrug a axe hit on their heads as if it was nothing?

And will that kensai do much with an arrow or bullet in his eye?

Sorry but I don't really get your point?!

Taunts and players, that depends quite a bit on the skill/ability and how it works in PvP. In some games it may have little gaming effect which of course gives the player the choice to "overwrite" what would be the "correct" response, while in other games taunt cause more sever restrictions forcing the player to make the choice of whether he wants to go against the taunter full force or against another character with half his power.

Interesting would also be the aspect of actual roleplaying: the first thing (okay, one of the first things) is that in a RPG you are not playing yourself but a character, and depending on how that character is defined you may be "forced" to act in ways that you wouldn't e.g. stay silent/say dumb things if you are smart enough to have figured out that riddle but your character happens to be dumb as a bag of beans, etc.

So, any player ignoring a taunt would potentially very much play out of character.

Which obviously is not punished in MMORPGs but it's something to consider for your gaming experience. ;-)

The natural reaction to defend you against an attacker (potentially at the same time as being taunted - I assume that's what you were going for?) - see, as such we are talking game mechanics and they can only do so much.

Now, I'm sure you have seen action movies where this strongman gets attacked by a bunch of guys while mister super bad goon stays in the back taunting him.

The hero plows thru the mob not really caring about those "little pests" will maybe only start plugging them off when he is actually standing before mr big goon.

Why? Is that realistic? Not really... though one could argue that the adrenaline the body produces make you less rational and also reduces pain.

Your last 2 points, sorry, but they have nothing to do with what I said.

So... I'm not really sure what you are trying to say?

Of course would a Kensai have problems fighting with a bullet/arrow in his eye. Just as everybody else. So, you'd go around the attacking force and try to shoot out everybody's eye?

Of course, a game like GW2 is using miracle rifles, but try doing that with Brown Bess where you probably didn't get more than 3 shots of per minute against potentially fast moving targets... ouch. More likely it would be they dagger thru your eye than the other way round.

But the point I was trying to make with the Kensai was just that if we didn't know class and level but just went but "looks" i.e. armour we may easily get fooled.  

Miracle rifles opposed to miracle plate armor that doesn't tire you and allow you to actually move?

My point is: it is a game.

If it is a master Kensai, maybe he is known by reputation.

If we go by realism all the concept of hit points and instant healing is silly.

Originally posted by GTwander

Yeah, I seen points including DoT healers and Burst healers, but they pretty much serve the same purpose, but just as a different utility. I personally do not believe that a specific situation defines a role, only the specfic expectation from one.

Stealth can define a role, but would you break it down into who has it permanently/temporarily? Or in varied degrees of opacity? I think not.

Well if we agree that last part is true, why would it matter?

Stealth is still something which could be mandated by game design.  Dungeons could frequently involve overwhelming odds (literally impossible to defeat via standard combat) which can be solved only with someone in the Stealth role.  The rogue stealths past the unbeatable skeletal legions to assassinate the Necromancer in single combat; the army outside crumples to the ground, allowing the party to pass.  The saboteur stealths past the unbeatable 5-story-tall monster to detonate the cliffside over its head, killing it in the avalanche.

And of course we've already seen rogues fill another rather crucial role in games (DDO's rogues filling the Disarm role.)

Any number of non-typical roles can be made into a requirement.  It's just a matter of designing the role correctly (you'd want the rest of the party to be busy with the combat portions while the rogue stealths to kill that Necromancer, most likely, so that overall dungeon pacing feels right)

Originally posted by Axehilt

Another seldom-used role is the mitigator (CoX is the only MMORPG I think I've seen this in) where they're basically a Tank-Maker class who massively shields an ally, turning any class into your group's tank.

Surely you remember prot-monk and boon monk from GW1.

Originally posted by GTwander

Yeah, I seen points including DoT healers and Burst healers, but they pretty much serve the same purpose, but just as a different utility. I personally do not believe that a specific situation defines a role, only the specfic expectation from one.

Stealth can define a role, but would you break it down into who has it permanently/temporarily? Or in varied degrees of opacity? I think not.

Buff/Debuff specialist.  Not a tank, not a healer, not a dps, and not a crowd control.  Can increase the tanks health regen, can increase the healers power regen, and increase the dps damage, can increase the tanks armor, can improve the healers heals, can decrease the opponents attack speed, attack power, movement rate, etc.

EQ mastered grouping like no other game and allowed for classes like the Enchanter and Shaman to flourish as viable group members while lying outside the trinity.  A good group in EQ was hard to find but when you did it operated like a finely tuned machine.

Originally posted by ChicagoCub

EQ mastered grouping like no other game and allowed for classes like the Enchanter and Shaman to flourish as viable group members while lying outside the trinity.  A good group in EQ was hard to find but when you did it operated like a finely tuned machine.

dont forget EQ bard :)

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter

Originally posted by Goreson

Originally posted by Loke666

Originally posted by Axehilt

Nothing about reducing the core roles is "dumbed down".

The fact that someone points out Shaman's purge ability brings up just one of many ways that each WOW class had plenty of little sub-roles they were playing in addition to their primary task.

