Random idea about removing demi-human level limits

[tkdco2]

I've seen people try to balance removing demi-human level limits by giving humans an additional benefit, such as the ability to multiclass. But instead of doing that, how about taking away the demi-human ability to multiclass? Sounds fair: give something, take away something else. Racial limitations on classes remain; only humans can be paladins or monks.

Is dual-classing allowed? DM's call on that one. I haven't seen anyone do that in any of my groups, and I've only used it for NPCs.

What do your think: good idea or bad?

[howandwhy99]

Contrary to popular belief, I see demi-human level limits as not really about balancing the race options. A Halfling is not so overpowered as a Fighter-Man they are limited to 4th level because of other racial abilities. Even stranger, in AD&D high-strength Halflings (17 or 18) are allowed to advance 1 to 2 levels further as fighters. If we were balancing wouldn't this be the opposite case?

I really think the best way to strip level limits would be to do something like 2nd or 3rd edition did. So you're on the right track. But level limits in and of themselves are not really a balancing mechanism and shouldn't be accounted for if they're removed.

[hamurai]

Mar 8, 2021 15:28:29 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

What do your think: good idea or bad?

In my group, that'd be a good idea. We mostly play without multiclassing per default, but that would make humans the only ones with access to multiclassing, which is a nice benefit. 

I'd allow dual-classing for some "popular" combinations, like the Fighter/Wizard Elf and the Fighter/Thief Dwarf, for example.


We have honestly never bothered with level limits for demi-humans, and I don't think anyone ever felt it was imbalanced. From today's perspective, I'd probably houserule it with a 5E element: Allow humans a "feat" at the beginning of the game, some sort of special ability fitting their class and/or background, if anyone felt necessary to balance the demi-human abilities. One of these feats might be a special ability I remember one of our fighters got at some point, Shieldmaster: shields add an additional +1 to AC.

[tkdco2]

2nd edition had the slow advancement rules for demi-humans which kicked in once the character reached his regular level limit. BFRPG just gives humans an extra 10% XP bonus from the start. Would the latter option be easier?

[Deleted]

Mar 10, 2021 10:31:54 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

2nd edition had the slow advancement rules for demi-humans which kicked in once the character reached his regular level limit. BFRPG just gives humans an extra 10% XP bonus from the start. Would the latter option be easier?

The latter option is less book-keeping if that's what you mean by easier. I happen to like the former option, though. The 2e/BECMI charts are flavorful and retain the alien-ness of non-humans. 

[sixdemonbag]

Mar 10, 2021 4:42:56 GMT -6 Piper said:

I did away with level limits for all classes and races. I gave humans a second saving roll if they failed the first (which ultimately came down to most players rolling two saves at once to save time). 

I've played OD&D for decades. These changes have made no overall difference I've ever been able to discern in how the game plays. And a difference that makes no difference is no difference. 

Exact same.

I haven't played over decades like you, but I quickly came to the same conclusions. In actual play, it makes no difference. Same with race/class restrictions, alignments, etc.

[tdenmark]

Just get rid of them. Level limits serve no useful purpose. Gary had a bias against players playing anything other than humans so he built in discouragements.

Class/Race limitations are lame too.

[tdenmark]

Mar 10, 2021 19:51:26 GMT -6 sixdemonbag said:

In actual play, it makes no difference. Same with race/class restrictions, alignments, etc.

I agree race/class restrictions aren't necessary, however I do find alignment to have its uses. Whether as a way to categorize, or as shorthand for personality, principles, and motives.

In my own games I have alignment slightly expanded and turned even more into a game mechanic with a stat called Devotion -- just how dedicated a character is to their beliefs. The difference between Chaos-ish to fully dedicated to Chaos.

So alignment can stay. Level limits and race/class restrictions gotta go.

[Deleted]

One interesting thing about Alignment - I believe in all the arguments for it, but I played BFRPG for a year before I realized it didn't have Alignment at all that that it wasn't missed in that campaign.

[jeffb]

Remove demi-humans. Problem solved.

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2021 8:16:34 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Remove demi-humans. Problem solved.

Insert meme of Gygax in crusader armor.

[tdenmark]

Mar 11, 2021 8:16:34 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Remove demi-humans. Problem solved.

