BECMI D&D is overrated

[T. Foster]

Level limits for the fighter class(es) kind of make sense since all of the demihuman races (including, in 1E, half-orcs) are smaller than humans and have lower maximum strength, so it seems reasonable they’d have a lower maximum hp cap, and the smaller the race the lower the cap (halflings and gnomes severely limited, elves and half-elves less so, dwarfs and half-orcs barely limited at all). That said, there’s no real reason they couldn’t continue to improve their attacks and saving throws even if they’re no longer gaining hit points (which BECMI sort of did with its Attack Ranks kludge).

Level limits for demihuman spell casters are harder to justify, and it’s really just a taste/flavor preference that Gygax wanted the highest level spells reserved to humans and for demihumans to exist in a secondary or supporting role - that they’re better for casual or younger players since they have a lot of “instant gratification” special abilities that are most useful at low levels, but the more serious and strategic-minded players who are thinking in the long term would (presumably) forego those shiny trinket abilities in exchange for unlimited potential.

It didn’t really work out that way (especially as the level limits kept being increased from OD&D to Greyhawk to AD&D to Unearthed Arcana to 2E to the point where most campaigns were never going to reach levels where they became relevant) and probably should have instead been dropped and replaced with something like requiring demihuman characters to earn 1.5 or 2x as many XP to level up as humans (alongside a maximum HD cap), which IIRC was presented as an optional rule in 2E.

I suspect they would’ve gotten there eventually even if Gary remained in charge longer (he was a LOT less wedded to the cobbled-together sacred cows of the 1E rules than a lot of the modern-day 1E grognards).

 

[Toadmaster]

View attachment 70121
Here it is in Gary’s own words from Europa 6-8 page 20, April of 1975. There may be more elegant solutions today, like not giving demi-humans any special in game abilities, but Gygax was literally writing the book on this stuff. Monday morning quarterbacking should to take that into account.

Even more modern systems, like Pathfinder, typically see all non human parties so the problem of how to encourage a human centric game hasn’t gone away.

This is why I didn't hate the alternate human rolling from Unearthed Arcana, it practically ensured human PCs would have good stats. Kind of a ham-fisted way of doing it, but no less so than limiting levels for demi-humans.

I know roll 3d6 in order has its fans but to me that was terrible from the start. WTF wants to play Dingle the fairly inept. For that one guy is there really a GM on this planet that would not allow a player to lower their rolled stats?

 

[sharps54]

This is why I didn't hate the alternate human rolling from Unearthed Arcana, it practically ensured human PCs would have good stats. Kind of a ham-fisted way of doing it, but no less so than limiting levels for demi-humans.

I know roll 3d6 in order has its fans but to me that was terrible from the start. WTF wants to play Dingle the fairly inept. For that one guy is there really a GM on this planet that would not allow a player to lower their rolled stats?

Notice that by the time we get to AD&D 1E 3d6 down the line isn’t even one of the options

 

[sharps54]

Level limits for the fighter class(es) kind of make sense since all of the demihuman races (including, in 1E, half-orcs) are smaller than humans and have lower maximum strength, so it seems reasonable they’d have a lower maximum hp cap, and the smaller the race the lower the cap (halflings and gnomes severely limited, elves and half-elves less so, dwarfs and half-orcs barely limited at all). That said, there’s no real reason they couldn’t continue to improve their attacks and saving throws even if they’re no longer gaining hit points (which BECMI sort of did with its Attack Ranks kludge).

Level limits for demihuman spell casters are harder to justify, and it’s really just a taste/flavor preference that Gygax wanted the highest level spells reserved to humans and for demihumans to exist in a secondary or supporting role - that they’re better for casual or younger players since they have a lot of “instant gratification” special abilities that are most useful at low levels, but the more serious and strategic-minded players who are thinking in the long term would (presumably) forego those shiny trinket abilities in exchange for unlimited potential.

It didn’t really work out that way (especially as the level limits kept being increased from OD&D to Greyhawk to AD&D to Unearthed Arcana to 2E to the point where most campaigns were never going to reach levels where they became relevant) and probably should have instead been dropped and replaced with something like requiring demihuman characters to earn 1.5 or 2x as many XP to level up as humans (alongside a maximum HD cap), which IIRC was presented as an optional rule in 2E.

