Removing Attribute Requirements: Unlocking Build Diversity in PoE 2

I’ve been playing PoE 2 and noticed that attribute requirements on gear severely limit build diversity. For example, a passive node allows spells to cost life instead of mana, but creating a warrior with high health (via Strength) to cast spells is impossible because the Intelligence requirements for high-level spells and staves are too restrictive. This forces heavy Intelligence investment, which undermines the health-based build and limits mages to energy shield for defense.
Another passive node heals teammates based on maximum health, suggesting a Strength-based aura build with a scepter, but scepters require significant Intelligence, which reduces the health pool and diminishes the effectiveness of the node. In contrast, building a melee character with high Intelligence and energy shield is easier, as Strength-based armor gear can still pair with energy shield, but melee weapons are locked behind Strength requirements.
Removing attribute requirements from skill/support/spirit gems and items would resolve this without being overpowered since power largely comes from passive tree investment. For instance, putting all points into minion damage and equipping a melee weapon would not make that weapon effective, but it would allow flexibility for unconventional builds.
Existing passives like the one allowing two-handed weapons in one hand could simply be reworked to slightly reduce damage instead of tripling attribute requirements.
Class uniqueness would remain intact, as starting positions on the passive tree and ascendancy choices still define archetypes, ensuring players have reasons to choose specific classes for their builds.

I totally second this!

On the trade market there are only 2H´d maces with 100 INT req... why?!

nope. That's why Diablo is piece of sh.. There's no diversity of builds due to lack of atributes. Because everyone using one OP combo as it's not possible to balance everything around everything.

it's core and the most important stuff for balance.

I 100% agree with you & Raxxanterax pointed this out as well in his state of POE2 video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWbOQOSuZZ0[/span]

"

saashaa#5518 wrote:

nope. That's why Diablo is a piece of sh. There's no diversity of builds due to the lack of attributes. Everyone uses one OP combo, as it's not possible to balance everything.

It's the core and the most important thing for balance.

This is going to do the same thing only 10 times worse on top of forcing players to pick attribute points they don't want but must pick so they can where there gear.

For diversity reasons I would say remove the weapon association of skills. Other than maybe some outliers like shield charge

This is a common argument and on its surface it sounds like it makes sense:

"If you want people to do whatever they want then remove all the restrictions so people can do whatever they want!"

Let me slice enemies with my mace, dual wield shields, stack strength and still cast spells! Ultimate freedom! Sounds great right?

---

If you are familiar with the idea of strategic collapse then you'll know why this does not work. Games have goals and players play to meet those goals. Optimization is inevitable.

"No! Games aren't about optimization, they're about fun!"

Yes, people play games *for fun* but the game systems themself encourage optimization to overcome their goals and challengs. Some people like to optimize *for fun*, can you believe it? You might not, but others do.

So what does this mean? Strategic collapse is when choices disappear because other choices that are already made are better (or at least believed to be better). Choice disppears because it has already been made once before.

If you don't believe me just look at how people recommend you play Path of Exile:

"Just look up a build guide or it's unplayable!"

"Look up a build and follow it or nothing will make sense."

"Game is impossible without a build."

(Or some other sentiment like those - but where does the information come from in the first place?)

With restrictions there can be lots of diversity because every strategy has trade-offs. Without restrictions you don't need to make sacrifices so it's more likely to result in less diversity after strategic collapse.

That's just a feature of game systems and human psychology whether we like it or not.

---

As an aside:

There is a phrase: "Players will optimize the fun out of everything."

This is common but also a bit confused. Optimization *is* the fun for many people. However, when you reach the end (as you believe it) then there is nothing left to optimize. The fun is still there for others (if you let them have it), but unless your game can offer you more things to optimize for then there will be a limit to that fun.

Quite specifically: layers of restrictions compounded with layers of freedoms create a huge amount of lines of optimization for people who enjoy that. So in the end there are two types of players:

1) People who enjoy the task of refining and optimizing based on the game's limitations.

2) People who enjoy the result of an optimized strategy (such as those who play others' builds).

It is different types of fun for different people.

If they remove restrictions, they will remove choice, and player type #1 will have nothing to do.

I think completely reove it is kind a bad idea, but it really need some adjustment for sure.

for a example that potentially effect almost everyone:
Blink aura: atleast about 139 int as I remember
Shield charge: 25 str

So almost every int build that can afford a low investment(or no investment) can use blink+shield charge swap trick for massive improvement of movement.

But if you're a str or dex build, you need to sacrifice your second weapon passive set to get the blink.

Another big W for es build, HP build sucks lul.

The attributes required for high level skill gems could plausibly start from a lower initial point so the top end isn't as high. Running a high level skill gem or high value base is a choice that is handled by solving the required attribute needs.

There is tension between freedom and costs when it comes to build goals versus viability.

Flexible attributes on the tree already are a massive enabler for build mixing.

The travel distance between major zones on the passive tree is short.

Without repercussion or opportunity cost, build identity suffers. You propose the better options should be a free-er choice, but this is in direct opposition to diversity given no one will choose sub optimal builds.

Base gear type currently has minimal interaction with a character build given they hardly have specific stat rolls available to them outside of stats pertaining to the defense stats themselves.


Consider the following:

-Pure defense bases have higher requirements, hybrid are lower
-You don't have to use the highest attribute requirement base and can limit your allotment of effort towards attributes
-Level and reach attribute appropriate nodes on passive tree
-Attribute rolls on gear
-Attribute stat requirement reductions on gear
-Attribute appropriate necklace base selection
-Anointing attributes
-Adaptive Catalyst for attributes on jewelry
-Using appropriate soul core to shift attribute requirements
-Corrupting appropriate attribute implicit onto item (cheap unique/jewels are good targets)

There are plenty of tools available. Future updates adding in weapons/skills/supports/classes/ascendancies/uniques will only add width to the tool kit to help enable you to get to where you want to be.

The stat requirements are a bit to high bit removing them entirely is stuup.