Gary approves this message.

[Zenopus]

Maybe. His pet project Lejendary Adventure has even more demi-humans than D&D, despite being set in a fantasy earth. Ilfs, Oafs, Veshoges...

[Falconer]

Mar 11, 2021 8:16:34 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Problem solved.

People may want to change things for any number of reasons, but no-one has made the case that level limits are a problem.

[talysman]

You could try raising the effective level of non-humans. Elves start at 0 XP but level 4, for example, but are treated as if they are level 1.

But I, personally, have no problem with level limits. The way I see it, non-humans can't reach name level because at name level, human characters can establish domains, collect taxes, and rule over human inhabitants in human lands. On top of that, dwarves and halflings are limited as fighters because they are short, and elves are simply better at magic than at fighting. You'll notice that when thieves were added, there are no racial level limits for that class. It's the only class where name level doesn't mean officially-sanctioned political power (although thieves can run guilds, which gives them unofficial power.)

[Deleted]

Mar 11, 2021 12:57:27 GMT -6 talysman said:

You could try raising the effective level of non-humans. Elves start at 0 XP but level 4, for example, but are treated as if they are level 1.

But I, personally, have no problem with level limits. The way I see it, non-humans can't reach name level because at name level, human characters can establish domains, collect taxes, and rule over human inhabitants in human lands. On top of that, dwarves and halflings are limited as fighters because they are short, and elves are simply better at magic than at fighting. You'll notice that when thieves were added, there are no racial level limits for that class. It's the only class where name level doesn't mean officially-sanctioned political power (although thieves can run guilds, which gives them unofficial power.)

Right...hence "class" as in "social class". Obviously in a society with a caste system of sorts with Humans on top, upward mobility is limited for people who don't fully fall under that umbrella. And the implied setting of D&D supports that, it would seem. 

[tkdco2]

Mar 11, 2021 8:16:34 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Remove demi-humans. Problem solved.

I have run games with only humans. Carcosa is one of them. I've run games without magic as well, although neither option was very popular with the players.

[tkdco2]

Mar 11, 2021 12:23:28 GMT -6 Falconer said:

Mar 11, 2021 8:16:34 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Problem solved.

People may want to change things for any number of reasons, but no-one has made the case that level limits are a problem.

It is a problem once the character hits maximum level and may not be able to keep up with the other PCs.

There are also some campaigns where the level limits don't make sense. 

[jeffb]

I was sort of serious. But mostly being a smart@$$.

That said, I've removed demi humans from my home brew worlds/settings because I'm just sick of the stereotypical ways they are played and portrayed in D&D. it's turned into the Mos Eisley Cantina*


Which I fine and dandy for SW.

[tkdco2]

I have tried running historical campaigns, but that didn't appeal to my players. They prefer high fantasy, which means nonhumans and monsters and magic to them.

Besides, I like playing an elf! Most of my characters are elves, including my character in LOTRO.

[tdenmark]

Mar 11, 2021 10:46:53 GMT -6 Zenopus said:

Maybe. His pet project Lejendary Adventure has even more demi-humans than D&D, despite being set in a fantasy earth. Ilfs, Oafs, Veshoges...

I'm having fun here. His views evolved significantly over time. 70's Gary was very different than 80's+ Gary. He sure built in a lot of resistance to playing non-humans in OD&D and 1e.

[Deleted]

Gygax was nothing if not a walking contradiction at times. He created rules that heavily favor Conan types, but he played as wizards like Mordenkainen. I think you need only look at his Lejendary Adventures rules set that he heavily promoted in his final years to see that he abandoned his earlier views at some point. Those books had more demi-humans and weird powers than AD&D ever did. He clearly decided to fully embrace the diversity at some point, whether that was financially motivated or not.

[Zenopus]

Okay, I found a post by Gygax that directly addresses this with regard to Lejendary Adventure, and resolves any apparent contradictions, to my mind at least.

Frankly, I find human characters a lot more interesting than most non-human ones. In most cases they are played as stereotypes...badly played thus at that.

When the Mythus game was designed I hoped that the change from class-based to skill-based play would also facilitate emphasis on the human character in the game.

