Class/level limits by race

[Falconer]

Has anyone come across or come up with an OD&D LBBs+Supps+TSRs equivalent of AD&D’s “Character Race Table II: Class Level Limitations”?



Thanks!

[Zenopus]

That's a great idea. This is the closest I've got; from one of the Holmes Ref drafts. Rather than presenting it as in the AD&D table, for simplicity I generalized the bonus levels for abilities described in Greyhawk to 1 level for prime of 17, 2 levels for prime of 18. I didn't include Monk, Assassin, Bard or SR classes. Some of this info is specific to Holmes like the Dwarf/Halfling mins. A table like the AD&D one might be more useful for picking and choosing among rules to use (e.g., you could include the level limits table without the racial minimums that Holmes has).

[Scott Anderson]

Are Monks actually a thing? Does anyone ever play an OD&D Monk?

[Falconer]

Yes. Why not?

[Falconer]

Hey, guys, I went looking for this info again and apparently never wrapped this up. Well, here is my current effort. Half credit goes to Zenopus for lots of insight and solid opinions. Some things were ambiguous, so I ended up making two versions, one more permissive and one more humanocentric.

Loose:

Strict:

PDF with both versions
Google Doc – loose
Google Doc – strict


I appreciate your feedback, including any info I might have missed, or what interpretation(s) you lean towards. I would also be happy to make customized versions with any changes anyone would like.

[tdenmark]

If there is any one mechanic from LBB that needs to be tossed, it's level limits by race. It provides no benefit to enhance the game play, and doesn't even do a good job at its purpose of game balance. You could just give humans a 5% XP bonus instead and be done with it.

[Falconer]

I figure it’s primarily a simulationist concern, i.e., the authors wanted a humanocentric world with mostly human PCs and mostly humans in charge of the organizations. If you change things the way you propose, you’re going to have a lot more nonhumans in the party, and they’re going to reach high levels that they were never intended to, eg., Hobbit Super Heroes.

[talysman]

Oct 29, 2020 10:14:09 GMT -6 tdenmark said:

If there is any one mechanic from LBB that needs to be tossed, it's level limits by race. It provides no benefit to enhance the game play, and doesn't even do a good job at its purpose of game balance. You could just give humans a 5% XP bonus instead and be done with it.

Oct 29, 2020 10:40:50 GMT -6 Falconer said:

I figure it’s primarily a simulationist concern, i.e., the authors wanted a humanocentric world with mostly human PCs and mostly humans in charge of the organizations. If you change things the way you propose, you’re going to have a lot more nonhumans in the party, and they’re going to reach high levels that they were never intended to, eg., Hobbit Super Heroes.

My own solution to the problem (Keep nonhumans rare vs. Allow players freedom) is to assume level limits are socially imposed by human culture and that nonhuman PCs can exceed those limits, but only through in-game actions.

For example: halflings can't exceed level 4 as fighters because humans don't see short races as heroic or intimidating compared to a full-sized human fighter. With enough heroic deeds, or maybe a magic ring that allows them to grow to giant size at will, they might convince people otherwise.

My general rule is:

• Non-humans can't be clerics (class represents human religion)
• Non-humans can't exceed level 8 as fighter or magic-user
• One of those two classes is the dominant (level limit 8) and the other is restricted to level 4
• Short races (3/4ths human size, 1/2 human size) are limited to a proportional level of fighter (6 or 4)

Figuring out how to overcome these limits is part of the player's goals.

[tdenmark]

Oct 29, 2020 10:40:50 GMT -6 Falconer said:

I figure it’s primarily a simulationist concern, i.e., the authors wanted a humanocentric world with mostly human PCs and mostly humans in charge of the organizations. If you change things the way you propose, you’re going to have a lot more nonhumans in the party, and they’re going to reach high levels that they were never intended to, eg., Hobbit Super Heroes.

And the humans will level even higher and faster. If +5% XP isn't enough, bump it to +10%.

I am well aware Gary disfavored players making characters other than humans. Still, the mechanic has not aged well. Whereas the genius of the rest of the LBB is becoming increasingly clearer.

Besides, there is nothing wrong with Bandobras "Bullroarer" Took being a Super Hero, and having a party full of elves and dwarves.

I'm just noting my own preference. These tables are interesting in that they provide clarity, and I applaud anything that makes the original LBB's even more clear to understand. This is the kind of thing that could make the Single Volume Edition even better.

