D&D and the MMORPG

[redwing]

I've yet to delve into the greatness that is called World of Warcraft, Everquest, or any other MMO. However, I keep hearing lingo that I can mostly relate to due to my experience in D&D. When refering to party structure, in D&D your party consists of the Rogue (skills), the Cleric (healer), the Fighter (obvious), and the Mage (magic casting). There may be that fifth man, the wonderful bard (buffer). All other classes are more focused areas or combine multiple facets of these five main classes.

In the MMO, I hear terms of Damage Dealer, Tank, Caster, Crowd Control, etc. What are all these staple positions in an MMO party, are there others I'm missing, and how do they compare to that of the standard D&D party?

 

[Agent Oracle]

The staples in an MMO party come from the fact that questing in an MMO is largely an issue of dealing with enemies that have an IQ of a medium-sized rock. I.e. none at all.

That's the primary reason why you have characters relegated to the tasks as they are in an MMO. Because enemies do not fight intelligently. Their general strategy is get within range of their weapon (usually a half-second animation loop of a general swipe through their threatening area) and then stand there, repeating the attack. Over, and over, until their hit points are depleted and they die.

Also, MMO's have never been able to work in that most important of aspects: the trap (hence, traditionally skilled classes (the rogue) get relegated to "crowd control" i.e. swabbing up extra minions.)

As for "damage"? In D&D, Everyone can be the "damage". arguably, it's the most fun part of the game. Being able to show off as a rogue with sneak attack or as a wizard bringing that fireball down, or as a cleric using his turn undead to cause skeletons to just explode.

Finally the generic MP-related magic systems of MMO's and generalization of their spells reduce the importance of casters to the party. Most of the time, a magical-class is either slotted as a simple damage dealer or as a great big "HEAL PLZ" first aid station.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Agent Oracle's comments mostly sound like EQ1-era MMORPG analysis. It was very true then, but EQ1's success meant something of a backlash in games that came after, since so many people saw its very many flaws and went the other direction. Subsequent games, especially following the release of WoW, have much less specialization. Very few people enjoyed the hyper-specialization in EQ1 (I played a wizard, which meant I could do two things: damage and teleport, and that's it).

In WoW, in contrast, priests can do damage, mind control, heal and more besides. Mages can polymorph targets, do damage, turn invisible and, yes, teleport. Every class can do damage, every class has out of combat utility abilities, every class has non-damage combat utility. This is the new model and I'd expect it to be the most common one from here on out.

Likewise, enemies have gotten smarter. MMORPGs don't have dumb enemies due to a limitation of the engine -- knowing to attack the healer, or whatever, is pretty obvious and it's actually coded into the NPC response system of even EQ1. It's just, as Blizzard discussed during BlizzCon, it might seem more realistic for Onyxia the black dragon to kill all the healers first, but who the heck wants to play a healer in that fight after that?

In D&D, with a small group, DMs can more finely tune an encounter. In a MMORPG, where wildly unpredictable combinations of classes (and equipment and races and skill levels) will show up, there has to be a more generic response from NPCs that will be fun for most of the players most of the time. (Within those limitations, Onyxia actually behaves more like a D&D dragon, minus the spellcasting, than any MMORPG dragon before her did.)

In any case, I don't think the roles really come from MMORPG, so much as they are a simplification of roles that appeared in pre-3E versions of D&D. Yes, the cleric could do more than heal, but no one called out "medic!" in D&D games because they wanted a Hawkeye Pierce impersonation.

But today's large-scale shared experience is MMORPGs, and it's only natural that the shared experience's player terminology would spill back over into D&D.

 

[Sejs]

In the MMO, I hear terms of Damage Dealer, Tank, Caster, Crowd Control, etc. What are all these staple positions in an MMO party, are there others I'm missing, and how do they compare to that of the standard D&D party?

Bear in mind that in an MMO you're dealing with enemies that are only as smart as their AI allows... generally not very smart at all. As opposed to a D&D game, where your enemies are as smart as the DM chooses to play them (including sometimes far too smart).

That being said:

A Damage Dealer (or DPS; Damage Per Second) character is one who is primarily focused on injuring your enemies. To compare to D&D, it'd be like a rogue who was solely focused on sneak attacks.

