Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Philotomy Jurament" data-source="post: 4824289" data-attributes="member: 20854">I suspect that D&amp;D was envisioned as a humanocentric game, so limiting the non-human races fit the &quot;fantasy concept&quot; and also seemed to fit in with the issue of game balance.&nbsp; Level limits were constraints, but not crippling ones, when the <a href="http://www.philotomy.com/#levels" target="_blank">&quot;level scale&quot;</a> of the game was considered, with &quot;name level&quot; marking the upper end of the scale.&nbsp; (The original Men &amp; Magic book referred to &quot;top level&quot; for the human classes, even though no firm limits were imposed.)Also, I don't think the <a href="http://www.philotomy.com/#class_race" target="_blank">races and classes</a> are best viewed as being rules of the world so much as definitions of typical archetypes for adventurers.&nbsp; For example, I don't think all Elves in the campaign world need be (or should be) Fighter/Magic Users.&nbsp; But PC elf adventurers typically are.&nbsp; Similarly, I don't see the Cleric class as being the &quot;rules for a holy man or priest in the game world.&quot;&nbsp; Instead, I see the Cleric class as modelling a specific type of martial, adventuring saint or holy man who is physically capable and also performs spells/miracles.&nbsp; I think the game world would also be full of other kinds of holy men and priests that don't follow Cleric class rules at all.&nbsp; This helps explain why non-humans couldn't be Cleric's, originally.&nbsp; It wasn't that Elves don't have religious leaders or priests or whatever, it's just that they aren't Clerics.The obvious criticism of this approach is &quot;well, what if I want to play such-and-such that doesn't fit this mold?&quot;&nbsp; I say, &quot;go ahead, if you want to.&quot;&nbsp; Come up with something fun and <a href="http://www.philotomy.com/#your_own" target="_blank">make the game your own</a>.&nbsp; But while doing so, <a href="http://www.philotomy.com/#considering" target="_blank">consider</a> that maybe the original approach isn't broken or stupid, it's just viewing the fantasy world with a different set of assumptions: one that doesn't attempt to set up a holistic system of rules that model everything, but rather bite-sized chunks that model specific concepts.&nbsp; Not &quot;these rules cover all holy men and divine magic&quot; but &quot;these rules cover a specific kind of adventuring holy man and his magic.&quot;&nbsp; Not &quot;these rules cover and define all Elves in the fantasy world,&quot; but &quot;these rules cover the archetypical elven adventurer.&quot;&nbsp; Et cetera.My $0.02, for what they're worth...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Philotomy Jurament, post: 4824289, member: 20854"] I suspect that D&D was envisioned as a humanocentric game, so limiting the non-human races fit the "fantasy concept" and also seemed to fit in with the issue of game balance. Level limits were constraints, but not crippling ones, when the [url=http://www.philotomy.com/#levels]"level scale"[/url] of the game was considered, with "name level" marking the upper end of the scale. (The original [i]Men & Magic[/i] book referred to "top level" for the human classes, even though no firm limits were imposed.) Also, I don't think the [url=http://www.philotomy.com/#class_race]races and classes[/url] are best viewed as being rules of the world so much as definitions of typical archetypes for adventurers. For example, I don't think all Elves in the campaign world need be (or should be) Fighter/Magic Users. But PC elf adventurers typically are. Similarly, I don't see the Cleric class as being the "rules for a holy man or priest in the game world." Instead, I see the Cleric class as modelling a specific type of martial, adventuring saint or holy man who is physically capable and also performs spells/miracles. I think the game world would also be full of other kinds of holy men and priests that don't follow Cleric class rules at all. This helps explain why non-humans couldn't be Cleric's, originally. It wasn't that Elves don't have religious leaders or priests or whatever, it's just that they aren't [i]Clerics[/i]. The obvious criticism of this approach is "well, what if I want to play such-and-such that doesn't fit this mold?" I say, "go ahead, if you want to." Come up with something fun and [url=http://www.philotomy.com/#your_own]make the game your own[/url]. But while doing so, [url=http://www.philotomy.com/#considering]consider[/url] that maybe the original approach isn't broken or stupid, it's just viewing the fantasy world with a different set of assumptions: one that doesn't attempt to set up a holistic system of rules that model everything, but rather bite-sized chunks that model specific concepts. Not "these rules cover all holy men and divine magic" but "these rules cover a specific kind of adventuring holy man and his magic." Not "these rules cover and define all Elves in the fantasy world," but "these rules cover the archetypical elven adventurer." Et cetera. My $0.02, for what they're worth... [/QUOTE]

Verification