(Source) After the announcement of the removal of yet another point-mashing feature (seen in our coverage of the press event), many are wondering how the Diablo III team rationalizes not having skill points while preaching customization to the masses. A user on the official Battle.net forum board brought the question to Bashiok's table, who responded with the sentiments of the team.
Their explanation leans back on the "it's not Diablo II" argument which has been touted since the game's announcement back in 2008:
Official Blizzard Quote:
We've been playing the game, we know what skill points were causing, and it was not interesting and unique builds. It was not meaningful customization. It was maxing out a couple skills, and that's it. It was Diablo II. What we have now actually forces people to make interesting choices, to craft interesting builds based on very strict limitations.
But the Diablo III team wants the latest game in the series to go beyond, as they see it, another shortcoming they saw in Diablo II's skill system. Bashiok says that "one common mistake people are making is thinking all the class skills are straight damaging attack skills... There's no variety because you just pick the most powerful six, and you're done."
Their latest iteration of the skill system essentially splits what would have been called passive and active skills in Diablo II into two exactly that: passive and active skills. Where passive skills are invested in separately and contribute to your character's brawn in secret, regular skills are the ones you will use to blast your enemies into gooey bits, as well as zip around the screen at lightning speeds and issue combo attacks. Not all of these skills are straight damage dealers. Some of them allow resource regeneration or life steal, which adds another level of tactical flare to your combat experience.
Whereas in the past you would have used skill points (awarded at each level-up) to augment the power of your favorite skills (or the potency of synergies), the new skill system in Diablo III scales your skills based on your level. In addition, runestones, including their numerous tiers, affect the look, feel, and effects of your skills. Beyond them, gear directly affects your battle potency. Bashiok laid out a Diablo II scenario for demonstration:
Official Blizzard Quote:
The base problem with skill points is that we found they simply put too much incentive toward pumping up one or two skills. If we wanted to balance the game it means we'd have to let someone be able to essentially beat the game with that build since it's the most obvious. You're not going to put a few points here, a few there, you're going to go the D2 route, horde points, and dump them all into a core skill or two. It really limited builds since points always went toward specific types of attacks that scaled well with additional points, and we're not going to keep systems that are stifling (viable) build potential and (meaningful) character customization.
So, removing functionality encourages customization? While many would argue the case of stat point removal for Diablo III, this might not be exactly the same thing. Regardless, this solution does directly address the "one or two skills" scenario (Diablo II cookie-cutter builds, anyone?), so maybe it is a big step in the right direction.
Interestingly enough, the removal of skill point allotment indirectly addresses yet another controversial topic: respeccing. Many have argued that allowing for respeccing caters to a "softer" gaming audience and drains the game of an element of challenge (just take a look through a 2008 article's responses). Without skill points, there's no longer any need for respeccing. Whether or not this appeases more hardcore players is another question entirely.
Force had some excellent one-on-one time with Jay Wilson to get the full story straight from the Diablo man, himself. Wilson talked about everything leading up to the latest decision, including observations from alpha testing and conclusions drawn from prior strategy scenarios in the older games.
But does all this wishy-washy skill softness mean something more than encouraging more diverse builds? As a user on the Battle.net board asked, "Do you come upon a particularly nasty group that this other skill would just be perfect for, so you hang back, grab that skill, then destroy the group?"
Bashiok did not shoot the idea down entirely:
Official Blizzard Quote:
You're far more likely to see a player sticking with a build and working to become better at it than constantly swapping around. That's not a rule, it's player psychology so there's going to be a wide range of variables, but it's what we have found to be true not only for Diablo III, but a lot of the games out there with similar free-swapping of builds.
The removal of skill points seems like a step away from the spirit of the franchise, instilled in us with Diablo II. It will restrict cookie-cutter and low-skill-count builds to an extent, and it indirectly removes the need for a controversial respeccing system. But it is a far cry different from the original games and many "Diablo clones," possibly alienating parts of an otherwise eager audience.
