What was the reason for Demihuman level and class limits in AD&D?

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 "level scale" of the game was considered, with "name level" marking the upper end of the scale. (The original Men & Magic book referred to "top level" for the human classes, even though no firm limits were imposed.)

Also, I don't think the races and classes 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 Clerics.

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 make the game your own. But while doing so, consider 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...

Treebore said:

I guess no one read Dragon back in the old days. The only "balance" they were worried about was having 1,000's of 1,000+ year old elves, all being 20th level in several classes, ruling the world. So to "balance" out the edge such longevity would give the elven race, and to lesser extent the Dwarves, they did the racial limits. Then to be "fair" they put limits on the other "demi human" races.

Then in UA they allowed higher racial level limits if they had super high attributes.

The racial advantages actually became pretty meaningless in high level games, because by then most parties had ways to see in darkness, etc... even when human. So to limit them at high levels due to their racial advantages was pretty meaningless. It was to make Greyhawk being a "human centric" world rather than elven or dwarven make sense.

After all, why wouldn't a race that can live a couple of thousand years not have a few hundred multi class elven demigods walking around being level 20 in 3 classes each?

So it was to have the world make sense that humans would have a position of eminence rather than servitude.

Click to expand...

Yes, and why not have chars attain 36th level in every class and become the ruler of the Gods themselves.
BWAH HAHA!

2009???

The alternate question to this one deals with 3.X editions of D&D.

To me, it is reasonable that unless you have level limits, you are going to have 10K level+ elves and 5000+ level Dwarves and such.

No one else could ever become dominate in the world.

If 3.X was played with unlimited levels, why were humans not just an afterthought along with any other short lived race. In reality, with unlimited levels and age ranges 5X to 10X that of humans, elves and Dwarves should absolutely dominate the game. There shouldn't even be a consideration of any other race.

The majority of enemies should be at least 100 level elf or dwarf (orcs, goblins, other short lived races would have been wiped out an infinite age ago).

Why isn't the world logically dominated by them except because DM fiat which makes absolutely no logical sense?

(5e gets away with this simply because 20th level is the highest level anyone can ever get regardless of any sense to that, but as 20th level is the highest, everyone is stuck at that point at the highest point. Still, you have epic boons and longer lived races should have more high level characters than shorter lived ones).

Becoming a god at 36th level is more of a Classic D&D thing than AD&D anyway.

rounser said:

Therein lies the rub. A halfling requires the most XP of any class to reach level 36 in the RC. Why? I assume because they're viewed as - like the hobbits they're facsimiles of - not natural adventurers, so a 36th level halfling is one hell of a thing. It's not a politically correct reason, and the heresy by modern standards, but it is a reason. A simulationist one, as unfashionable as that may be.

Their death ray saves make a big compensation for this if you're using some of the optional rules like weapon mastery (not joking here).

Click to expand...

That 36 levels table for Mystic, Elf, Dwarf, and Halfling's an optional rule, often not used.

The stock for Rules Cyclopedia is Elf 12, Dwarf 10, Halfling 8, Human Mystic 16, Fighter 36, Cleric 36, Wizard 36, Thief 36.

Then there are the Gazetteer line classes Elves go up to 20, Dwarves to 22, and halfings still cap at 8, but if living at home, can gain 35 levels of Master...

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
²: Secondary Class. Must meet prerequisites. Levels are on top of primary, but don't grant hit dice...

Olli said:

well, at least in BECMI, if you played low-level games, the elf was always the superior choice (spells like a MU, weapon and armor selection of a fighter and d6 HD). If one could reap up the necessary attributescores, there was no reason not to play an elf!!!!! The same does NOT apply to dwarves and halflings, as they were not much bettter then the fighter respectively!!!!!

Olli

Click to expand...

But advancement slower than molasses in January....
The halfling, without level caps, is a great form of Woodsman/Hunter... the hide and sneak of a thief. With them, well, once you have the master levels book (or the RC), the clan artifact is pretty damned potent.
But alas, the BECMI/RC + GAZ "Ranger" is just an elf without the infravision, special detects, pointy ears, and nigh-immortality. (No XP break, either.)
And the Warrior Elf is just a fighter, with the ability to add magic later.
And there is a possibility that one can become a cleric later in play... see the Wrath of the Immortals boxed set. (Sure, it's primarily for Benekander... but it does tell you how to do it for others...)

Plus, the GAZ line adding all those other classes, Shadow or Alfheim Elves to level 20, Dwarves to 22, halflings to essentially 43... (8 Halfling, 35 master after)...

It got real silly.

howandwhy99 said:

Roleplaying in the Army is acted out wargaming. (link) Hobby roleplaying is the sister half of hobby wargames. Heck, U.S. army officers are still under strict regulations not to play RPGs or wargames with enlisted soldiers.

Click to expand...

Doesn't stop many of them when at home station...

The actual regulation is more about general socialization anyway... not just RPGs. In theory, officers are not supposed to mingle with enlisted, period, for any reason, outside work, church, or unit recreational activities (such as the unit's Dining In, or holiday picknics/parties). Theoretically, it's primarily so the officers can, when needed, sacrifice any of the enlisted men under their command to accomplish the missions. It was much more important in the 19th C, but then the US was much more class-conscious then, too.

GreyLord said:

The alternate question to this one deals with 3.X editions of D&D.
To me, it is reasonable that unless you have level limits, you are going to have 10K level+ elves and 5000+ level Dwarves and such.
No one else could ever become dominate in the world.
If 3.X was played with unlimited levels, why were humans not just an afterthought along with any other short lived race. In reality, with unlimited levels and age ranges 5X to 10X that of humans, elves and Dwarves should absolutely dominate the game. There shouldn't even be a consideration of any other race.
The majority of enemies should be at least 100 level elf or dwarf (orcs, goblins, other short lived races would have been wiped out an infinite age ago).
Why isn't the world logically dominated by them except because DM fiat which makes absolutely no logical sense?

Click to expand...

Although the stereotypes of high-level 3e play* are generally the logical extreme and didn't see much actual play, it is still very much glass cannon territory, kinda returning to the high-lethality play of 1st-level. You can do amazing things, but so can whomever you are up against, and a lot of them are lethal*. The last thing you want is for them to get the drop on you when they are all prepped with pre-cast spells and loadouts optimal to the situation (or even showing up with 4 of their friends when you only have 3 of yours). Survival at that level kinda requires either DM fiat**, or incredibly extreme caution.
*nothing but scry-and-die insta-kills and arch mages living in demi planes with their self-chosen physics sending ice assassin duplicates out after each other. Or some such over-the-top-ness.
**and no few of those perma-dead, or at least hope your buddies really like you given the cost of getting you back and replacing any gear you lost.
***only putting challenges in front of the PCs that they can handle, or at least when they are ready to face them. Possibly explained in-world as a cold war treaty-like accepted set of norms of fair fights amongst high-CR creatures.

I can imagine an actual self-consistent 3.X world either doesn't actually have many level 30+ elves and dwarves* (because they and the opponents they face kill each other off), or they exist but are basically unseen (never setting foot outside teleport-exclusion zone impenetrable bastions unless you had every tactical advantage and every contingency taken care of).
*or anyone else, given the several dozen other ways to get around natural lifespans.

Zulgyan said:

To the OP:

EGG said here in ENWorld, and back in AD&D DMG, that he wanted to keep the game humano-centric, and humans as the main protagonists of the game.

Click to expand...

This is something that WOTC seems to want to change.