A Tank is a character who is really tough and is there to keep an enemy's attention focused on himself, getting hurt so the more fragile members of a party don't. A fighter in full plate, with a tower shield and a high Con who has mostly defensive feats like Dodge and Combat Expertise would be a sort of Tank.

A Caster is usually any magic user that isn't a Healer. Magic-based Damage Dealers are usually what they refer to. Your typical Evoker wizard type.

A Crowd Control character is one whose main concern is managing and hampering enemies. If you're attacked by several foes, making sure the ones you're not focusing on now are restrained or incapacitated. They tend to also be able to 'debuff' enemies - weakening them so that they're more managable. They're almost always magic using characters in some way. A D&D paralel would be an Enchanter - not so good with a fireball, but very handy with Slow, Hold Person, Sleep, Charm Monster and the like.

 

[Victim]

Likewise, enemies have gotten smarter. MMORPGs don't have dumb enemies due to a limitation of the engine -- knowing to attack the healer, or whatever, is pretty obvious and it's actually coded into the NPC response system of even EQ1. It's just, as Blizzard discussed during BlizzCon, it might seem more realistic for Onyxia the black dragon to kill all the healers first, but who the heck wants to play a healer in that fight after that?

The problem is that monster stats are pumped up because they're so stupid. So of course making them "smarter" is going to be a problem if they retain the stats designed to make them challenging (to some characters) when they're stupid. People still play healers in PvP, even though they're priority targets - the best form of Taunt in PvP is casting heals .

Tanking is basically fighter work, although other characters can also do it. The idea of the tank is that monsters can be manipulated into attacking the character with the best defense to protect the rest of the group. Sword and board characters are basically tanks.

Then there's damage dealing. Sneak attacking rogues, fireballing wizards, power attacking barbarians, etc. As in DnD, some situations in MMOs tend to favor some types of damage over others, but in general you can substitute one type for another.

Healing is far more critical in most MMOs than in DnD. Healing is generally far more efficient than comparable offense, so it's even more dominant. And most encounters are designed to "require" (there are often workarounds, but not easy ones) fairly steady healing. In DnD, the cleric might patch people up after the fight, possibly making an emergency save during it. But he's got other good spells to use, and can waylay people with his mace effectively. In most MMOs, healers are generally more dedicated - other stuff usually needs to be worked in carefully.

Crowd control is designed to reduce the number of foes the group must face at once. In DnD terms, you'd use battlefield control spells like Wall of Force, Entangle to limit enemy movement, Hold type spells, or powerful debuffs.

Then there's utility, which covers everything else. Scouting, teleporting the group around, etc.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

The problem is that monster stats are pumped up because they're so stupid. So of course making them "smarter" is going to be a problem if they retain the stats designed to make them challenging (to some characters) when they're stupid.

Well, even if you drop down the stats, it's still not really possible to make NPCs as smart as they can be in tabletop, IMO. Take the Hellfire Ramparts drake boss. If it was smart enough to attack anyone casting a heal in preference to all others, it would have to be made a LOT weaker for it not to win pretty much every time. And a drake with wimpy stats would feel awfully strange. It would necessitate redoing the stats for everything eventually.

And the obscene amount of hit points and damage and mana are required because there has to be sufficient granulatrity for 70 levels to feel sufficiently different. Add in the granularity for different classes, races, stats and gear, and you're pretty much required to use much bigger numbers than are necessary in D&D. (Or practical, for that matter -- no one wants to roll 4d100 for each and every attack.)

People still play healers in PvP, even though they're priority targets - the best form of Taunt in PvP is casting heals .

Oh, I know. My wife and I duo together in Battlegrounds, and everyones goes after the priestess, since they presume she's a softer target, when she's got hit points that make melee characters jealous. Meanwhile, I blast away at them freely. It works very well.

 

[Ibram]

In WoW (and other MMORPGs) there are positions in a party that are independent of the classes. To understand these positions you need understand 'agro' or aggression. It is how a creature determines what it attacks. Characters generate agro by by dealing damage, healing. The more damage or healing you do the more agro you generate the more likely the creature you are in combat with will attack you.

