In the first game being able to respec was a one time thing in the late game, I'm not suprised that Larian casualized some aspects of the game, but this is such a dumb change I can not fathom how it passed.

There is nothing stopping the player from robbing traders endlessly by respecing and hiring additional mercs, essentially creating free money

There is nothing stopping the player from respecing a character to perfectly fit any persuasion check in the game, why have it be in there if it's completely breakable anyway?

The first game had it right, being able to respec once for a high price made it rewarding in itself, this way it's so hilariously abuseable, I kinda just stopped playing when I realized how much it breaks the game.

free respec is the best thing in game. i can try every buid and possibility without playing 30 hours every time to try smth that i want to test. you understand that its not competitive pvp game? its pve and nobody force you to respec if you dont want...

Why have civil skills in the first place if respec makes them irrelevant?

you understand that every single party already have one char with max persuation, one with max thievery and one with max loremaster. so when the party meet locked chest or persuation check etc they dont need to teleport and respec. iam fun of respec but even me never respec civil traits... i dont respec whole party to thievery even once because just not needed. one maxed thieve generate enough gold for everything.

Nothing is stopping the player from doing anything in a single player except the player himself.

If you don't like the idea of respec, don't respec. It's really as simple as that.

I, personally, absolutely love that it exists. I can muck around with different character builds without playing an entire game through again. And I dislike the idea of coming back just to meet a persuasion check, so I don't.

*Face palm*

Dev please ignore this, the steam git gud crowd is here.

"I find this too easy so i want to ruin it for EVERYBODY!!"

What is "ruining it for everybody" about wanting a better implementation?
The first game did it perfectly, you could respec, but you had to pay, why not do the same thing?

The current implementation is hilariously exploitable, you could still experiment with builds however you want.

Are you so entitled to think everyone is like you? The game is hard enough as it is with plenty of noob traps in stats and skills, if Dev dont want people to pull their hair out and swear never to play another divinity game again, the current system is perfect if you want experimentation.

This is divinity original sin TWO, new armor new spells and even harder than before, please your highness let us peasants have this option?

I'm okay with it even if it's casual. The first game didn't have much of a respec, and people constantly complained for one.

The reality is that if Larian didn't include respecs, there would be a respec mod out within 48 hours and it would be the #1 mod for the game, so why try and fight it? People aren't interested in redoing a 40hour playthrough if they screwed something up.

Stop being so condescending, I didn't attack you personally.

I like respec, but right now there is nothing stopping players from respeccing each character to abuse civic abilities.

examples:
If a player fails a persuasion check, he can just go back to the ship, respec, and try again with another character who he never before specialized for persuasion.
If you have already pickpocketed a trader, you can rob him again with a different party member, just respec.
See what I'm trying to get at?
In the first game you would likely have one loremaster, one party member good at dialouge, one good thief etc. Now every party member is that at the same time.
Now you can just rob traders as often as you want, get through every conversation without a problem, max out bartering before selling a bunch of items and switch right back afterwards.

I have no issue with experimenting with combat skills, thats all fun and having to buy skillbooks is a good enough barrier that you won't switch your specialization constantly.
Respeccing civic skills though is so exploitable that it doesn't make much sense in an RPG. If you can't pick a lock in Fallout New Vegas, the game game won't just let you come back with a completely different skill setup.
Balancing what the player can and can not choose and do is a core design of any RPG. Letting players respec without consequence completely nullifies specializing your party.

Let people break the game if they want to, it's their game.

Im not seeing your point, if you dont like it, dont do it, personally I only limit myself to 1 respec per chapter, unless the build idea I had is seriously failing, but just because I only do 1 respect per chapter doesnt mean I should force that way of playing on others. Let others play how they want, some people hate the persuasion mechanic and dont want to deal with it, let them do their thing and you stick to playing the game the way you like.

And it matters to you because? i can install a cheat engine or mod right now and do the same, is a singleplayer FOR GODS SAKE, this ISNT JUST ABOUT YOU AND HOW YOU FEEL.

I, for one, like the free respec option. Besides, it's a single-player game. If you don't want to use it, don't use it. If you want to pay for respec, then remove some of your gold each time you use the mirror.

I personally dislike this mentality that the freedom to choose how you play the game somehow breaks it. As others have said, if you don't like it, you aren't forced to do it.

With that said, I don't think having some cost associated with it would necessarily be a bad thing, but I don't feel it, or really anything else that grant the player the freedom to play as they wish needs to be moderated.

That was actually one of the things I disliked about the enhanced edition, and their decision to rework a lot of the skills as well as the elemental resistances. In a world where you essentially play as a walking god, and every other NPC as complete immunity to some element, you can't? That makes no sense.

I'm quite capable of moderating my own gameplay. It's an rpg, not an e-sports title.

If you don't like it, don't do it. It really is that simple. What other players do, do not affect you, so it doesn't matter.

Just let this thread sank, terrible suggestion.

It is not that simple even if it is a SP game. For some people, they want their Achievements to meant something, so it will bug the hell of them when they know other players will abuse the game to easily gaining Achievements. Some people can't control their urges of knowing, and it will always be on the back of their head while they playing the game. They try so hard to not do it, it will drive them crazy to the point of stop playing the game.

There's a flaw in the idea of "fail a check, go respec and try again."

Conversations don't RESET.

So if you Fail your Persuasion Check, barring RELOADING the game, you don't get a second chance.

Also, being able to experiment and change your skills as needed can be extremely useful on higher difficulties where you really need to know exactly what to expect.

Whats to stop you from going to the console in most games and entering god mode? Its not a big deal and also, this is supposed to be an RPG. You are not supposed to respec at all if you are role playing. If you are just power gaming or min maxing, then just consider it part of the mechanics. Last, I dont really understand why its only important for civil skills... there is always one character with max civil skill anyway so why even bother respecing those? Maybe to undo the poorly chosen automatic choices when you recruit a character but thats about the only reason i can think of.

Nobody cares about balence in a single RPG / co-op

You're kinda acting as if you're playing an MMO. There's no one inside your game other than yourself to "exploit" the system, so why care that much about what other people do with their games? Kinda sounds like you're in a platonic competition with hypothetical people. If something doesn't impact you negatively at the moment, but you're suggesting a change that's going to negatively impact other people (and still have zero impact on you), I don't see why the change should be made in the first place.

Gamebreaking would be to live forever with a badly designed party. I changed only a bit (Ifan's beard in the first place, he got a shaving device to use) but I had a lot of experience from the EA. I'm usually not enthusiastic, but the respec is a great feature, adding to an already great game.

Hi,

// Free respec is gamebreaking, //
For you maybe; I had a look at the respect; was jolly excited it was there, and for free!
I then proceeded to remove points where I didn't want them, put them where I did; customised my character a little further to my preferred style, was happy and continued playing.
No gamebreaking to be had.

// casual //
I don't even know what this means.
Casual as in what? Casual vs Hardcore?

// and bad design //
In your opinion, of course.

~NuttiKrust

It's clear people aren't getting it. If in the core game all characters had a skill that instakilled anything, would you think it was stupid/broken?

"Oh but it's as hard as you want, just don't use it"
"I love the instakill! Can the peasants have something"
"Not everyone wants the game to be hard!"
"In your opinion you should have to work for to win fights, I think the game is hard enough as it is"

If it's in the core game it should be balanced. Free and unlimited redistribution of all points is over the top if it's in the core game. If you wanted to respec constantly so badly you could download a mod or enter the console or edit some game files, but that would be your out of game actions. Just like you could probably download a skill that did 1 billion damage directly to vitality on a 1 turn cooldown.