The trinity itself is just slapping big simplified labels onto classes which in many cases can provide a variety of benefits (my shaman wasn't just a healer, but could also be an interrupter, a kiter, a purger, a cleanser, and/or a buffer.)

So really whether a game has a trinity or not says nothing about the true depth of a given class' playstyle.

Not really, but it does tell us that the mobs are dumb as doorknobs all of them. All trinity games have really stupid AI.

My issue with trinity is tanking, it makes the game dumber and more predictable. Add a better mob AI and remove all taunts and CC and the combat will become very different even if you keep everything else the same.

Aggro should be set on who the mobs easiest kill and who is most dangerous in the group, not on silly taunts. Do you really think a smart dragon or liche would be that dumb?

Well, I don't quite agree with you there because you look at it from a stats point, not from a "reality" point of view.

Think about RL for a sec: you are out at night, and a bunch of guys start shouting trash your way. For the sake of it, let's say they are kids so you assume you may be able to take them on.

On whom do you focus?

The "loudmouth" who is taunting you? The big fella who is quite but looks like he could land a good punch? The thing guy in the back who seems rather cool? Add what other characters you like... I'm sure you'd go for the loudmouth.

Just because you don't go rational about this but rather follow your hurt ego.

And yes, even dragons and liche have egos. So taunts make perfect sense. I mean c'mon, think Braveheart: showing your arse does very little damage to you (well, it could probably blind you or cause nausea...) but it's a perfectly effective taunt.

We players live in a MMORPG world of all information provided, level, class, etc. Imagine this were not the case! You feel like taking on that guy in robes? Oooops, happens to be a "kensai", a swordmaster who is so skilled with his sword that he'd see the use of armour as an insult to his craft. Dang!

You get where I'm coming from?

Then why do players ignore tanks in PvP, even if they call names to their mothers?

What about the natural reaction to hit those that hurt you?

What about the fact no one can shrug a axe hit on their heads as if it was nothing?

And will that kensai do much with an arrow or bullet in his eye?

I have often seen people in pvp in various games go after the tank, or start hitting them because the tank pushed through and is causing havoc, or hitting them. Even when the game mechanics make the tank at best a nuissance, people still go after them because they are following their natural reaction.

I've play a tank on occaision and remember having several people attacking me because I was closer and easier to get to, annoying them, while the range was just picking them apart. They should have went after the squishy high powered range dps and leave just one to slow me down, but they didn't. Sure, you might say they were just bad players, but the funny thing is, I see that happen all the time.

Originally posted by terrant

The trinity was originally a quintet: Damage, Threat, Control, Support, and Healing.

Developers hated that much balancing, and certain players hated that much complexity, so things became simpler. Heals became primary support, with backup from others. Tanks became primary control in addition to threat management. Buffing became nearly useless in many games; others (wow) took the route of handing out redundant buffs so specific classes were no longer needed.

depends on what mmo you are talking about

as others have said, the trinity in EQ back in 1999  (13 years ago),  was  warrior, cleric, enchanter

alot of players disliked this and SOE toned down CC with Velious (2nd expansion) but needing to slow mobs was still necessary  (but could be provided by 3 classes instead of 2)

when WOW launched (2004) Blizzard made their mmo paradigm simpler

- no need for mana regen buffs  (power regen was innately faster in comparison to EQ)

- no need for slowing mobs  (a core feature of EQ)

- little need for CC, it existed but wasnt required for dungeons

- less need for debuffs  (in EQ, Enchanters and Shamans were often debuffing to make mobs less magic resistant)

Originally posted by Alcuin
It might be useful to ask ourselves a similar question, "what can a character do in relation to a monster or mob? "
We can also add some parameters like in a typical MMO world where you and the monster are both standing in a cave next each other .

Attack it

[list...]

choosing to attack can bring new options

in EQ, at upper levels, attacking also meant

- tash/malo it, so the mob is less resistant

- slow it, so it wouldnt strike as often

- debuff its stats, so it doesnt hit as hard

- if mob is caster, debuff its casting time so it takes longer to cast spells

- snare it, so it doesnt run for help when its near death

EQ also had lulls, some classes like bard,cleric,chanter could reduce the "call for help" range

facing 3 giants,  lull 2 giants and pull the 3rd

these options *still* exist in Everquest today

Originally posted by Nadia

Originally posted by Alcuin
It might be useful to ask ourselves a similar question, "what can a character do in relation to a monster or mob? "
We can also add some parameters like in a typical MMO world where you and the monster are both standing in a cave next each other .

Attack it

[list...]

choosing to attack can bring new options

 

in EQ, at upper levels, attacking also meant

- tash/malo it, so the mob is less resistant

- slow it, so it wouldnt strike as often

- debuff its stats, so it doesnt hit as hard

- if mob is caster, debuff its casting time so it takes longer to cast spells

- snare it, so it doesnt run for help when its near death

 

EQ also had lulls, some classes like bard,cleric,chanter could reduce the "call for help" range

facing 3 giants,  lull 2 giants and pull the 3rd

 

these options *still* exist in Everquest today

I think that most of this is in WoW

Originally posted by azmundai

what other roles would it expand to and how would content be designed to accommodate those roles?

