Sign in to follow this  
robert4818

Spicing up Other Classes.

Recommended Posts

robert4818    138
If you've read my free-form magic system post (here http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=323717 ) then you know how much more indepth it is than most MMO's out there. The question is what do we do with the other general classes out there? The way they play the game will be very simple compared to the system used by Magicians. Though they may be more or less still balanced...depth wise they would be VERY out of whack. I don't have alot of ideas on this topic, so if you have any ideas please feel free to share them. Damage Dealing Fighters (NOT TANKS) - What about introducing a combo system? DAOC had a very basic combo system. It was more along the lines of if you want to do move B, you need to successfuly do move A first. But nothing more than that. Its not really a combo system, as it is a move with an add on. So what do we do..We create a Combo system sorta similar to the old game of UNO. You give each move a symbol and a color, in order to pull off another move that move must have either a matching symbol, or a matching color. Then in order to do the next move they must be able to match the way opposite they just did. I.E. I have a red + move. In order to combo I need either a red move or a + move. I choose to go with a green + move. Now I need to find a green move. Then it goes back and forth. until it comes time to finish off the combo. In order to finish the combo you need to match BOTH color and Symbol. Why Combo? Well moves in a combo use up less (action points, endurance etc) and activate a little faster than used alone. Also, when finishing up a combo you activate some sort of special move, I.E. Stun, Disarm, Prone, etc. This is still a rough idea, but I think it would flesh out fighters whose primary role in the game is dealing damage. (think Monks or light weapon fighters) Naturally the combo system should have a way to interupt combos...Most likely by a player matching the color or symbol of the move the opponent is trying to pull off. Tanks - I'm at a loss on what to do to draw them deeper into combat... Anyone have a thought on interesting ways to grab aggro? Stealthers - The idea here is to create a system where the stealthers have the feel of actually sneaking around, not just turning on an ability and moving blazenly in front of creatures. Perhaps they get a "radar" and some tricks that help them distract creatures so they can move around. Then for combat give them abilities that allow them to move around position wise on the target. Since stealthers are generally also dex monkeys give them special moves that allow things like: The thief found himself infront of the bad monster...a place he didn't want to be. In an amazing act of acrobatic feats, the thief flips over the creatures head, rotates and lands squarely behind them, just in the right spot to perform a back stab. Any thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandman    2210
Quote:
Original post by robert4818
Damage Dealing Fighters (NOT TANKS) - What about introducing a combo system? DAOC had a very basic combo system. It was more along the lines of if you want to do move B, you need to successfuly do move A first. But nothing more than that. Its not really a combo system, as it is a move with an add on.


I'm not sure why you differentiate between 'damage dealing fighters' and 'tanks' - are you planning for these to be separate classes? Are tanks unable to deal damage? This would seem to limit the flexibility of the character creation process a bit.

One possible issue I see with the combo system is that it would seem to rely heavily on player skill rather than character skill. This isn't necessarily a problem though, since it is very similar to the magic system, but with melee instead - and you can use the same macro trick as you use for mages spells. Players could learn 'basic moves' which they could then use to assemble sophisticated combos. How effective the combos are depends on how cleverly designed they are.

Your animators will hate you though.

Quote:

So what do we do..We create a Combo system sorta similar to the old game of UNO. You give each move a symbol and a color, in order to pull off another move that move must have either a matching symbol, or a matching color. Then in order to do the next move they must be able to match the way opposite they just did. I.E. I have a red + move. In order to combo I need either a red move or a + move. I choose to go with a green + move. Now I need to find a green move. Then it goes back and forth. until it comes time to finish off the combo. In order to finish the combo you need to match BOTH color and Symbol.


The basic principle seems good enough, but I think it needs a bit of refinement. the colour and symbol are rather abstract, and while this isn't necessarily a problem, it's an abstraction that doesn't seem to work in a very realistic manner. What exactly does a green + represent? If it represents a particular move, then it seems unrealistic that a string of green +'es would make a good combo, since repeating exactly the same move over and over is rarely an effective, smooth flowing sequence.

Your magic system uses much more descriptive elements, such as wind, fire etc. Why not do the same for combat?

Quote:

Tanks - I'm at a loss on what to do to draw them deeper into combat... Anyone have a thought on interesting ways to grab aggro?


I don't see tanks as being seperate from damage dealing fighters - they can have combos too.

