Hi,
I’m pretty sure this may have been mentioned before as it seems a big issue in the build’s section, but what are the chances that attribute points will become re-fundable in a future patch?
Redesign your builds, be smarter the next time. You can still do this if you look hard enough.
I don’t really see why not, especially since this is one of the more unintuitive aspects of the game. Make it expensive as everything else but possible.
Agreed. I don’t see why not either.
Really, this has been asked for so many times and it simply isn’t going to happen. If it was the devs would have done it by now.
I don’t see what’s unintuitive about placing your points. Melee/ranged: Cunning and Physique, Caster: Spirit/Physique. Pretty much the same as in every other RPG I’ve played.
every game in this genre requires you too invest majority of points in health. So that means Physique.
Then pick Cunning or Spirit depending on the description it gives. Spellcasters tend to grab Spirit for some gear and energy to cast spells. Cunning for piercing/bleeding stuff like poky daggers and arrows.
Yeah, I know it’s been suggested for a long time, but just want to cast my voice in. Although I do plan my builds accordingly, it will be easier to shuffle attributes a bit according to gear available at the particular moment. Asking for it doesn’t hurt, so, yeah, why not? Still, it doesn’t need to be official feature, TQ Defiler worked fine back in TQ for that purposes.
Then you can wait until GD Defiler is done.
Yeah, been waiting on this already. It seems Soul’s went missing, though. Hope he’s okay!
+1 to make this happen.
You sound like the kind of person that would lecture a homeless person about how he should have paid more attention in math class when he was 10.
On topic:
If it’s possible to code, there is no reason for not being able to respec attributes. Especially since the game changes so much from patch to patch.
Difference being the homeless person can’t be 10 again, but we can make new characters.
Having not found any of the higher level heavy armor and not knowing the phys. requirements, I would have liked to be able to refund those points I put into cunning to wear them.
I also have to say that this should be added by the devs.
The simple fact of the matter is the paltry amount of assignable attribute points you get per level is good for little more than the quick assignment to allow certain items to be worn.
This is due to the fact items themselves give far exceedingly better returns for attribute gains and classes specifically focus a character towards set attributes.
There is literally no conceivably good reason ‘not’ to allow a character at cost to respec their attributes as the gear requisite balance dictates.
Simply put if you do not want people doing this constantly throughout a characters ‘career’, then make the cost based on a per point exponential increase in iron over said ‘career’.
Perhaps have, like certain other games, at specific points in the game earn refunds that can be used 1 time to refund a set amount of points?
You can if you download a GD trainer.
They should be refundable without a 3rd party utility. The only thing that shouldn’t refund are points put directly into a mastery.
Why allow refunds on attributes, but not on mastery?
Any reasonable build will max its masteries anyway, to make the 50-mastery skills available. Plus, what the points in masteries do is straightforward and rather unchanging. Attribute points, not so much. Different attribute point spreads are needed for different packets of skills within the same masteries.
Devotions repec, skill points respec. Equipment obviously does. There’s no non-elitist argument for attribute points not refunding.
As I play the game, I’m always loathe to spend my attribute points because of their non-refund-ability. I’m still on my first playthroughs and have no clue what I’ll eventually need where. (And I am the kind of person who avoids spoilers/build guides/etc… as most people are.)
Seems like an argument to allow it. After all it doesn’t impact anything. So why not?