I suspect they would’ve gotten there eventually even if Gary remained in charge longer (he was a LOT less wedded to the cobbled-together sacred cows of the 1E rules than a lot of the modern-day 1E grognards).

Definitely, it is kind of funny the game designer that actually plays with their rules as published is a rare bird!

 

[Armchair Gamer]

It didn’t really work out that way (especially as the level limits kept being increased from OD&D to Greyhawk to AD&D to Unearthed Arcana to 2E to the point where most campaigns were never going to reach levels where they became relevant) and probably should have instead been dropped and replaced with something like requiring demihuman characters to earn 1.5 or 2x as many XP to level up as humans (alongside a maximum HD cap), which IIRC was presented as an optional rule in 2E.

And in the early to mid days of 3E playtesting, +20% XP was going to be the big hook for humans, as opposed to the 'bonus skill and feat' they settled on.

Notice that by the time we get to AD&D 1E 3d6 down the line isn’t even one of the options

Brought back in 2E, though, although I don't think anyone outside of some grognards and newbies mislead by its characterization as 'Option 1' really embraced it. TSR was treating Method V (4d6, drop lowest, arranged) as the default by the end of their run.

 

[sharps54]

And in the early to mid days of 3E playtesting, +20% XP was going to be the big hook for humans, as opposed to the 'bonus skill and feat' they settled on.


Brought back in 2E, though, although I don't think anyone outside of some grognards and newbies mislead by its characterization as 'Option 1' really embraced it. TSR was treating Method V (4d6, drop lowest, arranged) as the default by the end of their run.

Yeah but 2E is post Gygaxian so I consider it apocryphal just like any Star Wars media after the Ewok movies and the last two films marketed as Indiana Jones movies.

 

[Sosthenes]

Here it is in Gary’s own words from Europa 6-8 page 20, April of 1975. There may be more elegant solutions today, like not giving demi-humans any special in game abilities, but Gygax was literally writing the book on this stuff. Monday morning quarterbacking should to take that into account.

That means he had enough time to find a better solution. If the "problem" demanded one in the first place.

Is there a "stages of grief" equivalent for D&D threads? ;)

 

[sharps54]

That means he had enough time to find a better solution. If the "problem" demanded one in the first place.

Is there a "stages of grief" equivalent for D&D threads? ;)

That’s if it is even a problem for you, for many of us it isn’t.

D&D isn’t my favorite d20 fantasy game, that would be DCC, but I don’t have an issue with its quirks. Of course I play a lot of old games that we seemed to get to work fine as kids, like Palladium and Rolemaster, that seem to baffle many adults today so I might be the outlier with weird tastes.

 

[Sharrow]

It was the original way of trying to balance player options. Demihumans were originally considered as a consolation prize for people that rolled poor stats. Gygax always wanted a humancentric world. If you don’t have level caps you end up with no one playing humans because you are penalized for not having darkvision and other cool superpowers.

The problem is that most games never reached the higher levels, even in B/X or early AD&D, where 'high' meant something like 8+. Thus most of your play time was at levels 1-5 and demi-humans hadn't reached their caps, even in AD&D, and so this method of balancing power by having it average out over the full level range didn't work. This is also why a lot of groups never thought that Magic-Users were particularly over-powered - they never played long enough at level 7+ for their Magic-Users to really outshine everyone else. At low levels a Magic-User is an investment in the future, and if you never get to that future, well they're wasted.

 

[sharps54]

The problem is that most games never reached the higher levels, even in B/X or early AD&D, where 'high' meant something like 8+. Thus most of your play time was at levels 1-5 and demi-humans hadn't reached their caps, even in AD&D, and so this method of balancing power by having it average out over the full level range didn't work. This is also why a lot of groups never thought that Magic-Users were particularly over-powered - they never played long enough at level 7+ for their Magic-Users to really outshine everyone else. At low levels a Magic-User is an investment in the future, and if you never get to that future, well they're wasted.

There is no question Gygaxian D&D, specifically AD&D 1E, was designed for campaign play and you will not fully engage with the system in shorter games. Many modern games have similar qualities. I don’t call them flaws because by not playing long campaigns you aren’t playing the game as intended so missing out is your fault not the games.