I realize there are a lot of people that don't like the trinity .. and the need to have roles and I appreciate that. Please be mature enough to appreciate that there is at least 1 person in the world that actually thinks they are a good thing. This post isn't about why I think they are a good thing .. I am just curious what other roles you think might work.

Regenerator:
What would it be like if mana/energy/etc were more finite and for more difficult encounters you needed someone in your group to cast regenerating buffs and spells? This would essentially be a healer for your mana/energy/etc bar.

Magic/Physical tanks:
What if tanking was broken into 2 roles. 1 for traditional warrior style mechanics and another where the clothies were the tanks. This has kinda been done before but not on a gamewide scale. That demon in SSC could be tanked by a warlock. Having played a traditional meatshield for most of TBC I found that fight to be quite interesting to tank along side a warlock. I remember mage-tanking the imps after broodlord in BWL too .. that was a blast :) and kite tanking the frost vulnerable mobs after the first drake .. man I miss that instance.

Buffer:
Basically vanilla wow shaman/paladin .. cleanse bot. This is a tough one. How can this be made into a more fun role overall? It's implementation in early wow is one of the things that to me .. ruined the idea of expanding roles. It was just boring as hell according to all the palys I knew back then.

Crowd Control:
I think this is easy enough to make cool. There are plenty of fights that use CC in many MMOs ..

Pullers:
pulling mobs, picking off runners

------------------------------------------------------------

How does it all play out?
The first thought is there would need to be encounters that didn't require a tank. Easy enough really. Think SOA in SWTOR without the tanking phase. Also fights that didnt require healers. Not sure how that would work.

Regenerators become a problem really fast .. as you would likely need one for every fight just like healers .. how do you prevent the need for this? Short fights, lots of mobility (buffer could have mobility buffs)

Anyway ... any other ideas?

LOL on topic and your 'posibilities'? Lineage II has them all, aside from the paper-tank (does have a mage tank in heavy though). And pullers..? Hmm... I remember me as dwarf (slowest race in L2 due to short legs) pulling hordes of mobs on my Great Wolf (being close at speed cap with right buffs from a BUFFER :p)

It's always fun to see ppl talk about a 'what if' if they've only played one (or more than one but all alike) MMO, without even looking what other MMO's are actually offering...

Originally posted by Gaia_Hunter 

Miracle rifles opposed to miracle plate armor that doesn't tire you and allow you to actually move?

My point is: it is a game.

If it is a master Kensai, maybe he is known by reputation.

If we go by realism all the concept of hit points and instant healing is silly.

 

 

I'm still a bit at a loss what you are trying to say (aside from trolling)...?

Yes, of course it's a game... and said game works on mechanics, like NPCs recting stronger to taunts than to attacks.

Is that bad?

Loke feels like the monsters/mobs should be clairvoiant and automatically know which role a character has i.e. he is a tank, he is a healer, he is a DPS, and attack them accordingly.

Fact is that if one was to take the simple availability of class/level information out of the game, you, the gamer, would first have to figure out which character has what role.

Which you could do by just standing there and observing (and probably getting shot to bits) or you could hope for the best that your guess to attack that guy is right.

Now, based on what would you make your choice? Armour? As only healer can wear clothes armour? Or staves? As only healers can wear staves? etc.

The trick here and now is that the enemy can easily sucker you into a trap if you go by that. That's why I brought up the Kensai but I could also have pointed at the classic D&D cleric in his armour.

If you don't know what is really going on you can easily make a fatale choice in combat...

And yes, the Kensai may be known by reputation... but do you every single character in every single game that you are playing?

"Kensai" in the context I'm using it is a character class going back to AD&D's Oriental Adventures.

It is not a title.

So, even a lvl1 Kensai would be fighting without armour because he believes that his swordskills make armour unnecessary.

Originally posted by coretex666

Originally posted by Nadia

Originally posted by Alcuin
It might be useful to ask ourselves a similar question, "what can a character do in relation to a monster or mob? "
We can also add some parameters like in a typical MMO world where you and the monster are both standing in a cave next each other .

Attack it

[list...]

choosing to attack can bring new options

[...]

EQ also had lulls, some classes like bard,cleric,chanter could reduce the "call for help" range

facing 3 giants,  lull 2 giants and pull the 3rd

these options *still* exist in Everquest today

I think that most of this is in WoW

@Nadia: True; once the attack begins, the actions & reactions branch out considerably.

@Coretex:  I think a lot of it is in WoW.  I also think that most of the gameplay (in WoW and a lot of games) devolves away from neededing anything but the following:  1) Tank get agro 2) Healer heal the tank, and 3) DPS... unleash as much hell as you can.  Repeat...repeat...repeat...

 I was often a rogue and remember how rarely I ever got to use the 'sap' ability during normal PvE(and how unecessary it was -usually because of unbridled AoE).

I really think some players balk at content where they have to stop and think and plan, rather tha, "gogogogogogo!!!"

Bringing back crowd control would