Levelling up is going to be pretty boring now all of our choices are made for us, and I think I'll grow sick of swapping skills around all the time for different areas. I liked it back when our actions had consequences.
Once again Im just going to have to ride this out and see how it all pans out in game. Maybe what we all remember and love about D2 isn't required to have a great time in D3. We shall see....
I have absolutely no problem with the skill points removal, I am all for this and to me it seems like a nice idea, but, please, Blizzard, please increase the player limit to 20-30, please... That's all I'm asking...
Do you mean the number of players partying together in a game? A 500% difference is a pretty huge change and they said it would make combat very chaotic.
This doesn't solve any of their problems they are stating it does.
How does this remove the 1-2 skill scenario? He says you cannot go around just WW everything and win, really? Only way to stop me from doing that is to make immune to physical monsters or make a big ass cool-down or drain on resource for it, which in turn means I would get another skill to accommodate that hinder.
Doesn't want cookie cutter builds or to go online to figure out best builds. Ok, so now that we own every skill Jay, you are trying to tell me that noone in the world will figure out a top tier build for PvP or for MF and post it online and it won't be followed? Did this guy even play Diablo 2? They obviously could not make lower skills enticing like they claimed they were so they went with this system where it's free so why not use it.
Why not keep respec, allow us to add skill points maybe only 1-5 per skill, that way we can still build the characters we want without everyone being the same damn character. You might make your barbarian all damage, I might make mine have more defense tho, that is customization. You can keep the scaling of skills but at least let us have some choice beside grabbing up 6 free skills which honestly is not that hard to do like he makes it out to be. 1 Buffer, 1 debuffer, 2 power skills with good resource or cool down management and D3 is a wrap, and how could it not be your character is essentially a god.
Yea, I'm not buying any of this. They are just being lazy. Instead of balancing skills so people actually have more than a couple of viable builds they are just throwing the entire concept out of the window.
If there is a lot of interaction between skills this system is great.
I think this is a really difficult point.
Think about the following: Skill synergies in Diablo 2 sounded awesome at first. But if you think about it, when you wanted to use Frozen Orb for example, you HAD TO put 40 to 60 points in 2 or 3 synergy skills, otherwise the build/skill was not useable in endgame.
If you now have interaction between specific skills in Diablo 3, you kind of enforce the same mindset. If you for example have a skill that freezes the enemy and another skill that exploits this, then you basically say the player "If you take the freezing skill, take THIS skill as well" (or vice versa)
I dont think this will be good for diversity.
On the other hand, if there is no interaction between skills, we have to see if there is then a need for "builds" in the traditional sense anyway.
I think this is something which needs iteration by the testers at blizzard...a lot of it
I don't necessarily mean skills that are designed to be used together and only that way, I mean skills that just happen to compliment each other. If they want to use the term "Build" at all there needs to be complimentary skills (I'm forced to not use the term synergy) otherwise they might as well call it "set of skills I happen to find interesting at the time"
Yea, I'm not buying any of this. They are just being lazy. Instead of balancing skills so people actually have more than a couple of viable builds they are just throwing the entire concept out of the window.
I second this.
Instead of making a balanced working system, with, I dont know, a skill point cap limit per level or something like that, they're just dumping the whole point system.
People is still going to take the same super damage skills, and the super deadly skill+gear killer combo. It's gonna happen, with or without points.
Come on! There's a lot of people designing this damn thing, couldn't they come up with something better than that?
We've had enough of this, It's just not fair!
We deserve better from them.
1) OK, I understand the no necessity of maxing skills. But what about the replayability of the same classes? One thing that I loved about D2 was that after making a bow amazon I could start over with a javelin amazon, and it would feel like the whole new game again. Now there is no need at all to make a new character of the same class? This does reduce replayability, doesn't it?