The contention is such a thing should not be available to such a degree, not that it exists at all.

Most of the time, Hardcore in a PvE game means "Minimal quality of life and as much handicap as possible". Also, keep telling everyone your build is terrible and that you can beat the game with it while calling everyone who does stuff efficiently as a bunch of casual.

I agree that game breaking stuff should be fixed but if you intentionally role play with a handicap, don't push personal limition on other people.

I wouldn't mind if the respec had some sort of cost (because I'm more on the roleplay aspect, and I consider that one doesn't change his lifelong knowledge and training with the flick of a wrist), but considering how uncompromising the game is in the fights, the staggering difference skill choice can make, how complex the whole system is, how long it can take to know it is and how easily you can ruin a character, a respec system is absolutely necessary.

I really, really don't want to throw a 20-hour game out of the window because I realize later that I leveled up myself in a corner.
Or to play for 15 hours just to test out something and check if it works.

Hi,


Whilst I agree with this in general; more specifically, I feel if it's in the core game and you have to use it (e.g: a spell, weapon type etc), then it should be balanced.
But if something is completely optional and doesn't impact you in the slightest for not using it..rather leave it be. Especially if it's established that others like the feature and use it.
Edit: This would be entirely situational, of course, as it will work in some instances, but not all.


Perhaps in a multiplayer game, or some kind of PvP experience; but in a single player game where the feature is optional? I disagre.


Or we could just use the in-game built feature; and you could stop trying to control how others play the game?
If you don't like the feature, don't use it, and if there's some imbalance, so what? It's a single player game; so the only person being affected would the individual using the feature. Don't use it, and there's no imbalance.


Really not comparable in the slightest.


Don't use it then; or, hey, a better idea, install a mod that removes it from your game.

~NuttiKrust

It is fine the way it is. I never understood the mentality where something that is OPTIONAL in a singleplayer game has to be removed because someone might use it to make the game easier for themselves. Just don't use it and let others do what they want. If they want to create uber characters that destroy rats and gods with impunity, let them, it is their game and if they enjoy it, isn't that what matters in the end? I only used it once because Accidentally increased Ifans intelligence instead of his finesse early on and this let me fix it.

"Don't use it" is a really dumb argument, even singleplayer games need to be balanced.

If you play a tycoon or city builder game and there was a building unlocked halfway into the game that was free and generates you tons of money, would you also say "You don't have to use it, it gives other players options, it's a singleplayer game afterall"? Lmao, thats simply bad game design.

I don't abuse the system the way I described, but simply it being so easy to exploit devalues the whole experience.




If I fail a persuasion check I can just come back with a different character, no savescumming needed.
Drop a pyramid by the NPC you are having trouble with, teleport to the ship, respec, teleport back, takes less than a minute.

I can't understand how you can defend such a huge oversight, again, if you can come back in less than a minute with character stats fit for every situation, why have roleplaying aspect in the first place? It completely nullifies specializing your party.
"Just don't use it" doesn't make a broken gamemechanic less broken, simple as that.



What is game balance?

"Hey, let's just give players endless amounts of money whenever they want, it gives players options afterall."
"Let's give the player a skill that can instakill any enemy whenever they want, it's not broken, it's just optional"

lmao, a game that advertises itself as being an oldschool RPG experience "with a really good game master" ( Swen Vinckes words ) shouldn't be so easily breakable.

It's still your choice as to whether or not you use or abuse it. Artificially locking out access to what's really just a quality-of-life issue in case someone doesn't have the wherewithal to not misuse it is the sort of hand-holding that modern RPGs are often criticised for. I honestly don't get the ire about features like this, I figure people can use restraint both with their own gameplay and desire to meddle with others'.

I already covered that at the beginning of the post.
As I said, it's situational. Something like a weapon type being OP would need to be balanced and simply saying "well don't use that weapon type" won't work because then someone is being sidelined from using that weapon type.

In the case of a respec, nobody is being sidelined.
There is no imbalance if it's not being used; there is only the possibility of being an imbalance if someone exploits it; and if it is .. it's not my game that's being exploited, it's theirs. Don't see why I should be denied a free feature because some random person can't play the game without exploiting it.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Yes, actually I would. :P
Would I use it? Maybe, probably .. okay, totally. FREE MONEH!
Would others? Maybe not.
So what? Still my game, still my experience, still my decision if I want to use it or not.



Only if you care how other people play the game; which I personally don't. My experience is no less valued than what it was before I discovered the free respec; nor has the value changed knowing that people exploit it.

If someone wants to exploit it and, IMHO, ruin the experience for themselves - so be it; it's not my problem.

I say 'don't use it' because you really don't have to use it. You don't have to experience it. You don't have to interact with it in anyway. You ignore it, and you continue playing the game the way you want to play it and let other players play it the way they want to play it.

~NuttiKrust

Telling me to artificially gimp myself by not using a system is much less elegant than desigining that system to not be hilariously exploitable

You are all still in the honeymoon phase and can't see just how some of the changes are compared to the first game.

Psychologist's fallacy.
Until you can provide objective proof of this imbalance, it is nothing more than your opinion.

~NuttiKrust

And you need to realize this is Divinity 2, not Divinity 1. This kind of complaint is as entitled as FF7 fans complaining about the remake not being the exact same game just with better graphic.

So the answer is that everyone else should be "artificially gimped", as you put it, by removing the respeccing system? I've still yet to see a compelling argument against the "don't like it, don't use it" approach.

I'm not saying that it should be removed, but should cost money like in the first game, that way you can not abuse it as easily.

I agree that single player games have to be balanced. If there were skills so much more powerful than usual and so easy to use that all would be trivialized, it would be bad. But the respec is far from such an op feature. You are exaggerating the possible negative influence. It's is not like the uber skill on your bar.

You have to go back and reskill, then try again. It's at least a little bit inconvenient. You could also try again with your proven build, just try another approach. It's up to you. If someone hits a big wall and cannot go further with his build, then it is a chance to overcome the wall. It's better than to reroll, if you have a life beyond the game.

Games like Skyrim or the Total War series must be a horror for you. Because you can of course easily mod you super weapons or troops. You need a certain kind of self control to avoid it. It's the same with the respec.

And the respec is a good tool for experimentation

That's presuming that people abuse it: I haven't used it at all yet in spite of my builds probably being less than ideal. And if other people do "abuse" it, so what? What they do in their games is none of my business.

You know what? i think that the whole point of this thread is about comparing e-penis. I mean, all the comparisons with mods didnt work because, if you use a mod, you cant (unless you're liar) tell "i beat the game in tactician/honour mode!", because you actually played a modified version of the game.
You cant really brag of your playthrough.
Same argument with difficult. Explorer mode is far more easy than tactician, but nobody complain saying "it's not fair, some player could abuse this difficult system to make their game easier!". Why? because, in that case, you cant say "i finished the game on the hardest mode!".
So, the point is that there are free respecs on every difficult, and there's isnt a "no respecs mode". If there was such modality, i think nobody would complain about that, because in that case they will just raise over the "just tactician respecs" plebs.

The whole point is that if there is some "make easier" mechanic in one game, generally the hardcore player want some tag/achievement/medal to beat the game without using it.

