Traits are one of the best new features this game has. They make roleplaying have an impact on gameplay, or from a powergamer point of view they force you to actually engage in roleplay. I don't think I'd ever even consider playing a cautious or blunt character, but with the trait system that's exactly what I did, and because of it I tend to feel like my characters are more "characters" and less "me". It's especially important since I'm controlling two characters. Odds are they'll be different classes and therefor want the benefit of different traits, so they end up diverging and becoming different characters BECAUSE of the trait system, when otherwise I would just roleplay them identically.
I think exactly the opposite, but I think it boils down to how you define roleplaying and powergamer.
A powergamer will skip dialogs, and simply chose the ones that give the best outcome in term of game power.
A roleplayer will... roleplay, even if it gimps his character in term of gamepower. As a side note, please consider exactly what kind of "roleplay" is involved with the trait-related discussions (they are inconsequential most of the time, outside of the trait bonus themselves): character A and B talk amongst themselves and give their vapid opinion about something, which yield bonuses.
If you are stuck in a dilemna opposing powergamer and roleplayer, a powergamer will choose powergamer against roleplaying.
You are saying that you would not consider consider playing a blunt or cautious character, but since it gives bonus you are. So you are a powergamer, and you disregard roleplay because you adapt your character personality to what yield the best bonuses (you put roleplay second to powergamer).
I see the "ways" of playing more of a roleplaying thing than the current "traits" system is. If you are roleplaying a cautious character, then the sneaking or talker way is for you (you try to avoid fights). If you are roleplaying a blunt character, then the talker way isn't probably for you. Those are roleplaying choices that really affect how you approach the game and interact with things.
The current trait system is currently inconsequential and boring to read chatter that gives OP buffs.
While I understand wanting the game to cater specifically to different paths of play, you lost me almost the instant you said "merge". You are trying to take out depth from the character system and turn it into a set path with hardly any choice, and I can't get behind that. There's definitely some bloat in the skills as it is, but nothing quite so drastic.
If you agree that there is some bloat, you can't be lost at the "merge" word. Which is it?
Also, depth isn't the result of bloat. You don't necessarily remove the depth of a system by making it simpler and less bloated.
I think Extra Credits made a cool video about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg8fVtKyYxY(or
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45PdtGDGhac )
Tactician mode simply doesn't need an xp nerf. There aren't actually that many "extra" enemies, I don't think it even amounts to one whole level by the end of the game. It's still too easy, and there are other things that do need nerfs, but not the XP rate.
Which level were you at the end of the game?
Anyway, maybe the XP rate is not that big of a problem (I still think it does because I tend to overlevel enemies, which is actually a big thing and makes the game easier due to the hit and armor mechanics).
And which things do you think need to be nerfed?