Quote:

The thief found himself infront of the bad monster...a place he didn't want to be. In an amazing act of acrobatic feats, the thief flips over the creatures head, rotates and lands squarely behind them, just in the right spot to perform a back stab.


This could be part of the combo system. Certain moves might be available to high dex characters, other moves available to high strength characters, or even particular classes Rogue characters with higher dex and not such good strength get fewer actual attack moves, but a lot of positioning moves, enabling them to get into a better spot to use what attack moves they have.

As for stealth, I agree it would be nice if you actually had to stick to shadows and avoid certain surfaces as in the Thief games, rather than just turning invisible as you say. Coupled with some of their nifty moves to get into otherwise inaccessible places, this could be quite fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Inmate2993    222
One of the problems with Many Classes is that the absolute fundamental classes are kept, and these are the classes that max-out on their stats, which in a well balanced party, you need each character capable of covering an extreme, should the need arise. Such as the "Tank" whose only role is to take damage.

If you really want to have a multi-class system, where the players really have to weigh the pros and cons, you perhapse should remove, or at least well hide, the traditional classes and develop those extra classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yapposai    410
how about using the same system as your mages. Warriors and other classes
can have customized attacks. more powerful players can mix and max more components in the attack. Perhaps using stamina as an equivalent to MP.
Make them collect attacks and fighting styles like spells. Everybody has the stab attack but only a few persons have Flying-dragon-slash (3 slot attack) you can add speed to the attack, damage, defense, knockback, etc.

In addition to the attacks possible to be learned, I also had the idea from Lufia (SNES) to have attacks based on the weapons/armor. the rapier has a stab attack, the Heavy sword has the Decapitate attack and Block that only become available when the Heavy sword is equiped. this gives more depth to the weapons rather than adding damage. The player has to choose to give up his 5 damage rapier with Stab attack (disregards most armor, and fast attack of Stab) or go with the 10 damage longsword that has Swipe (hits multiple enemies near , slow recovery time)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YAITS    109
if you ever played a game called "die by the sword"
i'll find the combat system interesting, instead of clicking the target, you press the numpad keys that acts like direction keys for where your blade swings.
but its pretty in responsive, and your can only swing your blade, (you cannot thrust, cannot parry), so a more developed sword swinging combat system will be nice.
go check if die by the sword demo, maybe it still exists?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robert4818    138
Whats the difference between damage dealing fighters and Tanks. I don't really plan on seperating them... However some games do. As this is a generic system, then I am asking for Intuitive ways to spice up the concept of getting and holding aggro.

Part of the idea here is to make classes that feel and play very differently from each other. This is why I didn't suggest a combat system similar to the magic system. I don't want moves to be like spells.

But to clarify..

Imagine different moves get divided into different suits and symbols like a deck of cards. Then the idea is to match the moves together like you would in UNO. Does green specifically mean anything...in the basic system no. You could actually create a system such that everytime combat is initiated the color and symbol of your selected moves changes, such that the "Deck" they choose from is "shuffled" so to speak. This adds into the randomness of combat.

The color and the symbol are added over the move symbol.

-------
|.....|
|.....|
|.....|
|....+|
-------

The border is colored green, red, blue, or yellow... and there is a grouping of say 4 symbols +, #, @, %. The idea is to build up a sizable combo.

Whats to keep someone from spamming the same move over and over. Well by completing a perfect match, you finish the combo...which means a series of one-two punches...and very easy to counter once they learn what you are up to.

The more moves in a combo, the bigger the effect of the final move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robert4818    138
Onto Thief. I'm semi-opposed to giving the thief a combo system. I think doing so would make them to similar to the fighter.

Here's an idea. Its not combo based, but is similar. Its based of the concept that thieves are HIGH Damage melees that do most of thier damage in one or two hits.

Dirty Fighting.
Thieves get a series of moves that they can stack (not like in the combo system) that give them an advantage. They get five types of basic moves.

Damage Modifiers. These are moves that a thief pulls on an enemy to make thier next attack do more damage. The effect lasts for a certain amount of times, and its possible to stack a few of them together. (Armor Chink, sharpen blade, focus etc)

Dex Negators. These moves are pulled on an enemy that reduce the thieves miss chance. Again these stack with each other, each making it more likely that the thief will successfully land thier hit. (Mud toss, distraction, etc)

Position changers. These are moves that a player uses right before an attack in order to get into correct position to do thier moves. Since its very likely that the enemy will focus on a thief once they start doing Dirty Fighting this will likely be the last move pulled off before the attack.

