I find in interesting that Gary didn't seem to anticpate folks actually playing Hobbits. M&M (p.8) says "should any player wish to be one" and thus seems to imply that basically no one wanted to be them in a campaign.
This is obviously Gary's dislike of Tolkien showing through, as well as his astonishment at his players wanting to play them.
Joined: Aug 2010 Gender: Male Posts: 261 Karma: 21
Re: How Hobbit PCs are Handled « Reply #17 on Apr 9, 2012, 3:43pm »
My observation is that a 4th-level Hobbit Fighter is no pansy; with good Constitution and magic weapon/armor, he's tougher than an Ogre, and if Chainmail combat is used, he gains all the benefits of fighting as a Hero.
Maybe Gygax saw Hobbits as a sort of challenge for more experienced role-players who want to play a scrappy underdog?
In one campaign I DM'd in the past, I allowed players of demi-human PC's who reach their level limit to roll up a 2nd PC (or 3rd when that PC reaches max level, etc.). Using LotR as an example, Frodo/Sam/Merry/Pippin could all be controlled by the same player.
A man may do both. For not we but those who come after will make the legends of our time. The green earth, say you? That is a mighty matter of legend, though you tread it under the light of day! —J.R.R. Tolkien
I think where the later editions got it wrong is the modern idea of "balance," that all PCs must be equal in power and have equal opportunity to contribute. The two most egregious examples I can think of are the concepts of point-buy for stats and guaranteed-wealth-by-level.
Balance is one of the problems I have with newer editions too. Why would a person dedicate their entire lives to magic when they can be just as powerful as a man with a big sword?
The idea that everyone must be the same level shocked me the first time I encountered it.
It has to be a fairly recent (i.e. post-2000) notion, because there was simply no way that a group of characters of different classes would ever be the same level, even given equal XP distribution.
The idea that everyone must be the same level shocked me the first time I encountered it.
I has to be a fairly recent (i.e. post-2000) notion, because there was simply no way that a group of characters of different classes would ever be the same level, even given equal XP distribution.
3rd edition (2000) unified the XP tables and removed racial level and class restrictions. Thus the halfling barbarian 5/sorcerer 6/thief 9 was born!
(edit to say) this isn't all bad; my 3rd edition campaign was memorable! We had a halfling sorcerer who was basically played as an illusionist-thief; I never saw a player get more mileage out of ventriloquism!
I find in interesting that Gary didn't seem to anticpate folks actually playing Hobbits. M&M (p.8) says "should any player wish to be one" and thus seems to imply that basically no one wanted to be them in a campaign.
I remember one Mello the Hobbit in Dave's game, but I assume that not many were in Blackmoor, either.