Maybe I don't care about achievements and e-penis and want to play a game that doesn't water down it's RPG mechanics? Maybe I shouldn't have to mod a game to fix an obviously exploitable mechanic?
It's easier to attack me for making the topic than accepting that a core mechanic is broken in your new favorite videogame, I understand.
I can live with the devs streamlining the game, adding questmarkers, combining lockpicking and pickpocketing into thievery, combining bow and arrow into a ranged skill, it makes sense, but this simply doesn't.

I don't even care about combat respeccing, you have to buy skillbooks anyway, but the civic skills become completely irrelevant if you can respec to your hearts content.

I don't call Skyrim a bad RPG because it makes me look like some hardcore nostalgiafag grandpa, but because it's boring.

It's not broken, you just don't like the feature because it clashes with your preconceived notions of what an RPG should and should not contain.

A broken mechanic can be objectively proven to be true.
A personal belief cannot.

~NuttiKrust

Does respeccing being free make your civic skillchoices irrelevant? Yes or no?
Yes it does, this isn't even debateable. If I can teleport to the ship, respec and be back at the chest/door/trader/NPCs I want to lockpick/pickpocket/persuade in LESS THAN A MINUTE, then this one mechanic nullifies the other mechanics. This a change that completely defeats other core parts of the game, something that was never a problem in the first game, thus it's bad design, finished, finito, Q.E.D.
Not an opinion, fact, try it yourself.

I don't get how this is hard to understand?

Larian should make respec available in Act I. Best feature ever!!!

In my opinion, nope.


Of course it is.


Do you do that? Because I don't, nor will I.
If I can't open it, or if I can't persuade someone, I don't. I prefer to see where my decisions / lack of planning / character build takes me.

Other's don't.

And, again.. I ask (which you seem to be conveniently ignoring): How does a player doing that affect your game?

Why do you feel the need to impose YOUR idea (because that's what it is) of an RPG game onto others?


Less difficult to understand, more disagreement with your summation that it nullifies the other skills, or breaks the game, or devalues the experience.


Edit: My post you responded to was edited, likely whilst you were replying.

~ NuttiKrust

It's irrelevant whether you do that or not, its an exploit and shouldn't be possible.
I guess in the end you simply don't care and are just defending the game because you like it, so I'll stop responding here since it's going in circles.

Developers should fix exploits, you are just looking the other way because you are a fanboy.

Considering that a) teleportation is part of the game, b) running is part of the game, c) respeccing is part of the game and completely free..
... I'd say your claim that it's an exploit is nothing more than an emotional response to a feature that you simply do not like.

And you've run out of arguments so you resort to ad hominem's.

With that, I think we're done here.

This is a terrible argument. The validity of a system has absolutely nothing to do with the title of the game.

I think the free respec is the carrot to keep folks going when things get tough or Larian makes balance changes to the game. It has value to me whether or not I actually use it. A functionally similar feature in another game I've played (Heroes of Steel) is the option to "boost" a party to the beginning of Act 2 (once the player has completed Act 1 at least once), where the boosted party is given access to a bunch of chests so that they can gear themselves to match their builds. If your party idea proves fun and effective you can then remake the group at level one or continue from there without replaying an act you may have played as many times as you want to.

If DOS 2 were less complex, less buggy, and companions weren't pre-leveled, I wouldn't see a point to this option, but given the nature of the game I think it's a great addition--and a feature that shouldn't be PC-only, which it likely would be if left to modders.

Again, if I can just respec any of my civic skills at any time, they become irrelevant, no? You keep denying it, but don't explain your view. Why have civic skills if I can change my characters to have the perfect skills for every situation anyway? Getting past that door is just a minute of respeccing away.

Just because you don't it doesn't make it go away.



Because a certain bit of permanency is important for an RPG, see Fallout, see Diablo, Wasteland, Pillars of Eternity, Planescape, KOTOR, Dragon Age.

You aren't roleplaying if you can change your role whenever you see fit.

I don't. If other people do, I don't care: like I said, what they do in their own game is none of my business.

The respec is behind a :effort: paywall.

You need to have finished act1 before having access to it, and so it's a great tool for people who realise they have gimped their build with bad choices but like what they actually have done with their roleplaying or just don't have time to reroll and begin the game again. Or, you know, know they would lose motivation to play if thye do.

Then if you want to abuse it you need to go back there, make new characters and spend time abusing it. It has a high 'effort' needed to abuse, and when it comes down to it, it's OK if people want to spend a lot of time to abuse a game. It's part of the game, and it's something most people just won't do because it's, for most, not a fun thing to do. For the people it's fun to....well, they can do it. It's good for them.

It's also very good for people who get stuck at a wall and realise they /need/ a respec or they have to stop playing.

Or, as people say, for experimentation.

I'm not attacking you, i just gave my 2 cents on this argument. You're saying all the time that respecs water down the rpg mechanic, but it's not objectively true.
Yeah, you could abuse that system, and in the same way you could abuse many other things in the game (and that was true even in dos 1), so? what's the difference?
You can choose explorer mode, abuse all the cheese build, abuse ai, download a cheat engine trainer, and made dos2 the easier game in the universe. All this things are acceptable, why? what is the real difference between download a #1 downloaded mod from nexus and use a in-game function?
The difference, in my opinion, is that you cant accept that someone else could beat the original game (not modded) in a way that you consider easier.

This does seem to be an ongoing problem with RPGs in particular, I've noticed. I like SP games because I can do my own thing without feeling like someone else is trying to usher me along but sometimes it seems even SP isn't safe.

One of the earliest examples I saw (okay, it's comparatively recent, especially for someone who's been gaming on and off since the 1970s, but I'm somehow a latecomer to RPGs) was in Oblivion where I was surprised and not impressed with the number of suggestions that new players get rid of quality-of-life things like the Skeleton Key or Azura's Star. I remember accosting a few and they defended their "advice" on the basis that it would somehow enhance the newbies' gaming experience although their general attitude rather belied that claim: it seemed more a case of the big kids not wanting the little kids in their playground.

I've seen the same mentality a lot since then and still don't really understand it.

There is a difference between quality-of-life changes and casualizing mechanics into irrelevance.

If you rather have choice be completely inconsequential, rather than choices mattering, in a genre that is DEFINED by choice and consequence, because it somehow empowers the player, more power to you, that is where the market is headed.

title is pretty spoiler.

Oh lord, someone is afraid of being called a "casual" because the designers saw fit to allow free respecs. Even a double facepalm doesnt do this thread justice.

It's as inconsequential or not as I decide. Much the same as savescumming, or even starting a new game because I wasn't happy with the outcome: even in the latter regard I'm generally loath to do so unless it's gone really bad. It's nothing to do with "where the market is headed" and everything to do with taking responsibility for one's decisions.

The problem I'm having with OP's issue is his contention that it nullifies social talent choice.

I, personally, disagree. I have maxed out persuade on my avatar, maxed out loremaster on my elf, maxed out barter on another character who does all my trading, and maxed out theivery on another who unlocks all doors and chests.

Would you say that kind of build nullifies choice? Because not once have I felt compelled to "go back and try again" or something.

Sure I could change my avatar to full lucky charm during dungeon crawls and my barterer to full sneak between barter sessions, but let me tell you... I am far too lazy to go through all that effort.

Got a question for OP: do you save scum?

Hi.

1. The existence of an option to change a decision does not automatically make the original decision irrelevant, as you claim. No: you yourself have to make *another* decision to actually use said option to change your original choice (and thereby to make it irrelevant, if you want to see it that way).

