I think we should learn a lesson from reality when designing this part of the game. Simply put, the dps, healer, tank strategem is outdated and unrealistic. Consider my alternative.

A player will be able to be defensive, offensive, and support with the same character and I don't mean through double-speccing or anything like that.

For instance, a player creates a character, and can choose from the following abilities.

Defense

* Armor - The heavier the armor, the more armor protection it provides. The type of armor makes a difference too, such as plate being resistant to piercing and slashing, but more vulnerable to crushing and magic.

* Evasion - The lighter the armor, the more evasive you become. Armor such as leather and cloth, would be more flamable.

* Parry - When wielding weapons, you may parry. The longer the weapon, the more chance there is to parry

* Block - When wielding a shield, you have a greater chance to block, and a lesser chance to parry.

* Magic - Defensive magic can be used to create invisible shields that protect you from damage. Certain magical shields can focus more on defense against certain kinds of damage

Basically, the idea isn't perfect, but the idea is to allow people to pick and choose their method for defending themselves. This is so that people can look the way they want, without suffering stereotypical penalties for it. I'd also prefer a FPS twitch style gameplay for this. Meaning you actively evade, parry, block, and activate magical shields. You'll evade faster the lighter armor you wear, parry better with longer weapons, block as long as you click the block button and your shield is still in servicable condition, and block with magical shields (by holding shift, like blocking w/ shields), which will last as long as you have mana.

Offense

* Melee - In reality, weapons kill just as effectively in the right hands. Meleers would use the weapon of their choice, and will gain combos for their weapons the more points they put into it. The combos grant more damage.

* Ranged - The advantage is killing from afar. More points into Ranged Weapons makes the cursor less shaky, improving your aim. It also grants you special skills, such as better precision, so you can cripple your foe if you chose to. Also it grants you more skill with the weapon, which allows you to deal more damage with it.

* Magic - There are different kinds of magic, as there are different kinds of weapons. The more points you put into magic, the less your spells will fizzle, and the more powerful and grand they will become.

The idea here is to allow players to pick how they choose to deal damage. They can mix and match as much as they like, but with only a limited amount of points, they can't master everything. However, cross-specializing has it's advantages, since you're more prepared for a variety of encounters, but specializing also has it's advantages, as you unlock better combos and deal more damage, and handle particular encounters better.

Support

* First Aid - Can use bandages to patch up wounds, and stop bleeding among other first aid related things.

* Alchemy - Can use potions to enhance abilities and knowledge of herbs to heal, among other things.

* Magic - Can use divine magic to heal and bolster, or arcane magic to bolster and ward.

The whole idea here is to allow people to choose how they want to support themselves and their allies. Each should be equally viable and attractive, but also carry benefits and penalties.

Obviously a great deal of thought hasn't gone into this, but it's an idea that popped in my head that I wanted to get down on paper before I forget it. I'll let discussion refine and polish the idea. Basically, the variety in the game and difference between two players is how you do what you do, not what you do, since everyone can take care of themselves. The amount a mob does in damage, the type of damage delt, and it's resistances will determine which skills are most useful against it and which players are better suited for the encounter. However, everyone should be at least adequate in handling the challenge, or at least bring something to the table, so that they're needed in the group. I just think the whole tank, healer, dps thing is outdated and unrealistic. It's more realistic to believe that everyone can kill something just as easily as the next person, and have learned how to defend themselves in their own way (they did live this long afterall), and have learned ways to treat their wounds.

I'm confused. You say the tank, healer, dps thing is outdated and unrealistic and you want to change it but what you did was listed tank, dps, heal. Also you mentioned that if put more points into a category it can be more powerful vs spreading them out. So with that you will still have players that become purely focused on tank, dps, or heal but still have the option for some variation. That brings you back to how the majority of fantasy mmorpg classes are but the classes are built in a way each one can do something unique and is fun in its own way.

What if you took out a way for a pure tank or healer?

