It must and should be today. I will die if it’s not today:eek:
:D:D
we will get it ^^ maybe later but at the end or better called on release date (october), we will all play it 
maybe we get 2 masteries hmm. AoM did the same with us and we are still alive 
with the way the dev progress is unfolding and deadline before 2019, let me be prophet and say that we will only have 1 mastery. Guaranteed on that;)
There’s that guarantee thing again.
at least that saves us from constantly hearing you gripe about the new mastery in one way or the other…
I’m still hoping to see two new masteries. An illusionist would be really fun and fits the upcoming atmosphere.
We already have an Illusionist - you change your costumes there.
Main spell to the mastery, “Wardrobe Change” against the enemies of Cairne. You’re on to something!
i am not against another mastery apart from Oathkeeper but adding 1 more requires a lot of work ( much balancing and effort than making a game mode)and poor zantai can only handle so much stress. A paladin like mastery is more than enough.
A separate 10th mastery DLC is good though for 2019
Not really. It’s just an illusion you know.
Already said they wouldn’t be doing that sort of thing either. :rolleyes:
I think there is a high chance that we will see gear/weapons.
Any if they do show that, i bet they will tease a new mastery skill name on that, just to torment us.
Mastery DLC packs won’t happen because it fragments the player base even further.
From 25th May stream:
“If you ever decide you’re not going to make another GD expansion , would you consider doing New Mastery DLC’s?
Probably not. Each new mastery is expotentially more timeconsuming to do than the last, so if we were to do a mastery DLC that would be almost a good chunk of work as a new expansion would so I’m not sure how likely that is to happen. Not to mention that adding a new mastery would fragment the community further than a new expansion in the base game.”
What does “fragment the community” even mean? I get how adding more DLCs in general could negatively “fragment the community” but adding more masteries is the kind of fragmentation you want, if you want to call that fragmentation. Also, are they really using fragmenting an online community as a reason for not creating more content for a SINGLE PLAYER GAME?
Note: I don’t actually want more DLC (outside of fixes and minor updates) after this next expansion. I’d rather see their resources being used on GD2 and/or other new titles.
There are people already complaining how they need AoM to play with friends because they have AoM but that person doesn’t it. Small DLC packs fragments it even further by forcing people to buy a thing they might not lke (granted, this can be applied to expansions too).
Sure, the game is single player focused, but multiplayer is a thing and this is one of the things that needs to be taken into account when making dlc.
I think the first part of Zantai’s reply is mostly the reason. The amount of work involved given it has to be balanced with everything else in the game is almost as much as making a new expansion. So from a financial point of view another expansion would hopefully see a better return than just a single mastery DLC.
it means there will be players that own the expansion and players that do not. Those that do cannot play MP with those that don’t
Also, are they really using fragmenting an online community as a reason for not creating more content for a SINGLE PLAYER GAME?
the game has optional MP, and the obvious answer here is ‘yes, why else would they bring fragmentation up’
The game being mostly SP obviously means there is less of a negative impact from fragmentation however
I would think that an epic single player oriented story/lore conclussion to prep the waters for GD2, via DLC post FG makes lots of sense and would be financially viable vs an entirely new mastery.
Heres hoping my dream for a showdown and semi-closure with the Council of Five or sorts of 
Any chance that these specially dropped sets would be linked to the character build you are playing with specifically?