There is a designer at Larian like any game, that has a vision and expectation of how they want their game to work. When they see mistakes to that vision they correct it. Only companies that don't do this are typically companies that don't make any patches and we whine about "why no support?".
I'll have to take your word for it that it's somewhat unique to this game/forums. That being said, I think the argument for balance changes just SEEMS like a new phenomenon because of MMO's and the commonality of forums.
MMOs require players to lobby for balance changes because MMOs are more competitive (either directly or indirectly) and a neutral party needs to do the balancing. So, I think over the years we've gotten used to that need to lobby. It's what we automatically do now: jump on the forums and call for a balance change. But with D:OS, you don't have to lobby because you as the player can balance the game to your liking with a little self discipline. Or a mod. We've just forgotten that we actually have that opportunity.
Forums are more common than they were 10+ years ago, and so is the traffic to them, which means that this argument may have also existed back in the day but there were far fewer people arguing for it.
Lastly, D:OS is (mostly) an old school CRPG, so there's an element of getting back to basics. Combined with the above to points, I think that's why you're seeing this argument. You're actually seeing pushback against where 10 years of MMOs and single player games (that are very different than D:OS) have taken us.
But being a PC game, take an hour, go over to the mod section, download Lstools, unpack main, open up a handful of files in excel, make changes yourself, talk about variety there, then compile and add to a mod and play it the way you want to. The Resis cap was one single cell change in excel from whatever it was to 80.
This argument works both ways. If the game is designed to be moddable, balance changes (especially big balance changes) are even more unnecessary.
Regarding designer liberties: such liberties only go so far. At some point, the game isn't his/hers anymore. Of course it is legally and all that, but at some point the game becomes beloved and "owned" by the players, and the "this is my game I'll do what I want" isn't going to go over very well. Just ask George Lucas.
The argument for no balance changes is not the same as arguing for no support. There is some overlap, but fixing things is not necessarily the same as balancing things. And regarding that overlap: in single player games like D:OS, more in game liberties result in more fun for a wider range of players. Even if a liberty (such as excessive resists) is unintended or broken, designers should seriously consider leaving in such "emergent gameplay."
