Do you think WotC tried to keep-up and keep things balanced even as they continued to add base classes (and other stuff that increased complexity)? On the assumption that they did, how did they do it (aside from errata, magazines, and the 3.5 release).
I was never really into D&D before, so I'm curious on what WotC did/tried to do to make sure everything workd (assuming they did) before they decided to reboot with 4e (aside from using the methods mentioned above). Basically, I'm trying to see how non-software mediums go about "patching" or "bugfixing" their work, particularly in this case.
Well in the first place, the 3.5 PHB wasn't really balanced. There were improvements compared to 3.0 (i.e. the Ranger and the Bard) but a class like say, the Monk, was still pretty much ineffectual. Then there was the D&D-assumed imbalance: spellcasters were "weak" at the early levels but came to dominate the higher levels.
Each new supplement gave varying results. The Samurai class for example was sub-optimal compared to the Fighter. Psions operated on a different power scale compared to other spellcasters. Some classes became popular, such as the Warlock, although it had limited support. Others became a testbed for 4E such as the Marshal class and the Tome of Battle classes. Of course in many ways, balancing isn't that big of a priority since D&D is a cooperative game and not a PVP game.
One "patching" or "bug fixing" they did was in the 3.5 PHB 2 where the Fighter received more feats related to his class.
However, there is only so much "bug fixing" you can do to a system. For example, D&D 3.XX doesn't address the imbalance the CR system can provide (i.e. I can make a monster that's theoretically CR 10 but in actuality is significantly much more effective than its proposed CR value). Even game systems that have chosen to remain 3.5 (i.e. Paizo's Pathfinder) have made revisions/changes to the game.
D&D 4E however is distinctively different from the previous version of the game and is not simply an "upgrade" (which was what 3.5 was in comparison to 3.0).
In other hobbies, the non-software patches varies. Magic: The Gathering issues errata or simply changes the metagame with old expansions cease being tourney legal. Some CCGs issue "magic bullets" or the equivalent of sideboard cards to combat dominating strategies. Board games tend to have expansions which fix some things the original game wasn't designed to do (i.e. a 2 or 3-player game of Ticket to Ride).
_3696.gif)
_3218.gif)