Evade, Parry and Block are notoriously hard to balance... yet I see a lot of games where one of the three is the main form of mitigation. It's easy to moderate output vs mitigations, but adding "chance" is always an issue - especially when that chance is around 40% and expected to match the mitigations of a high-defense character who is taking hits but mitigating damage. Nothing promises that a fight will have the 40% chance of evades, sometimes its more or less and the fight never had a chance, sometimes it only happens on hotkey abilities or would-be crits. There is no way to balance it, and thats why I am always for the complete removal of passive "whiffs" in lieu of abilities and actions that can either be used preemptively or to-the-moment like an active blocking system.

The other fact being that a guy without heavy armor has no reason to be fighting a guy with it in melee range - he's gonna get hurt more. The idea of light armor is supposed to suit ranged combat because of the mobility, but they never take that into account in games and armor preferences for classes are simply a way to wormhole the damage to mitigation scheme in the way the devs wish implemented; high dmg = low armor, and a mix thereof.

One of the many things holding the industry back; convention.

As for the DPS, Tank, Healer scheme - there is no balance without one class outright destroying another, and that is not usually measured in a DPS to mitigations scheme, as much as applying weaknesses to the class lineups.

Warrior (Magic Tank and some DPS) > Mage (Ranged DPS) > Rogue (close range DPS) > Healer (Debuff/Heals) > back to the Warrior

*this is just an example, you can set it up any way you want*

Then you have a strategy in "if you are this class, take on that one".

The warrior tanks and melees the mage down after draining him, but the mage nuked the rogue from afar, but not after the rogue merced the healer who debuffed the warrior who is now taken by anyone.

1 v 1 balance is achieveable - but then you have zero hope for a group tactic because all you can do is work the DMG to mitigation scheme until everbody is the same output for effort in PvP.  Then healers become the only real advantage to another class.

.

following on  from biofells:

In reality: Soldiers made the bulk of the army, they were more expendable and would be there primarily to protect the damage dealers. They were not tanks as such, but it was in their numbers that they defended. You would have to fight through a thousand warriors to kill the hundred archers, this was the problem, not that the soldiers had more armour, there were just more of them you had to kill. This does not work in many mmos because you can walk through each other, however in games like WAR this becomes very apparent.

Likewise powerful soldiers (usually on horses to get them to the fight quicker,  examples are knights and beserkers) were there for two reasons. Firstly they were there to fear and break the enemy line quickly (reducing the time for soldiers to get to those archers), and secondly they were there to mop up without loosing anymore of your soldiers (so they are there for the next battle).

In battle assasins/thieves were useless because they did not carry a shield and would fall to the archers.

In history the most deahs are caused by the archers and ranged catapaults etc.

From what I have seen from MMOs is that WAR is most accurate in the use of such fights, however AoC may also reach that scale if numbers increase.

Originally posted by mmoguy43

I'm confused. You say the tank, healer, dps thing is outdated and unrealistic and you want to change it but what you did was listed tank, dps, heal. Also you mentioned that if put more points into a category it can be more powerful vs spreading them out. So with that you will still have players that become purely focused on tank, dps, or heal but still have the option for some variation. That brings you back to how the majority of fantasy mmorpg classes are but the classes are built in a way each one can do something unique and is fun in its own way.

 

What if you took out a way for a pure tank or healer?

I think your misunderstanding. It seems he wants to do away with the system of only 1 toon can fill that 1 role at a time, dps/tank/healer, and allow everyone to choose their method of performing all 3 of those things with 1 toon. Basically everyone has a method of dps, a method of defense/tanking, and a method of healing, each with their own benefits and penalties.

This would cause some issues though. This would basically increase the amount of soloing going on, as everyone can support themself easily, so why group with someone else when you can tank, dps, and heal on your own? the game mechanics themself would have to somehow work to create an incentive for grouping, maybe even just by simply having a wide variety of types of attacks/damage/debuffs used by mobs against you in a way that makes, lets say, melee damage & blocking useless against them, requiring you to join up with perhaps a magic damage/magic shield user in order to progress, or range dwith evade, etc.

Without those incentives, it would cause everyone to be able to just handle everything on their own and probably severely hinder the community overall and pretty much turn it into a single playe rmmo. if done properly it would work out great though, and im all for it, i hate being stuck in 1 role.

