2005-09-03 Homework answers from AlanDeSmet
I've got a few minutes, so you get bonus answers.
1a. Most powerful class and why
Hard to say, the classes are reasonably well balanced. Bard's the only obviously gimpy one. It's hard to pick a clear winner.
I'll assume "most powerful" means something like raw power, with a focus on combat.
Ultimately generalists and people with special powers pay a price for it. They tend to be cool at the expense of raw power. So no monks, bards, druids, paladins, or rangers. Rogues are cool, but very few definitions of "powerful" will include "lots of skills". Clerics verge on being too generalist. Their spells aren't the most potent, they're not the best fighters.
Now it's down to the warriors and the mages. Barbarian versus fighter is hard. Armor versus hit points. Probably armor, especially when it gets magical at high levels. So fighter represents the warriors. Sorcerer versus wizard. This is a raw power versus generalist. The a straight up competition being a generalist isn't enough. So the sorcerer.
Sorcerer versus fighter. The sorcerer is going to have potent, potent spells, including many save-or-die. But in melee the sorcerer is a fine red mist. In battle it's mostly luck. At high levels the sorcerer will have the advantage at range, or if there is time to prepare. But at low levels the sorcerer is target practice. Averaged over all levels, for most levels (especially since the ultra high levels are relatively unusual in actual play), the fighter.
1b. Least powerful race.
Halfling (with gnome a close second). Less damage with weapons. Less carrying capacity. D&D has slowly increased the importance of dexterity, but it remains focused on raw strength.
2. Longstrider potency
*eh*, about the same. Extra speed in combat is useful, but hardly critical.
3. Swift actions.
Obviously added because they wanted to add the ability to cast two spells on a single round (if the player is willing to pay a high enough price). Turning it into a free action is too powerful. Two spells at once is potent, but no game killer. Say, five spells at once could be very problematic. Swift actions were the compromise. The downside? Mostly complexity. It's another rule. There is some risk of it proving overly powerful. D&D has so many spells that it's hard to balance them. Adding the ability to cast two spells effectively simultaneously may reveal combinations that are too potent. Beyond spells, I find it hard to abuse swift actions in any other area (assuming a reasonable cost to the player).
4. Feats Arcane Defiance and Burning Barrier of Breath.
Arcane Defiance is boring, but a logical extension. Seems reasonably balanced. Is that Int 12 requirement really worth bothering with?
BBoB is quite cool. I can easily see using it to create cinematic scenes as a dragon puts up a barrer. You'll need to define the duration of wall of fire (concentration seems unrealistic given the intent. Perhaps simply "1 round per hit die or challenge rating") Also, why in the world the Charisma requirement?
7. Game mechanic
Twilight Imperium 3rd edition adds cards for each planet a player can control. The card lists the important statistics for the planet. It makes it easy to track who owns which planets; when a player takes over a planet he has incentive to immediately demand the card. The player who used to own the planet can't accidentally keep the planet's benefits. It dramatically reduces tracking errors that similar games have.