Hybrid vs Pure Bred Classes

[Crissa]

Now, we've had the D&D arguement that when you pile bonuses on top of bonuses, the bigger pile always wins, right?

But we've always been hedgy on the topic of Hybrid classes. They're always 'worse', so to speak, when compared on the exacts. But everyone likes to play Hybrids, because it actually means more and more complex play.

So... Hybrids or no?

(This is actually in relation to group dynamics in WoW.
Forums, WorldofWarcraft.com, Realm: Silver Hand)

[*]Background

Now, in these games, people tend to think very narrowly in jobs: Support/Healing, DPS, Tank. Tanks engage enemy units and control 'aggro' - where the enemy units move and who they're engaged with. DPS are the damage-dealers; they range from spellcasters to archers to ninjas - units designed to do damage, and avoid taking any. Support and Healing - in WoW, just called Healing - heal the engaged units and support by removing damaging or hindering spells and effects in combat.

But where WoW differs from D&D is that all classes are equipment dependent. At the end of an adventure, you get a few pieces of equipment to disburse among the many of the group. This can be as good as one to one or as bad as one piece to forty characters!

[*]Hybrid theory:

Hybrids are nearly as good as focused classes in doing a task; but can do more than one task in total. This means that they can either do two jobs at once - a Paladin healing while engaging enemy units - or able to switch from one job to another - a Druid can heal then switch to being a melee damage unit. Their abilities in thie secondary task are more narrow, but not less effective when they work, than a Pure class.

[*]Hypothesis:

Hybrids are handy to have on hand, as they can adapt to a changing situation. Instead of standing by and not acting; they bolster the group's total available effectiveness to the current situation.

Given otherwise class-specific gear for a task, Hybrids should have equal chance at non-class task-specific gear because of the following mathmatical situation:

Say a Melee unit has a bonus which is 20% and a Hybrid's bonus is 10% (say for instance, crit). Given a piece of equipment both could use that added 1 to that value; 20+1 is only a 5% increase in effectiveness and 10+1 is a 10% increase.

Therefore to have an increase that benefits the group equally, the Hybrid only needs to do that task half the time.

[*]Counterpoint

The counter argument is that a Hybrid should choose a task that is less common (say, Healing) and specialize in it just as the Pure classes do. This way the group has maximum effectiveness in each task. This is usually the 'A Rogue can't heal, therefore a Druid should not do a Rogue's job' argument.

[*]Conclusion

I really wish I had Frank's number-sense on this. It seems to me a group benefits most by having Hybrid classes. This way they can expand Healing, Damage, etc as needed, as there is not always a need for all units in each job at each encounter - the benefit of having a slightly less broad unit is higher than having a unit standing around doing nothing.

-Crissa

Darn markups. Fixed.

[Username17]

Equipment dependence is pretty much a non-factor if everyone has it or noone does. Just like making Timewalk into a Rare card didn't meaningfully effect Magic tournaments, the ultimate power of any class is definitely not changed by whether or not it needs a ruby crown guard to maximize its potential. Indeed, even a class needing more equipment to be good doesn't change its overall dominance.

It may make your character shitty, but it doesn't effect the overall power of the class. You can't compete with a classic Magic deck unless you have a Timewalk, an Ancestral Recall, a Demonic Tutor, etc. - but that doesn't change whether a Djinns and Hymns is better than a Permission deck.

--

Regardless, the basic question of whether the guy who is 2/3 as good at 2 things is better or worse than a guy who does one thing well is how the game tracks success and failure. There are two main models: The Star, and the Dot.

Star Models: In the Star model, you have one guy being the star in any activity. In this model it doesn't really matter how many people can do something, only how well they do whatever it is that they do. In this model, buffs don't stack, and important attacks drop opponents from combat. In its most extreme version, characters don't even accumulate damage between each other (because of separate damage tracks, or whatever), and may even inhibit each other when going against the same target (example: sword blows give a saving throw bonus vs. the Enchanter's mind control).

Dot Models: In the Dot model, you have every task advanced by every character at a variable rate until collective success is achieved. In this model, it doesn't really matter how good you are at any task, only how good you are in aggregate at all the tasks your team engages in. At its most extreme, there aren't any exclusive tasks at all and no character has any meaningfully unique abilities.