Originally posted by nate1980

 I'd also prefer a FPS twitch style gameplay for this. Meaning you actively evade, parry, block, and activate magical shields

 
In real martial arts, parrying is a conditioned response to whatever your opponent is doing.  It's not just a sequence of random twitches; it's a fluid system.  Trying to portray that in a twitch-based computer game is either going to result in an awkward experience, or one that requires the player to develop a set of conditioned finger responses.  No normal person is going to find that entertaining.

I'd prefer a combat system that let me strategically plan when to press my attacks, but kept parrying and blocking more computer-controlled.  Each character would have a "guard", represented by a pool of "fatigue points" that regenerate very  quickly.  You'd use the same pool of points to defend, attack, cast spells -- or even move quickly.  Only when that guard is actually penetrated would you start taking damage to your (harder to heal) "body points."

Graphically, this would provide a more realistic view of combat.  Instead of the characters repeatedly cutting each other up like a pair of lumberjacks taking turns whittling down trees, you'd see  parrying, blocking, sidestepping, etc. for most of the fight.  Only after this had gone on for a bit would you see actual body strikes start to take place.  And finally a killshot animation.

Tactically, I think this would a blast.  Instead of  waiting for power-up buttons to refresh, and cycling through combos, it would be a game of strategy.  Press your attack too early in the fight, before you've worn your opponent down enough, and you could miss and leave yourself open to counter attack.   But if you wait too long to make a move, your opponent might get you first.

That way, the bizarre paradigm of in-fight healing could be removed from the game entirely.  Instead, the fight would be a cooperative effort to keep each player from running out of steam.  Don't try to put a bandage on him while he's fighting; that's stupid.  Insead, just step up and give a beleaguered player a breather to recover his strength. 

Strategically, it could open up a whole new aspect to RPG gameplay.  Instead of the arcade-style outcome of ending up either trivially delayed or dead, you'd also have minor injuries to worry about.   A "healer", of course, would have to wait until after the fight to do his job.  You wouldn't have ANY downtime for a well-played fight, but you'd have to stop and deal with injuries.  That way, even minor enemies would have to be taken seriously, and finally an RPG could do away with the most immersion-breaking paradigm imaginable: frequent death.  

I've been thinking about this one myself and how most modern MMORPG's focus too much on clear definition and divide mechanics up based on class/roles.

For instance Tanks are generally responsible for threat generation. DPS/DD are responsible for damage and Healers are responsible for, suprisingly, healing.

My own personal idea for changing and rewiring this whole thing, as well as shaking up the boredom and routine a bit is by tweaking classes further than usual to help with, or participate in one of those three areas while maintaining an active roll in whatever they do.

Im probably not explaining it well so ill give an example:

The old Tank/DPS/Healer holy trinity heads to a dungeon. In most cases, the tank builds threat, is healed by the mage, and DPS just spams skills and waits for inevitable death, in some games there is room for a bit of scripting and events etc.

What I would like to see is Threat becoming a new commodity, something akin to playing with fire and bringing some risk vs reward to everyone. I would like to see threat work as a managed sweet spot, say you have a bar that represent your level of threat. something like this: |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||  (this would only apply to healers and DPS)

The green part in the middle is where you are aiming for, at that point you are threatening enough that your attacks are causing extra damage, but not so much so that you are now the focus off attention.

Yellow represents a warning zone, while in here you would be the victim of say random attacks from the boss such as a charge, or a randomly fire spell.

The two red zones leave you in danger of being attacked and killed. Whoever is deepest into the red will still only be the focus of random attacks, but they are random sustained attacks. Each attack would lower your threat towards yellow again, and you only lose the bosses focus once in the yellow again.

For clarification, the meter would move to the left when you are performing underpar and are being seen as weak and an easy target to pick off. Say someone doing low damage or healing compared to everyone else. The right hand side means you are going overboard, as in normal ingame threat.

Now the big twist comes in the form of threat management. The bar itself is based on numbers, specifically the total threat generated by the main tank. Simply working by going off whoever has the highest total threat. As the tank build his overall threat, the sweet spot and yellow area's expand out allowing more room for error.

Healing someone would give them HP but also lower their threat, so someone who has taken some damage would need to fight back hard in order to make sure the healing wont push them back into the red. The threat lowered by healing them is taken and transferred to the healer, in this case we will assume that a healer healing himself receives no threat modification. Healing the main tank will increase the tanks HP, and as well as this will increase their threat total and lower the healers overall total.

