How does this strike you gentle folk as an alternative system to level limits for demi-human characters in AD&D?

a. Clerics.
Demi-human clerics cannot cast spells above level 4. They get the spell 'slots' for higher-level spells as they progress, but they must fill those slots with lower level spells. Otherwise, demi-human clerics progress as normal.
Justification: the demi-human races are in decline, and so are their gods. The demi-human gods simply cannot channel as much of their divine essence to their followers as human gods can.

b. Magic-Users
Elven and half-elven magic-users cannot cast spells above level 5. Gnome illusionists cannot cast spells above level 4. They nonetheless receive the appropriate spell 'slots' for the higher levels, but have to fill those 'slots' with spells that are level 1-5 in power (1-4 in the case of gnomes).
Justification:The long-lived, traditionalist ways of the elder folk have engendered in them structured minds simply too rigid to apprehend the non-Euclidean runes (or whatever) that higher-level magic requires.

c. Fighters and Rangers
Once demi-human fighters or rangers reach their level limit, they no longer receive full hit die (d10 for fighters), but rather the flat +3 bonus per level thereafter (the bonus that all fighters receive levels 10+). Moreover, their combat abilities (to hit rolls, or THAC0) improve in only one weapon (with all other weapons, they remain as they were at the original level limit). Finally, demi-human fighters do not found new strongholds and lands of their own.
Justification: The decline of the civilizations of the demi-humans saps their martial and political will. Culturally, it becomes difficult for them to remain continually ready for conflict. They thus concentrate their limited attentions on only a single weapon after a certain point.

d. Thieves and Assassins
Just let demi-humans in these classes progress normally (most demi-human thieves could progress without limit already, and half-orcs could progress without limit as assassins). However, they never can become guildmasters in any city dominated by humans (and most crime-ridden cities, of course, are dominated by humans).
Justification: Humans are somewhat envious of demi-human thieves and assassins, and refuse to grant them positions of authority.

e. Druids
Half-elves can be druids just as humans can be, according to the core 1e rules. This should not be changed. However, I recommend that elves also have their own druidic order, and can advance to level 14 within that order. Unlike regular druids, elvish druids receive only a d6 HD, do not learn to shape change, but are skilled in short bows (with a +1 to hit bonus) in addition to the usual druidic weapons. The Elven Druidic order is NG in alignment and accepts only elves (however, rumours of dark elven NE 'spider druids' exist). Half-elf druids must be part of the human hierarchy.

f. Bards
No changes, though the class probably should be open to elves, who use only a d8 for HD during their phase as a fighter.

Paladins and monks are unaffected, as they are human-only classes.

Also, human PCs receive a +1 bonus to any ability score of their choice at level one (no ability score can be improved beyond 18), and another +1 bonus to any ability score of their choice at level 5 (no ability score can be improved beyond 18). This reflects humans' focus on continual self-improvement, a focus the elder races now lack.

That's it. Thoughts?

Sure, they sound as reasoned as anything; although I've never seen the reason for level-limits in either AD&D1&2 or Basic. It isn't like demi-humans are over-powered - even though I think there is a case for Elves being so (from mythological/Tolkien source material). Game balance should come from role-playing or from the DM not from mechanics. With that said, how about:

Clerics: Demi-humans worshiping Human gods may only advance/reach a certain power level due to church hierarchy. Demi-humans worshiping their own gods have completely different objects and tenets of faith; after a certain level they are required to spend their lives in a monastery or within their homelands.

Magic-Users: I think it depends on which take on Elves you go with. If you go with Elves as being adept with magic then you would have to allow any level. Alternatively, you could say that D&D magic is mainly of the human variety and that Elven magic requires study within their own lands - thus hierarchy prevents higher levels. Though I think this doesn't seem to fit well. Of course you may have Elves as being one with nature and therefore have hefty restrictions. As for Gnomes, I'd go with unrestricted illusion magic.

Fighters: Again, I'd say any level; unrestricted. However, again you could bring in hierarchy, though again this seems unfitting. You could bring in weapon restrictions and fighting styles though. Elves only being able to advance with certain weapons (spear, Eleven Swords), with humans weapons being too unbalanced for Elves to use. You could also apply this to the other demi-humans (i.e. Dwarves using axes and hammers only).

