You too can be a D&D developer!

Well, pretend to, at least. WOTC has an article about what development is on their site. At the end, there is a quiz they used to give people looking for a job as a developer (I'm assuming they use a different quiz nowadays). I'll include the questions as well as my answers:
[bq]1. In D&D, class and race are crucial elements that define a character's role in the party and his place in the world. It's no coincidence that they're among the most important game mechanics for developers to understand.

a) What is the most powerful class in the Player's Handbook, and why is it the most powerful?

b) What is the least powerful race in the Player's Handbook, and why is it the least powerful?[/bq]
A: I think the most powerful class in the PHB is the druid, with competition from the cleric. They have powerful spellcasting abilities, decent combat capabilities (especially when wild-shaped), and pretty good skills. In addition, they have an animal companion that will often be a holy terror in combat, they can spontaneously summon more animals to help them, and they can wild shape to get lots of different capabilities in a highly flexible way.
B: The half-orc. They have negative stat adjustments, a racial ability that's not unique (Darkvision), and another that's mostly negative (the most common effects that are linked to being considered an orc are dwarves getting +1 tp attacl you and being affected by orcbane weapons.

[bq]2. Longstrider is a 1st-level ranger and druid spell that increases movement by 10 feet for 1 hour per level. Is this spell more powerful, equally powerful, or less powerful than most 1st-level spells? Why do you think this is true?[/bq]
I don't think it's a particularly powerful spell, though it does have its uses. +10 ft of movement isn't that impressive, especially since the spell has a range of personal and most druids and rangers will stick to light armor, thus already having decent movement (it would be more impressive if you could cast the spell on the dwarf tank to compensate for his poor movement).

[bq]3. The concept of the "swift action" (as described in such books as Expanded Psionics Handbook and Complete Arcane) is a relatively new addition to D&D. Why were swift actions (especially swift-action casting time spells) added to the game? What's the downside of adding swift actions to the game?[/bq]
I think they were added because there was need for something between a "pure" free action and a move action - something you could do while doing other stuff, but still with a limit. They are especially useful for abilities that "self-buff" a character, like many of the Psychic Warrior powers. Actions are one of the most limited resources characters have, so a character that has to spend precious actions prior to combat beefing himself up would be pretty weak - but buffing and fighting is fun.
As for downsides, they do add complexity to a system that's already enormously complex, and they do eat up a quarter of a page in each book where they're used (since they're not in the core rules, they need to be explained).

[bq]4. You're part of the development team for the next D&D sourcebook. If these two feats were part of the design turnover, what are some comments that you would make about them?

Arcane Defiance
Your knowledge of one school of spells enables you to better resist spells from that school.
Prerequisites: Int 12, Spell Focus in the chosen school, ability to cast one spell from the selected school.
Benefit: Select one school of spells that you can cast and for which you have the Spell Focus feat. You get a +1 bonus on saving throws against spells from that school.

Burning Barrier of Breath
You can channel the power of your breath weapon to create a barrier of flames.
Prerequisites: Cha 13, breath weapon.
Benefit: Use your breath weapon to cast wall of fire.[/bq]
Arcane Defiance is incredibly weak, both compared to Spell Focus and the save-increasing feats (Great Fortitude etc.). +1 to saves against one school is worth much less than +1 to save DCs when casting spells from that school, mostly because you don't decide what spells someone will cast at you. Also, +1 to approximately 10% of all saves (assuming the spells you get cast at you are split evenly across schools, and a significant number of saves are against non-magic things like poison) is a lot weaker than +2 to a third of all saves (Great Fortitude etc.). I would increase the bonus to +2 or +3. Also, the Int prerequisite should be an odd number, if it's going to be there at all (I don't think it's needed, really - like I said, it's not like this is a powerful feat).

Burning Barrier of Breath is just confusing. First, why should a black dragon (who spits a line of acid) be able to create a wall of fire with his breath weapon? Does it count as a use of the BW? What is the caster level? Can you put the Wall anywhere you like (like the spell) or is it somehow limited to the area covered by your BW? Frankly, I'm thinking this feat might be beyond rescue.
[bq]5. You're part of the development team for the next set of D&D Miniatures. If this model were part of the design turnover, what comments would you make about it?