[Falconer]

Thanks, man. Yeah, to me it’s just not a problem in need of a solution, unless I’m running a world where the reality is different, in which case I simply change the limits to suit. I actually initiated this project as part of a Westeros Supplement I have been working on. Of course, Westeros is if anything MORE humanocentric. But either way, I needed to know what the starting point was. I think the OD&D rules as written cover the Hobbit/LotR/Broken Sword mentality quite well, of it being the time of Men and these other races being around but not really up to par. I had a hobbit in my game who reached her Fighter level limit, and I simply let her change her character to a multiclass Fighter/Thief. I simply do not imagine hobbits as great warriors; I think that’s all over the books. Merry and Pippin become great by hobbit standards after drinking the ent-draughts—drinking from a magic fountain, in D&D terms. So maybe their Fighter level limits went up by a couple of levels. But they were still no Aragorn or Boromir or Bard. Anyway, just MY preferences. I also encourage my players to have multiple characters, and make sure they are familiar with the limits from the start, so they know what they’re getting into.

[kaiqueo]

Level limits for non-human races and other od&d mechanics (like 3d6 in order) only become an issue if you consider one player per character in a dedicated campaign, like most people play d&d nowadays.

It was common for a single player to have a pool of characters of different classes/races/levels to choose from at the beginning of every adventure/expedition. The same way that was common for a DM to have a pool of players that showed up every now and them.

You don't care that your halfling fighter is limited to lv4 if you can roll a Magic-User unlimited in level. With the exponential growth of required xp in D&D, a low level character with high level friends killing high level monsters and discoring big treasures will level up rather quickly.

[Punkrabbitt]

Part of the beauty of OSR is a philosophy of "rulings, not rules; change the rules you don't like." If I want my 2,000 year old elves to show that they can attain some really badass mastery of both sword and spell, maybe elves do not have level limits. Maybe they even get 5% experience bonus per class once it hits 15th level. Maybe halflings are never really sturdy enough to progress as fighting men and must always be a thief. It doesn't matter if it's by the book, because the book is only a guideline to stimulate the spark of imagination.

[tkdco2]

Oct 29, 2020 10:14:09 GMT -6 tdenmark said:

If there is any one mechanic from LBB that needs to be tossed, it's level limits by race. It provides no benefit to enhance the game play, and doesn't even do a good job at its purpose of game balance. You could just give humans a 5% XP bonus instead and be done with it.

I agree. Basic Fantasy gives humans a 10% bonus since there are no level limits for nonhumans. Also, humans can be any class; demi-humans don't usually have that option.


Yes, I know Gary and company wanted humans to be the prime movers and shakers in the game. That doesn't mean I want to play it that way.

[dicebro]

I give luck points in lieu of level advancement. During the game, the player can use them however they want. Seems to work well. However, in my campaign, even humans retire from the adventuring life no later than 12th level.

[hamurai]

Can you explain a little, dicebro ? Do demi-humans or all get these luck points? How can they be used? "However they want" covers a lot - I doubt they are equal to wishes...

[dicebro]

Oct 30, 2020 9:57:39 GMT -6 hamurai said:

Can you explain a little, dicebro ? Do demi-humans or all get these luck points? How can they be used? "However they want" covers a lot - I doubt they are equal to wishes...

Just hobbits, elves and dwarves. Once they hit level maximum, then they get luck points instead of levels. They can use them to modify Die Rolls.

[hamurai]

I see, thanks for clarifying!

[Deleted]

Oct 6, 2016 13:47:58 GMT -6 Scott Anderson said:

Are Monks actually a thing? Does anyone ever play an OD&D Monk?

I once ran a Monk-only game flavored by Shaw Bros. film tropes, in fact. 

[Piper]

I use brawlers (a custom NPC class) in my campaign as tavern bouncers, town bullies, and guardsman in my campaign.

They are trained in non-weapon fighting (e.g. brawling, fisticuffs, wrestling) and non-lethal weapon fighting (whip, bola, slapjack, etc.). They good enough in a brawl to keep unarmed player-characters at bay, since player-characters are unarmed and typically unarmored (and quite often a bit drunk) in town. Against a fully armed and armored fighter, however, brawlers are at a marked disadvantage.

[doublejig2]

Brawlers are good with the sucker punch in one stone gray, outside the city wall tavern!

[tkdco2]

Nov 1, 2020 8:53:00 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

Oct 6, 2016 13:47:58 GMT -6 Scott Anderson said:

Are Monks actually a thing? Does anyone ever play an OD&D Monk?

I once ran a Monk-only game flavored by Shaw Bros. film tropes, in fact. 

I'd like to run that kind of campaign, but my players aren't fond of monks.

I haven't run an OD&D monk, but I have a few 1E monks, including the Dragon Magazine and OA versions.

[Deleted]

Nov 1, 2020 16:34:31 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

Nov 1, 2020 8:53:00 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

I once ran a Monk-only game flavored by Shaw Bros. film tropes, in fact. 

I'd like to run that kind of campaign, but my players aren't fond of monks.

I haven't run an OD&D monk, but I have a few 1E monks, including the Dragon Magazine and OA versions.

Sounds like you need to sit your players down and let them watch some classics. If they truly embrace the gonzo awesomeness of 70's style Kung Fu films they won't be able to refrain themselves from rolling up Monks!