Tanks could then spend the rthreat on buffing the group say sarificing threat (and shrinking the safe spots of the bar) for say a bonus of locking everyone's bar into the safe spot for a set period of time.

Its just one idea (and one i'll admit is kinda half baked) to changing the mechanics of a group and getting everyone else involved in all area's. Feel free to pick my idea apart, because im sure the crude idea itself is more than open ground for exploitation, but im sure if it was refined and picked up by someone capable of putting it into action it could be a new way of thinking.

I ran across this thread late last year and have been contemplating it ever since. These are some of the things that crossed my mind:

• Generally speaking, in real life I am my own defender, damage dealer and healer.
• I have to stick up for myself, compete with those who want to take credit for my accomplishments or just take my stuff, and I am responsible for my health or seeing a professional when something is wrong. If I am headed into unknown territory or if I'm nervous, I don't grab a buddy to come with me; I might talk with someone beforehand or I might consult a specialist, but ultimately I'm walking in by myself.
• In real life group dynamics, comparison, competition and jockeying for position/creating hierarchy are the norm. Perhaps it is arising from some territorial imperative, but it is one of the most common dynamics in a group or social gathering.
• If a group comes together with a common goal or purpose, most of the competition stops. However,  hierarchy remains and is actually much more apparent.
• What would an MMO be like that reflected more of real life? Would it be boring? Would it grind to a halt?
• What if every character embodied all the basic survival skills? Would that eliminate the need for classes?
• What if specializing was contained in skills or professions (like real life)?
• Since competitive humans are the ones actually playing this MMO, where does competition occur if there are no levels or classes?
• Ruh roh, this is sounding a bit too much like real life...

*runs screaming from the room*

It doesn't matter what you attempt to do with the classes unless you rethink the encounters as well.  The trinity survives because it is easier to design encounters for it and by virtue of being a convention is "universally" understood.  Hybridize all you want, players will revert to this model every time because it seems you are still making encounters that support the trinity.

To me the answer is to let everyone do everything, but make it all very situational.  For a given encounter, you might be in any role.  I do have an idea that could accomplish this, but describing it often makes it sound far more complicated than it would actually be while playing.

hybrids are interesting by itself and i do like games where you can experiment with picking skills from different kind of character classes or games with multiclasses because it does make characters unique but the setting is important to make it succeed.

in mmo's for grouping it's often not going to be as effective because skills tend to increase in game as part of the reward system therefore in most current games for example 2 half mages are not going to do the same damage as one specialised full mage so you'd have to compensate somewhere to avoid a jack of all trades syndrome.

one other line of thinking which might be interesting is a game where you don't assign skill points, every character starts out with the same but  you train your skills in effectiveness by using them instead, this could diversify characters automatically because one player will not use the same skill as much as an other one. this requires however a whole new line of thinking when it comes to balance and skill progress.

Originally posted by kopema

 
In real martial arts, parrying is a conditioned response to whatever your opponent is doing.  It's not just a sequence of random twitches; it's a fluid system.  Trying to portray that in a twitch-based computer game is either going to result in an awkward experience, or one that requires the player to develop a set of conditioned finger responses.  No normal person is going to find that entertaining.

I'd prefer a combat system that let me strategically plan when to press my attacks, but kept parrying and blocking more computer-controlled.  Each character would have a "guard", represented by a pool of "fatigue points" that regenerate very  quickly.  You'd use the same pool of points to defend, attack, cast spells -- or even move quickly.  Only when that guard is actually penetrated would you start taking damage to your (harder to heal) "body points."

Graphically, this would provide a more realistic view of combat.  Instead of the characters repeatedly cutting each other up like a pair of lumberjacks taking turns whittling down trees, you'd see  parrying, blocking, sidestepping, etc. for most of the fight.  Only after this had gone on for a bit would you see actual body strikes start to take place.  And finally a killshot animation.

Tactically, I think this would a blast.  Instead of  waiting for power-up buttons to refresh, and cycling through combos, it would be a game of strategy.  Press your attack too early in the fight, before you've worn your opponent down enough, and you could miss and leave yourself open to counter attack.   But if you wait too long to make a move, your opponent might get you first.