Ruby Golem
Cost: 38
Faction: CG
Type: Construct
Level: 8
Speed: 4
AC: 22
HP: 80
Melee Attack: +4/+4 (10)

Special Abilities
Fearless
Regeneration 5 (heal 5 damage each time Ruby golem is activated)
Sonic weakness (Ruby golem cannot regenerate damage from sonic attacks)
Magic Immunity (Whenever a spell is cast on ruby golem roll 1-10 the caster gets the spell back and it has no effect, 11-20 the caster loses the spell and it has no effect.)

Warband building
Ruby Golem can be played in any warband but costs an extra 5 points and loses fearless if he is not in CG.[/bq]
Sorry, I have no clue whatsoever about D&D Miniatures.
[bq]6. Your development team has decided that this rule is mechanically balanced, but the team lead tells you that it needs to be rewritten for clarity. How might you rewrite this rule and why?

While this effect affects you, your Reflexive saves are improved by +2 if you're a rogue or other kind of character with evasion, except when she's flat-footed or loses her AC Dex bonus, in which case she doesn't get any bonus, but if she has improved evasion improves you to +4.[/bq]
You get +2 to Reflex saves if you have Evasion, or +4 if you have Improved Evasion. You lose this bonus when you lose your Dex bonus to AC for any reason.
[bq]7. Describe a game mechanic (from a game other than a roleplaying game) that you think is good, and explain why you think it's good.[/bq]
(Damn, can't think of any at the moment)

The ruby golem is problematic for the following reasons:

1. Melee attack (and damage) are too weak for the point cost; the other stats seem alright, although Speed 4 and high AC don't fit the flavor of CG very well.

2. Sonic weakness doesn't really work with DDM, as it increases the bookkeeping and slows down play. Sonic weakness should be the same as other energy-based weaknesses.

3. Magic Immunity is also more trouble than it's worth; it should be replaced by Spell Resistance All (Ignores all spells), which is a standard ability for golems.

4. Warband building is just bizarre. First, I don't think I've ever seen a creature that grants itself warband building. If they wanted to make it available for other factions, they should just make the faction Any and be done with it. Second, there is no mechanical reason for the golem to cost more if not in a CG warband, as I don't see anything in his stats that has a huge synergy with typical CG warbands. Finally, a golem can't lose Fearless, because he is a Construct, and Fearless comes from the Construct type, not the faction.

5. The golem needs a bit more oomph to be ever really considered for a warband. He is a decent meatshield, but he is really too slow for CG. As written, even taking my previous comments in account, the golem will never see play. He needs a defining ability, as most 30+ point creatures have one.

I'm so looking forward to Mike Mearls answers. (What did he get wrong? )

Sorry, I have no clue whatsoever about D&D Miniatures.

Click to expand...

I've seen a lot of that on the Wizards thread recently.

Here are my comments on the Ruby Golem.

* For the cost of the figure (and its other stats), the +4 attack bonus is too low; it won't damage most other figures. The Level vs. HP seems off as well.

* Sonic Weakness requires a memory of what type of damage is done, something that DDM tries to avoid. It would be better to place the Double Damage from Sonic Damage ability, which already exists in other forms.

* Magic Immunity is superfluous; it doesn't properly reflect the D&D RPG, and Spell Resistance All is more standard for existing DDM golems.

* Warband Building has traditionally been part of a commander effect. Changing figure stats based on warband alignment has been done, but it is troublesome to remember. This is doubly so with point costs. It is easier to just let it stay in one faction, and have commanders bring in constructs with their own warband building effects.

* CG is the wrong alignment for such a figure: high AC, slow speed and low damage figures are more traditionally Lawful. (Although Clay Golem is an exception)

For the other questions:
1a - Most powerful class

The most powerful class in the Player's Handbook is the sorcerer. They have incredible access to a range of devastating spells, and any holes in their spell selection can be plugged by the application of metamagic. For the ability to destroy large numbers of enemies at once, or one at at a time, the sorcerer comes out on top.