2. It follows that you can simply decide not to use that feature. In this case, your game is free of what you consider an exploit. There is nothing to discuss.

3. You can also decide to use the feature. In this case, you (irrationally) chose to use what you consider an exploit, and you have nobody to blame but yourself for it. There is nothing to discuss.

4. It's up to you if you want/need an in-character justification for exercising (or not) that option. The game cannot hold your hand for every bit of storytelling -- that is one of the core aspects of RPGs. They (intentionally or not) leave a lot of room for you to fill with your own inspirations and fantasies.

5. By the way, this applies to almost everything in a game, particulary a RPG. You feel that pyro spells are OP? Do not use them. You do not like how stealth works? Do not use it. You want an iron-man mode? Do not use the save/load feature. It is child's play to justify every non-meta decision from an IC perspective (e.g. your character has had to witness a parent die to fire and hence suffers from a severe trauma, rendering them unable/unwilling to cast fire spells).

6. However you decide, personally, you cannot legitimately impose your choice in this matter on everybody else. What would be the justification?

he talk 24/7 about game need to balanced and can't give single argument why... its clear even for 5 years old child that respec ingame is exactly for balance... he just ignore every single argument and continue to thow this shi*t about balance...

Maybe you could RP that ancient lore states using the mirror destroys whoever uses it and replaces them with an evil doppleganger, so avoiding the use of the mirror to respec is no longer hard to resist - It's your only choice if you want to survive.

Also the only way you could "respect to beat persuasion check" is if you save scum.

You know, get into a conversation, see a Persuasion check needed, fail it, so reload, visit ship, respec, go do the conversation again, then respec after the conversation.

I could see them putting in something like a timer for Respec. Ie "only available every X hours" to avoid this issue. But frankly, its not really an issue.

If you know you're going to engage in a lot of conversation with people ... you have four characters. SPECIALIZE them. Like others have said.

Have one character max out his persuasion (Lizard / Red Prince gets a bonus). Voila, no worries about "respec to beat persuasion check!" just make sure that you do conversations with your 'face' man.

This is true for only a few NPCs most let each individual party member engage in dialouge. Just take a different character to talk to the same NPC with readjusted skills, unless your skillcheck you failing the check results in combat there is no savescumming required.


Only for encounters so I don't have to redo multiple fights, I don't reload to revert decisions I made.

Jesus christ why isnt this thread sunk to second page yet?

a few elitist snobs want to ruin quality of life measures on a perfectly valid balance, and yet people still taking the bait?

SERIOUSLY EVEN PILLARS AND TYRANNY HAS FREE RESPECT, GET OFF YOUR HIGH HORSE.

If you really like a challenge theres tactician honorable for you, request a mod that makes every NPC hostile or something.

If you don't like the respec system, show some self-restraint and don't use it.

Or if you want, donate all of your gold to a random NPC every time you respec for the cost.

Stop trying to ruin things for others because you have no willpower.

How is my suggestion to not have respec be completely inconsequential elitist?



You are wrong though.
Pillars of Eternity requires you to pay for respec at a tavern, while Tyranny doesn't allow it at all.







Oh I don't use it, but I just hate casual game design.

We have different outlooks on how games should be designed I guess. I get it, you think it's not a problem because you don't have to use it.
Let's hyperbole this a bit.
If the game gave you a key that opened any door, a spell that instakilled any enemy once you reach Act 2, would you still just say "Don't use it"?
Those would be completely overpowered. Everything needs to have a down and upside, respec just being free whenever you want has no downsides.
Why does every other RPG, whether singleplayer or MMO, either not allow respecs or makes you pay for it in some way? It's simply good design.

The developer sets the boundaries for what is possible inside the game, a good game doesn't let you abuse such elements to this extend. It's also not up to me to ignore such lazy design, but up to Larian to fix.

You are wrong, Tyranny with DLC ALLOWS free respec any time via spires.

Did you even look at your thread title? I can never understood someone so self absorbed.

Alright, I only played vanilla



How does the thread title make me self absorbed?

Free respec makes civic skills irrelevant

Free respec is casualized compared to the first game and others in the genre

A mechanic that works against other mechanics is bad design.
There is no need to specialize your parties civic skills when you can just go respec everyone to a great thief, go to a trader and rob him 4 times instead of just once.
How is that not self defeating?

Can you stop with the personal attacks?

It's the word "casual" which proves it.

Please just shut up and go away. No one is going to agree with your whining.

How is it not casual, compared to the first game for example?

Can you not discuss this without attacking me personally lmao, put in some effort
I guess I'm talking against a wall of fanboys, sorry for critizing your pefect video game.

Sorry for interrupting your release hype circlejerk, I'll be off to bed, see you tommorrow
Larian has crafted a perfect, flawless masterpiece.

Yes, exactly, you nailed it perfectly!

The entire forum is just a bunch of Larian-worshippers who have absolutely zero complaints at all, and band together to tar and feather anyone who dares to say otherwise. You've found us out, well done.

It has nothing at all to do with your ridiculous position unsupported by any arguments not based on your own personal opinion.

Not to mention almost no one has agreed with him at all, yet he still somehow thinks hes right.

Honesly, OP, the fact that you use terms like "casual" and "casualized" tells me enough. Dude, you're coming off as kind of pathetic. Just stop.

Fact is, free respec is NOT a bad thing. Not everyone has hours to devote to grinding up gold for a respec if they've got a build that doesn't work. People have lives and jobs - maybe you'll understand that one day :)

And before you try your strawman garbage on me, I'm not a Larian fanboy. DOS2 has plenty of issues, and segments/elements that are ACTUALLY bad design. This isn't one of them.

I think that rather sums up the problem with this topic in one neat sentence.

Being right does not come from majority decisions or opinions. Just because a mob thinks the earth is flat does not make it so. Socrates was tried because he "failed to acknowledge the gods that the city acknowledges". We are in the 21st century, let us try to avoid regressing to stone age mentality. We are no longer waging wars with sticks and stones, we now have nuclear weapons that could destroy the world a hundred times over.

Regarding the issue OP mentioned, it seems he is not complaining so much about respec in the sense of rebuilding your character's combat roles, but rather abusing the free respec to change outcomes to your favor or amassing gold via pickpocket rotation.

If that is the issue, then limiting pickpocketing to a single instance, regardless of character, and restricting persuation checks to a single instance (no second chances) would solve the issue OP is complaining about. Unless there is something else that bothers him about respec'ing

This isnt a mob, this is blantly stupidity suggesting nerfing respect out of sheer selfishness and ignorance in an already hard game that punishes new comers.

There is no logic in this from the mere title alone. And your suggestion is even worse, but what more can i expect from someone named "overlordgod"

This forum needs an "upvote" system. Q_Q

Why, though? In an MMO, sure; but a single player game?
If someone wants to abuse the feature for their own single-player experience .. let them. It's their game, it's their experience.

~ NuttiKrust

because someone isnt happy if they cant ruin other people's experiences that have no relevance of their own, thats what we call A Troll

It makes sense for it to be free really. If respeccing your character was a big investment then you are punished for not making the right choices while making your character or while levelling up. Players who are most adept at manipulating the economy (making affording the respec easier) are also likely to be the most informed about the game in general (making good build choices) and less likely to need to use it. If getting a respec is significantly challenging then people will go out of their way not to have to do it, diminishing its usefulness.

If respecs still have a cost but its cheap or negligible then you may as well just make it free. You can say "oh why not a balanced cost" but again, what is reasonable will be different for those with system mastery and those learning as they go.

