"is strong enough for Thorn, who have sold hundreds, to recommend a 32 spoke, 26 inch wheel for heavy touring."
I'd be more impressed if they offered them in 36 and Thorn was still recommending that size hole spacing for their bikes. Hard to seriously consider it on a 700c. Keep in mind that a wide staying base from wideset flanges is actually weaker, relative to the in-line loads. It's stronger as regards the diagonal and banking loads. In other words, ride endlessly down straight roads with a load on your bike, or land heavy jumps, it's weaker (for the same spoke count). Do a lot of switchbacks or leave the bike sitting there unused, it's stronger. Sounds sorta like it's stronger where I don't need it. And anyway it's 4 pounds. Is the 32 stronger than a 48 on DT hugli, because you can have that and a big wadge of cash in your pocket. You could probably carry an extra rear wheel for what the R costs in dollars and rotating weight. You could carry an extra 2 derailleur and stay on budget. You could run 719s, they never break.
I was looking at an online source for the Rohloff and daring myself to jump in last night. So I ran the numbers on the Harris site. The ratios for the Rohloff are worse than a 7 speed, with 3 chainwheels. The straight line rations are reasonably comparable, I would choose the R. ratios (though with a derailleur system I could build more Rohloff like ratios if I wanted to). With double shifts there isn't any comparison, the derailleur win hands down. Double shifts are a pain, but they are worth it if you have the opportunity to stay in a particular gear for a while and you can get closer to your optimal cadence, which is usually the condition where I get most done. And that is a 7 speed, if you want to work in more gears the argument is even more one sided.
The only problem with the Rohloff is the initial price. I'm sure I would have tried it at least once if I didn't have to consider it so carefully. It's certainly worth the price, it's just that not having owned one, the numbers from price, to weight, to strength, to ratios, are not encouraging by themselves.