That way, the bizarre paradigm of in-fight healing could be removed from the game entirely.  Instead, the fight would be a cooperative effort to keep each player from running out of steam.  Don't try to put a bandage on him while he's fighting; that's stupid.  Insead, just step up and give a beleaguered player a breather to recover his strength. 

Strategically, it could open up a whole new aspect to RPG gameplay.  Instead of the arcade-style outcome of ending up either trivially delayed or dead, you'd also have minor injuries to worry about.   A "healer", of course, would have to wait until after the fight to do his job.  You wouldn't have ANY downtime for a well-played fight, but you'd have to stop and deal with injuries.  That way, even minor enemies would have to be taken seriously, and finally an RPG could do away with the most immersion-breaking paradigm imaginable: frequent death.  

I LOVE THIS! I had to quote it.

For myself, I think you can kinda choose any set of roles that are kinda equivalent and have a brand new kind of trinity or quadrilogy.  Or you can just remix the trinity. Think abou the big 4 (warrior, mage, rogue, cleric) they split the DPS role, and boom, totally legit.

So if I was making an MMO, I might do something like: 

CLASS A: Best 1v1 DPS, AoE Tank

CLASS B: Best AoE DPS, AoE Buff/Debuff

CLASS C: Crowd Control, 1v1 Buff/Debuff

It's the trinity, but it's not a hybrid in the sense that you are both a tank and a DPS as CLASS A, you're half a tank, and half a DPS. Encounters could be designed based on the class' strengths and weaknesses. Want to give Class A and C a hard time? Give an encounter a lot of low level mobs. They can knock each one off quick, but there's a lot of attackers. Want to make it tough for B and C? Put in a high level boss. It'll take forever to take them down? Give a medium sized group a lot of resistances and classes A and B will be LF Class C in a second.

That's just how i'd do it.

Originally posted by kopema

 
In real martial arts, parrying is a conditioned response to whatever your opponent is doing.  It's not just a sequence of random twitches; it's a fluid system.  Trying to portray that in a twitch-based computer game is either going to result in an awkward experience, or one that requires the player to develop a set of conditioned finger responses.  No normal person is going to find that entertaining.

I'd prefer a combat system that let me strategically plan when to press my attacks, but kept parrying and blocking more computer-controlled.  Each character would have a "guard", represented by a pool of "fatigue points" that regenerate very  quickly.  You'd use the same pool of points to defend, attack, cast spells -- or even move quickly.  Only when that guard is actually penetrated would you start taking damage to your (harder to heal) "body points."

Graphically, this would provide a more realistic view of combat.  Instead of the characters repeatedly cutting each other up like a pair of lumberjacks taking turns whittling down trees, you'd see  parrying, blocking, sidestepping, etc. for most of the fight.  Only after this had gone on for a bit would you see actual body strikes start to take place.  And finally a killshot animation.

Tactically, I think this would a blast.  Instead of  waiting for power-up buttons to refresh, and cycling through combos, it would be a game of strategy.  Press your attack too early in the fight, before you've worn your opponent down enough, and you could miss and leave yourself open to counter attack.   But if you wait too long to make a move, your opponent might get you first.

That way, the bizarre paradigm of in-fight healing could be removed from the game entirely.  Instead, the fight would be a cooperative effort to keep each player from running out of steam.  Don't try to put a bandage on him while he's fighting; that's stupid.  Insead, just step up and give a beleaguered player a breather to recover his strength. 

Strategically, it could open up a whole new aspect to RPG gameplay.  Instead of the arcade-style outcome of ending up either trivially delayed or dead, you'd also have minor injuries to worry about.   A "healer", of course, would have to wait until after the fight to do his job.  You wouldn't have ANY downtime for a well-played fight, but you'd have to stop and deal with injuries.  That way, even minor enemies would have to be taken seriously, and finally an RPG could do away with the most immersion-breaking paradigm imaginable: frequent death.  