Damage Dealing. Ah, the bread and butter of the system. This is you classic example of the thief, the backstab like moves. Naturally these are alot more varied than just back stab...but the basic idea is always the same. Only difference is it only does moderate damage by itself. In order to make the move more effective the thief has to use Damage Modifiers to increase the damage.

Last but not least are Thieve's own set of moves that allow them to dodge, weave, duck, and otherwise avoid blows..as we all know thieves just can't take a good hit.

The idea with these guys are of course to stack together a series of moves until you have the right set of modifiers (say 4x Damage, and Miss -3) and then to move into position and attack. Requires decent timing, and a bit of strategy once you learn your enemies. But I think one well worth working out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're just going to make the physical combat like the magic, and change the damage type, then you may as well leave out physical classes altogether. Physical characters should use a different system.

I like combos, but I'm afraid it would just turn into a puzzle/card game.

How about a system of attacks and counters? You assign your fighter a target, a mindset and a tactic, and you cut them loose for a round. Targets could be any unit on the field, or maybe even a patch of ground, if you're doing it with physical space. Mindsets would govern your characters attitude toward that target. Attack, defend, interrupt, assess, etc. Tactics could range from types of attacks to prepared counters to enemy activity.

For instance, you target the enemy orc, use a simple engagement mindset, and go with a "dodge" tactic. Your guy will try to close with that orc, he'll give him about 70% of his attention, and he'll be on the lookout for melee attacks (mostly from that opponent, but he has 30% focus left to watch for incoming arrows or backstabs) that can be dodged by disengaging and moving out of the way.

"Focus" would be the currency of combat here. If you give half of your attention to your target, you have only 50% with which to address threats, making you more vulnerable to counter-attacks from other enemies. You could use tactics to boost resistance to certain situations, for a price. If you steel yourself for a physical riposte, you could be blindsided by a relatively slow, weak fireball.

Focus could also be used to gauge counter availability. If a thief is darting past your barbarian (during the thief's turn), that barbarian needs a certain amount of free attention to react. If he has it, then he gets a chance to do something. you can choose either to spend some attention to address the thief or ignore him, and preserve that focus for later events. This way, it might be worthwhile to set your quicker characters to simple vigilance, giving them a chance to respond to enemy actions rather than initiating their own. Perhaps some kind of "proactive" versus "reactive" character development paths would arise from this.

I think this system would be most effective with a physical space for an arena--a sort of chess board on which to consider options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JWindebank    156
Fantastic discussion guys, this is an extremely exciting topic for me as I must admit to getting very sick at the lack of challenge involved in combat for almost every RPG to date.

RPG's have to have the most repetitive combat systems known to man, and it doesn't make sense to me when it can be expanded so easily. What you have suggested here is a very good start, and I think combo's add a lot to the game, even if it is quite similar to the magic system.

Another option I like the idea of is to start your character with pretty much no skills in combat. You can swing a standard weapon clumsily (a training sword, staff, wood-cutters axe) and that's about it. If you want to improve, you need to actually develop skills for each weapon, and there are many, many skills for each. For instance, you initially have the option to train in your standard weapons, and over time you learn how to stab with your sword, parry with your staff and perform a powerful overhead chop with your axe. Now you are able to tie these in to mini combo's with your initial 'moves'. Create entirely different skill sets for a lot of different weapons, and make it plausable to use any weapon. I choose to use a massive 2 handed sword? LEt me learn some extremely powerful, high damage dealing moves. Let me learn how to parry or block with such a massive weapon, let me learn how to completely annhialate my opponenet with only 3 or 4 swings. On the other hand, maybe I want to be a dual rapier user? Give me skills to jab at my opponent, some stylish spin attacks and so on and so forth. Make it worthwhile to use any weapon or weapon combo and the game grows in diversity. As it is, in most games you pick one weapon and that's about it. Cool, got my "Massive Sword of the Dragon". Now there is absolutely no reason to swap to an axe as they are identical in all but appearnace, and the minimal details. Also adding generic skills for all players of x class does not hurt, so all "Warriors" will still get a 'Taunt' function, a 'Dash' skill, and so on, but mix up the combat a little.