Needless to say, if you are using a Star model, holding even a small penalty to your main schtick is not a good trade for any number of secondary abilities. In a Dot model, specializing in any task is worthless unless you get a bigger bonus than you are giving up in every other category combined.

--

Most games use a mixture. Even D&D, which is an almost completely Star driven game (a Fighter and an Enchanter actually inhibit each other's abilities and gain less than nothing by teaming up against an enemy), has Damage Over Time elements in it. For example: AC bonuses are completely interchangeable and add in to the same total.

Most MMORPGs use a more Dot-oriented system, where characters interact in "real time" to add into a big success pile together at various staggered rates. This encourages specialization less than D&D does - though it often still has pockets of Star going on (few teams need more than one Tank, for instance).

But of course, since I find MMORPGs repellant (even WoW), I can't really evaluate the conditions of the classes.

-Username17

[RandomCasualty]

I really can't speak much for MMORPGs, but in terms of general hybrid theory, I can say the following.

Basically hybrids tend to shine in games where major class abilities can get nullified. If you can always swing your sword and deal full damage, then there's generally no reason not to just specialize in sword and get the most power in any one action.

If however sometimes your sword doesn't work or at the least is suboptimal, like the monster is flying or has some kind of anti-melee defense, then it benefits you to have other options. So basically if your game always lets people use their specialty to full effect, then it's a specialists game. If you commonly place restrictions on what people can use at given times, then it becomes a generalists game. It can be as simple as "you're underwater, fire spells dont' work anymore" or "you can't use reach weapons in this narrow corridor". Whenever you have terrains or abilities that nullify certain offenses or defenses, then it pays to be able to use another ability.

Now D&D hybrids don't actually tend to be hybrids at all. I actually like the MMORPG "roles" better than talking about classes. Tank, DPS, healing, support and so on actually make a lot more sense than most of the D&D classes do.

And really, in D&D, the casters end up being the hybrids, especially the divine casters, and they totally dominate. They're the ones who can tank, heal, support and DPS people. You look at all the strong characters in D&D, and it tends to be the casters, because of all that versatility.

When most people think of hybrid, they think of fighter/caster. But really, that's not the case. The druid and cleric are the true hybrids, and they pretty much own the game.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

First off, it's weird seeing a realm forum that actually has intellegent debate. On my realm, a majority of the posts are along the lines of THIS.

Anyhow, this is my observations. (Note that this is from my server, hordeside. Alliance side has a slightly different class setup, and different ways of doing things in general. Not a slam, but an observation.)

Either way, hybrid classes usually are in somewhat high demand. Although each one doesn't do the job QUITE as well as a dedicated class, the difference isn't as abrupt as it would be in D&D, for example.

To give an example, the warrior dies. The shaman can earthshock it real quick, and keep the group from wiping. (hopefully. If it was a particularly gnarly pull, then there's not a lot you're gonna do, but in most cases, a shaman can jump on a mob real quick.)

Also, it is generally considered more effective to prepare if you're a hybrid. A druid wearing healing gear, and extra dps and tanking sets for backup is in huge demand, being able to switch roles between battles if needed is a handy skill. (To give an example, a priest can heal, or they can DPS, but they need to respec if they're not shadow specced, while a druid usually just has to change gear, a feral druid is still a capable healer. A holy/disc priest isn't DPS'ing their way thought a paper bag, although the 1.10 changes to the holy tree do look promising for priests that want to DPS, but not melt faces. however, that's not live as of this posting, so I won't get into it.)

The gearing thing isn't really relevant, as every class needs the gear anyhow. (Well, I wouldn't say that. Due to the fact that every high-end guild requires lots of Fire Resist for Onyxia/MC, if you're a PvP mage, and you're fire specced, you will have issues with resists.)

[Crissa]

I was just thinking the utility of the 'big piles' theory or the 'generalist' theory.

Anyhow, the argument goes that since 'we need one good tank' all Warriors should tank - and then all Warriors should get all tanking related gear. Even if Warriors aren't the only unit called on to tank - they get preference when one item can be used by both, just to insure that one Warrior has a 'biggest' pile.

Doesn't it make sense, then, that an item that can be used for the same task by two people should have equal chance at it?

Or does it make sense to say that 'class a' needs to have someone with a 'biggest' pile, therefore it should be distributed upon some arbitrary line?

