What is wrong with race class limits?

[Sejs]

I said the privilege can be granted by the rules. The point is that they are monsters, so the privilege of using them as PCs can rationally come with restrictions (class/level limits).

You're going to have to forgive me here, but can you point out where it actually said "demihumans: a privilege, not a right" in a book?

 

[molonel]

My campaign philosophy is similar to that of the Dungeon Crawl Classics: "Remember the good old days, when adventures were underground, NPCs were there to be killed, and the finale of every dungeon was the dragon on the 20th level? Those days are back. Dungeon Crawl Classics don't waste your time with long-winded speeches, weird campaign settings, or NPCs who aren't meant to be killed. Each adventure is 100% good, solid dungeon crawl, with the monsters you know, the traps you fear, and the secret doors you know are there somewhere."

I know. You keep using that quote. The problem is, I played the game back in Ye Goode Olde Days that they are referring to, and I played elves and dwarves and half-orcs, and I loved it then and I love it now. Removing those elements doesn't take me back to those days. In fact, it's a different game entirely. Now, there's nothing inherently WRONG with playing a different game, but don't tell me that you're trying to take me back to the good old days when you're not.

And my point is, if YOU, as the DM, can roleplay all of those things, how can you tell me that I don't have the knowledge or understanding of those races to do so?

In other words, non-human NPCs are there to elicit wonder, horror, and combat. Roleplaying is at a minimum. Non-human NPCs are merely part of the setting and thus do not require more than a mere modicum of role-playing. Contrast that with a PC, who has to be role-played for hours on end, week after week, year after year. Further, PCs tend to have similar goals: acquiring experience points and treasures. As a Judge I can make an NPC do something so bizarre and off the wall as to make no rational sense, but if a PC were to do that, the player would probably have to roll-up a new character in short order.

As both a DM and a player, I disagree entirely. The roleplaying that takes place on either side of the screen is rich, deep, diverse and never 2-dimensional. Or at least it shouldn't be.

I was going to post something to this effect, but someone else already said it better:

This might be a valid point, except that the source material from whence these nonhuman races were derived was (and is) human imagination. Elves are the personification of nature-friendly humans, dwarves are hard drinking miners with an affinity for rock and stone - because that was how they were conceived in legends and stories. They are relatable to humans because if they were not, then they would not have made interesting characters in the tales in which they were placed. Trying to assert that nonhumans like dwarves, elves, gnomes, and so on are so alien that they are incomprehensible to human experience misses the point. They are human experience, that is where they got their genesis. Making them wholly inscrutable simply makes them irrelevant as players on the stage, and is a betrayal of the source material that engendered them.

 

[BroccoliRage]

Yeah, it's stupid when the rules limit what characters can do!

It's only right that every player should have all the KEWEL POWERZ of their choice. And my fiendish half-grell half-myconid paladin/assassin/bard/ranger/monk makes much more sense than those stupid rules.

/sarcasm

People who are not inclined toward strategy hate restrictions. And love anime.


On the other hand...

sounds l33t, d00d.

My bitchin' anime adaptation/groovy seventies van art concept is kewl. Can I play in your game? Pleez?

 

[BroccoliRage]

You're going to have to forgive me here, but can you point out where it actually said "demihumans: a privilege, not a right" in a book?

"It's what your DM thinks that is important, not what I think."

"The DM is final arbiter of all rules."

-Gary Gygax, Dungeon Master's Guide.

Yes, I know, the 3e books subtly communicate that the DM should always be challenged, and is always wrong when he deviates from the rules as written. Balderdash. If the DM makes a decision, respect the decision or leave. Don't waste time arguing. That's time that could be spent gaming.

Arguing with me when I've made my deliberations is a good way to get asked to leave. It's a guarantee that you won't be invited back to play, too. My group has jobs, families, and limited time to play, we aren't interested in arguments like this.

 

[Sejs]

My bitchin' anime adaptation/groovy seventies van art concept

Why do I suddenly have the mental image of Shaggy from Scooby Doo as a ranger?
"Zoinks! Orcs are coming down the hallway. Like let's get outta here, Scoob!"

 

[Seeten]

Anyone who gave me the "Its a priveledge for you that I allow you to play anything in my games, be happy with the scraps from my table" statement gets to game alone, in my experience. They certainly won't be gaming with me.