2) Some time ago Bashiok said that with the automatic attributes level-up would still feel like a "level-up". But now without skill points, what is keeping the level-up from "Great, I'm a little stronger in everything I always used and can use better gear"? Does this seem like a "level-up"? Or am I missing something?
It only took me about 4 hours of playing D2 to become disenchanted with the skill system. I don't know why people love it so much. The insane diminishing returns made actually maximizing builds tedious and unrewarding and the addition of synergies later just exacerbated the problem by forcing an even greater point expenditure just to max your chosen skill. As Jay pointed out in the interview, you were forced to pick a skill or two to focus on which stifled diversity. And what if you wanted to try a different build? Reroll, start from level 1, and grind out everything once again.
This new system, on the other hand, completely removes those problems. It lets the players enjoy every aspect of their class and tailor it to fit their style without cringing every time they have to drop another point in the same skill just so they can keep progressing. Furthermore, since they'll know exactly how powerful the base skills are at any given level then they'll know exactly how strong to make the enemies in order to provide the appropriate challenge. The true variables are equipment and runes, the latter of which essentially lets you choose from ~100-110 different options for those six active skill slots.
Some people are really upset by this decision. Nothing wrong with that. But let's maybe give the game a chance before deciding that it's completely ruined. I fully expect that most of the naysayers are going to come around and find D3 to be just as rich and rewarding as they found D2. As for me, I've never been more excited for this game than I am right now.
From my vantage point, I'm not too fond of this approach. I feel that the original plan worked fine. I felt that the skill restriction of having only 7 skills was enough to make the player choose which of those skills to level hard. For example, if I was given 60 points to allot to 7 different skills, I'd put 40 of those points into 2 skills and the other 20 I'd find a way to fit them in so that they make sense. OR I'd find a way to allot all 60 points into 3 skills. That would be a part of the customization, which is what Diablo is supposed to be all about.
I'll have to play the game to find out if I like the system, but as it stands from my point of view, it doesn't feel like you can actually create a bad build - which I think bad.
It only took me about 4 hours of playing D2 to become disenchanted with the skill system. I don't know why people love it so much. The insane diminishing returns made actually maximizing builds tedious and unrewarding and the addition of synergies later just exacerbated the problem by forcing an even greater point expenditure just to max your chosen skill. As Jay pointed out in the interview, you were forced to pick a skill or two to focus on which stifled diversity. And what if you wanted to try a different build? Reroll, start from level 1, and grind out everything once again.
This new system, on the other hand, completely removes those problems. It lets the players enjoy every aspect of their class and tailor it to fit their style without cringing every time they have to drop another point in the same skill just so they can keep progressing. Furthermore, since they'll know exactly how powerful the base skills are at any given level then they'll know exactly how strong to make the enemies in order to provide the appropriate challenge. The true variables are equipment and runes, the latter of which essentially lets you choose from ~100-110 different options for those six active skill slots.
Some people are really upset by this decision. Nothing wrong with that. But let's maybe give the game a chance before deciding that it's completely ruined. I fully expect that most of the naysayers are going to come around and find D3 to be just as rich and rewarding as they found D2. As for me, I've never been more excited for this game than I am right now.
They already fixed your problem when they removed skill trees and let you just pick and choose skills. Now this is another step forward from that, soon we will all start at level 60, or wait maybe 59 3/4.