Thieves: Thievery could be a human concept so apply level limits; Elves may find in utterly alien, Dwarves less so. You could allow Halflings to gain maximum level by being a certain type of Thief (i.e. Bilbo Baggins Burglar). Half-Orcs would seemingly make great Thieves, but I think your idea could reason why they couldn't advance in level.

Druids: If you've gone with nature loving Elves then I'd allow Elf Druids and any level - same with Half-Elves.

Bards: Yes to Elven bards

In AD&D demi-humans have a number of mechanical advantages like special vision, a boatload of languages, immunities/saves and so forth, and very few drawbacks other than level and class limits. Any kind of level limits, hard or light, postpones the cost of selecting a demi-human to a point most campaigns never reach.

Handwaving "old school shouldn't care about balance" doesn't absolve you from running a game where players feel they have real choices and don't feel dumb because they wanted to play one legitimate thing over another. A straight-up 10% experience levy on demihumans (5% for half elves, yeah) at least only postpones the consequences to 2nd level. or, more smoothly, just restrict the XP bonuses for ability scores to humans.

Quote from: elfandghost;679716Sure, they sound as reasoned as anything; although I've never seen the reason for level-limits in either AD&D1&2 or Basic.

I believe it's a way to explain why Elves (and Dwarves) don't rule the world, as they live 100s, even thousands of years.

I think the cap could have been a little higher, though. I used to run into it on Half-Elf clerics a lot

Not bad at all.

I also like the Dark Dungeons take, where they simply require lots and lots of extra XP, and the Blood & Treasure take, where humans Get a couple Nice advantages (+10% XP, and a bonus to all saves (wich also makes them better at skills!) or an extra feat (if used)).

And yeah, in AD&D the demihumans Are just plain better - Dwarves, Elves and even Gnomes make better Fighters than Humans, and while Halflings can't have 18 STR wich means they can't really be melee monsters, their Dex + thrown & sling bonus makes them at least equal to Humans as Fighters (a Halfling Fighter that say specializes in, say, darts makes for an extremely good wizard-killer!).

And that's not getting into multiclassing. Dear Gawd. Elf Fighter/Mage, anyone? (or Half-Elf Fighter/Mage...who can have 18 Con...)

Not having Elf Fighter 20/Mage 20 dudes running around (...or Half-Elf Fighter 20/Mage 20/Cleric 20...) is a good thing, unless you want to play Silmarillion.

I prepping a LL w/AE Companion game for the near future.

Instead of level limits, I was thinking of making the following changes:

1) There are are no hard cap level limits except for classes that have one (such as assassin)

2) Only humans get a bonus to XP from high ability scores.

3) All demi humans require a base 10% more XP to advance per class chosen. So a F/MU/Thf would need 30% more XP to level than the tables indicate.

4) All XP from all the classes (plus the additional %) are added together in a single pool. Once this total is reached the character gains a level in all chosen classes.

5) The only classes available for multiclassing are fighter, cleric, magic user, and thief. All subclasses must be single classed.

I plan on working out a hit die progression for each combo so no wonky totaling multiple dice, dividing, etc.

Also demihuman life spans for this game will be reduced. Elves max age will be about 160, Dwarves 140, and halflings/gnomes about 120.

Quote from: Roger the GS;679720In AD&D demi-humans have a number of mechanical advantages like special vision, a boatload of languages, immunities/saves and so forth, and very few drawbacks other than level and class limits. Any kind of level limits, hard or light, postpones the cost of selecting a demi-human to a point most campaigns never reach.

Handwaving "old school shouldn't care about balance" doesn't absolve you from running a game where players feel they have real choices and don't feel dumb because they wanted to play one legitimate thing over another. A straight-up 10% experience levy on demihumans (5% for half elves, yeah) at least only postpones the consequences to 2nd level. or, more smoothly, just restrict the XP bonuses for ability scores to humans.

Never had a problem with no level limits here. People play what they want to because they think it's cool, so there are players who mostly play elves because they like elves, or dwarves because they like dwarves, or humans because they like humans. It doesn't have anything to do with mechanical advantages (in these cases).

