There’s a difference from changing a flavor of a pie (making changes, but it still respects the fundamental conditions of being a pie) and turning it into a cake.
Just like tbcc should respects fundamental design goals of tbc instead of making it into something different that would no longer even resemble tbc in its design.
Pie and cake have fundamental things about then that cannot be changed without making it no longer a pie or cake.
So again, stop trying to turn my pie into a cake.
Anti Dual Spec:
Nooo, please don’t change my favorite pie recipe 
Pro Dual Spec
The baker has the final say, if enough people want to change the flavor they might just change the flavor.
Like I don’t get what’s so hard. Seems like both positions are reasonable.
Yes, when people make the claim that dual spec would damage the game the burden of proof falls on them to make clear convincing rational arguments proving it. It’s not on other people to disprove that claim
You are confused again. It’s not illegal to advocate for changes. In fact the devs asked that the players give them feedback on the changes they would like to see in the game. This is why I doubt you work for homeland security. You have absolutely no clue what is legal or illegal.
I would agree. Though some of the arguments being used are flakey.
But there is a case for adding dual spec - based on popularity. But I don’t agree with it based on it setting a precedent for there being no design based limitations to the some change clause. If we go open slather with making changes that expressly reverse the game design intentions of the original based purely on popularity then I think it will lead to a less cohesive and less fun game overall.
Also I would hope that popularity is determined in a more provable way - inhouse Blizzard polling with neutral survey design and questions polling the sample of people who actively play Classic.
Dual spec is a part of that - the sky won’t fall if it happens, but if it does it will be the first change to be made that intentionally reverses an original dev game play intention. The other changes were done to either improve the game without breaking with the original game design intention in a noticeable way or to fix an unintended consequence.
My fear with having popularity be the only limit is that this will almost inevitably lead to TBCC becoming WoTLK lite - as that on numbers alone was the more popular iteration of the game.
You’ve had multiple people explain in detail why lack of dual spec results in them playing less.
Just because those reasons don’t apply to you doesn’t mean they aren’t real.
In all honestly we should really limit the scope to dual-spec and how it changes the game.
Adding dual spec doesn’t set any precedent. Blizzard isn’t under any obligation to follow such a precedent.
It does set a precedent in terms of forum discussion. You’ll see arguments like “Well Blizzard added dual spec so therefore they should also add X” kind of like we are seeing now with other changes somehow justifying dual spec, but that shouldn’t affect the actual decision making process at Blizzard.
Correct - but the begging for various additional WoTLK features on the forum will become deafening. Again you’re right that this won’t mean the Blizzard will act on that.
Once it becomes simply a popularity contest - as far as the forums are concerned petitioning works. Obviously Blizzard will use their own discretion as to whether and when it does.
My main objection to Dual spec specifically is that I don’t think it does cause people to play more - not in the long run. And in fact I think it will lead people to ultimately play less.
My objections are to two things -
That’s up to the Devs. You can demand your original cherry pie with the exact texture and flavor of the first from over a decade ago… but the Devs have already said they’re going more fruit-like with the Classic Cherry (and other flavors) Pies, with full combo meals on the side for people with extra cash.
Just because you want to call a topping of whipped cream a cake doesn’t make it so.
Dual spec isn’t a wrath feature, it’s a general change to how respeccing works that happened to be added in wrath(and was decided on in TBC).
That is probably the most twisty turny circular reasoning I’ve yet read.
Your claim:
I don’t think classifying Dual Spec as a Wrath feature serves any argumentative purpose.
If it wasn’t the Wrath feature people were asking for, and instead it was just a button on your talent tree that limitlessly refunded your talents for free, I wouldn’t suddenly be happy with it.
There is nothing about dual spec that is strongly tied to wrath. It doesn’t have any quest lines in northrend, you can get it at any trainer, heck you can activate it long before even going to northrend.
It does in the context of intended design and backed by quotes from representatives of the WOTLK dev team and those of the original TBC dev team.
If design intention is not a limiting factor then it serves no purpose. But if it is then it becomes an important point - that dual spec was introduced as part of the design paradigm shift toward “bring the player not the class” as championed by WoTLK lead designer Ghost Crawler. That paradigm was a direct response of GC to the previous teams focus on class niches.
I think what you’re saying is that dual spec happened to come out during wrath but doesn’t necessarily need Wrath to work? Is that accurate?
Except the fact it was added in wrath based on wrath design goals for the game, which were very different from tbc design goals?
Let’s just leave that fact out right?..
Yeah but you could use similar logic for a change that doesn’t break the design but still is tied to Wrath, like Tinnitus. There’s overlap between Wrath and TBC design goals. It’s possible for a change to satisfy both.
you guys are gonna be begging for dual spec all the way until wrath classic. just give up.
blizzard can barely get TBC running currently without bugs. they are NOT going to add dual spec to TBC under these conditions. lol
I agree but the context of me arguing what I am comes on the backdrop of people quoting Ghost crawler after WoTLK release as a defence for the feature.
In using Ghost Crawlers comments on what dual spec is meant to fix as a defence (as they did) they are tying their argument to WoTLK design priorities. Otherwise why does GC’s projection in 2008 on why he thinks dual spec is good to add to WoTLK have any bearing on the discussion now in 2021? If it does then why not include Ghost Crawlers later 2015 comments on why he thinks it wasn’t a completely successful feature in retrospect.
I’m all for reducing the discussion to the discussion of the feature now in 2021. But if we do that we can’t then claim the devs idea of how got it will be in 2008 during another expansion is evidence of why it should be added now. Especially given that that expansion was part of a very well known shift in WoW design philosophy.
For reference this was the quote that sparked this line of discussion this time around:
Yes but the design intent of professions in tbc was not to have one perfection rule them all by such a large degree as drums did in actual tbc. It just didn’t see the abuse we would have seen in classic if it wasn’t changed.
The change to drums was an attempt to emulate the actual choices player made back in the day of not having 4/5th of your raid be leatherworkers as we would have seen today if the change wasn’t made.
The changes to drums and other professions made today’s players make similar choices in profewsion as they would have back then.