Ok, so I dont know if I am missing something here or not. People are arguing that they are basically taking out the players choice and consequences for their actions because you can freely choose which skills to use at any given time (which I agree). So, what if the player still had to choose which skill to use out of their 6 and they could not change it after they selected it. The skills still scale with level and are made more powerful. With that being said, you keep respec in the game to change your 6 skills that are alotted to you. This way, the players choices have consequences, there is a cost to change skills around, and this still eliminates the skill system. I just dont think that people should be able to choose whatever skill to use at any given time, that just doesnt make since to me. You are going to use whatever skill set is effective for whatever types of monsters you are fighting at that time and change it as you go. I dont feel like people have to make very many decisions and everything is handed to you on a silver platter. If anything, they should make it where it costs the player something to change their 6 skills around...by thats just me, anyone see any problems with this?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~ Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them ~
From my vantage point, I'm not too fond of this approach. I feel that the original plan worked fine. I felt that the skill restriction of having only 7 skills was enough to make the player choose which of those skills to level hard. For example, if I was given 60 points to allot to 7 different skills, I'd put 40 of those points into 2 skills and the other 20 I'd find a way to fit them in so that they make sense. OR I'd find a way to allot all 60 points into 3 skills. That would be a part of the customization, which is what Diablo is supposed to be all about.
I'll have to play the game to find out if I like the system, but as it stands from my point of view, it doesn't feel like you can actually create a bad build - which I think bad.
Why ? Why is it bad, not being able to create a bad build?
I simply cannot understand this argument.I simply cannot. Is it fun for you, failing everytime with a build? Is it fun for you having to restart and rewind everything, all the time, because you choose poorly, and because the design system is flawed?
Most people will probaly agree that this isn't a whole lot of fun. Part of what made Diablo 2 bad, was exactly the way, that bads builds were really bad, and that locking yourself into this, made the game even more skewed in a weird way.
You said u wanted to make all skill points into 3 skills, yet you had to choose from 7? That doesn't make any sense to me. Having only 3 skills out of 25 or whatever, is a bad system design.
6 skills is a perfect nr cos blizzard have internal information about skills that you don't.
Because it feels awesome to finally make a good, viable build when you've failed a few times. It's rewarding.
Ok, so I dont know if I am missing something here or not. People are arguing that they are basically taking out the players choice and consequences for their actions because you can freely choose which skills to use at any given time (which I agree). So, what if the player still had to choose which skill to use out of their 6 and they could not change it after they selected it. The skills still scale with level and are made more powerful. With that being said, you keep respec in the game to change your 6 skills that are alotted to you. This way, the players choices have consequences, there is a cost to change skills around, and this still eliminates the skill system. I just dont think that people should be able to choose whatever skill to use at any given time, that just doesnt make since to me. You are going to use whatever skill set is effective for whatever types of monsters you are fighting at that time and change it as you go. I dont feel like people have to make very many decisions and everything is handed to you on a silver platter. If anything, they should make it where it costs the player something to change their 6 skills around...by thats just me, anyone see any problems with this?
This is exactly what a couple of other people and I have asked for. It retains their system and allows us to actually make choices beyond putting them in our skill bar.
Ok, so I dont know if I am missing something here or not. People are arguing that they are basically taking out the players choice and consequences for their actions because you can freely choose which skills to use at any given time (which I agree). So, what if the player still had to choose which skill to use out of their 6 and they could not change it after they selected it. The skills still scale with level and are made more powerful. With that being said, you keep respec in the game to change your 6 skills that are alotted to you. This way, the players choices have consequences, there is a cost to change skills around, and this still eliminates the skill system. I just dont think that people should be able to choose whatever skill to use at any given time, that just doesnt make since to me. You are going to use whatever skill set is effective for whatever types of monsters you are fighting at that time and change it as you go. I dont feel like people have to make very many decisions and everything is handed to you on a silver platter. If anything, they should make it where it costs the player something to change their 6 skills around...by thats just me, anyone see any problems with this?
This is exactly what a couple of other people and I have asked for. It retains their system and allows us to actually make choices beyond putting them in our skill bar.
Ok, I must have missed a post or something somewhere, because I really dont see anything wrong with this. It combines some of the two systems, creates consequences for players actions, and also could possible create another balance/cost to reduce gold in game...I just dont want Diablo 3 to be another walk in the park...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~ Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them ~
1. If you want to make a new character and stick with specific skills, then do that? What is the problem? Why do you need to make 50000 new characters? That's stupid. But it's there for u if u want. You can make 10 characters right now, so do that. You can always delete your char if u dont like it and start over, or u can strip all your skills. Start a new character and do another build if u want.. do that.
