Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5139746" data-attributes="member: 82106">Uh... Not disputing anything about the history of roles within CRPGs/MMOs but the roles have always existed from OLD D&amp;D onwards. They were instantiated in different concepts as the game progressed, but the whole idea was a direct lift from D&amp;D in the first place. OD&amp;D had fighter (tank/defender), cleric (leader/buffer/healer), and magic user (artillery/controller/striker), plus the thief which showed up in Greyhawk which really doesn't take on much of a distinct role, more like utility/striker/scout. With the advent of additional classes role stopped being really specific to a given class and the more derived classes to an extent have some degree of split, but every class has effectively had more-or-less a primary role.I think it would be more accurate to work it back from OD&amp;D into the concepts it was based on, table top gaming. TTGs are fundamentally simulationist and were designed to simulate warfare. Its easy enough to see that things map pretty cleanly back to basic military force arm distinctions, which in turn are just a practical reflection of reality. You have infantry (hold ground, block the enemy, resist attack), cavalry (high mobility, offensive force projection), artillery (area denial, force projection), and the command function, plus other miscellany like medics, recon, etc. OD&amp;D characters simply reflected these and that was the genesis of roles, which feeds directly into the computer games by direct emulation of D&amp;D. Overall any game where you have a distinction between character types is going to devolve down to something role-like. Its just very natural. 4e certainly didn't need to get it from other games, it was there in whole cloth already. I'm sure they DID follow the lead of games like WoW or EQ to actually plaster it on the classes explicitly for all to see, but you didn't have to play much OD&amp;D/1e/2e to know all about it anyway.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5139746, member: 82106"] Uh... Not disputing anything about the history of roles within CRPGs/MMOs but the roles have always existed from OLD D&D onwards. They were instantiated in different concepts as the game progressed, but the whole idea was a direct lift from D&D in the first place. OD&D had fighter (tank/defender), cleric (leader/buffer/healer), and magic user (artillery/controller/striker), plus the thief which showed up in Greyhawk which really doesn't take on much of a distinct role, more like utility/striker/scout. With the advent of additional classes role stopped being really specific to a given class and the more derived classes to an extent have some degree of split, but every class has effectively had more-or-less a primary role. I think it would be more accurate to work it back from OD&D into the concepts it was based on, table top gaming. TTGs are fundamentally simulationist and were designed to simulate warfare. Its easy enough to see that things map pretty cleanly back to basic military force arm distinctions, which in turn are just a practical reflection of reality. You have infantry (hold ground, block the enemy, resist attack), cavalry (high mobility, offensive force projection), artillery (area denial, force projection), and the command function, plus other miscellany like medics, recon, etc. OD&D characters simply reflected these and that was the genesis of roles, which feeds directly into the computer games by direct emulation of D&D. Overall any game where you have a distinction between character types is going to devolve down to something role-like. Its just very natural. 4e certainly didn't need to get it from other games, it was there in whole cloth already. I'm sure they DID follow the lead of games like WoW or EQ to actually plaster it on the classes explicitly for all to see, but you didn't have to play much OD&D/1e/2e to know all about it anyway. [/QUOTE]

Verification