(When I say you I don’t mean Sharrow , I am speaking in the broader sense of the word)

 

[Spellslinging Sellsword]

I always thought that giving humans a bonus to XP would increase the draw. The carrot vs stick argument. You could even say that because humans live such short lives they have an accelerated learning compared to the longer lived races. Or just say it's a game and it's just balanced.

 

[sharps54]

I always thought that giving humans a bonus to XP would increase the draw. The carrot vs stick argument. You could even say that because humans live such short lives they have an accelerated learning compared to the longer lived races. Or just say it's a game and it's just balanced.

I prefer the “just say it’s a game” approach. I know a number of games give humans extra skills but to me that makes no more sense than level caps. If demi-humans start off as being hundreds of years old it seems to me they should have more skills and a higher proficiency in them.

 

[Sharrow]

Even more modern systems, like Pathfinder, typically see all non human parties so the problem of how to encourage a human centric game hasn’t gone away.

In my experience, in D&D 3.x, all-human groups were common. The bonus feat was quite a strong racial bonus, and if some characters lacked darkvision, then its utility for the rest dropped dramatically.

 

[sharps54]

In my experience, in D&D 3.x, all-human groups were common. The bonus feat was quite a strong racial bonus, and if some characters lacked darkvision, then its utility for the rest dropped dramatically.

It could just be the groups I have encountered online this century. I never played 2E or 3E, in fact it was only perhaps two years ago I played my first game of Pathfinder. I basically missed the D20 boom and WoD boom, we were playing Palladium, Cyberpunk 2020, WHFRP, and some other games in the early to mid 90’s and between 1997 and 2006 I was basically out of the hobby.

 

[Sharrow]

I prefer the “just say it’s a game” approach. I know a number of games give humans extra skills but to me that makes no more sense than level caps. If demi-humans start off as being hundreds of years old it seems to me they should have more skills and a higher proficiency in them.

They did (especially Elves) in WHFRP 1e. 2e decided instead that Elves should suck.

 

[Sharrow]

It could just be the groups I have encountered online this century. I never played 2E or 3E, in fact it was only perhaps two years ago I played my first game of Pathfinder. I basically missed the D20 boom and WoD boom, we were playing Palladium, Cyberpunk 2020, WHFRP, and some other games in the early to mid 90’s and between 1997 and 2006 I was basically out of the hobby.

I don't know how it went post-3e, not having paid much attention to d20 games after the point where WotC dropped D&D 3.5, aside from a little PF2 recently (but I still don't pay any attention to the greater PF community).

 

[sharps54]

My only interaction with PF is the PF 1E group of friends I’m playing with. It’s a decent game that scratches the tactical combat itch but I can’t stand the feat trees.

 

[Fenris-77]

People often forget that classes have different XP requirements in old school D&D. When the Fighter hits 10th level, the Elf in the party will still be 8th level. The Elf won't get to 10th level until the Fighter is 12th level.

Halflings are the opposite. They level very quickly. However, you could see that as.a benefit. They get a stronghold before anyone else.

Not a nasty, dirty, wet stronghold, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy stronghold with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-stronghold, and that means comfort.

 

[Sharrow]

My only interaction with PF is the PF 1E group of friends I’m playing with. It’s a decent game that scratches the tactical combat itch but I can’t stand the feat trees.

I played a campaign (Kingmaker) of it with some friends, but never really took to it. It fixed some things with 3/x, but made other things worse, IMO, and I never felt anything for it, one way or the other. For some reason it was just bland.

I do like PF2, but it's a very different beast, to my mind.

 

[sharps54]

I played a campaign (Kingmaker) of it with some friends, but never really took to it. It fixed some things with 3/x, but made other things worse, IMO, and I never felt anything for it, one way or the other. For some reason it was just bland.

I do like PF2, but it's a very different beast, to my mind.

PF2 was ok, I played the scenario from the beginner set and a few more sessions. Character creation felt even more fiddly but that might be because we were using Fantasy Grounds and since I didn’t have the books I was just using the online SRDs to build my character.