Koperna, was you a lucky fellow that I told about my guard system for melee combat? It sure has heck sounds almost like my implementation.  The system you have here is the vision I see with melee combat as well. I actually researched real swordsmanship and came up with a similar idea. I call mine the guard system because that's what stances are called in swordsmanship. I have about 90% of the guard system complete. I am not sure how movement would take in affect in actual combat. Would the movement speed by slowed? I would like to limit the jumping and running around while spamming buttons. I want the player to be actually immersed in melee combat.

Also I took this mechanic a bit further. There are three primary positions of the guards; High, Medium and Low.  High Guard is essentially for offensive strikes with minimal defense. Middle Guard is typically a guard where you can both strike offensively and parry just as effective, however, the middle guard can not perform both at a higher percentage as the other two. Low Guard is typically for defense. You can still strike in low guard position but it wouldn't be as effective.

I also incorperate class abilities with this system, however depending on the guard you choose those abilities would slightly change and gain either a bonus of a penality. I would like to share my mechanic but I am using it as a portfolio peice.

the holy trinity as they call is something I would love to see changed, I can only see it changing for a short time until player's play test different classes. I have seen 4 types of player's who play MMO's for different reason. I will list some.

1. The Raider

2. The solo player

3. The casual player

4. The PVP oreiented player

#1 will always choose a class role that gets him in groups or raids. at the same time he can switch to #4 for fun when raids aren't going.

#2 will always roll a hybrid regardless. He/She wants to be a "jack of all trades" as it were. and persue solo content.It always nice to have heals as well for friend's or when it's time to group's and  to be able to DPS solo mob's.

#3 could careless and spend more time crafting or doing #4 when time allows. Sometime's the casual player will run solo stuff and generaly help people but spend more time doing RL stuff  then to get into a heavy commited raid group.

if a hybrid tank/heal class exist? then people will choose that depending on the play style. You have to look at Mob AI alot when thinking about doing away with the trinity's! the key is to make a game with no class (No pun intended) more skill based and possibly more profession based. also loose the level system! and move to a "skill based" system.

You have to change the way Mobs/Bosses work when looking at players. Most attackers are put on the "hate list" once on this list a players has to maintain hate to generate aggro. healers go on the list  when they start spamming heals. The only thing that needs to be changed is making mobs (regardless of the attacker) view each player in a group as an equal. so toss the hate list and make it so it does'nt matter who's attacking. then you can start designing offensive/defensive capabiltys that work for the general classes regardless of role. it will make many people complain. but if mobs see each attacker equally?, then it will make a group as a whole work together to defeat a Mob. so long would be gone of the healer sitting in the back spamming he would need combat support to survive.

You would have to create some pretty niffty combat mechanics to circumvent the hate list.

Originally posted by nate1980

I think we should learn a lesson from reality when designing this part of the game. Simply put, the dps, healer, tank strategem is outdated and unrealistic. Consider my alternative.

A player will be able to be defensive, offensive, and support with the same character and I don't mean through double-speccing or anything like that.

For instance, a player creates a character, and can choose from the following abilities.

Defense

* Armor - The heavier the armor, the more armor protection it provides. The type of armor makes a difference too, such as plate being resistant to piercing and slashing, but more vulnerable to crushing and magic.

* Evasion - The lighter the armor, the more evasive you become. Armor such as leather and cloth, would be more flamable.

* Parry - When wielding weapons, you may parry. The longer the weapon, the more chance there is to parry

* Block - When wielding a shield, you have a greater chance to block, and a lesser chance to parry.

* Magic - Defensive magic can be used to create invisible shields that protect you from damage. Certain magical shields can focus more on defense against certain kinds of damage

Basically, the idea isn't perfect, but the idea is to allow people to pick and choose their method for defending themselves. This is so that people can look the way they want, without suffering stereotypical penalties for it. I'd also prefer a FPS twitch style gameplay for this. Meaning you actively evade, parry, block, and activate magical shields. You'll evade faster the lighter armor you wear, parry better with longer weapons, block as long as you click the block button and your shield is still in servicable condition, and block with magical shields (by holding shift, like blocking w/ shields), which will last as long as you have mana.

Offense

* Melee - In reality, weapons kill just as effectively in the right hands. Meleers would use the weapon of their choice, and will gain combos for their weapons the more points they put into it. The combos grant more damage.