There are plenty of people running fun games that arent egomaniacs.

 

[molonel]

"It's what your DM thinks that is important, not what I think."

"The DM is final arbiter of all rules."

-Gary Gygax, Dungeon Master's Guide.

Gygax was excellent beginning for this game, but if he'd stayed at the helm, it would have sunk the hobby.

Yes, I know, the 3e books subtly communicate that the DM should always be challenged, and is always wrong when he deviates from the rules as written. Balderdash. If the DM makes a decision, respect the decision or leave. Don't waste time arguing. That's time that could be spent gaming.

3rd Edition has done nothing of the sort. My players respect my rulings. I allow discussion, but my rule is that if there is a question, and it starts chewing up game time, I will make a rules call, and that is final. If the decision ends up hurting the player's character, and I was wrong, I will make ammends. If I was wrong, and they benefit, and it doesn't break the game, then congrats! Christmas came early this year.

We're not technically players or GMs in this discussion. We're talking about gaming philosophy, and reasoning behind decisions.

And someone telling me that I'm incapable as a player of grasping the intricacies of playing a non-human race is poppycock. Pure and simple. Someone who says to me, "I only allow humans because that's the flavor I'm going for" gets a shrug and a nod.

Arguing with me when I've made my deliberations is a good way to get asked to leave. It's a guarantee that you won't be invited back to play, too. My group has jobs, families, and limited time to play, we aren't interested in arguments like this.

You wouldn't have to ask me to leave. I'd pack up, grab my eight-pack of Guinness, and hit the road without being asked.

 

[Aaron L]

"It's what your DM thinks that is important, not what I think."

"The DM is final arbiter of all rules."

-Gary Gygax, Dungeon Master's Guide.

Yes, I know, the 3e books subtly communicate that the DM should always be challenged, and is always wrong when he deviates from the rules as written. Balderdash. If the DM makes a decision, respect the decision or leave. Don't waste time arguing. That's time that could be spent gaming.

Arguing with me when I've made my deliberations is a good way to get asked to leave. It's a guarantee that you won't be invited back to play, too. My group has jobs, families, and limited time to play, we aren't interested in arguments like this.

You know, everyone I play with is a good friend of mine, and I'd never tell any of them to get out or leave a game we are all playing together because they don't agree with some draconian "it's my way or no way" attitude.

That's actually pretty vile.

People who are not inclined toward strategy hate restrictions. And love anime.

This part is a joke, right?

 

[Crothian]

If the DM makes a decision, respect the decision or leave. Don't waste time arguing. That's time that could be spent gaming.

Respect is earned not given. I don't respect someone just because he happens to call himself a DM. There are plenty of DMs who do not deserve my respect or anyone elses.

 

[Geoffrey]

I played the game back in Ye Goode Olde Days that they are referring to, and I played elves and dwarves and half-orcs, and I loved it then and I love it now. Removing those elements doesn't take me back to those days. In fact, it's a different game entirely. Now, there's nothing inherently WRONG with playing a different game, but don't tell me that you're trying to take me back to the good old days when you're not.

You're right. Demihuman PCs have always been a part of D&D. It is also the case that options for demihuman PCs have continually expanded from 1974 to today, so that demihuman PCs are far less limited than they used to be and are therefore probably more common.

I don't think that excluding demihuman PCs makes D&D cease being D&D. The impression I get from the 1974 rules is that Gary basically threw them in there simply because The Lord of the Rings was (and is) so popular. In other words, demihuman PCs started out as a marketing technique: "Hey! You can have a party of four hobbits, an elf, a dwarf, a magic-user, and two fighters! Sound familiar? Hint, hint." Here are the options for demihumans in the 1974 rules:

Elves could rise as high as 4th-level fighters and 8th-level magic-users.
Dwarves could rise as high as 6th-level fighters.
Hobbits could rise as high as 4th-level fighters.
And that's it.

Those roles are so restrictive that it is a very small step to disallowing them completely. Compare that to the notes in the 1974 rules that humans are completely unlimited in class and levels (with examples mentioned of 20th-level characters). Imagine a party of three 20th-level humans and a 6th-level dwarf. He'd be toast. The numbers were stacked to clearly discourage demihuman play.

Ergo, I do not think a human-PCs-only game thereby ceases to be D&D.