Most importantly, there are so many cool and fun skills and skill interactions in this game, being able to try out fun new moves that you see enemies or your friends use is hella good.

Oh of course, I'm a troll for suggesting fixes to an abuseable game mechanic. Rotating your characters civic abilities to rob traders dry is obviously a great experience and not a flawed system.
Why let players only pickpocket once per characters in the first place then? This one system is in direct conflict with another system, so that's flawed game design, why keep it?
Singleplayer games need balance, why do you think they rebalanced tons of stuff with the EE of the first game?
What Overlordgod said would be a perfectly valid option to fix a system the devs obviously didn't intend.

And is your only rebuttal to posts you don't like to attack the poster himself?
You are the most toxic person in this thread, but what can I expect from someone called "Cyka"




I never once said a thing against respecing combat skills, it's the loophole around civic skills I find so glaring.

My two cents.

I think the respec feature makes perfect sense with however you are role-playing. No matter how you build your team, all of the playable characters are Godwoken. Beings that posses Godlike power. At the
end of act 1, we control a ship that has a magical mirror that allows us to respec our characters free of charge. Maybe these mirrors react to us in such a way, because of who we are, and we can completely change ourselves at a whim through the use of our Godwoken powers.

I just made that up at the top of my head, but my point is that there is nothing wrong with how it is now. I feel that it is balanced, considering you have to work to get that feature. If it were at the beginning of the game, the argument against it would have some merit.

It's good, keep it and do the same for whatever game comes after that.

This exactly. If you think it's unbalanced, don't use it. You can play the game by your own rules.

So I assume if Larian had a patch come out that made all pyro skills ignore magic armor everyone would just "choose not to use" the pyro skills. Instead of looking to fix it. Just because it's in the game doesn't mean it has to be balanced after all!

"If you don't like it, don't use it" goes against the whole concept of improving the game. I want the game to improve, unless the devs state that abusing the stat redistribution is what they intended then it's a bug not a feature.

Looking at the thread, apparently games aren't supposed to be challenging or balanced anymore unless they are competetive multiplayer games.
Guess it's my fault for not pretending

If something is overpowered, just dont use it, it's not the developers who should set the boundaries but obviously the player. If summoners are OP just gimp yourself and play something else

I think it would help if you provided a better analogy since the two are apples and oranges; but ultimately, if that's the way it was designed, that's how I would deal with it.

In my case, this and the previous game are turn-based isometric only, both of which are unwelcome relics from another age as far as I'm concerned and seem rather archaic, but I love the games in spite of those features and haven't campaigned for them to be removed. Because that's the way they were designed, so I deal with it.

I think I've more important things to worry about than whether the game is too accessible to "casuals" or whatever seems to be the underlying reason for this sort of disgruntlement.

It's not though, it's game feature to game feature. Comparing two aspects of the same game.



That's how I am dealing with it. By voicing concern that it should be designed differently, that is if this was the design intention at all.



You're not asking the devs to literally change the entire genre of the game, therefore you shouldn't ask the devs to look into an exploit. Right.

Poor analogy.
Pyro ignoring MA can be conclusively proven to imbalance the game, whereas having a free respec cannot.


Only when something can be proven to be damaging to the game.
Opinions of an imagined imbalance don't count, for obvious reasons.


We all do.


Tell yourself whatever you like, we're all entitled to our opinions.


~ NuttiKrust

So in what way is the respec as it stands adversely affecting your gameplay experience? I'd love to know.

I dunno, maybe it should be removed from tactician or honour modes and left there for everyone else; you'd think that would be an acceptable solution but I've even seen people complain that explorer should be much harder even though they don't use it themselves (or they claim not to) which seems to just be sheer bloody-mindedness.

@ OP

This is a singleplayer experience. If someone wants to respec, let them. It does not affect your game what so ever. Honestly this kind of one sided thinking is from the same minority who tried to say the same thing about Skyrim on release. This game has Online Co-op, where you need to make a new character to even participate. So someone who would use the re-spec mirror couldn't even port their character over to multiplayer to otherwise "ruin your game experience." The only person you ruin it for is yourself if you decide to abuse it.

Do not call it bad game design if you yourself plan to use said "bad game design" in the first place. You must've used the mirror at some point or another or else you wouldn't be here complaining about it. Something must've gone wrong in your game, so you're under the mentality of "Stop liking the thing that I no longer like." Not everyone feels this adamant about it. Being able to respec in an RPG. (Role-Playing Game) is vital for players as it let's us approach the game from different viewpoints.

If you don't like it, then that's too bad. Nobody is forcing you to use the Mirror. Stop being pessimistic over a system that you clearly aren't forced to use and trying to bring the roof down upon everyone else simply because you're not happy with it. If you want a real hardcore experience, go play Honour Mode and come back to us since the game is too "casual". As a matter of fact.

Idea Proposal: Respec Mirror is removed in Tactician Mode/Honour Mode.

For you elitist types out there.

-Pyro ignoring MA can be conclusively proven to imbalance the game, whereas having a free respec cannot.

Rotating your characters civic abilities to rob traders dry imbalances the game.

-I dunno, maybe it should be removed from tactician or honour modes and left there for everyone else

An actual suggestion. Excellent, I'd be behind that.

-Stop liking the thing that I no longer like

Calling me elistist because I want an exploit removing is... well it's comical to be honest. Saying don't use something major in vanilla game that is NOT a bug or glitch is pointless. An exploit should be fixed unless it's what the devs intended - the rotation of civic abilites to gain wealth.

If the devs intended it then, whilst very sad, I have no more to add. I do not believe this is a feature, I believe this should be patched out. There are other ways and means, but claiming there is no problem when there clearly is baffles me.

As an add-on, statements such as:
"Why, though? In an MMO, sure; but a single player game?
If someone wants to abuse the feature for their own single-player experience .. let them. It's their game, it's their experience. "

Is why mods/console commands exist.

Here's an idea; stop using the feature.
Even better idea: Install a mod that removes it.

Because if it's not being used, it's not allegedly imbalancing anything.

Seriously, you and OP remind me of the "Fast travel ruins Skyrim, take it out now!" crowd.

Edit:
I don't mean that in a condescending, or rude way.
I mean it like; there's a built in and usable feature; it's not a bug, the intention is clear - and how you use it is up to you.
You are free to never see it, touch it, use it or otherwise experience it in any way. It doesn't impact your game. It doesn't intrude upon your gameplay yet instead of ignoring it .. you call for the developer to change the game mechanic to how YOU want it.

Yeah, I saw the same in Oblivion. In my opinion they were right, I found the game was much better paced if I didn't fast travel and I also found I "needed" to install a mod to disable it to get myself out of the habit (though really that was a bit of a lazy approach as I could've just not used it: and in fact not being able to use it at all got tedious with the likes of Fighters Guild quests being seemingly deliberately inconveniently placed) but I would've hated to impose my idea of what improved the game on other people.

Another example was installing the FCOM meta-mod which totally changed loot and enemy scaling and more, and actually made things quite a lot more difficult. Although part of me thought "this is what it should've been like to begin with" I had to consider that some people actually liked the way the game was out of the box, however much that surprised me.

Balance should never be a priority in non-competitive games. FUN should be.
Respec-ing is fun for some people and it's good to have the option.

So you'd be fine with a spell that did 300 direct vitality damage. Because: Here's an idea; stop using the feature. Because if it's not being used, it's not allegedly imbalancing anything.