2. Levelning up, you gain, more powerful spells, powerful rune effects and new items, new powerful spells, just cos u dont have a little button to click, doesn't mean anything..
All your stuff increases when u level-up. That's nice and powerful. Just go look in your inv.
1. There is really no need at all to make a new character since you could only make a lvl 60 character and switch skills. This is not about stupidity or need to make 50000 chars, it is about relevant choices and about the developing of a character to try a build. Now you can try a build simply changing the lvl 60 character skills. It's easier, as using a trainer and making a level 99 character and choosing the skill point allocation also was, but is not as fun as starting over and FEELING the build in every part of the game. I always loved the first 20-30 levels far more than the last ones.
2. I don't know, does that feel relevant to you? A completely automatic level-up? The level-up is the climax of every RPG, it can't go like "Oh, another level, what can I do now? Oh, i am stronger, that's all.".
I am not trolling nor am saying that the system will be bad. I am just trying to grasp how this system deals with the aspects I've risen, that are very important to me.
Ok, so I dont know if I am missing something here or not. People are arguing that they are basically taking out the players choice and consequences for their actions because you can freely choose which skills to use at any given time (which I agree). So, what if the player still had to choose which skill to use out of their 6 and they could not change it after they selected it. The skills still scale with level and are made more powerful. With that being said, you keep respec in the game to change your 6 skills that are alotted to you. This way, the players choices have consequences, there is a cost to change skills around, and this still eliminates the skill system. I just dont think that people should be able to choose whatever skill to use at any given time, that just doesnt make since to me. You are going to use whatever skill set is effective for whatever types of monsters you are fighting at that time and change it as you go. I dont feel like people have to make very many decisions and everything is handed to you on a silver platter. If anything, they should make it where it costs the player something to change their 6 skills around...by thats just me, anyone see any problems with this?
This is exactly what a couple of other people and I have asked for. It retains their system and allows us to actually make choices beyond putting them in our skill bar.
1. You don't know ANYTHING about limits and costs of respecs or anything yet... wait for it before you complain, there will be costs and respec limits.
2. Respeccing skills in 6 + 3 is not that easy and fast, once you choose your skills you are supposed to stick with them for a while, so choose wisely.
3. Runestones makes you focus on which 6 spells you want to be using alot, so, you don't want to just use all spells all time. You want to use the spells you think is fun and the spells which u play with best, and focus on them with runes, items, gems etc..
4. You can't switch spells on the fly, while in combat, or even in a dungeon.
5. Not being able to change the 6 spells you choose, would be the same as D2 in away, you CAN always respec, if u wanna try anothe rbuild, and u can always refocus ur runes, but it takes alot of cost and work to do so.
1. Respeccing is gone with the new system, so yea...did I miss your point?
2. Since Respeccing is gone, you can easily change your skills back and forth on the fly. No need to choose wisely..
3. I agree that runes will make you stick with some skills, but once you start using high level runes, you would have already found the build that works best for you and stick to those skills.
4. I havent seen a quote stating that you cannot change skills in a dungeon? Please provide...
5. As it stands now, you can change skills freely and there is no cost to you. That is why I want players to choose their skills and it is locked until you respec. Which needs to be added to the current system.
Honestly, I think you might be confused regarding the new system and that respec is out the window...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~ Some people are still alive only because it is illegal to kill them ~
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Their explanation leans back on the "it's not Diablo II" argument which has been touted since the game's announcement back in 2008:
Official Blizzard Quote:
We've been playing the game, we know what skill points were causing, and it was not interesting and unique builds. It was not meaningful customization. It was maxing out a couple skills, and that's it. It was Diablo II. What we have now actually forces people to make interesting choices, to craft interesting builds based on very strict limitations.