 

[ffilz]

I prefer the “just say it’s a game” approach. I know a number of games give humans extra skills but to me that makes no more sense than level caps. If demi-humans start off as being hundreds of years old it seems to me they should have more skills and a higher proficiency in them.

That was one thing that always bugged me about long living races. I think they do belong in the settings, but yea, having a PC that is much older than the others (and in some games, that could even be an old human) doesn't work for me if they don't get skills commensurate with their age. My ideal system (which I actually tried to write at one time) would have starting skill points tied to age and the training system in the game.

So my solution is that non-humans mature at roughly the same rate as humans, and PCs all start in the same age range. That actually makes sense. Humans already mature pretty slowly, how would it work for adolescence to last decades? That's a lot of cultural resource tied up in taking care of offspring.

 

[sharps54]

That was one thing that always bugged me about long living races. I think they do belong in the settings, but yea, having a PC that is much older than the others (and in some games, that could even be an old human) doesn't work for me if they don't get skills commensurate with their age. My ideal system (which I actually tried to write at one time) would have starting skill points tied to age and the training system in the game.

So my solution is that non-humans mature at roughly the same rate as humans, and PCs all start in the same age range. That actually makes sense. Humans already mature pretty slowly, how would it work for adolescence to last decades? That's a lot of cultural resource tied up in taking care of offspring.

Huh, that is an interesting idea. Kind of like Muppet Babies. So your group of mixed species could all start with a chronological age of say 20 years old which eliminates the issue of all those years of extra experience. I like it!

 

[ffilz]

My RuneQuest campaigns have had mostly human PCs. My current campaign has had one elf (bad decision on my part), two baboons, two ducks, and one dwarf. In the past I've had a pixie, a newtling, another baboon, and beyond that, I'm stretching to think of non-human PCs. It's possible my 1970s and 1980s campaigns featured some other non-human PCs, but I really can't recall any. My RQ Thieves Guild campaign was the most non-human with a goblin, kobold, elf, dwarf, and centaur.

My Cold Iron campaigns have also been pretty dominated by humans, with a goblin, dwarf, and a gargoyle (Harnic - I think that counts as the most unusual race I've had as a PC) as the only non-human PCs that jump to mind (well, one PC BECAME a balrog - or whatever the Harnic equivalent is called - cleric of Agrik). I feel like there may have been others, but I can't recall them.

D&D campaigns on the other hand have been peppered with non-humans. In the pre-3.x days, multi-classing was a big draw, plus leveraging the AD&D attribute modifiers. Arcana Unearthed/Evolved had some pretty cool non-humans, and non-humans had cool racial class (basically a prestige class for each race) so many of the PCs for those campaigns were non-human.

 

[Fenris-77]

Things I was not expecting to say in a BECMI thread - That's a lot of baboons dude.

 

[ffilz]

Huh, that is an interesting idea. Kind of like Muppet Babies. So your group of mixed species could all start with a chronological age of say 20 years old which eliminates the issue of all those years of extra experience. I like it!

Yep. But my assumption these days is roughly human rate maturing, so those 20 year olds would all be of equivalent maturity.

 

[sharps54]

My RuneQuest campaigns have had mostly human PCs. My current campaign has had one elf (bad decision on my part), two baboons, two ducks, and one dwarf. In the past I've had a pixie, a newtling, another baboon, and beyond that, I'm stretching to think of non-human PCs. It's possible my 1970s and 1980s campaigns featured some other non-human PCs, but I really can't recall any. My RQ Thieves Guild campaign was the most non-human with a goblin, kobold, elf, dwarf, and centaur.

My Cold Iron campaigns have also been pretty dominated by humans, with a goblin, dwarf, and a gargoyle (Harnic - I think that counts as the most unusual race I've had as a PC) as the only non-human PCs that jump to mind (well, one PC BECAME a balrog - or whatever the Harnic equivalent is called - cleric of Agrik). I feel like there may have been others, but I can't recall them.

D&D campaigns on the other hand have been peppered with non-humans. In the pre-3.x days, multi-classing was a big draw, plus leveraging the AD&D attribute modifiers. Arcana Unearthed/Evolved had some pretty cool non-humans, and non-humans had cool racial class (basically a prestige class for each race) so many of the PCs for those campaigns were non-human.