A mod to remove an exploit is your solution. Instead of... the devs? This isn't an easter egg, this is core aspect of the vanilla game that I think should be fixed.

I am still waiting for one person to make a NON-STRAWMAN reason why the respec is breaking their own game even though they are not using it.

Spoilers for Bukki: Your "what about a 9999999 damage spell" is a STRAWMAN argument and therefore is worthless.

I think I have over 300 hours in Skyrim? Give or take. All of them with Fast Travel disabled though.
I didn't like it and felt that it ruined the scale of the gameworld (still do, even in DOS though not to the same extent).
So I installed a mod to remove it, and never looked back.
Actually, I lie; I installed a "auto-travel" mod. Basically, if you took the travel cart, it would travel along the road automatically. It wouldn't fast travel, and it would travel at cart speeds. xD
I'd sit in it, and chill.

However, it never even occured to me to try to get the devs to change a game mechanic to suit my preferred playstyle .. in fact, I never even considered how other people felt about it. I didn't like it, so I didn't use it. I literally gave it no more thought than that.

Another bad example.
Insert coin(s) to try again.


You see it as an exploit. I, and clearly many others, do not.
In fact, I'd actually place you in the minority.

Some people even consider multiple saves to be an exploit: and sometimes it finds its way into video games, e.g. Fable where they tried to force choice and consequences to be a certain way. In my opinion it was a really artificial restriction and it was rather annoying to make manual backups so that I actually had multiple save points.

I can see the point in some sort of honour mode and can therefore also see the point of removing the respec system in the same mode or at least restricting it; but it's annoying for everyone else. For me personally, all of this planning and strategising and poring over figures is a bit close to the day job and I prefer to focus my gameplay on story and exploration, so I guess I object to any suggestion that I should be railroaded in a direction that makes it less fun. But as it does have different gameplay modes, it should be possible to satisfy everyone (well, other than the minority to want to meddle with other people's gameplay and I don't care about what makes them happy, but hopefully that excludes present company).

Free respect must be limited by levels. Some around once per 3-5 level will be fine i think.

The point about using Civil abilities in a crazy way with respecs makes sense, it is unbalanced. It's the good kind though, old school cheese tactics of manipulating game mechanics in a clever way.

I know that usually people saying "dont do X" if you don't like it can be annoying but its not like a certain ability that is really powerful, its you going out of your way to do something convoluted in order to maximise your gold. It works in this instance I believe. It's not hard to get absurd amounts of money without doing it anyway so does it really affect the game to such a huge degree?

You can't roleplay a career change or "fix" a value auto-assigned when you told a potential companion you were looking for someone who belonged to a particular class? After all, the game didn't give me the opportunity to explain to Fane that I needed a wizard willing to use his bony digits as a skeleton key. As far as my roleplay is concerned, Fane was always inclined to fiddle with locks. There was just an error in the official record of his abilities.

I love free respec in this game. In addition, would encourage it in just about ANY RPG game.

And not because I want "ez mode" or anything stupid like that. It's because, I love DISCOVERING new abilities as I naturally progress through the game. I think that researching every ability in the game before you start playing really kills that enjoyment of discovering.

But in a difficult, punishing RPG without a free or cheap respec option, the player is forced to research builds before starting and plan their build out the entire game. Or, more often, pick a cookie cutter build from a forum or something. If they don't do this, they will almost always have a crappy or at least suboptimal build and will have to either restart, or just be stuck with it.

This absolutely KILLS that enjoyment of discovering new skills, or experimenting with a new unorthodox build just to see how it performs.

With the ability to respec however, I can actually experiment with new ideas. I'm not stuck with some cookie cutter crap just because I don't want to waste 40 hours of my life leveling a crap build, only to find out its crap after 40 hours.

I kind of love the fact that the two people in this thread in favor of removing the 'imbalanced' free respec are both parroting the EXACT SAME ARGUMENTS. And none of the arguments really hold water. At the end of the day, it really IS just a matter of them not liking something that's potentially abusable for a small percentage of players, but a valuable convenience for literally everyone else.

Let me make this absolutely clear, kids: There. Is. Nothing. Wrong. With. "Casual." Mechanics.

Get over yourselves.

I've been sitting here this whole time trying to figure out who would actually take the time to go back to the boat and respec over and over and why. Like would people really go back to the boat so they can get persuasion success on every single dialogue? That sounds boring. Why would anyone do that? Who cares if you fail a persuasion, it's part of the game and part of what makes each playthrough a unique experience. It's part of your story.

Unlimited money? I don't know about you, but I already don't have a money problem, so I'm not sure how this would really affect my game much.

These are the only two points I've seen against free respec and neither of them are very convincing. Perhaps you need to use your free respec to put some more points into Persuasion.

I'm also trying to imagine myself being upset about others utilizing either of the above and it's not working.

I suppose I'm inclined to reiterate what seems to be the problem with "casual": it's a bit of a moving target but there's definitely an element in RPG playing circles who view studious analysis of the mechanics and exploits thereof as the correct means of gameplay and everything else being contemptible. Personally I would like to enjoy my games as a more complete and immsersive environment, of which combat and its mastering is just one part and actually I think that an excessive focus on combat rather detracts from other elements such as the story, roleplay and exploration, which for me are equally important things that make the Divinity series what it is. And yeah, I am saying that combat mastery isn't necessarily compatible with roleplay and might be inclined to contend that it is even less so than arbitrary respeccing.

I dunno, "casual" is just one of those words that's tossed around far too often and doesn't really mean anything useful. It's about as welcome in discussions like this as "entitled" and any of the other usual suspects. People have different playing styles: one isn't better than another. Hopefully games can endeavour to accommodate a variety of them.

Alright, I'll admit that the thread title is hostile without reason.
Having players force themselves through a game over 100 hours long with some kind of error in their build is unreasonable. Also, the player has to get through fort joy in the first place to be able to respec.

I still think the first game did it more with more elegance, whatever.

Regardless, being able to cycle through civic skills is kind of silly. The devs stop you from pickpocketing an NPC multiple times with the same character. There is an obvious intention here to stop players from doing this multiple times.

I want to reply to the OP's contention that the ability to respec for free "breaks" civil skills because you can just go back to the ship and respec to have whatever you want.

Okay...so just imagine you get rid of any respec in the game. There are only 7 civil skills, and you can get a minimum of 6 party members...exclude telekinesis and there are just 6 civil skills. Just max one civil skill on each character and then whenever you need that civil skill, put said char in your party.

OMG CIVIL SKILLS BROKEN!!!

Except they aren't. And you know why? Because doing this EVERY time you need one of those skills is a pain in the butt. This is the same reason why free respeccing does not "break" civil skills. Because I don't want to have to go through respeccing EVERY time I need a diff civil skill.

nothings broke i tested it alot you cant farm steal anything

If you abuse teleport pyramids, then it is not particularly time consuming to respec every time. Also, no need to rotate the 6 characters, if 3 are enough.

Most people in this thread completely missed the point of OP's complaint. He is complaining about civic skill abuse, not respeccing combat abilities.

Also, casuals keep saying "fun" is more important than "balance", but they miss the point that for some people, you cannot have "fun" without a balanced game. If some people want a casual, easy and exploitable experience, there is an explorer mode just for them, so they can have their "fun".

Why do people who do not want challengening games think the word "casual" is an offense? There is no shame in playing easier difficulties if you don't want an "stressing" experience.