But the Diablo III team wants the latest game in the series to go beyond, as they see it, another shortcoming they saw in Diablo II's skill system. Bashiok says that "one common mistake people are making is thinking all the class skills are straight damaging attack skills... There's no variety because you just pick the most powerful six, and you're done."
Their latest iteration of the skill system essentially splits what would have been called passive and active skills in Diablo II into two exactly that: passive and active skills. Where passive skills are invested in separately and contribute to your character's brawn in secret, regular skills are the ones you will use to blast your enemies into gooey bits, as well as zip around the screen at lightning speeds and issue combo attacks. Not all of these skills are straight damage dealers. Some of them allow resource regeneration or life steal, which adds another level of tactical flare to your combat experience.
Whereas in the past you would have used skill points (awarded at each level-up) to augment the power of your favorite skills (or the potency of synergies), the new skill system in Diablo III scales your skills based on your level. In addition, runestones, including their numerous tiers, affect the look, feel, and effects of your skills. Beyond them, gear directly affects your battle potency. Bashiok laid out a Diablo II scenario for demonstration:
Official Blizzard Quote:
The base problem with skill points is that we found they simply put too much incentive toward pumping up one or two skills. If we wanted to balance the game it means we'd have to let someone be able to essentially beat the game with that build since it's the most obvious. You're not going to put a few points here, a few there, you're going to go the D2 route, horde points, and dump them all into a core skill or two. It really limited builds since points always went toward specific types of attacks that scaled well with additional points, and we're not going to keep systems that are stifling (viable) build potential and (meaningful) character customization.
So, removing functionality encourages customization? While many would argue the case of stat point removal for Diablo III, this might not be exactly the same thing. Regardless, this solution does directly address the "one or two skills" scenario (Diablo II cookie-cutter builds, anyone?), so maybe it is a big step in the right direction.
Interestingly enough, the removal of skill point allotment indirectly addresses yet another controversial topic: respeccing. Many have argued that allowing for respeccing caters to a "softer" gaming audience and drains the game of an element of challenge (just take a look through a 2008 article's responses). Without skill points, there's no longer any need for respeccing. Whether or not this appeases more hardcore players is another question entirely.
Force had some excellent one-on-one time with Jay Wilson to get the full story straight from the Diablo man, himself. Wilson talked about everything leading up to the latest decision, including observations from alpha testing and conclusions drawn from prior strategy scenarios in the older games.
But does all this wishy-washy skill softness mean something more than encouraging more diverse builds? As a user on the Battle.net board asked, "Do you come upon a particularly nasty group that this other skill would just be perfect for, so you hang back, grab that skill, then destroy the group?"
Bashiok did not shoot the idea down entirely:
Official Blizzard Quote:
You're far more likely to see a player sticking with a build and working to become better at it than constantly swapping around. That's not a rule, it's player psychology so there's going to be a wide range of variables, but it's what we have found to be true not only for Diablo III, but a lot of the games out there with similar free-swapping of builds.
The removal of skill points seems like a step away from the spirit of the franchise, instilled in us with Diablo II. It will restrict cookie-cutter and low-skill-count builds to an extent, and it indirectly removes the need for a controversial respeccing system. But it is a far cry different from the original games and many "Diablo clones," possibly alienating parts of an otherwise eager audience.
If there is a lot of interaction between skills this system is great.
How does this remove the 1-2 skill scenario? He says you cannot go around just WW everything and win, really? Only way to stop me from doing that is to make immune to physical monsters or make a big ass cool-down or drain on resource for it, which in turn means I would get another skill to accommodate that hinder.
Doesn't want cookie cutter builds or to go online to figure out best builds. Ok, so now that we own every skill Jay, you are trying to tell me that noone in the world will figure out a top tier build for PvP or for MF and post it online and it won't be followed? Did this guy even play Diablo 2? They obviously could not make lower skills enticing like they claimed they were so they went with this system where it's free so why not use it.
