A few more DiabloWikiBashiok posts today, on this and that.

    He posted a follow up to yesterday’s lesson about the unrevealed, unique, non-mana resources the Wizard and Monk (and 5th char?) will be using. It’s kind of vexing to read if you’ve been following the debate, since most of the B.net forum comments are from people who apparently just heard about this feature, and are mostly stuck at stages 1 and 2. Join me again in lamenting the fact that Blizzard’s CMs aren’t allowed to post in community site forums.

    If the resources are different, will they act in different ways?

    Bashiok: That’s the idea.

    Using all different resources kills flexibility, unless you give each class access to every resource, in which it just adds unnecessary complexity. I’ve already discarded the Barbarian as an option because it used a “different resource”, but since all characters use different resources now, I’ll probably just stick to 1 class and only have a fifth of the gaming experience. Also, way to set yourselves up for more problems when you want to release multiple expansions with new classes.

    Bashiok: Kills flexibility how? Flexibility where exactly? And what is necessary or unnecessary is certainly debatable. I don’t think anyone is denying that it’s a lot of extra work. Sure we could just give every class mana and call it done. We think this will be a lot cooler and more fun. Why would you discard a class because it uses a different resource? Or not play multiple classes? Very odd sir. Very odd.

    A fan asks why there were so few skills in the skill trees at Blizzcon vs. earlier this year. His question is kind of weird, since he uses this image vs this image, thus comparing the Barbarian to the Monk, who only had 8 skills included in the Blizzcon build. (Better to compare Barbarian to Barbarian.) Furthermore, the Barbarian’s skill tree as of Blizzcast 8 was considerably pared down from the initial 50+ skills he and the Wizard had when they were playable in Blizzcon 2008. Bashiok answers, but in a general way.

    When we changed the trees from each tree only unlocking tiers within itself, to the side-by-side approach where points in any tree would unlock the entire next tier in all trees, we could obviously then get rid (merge) a lot of the passive skills. So we then don’t need that many skills, don’t need as many spaces, and the trees shrink in size. Nothing was lost, just that the redundant passive skills were removed. Nothing to worry about, the number of actual active skills is the same.

    edit: It should be noted that the Monk and Barbarian obviously don’t have the same amount of skills shown, but the OP was referring to the number of places skills could exist. The actual size of the trees.

    Elsewhere, Bashiok answers a question about LLD with a reply that’s mostly about twinking.

    We haven’t talked about any PvP, and it’s going to stay that way for now.

    I think in general though twinking is a meta game, and while we wouldn’t design specifically for it (encouraging a player to stop leveling is just kind of weird from a design standpoint) I doubt we would take any steps to purposefully break it.

    And in two final, very short replies, Bashiok makes an appropriately one-letter reply to a fairly pointless comment about the WD and expresses his support for the DiabloWikiLacuni.

    You may also like