What is wrong with race class limits?

[dcas]

A. Most classes stop gaining HD and special abilities. Spellcasters became increasingly godlike, while Joe Fighter or Bob Theif are more or less stuck with gaining +2-3 HPs for every half a million XP they managed to scrape together.

I don't think spellcasters become increasingly "god-like", but even if they did, how is that "broken"?

B. When you can already kill practically everything, and your character stops advancing in any meaningful way...why not just start over? You've already "won" the game, really.

I don't think your premise is correct -- that characters can no longer advance in a meaningful way. When characters "max out" then they can concentrate on ruling strongholds and whatnot instead of on dungeon-delving for treasure.

 

[dcas]

The elder elves did crazy things in the Silmarillion.

That's because they had lived among the Valar. Those who had not dwelt in the Blessed Realm were much less powerful.

 

[Aaron L]

Sure, and in 1E "a few" special elves could attain very high level (but those would be NPCs...PCs are considered the "typical").
Look, the elves were immortal (most alive for 1000s of years), and could practise fighting or casting spells all day for many centurys (compared to 30 yrs or so for humans). In that time (if they applied themselves in practise) every Elf would be very high level. They certainly wouldn't have been threatened by Orcs or trolls in hand to hand combat (espl. considering mere 20 something humans killed orc).

Yes, Elrond, Galadriel, Legolas were beyond the average power of regular elves...so what. Thats only 3 in millions (or however many elves there were).

I fail to see any relevance to what you have just said. Most elves probably don't go adventuring and are commoners, just like humans. Just because elven civilians aren't any more of a match for orcs than human civilians are doesn't prove anything at all.

From a Tolkien perspective, putting arbitrary level restrictions on PC elves so that only "special" NPC elves can be great heroes is in no way different than putting arbitrary level restrictions on humans so that only the likes of Aragorn can rise to great level. By the books, we only have evidence that Aragorn, Bormir, and a few others were beyond the power of regular humans. Why do you not take that as evidence that Tolkien's Men were limited? We get the same amount of evidence either way (in other words, none.)

Are you really arguing that Tokiens elves were limited in power compared to humans? That's really silly.

Fingolfin vs. Morgoth?

I was just thinking of Faenor telling Morgoth to "get off my lawn!" and slamming his door in his face

 

[Darth Shoju]

You seem to have an interesting definition of "immerson". I fail to see how skills and feats defeat immersion in any way. QUOTE]


You are entitled to your opinion. For me they interfere in 2 ways: 1. they reduce actions to video button feel (jump, bluff, tumble) and they create overly complicated PCs *highly customised, where the player is forced to look at their PC sheet to remember what powers they have and can use, what their stacked chances to do anything in particular is etc. etc. This need to search there paper and then do math brings them out of their imagination (breaking the concentration) and reminds them there just playing a game with rules (compare that with 1E or OD&D, with simplistic PCs). Feats and skills also give a since of predictability (as these chances are rolled on a D20 system rather then a table system which puts the power in the hands of the DM).

I realize Merric B and others have stated they do not experiance these problems. And I realize not everyone plays D&D for the same reason (some actually prefer stacking, building unique characters with powers, and in-game use of skills as actions). But, my players seem to find 3E too confusing, and have stated they have a hard time getting into the game because of it. Who knows, maybe its a difference in how brains are wired, or just getting enough experiance under your belt.

I found calculating THAC0 ruined my immersion pretty consistently. Figuring out which saving throw we were supposed to be using required a lot of consulting of the character sheet too ("which save does this fall under...poison? petrification? breath weapon? wands? staves?"). While I hardly consider 3E flawless the core mechanic is at the very least more intuitive. I'm also not sure how anyone could find feats and skills to be *more* predictable than a GM consulting a table for results (skills and feats are open-ended, a table is very closed-ended). :\

YMMV though, I suppose.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Tolkien's elves aren't (A)D&D's elves. Comparing them, except in a general way, really isn't appropriate. Furthermore, the AD&D setting isn't Middle-earth of either the First or Third Age.

 

[Darth Shoju]

It's been mentioned several times in this thread that level limits for demi-humans make little sense because it's illogical to think that a being that lives for hundreds or thousands of years wouldn't acquire high levels. A sincere question: do those of you who have no level limits actually have lots of super high level elf wizards and dwarf fighters because of the open-ended potential and long lifespans? What's the average level of those race/class combos in your world?

