Almost every complaint about the ShB job changes could be solved with talents

[battleshadow66]

Just because people disagree with you, you're calling them toxic?

Ironically, looking at his own posts here, he was the toxic one.

[GrenGarm]

Ironically, looking at his own posts here, he was the toxic one.

I haven't attacked anyone personally. I've tried my best to refute their arguments arguing against my point. If that makes me toxic, then so is literally everyone on this forum.

[reyre]

I haven't attacked anyone personally. I've tried my best to refute their arguments arguing against my point. If that makes me toxic, then so is literally everyone on this forum.

I agree you havent, nor should you, but you arent refuting anything, literally your post boils down to: Its a straw man arguement or its fun because it gives player choices. The first part is pointless and is more akin to an ad hominem than straw man but not the point really. The second one while its true that said system might be fun for the players it also raises questions, what kind of system? what kind of talent tree? what makes this system better than others? other than the idea of flexibility what are the advantages? will it really be flexible? what about group content how will it work then? how will those talents work? ...etc

Yet as i said before your only argument is it will be okay because the devs might not screw up and its fun. That doesnt really an answer to any of those questions and if people uses your example to say or ilustrate why that system might be bad, you call that straw man argument, if one creates an example of its own to do the same ilustrate how and why could be a bad system (just like you use examples of why it might be a good system) you call that a straw man argument.