TSR Why would anyone want to play 1e?

[Nikosandros]

Can you say where a 1e 1d4 is stated? The MM says d6, and the DMG I found the mercenaries as 0 level with d4+3. I vaguely remember d4 for peasants but can't find the reference right now.

The DMG has this table for NPCs hit points. I would classify peasants as farmers and thus as "laboring".

 

[Sacrosanct]

nvrmind, posted above answers that

 

[Mannahnin]

Human's are successful (even with primitive weapons like spears) because they work in groups and work together with tactics and strategy. It's not just one human vs. that Bear coming into their village, it's a dozen or more humans verses that bear...all armed with bows and then with spears if that doesn't take it down.

Sometimes the bear wins, but in the larger groups, normally humans can win.

Of course, this doesn't work as well against Orcs, goblins, or others who also congregate in large groups. These are fantasy groups of course. The only advantage humans have is higher numbers in this case...and of course...Heroes (and that's where the PC's come into play).

We have one other advantage today that gives us a better hand up than they did in primitive times. Technology. Technology is a game changer.

Mankind's biggest weapon isn't ability scores, hitpoints, or class levels todays...but our brains which help us overcome enemies, animals and the environment.

So what's going on in D&D worlds, where all humanoid races have brains with which to overcome these things, yet somehow, many of them are human-centric?

I think the implied worldbuilding is roughly:

Humans out-reproduce elves, dwarves, and other more long-lived and theoretically more powerful species. And humans out-organize more numerous species like orcs and goblins. In addition to being more ambitious and heroic (capable of advancement to higher levels) than either.

AD&D borrows from Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions that civilization and humanity benefit from Law, being better organized, more stable and mutually-supporting than the peoples of Chaos. You can see this mechanized in the Henchman and Hireling rules in the 1E DMG, for example, where Lawful alignments and good treatment of followers give substantial loyalty and morale bonuses. Evil and chaos contain the seeds of their own downfall, fighting amongst themselves and not having long term stability of leadership, even under a powerful overlord.

 

[James Gasik]

I think the implied worldbuilding is roughly:

Humans out-reproduce elves, dwarves, and other more long-lived and theoretically more powerful species. And humans out-organize more numerous species like orcs and goblins. In addition to being more ambitious and heroic (capable of advancement to higher levels) than either.

AD&D borrows from Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions that civilization and humanity benefit from Law, being better organized, more stable and mutually-supporting than the peoples of Chaos. You can see this mechanized in the Henchman and Hireling rules in the 1E DMG, for example, where Lawful alignments and good treatment of followers give substantial loyalty and morale bonuses. Evil and chaos contain the seeds of their own downfall, fighting amongst themselves and not having long term stability of leadership, even under a powerful overlord.

I don't know about birth rates- it's mentioned from time to time that Dwarves and Elves have lower birth rates (though in the Forgotten Realms, at least, this was rectified with the Thunder Blessing when Moradin gave Dwarven mothers a large number of twin births).

If a Chaotic culture is problematic, 1e Halflings (who don't seem to have any fertility problems) and Dwarves are typically Lawful Good.

Plus, well, if some peoples should be rarer than others, it's funny that the PHB doesn't address this. Elven and Half-Elven PC's especially are pretty popular choices (although that is going off of anecdotal evidence, when my games used to be flush with them before playing more exotic characters became a more accepted practice).

It always felt to me that the reason for D&D to be human-centric basically came down to "because we said it is". You could easily come up with reasons why another culture was more influential, like Earthdawn's Dwarves, whose civilization survived the Scourge with the best infrastructure, and being merchants and craftsman, were the first to travel far and wide to explore the world and find trade routes- to the point that the "common tongue" of Earthdawn is Dwarven!

And if a DM is fine with the status quo, that's fine, obviously, it's easier to describe human cities and culture to fellow humans after all. But for most campaigns, the reasons why this is the status quo seem quite arbitrary and manufactured.