I go with a combination of factors.
-Long-lived races mature slowly. Several human generations could pass before an elf hits adulthood.
-Said races also tend to be more contemplative and focused on the past and present rather than the future. A type of racial ennui if you will. Without the impetus to excel they tend to progress slowly.
-Modest ability scores. I don't tend to assume everyone who is a spellcaster starts out with an 18 INT at first level. Some never get higher than 16. 16 INT is still pretty bright. This goes for humans as well though.
-Necessity and interest. Not every elf or dwarf spends all day practicing their martial or magical skills. They also aren't generally constantly fighting. Those who do have a need or inclination to hone those skills do often advance to a higher level. These individuals aren't entirely common in their societies. Some end up as adventurers. Most members of a given race aren't interested in the dangers of a martial/magical lifestyle. Many just want to live their lives, make music, eat good food and practice their humble crafts.

Personally I'd rather come up with setting reasons to explain why all elves aren't 50th level fighter/mages than create rules that nonsensically limit their options. If I want an NPC halfling to be one of the most powerful wizards in the land, then I don't have to contrive some rules exception to do so. If one of the players wants to play a dwarven druid then why shouldn't they?

 

[Odhanan]

There's nothing wrong with race class limits as long as people playing limited race/class combinations have something to play with that makes them have as much fun as any other player around the game table, at any level.

Which instantly becomes a tricky issue. Thus, it's far simpler to stick with balanced races and balanced classes in the rules theory rather than start to screw with the system without any idea of what the experience of this or that RPG group out there will be with those limitations. Better to let the users decide.

 

[Darth Shoju]

Tolkien's elves aren't (A)D&D's elves. Comparing them, except in a general way, really isn't appropriate. Furthermore, the AD&D setting isn't Middle-earth of either the First or Third Age.

As far as elves are concerned I'd agree. Then again "halflings" didn't exactly spring fresh from the mind of Gary Gygax either. LoTR certainly had a sizeable influence on D&D, but Middle Earth is hard to simulate without fairly extensive modification of the D&D rules.

 

[tx7321]

Darth, I never used THACO, just tables. So the players did absolutely nothing but role a D20 dice to hit or 2 D10s to save. And most players don't have a clue what they need to hit or save. So its very "cowboy and Indian" in that way.

G, I didn't say the elves were similar between AD&D and Tolkien. What I said was that the level limits in AD&D reflected a world where elves weren't on average overly powerful (in a similar way to Tolkein and other authors of fantasy). In Tolkein we have Elf warriors being killed by orc and troll (in several battles). Some of these were elf soldiers for 1000s of years; yet they fight no better then 30 something humans. Imagine if you had 1000 years to become a warrior to secure the borders of your elvish kingdom from orc and worg. Level limits would explain this. Bottom line, Gygax wanted to create a human centric world. He wanted most players to pick human...its not right or wrong...its Gary Gygax.

 

[molonel]

G, I didn't say the elves were similar between AD&D and Tolkien. What I said was that the level limits in AD&D reflected a world where elves weren't on average overly powerful (in a similar way to Tolkein and other authors of fantasy). In Tolkein we have Elf warriors being killed by orc and troll (in several battles). Some of these were elf soldiers for 1000s of years; yet they fight no better then 30 something humans. Imagine if you had 1000 years to become a warrior to secure the borders of your elvish kingdom from orc and worg. Level limits would explain this. Bottom line, Gygax wanted to create a human centric world. He wanted most players to pick human...its not right or wrong...its Gary Gygax.

Mmmmmm ... no.

There is this sense throughout Tolkien of the races waning and becoming less powerful. This is true of elves. This is also true of men. Hurin, in the Silmarillion, slew over 70 trolls from the troll guard of Gothmog. In the Book of Lost Tales, Volume 2, during the battle for Gondolin they slew a couple of dozen balrogs including Gothmog, the Lord of All Balrogs. Shelob is less powerful than Ungoliant. Sauron is less powerful than Morgoth.

In D&D, adventurers are powerful. People who go out and fight, and learn how to do battle, are ultimately more powerful than someone who stays home and grinds corn, and farms. The Noldor who came over from the blessed land were much more powerful elves than the wood elves of Mirkwood.

Tolkien has elves and great heroes dying, not because he's human centric, but because it's not D&D. People don't have abstract hit points. When Isildur lost the one ring, and came up out of the water, he died with an orcish arrow in his eye. The elves you're talking about were not the most powerful elves.

Level limits are an arbitrary mechanic to make humans more powerful with no logic or reason beyond, "I want humans to be the most powerful race." It doesn't reflect Tolkien or any other great fantasy writer. It's Gygax, and it was a silly rule then, and it's a silly rule now. Many of us ignored it back then, and rightly so.