#somechanges eliminates your position.
Now you’re just redefining things because you want comfort.
There are no issues to address, its a key part of the game.
1 Like
Not at all, it validates it.
1 Like
How? We got Wrath and much later changes already, and the Devs already said authenticity to the original is no longer the guiding principle whatsoever so…
Respeccing already exists.
Exactly, and it comes with choices.
The big question really is. Where is the line for TBC.
1 Like
Given #nochanges is off the table? And the scope of what blizzard has already deemed acceptable as changes far exceeds dual spec?
Dual spec is fine for TBC Classic.
Maybe that was Profits intent. Maybe it wasn’t. Either way, Profits skipped the part where Profits shows Profits has a legitimate gripe. Otherwise Profits only stance is I want this and I dont care what anyone else wants to which anyone is free to tell Profits they dont care what Profits wants. There’s no real argument taking place there - just people angrily discussing their preferences and opinions.
On the other hand, people who want to play the most TBC like of TBCs and like that TBC didnt have dual specs do have a legit gripe when someone says they want to change what TBC is and was to accommodate their non TBC attitude toward TBC. Those people might be audacious enough to expect some form of reasoning that doesnt end with “because screw you”.
2 Likes
Whatever the modern community of Classic feels interested in that the Devs think best serves the community as a whole… which is another way of saying that the line is much further out than you think.
But at this point that seems to be the only gripe of the #nochanges crowd.
There are a number of different reasons a number of different people want dual spec. The benefits extend beyond just I want dual spec because “personal reason” . The people opposed have not managed to do so for why dual spec would be bad.
1 Like
…bad arguments can be refuted, which is what Profits did. All of the listed arguments are bad arguments, either argued entirely in bad faith or in direct contradiction of what is presently available in game and/or Dev comments on the matter.
The legitimate gripe is that people argue dishonestly and badly to bolster their otherwise subjective opinion. Disregarding those bad arguments doesn’t make people entitled, it makes them mature and intelligent.
When someone compares the request to Sharia Law, I don’t really have much hope for a valid conversation.
Blizzard already picks winners and losers, and those asking for a change know that some subset of the community will be the “loser” and quit or be very angry about it. Blizzard already did that with Boosts and entirely glossed over the disgruntled concerns regarding them. The point being, we know some of you are going to be angry no matter what we say or what we argue, but when you come out the gate already angry and/or equipped with bad argumentation, I don’t see why you should expect us all to treat your position as legitimate.
Dual spec isn’t about giving players the power to change specs, it’s about reducing the cost of that power. Reducing a cost is a balance altering decision in a game where a component of the challenge is getting the most value out of limited time.
1 Like
Dual Spec is about convenience, GC said so himself in WotLK.
This doesn’t actually make us more powerful unless you think AoEing Paladins have more “power” than a Rogue because of their gold farming speed…?
1 Like
Its not because no dual specs isn’t a player requested game alteration in the name of convenience. Its also more of an accurate representation of TBC which is what youre supposedly sub’d to play. Exceptions need not apply.
Its fine if thats what you want. Lobby or petition Blizz to give you your dual spec TBC server. No need to force everyone under one paradigm when that can be done.
1 Like
#nochanges is a player requested stance at this point, in the name of who knows what. And a stance that blizzard has said no longer applies to TBC Classic.
This looks like a purely semantic argument and an appeal to authority, so as far as I can tell there’s no actual content here to discuss.
There’s an argument for that. A player that is more efficient at farming gold might show up to a raid with more consumables. I think that’s pretty irrelevant to the central point but if it helps establish the notion that investment is associated with player power then I’m all for it.
Just to clarify I haven’t been talking about giving players the power to switch to a farming spec for free to help them farm gold for raid consumables, although now that I think about it, that is another indirect way that access to dual spec will increase player power.
3 Likes
According to a minority.
1 Like
I think you’d be really disappointed in the results if that actually got put to a vote 
No, dont think so.
2 Likes
Those sounds like betting words.