Not a fan of this sort of targeted, specific explanation for everything. I prefer loose abstractions which can be explained differently in specific circumstances instead.

But then, I'm okay with level limits in the first place. I know it rubs a lot of players the wrong way, but I like the notion of a medieval fantasy world in which the humans, though short lived, fleeting presences in the world, as it were, can realize a heroic potential the demi-human races simply do not have, or can only attain rarely. Reminds me of Moorcock's Young Kingdoms in which humans are the center piece on the Cosmic Balance's chessboard.

If I softened it, I would use UA's level limits, and rule that demi-humans can advance beyond those limits, but at a much lesser rate of XP gains, like they would effectively gain only one XP for each four, or five, or ten acquired by a human in similar circumstances. So they can mature and realize some potential in a development capacity comparable to humans on the short term, but stagnate, and learn much more slowly from new experiences, as time passes.

Or you just do away with level limits and come up with in-game disadvantages like a lack of anonymity, treated either really well or very badly, and so on.

Quote from: Benoist;679793If I softened it, I would use UA's level limits, and rule that demi-humans can advance beyond those limits, but at a much lesser rate of XP gains, like they would effectively gain only one XP for each four, or five, or ten acquired by a human in similar circumstances. So they can mature and realize some potential in a development capacity comparable to humans on the short term, but stagnate, and learn much more slowly from new experiences, as time passes.

I think if I ever went back to an earlier edition of the game, I would use a combination of this and swapping multiclassing and dual classing. It just makes more sense to me that an elf would suddenly get bored over the years and decide to give up his sword to learn magic, whereas a human would try to cram as much into his life as he could, and so he decides to be a fighter AND a thief AND a mage, all at once.

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;679797I think if I ever went back to an earlier edition of the game, I would use a combination of this and swapping multiclassing and dual classing. It just makes more sense to me that an elf would suddenly get bored over the years and decide to give up his sword to learn magic, whereas a human would try to cram as much into his life as he could, and so he decides to be a fighter AND a thief AND a mage, all at once.

That is true. Dual-classing suits demi-humans much more than humans. One advantage could be that only humans can multi-class, while demi-humans don't feel the need  - due to longevity. I know that prevents Elven fighter/mages but I always felt that such a concept should be its own class (for Elves only).

Way back on Dragonsfoot - wow, was that really almost seven years ago?! geebus! - I wrote about uncapping demihumans' archetypal classes as an alternative to the current rules, but now I'm more inclined to require player character demihumans to multiclass instead and leave the level-limits as-is.

Quote from: Tommy Brownell;679797I think if I ever went back to an earlier edition of the game, I would use a combination of this and swapping multiclassing and dual classing. It just makes more sense to me that an elf would suddenly get bored over the years and decide to give up his sword to learn magic, whereas a human would try to cram as much into his life as he could, and so he decides to be a fighter AND a thief AND a mage, all at once.

I had this thought ~10 years ago, and agree that it makes good sense.

The one drawback with it -- and the reason why I wouldn't use it -- is that in any ADnD game I'm likely to run, I'd use a number of classic TSR modules (indeed, doing so would be one of the main reasons why I'd run ADnD again).  I would not want to rework all the NPCs in light of such a change.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;6797375) The only classes available for multiclassing are fighter, cleric, magic user, and thief. All subclasses must be single classed.

No gnome thief/illusionists! :eek:

Quote from: The Ent;679733...
Not having Elf Fighter 20/Mage 20 dudes running around (...or Half-Elf Fighter 20/Mage 20/Cleric 20...) is a good thing...

Yeah, this is, I think, the original rationale for level limits, in addition to a mechanism for encouraging human PCs.

My understanding is that Gygax was concerned to ensure that the world was human-centric, with demi-humans 'exotic' but marginal (and in decline).  (I don't think Arneson cared about this issue...)

So Gygax had no problem with unlimited progression for thieves, as members of that class were never going to become world-dominators.  

I have some sympathy with this view, at least for ADnD.  At the same time, I wanted to come up with a mechanism that did not impose such a 'hard' limit on demi-human PCs, which seems both excessive and violates (IMO) verisimilitude ("my dwarf fighter is going to live for another 200 years, but he will never improve his skill with his battle-axe at all?!?").