From: maillet@tls-cs.cert.fr (Luc Maillet)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Level limits
Date: 18 Dec 92 11:11:17 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: CERT, CS Dpt. Toulouse, France
Keywords: four-way balance

In article <1992Dec18.061531.11632@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
|> Spurred on by a private e-mail discussion, I've decided to inflict
|> my arrogant, anthropocentric views on the rest of you....
|> 
|> The level limits on non-humans are there purely for game balance.

  Yeah - that's why the rule sucks so much.

|> If there are no limits, every player would choose a non-human character --
|> and the game designers wanted to have humans around to be consistent
|> with the genre of fantasy literature.

  IMHO and ATME ( According to My Experience ), this is wrong. We got rid of
level limits about six years ago ( we rarely had to use them anyway ). And we
still play humans 75% of the time.

|> storytelling.  It's easier for the reader to relate to humans.  Even
|> the archetypal fantasy story which really inspired the whole resurgance
|> in the genre -- Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit -- is about the fall
|> of the non-human races and the beginning of human history and the Age
|> of Man.  (And the human characters, Boromir, Aragorn, Gandalf and
|> Saruman, are definitely the most interesting.

  Sorry, you lost. Neither Gandalf nor Saruman are human. They are Greater
Spirits ( Maiar ) who have assumed a physical form on behalf of the Valars.

 [... long text about TSR bias for humans deleted ...]

|> Faced with these advantages, the only things which would make a player
|> choose a human character over a non-human one are (1) he wants to play
|> that race because it fits with his character concept, or (2) these
|> advantages are all more than counterbalanced when a non-human character
|> hits those level limits.  No matter how many minor racial advantages
|> there are, as the game progresses naturally into higher power levels,
|> non-humans are left in the dust.

  Well, for one, and if I remember well, the stats bonus/malus for demi-humans
cancel each other, making them equal to humans in this matter.
  But the main point is that you suggest that one chooses a race for the advan-
-tages it gives. If this is the case for the group you play with, I pity you.

|> exception of half-orcs) is related to the level limits.  If an elf
|> lives for 200 years or more, one would think that he'd take a decade
|> somewhere and go adventuring, if only to make himself harder to kill,
|> more resistant to poison and disease, etc.

  I beg your pardon ? "if only to make himself..." ? have you tried other games,
to get rid of this PLAYER ( as opposed to CHARACTER ) concept ? Amass wealth,
knowledge, magic items, wisdom... fiding one's place in the world, ascending the
social ladder... OK. But getting more hp, better saving throws, those are mecha-
-nics !

|> races are "allowed" to progress to unlimited levels, the process of
|> natural selection would quickly have them overrun the planet.

  Check Middle Earth : most of the very high-level NPCs are non-humans. And they
have NOT overrun anything, because they can't see why they would do it. It's
the same thing for AD&D dwarves & elves...


|> farming accident, a knife in the back, a disabling disease -- none of
|> these will even slow down a 5th level Adventurer.

  Ah, the rules flaws... modify them, or play another game...
|> 
|> I can't buy the story that "elves live longer, therefore they should be
|> unlimited in level."  Because the elven races live longer is precisely
|> the reason why they should NOT be allowed to progress to high (14+)
|> levels of clericism and magic use.

  Just give me a good WORLD ( NOT "game balance" ) reason to do that.
|> 
|> When I was young, I sometimes wanted to be a member of another race.
|> Humans can be, well, frustrating.  But as I've grown, I really started
|> to like being human.  Dwarves are good drinking buddies, and a pair of
|> elven maidens may be fun for a weekend.   Nobody throws a party like
|> gnomes and halflings, and a half-orc can't be beat in a dark alley.
|> But, believe me when I say it, there's no better race to be -- anywhere
|> in the multiverse -- than a human being.

  If you play non-humans like archetypes ( like the above descriptions are ),
I can understand that. But role-playing a person can be done for any race. What
is interesting is the implications of being an elf in a certain elvish culture,
or a dwarf from an original clan...
  I like playing humans, too. My highest-level PCs are humans. But I can't see
why one should prevent genetically long-live or immortal races to attain high
levels just for "game balance" - which is the thing I hate most, BTW.

								Redwing.