Later editions of Tunnels & Trolls suffered from a lack of humans, when I got back in the hobby I joined a game of 7th edition? and everyone was a non human due to the attribute multipliers of non humans in T&T

 

[ffilz]

Things I was not expecting to say in a BECMI thread - That's a lot of baboons dude.

Yea, for a time, they even both were in the party together... Sadly both players have had to step away from the game. They were cool PCs. Gloranthan baboons are pretty sweet to play as long as you can put up with some shit when entering towns.

 

[Baulderstone]

That was one thing that always bugged me about long living races. I think they do belong in the settings, but yea, having a PC that is much older than the others (and in some games, that could even be an old human) doesn't work for me if they don't get skills commensurate with their age. My ideal system (which I actually tried to write at one time) would have starting skill points tied to age and the training system in the game.

So my solution is that non-humans mature at roughly the same rate as humans, and PCs all start in the same age range. That actually makes sense. Humans already mature pretty slowly, how would it work for adolescence to last decades? That's a lot of cultural resource tied up in taking care of offspring.

My favorite approach is the one in WFRP. Elves simply have better stats than everyone one else, but as race whose time is passing, they get less Fate Points. Fate Points represent the favor of the gods, so you can spend one when your character would otherwise die to somehow survive the situation you are in.

 

[T. Foster]

I’ve always treated demihuman adventurers as being on a sort of post-adolescent “rumspringa” in which they leave their society and go mingle among the humans for a while before returning home and settling down for the remaining centuries of their life - performing lots of tedious rituals and learning how to craft those race-specific magic items that the rules say PCs can never make (elfin cloaks, dwarven hammers, etc). Under that concept hitting the max level is perhaps when they feel the call to return home and take up their rightful place in dwarf/elf/gnome/halfling civil society.

Alas, the starting age table in the 1E DMG only really supports this interpretation for elves (who always start as “young adults,” equivalent to humans aged 14-20) and fighters - dwarf, gnome, and halfling thieves (and gnome illusionists) all start out as “mature adults” just like humans do.

 

[Dr. Gnome]

The biggest low-level difference is that Thieves are weaker in BECMI.

As for the sweet spot in D&D being 3-10, I always point to the fact that OD&D only had 10 levels to start. That's how the game engine was designed, and it starts to break past that point. Whether you are talking AD&D or BECMI, more levels are there to feed consumer demand, not out of thoughtful design.

My favorite version of D&D is Dungeon Crawl Classics. It has 10 levels, and it plays well at all of them.

I'd like DCC more if it didn't need wonky dice to play with over the already wonky dice I need to convince friends who don't game that this new game they will love necessitates. And yeah, I guess you can replicate the rolls with other dice but... it just seemed really needlessly to add complexity to a system. It's also a little more gonzo than I like; but then again I liked Lamentations of the Flame Princess so what do I know.

 

[Dr. Gnome]

View attachment 70121
Here it is in Gary’s own words from Europa 6-8 page 20, April of 1975. There may be more elegant solutions today, like not giving demi-humans any special in game abilities, but Gygax was literally writing the book on this stuff. Monday morning quarterbacking should to take that into account.

Even more modern systems, like Pathfinder, typically see all non human parties so the problem of how to encourage a human centric game hasn’t gone away.

I guess it's gone away if you don't see it as a problem. Why try to encourage a human-centric party, anyway? If they are a major species in the world you can wave that away with higher birth rates and a human desire for conquest.

 

[Dumarest]

Unearthed Arcana...we tried the cavalier a s barbarian for sure, then realized both were overpowered and unnecessary anyway. Pretty sure the spells and additional weapons, items, and such things were still used. Definitely did not use the Comeliness attribute. Wasnt it mostly cribbed from articles in Dragon, then rewritten to be "by EGG"? I still have my copy but barely remember anything else from it as I wouldn't use it at all today if I were to run AD&D.

 

[Fenris-77]

I Conan-ed the ever-loving shit out of the Barbarian class when I got my hot little teen hands on Unearthed Arcana. I feel no shame or need to apologize for that fact.

 

[Dumarest]

I Conan-ed the ever-loving shit out of the Barbarian class when I got my hot little teen hands on Unearthed Arcana. I feel no shame or need to apologize for that fact.

