Posted Wed, Apr 03, 2013 by gunky
The MMO Trinity of tank-healer-damage has been around since the early days of MMOs. This arrangement has had a profound effect on progression-style MMOs, shaping how group content is designed and how it is consumed by players. It is such a powerful arrangement that it has spilled over into non-MMO settings, such as 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons, where "Fighter = Tank" is now official. The trinity represents standardization and balance, which makes it easier for game designers to build new group-based content - a developer knows exactly how much power an on-level, balanced group should have, and whether or not such a group can be expected to succeed at a given task.
There's just one problem with the trinity: it's not a lot of fun for a lot of people. The market has changed since this concept first rose to prominence, and the rise of F2P means a lot more "casual" play - players who drop in for an hour or two here and there to kill some monsters and maybe run some group stuff, rather than the hardcore MMO player who subscribes to one game and spends several hours every day in-game.
The current trend in MMOs is to appeal to that casual crowd. The leveling process is mostly solo and can be done in lots of short "shifts," with moderate forays into group content along the road to level cap. By end-game, where the hardcore guys live, the focus shifts mostly to cooperative group content (or PvP, where the trinity has a much less significant role). This may not be true for every single game on the market - certainly there are exceptions to just about every rule - but it seems to be the case in all the big ones. And while some players enjoy leveling tanks or healers precisely because of the challenges these classes represent, that same challenge is what makes these classes rare by the elder game when they are most needed. This is where the trinity fails.
It's a different story in sandbox-style MMOs where character classes are less restricted. Depending on the game, group play may not be all that different from solo. Character roles are softly-defined and easily-changed, if they are defined at all. There's no need for the trinity here because the restrictions that require it don't really exist. But you don't get that visceral thrill of chasing levels, the incremental accomplishments that essentially define the progression-based game. And it's that chase that appeals more strongly to casual players, because it is a sure mark of measurable progress. Spending a couple of hours in a game and gaining a new level, that's something you can share on facebook.
However, even some modern progression-based games have reduced the reliance on the trinity as a means of enforcing balance. The casual players they are attempting to lure into their games don't want to sit for hours in a queue when they could be spending their limited game-time killing stuff and gaining levels. Progression can be just as fixed and controlled as ever in these newer games, but a host of other options allows players to complete group content without forcing them to adhere to one old-school group arrangement.
Giving all characters a way to avoid taking damage would eliminate or greatly reduce the need for dedicated healers and tanks. This system is in place in Neverwinter - all classes have a damage-avoidance "skill" tied to the Shift key, and it is unique for each class. The defense-based melee class raises his shield and blocks, the stealth class tucks and rolls, the caster class teleports. Each class plays very differently and each is very restricted in terms of build options and gear, but all of them are able to duck out of the way when enemies swing at them. And enemy mobs in Neverwinter "telegraph" their attacks by using long wind-up animations or visible hot spots where their area attacks will land. With this system in place, most serious damage can be avoided by everyone in the group, and having a tank in the group is handy but perhaps not strictly necessary.
The dynamic combat of RaiderZ allows the player to avoid taking damage. Most of the time.
One potential issue with this is enemy aggro - a boss tends to lock on to the one character generating the most threat, either through threat-building skills and taunts or through dealing the most damage. This can be offset by coding that makes the creature switch targets frequently, either randomly or based on some other criteria. Random-aggro boss battles are the bane of healers and support classes in trinity-based games, but in non-trinity games they would fit just fine.
Healing potions with short or no cooldowns can eliminate the need for dedicated healers. These potions don't need to be particularly powerful, and they can be as expensive or as affordable as the game economy allows.
Alternately, healing duties could be assigned by tradeable items. Imagine a staff or equippable crystal or some other kind of item, useable by any class, that adds a handful of healing skills to the character's toolbar (or radial menu, or whatever), in addition to all of their regular combat skills. Every character could carry one, enabling any character to serve as the group's healer.
But this is not just limited to healing. Threat moderation could be effectively managed with items or consumables - a clickable item that draws enemy attention, another that drops it. Clickable buff items could add bonuses to damage mitigation or damage output. The standard suite of progression skills wouldn't change, but the clickable buff items would allow any character to fill any role.
This is coming with the Elder Scrolls Online. Any character can use any kind of weapon. Casters can use melee weapons, melee characters can use ranged weapons, etc. Expanding this idea to armor allows for even more character freedom: armored casters, unencumbered melee fighters, etc. Give any character a shield and he can effectively mitigate damage, allowing him to serve as a "tank." The character would still have a strict progression of skills, feats, talents or whatever, but they would be able to gear out as they saw fit.
This is inherently more "sandbox-y" than the other options, because gear can drastically change how a character performs... unless it doesn't. Removing massive stat bonuses from gear altogether, or balancing bonuses with penalties (for example, heavy plate armor that offers more physical protection but slows movement), making armor more cosmetic than functional, means that characters can pick armor just because it looks cool, rather than because it contributes better to their play-style or to their characters skillset.