In the LA system I went back and included a large number of non-human races to opt for as an Avatar choice, but I weighed the game in favor of humans by giving Ordered, mainly human, ones a clear leg up on others. Although the edge is slight it is evident, and even non-Ordered humans have more freedom of choice selecting Abilities than do the non-human. The most desirable benefit-wise non-human Avatar races are the ones less likely to be chosen--Kobold, Trollkin, Veshoge.

Anyway, I hope that the racial mandates and guidelines set forth in the LA game make playing any of these non-humans at least a bit more unique and interesting than is usual in many other systems.

Cheerio,
Gary

www.enworld.org/threads/q-a-with-gary-gygax.22566/page-426#post-3900450

[Falconer]

I played a kobold with an outrageous French accent in a game of LA that Gary ran. Gary was highly amused.

[sixdemonbag]

FWIW, I have no issue with race/class/alignment restrictions, generally speaking. Same goes for class-based weapon/armor restrictions and also for race-based level limits.

I just want them to be campaign-specific and not baked in the system, which is why I remove them. Also remove ability scores but that's a whole 'nother topic. 

[tombowings]

Mar 12, 2021 3:19:14 GMT -6 Piper said:

Well, looking at the Appendix N literature which inspired Gygax may shed some light on his early distaste for the demi-human races. These tend to feature heroic white males defeating enemies who are only thinly disguised ethnicities or nationalities from right here on Earth. Of course humanity would be the "gold standard" by which any other race would rate a poor second.

I'm not sure elf-games are the right context for this type of discussion.

[tdenmark]

Mar 11, 2021 10:42:11 GMT -6 tdenmark said:

Mar 11, 2021 8:16:34 GMT -6 jeffb said:

Remove demi-humans. Problem solved.

Gary approves this message.

And what do you know, Grognaria articulates Gary's attitude towards non-human characters better than I could.

grognardia.blogspot.com/2021/03/random-roll-dmg-p-21.html

[tdenmark]

Mar 12, 2021 3:19:14 GMT -6 Piper said:

Well, looking at the Appendix N literature which inspired Gygax may shed some light on his early distaste for the demi-human races. These tend to feature heroic white males defeating enemies who are only thinly disguised ethnicities or nationalities from right here on Earth. Of course humanity would be the "gold standard" by which any other race would rate a poor second.

Wow, what a terrible take. Like those who see Tolkien's orcs and think they represent some real world race when they were clearly representing "corruption" not race.

[derv]

Mar 21, 2021 8:06:48 GMT -6 tdenmark said:

Mar 12, 2021 3:19:14 GMT -6 Piper said:

Well, looking at the Appendix N literature which inspired Gygax may shed some light on his early distaste for the demi-human races. These tend to feature heroic white males defeating enemies who are only thinly disguised ethnicities or nationalities from right here on Earth. Of course humanity would be the "gold standard" by which any other race would rate a poor second.

Wow, what a terrible take. Like those who see Tolkien's orcs and think they represent some real world race when they were clearly representing "corruption" not race.

I don't think a person has to take Piper 's post personally. It's a basic fact that nationalism, peppered with racial stereo typing, pervaded the pulp fiction and closely tied comic industry during the war and post war period. Comics were used richly as a medium of propaganda. It could be argued that this generation reached it's zenith when man literally reached the moon- something the pulp sf produced as pure fantasy prior. What couldn't humanity accomplish? From there the pendulum of public opinion started to swing in the other direction starting with the Kennedy assassination, Watergate, and the Vietnam war.

Some things are just a part of the time period.

My son, whose in his first year of college, has been discussing communication theory with me. One such theory is known as the "Inoculation Theory". He associated the concept with smoking for the benefit of clarity with me. Which was helpful. My children are a product of this theory in practice. So much so that none of them can appreciate the reality that during my childhood everyone, or nearly so, smoked. It was pervasive, permitted, and accepted everywhere- work space, public transportation, doctors offices, barber shops, family gatherings, etc. Ashtrays were found everywhere, a token to our culture. It was just a fact of the period that had no real moral attributes at the time. I don't want to overstate this though. People did recognize it as being less than healthy and eventually it's association with lung cancer would lead to the valid criticism of the tobacco industry.

[tdenmark]

Mar 21, 2021 9:38:29 GMT -6 Piper said:

I truly meant no offense. Apologies.

Alright.