Add a shield to the mix? Give me skills for fighting with a sword and a shield, and even different skills for having an axe and a shield, and so on. The system needs to reflect the difference in using different weapons, and what you would and would not be able to do.

As was mentioned earlier, add a system where different keys (the number pad) perform different targetted swings. Hit '1' and I aim at my opponents left leg, hit '9' and I swing at his right shoulder. This adds yet another level of variety to a system which is currently horrible.

Similar to my post in the Free Magic system, give fighters the ability to use combos on the fly, and have hotkeys with preset combos. These would almost always be only used when an opponent is stunned/surprised and besides that the game becomes extremely dynamic.

Also allow counter moves and block, and whoah! This sytem is becoming extremely challening to find 'cookie-cutter' templates as there is just so much diversity.

Thinking of classes other than fighters and casters starts to get a little tricky though. Rangers couls perhaps be given different levels of skill such as "Sniper", and the ability perhaps to transfer in to a FPS style view to actually aim their arrows, take the randomness away and replace it with skill. With a bit of creative thinking I am sure lag can be made a moot point. Perhaps add a calculation based on the players lag that determines if the enemy would in fact have been in the correct position if all pings were equal? This is starting to get a little beyond my knowledge though so I'll stay outta this one. :)

As mentioned previously thieves/rogues could have a system similar to casters/fighters but more directed towards positioning. They should be taking advantage of their Dexterity and being nible in battle. My Warrior opponent is about to swing his massive broadsword? I'll just roll between his legs and whilst I'm at it slash his thigh with my poisoned dagger. Maybe I can drop from this roof on to my unsuspecting opponent and throw a wire around his neck? I picture rogues to be more like ninjas in that they should be able to slip away from a fight almost invisibly, and appear just the same. At the moment they seem to be given the roll of 'fast fighters'. That doesn't quite cut it for me.

Paladins, Necros, Priests, Monks, Druids would seem to be able to cope on a mix of the two systems if done carefully.

Paladins have very limited magical ability in the form of healing and shielding. Necro's the ability to raise dead, and perform death spells. Priests life spells, monks unarmed fighting and perhaps spells from scrolls which can be learnt as a skill, and the same as spells are created for mage's, they can be recorded for monks. Not quite as 'on the fly' but still a similar system.

With some fleshing out I think this sort of robust system would completely evolve the cRPB genre and take it to a level based more on skill of the player, intelligent building and remove a lot of the 'random number' factor.

Now to see someone eventually use this system and I'll be a happy man. Oh, and I agree with whoever mentioned that the animation team would absolutely despise anyone who used this. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robert4818    138
Quote:
I like combos, but I'm afraid it would just turn into a puzzle/card game.


This is worse than the current system how? I'm personally against the idea of making the color and symbol random... But I used that to note that there was no meaning behind the colors and symbols. Really there is no meaning behind the "element" part of the magic system. That could be replaced with zodiac sign, Virtue/Vice, etc.

Personally the idea of combo's appeals to me (of course it is my idea.) The symbol and color matching gives the play a little more to think about than just tossing out a move after another.

Now for a system I'm a little unsure of, but I'll toss it out anyways.

TANKS

Tanks have two main functions in most games...and damage isn't one of them. One is to hold aggro or attention of the enemy. And the other is to Take hits. Try as I might, I've yet to come up with a sure-fire way to improve aggro taking. I thought of a system where you do different things to hold aggro, but really I don't think that would work. If someone can come up with an idea to spice that up for a tank..let me know.

Any ways if you don't spice up that...then you need to spice up taking hits.

Here's the idea here. Its a little odd, but I hope you guys like it.

I call this Damage Management.

All tanks have magic boots / gauntlets that constantly heal damage underneath them. This is at a MUCH higher rate than normal healing. However, they ONLY heal that damage underneath them.

So how does this work?

A tank has 5 damage areas Torso, Left Arm, Right Arm, Left Leg, Right Leg. As a tank takes damage it gets allocated to his Torso. This is his main Hit Point area, and heals at the normal rate. Meaning that in combat damage to this should be healed by a healer. However during combat a tank may choose to shift damage from his torso to his different body parts. If a certain body part loses all of its hp (Seperate from the torso) they take some sort of penalty, whether it is the ability to swing a sword, or a loss of defence/dexterity.

Damage on the different body part heals faster than normal, around the tune of 4-5 times faster or more. But of course it doesn't hold all of the damage of the torso, but it will hold some of the damage.