Tank: a tanks job is to 'hold agro'. By remaining at the top of the agro list the creature keeps attacking the tank. Tanks also have to have high armor and hitpoints, so that they can survive the attacks of the creature they are fighting. In WoW this position is usualy held by warriors.

DPS (damage per second): these are the people who actualy end up doing the most damage to the creature durring the fight. Care must be taken while doing this, as if to much damage is done then the creature will attack one of the DPS characters (which can kill a character instantly). In WoW most any class can hold this position.

Healing: Healers keep the tank alive, and provide secondary healing to anyone else who is injured. Healers have to be careful, as to much healing can attract the attention of the creature being fought.

Crowd Control: Crowd control is usualy seen in fights with more then one creature. One creature may be temporarily neutralized while others are fought.

Buffing/debuffing: Buffer characters provide enhancements durring a fight, while debuffers remove enemy effects

 

[Remathilis]

My only experience with MMORPGS is Final Fantasy XI, but I still can see some of the correlations in D&D.

Interestingly, the Dragon Shaman and the Knight from PH2 seem VERY MMO-Inspired. The Dragon Shaman's "always on" auras (including healing) and the knights "fighters challenge" control Aggro in a D&D fashion.

My biggest disappointment in any MMORPG is the lack of of traditional "rogue" things. Sneaking, opening locks, trapfinding, etc. That makes the rogue have to be a damage dealer rather than a skill character.

 

[Destil]

Rogues in EQ had find traps... just no traps to find.

MMOs in general, however, are a very immature and narrow genera, having forgotten most of the lessons of 20+ years of MUDs. I have yet to see anything approaching say DragonRealms or Legend of the Red Dragon, which is sad. Really graphics seem to have done more harm to the genera than anything else.

There isn't just the issue of narrow classes (look at FFXI, every class is rather narrow compared to WoW, and it has really strict group makeup rules to get optimal XP and there are way too many DPS melee types that compete for the same spots in groups), but because the overall design of graphical muds is poor. They're leveling treadmills (now with quests, at least to make it less obvious).

The big problem (or at least one of them) is the fact that the games focus so much on single spawns of monsters. Entire encounters need to be spawned and scaled to match your party if there's to be any variety (i.e. a swarm of mooks for a mage to fireball plus some big guys for the meatshields to get up close and personal with). The games need to get away from simply rewarding players for doing the same exact thing with larger number from level 1-60 and then changing completely...

 

[Jim Hague]

Rogues in EQ had find traps... just no traps to find.

MMOs in general, however, are a very immature and narrow genera, having forgotten most of the lessons of 20+ years of MUDs. I have yet to see anything approaching say DragonRealms or Legend of the Red Dragon, which is sad. Really graphics seem to have done more harm to the genera than anything else.

Niggle here - it's 'genre', and MMOs are not a genre (which refers to a specific type of fiction), but a medium (like television, or a mode of delivery of content) for the most part. There's fantasy (genre) MMOs (medium), super hero, science fiction...you get the idea. And you're not going to get the sort of scale of interaction you see on MU*s for a simple reason - you can't have that many GameMasters running the show. Logistics prevent it. Comparing the MMO to something like a MUD is almost apples and organges, and definitely so when you talk true MU* RP environments.

There isn't just the issue of narrow classes (look at FFXI, every class is rather narrow compared to WoW, and it has really strict group makeup rules to get optimal XP and there are way too many DPS melee types that compete for the same spots in groups), but because the overall design of graphical muds is poor. They're leveling treadmills (now with quests, at least to make it less obvious).

That may be true for the game you've played, but there are some positively gorgeous engines out there. Likewise, characters differ wildly from game to game - some are very narrow, others not nearly so. It's not really a valid argument you're making, here.

The big problem (or at least one of them) is the fact that the games focus so much on single spawns of monsters. Entire encounters need to be spawned and scaled to match your party if there's to be any variety (i.e. a swarm of mooks for a mage to fireball plus some big guys for the meatshields to get up close and personal with). The games need to get away from simply rewarding players for doing the same exact thing with larger number from level 1-60 and then changing completely...

Again, this differs from game to game.