Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="francisca" data-source="post: 998791" data-attributes="member: 9734">From the Sean Reynolds rebuttal:===============True, and again this is a problem stemming from the brand team. Other than &quot;make 3.5,&quot; the brand team didn't give R&amp;D much direction as to how far they should go with the changes. Should it be just an incorporation of errata and rewrites of confusing rules? No answer. Should it be a step forward in the evolution of D&amp;D, a hybrid between 3.0 and whatever 4.0 would be in the future? No answer. So the designers made changes they thought were needed and others that they thought would improve the game, but weren't really told when to stop. The result is a game that's much like 3.0 but different enough to require relearning of your game memory and reflexes.==============Excuse me, but it seems to me that the R&amp;D team should the group that decides when to stop.&nbsp; Not the brand team.&nbsp; I mean come on!&nbsp; If the R&amp;D team can't decide what is revised content and what is new edition material, then who can?&nbsp; Dunno if SKR is trying to deflect heat from his pals still at WOTC, but in my estimation, it is up to the R&amp;D to reign themselves in on revision.&nbsp; If 3.5 is a slushy mix of revision and new edition, then the responsibility for it falls squarley on the shoulders of R&amp;D, especially if the brand team gave them no direction.Chalk me up as another &quot;3.25&quot; player.&nbsp; I'll get the SRD and house rule stuff in.&nbsp; More than that, I'll do so sometime in 2004, after reading posts here on ENWorld.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="francisca, post: 998791, member: 9734"] From the Sean Reynolds rebuttal: =============== True, and again this is a problem stemming from the brand team. Other than "make 3.5," the brand team didn't give R&D much direction as to how far they should go with the changes. Should it be just an incorporation of errata and rewrites of confusing rules? No answer. Should it be a step forward in the evolution of D&D, a hybrid between 3.0 and whatever 4.0 would be in the future? No answer. So the designers made changes they thought were needed and others that they thought would improve the game, but weren't really told when to stop. The result is a game that's much like 3.0 but different enough to require relearning of your game memory and reflexes. ============== Excuse me, but it seems to me that the R&D team [B]should[/B] the group that decides when to stop. Not the brand team. I mean come on! If the R&D team can't decide what is revised content and what is new edition material, then who can? Dunno if SKR is trying to deflect heat from his pals still at WOTC, but in my estimation, it is up to the R&D to reign themselves in on revision. If 3.5 is a slushy mix of revision and new edition, then the responsibility for it falls squarley on the shoulders of R&D, especially if the brand team gave them no direction. Chalk me up as another "3.25" player. I'll get the SRD and house rule stuff in. More than that, I'll do so sometime in 2004, after reading posts here on ENWorld. [/QUOTE]

Verification