Damage may be shifted back towards the torso, which is a good thing since a healer can ONLY heal torso damage.

What does all of this mean? It means that for good tanking the tank will have to effectively manage where the damage he's taking goes. As his damage increases he shifts it to the different body parts, which gradually gets rid of the damage. Then when it comes time to get healed by the cleric, the tank needs to move his damage back from the outer limbs back to the torso so that the damage goes away.

This makes being the tank one of the most interesting classes out there.

What do you all think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like a real team dynamic. A good tank would conduct a symphony of damage absorption, withstanding maximum destructive force while deriving maximum benefit from friendly healers or "down time". It could be a very nuanced play type.

But wheat sort of levelling will a tank look forward to? What skills can they gain? WIthout the full suite of damage management abilities, they'd be useless, so that sort of thing would have to be built-in. Once you have all those skills, though, you wouldn't need anything except higher HP and armor class. How do tanks avoid developmental stagnation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Inmate2993    222
RPGs suffer from being a tad to abstract, and adding gameplay where it's not needed. Like, take attacking. In any action game, you don't really need areas of damage. Maybe for an FPS, but in a high paced enough game, you're more focused at the kill, where any tactical advantage wouldn't be there long enough to be worthwhile. The problem is RPGs are low paced, but try to bring across this same fast-kill battle. When you kill an enemy fast, and the game is supposed to have an element of strategy, the solution is just have tons more enemies. In which case, the strategy is which enemies do you take out so they don't become a problem later when you're after the bigger enemies.

Now, consider a slow-kill battle. Something where its a lot closer to one on one fighting, and you have to manage the enemies so that the fight can go your way. Class wise, if everyone just excels at their own strengths, like the tank is just high HP, good AC, then he's the one who blocks the enemies that would try some dirty trick like poison darting the one with the high attack power, or the magician. Oure battle has turned more into football where we have the linemen blocking the quaterback before he picks where th throw the ball.

Heres your decision now. Supreme strategy over a small group of enemies, where knocking out someone's arm would be an advantage, or supreme tactics over a large group. Thats where you have to build up your classes. How many have high attack scores, who will defend?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tolaris    288
Quote:
Original post by JWindebank
Thinking of classes other than fighters and casters starts to get a little tricky though. Rangers couls perhaps be given different levels of skill such as "Sniper", and the ability perhaps to transfer in to a FPS style view to actually aim their arrows, take the randomness away and replace it with skill. With a bit of creative thinking I am sure lag can be made a moot point. Perhaps add a calculation based on the players lag that determines if the enemy would in fact have been in the correct position if all pings were equal? This is starting to get a little beyond my knowledge though so I'll stay outta this one. :)

Am tempted to suggest something lifted semi-directly from golf games for archers, since the goal (time things just right to fling the projectile somewhat close to desired point) is similar to a degree :P

more specifically... picture a scale on archer's ui:

===============================

when the archer selects the target, the scale is updated with addition of the 'hit zone':

==--.--========================

the width of this 'hit zone' is determined by the character's archery skills, distance to target and possibly by (relative) speed of it. The width/position of the 'exact hit' . point on the scale can be additionally skewed by factors like wind, archer's condition and whatnot.

Now, when the archer taps their attack key, the bow is drawn; an indicator appears on one end, and slides all way to the other side...

==--.--========================[]

... then begins to slide back towards the 'hit zone'. The exact speed of movement can be again determined by certain skills of the archer. For extra fun and annoyance factor, sway the hit zone back and forth on the main scale at rate depending on both the archer's and the target's movement rate.

=====--.--===============[]======

The goal is to release the bow at just the right time, i.e. tap the attack key again when it's over the 'exact hit' . point of the 'hit zone'. The closest it is to that point, the better chance for scoring a hit.

=======--[.]--===================

This way both the player's skills and character's skill matter in the final result, while lag factor is hopefully reduced.

Oh well, silly idea but it's late night over here :s

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GroZZleR    820
Why not give fighters the exact same system?

Fighters can develop "forms" by combining a set of movements. You're allowed to spend X points to build one form and each attack takes away points from that pool. If your game is turn based (or fake real-time), every form would execute over the duration of that turn.

Let's assume a thrust attack costs 10 attack points and an overhead swing costs 20 attack points. Every form has a pool of 40 attack points.

