Or that wants to move away from the cookie cutter spec and just play around with different covenants/bind/conduits.
Great post Furrymental. Thanks for commenting on my post too, appreciate it! 
This needs to be stressed as much as possible. People need to stop trying to turn this debate into a Mythic World First Racer vs Casuals. It is anything but that. SO many casual people, including myself and the OP of this thread, do not like this system. This has nothing to do with the 1% vs everyone else.
1 Like
Ironically, your name describes Ralph
Even some role players don’t like the system.
There are “hard core” rpers. And there are rpers that enjoy change and flexibility. The latter get punished similar to the min/maxers.
1 Like
I think this is the crux of the whole disagreement. If you CAN change your covenant at the drop of a hat, it will be like Blizzard is telling you you SHOULD. And then other players will start telling you you should. And that will feel just as bad for a different set of players. (Bigger, smaller, who the heck knows? Probably not even Blizzard at this point.)
If covenant changing is obviously a big deal then it’s obviously unreasonable for someone else to tell you “go Venthyr for this run/boss/etc”. So most people won’t, and the few that still do will be laughed at. If covenant changing is effortless then that will just be the default expectation.
This is where the 0.1% argument comes in – for actual world first racers they really MIGHT do that even if it does take a week, because it’s literally their job. (See also: race changes.) But anyone else will say “lolnope, we’re doing this with the covenants we have”.
How the systems are designed affects how people will play around them.
That’s not true at all.
Giving players options and freedom of choice doesn’t mean they SHOULD.
Players in the game today don’t change to “meta” builds or class specs.
And even if those things ARE restricted - the community pressure to be “Meta” doesn’t go away. You’ll still be sat/removed/declined all the same for not being “meta”; but instead, players won’t even have the choice to be a team player - they’ll just get to sit on the sidelines and stick to easy content while everyone else gets to keep playing.
3 Likes
That’s like removing all choices from players because you have no restraints.
I wouldn’t have a problem with the ‘locked-in’ feature so much if I could actually trust the Blizzard would have some kind of balance to the system… Or won’t nerf something in x.1, x.2, x.3 because it is now deemed to powerful… You know the standard fare around here.
I don’t think lock systems like this are bad for single player RPG’s, but for an MMO where nothing is static and where the dev’s are constantly changing things and not thinking through all of the possible impacts… No it isn’t suitable.
1 Like
Homogenization always feels attractive from a balance or fairness perspective, but it is insidious and always ends up diluting out any flavor or character.
Having to make choices with actual consequences is a good thing. Having to make compromises is a good thing. Things don’t have weight otherwise, and that makes things feel meaningless.
valid point. These restrictions make more sense in a single player RPG, not an MMO.
There we go - I fixed that for you.
You are probably one of those savages that puts ice in your whiskey. 
Diluted and flavorless are for some people. There is no accounting for taste.
Playing with limitations and restrictions makes for diluted and flavorless gameplay.
Being able to make choices, change things up freely, and to experiment creatively makes for vibrant and enjoyable gameplay.
I don’t put ice in my whiskey - I also don’t only drink whiskey. I like to drink lots of beverages because I want to avoid a diluted and flavorless palette over the years.
1 Like
I don’t drink whisky. I do drink good tequila tho.
That is what alts are for. If you want a different build then make a different character ala Diablo 2. MMORPGs are all about pluses and minuses. Every character should have multiple very near everlasting choices to make that tweak their character in some way. This way no two characters would ideally be exactly alike. Obviously with min/max mindset whatever someone discovers as the ‘best’ build gets copied by everyone BUT… now we have people choosing which covenant to pick based on the end game they most want to focus on. This means we have 3 ‘best’ builds based on M+, Raids, or PvP. Everyone will not be the same.
That’s such a horrid solution to a problem that is completely avoidable.
Many players pick their class specifically because it can play in a varied way. Forcing alt-play is just a way to pump more player metrics like “time-played”. These are disrespectful to players.
1 Like
Sometimes the player base is ‘we want choices to matter but we want all the choices’.
So Blizzard is trying something new. The end of the world (of warcraft).
1 Like
It is not avoidable because Blizzard has said they are going forward with the choices being lasting with covenants. Blizzard has made their choice and just like pathfinder they are going forward with this feedback be damned.
Yeah I guess that’s one way to kill a game I suppose.
But because changing races is so costly (literally), it’s very rare for anyone to say “OK guys, we’re going to need to all change races for this next encounter.” Or “LFG Waycrest+20, night elves only”.
It HAS happened (some guild all changed to trolls for Jaina IIRC, and there have been all-NE MDI teams). But it is very rare and for 99%+ of players such a suggestion would be – rightly! – regarded as utterly insane.
That’s the intended model for covenants: just pick one and do everything with it.
Is my agency being diminished by not being able to talent into Shadowmeld or Da Voodoo Shuffle at any time for free? Well, maybe in a sense. But it doesn’t ruin my enjoyment of the game.
I definitely agree with that, but that can be achieved by making all four paladin abilities useful to all three specs in raids, M+ and PVP.
If players weren’t so quick to label all but one option “doing it wrong”, then people would have more freedom of choice – regardless of whether the choice is short term, like spec/role and talents, or long term, like class and race (and now covenant).
Some choices are character-defining and some are tactical.
Both types can co-exist in a game like this, and both can be fun.
One type allows me to create my character’s identity, and the other is more about how I approach a particular instance or encounter.
The concept isn’t the problem. No one really expects all the classes to be the same, it’s expected that each class will have some strengths and weaknesses, but WoW has become so hyper-focused on tiny performance differences over the years that even class identity has been eroded quite a bit at various times (loss of buffs and utility, homogenization, etc.).
Part of that is on Blizzard, not entirely, but players have that mentality because the game’s design encourages it. So it’s not going to be easy to move away from it.