-Crissa

[Count Arioch the 28th]

Well, hordeside only warriors can wear plate armor, so they don't really have any competition except from other warriors when it comes to gear. So they pretty much have it made, if they want to tank, they can get their tankgear, if they want to do melee DPS they can get +attack and crit gear without competition.

Rogues might have to compete with druids for +damage gear, and mages and priests are occasionally stepping on each other's toes for gear.

But all in all, it depends on the players involved. Some people would rather the gear go to a class that's dedicated, some aren't so picky.

And to be honest, both seem equally effective to me.\, as hybrids in WoW tend to be rather competant in their respective abilities.

[Username17]

Anyhow, the argument goes that since 'we need one good tank' all Warriors should tank - and then all Warriors should get all tanking related gear.

That's unsurprising. As I understand the combat system, tanking is a "biggest pile" job. You aren't normally in a situation where there is a "front line" that is all subject to attack, the enemy can simply move more often than it can attack and attacks whoever it currently hates the most.

Thus MMORPG combat encourages, even requires, one guy to get all the defensive buffs and to spend his time taunting the foe in order to arrange that all attacks are wasted on himself. In a position based game there would be call to have a whole group of guys who could take a punch, but that's just not the setup. MMORPGs long ago realized that they couldn't exist in real time (because of lag) or in turn-base (because so many people are afk), so they've all adopted a continuous fire-and-forget model that renders management of location unnecessary.

The hate-management model actually spins other tasks the other way. Everyone accumulates damage on the target until it dies, but if any one character "over-nukes" the warrior loses hate and players start getting killed. It is actually to the advantage of the group to spread damage dealing capability out over the entire group as much as possible (even in some cases for characters to voluntarily reduce their own effectiveness to avoid pissing off the monsters they are killing).

That's a facet of the way combat timing works. In a turn-based model (like D&D) characters are encouraged to maximize their offensive output. In a real-time system (like Diablo II), characters are encouraged to spread their defensive powers around.

-Username17

[Crissa]

1141145842[/unixtime]]It is actually to the advantage of the group to spread damage dealing capability out over the entire group as much as possible (even in some cases for characters to voluntarily reduce their own effectiveness to avoid pissing off the monsters they are killing).

And yet...

...They use the biggest pile methodology on damage and healing as well, actively discouraging lower dps classes from competing with the burst-damage classes.

I keep thinking that based on a time-utility strategy, boosting something you use say half the time twice as much will help as much as boosting something you use most of the time half as much.

Of course, I can't think of anything to support that argument.

-Crissa

[User3]

I occasionally play a MUD which has an interesting (although often unbalanced) way of balancing hybrid vs. pure classes.

It gives a lower maximum 'practice' for skills based on the number of multiclasses (and a few other factors), which translates directly into a higher chance of skill failure.

That is, a 'good' Fireball will fail to 'go off' signifigantly more than a 'superb' fireball, but the damage and difficulty to resist remain the same.

This leads to multiclassers gaining relatively more benefit from 'prebuffs,' and relatively less from passive or active skills.

The specifics work out to the extent that there are plenty of multi (2+) classes which work as well as single classes, but individual single- or multi- class combos are relatively much worse or better.

The the chance of failure is not linear. This has both advantages and disadvantages. A character with 10 classes has about the same rate of failure as a character with 5 classes, so if you're going for massive multiclassing the only thing stopping you is ability overlap (Why waste time leveling 12 classes when you can get exactly the same effect with 4?).

[RandomCasualty]

Well the other benefit to having hybrids in MMORPGs can also be time management. Unlike in a real RPG, when you rest in a MMORPG you're actually sitting there wasting your own time, instead of just saying "ok eight hours pass, we're fully healed, lets continue on."

Even if your paladin (fighter/healer) isn't quite as effective at combat as your fighter and only uses his healing out of combat, it may well let you fight more efficiently because you've got another guy healing. Since mana and hp can regen at the same time, you're going to recover faster than you normally would. Now, in a straight pencil and paper RPG, you probably wouldn't care. In a MMORPG, this is actually a much bigger concern. You tend to care about time spent waiting a lot. Therefore healing fast or helping the party to conserve mana is worth quite a bit, since you'll be sitting on your ass waiting for your wizard's mana to go back to full.

So I can see trading pure numeric effectiveness for reduced wait time.