1b - Least powerful race

The Half-Elf has this inenviable status. This is due to none of its bonuses being related to the core "power" of D&D: combat. Instead, it has bonuses for the social side of D&D, which is extremely DM dependent in application.

2 - Longstrider power

The longstrider spell, although interesting, is not as obvious for dealing with enemies as sleep, colour spray or magic missile. It also does not directly preserve the lives of you and your companions, such as cure light wounds or shield of faith. It does, however, give the ability of increased mobility. This is of variable benefit. In dungeon corridors, it is likely to be of little use.

In the wilderness, it gains greatly in effectiveness, as manuevering and the evasion of enemies become more important.

As its duration is so important, this is a spell that is dependent on the level of the PCs. It is a weak 1st level spell for a 1st level character; it is an excellent 1st level spell for a 8th level character.

3 - Swift Action

The reasons for adding Swift Actions are many. To summarise:
* It exploits the design space originally created by Quicken Spell

* It allows spells to be created that have a short duration and to get around the problems caused by True Strike - 1 round durations are meant to expire *before* your next turn, which made True Strike problematic in its original form.

* Swift actions make spells cast on yourself more interesting. A 2 round spell cast on another will last for 2 of their actions, but for only one of yours. Thus, swift actions improve the usability of personal spells.

The main problem with the Swift Action is that it can complicate the round with too many actions being allowable during it. It also adds a level of complexity to the terminology that some players may not enjoy.

4a - Arcane Defiance
* Feats should have an odd ability requirement; this is mainly to keep the ability scores useful at all values, rather than just the ones for bonuses.
* Needing both Spell Focus and the ability to cast spells of that school is redundant - Spell Focus assumes the latter
* The feat is weak; indeed, there is already a stronger feat that has the same effect.

4b - Burning Barrier of Breath
* There is no link between the fire effect and the type of breath weapon; surely this ability should only be used by fire-breathing creatures?
* A feat that gives a spell castable by a 9th level wizard should have requirements commesurate with that. (A Cha 15 pre-requisite would be useful).
* The ability description should have different wording, e.g. "Expend a use of your breath weapon to create a wall of fire, as the spell."
* The caster level of the spell should be made explicit (your character level?)
* I'd suggest a character level/Hit dice requirement, or a strength of breath weapon.

6 - Ability rewriting
I like Staffan's answer.

7 - Other game mechanic
In Magic: the Gathering, being able to only play one land per turn. It allows the game to build up to more powerful effects, rather than having them all available at the start of a duel and slowly depleting them. This allows a greater variety of effect to see play in the game than otherwise.

Cheers!

Staffan said:

[bq]1. In D&D, class and race are crucial elements that define a character's role in the party and his place in the world. It's no coincidence that they're among the most important game mechanics for developers to understand.

a) What is the most powerful class in the Player's Handbook, and why is it the most powerful?

b) What is the least powerful race in the Player's Handbook, and why is it the least powerful?[/bq]
A: I think the most powerful class in the PHB is the druid, with competition from the cleric. They have powerful spellcasting abilities, decent combat capabilities (especially when wild-shaped), and pretty good skills. In addition, they have an animal companion that will often be a holy terror in combat, they can spontaneously summon more animals to help them, and they can wild shape to get lots of different capabilities in a highly flexible way.
B: The half-orc. They have negative stat adjustments, a racial ability that's not unique (Darkvision), and another that's mostly negative (the most common effects that are linked to being considered an orc are dwarves getting +1 tp attacl you and being affected by orcbane weapons.

Click to expand...

Generally agree, but I think the real question is not the reasons why they are the most powerful/least powerful, but the reasons why they were designed that way. I'd say that the cleric was designed to be the most powerful class mechanically, because its primary function - healing and buffing the party - is not as fun as fighting the monsters in melee or blasting them to bits with magic. So, the cleric was given more mechanical benefits so that it would be more attractive to play. For the races, I would agree that the half-orc was the least powerful, followed by the half-elf. I can think of a couple of reasons why they were designed this way. First, half-orcs and half-elves as crossbreeds should be rare (IMO, despite the fact that there seems to be one in every book ) and a slight mechanical disadvantage keeps the number of half-orc and half-elf PCs down. Second, there is the roleplaying angle - a player can have a lot of fun with the archetype of the angst-ridden outcast caught between two worlds, or (for a half-orc) the archetype of the dumb brute, so these two races can be at a slight mechanical disadvantage.

