Please reconsider gender-locked classes for PoE2

I was considerably surprised when, during ExileCon, I realized that you were sticking with gender-locked classes for Path of Exile 2, especially considering how you seem determined to rework, expand on, reinvent, or replace more or less every single other aspect of the Path of Exile experience.

I don't play male characters if I can help it. It feels bad! It's a gender thing. I haven't made a single character in Path of Exile that isn't a Witch, Ranger, or Scion, and I don't intend to change that.

I was looking forward to PoE2 with the hope that I wouldn't be limited to half of the passive tree and a handful of ascendancies. Instead, with no Scion, it's looking like my options will be even more limited.

I realize that there's probably not much that can be done at this point. But maybe consider letting us choose our character, and then letting us also choose where we start on the passive tree?

Please reconsider gender-locked classes for Path of Exile 2. It feels bad.

Thank you.

I share your sentiments regarding the gender-locked classes in Path of Exile 2. It's indeed perplexing to see such limitations in a game that otherwise appears to be embracing a vast array of innovations and improvements over its predecessor. Player character identification is a significant aspect of the gaming experience for many, and it's understandable that you would prefer to play characters that reflect your own identity or preferences.

Having clones of the same character model can indeed disrupt the sense of immersion, and it seems like an opportunity for the developers to introduce more diversity and personalization. The ability to choose a character's gender independently of their class could enhance the role-playing aspect, allowing for a more inclusive and immersive experience.

The suggestion to allow players to choose their starting point on the passive tree is an interesting one, as it would provide flexibility while still retaining the core gameplay mechanics that fans love. It's a change that could potentially satisfy both the narrative concerns and player preferences.

No, go back to reddit.

is probably to much work for something that will get buried under armor and cosmetics.

best bet is to create 2 models one male and one female and then let players select the class, everyone will be using the same 2 models but as said before once the armor and cosmetics start to add up it wont matter.

"

Ethak wrote:

it's understandable that you would prefer to play characters that reflect your own identity or preferences

I really don't get this. I've never had any issues playing female or male or non-binary characters, or gay or straight or bi or asexual characters, cis or trans characters, even in games that are far more immersive than ARPGs. I don't have any issues playing characters whose identity and/or preferences don't align with my own, because they're not me, and frankly it's boring and potentially unhealthy to only engage with or consume content that aligns strictly with whatever narrow set of properties defines you specifically.

I'm not a hulking superstitious brute, but I play marauders.
I'm not an old religious fanatic with a fear of wearing pants, but I play templars.
I'm not a misanthropic survivalist living off the land, but I play rangers.
I'm not a professional murderer, but I play shadows.
I don't do any sort of competitive fighting, but I play duelists.
I don't even believe in the existence of magic, let alone try to practice it, but I play witches.
I was not born into wealth or status, but I play scions.

"

AxiomOfAnarchy wrote:

I'm not a professional murderer, but I play shadows.

that's what a professional murderer would say..

The "classes" are, themselves, characters. They have backstories, personalities, and motivations of their own independent of the player.

This post is comparable to complaining that you can't play Male Karlach or Female Gale in BG3.

Through experiencing each class while playing the game, the players get to experience a little bit of an alternate view of Wraeclast. Could the developers add a less-defined character class that is either male or female similar to the Bhaalspawn origin on BG3? Probably, but what would the value in that be? Do the writers have a spot in the story for a "mysterious stranger" with unknown background and can they get some value out of that? That's up to the writers.

"

AxiomOfAnarchy wrote:

I really don't get this. I've never had any issues playing female or male or non-binary characters [...]

Same here. It's like not being able to read a book because the main character isn't a certain way.

GGG stated multiple times that you are not playing a witch but THE witch.

Thats a fixed character in the world of Wraeclast with a fixed background, storyline and whatnot.


I highly doubt its about implementing another 3d model or recording voice lines thats holding them back but the writing and storytelling going forward.
Most people, including myself, dont care about the story whatsoever and simply want to kill monsters and become a godlike character, which is perfectly fine.

However, I can see how having to write a storyline with multiple outcomes, voicelines for NPCs and whatever else is needed, all of it depending on the character gender, could become a nightmare GGG doesnt want to deal with - and thats fine too.

LMFAO