Can someone explain races being classes?

[Nyaricus]

What's that supposed to mean?

You wanna fight about it?

*groans*

 

[Staffan]

Which is patently not true, as 2E had Weapon Proficiencies that could be learned by every class, and non-proficient use of a weapon meant, for the wizard, a -5 penalty on his attack roll, a system that was taken directly from 1E. That still enabled the wizard to carry around a sword, and even attack with it, he simply wasn't that good with it if he hadn't allocated a proficiency point on "Sword".

Not really. From the 2e PHB: "For similar reasons, wizards are severely restricted in the weapons they can use. They are limited to those that are easy to learn or are sometimes useful in their own research. Hence, a wizard can use a dagger or a staff, items that are traditionally useful in magical studies. Other weapons allowed are darts, knives, and slings (weapons that require little skill, little strength, or both)."

There's nothing in the weapon proficiency rules that enable them to use another weapon at a penalty either. Now, the Skills & Powers rules changed this, and IIRC allowed characters to buy non-kosher weapon proficiencies at double cost, but in core 2e a wizard simply can't use a sword.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Not really. From the 2e PHB: "For similar reasons, wizards are severely restricted in the weapons they can use. They are limited to those that are easy to learn or are sometimes useful in their own research. Hence, a wizard can use a dagger or a staff, items that are traditionally useful in magical studies. Other weapons allowed are darts, knives, and slings (weapons that require little skill, little strength, or both)."

There's nothing in the weapon proficiency rules that enable them to use another weapon at a penalty either. Now, the Skills & Powers rules changed this, and IIRC allowed characters to buy non-kosher weapon proficiencies at double cost, but in core 2e a wizard simply can't use a sword.

Yep...you quoted from the class description, that's perfectly fine. You will note, I hope, that the Proficiency system was an optional system, which worked the same way for every class, and that the weapon restrictions of the core system wizard were represented by giving them only one weapon proficiency slot at first, and 1/6 levels on top of that. In the whole section, there is no limitation to what weapon the wizard may spend his point for, and neither is there any mention of the class weapon limits being in effect for weapon proficiencies. In reverse, nowhere in the class description does the proficiency system get even mentioned. It's optional, and if you use it, it supercedes the core rules for that part of the class. This is one of those cases where "What's not forbidden is allowed". YMMV, but that's how I've always seen it used, and believe it was meant to be used. The same goes for penalties for non-proficient use of weapons, by the way, as that only came into play with the proficiency system.
The same can be said for the other systems mentioned in my post, 1E or BD&D respectively.

 

[Staffan]

Yep...you quoted from the class description, that's perfectly fine. You will note, I hope, that the Proficiency system was an optional system, which worked the same way for every class, and that the weapon restrictions of the core system wizard were represented by giving them only one weapon proficiency slot at first, and 1/6 levels on top of that.

I'm pretty sure the way the proficiency system worked was as a further limitations on what weapons you were skilled in. As in, a wizard gets his one slot, and has to spend it on one of the wizard weapons. Note that even in settings where the proficiency rules are nominally non-optional (e.g. Dark Sun), new class descriptions and revisions of old ones make note of weapon restrictions. Also, the Complete Wizard's Handbook has a section on weapon restrictions, and makes it clear that the restrictions apply even when using proficiencies, unless there's a really good reason they shouldn't apply (e.g. an Amazon wizard comes from a culture where everyone uses the Spear and the longbow, so she should be able to choose them).

Skills & Powers, to use a later expansion of the proficiency system, went on to say that weapon proficiencies were normally limited to the ones allowed by your class, but then went on to say that you could choose another one but at a greater cost (a wizard would pay 3 CP for a wizard weapon, 5 for one allowed to a rogue or cleric, or 6 for one that's usually warrior only).

So while the PHB never comes out and straight-out says "you can only select weapon proficiencies from those allowed to your class", that's probably because they felt that wasn't necessary.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Or they were added/reinterpreted at a later point in game development.

But at this point, I think we can agree to different point of views, and that the possibility was there in the PHB, if interpreted that way.

And gods, it's years since I last looked into my 2E PHB, thanks for giving me a reason to.

 

[RFisher]

The races as classes thing got started partly because of that original system. If dwarves and hobbits have to be fighting men, why bother giving them classes at all?

In fact, when I read the oD&D Men & Magic, then the Holmes Basic Set, then the Moldvay Basic Set, it made perfect sense. Holmes doesn't actually make the jump to make demihumans classes, but the way he summarizes the rules from the original set--if you hadn't read the original--you could have read it as if he had.

I used to think the race classes were outright silly. It was one of the factors in my quickly moving from D&D to AD&D. These days, though, I actually like race classes.

One part of it is that I fully realize now that the rules for creating PCs weren't meant to be a comprehensive set of general rules for every character in the game-world. While some NPCs might follow PC rules, they don't need to. Even if a PC can't be a elven cleric, that doesn't mean there are no elven clerics.

(Although, I like the idea that demihumans lack souls & thus feel no compulsion towards celestial matters or veneration of deities. So there are no demihuman clerics in my world anyway.)

I also never really liked the way--in so many other games--in my experience--human PCs were so rare. (There's no accounting for taste, but that's mine.) Limiting the demihuman PCs--as race classes do--helps counter that. It also goes along with the common sci-fi/fantasy idea of human flexibility/adaptibility giving them an edge over other sophont races.

 

[HeavenShallBurn]

I also never really liked the way--in so many other games--in my experience--human PCs were so rare. (There's no accounting for taste, but that's mine.) Limiting the demihuman PCs--as race classes do--helps counter that. It also goes along with the common sci-fi/fantasy idea of human flexibility/adaptibility giving them an edge over other sophont races.

I can see where you come from it's one of the "traditional" tropes of most fiction. But it's also one of the things about D&D I've found offputting over the years. I admit I'm biased and dislike humanity, but I've always disliked the way humanity was the major race of the setting. In Homebrews I tend to make them oppressed underclasses with minimal talents and few redeeming qualities compared to other races. Either that or as I'm doing with Siluria making humans more formidable and giving them flavor for the setting that departs from the standard tropes but make sense.

As far as racial classes I find them useful for NPC but by definition PCs are exceptional and odd so even in earlier editions I never paid much attention to those restrictions on classes.

EDIT: Also why is it that in RPGs that humans are always considered the default most common race and all other "standard" races balanced off of them. While races that are more different than just people with funny ears get signifiacnt penalties to play? Such as in 3e where even above the penalty of racial HD significantly less valuable than PC classes you have to add an LA on top of it. By the time you get done the "unusual races" aren't balanced against a "standard" race PC of the same level, they're usually inferior and barely capable of keeping up.

 

[Warlock75]

I admit I'm biased and dislike humanity.

Hear! Hear!