TSR Q&A with Gary Gygax

This is the multi-year Q&A sessions held by D&D co-creator Gary Gygax here at EN World, beginning in 2002 and running up until his sad pasing in 2008. Gary's username in the thread below is Col_Pladoh, and his first post in this long thread is Post #39.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Hey there Gary, how are things going?
Well, the other day I was having a discussion with a buddy of mine about AD&D and all that, which edition we liked better and so forth. Anyway, at one point, my pal there says that back in the seventies and early eighties, in general, it was not expected for gamers to have there campaings go over the level of 12 or 13. His excuses were that you guys who designed the game figured most people would just start over again, with a new character, because the system was not designed to handle high level games. His words, not mine Anywho, I found that to be rather odd, since in the PHB it clearly gives XP goals for up to 20th level. So I figured I'd ask you: was AD&D designed to handle high level campaings or not? I always felt it was, only because I had participated in campaigns that did so. An odd question to be sure, but as always, your time and patience is always appreciated. Thanks! Incidentally, this branch of our discussion started when critiquing the Dragonlance modules converting from 1st to 2nd ed. Ciao!

There is no black and white answer to the question.

The fact is that most of the veterans started new PCs when their current one got to around 13th to 15th level. The "retired". high-level PCs remained as the "big guns" to be brought out when something special threatened, served as mentors, and sometimes as semi-NPCs for the use of the DM. Although I did not play intensley with Mordenkainen after he hit 16th level, the occasional adventures he undertook worked his level upwards into the 20s. As I had the privilege of having several very able DMs, there was never a problem with adventures being too easy--quite the opposite, as is demonstrable in Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure

That said, I had a large roster of PCs that were from 4th through 10th level for "regular: adventures.

It was not so much a matter of the game system not being able to manage PCs of levels into the upper teens and 20s, as there being not much in the way of modules to assist new DMs in handling high-level campaign play. Thus "retirement" was encouraged.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Actually, in the 1e PH, there is no real limit on levels (except for certain classes like the druid or monk). And as for class charts, the table for the magic-user goes all the way up to 18th (29th for the purpose of spells)! It sure seems to me like Gary & co. wanted the game to be playable at higher levels. I am certain the Master shall be able to deliver a far more elegant answer of course.

See above.

While the rules covered progress of many sorts of characters well into the 20s, there was little to guide and direct DMs in management of such potent figures. Camapigns with characters of c. 20th level and up are different animals than the those involving less powerful ones. The adventures have to be much different from those designed for low and moderate level PCs.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

And racial limits. My elven fighter topped out at 7th level.

The expansion of non-human PC level limits covered in Unearthed Arcana was to facilitate their play in higher-level camoaigns. For example, an elven fighter/magic-user/thief of 5/9/12 level equates to around 19th level.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[haakon1]

That said, I had a large roster of PCs that were from 4th through 10th level for "regular: adventures.

Did you always start at 1st level? I always have, but I've had DM's who say bring in new characters at the level everyone else is already at, and I know DM's in 3.5 often start at 2nd or higher. That feels wrong to me as a player and as a DM. :\

 

[haakon1]

The expansion of non-human PC level limits covered in Unearthed Arcana was to facilitate their play in higher-level camoaigns. For example, an elven fighter/magic-user/thief of 5/9/12 level equates to around 19th level.

I didn't use much from UA. I actually didn't mind the racial limits. I thought it added interesting "balance" and challenges.

For example, my half-orc LG fighter/cleric, who always wished he could be a paladin, but never could be, was built around a contradiction that I found interesting.

And my 7th level elven fighter survived Against the Giants, the D series, and Demonweb Pits all at his maxed out level, so 7th level (with 61 hp) wasn't totally weak . . . he could survive and contribute with his 11th level comrades, and I liked knowing he was "the best he could be".

 

[airwalkrr]

And racial limits. My elven fighter topped out at 7th level.

Oh yea, I forgot about those cuz we never used 'em.

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Did you always start at 1st level? I always have, but I've had DM's who say bring in new characters at the level everyone else is already at, and I know DM's in 3.5 often start at 2nd or higher. That feels wrong to me as a player and as a DM. :\

Real noobs always began at 1st level. More experienced players that were joining up with the main regulars for some special adventure might begin with new PCs of 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th level. They were not missing anything, certainly, as they had already worked one or more PCs to that level and above.

Having a higher starting level often makes the difference of being able to actively participate in play

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

I didn't use much from UA. I actually didn't mind the racial limits. I thought it added interesting "balance" and challenges.

For example, my half-orc LG fighter/cleric, who always wished he could be a paladin, but never could be, was built around a contradiction that I found interesting.

And my 7th level elven fighter survived Against the Giants, the D series, and Demonweb Pits all at his maxed out level, so 7th level (with 61 hp) wasn't totally weak . . . he could survive and contribute with his 11th level comrades, and I liked knowing he was "the best he could be".

No problem with that.

There were many players that were not happy thus, however, so that was why I tinkered with the demi-human racial level maximums. There was no way I would ever remove them entirely across the board, certainly, as the world setting was always assumed to be human dominated for the reason I have expressed many times in the past: I have never felt competant to design a world with the dominant cultures and societies being non-human.

The same is generally true even for most SF settings.

Cheers,
Gary

 

[Col_Pladoh]

Oh yea, I forgot about those cuz we never used 'em.

Then one must perforce assume your world was dominated by non-humans as demi-human racial factors made them generally superior to humans overall...

Cheers,
Gary

 

[John Drake]

There is no black and white answer to the question.

The fact is that most of the veterans started new PCs when their current one got to around 13th to 15th level. The "retired". high-level PCs remained as the "big guns" to be brought out when something special threatened, served as mentors, and sometimes as semi-NPCs for the use of the DM. Although I did not play intensley with Mordenkainen after he hit 16th level, the occasional adventures he undertook worked his level upwards into the 20s. As I had the privilege of having several very able DMs, there was never a problem with adventures being too easy--quite the opposite, as is demonstrable in Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure

That said, I had a large roster of PCs that were from 4th through 10th level for "regular: adventures.

It was not so much a matter of the game system not being able to manage PCs of levels into the upper teens and 20s, as there being not much in the way of modules to assist new DMs in handling high-level campaign play. Thus "retirement" was encouraged.

Cheers,
Gary

Ok, thanks Gary. That makes sense to me, and yeah, I forgot about the really high level modules like Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure and the great Isle of the Ape. And personally, I never had that much of a problem with the race limits, still don't, and I believe imho that it is one of the major things lacking in the current system (3.0 &3.5) today, amongst other things. I like the sense of balance that it represents in the game world.
One question, on a slightly different note: may seem odd, but could you please clear up something I've been wondering about for a while? How exactly is Mordenkainen's name pronounced? I always assumed that the "kainen" part was pronounced as a long "a" sound, "kay-nen". Is this correct? If not, so sorry! Anywho, thanks for your time, much appreciated!