[bq]3. The concept of the "swift action" (as described in such books as Expanded Psionics Handbook and Complete Arcane) is a relatively new addition to D&D. Why were swift actions (especially swift-action casting time spells) added to the game? What's the downside of adding swift actions to the game?[/bq]
I think they were added because there was need for something between a "pure" free action and a move action - something you could do while doing other stuff, but still with a limit. They are especially useful for abilities that "self-buff" a character, like many of the Psychic Warrior powers. Actions are one of the most limited resources characters have, so a character that has to spend precious actions prior to combat beefing himself up would be pretty weak - but buffing and fighting is fun.
As for downsides, they do add complexity to a system that's already enormously complex, and they do eat up a quarter of a page in each book where they're used (since they're not in the core rules, they need to be explained).

Click to expand...

Again, I generally agree. I think the game designers realized that buffing during combat was no fun because it ate up all the buffer's actions, and buffing before combat is very dependent on DM whim. It's similar to the cleric problem - most people would rather do something concrete than play support. Personally, I think the game would have been better served if the designers introduced move-action spells rather than swift spells, but maybe that would have been even more confusing. The main downside is that it reduces the value of the Quicken Spell feat, which they had gone through such great effort to build up again in 3.5e by changing the haste spell.

[bq]7. Describe a game mechanic (from a game other than a roleplaying game) that you think is good, and explain why you think it's good.[/bq]

Click to expand...

When playing "Uno", any player who has one card left must announce this fact by saying "Uno".

Why it's good:
1. It creates tension and excitement in the game. Once someone says "Uno", all the other players sit up, take notice and ususally gang up on that player. It prevents the game from ending with a whimper because the other players aren't paying attention.
2. When it happens, it encourages the other players to use their "big guns": the Skips, the Draw Twos, the Wild Draw Fours, etc. instead of hoarding them. This makes the end-game even more interesting.
3. The eventual winner knows that he won depsite giving the other players fair warning and despite them ganging up on him. This gives him a bigger emotional pay-off.

In addition to everything that has already been said, I think that Arcane Defiance would need to have the stat requirement removed. It makes the feat mostly only available to Wizards, but there is no reason not to make it available to Sorcerers as well. Making it available to divine spellcasters, despite the name of the feat, wouldn't be out of line.

Copying my answers over:

[sblock]1.a) The cleric and druid share this honor. These two classes, when played properly, can cause a lot of damage with their spells, and can hold their own in a fight very well thanks to their "buff" spells, the cleric better than the druid. The druid, on the other hand, has less to fear that his spells go to waste due to an unfitting environment, as his Spontaneous Casting ability is more flexible than the cleric's.

1.b) The half-orc bears this mark. While he may be the only race that offers a Strength bonus, it suffers from penalties to two mental statistics. While that may seem like a good trade with the addition of Darkvision - how many good mental stats does a warrior need, anyway? - it falls short once you compare it to the other races.
Half-elves, the next step on the "power ladder", have a little more flexibility going for them, though their higher power is not fully apparent.
Dwarves, the most powerful race presented in the Player's Handbook, are very easy to compare. Sharing Darkvision and the -2 penalty to Charisma, the half-orc effectively loses 2 points of Constitution, 2 points of Intelligence and several abilities (some situational, but still good). He gains, on the other hand, two points of Strength.

2. Longstrider is somewhat weaker than most 1st level spell, but still can be an useful utility spell. It is not a spell a character wants to prepare, but ocassionally may want to have as a scroll. It is quickly eclipsed when the character has a mount that is not an animal companion, due to the personal only range, and as soon as better, and easier to share, travel spells become available, it is obsolete. A wizard, especially, has easy access to the mount spell.