The fighter decides to build three basic forms for his character. His natural form, which is two swings. His speed stance which is four thrusts and finally his shake-up which is one overhead swing and two thrusts.

You could even take it a step further and add effects just like your mages get. You might try to disable the player's legs to prevent them from running, or throw sand in their eyes to lower their attack rating.

I don't see why your magic system can't be adapted to a melee system.

EDIT: Apparently everyone else already said this and I just didn't bother to read before posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sandman    2210
Quote:
Original post by robert4818
TANKS

Tanks have two main functions in most games...and damage isn't one of them. One is to hold aggro or attention of the enemy. And the other is to Take hits.


Tanks as you describe them really shouldn't exist. They only exist because players minmax to create them because they're seen as tactically useful, they aren't at all realistic. They represent an extreme which really shouldn't exist at all, let alone be considered a class of it's own. Seriously, how many adventurers would set out with the goal of becoming the ultimate human shield? Not many I'd guess.

If you're going to treat different types of fighter differently, then I don't think 'damage dealing fighter' and 'tank' are suitable categorizations. 'Finesse fighter' and 'brute force fighter' would seem to be more realistic.

Finesse fighters are the quick, agile guys who dance in circles around you and carve their initials on your forehead before you can even draw your weapon. They rely on speed, agility and accuracy to kill their opponents before they take too many hits. They tend to use small, light weapons like rapiers, and tend to avoid armour as it slows them down.

Brute force fighters are the big heavy lunks (similar to your tanks) that just wade in and bash everything. They're big, heavy, clumsy and slow, and while they won't hit you as quickly or as accurately as the finesse fighter, when they do hit they'll cleave you in two. They're also tough as old boots, and can take a ridiculous amount of punishment. They use great big heavy things as weapons, like greatswords, greataxes, tree trunks etc. They may or may not wear armour - if they do it's usually the heavy stuff.

Bear in mind also that both of these are still somewhat extreme examples. There are plenty of shades of grey in between, which is why I don't think you should differentiate between them too much in the basic ruleset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robert4818    138
Part of the Advancement of tanks would be to start them out as basic tanks in the game. As they level they slowly gain (and the damage they are able to absorb just with HP alone increases comparitavely) the extra damage sinks either one arm or leg, then another and another, until later in the game they have the full suite available to them.

Also, as they gain levels the different types of provokes they get increase, I didn't get rid of those I just couldn't find a way to spice it up. ALso they will get attacks, and special moves, but the spice in the class will come from the damage management.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jotaf    280
I agree with Sandman that tanks are way too artificial in a medieval world. However, an equivalent could just be a fighter specialized in slow but powerful attacks, wearing heavy armor, and with the abilities necessary to protect other characters.

The moves central to this "class" would be: different moves that hold at guard a higher number of enemies than usual, by catching their attention and avoiding/defending/rendering impossible their attacks; jumping in the way of an enemy attacking one of the members of the party, defending him; etc, all these carefuly put in place by the developer to support this role in a party.

Reminds me of those Mighty Max cartoons where the big Barbarian stands between the monsters and Max, keeping them at bay, while Max does the usual heroic kid stuff ;)



BTW this sort of gameplay would benefit a lot from Iron Chef's "focus management" idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is getting a little out of control, and I'm afraid I may be making things worse, but why is it necessary to have tank characters? I understand that they arise in combat systems because they're a useful gameplay tool, but it seems that the "tank" character is a form of metagaming - addressing the mechanics of the system rather than operating withing the confines of the world it's trying to replicate. The game shows you trolls and knights and mages, but players talk about buffs and aggro and pathfinding glitches.

Wouldn't it be best just to build a system in which gameplay more closely resembles the combat it's supposed to portray?

Why, for instance, does "aggro" exist as a game mechanic? If I and my team of orc raiders were faced with a fragile, yet devastatingly powerful mage, a nimble thief, and a ponderously slow, impenetrably armored barbarian, there's no way we'd focus all our efforts on the tank. We'd run around his iron-clad butt and chop the wizard to death, then use focus fire to take out the thief, and THEN maybe think about planting some charges at the barb's feet.

Specializing a character as a tank only really works in a video game, and I think that's a failure of video games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
robert4818    138
Your right ICC.

However, I'm writing at the moment because I realize that whether or not I like tanks. The fact that they exist is there. So I'm thinking of ways to spice them up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this