I wouldn't expect you to!

​

As long as you had fun with it.

 

[T. Foster]

Unearthed Arcana...we tried the cavalier a s barbarian for sure, then realized both were overpowered and unnecessary anyway. Pretty sure the spells and additional weapons, items, and such things were still used. Definitely did not use the Comeliness attribute. Wasnt it mostly cribbed from articles in Dragon, then rewritten to be "by EGG"? I still have my copy but barely remember anything else from it as I wouldn't use it at all today if I were to run AD&D.

It was mostly (about 80%) a collection of Dragon articles, but they were all* written by EGG and initially framed as a series of sneak previews of content from his in-progress AD&D rules expansion book, “anticipated for release in 1983.” However, due to managerial chaos at TSR the book wasn’t released in 1983, and by the time it finally did come out in 1985 everyone had forgotten that the Dragon articles from 2-3 years prior collected in it were supposed to have been previews of an in-progress rulebook so a bunch of people groused about the book being “just a collection of old magazine articles.”

*except for the demihuman deities in the appendix, which were written by Roger Moore. But in fairness that section of the book does credit Moore as the author of the material, even though the cover of the book doesn’t mention him (and it’s also pretty obvious that both those deities and the Gygax essay about polearms that also appears as an appendix were inserted as last-minute filler because the manuscript otherwise came up 19 pages short of what it needed to be)

 

[Sharrow]

PF2 was ok, I played the scenario from the beginner set and a few more sessions. Character creation felt even more fiddly but that might be because we were using Fantasy Grounds and since I didn’t have the books I was just using the online SRDs to build my character.

It is in some ways, and isn't in others. It's certainly a hell of a lot better explained in the rules, which are vastly better organised than PF1 ever was.

 

[Sharrow]

Yep. But my assumption these days is roughly human rate maturing, so those 20 year olds would all be of equivalent maturity.

My fantasy worlds generally had PC-suitable humanoids maturing between 15 and 25, assuming 18-20 as 'mature' for humans. So all young-adult PCs would be about the same age, though I'm sure from the perspective of an 18-year old Human the 25-year old Elf would seem positively ancient. I further assumed that maturity meant they'd reached the same level of mental and physical maturity, so the races with later maturity wouldn't see much benefit from it - everyone would start at much the same point, the difference in age being largely cosmetic.

Now, this didn't mean things stayed that way. At 50 a Goblin (or variant) might be getting quite old and tired, while the Elf would be just about considering whether or not they should consider finding a nice quiet community and a decent partner and spending some time raising a child and seriously pursuing a profession. At 100-150 that same Elf might be ready to try another profession, or go wandering again. That's when the shock sets in, when they find that their old (Human) friends are dead, their friends' children are dead, and their grandchildren are, or are about to be, and all the Human towns are different, in detail, if not in overall nature (i.e. new buildings, new roads, but they smell just as bad as always).

 

[gruagach]

TIL one of the many reasons BECMI D&D is overrated is a paucity of playable baboons!

 

[Baulderstone]

TIL one of the many reasons BECMI D&D is overrated is a paucity of playable baboons!

The noble baboon is a natural enemy of geese everywhere.

 

[Bunch]

It was mostly (about 80%) a collection of Dragon articles, but they were all* written by EGG and initially framed as a series of sneak previews of content from his in-progress AD&D rules expansion book, “anticipated for release in 1983.” However, due to managerial chaos at TSR the book wasn’t released in 1983, and by the time it finally did come out in 1985 everyone had forgotten that the Dragon articles from 2-3 years prior collected in it were supposed to have been previews of an in-progress rulebook so a bunch of people groused about the book being “just a collection of old magazine articles.”

*except for the demihuman deities in the appendix, which were written by Roger Moore. But in fairness that section of the book does credit Moore as the author of the material, even though the cover of the book doesn’t mention him (and it’s also pretty obvious that both those deities and the Gygax essay about polearms that also appears as an appendix were inserted as last-minute filler because the manuscript otherwise came up 19 pages short of what it needed to be)

Polearms are never filler. Those have been core since 74! You can't play proper D&D of any version without strong polearm knowledge.