Perhaps devs should relabel difficult settings, where "easy" is relabeled as "Very Hard", normal relabeled as "Balls of Steel" and hard relabeled as "Soul Crushing".

As far as I know, literally nothing, I mean *nothing* forces you to use the mirror in the first place? So what exactly is the problem here.

If a player does not wish to use it, then you simply ignore it. What I'm trying to say here being able to respec or not changes very little. If a player wants to cheat they will find ways to do so and there is *nothing* you can do about it. I guess having the mirror in the game is more for players that thought they made a grave mistake and gave them the option to a respec if they chose to do so. It's more for min/max than anything else.

Also one must not forget that it's 2017 and not 1997.

Didn't read all these pages but here's my thoughts.

It's optional. Just like a mod for godmode is optional.

The respec option is there mainly for people who want to try different skills and builds to experiment or simply do not have the luxury of time to respec. Not everyone is a no-lifer with 10 hours a day to play (coming from me who actually is a no-lifer with 10 hours a day to play).

If peple want to ABUSE IT, then it is literally NO DIFFERENT from a person using a mod or cheat to become immortal/godlike. Most people do not enjoy abusing such things and for those who DO want to abuse it they have the option to - it doesent impact other people either way. If people enjoy abusing it to cheat and enjoy it why do you care?

Leaving only the remaining people saying "I can use this to cheat, so I will use this to cheat because I can and I hate it! Why did Larian put this in the game? They are forcing me to cheat...". If I even have to start at how idiotic such people are in their reasoning I give up :P

When you start an argument by basically saying something is "designed for casuals" and "bad design" you have already cemented your position as a Forum Troll.

Because you are MOCKING and INSULTING casuals, saying that anything designed for them is a "bad idea", "poorly designed", the list goes on and on.

So what if an aspect of the game is designed for casual players? That is not "bad design".

Bad design is stuff that leaves the majority of the players unhappy.

Bad design is things like a UI that you have to struggle with, one that is cumbersome and clunky. That is the kind of things that deserve to be considered "bad design".

Creating options for a certain style of players is NOT "bad design".

Using 'casual' as a pejorative makes you come across as a condescending ass. Like "oh that's so cute, you're a "CASUAL."" That's why the word is offensive.

And that's why any argument that uses words like 'casual' or 'casualizing' is ultimately going to fall flat.

The list of things you need to abuse in order to be able to run into your 'issue' is getting longer and longer.

(1) Abuse save-game mechanics to gain a priori knowledge (aka IC omniscience) and to circumvent dialogue lock-in.
(2) Abuse teleport pyramids to circumvent travel time, breaking game flow.
(3) Abuse the mirror to adjust your build to suit the a priori knowledge from (1), breaking immersion and any semblance of RP your RPG may still have had after (1) and (2).

At what point does it stop being the game's fault and start being the gamer's fault? The way you play it, it's not even an RPG (= role-playing game) any more, it's more of an automaton that you feed with flowchart analysis results. I mean that's okay, if you want to play it that way, it's your choice, but seriously, calling it an 'issue' that panders to 'casuals' is putting the horse before the cart. I do not see any fundamental difference between that gaming style and loading up a cheating mod that cuts out (1) to (3) to just give you the result you want (i.e. pass the persuasion check). The only difference is the amount of mouseclicks and time required to obtain the same results.

A few thoughts:

As soon as I saw that mirror, I thought ugh, I don't want any part of that. I spent too much thought and effort to get my party the way I like it, I don't need no steenking respec. And even for exploiting purposes, it's too much hassle to keep going back and forth. Also, if you try out new builds with respec, you completely miss Act 1. I would want to see how the new build fares there as well.

OP I think I know where you are coming from. You want to min-max as much as possible within the confines of the rules and game system. But ask yourself, are the scenarios you presented something the devs had in mind/would encourage when they implemented this feature? Probably not - I dont think that was the intent. At this point, you might as well use console commands or cheat devices. My suggestion would be to employ some discipline and implement your own guidelines.

after much testing i actually now dont think thievery is broken, you only have access to a certain number of recruitable mercs including the base recruits that are also available on the start screen. not like there is a infinite amount of them and you can only steal once per char there is 14 recruits from serg Zrilla nothing more, that in my eyes means you can steal at times you need to and not abuse it to the point of a game breaking bug.

In SP it isn't really a problem, but yes in Co-Op it is a joke ...
even I am only playing with 2 personal friends, all Interactions are gone ... no need of a thief or diplomat or a lucky guy, respec and do all yourself it breaks the immersion ...

If it would cost some money, friends and even I would feel more that need of the other players ...

and also that you could respec your char to use a special item ruins that need to trade ...

SO YES FOR Co-Op it is TERRIBLE even gamebreaking, for single it is only immersion breaking ...

the only good thing is, I AM THE HOST and have a NPC in our game LOL !

SO PLEASE DEVS change it,
MP money for respec ...
SP should depend on playing settings, for normal also money , below no money and above even some magic items needed ...

I still don't get it. All three of you agree that that feature sucks because it makes you stop playing *together*? Yet you still use it to... what? not have to play together?

Are you sure that's actually a problem the game could/should solve and not one that you should tackle by yourselves? Like... by... agreeing not to use the mirror? How do you even RP as a group if you can't agree on such a basic (meta) thing?

Re: your edit, just logically, how would introducing a price for this feature change things? If you want to play together and not use the mirror, the price won't change a thing. If you don't want to play together... then the price won't change a thing either because you'll just pay the fee and do the same thing you've done before, i.e. not play together. At worst it'll just force you to save up a bit so you have enough funds not to have to play together.

*mind boggled*

I actually read this entire thread. I'm in-between shows to binge on Hulu. So as far as entertaining dramas go, this was like most of them. Good at the beginning, then escalating boredom until finally it's over.

So, from my filthy casual observations, the quote above was the best in the thread and pretty much sums this thread up.

Case closed. Cyka wins.

I have no problem with the respec. If you're 'cheating' by using it, you're likely already doing that with save-scumming, etc. We barely even use the thing because we're too busy out in the world playing, but I do like the option of being able to fix my mistakes every so often.

Notice that those who want to change it want to make the cost punative. Magic Items to use the Mirror? In a game with a relatively finite amount of items floating around?

Oh, and its not just the forums here, the steam side has a number of yahoos who rant and rave about this as well.

I can see placing a debuff where you can only use it every so often.

You shouldn't punish the majority because of something the minority is doing (save scum so you can know about persuasion checks, things like that).

As I said earlier, "bad design" is something that leaves the majority of the players unhappy. And the number of players speaking AGAINST the respec system is definitely not the majority.

Without respec you would have to restart the game from scratch every single time if you want to change something. Which by the way is something i've already done a bunch of times since you first need to be able to complete act1 and it's going to be a pita with a bad build.

On the contrary, i would like the respec to be available sooner. Getting through the same intro ship and island over and over gets a bit draining after a while.

And as someone else already said, if you don't like free respec -- don't use it.

I'm sure there will be mods that put respec in act 1 OR remove it completely. Seems simple enough to just put / remove the mirror somewhere in the world, or create an item that runs its scripting.

On that note, I really don't understand this logic:

> Hacking / modding the game, using cheat-codes, or even using 'easy' mechanics intended by the game is 'cheating'.

> Using exploits and cheese tactics like buying 1000 knockdown arrows / exploiting infinite turn, bad AI, broken builds and glitches is totally legit and fine.

> But not using optional aspects of a single-player, non-competitive RPG game you don't like is 'ruining my experience'.

