*shrug* The beauty of the game is in experimenting with different skills. You can say that Larian designed the game so that classes can use skills from different "paths" -- that's why they're not called class skills but rather paths, IMO.
There are all kinds of hints like "invest some points in enchant weapon" that apply to Survivors and Mages as well. IMO the warrior is the only class who can actually put ONLY points into warrior skills and still finish the game successfully. Just buy a lot of restoration potions, get some good armor, a good weapon and you're all set.
Anyway, the different skills as they are right now are not completely balanced, so that's why you run into problems when you only focus on ones for a specific class (elven sight vs. ranger sight, elven sight obviously is way better). This is a problem that will hopefully be resolved, but I still think that the skill system should be left as it is right now.
I guess we've come full circle then. All I'm saying is this: "Allow experimentation and diversification, don't REQUIRE it"
I like games where you have strict classes. You can go through the game and say "Ah, this is how it feels going through as a mage/warrior/etc." But I don't mind games that let you branch out either, as long as I don't have to.
Yes, the skills are called paths, but there are most definatly 3 different classes - 6 if you count male and female.
If you want us to expiriment don't make classes. Gothic is a good example of a game that doesn't have classes. You are what you learn. I haven't played gothic yet (bought it yesterday), but rest assured If I want to be a warrior or mage or whatever and I find that I can't do that and that I must be a hybrid, then I will have the same complaints.
Is it really that hard? To me this is a win/win situation. You can satisfy people like me and those who want to diversify! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />
