I think you can, if you want to, but it's not relevant.

Right now we are at the point, where there will be no RTwP in the game, and that's almost 50% of voters preferred way of how combat should look like.

So it not as having Unreal Tournament with only Deathmatch and CTF as a paid extra. It's like having a possibility to play the game you've been waiting for 10 years in a way you like for 5$ more, or not play it that way at all.

It's just as simple, as telling backers "folks, we decided to go TB, but after the release we will make a paid DLC, so those who prefer RTwP will be able to play it this way".

They can even go "RTwP Kickstarter" and say "we will make it for 50.000$, if there's enough interest in it".

How's that the same, when alternative is not having RTwP at all?
Really? Right now I'd be delighted if they told me I'd be able to play RTwP for just 5$ more.

Personally, that's a pledge withdrawal, no matter which system is chosen.
I have no problem with people preferring one system over the other, and I do have faith that T:ToN will have a proper system, whichever that may be. Offering to sell me an additional combat system that I may or may not want is a no-no though.

Let me give you a few hypothetical examples.

Grim Fandago 2. Control scheme is kinect. Pay $10 to add gamepad support.
Shadow Warrior. Keyboard only. Pay $10 to add mouse support.
Age of Wonders 3. Touch controls only. Pay $10 to add mouse support.

Would you pay extra to have a control scheme you could use, or would you not buy the game?

Yep, really, especially considering, as you pointed out, that pretty much half of the backers voted for the RTwP system. So, as JMich pointed out, it would mean half of the backers have to cough up more money. I'd be pissed as hell about that, actually.

Wrong example : I would trade my 2 hands to play an AOW3-touchscreen-only ! Don't underestimate fanboyism ;p

Otherwise you are right, one game at one price is an adamant concept. Wandering even a little out of that path is a window opened on all kind of sour marketting practices ...


Edit : and I wanted to underline that making a hybrid combat system à la Fallout : Tactics (which is a game I love btw) generally leads to a double watered down experience.

And quite a few people would prefer to have T:ToN be turn based instead of RTwP. Whether all of them would pay extra to be able to do so is a different concept.
Oh, and I think you should poke AoW's developers, they may be willing to add touchscreen support. I know Civ V has for example.

Sure, if I wanted to play the game, and prefer to play it with the controls that are not supported in the main release, I don't even understand why you need to ask this. If it's the only way, and I want to play the game, then sure I'd pay for it.

Also, what I'm suggesting is not the same as offering something that should be in the game, but was cut out and devs ask for money for it. It's like doing full game (with all the components) the way devs wanted to do, and then - doing more, for money, of course.
I can't understand that. I'm pissed I won't be able to play it with RTwP. I backed Torment with more than 100$, and I would pay at least another 100$ if that would bring me RTwP in this game. I'd be very happy, if I could do it for only 5$.

I don't have problem paying for more content. But I don't see control schemes as content. As I already said, if they do introduce a paid dlc to add a control scheme, I will be looking to revoke my pledge, as I guess quite a few more.

Oh, and if the game does play well with a system you or I find inefficient, why should another control scheme be in the game? Would you ask for gamepad support on Starcraft, or Kinect support for Unreal Tournament?

Happy to see TB is leading! I love TB if done right. And looking at Wasteland they seem to be capable of implementing a TB system.

I guess we won't understand each other, then. Because I find it mind-boggling that you'd pay extra (and especially a high amount) to get something they should provide in the game in the first place. I don't think RTwP or TB is the same as extra content like missions or other DLC. This is a core game mechanic. If it were presented as paid-for DLC... yeah, I'd be out. Now, if they decided to do it as DLC down the road for free, then I'd be fine with that.

I think you don't realise that it's easier to make more content that to make completely new combat scheme. It's much more work than making some more quests.

I also think that you may forget about revoking your pledge, even if they would do such thing. You will get exactly what you paid for, after all. And if they decide to make some more options for gamers, after the initial release, it's not the base to revoke the pledge.

Why another control scheme? Because there are people who would like to pay for it is good enough, right? At least I am, and they can ask their backers, after all.

If I was a Starcraft player, and Blizzard would say: vote, gamepad or keyboard, and people would vote keyboard, while I would prefer gamepad, then yeah, I would ask Blizzard if they were kind enough to make gamepad support, and I would pay for it, if they decided they release it as a paid DLC.

I think we are a bit closer to understand each other, because you just need to make two assumptions:

1) it's not like they should provide that in the game. They should provide a combat scheme, and they will. It will be TB, and that's it. They will do what they promised. RTwP is something that should not be provided in the game, it's an extra bonus.

2) another combar scheme is much more than extra content. As you said, it's like changing core game mechanics. It's more work to do.

After exploding their initial goal, stacking countless milestones with very broadly estimated content ..... making a DLC for gamepad support could be considered a shit move OR a bad planification OR an answer to a real need which justifies an additionnal mark up because the GUI has to be remade which proves that a bad design choice has been made at some point ...

Point is : this is the kind of feature you don't "add later" in that kind of game. If it's not part of the design from the start, it is very hard to seamslessly integrate.

Please, god, no. Something as integral to design as RTwP vs TB just can't easily to 'switch out'. It doesn't work. Pretty much any game that offered that had far worse combat, all together, than games that stuck to one or the other.

Whatever system they choose WILL influence encounter design, how (and how many) skills you can use / utilise, how many opponents are manageable and how the game flows, all together, and all sorts of other core design aspects of the game. This is not just something *optional*. I prefer TB, but I'd much much rather them going for RTwP if they must then to attempt this [even with additional funding they'd have to re-balance and re-do any and all combat encounters and tweak the skills, as mentioned and then patch your game. As this one, in particular, is meant to be a story driven game for and foremost I just don't think that'd be worth the effort.]

Sure, it's more work to do. The problem is the division of the voters for which system they'll go with. It's pretty much evenly divided. So how does the faction that doesn't get the combat system they voted for swallow a 'too bad, so sad, we decided you guys have to pay extra to get the system you want'?

I can see something like a paid DLC for whichever system they choose if it's a minority of buyers that want that system. But when it's a group of backers that represents pretty much the same percentage (i.e. those that want RTwP are almost the same number that want TB), how do you justify saying "You guys (TB) get what you want, but you other guys (RTwP) have to pay extra to get what you want"? That certainly would not sit well with me.

Turn Based 6760
Real Time w/Pause 6512
Indifferent 711

Note " This vote is for advisory purposes only and the final decision will be made by the development team through the careful consideration of all factors.

We’re planning for Torment’s combats to be hand-crafted and relatively few in number. We will be emphasizing quality over quantity and “trash mobs” won’t be part of the game."

I wonder how much of a factor the final vote is going to be?. If its overwhelming for one over the other

Personally I think they are going to do what they did with the stronghold. Since the votes are so close, they'll probably try to incorporate both. Whether they succeed or not remains to be seen.