If it's ruining your CO-OP just have a no-respec rule, and if your friends can't agree to that - find new friends!

And really, there is a fairly hunky gold cost for completely re-tooling your character. Skill-books and armor will set you back a good 40+ thousand in the late game to full re-tool someone from, say, a warrior to a rogue. Whereas being REQUIRED to have 22 wit to complete some quests and being sh*t out of luck because you couldn't have possibly known that first time around is, indeed, gamebreaking.

tl;dr:

Restraint is your friend if you don't like 100% optional game mechanics. Don't have restraint? Acquire it and don't ruin the game for everyone else.

just dont use it

If you're running a co-op game, you can feel free to put a disclaimer of what is accepted and what isn't accepted. It's your game, so its your rules. If people don't want to abide by your rules, then don't let them play in your game. It's really that simple.

As to single player ... there's nothing more that can be said. The majority seem happy with it and that's what matters at the end of the day.

Then don't respec in your games then. What others do in their games does not affect you.

"Just don't use it!" is a terrible argument. It completely ignores the fact that this 'feature' is in the game and that the overall design is impacted by it and, more importantly, the overall design of the rest of the game has to account for its implementation.

Free, instant respecs at any time is an incredibly powerful tool for players that has the following consequences:
-Civil Skill investments are trivialized immensely; this is especially evident in co-op play where players interactions and inter-reliance are significantly devalued.
-Equipment Requirements are an effective non-factor; you can always stat up into the minimum requirements of any equipment without consequence and minimum impact on your build.
-The Economy is broken immediately by the ability to maximize Lucky Find and Barter when utilized. (I actually believe the current economy is actually -counting- on you to do this with how much it is ballooned)
-Combat Encounters do not force players to adapt, the optimal strategy is always available. (This is especially apparent when utilizing the broken economy to outfit yourself at a significantly lower cost)
-Dialogue Checks suffer a similar subversion; any significant outcome can be assured through a quick trip to the character editor screen. (This allows players to accrue significantly more EXP and rewards)

It is of my opinion that character respecs should be available, but there does need to be a significant cost attached to them. The more openly available this option is, the less defining and meaningful character building becomes: With infinite retries and no penalty or cost, every build is meaningless until the point-of-no-return.

I'm still not seeing who these people are or why they need to have the game hold their hand to stop them spoiling it for themselves. I've yet to see anything that indicates this is anything more than a theoretical and rather subjective problem. I personally don't see the problem with locking it out of honour type modes if people would really it rather wasn't there, though perhaps easy for me to say as I don't play them, but for everyone else, "just don't use it" is just fine and better than some contrived restriction.

If they're going to do anything they should really concentrate on things that are actually exploits, though I'd say "just don't use it" applies there too.

Nope. It is a very valid argument. It really is that simple, just do not use it.



Nope. It hasn't impacted the design at all. Not at any time do I feel like I need to change my spec. If it was designed for the use of the free respec to respec for any situation, then I would have to feel like I need to change my spec often. So you are wrong.

So the argument: "Just don't use it" is the best argument.

The argument is not: "We really don't like the feature but we are stuck with, just don't use it.". It is "We like it and want to keep it, but if you don't like it, just don't use it."

So it is a trial to make the best from a situation we are comfortable and you are uncomfortable with.

It's not entirely dissimilar to me saying tactician difficulty is terrible and should be removed because I wouldn't enjoy it and it would spoil the game for unwary players. Or, alternatively, I could just not use it. Which actually seems to work just fine.

It works great. I play Classic, as an incompetent player, and often chuckle, however with deep compassion, about the problems broad to the public by enthusiastic Tactician players.

Yes I agree with this post. please devs change it. this game has to be more immersive because of difficulty.

@ OP - don't you have some DOTA ranked matches to go play and complain that your teammates are all incompetent and that your back hurts from trying to carry them to a loss that you caused because of your elitist, cancerous attitude?

So ... should I start arguing that stealing (which I assume many enjoy) should be removed from the game because its effect on game balance is detrimental to my characters who don't use it? Or should I continue to ignore the guides that say you have to steal and quietly shoulder the bit of added difficulty that comes with playing a virtuous character? And to appreciate that not stealing would have no meaning if stealing were not an option?

The price of freedom is always going to be individual responsibility. Part of role-playing is choosing what sort of character you're going to play and choice only exists in the presence of options. To my mind "don't like it, don't use it" is pretty basic to RP.

Yes. Yes you are.

Be 100% completely honest here: how does someone choosing to play the way you're describing break your experience?

Why the hell does it matter if it's "abusable" or not? Are there any ramifications of people using the respec system in the way you describe that directly affect the enjoyment of others?

I also don't think you've properly thought through your argument or even tried to do what you describe. In order for it to work, you have to save before each and every conversation or encounter, reload the save when it doesn't go the way you want, head back to Lady Vengeance, respec, head back to the scenario in question and win it with your newly assigned skills.
Oh, and heading back to Lady Vengeance then back to the encounter isn't as quick as it sounds. Teleporter pyramids don't take you to or from the ship, so you have to head to and from the nearest waypoint.

Personally, I myself save scum, but not to that extent. While I know it's possible, life's too short to do this at every step of the game. And I think most people think the same.

And if I do want to "win" every last situation (which I don't; the story develops in interesting ways when you can't succeed at everything), I can forgo all that nonsense, load up Cheat Engine and max out all characters. That's a lot less time consuming than doing things the way you think breaks the game.

And you know what? If I do load up Cheat Engine, especially in a single player game with no online code checking for cheats, there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it. In that scenario, am I ruining your enjoyment of the game? Because let me tell you, there are actually thousands of people out there doing exactly that.

One thing that poked me in the eye:

"The game is balanced around the assumption that players will use the mirror to exploit their way around civic skill checks. Therefore, the mirror has a detrimental effect on game design." (condensed version)

What a load of ****. It is not, you simply have not understood what differentiates an RPG from, say, an action game.

Not meeting a skill check can result in a lesser quest reward, or forced combat with a person you did not really intend to fight, amongst other outcomes. None of these consequences are game-breaking, but they do define your character(s) in that game: your character will have to live with, say, the avoidable death of an NPC on their hands because they failed to read up on lore. If the game was designed around players always succeeding at skill checks, then why didn't Larian just put a red-on-black 'game over' screen right after a failed check?

I'm sorry, but you cannot operate on the basis of an extremely flawed understanding of RPG basics and then go to Larian to complain about how they designed their RPG.

i had no idea people cared this much about how other people play a single player game

it's actually extremely easy to set self-imposed rules for RP purposes specifically to avoid things that can be potentially abused and/or exploited, in either a SP or MP setting

if you think this specific feature is too strong then you're at liberty to not use it, you won't miss out on any other features the game has to offer and your playthrough will be as clean as a bowl of holy water

I never even thought about abusing the system only those idotic min-maxers do that have no respect for a game and don´t get what RPGs are.

That will be me then. If I have a ranger I put points in Finesse. Rather than doing it at random or asking "what would my guy do". The answer being "do nothing, lets go to the pub".

You have respect for a game? That is peculiar. It isn't something conscious. How can you respect it?

Would you have respect for a table? A chess board? A lump of rock?

I can imagine having respect for someone who was good at (or knowledgeable about) something is normal. While I could have respect for a tree-surgeons skill, having respect for the tree his/her chainsaw is cutting is, frankly, a little odd. Far more odd would be respecting the car (or choice of car) they drive to work.