I think Stabbey's point is that in a game where combat is mandatory, it's somewhat expected that you'll take at least a couple purely combat talents (i.e., the game is balanced with each character taking at least a couple purely combat talents), but none of those particular combat talents are required. And ultimately, all talents and player skills tend to contribute to combat prowess in indirect ways anyway. If you're a skilled barterer and talents help you get good gear or items, even if you sacrifice a certain amount of combat skills to become a good barterer, the extra gear and items you get will at least partially make up for your smaller investment in direct combat skills or talents.
I don't see what makes +damage/+AP talents so special. They just need to be balanced correctly so they're not the obvious choice. I think Bully could drop down to 20-25% damage bonus, and Glass Cannon could drop from 100% AP bonus to 50% AP bonus. On the other hand, Anaconda with its mere 10% bonus for maces only is pretty useless. They could add stun chance or a sunder armor effect to all bludgeoning attacks and that'd more interesting. What A Rush is a pretty situational AP bonus.
Where has anyone said that they balanced around having some of the combat talents? It's blindingly obvious that they didn't lulz, but if you have some info and source I'd be glad to look it over. I've explained multiple times why dmg/ap talents are not conducive to balance. Balancing around them = mandatory talents = pointless = underpowered characters who don't have them; Not balancing around them = overpowered characters = boring (for people who like challenge). If you make them so underwhelming that even balancing around them doesn't change anything, then why have them? Adding on top of existing abilities, like a chance to stun isn't the most fluid design imaginable, but it's a bit better than pure, no-brainer +dmg/ap. Game Changers like Lone Wolf and Glass Cannon are fine in theory, but they need number crunching and tweaking. Combat being mandatory is the intial problem. It's always, *always* a good choice to pick up a no brainer like +dmg, but it isn't very clear on the social skills.
Disclaimer: All my arguments stem from the initial assumption that we want valid choices and a balanced game. If you don't want these things then this isn't the thread for you. OK, that's a bit harsh, it sounds like "if you don't agree with me then shut up", that's not my intention. It's just that some posters aren't clear on what I'm trying to achieve and talk about, or at least I think they aren't clear.
