Apologies, I'm having trouble quoting for some reason.
Um. Nevermind. Your quote just showed up, literally while I was typing in a blank quick reply. These forums need a new foundation. Too creaky when it gets windy outside.
Anyway...
Originally Posted by Flooter
Originally Posted by JandK
I really don't follow.
I doubt I'll use respec at all unless it's for something I want to test.
I won't even notice it unless I talk to Withers. Same with hirelings.
I was thinking specifically of multiclassing. (Respec and hirelings don't bother me at all).
I get a good deal of enjoyment out of just sitting and thinking out the ramifications of particular build decisions. I like comparing tradeoffs, seeking out synergies, etc. If it turns out that multiclassing is always better than not multiclassing, then there are fewer real decisions to be made. If the value of a game (to some gamers) is tied to the number of interesting decisions it contains, then reducing the number of interesting decisions reduces the value of the game (to those gamers).
There may be some dramatics in expressing this or similar sentiments, but I'd say that nobody likes to see their expected value go down (or perceived value, as the game aint out yet) and that holding interest in a game for 1000 days of early access requires some level of passion. Strong emotions come with the territory.
Yeah, I love to build characters and lose myself a little bit in the process.
As far as the multi-classing concerns:
1. I don't care about the stat requirement stuff.
2. The spell progression issue is something we need to learn more about. Right now, I'm not sure we have anything official about the way it's working. But yes, if you take one level of Wizard and then 11 levels of cleric and end up with 6th level spells in each, that will probably end up getting addressed in a future patch. It's just, that sounds so ridiculous to me that I don't think it's worth worrying about until we know what the actual system is.