Why not keep respec, allow us to add skill points maybe only 1-5 per skill, that way we can still build the characters we want without everyone being the same damn character. You might make your barbarian all damage, I might make mine have more defense tho, that is customization. You can keep the scaling of skills but at least let us have some choice beside grabbing up 6 free skills which honestly is not that hard to do like he makes it out to be. 1 Buffer, 1 debuffer, 2 power skills with good resource or cool down management and D3 is a wrap, and how could it not be your character is essentially a god.
I second this.
Instead of making a balanced working system, with, I dont know, a skill point cap limit per level or something like that, they're just dumping the whole point system.
People is still going to take the same super damage skills, and the super deadly skill+gear killer combo. It's gonna happen, with or without points.
Come on! There's a lot of people designing this damn thing, couldn't they come up with something better than that?
We've had enough of this, It's just not fair!
We deserve better from them.
1) OK, I understand the no necessity of maxing skills. But what about the replayability of the same classes? One thing that I loved about D2 was that after making a bow amazon I could start over with a javelin amazon, and it would feel like the whole new game again. Now there is no need at all to make a new character of the same class? This does reduce replayability, doesn't it?
2) Some time ago Bashiok said that with the automatic attributes level-up would still feel like a "level-up". But now without skill points, what is keeping the level-up from "Great, I'm a little stronger in everything I always used and can use better gear"? Does this seem like a "level-up"? Or am I missing something?
This new system, on the other hand, completely removes those problems. It lets the players enjoy every aspect of their class and tailor it to fit their style without cringing every time they have to drop another point in the same skill just so they can keep progressing. Furthermore, since they'll know exactly how powerful the base skills are at any given level then they'll know exactly how strong to make the enemies in order to provide the appropriate challenge. The true variables are equipment and runes, the latter of which essentially lets you choose from ~100-110 different options for those six active skill slots.
Some people are really upset by this decision. Nothing wrong with that. But let's maybe give the game a chance before deciding that it's completely ruined. I fully expect that most of the naysayers are going to come around and find D3 to be just as rich and rewarding as they found D2. As for me, I've never been more excited for this game than I am right now.
I'll have to play the game to find out if I like the system, but as it stands from my point of view, it doesn't feel like you can actually create a bad build - which I think bad.
Ok, I must have missed a post or something somewhere, because I really dont see anything wrong with this. It combines some of the two systems, creates consequences for players actions, and also could possible create another balance/cost to reduce gold in game...I just dont want Diablo 3 to be another walk in the park...
1. There is really no need at all to make a new character since you could only make a lvl 60 character and switch skills. This is not about stupidity or need to make 50000 chars, it is about relevant choices and about the developing of a character to try a build. Now you can try a build simply changing the lvl 60 character skills. It's easier, as using a trainer and making a level 99 character and choosing the skill point allocation also was, but is not as fun as starting over and FEELING the build in every part of the game. I always loved the first 20-30 levels far more than the last ones.
2. I don't know, does that feel relevant to you? A completely automatic level-up? The level-up is the climax of every RPG, it can't go like "Oh, another level, what can I do now? Oh, i am stronger, that's all.".
I am not trolling nor am saying that the system will be bad. I am just trying to grasp how this system deals with the aspects I've risen, that are very important to me.
1. Respeccing is gone with the new system, so yea...did I miss your point?
2. Since Respeccing is gone, you can easily change your skills back and forth on the fly. No need to choose wisely..
3. I agree that runes will make you stick with some skills, but once you start using high level runes, you would have already found the build that works best for you and stick to those skills.
4. I havent seen a quote stating that you cannot change skills in a dungeon? Please provide...
5. As it stands now, you can change skills freely and there is no cost to you. That is why I want players to choose their skills and it is locked until you respec. Which needs to be added to the current system.
Honestly, I think you might be confused regarding the new system and that respec is out the window...