* Ranged - The advantage is killing from afar. More points into Ranged Weapons makes the cursor less shaky, improving your aim. It also grants you special skills, such as better precision, so you can cripple your foe if you chose to. Also it grants you more skill with the weapon, which allows you to deal more damage with it.

* Magic - There are different kinds of magic, as there are different kinds of weapons. The more points you put into magic, the less your spells will fizzle, and the more powerful and grand they will become.

The idea here is to allow players to pick how they choose to deal damage. They can mix and match as much as they like, but with only a limited amount of points, they can't master everything. However, cross-specializing has it's advantages, since you're more prepared for a variety of encounters, but specializing also has it's advantages, as you unlock better combos and deal more damage, and handle particular encounters better.

Support

* First Aid - Can use bandages to patch up wounds, and stop bleeding among other first aid related things.

* Alchemy - Can use potions to enhance abilities and knowledge of herbs to heal, among other things.

* Magic - Can use divine magic to heal and bolster, or arcane magic to bolster and ward.

The whole idea here is to allow people to choose how they want to support themselves and their allies. Each should be equally viable and attractive, but also carry benefits and penalties.

Obviously a great deal of thought hasn't gone into this, but it's an idea that popped in my head that I wanted to get down on paper before I forget it. I'll let discussion refine and polish the idea. Basically, the variety in the game and difference between two players is how you do what you do, not what you do, since everyone can take care of themselves. The amount a mob does in damage, the type of damage delt, and it's resistances will determine which skills are most useful against it and which players are better suited for the encounter. However, everyone should be at least adequate in handling the challenge, or at least bring something to the table, so that they're needed in the group. I just think the whole tank, healer, dps thing is outdated and unrealistic. It's more realistic to believe that everyone can kill something just as easily as the next person, and have learned how to defend themselves in their own way (they did live this long afterall), and have learned ways to treat their wounds.

The thing is, and this is my opinion only, I want my classes:

A. detailed

B. unique

C. to fill a niche

D. to be viable in a solo state.

I like having an abundance of classes. I don't want to be Warrior # 458 or Healer # 1243. That's the thing I loved about DAOC - not only were there an abundance of classes, but the classes were different per realm. You really had to get to know your class, and you really had to get to know the classes and strengths/weaknesses of your enemy.

The reason the paradigm of tanks, melee dps, magic dps, buffer, healer, etc. has lasted so long is that I think it is pretty good. Your thinking is on to something but I'm not sure how you'd improve upon the established paradigm (+ 5 points for using that word twice) except to make more variety. 6 - 8 classes choice does not work. 15 - 20 does.

With a great variety of class comes unique-ness. Give me 3 varieties of tanks - a tank that focuses on armor mitigation, one that focuses on high hitpoints, and one that is a magic hybrid. Give me a couple of varieties of healers - the shaman style, the druid style, the cleric style. I like that. It means that whatever class I am, I will have greater chances of being needed within a guild and a group, and I will contribute in unique ways.

Don't make my class gimpy though. The one thing that bugged me about the DAOC midgard "healer" class for instance was its abysmal lack of offensive spells. That was what I liked about the EQ1 druid as well as the SWG pre-expansion combat medic. Even the WoW priest could hold his own. Make them good at what they are designed to do, but don't focus on parry, mitigation, healing, or electricity to the detriment of other skills that all classes need.

Originally posted by harvschmarv

The thing is, and this is my opinion only, I want my classes:

A. detailed

B. unique

C. to fill a niche

D. to be viable in a solo state.

Detail and uniqueness create ever-greater opportunities for imbalance unless you build your mechanics on a mathematically-symmetrical foundation: all abilities available to all characters or subsets of the same mechanic where actions/outcomes oppose each other in a symmetrical relationship (eg: rock-paper-scissors)

Groups naturally gravitate towards specialized roles - people will want to press their advantages (whether within the game or on the boards where they worry about being unable to fulfill their role).  The trouble is that the more people group and specialize, the less well they fare when you drop them in the wilderness and ask them to fend for themselves.  If you want a game that allows you to do both, what you are essentially asking for is seperate group and solo minigames (seperate challenges, or a layer of challenges that melts away when you are 10 levels higher than the group level version of the same encounter).