3. The idea of swift actions, but not the name, has been part of the game from the start, in the guise of Quicken Spell and Barbarian Rage. Naming that concept allows for easy reference both in the rules and in the discussions. It creates an easily identifiable group of spells sharing the concept. Also, it allows for the creation of more swift spells within a given product, as the rules behind them need to be printed only once. Otherwise, these spells would take too much space.
Swift spells do become problematic when they are used too much, however. As the pre-revision Haste spell showed, the ability to cast many spells in a round is troublesome in many games. The Quicken Spell feat has the cost of increasing the spell's effective level by 4. With too many swift spells, a player may quickly reach a point where he gets the Quicken Spell feat for free, with no or little increase in spell level.
Another problem is that the rules may be confusing or partially incomplete. A commonly seen question is "Can you perform a swift action as a standard action?"

4.
* Arcane Defiance defies one design decision by requiring an Int of 12. To make uneven scores relevant, it should be 13.
* The Benefit line superfluously repeats all the prerequisites. With the current prerequisites, it should read: "You get a +1 bonus to all saving throws against spells from the school of magic you select." The feat should state "Choose a school of magic" before the prerequisites line.
* The prerequisite "Ability to cast one spell from the selected school" is potentially superfluous. While getting rid of it allows a non-spellcaster to get the bonus, it seems unlikely that such a character would waste a feat slot for Spell Focus, gaining no benefit, to qualify for this one, which provides little benefit.
* I feel this feat to be underpowered compared to the Great Fortitude line of feats. Even with getting rid of the above prerequisite, I feel increasing the bonus to +2 would be in line.
* This feat literally begs for the Special line that allows it to be chosen multiple times.

* Burning Barrier of Breath may benefit from a shorter and/or more relevant name. Suggestions: Breath Wall, Wall of Breath, Defensive Breath.
* The feat allows a silver dragon to create a wall of fire - that should not be. I would suggest to make it a metabreath feat that shapes the breath weapon into a wall, with the usual restricing factors. While it may be easier to restrict it to creatures with a fire breath, the feat would seem to be more interesting, and easier to balance (considering mephits have little problem qualifying, for example), if it were a metabreath feat as above. As written, it is too powerful.
* The benefit line leaves too many uncertainties. Is it a spell, or a spell-like ability? What is the caster level? Why can that black dragon breathe a ring of fire? Is using the feat a standard action? Can it be used every time it could use its breath weapon?

5.
* The Ruby Golem poses a number of memory issues, sonic weakness and the warband building. Having to remember what amounts of sonic damage were dealt can be troublesome. I'd suggest Vulnerability to Sonic (double damage from Sonic). Losing fearless is not intuitive for a golem, and may be easily forgotten.
* In addition, constructs are by definition Fearless, so there is little need to print it on the stat card.
* The ability named Magic Immunity has been represented by the Spell Resistance All ability, and I feel that should be the case here as well.
<My knowledge of the Miniatures game is rather limited, but I answered as well as I could>

6.
"As long as the effect lasts, you get a +2 bonus on Reflex saves if you have the Evasion ability. The bonus increases to +4 if you have the Improved Evasion ability. If you have neither ability, you receive no bonus.
Any condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose this bonus."

7.
I really like the commander effects of the Dungeons and Dragons Miniatures game. They are a good way to give a warband, creature and/or faction their own identity. I feel an effect like this, not restricted to any class, would work as a good alternative to the current Leadership feat.

----

An added analysis of the Ruby Golem using the source material available to me (Monsters of Faerûn, pgs 53 + 54).
While the stat block does capture some of the elements of the original creature, it is a faulty conversion unless it was deliberately created as a lesser ruby golem. It should be large, it's level 10, speed 6 with burrow 2 (though the latter ability may be too minor), AC 25, Hit Points 85, and melee attack +12/+12 (15). It is missing Damage Reduction as well.

It is an intelligent construct with fast healing (printed as regeneration, but in D&D, constructs and regeneration are a bad mix), as such its regeneration, and its "independence" are well within reason.

While I am not familiar enough with the pricing guidelines for DDM, I suspect its point cost is too low after those changes, and maybe currently, as well.[/sblock]

I was more impressed that the article claims at one point that 11 is "more than half" of 22. Not, I thought, an auspicious start to a series of articles about the importance of development!

(I sent an email to WOTC and they acknowledged the goof with a laugh.)

Wow, its like an exam for D&D 101......