Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jgsugden" data-source="post: 8464830" data-attributes="member: 2629">Andy Collins (and his peers) made huge efforts to be transparent about the development of 3E and 3.5E.&nbsp; You can look back on these boards, on Andy's own message boards (<a href="https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/gameschat19968/all-f13/" target="_blank">All</a>) and on archives of the old WotC boards (as well as archived interviews with him and other people listed in those core 3E books) and get the full story - from design philosophy to playtesting to the whole 9 yards.My short hand view: They built a game that was intended to be versatile and balanced.&nbsp; They, at first, underestimated the amount to which the D&amp;D community would unite on the internet between 1999 and 2005 and did not realize how much they'd see optimization.&nbsp; They also did not realize the extent to which the community would have unified opinions that were wrong from a statistical / numerical standpoint.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jgsugden, post: 8464830, member: 2629"] Andy Collins (and his peers) made huge efforts to be transparent about the development of 3E and 3.5E. You can look back on these boards, on Andy's own message boards ([URL="https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/gameschat19968/all-f13/"]All[/URL]) and on archives of the old WotC boards (as well as archived interviews with him and other people listed in those core 3E books) and get the full story - from design philosophy to playtesting to the whole 9 yards. My short hand view: They built a game that was intended to be versatile and balanced. They, at first, underestimated the amount to which the D&D community would unite on the internet between 1999 and 2005 and did not realize how much they'd see optimization. They also did not realize the extent to which the community would have unified opinions that were wrong from a statistical / numerical standpoint. [/QUOTE]

Verification