I've been fiddling with the idea of running, sometime in the future, a D&D game using the RC D&D rules, but all of the modifications provided in the Majestic Wilderlands book; probably set in the Forgotten Realms (a very modified version of that setting, basically the way I've always actually wanted to run it, I guess you could say a much more old-school FR).

One thing that's been concerning me is that many of the races highlited in the MW book are superior to humans.  The only class which seems exclusive to humans is the Berserker. So without limits to the classes they can play, and without level limits, I'm suspecting that we'd find a heavily non-human gaming group (at least, with my players that would be likely).

I'm fooling around with ideas of how to balance this out.  I considered applying level limits, but I know from my past experiences that ultimately this prejudices non-humans a bit too much (at least, in my campaigns, where characters regularly get played long enough to reach high levels).

So the question is: should level limits be used? If not, what other options would you consider imposing that might put some structural limits on the non-humans?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;386950I've been fiddling with the idea of running, sometime in the future, a D&D game using the RC D&D rules, but all of the modifications provided in the Majestic Wilderlands book; probably set in the Forgotten Realms (a very modified version of that setting, basically the way I've always actually wanted to run it, I guess you could say a much more old-school FR).

One thing that's been concerning me is that many of the races highlited in the MW book are superior to humans.  The only class which seems exclusive to humans is the Berserker. So without limits to the classes they can play, and without level limits, I'm suspecting that we'd find a heavily non-human gaming group (at least, with my players that would be likely).

I'm fooling around with ideas of how to balance this out.  I considered applying level limits, but I know from my past experiences that ultimately this prejudices non-humans a bit too much (at least, in my campaigns, where characters regularly get played long enough to reach high levels).

So the question is: should level limits be used? If not, what other options would you consider imposing that might put some structural limits on the non-humans?

RPGPundit

You could always just multiply by some factor the xp required for demihumans to level...

Ditto on what JoeTheLawyer said - XP penalty of some kind.

Level Limits strike me as kinda *No penalty*No penalty*No penalty*PIANO!* An XP penalty would do the same sort of thing, but be a constant and consistent penalty.

Give humans a lump sum of "bonus" xp at the beginning of the game.

Is it a problem?

By which I mean: is it an actual, concrete, positive problem at your particular game table?

If it isn't, and you're just anticipating potential problems, I wouldn't worry about it. Just run the game, point out to players whether you want the campaign to be human-centered or not, discuss about potential characters, and let common sense and cooperation do the rest. Not everything needs to be fixed with a rule.

I agree with the general sentiment expressed elsewhere: an xp penalty or higher xp requirement to level demihuman classes.

As a "variant" to that idea, you could instead let demihumans level at approximately the same pace as their human peers until they reach the point they would normally be capped (i.e. 8th for halflings, 9th for elves) and then the higher xp requirements kick in.

Going that route, the demihumans still seem like a superior choice at early levels, but those benefits start to wane.  One could promote the human classes by offering a modest attribute bonus or general skill or saving throw perk.  But, if you plan on it being a long-term campaign, I doubt any such boon is necessary.

First I think you have a legitimate concern. My solutions has never been easy to implement and is focused over multiple campaigns rather than a single campaign. Which in retrospect means that I need to come up with more options for referees starting out with the Majestic Wilderlands.

Right now I award humans with a +10% XP Bonus over and above any prime requisite bonus. This represents the human capacity to adapt faster than any other race. If you don't feel it is enough then bump it up. One guy seriously proposed +40% xp which I feel it is a bit excessive. Syrivald the Human Thothian Mage in my campaign, has +15% XP compared to +5% to the Elf and Half-Viridian-Elf in the campaign.

To me giving human a XP bonus is most OD&Dish of any mechanical solution to balancing human in regardless to demi-humans.  I know that OD&D is a incredibly fuzzy term and your feeling what is OD&Dish may differs.

To bad I didn't think of this in November while writing MW.

I don't like XP Penalty as it is what I consider a dick rule. I rather flip it around and give a bonus to the other side.

Plus my main tool for balance has always been how I roleplayed the setting.  It is human dominated and it shows when the player interact with the people and organizations.

Quote from: Benoist;387002Not everything needs to be fixed with a rule.

I generally agreed. However the +10% bonus for Humans felt right for the Majetic Wilderlands which is the main reason I added it to my current campaign.  It reflect the advantage humans have over other races in a way that it is D&Dish (my opinion of course).

Quote from: RPGPundit;386950I
 The only class which seems exclusive to humans is the Berserker. So without limits to the classes they can play, and without level limits, I'm suspecting that we'd find a heavily non-human gaming group (at least, with my players that would be likely).

I started type a complete answer to this but it would have been two pages to explain all the nuances that I use.

In general it is true that any race can be any class. But I really come down hard on the side of plausibility. It isn't a plausible background I work with the player to come up with something that works better yet still kinda gets what they want.

For example it would not be likely an Elf would be a Claw of Kalis. There is simply the lack of opportunity for Claws to kidnap a Elf child first. Second MW Elves have other ways of going bat-shit crazy than join a nihilistic death cult like the Claw of Kalis.

For the Forgotten Realms I would think how the classes would fit into the society that would plausibly exist. Then explain that to your players.

If I was to use the Forgotten Realms (the original boxed set) I would developed different cultures and come up with an outline (one page) of where they all are and how they got there. For example in your FR it may be the Claws of Kalis emerged from the Elves angry at the loss of Myth Drannor.

I am a fan of the original boxed set of FR and would glad to answer any specifics on how I think the various MW stuff would fit there.

Uber Stats!

You can give human PCs a better dice-rolling method at 1st level and call that balanced - perhaps the Unearthed Arcana method. For Basic D&D higher stats translates into Bonus XP for Humans anyway, since it'll probably bump prime requisites over the xp-bonus threshold.

I don't know anything about the Majestic Wilderlands (sorry) but in most settings humans outnumber by perhaps 10:1 or more, so you can justify this by saying that a PC Fighter or Wizard will presumably be from the top 10% of humans, while if you're a dwarf or elf they draw from a smaller pool of talent and so can be expected to have less characters with 'heroic' stats. I think 0D&D usually implies that all elves (and maybe all dwarves) have levels, so elven adventurers aren't elite the way human PCs often are.

I don't like the idea of having to turn humans into SuperHumans just so that they are balanced with the rest.

I do like the idea of XP bonuses; my original thought after level limits had been to impose XP penalties to the demihumans.

I think the solution I'll actually apply is a combination of the above:
1. Humans get a +5% bonus to XP above and beyond their prime requisite if any
2. Demi-humans get a set of preferred classes, where those classes get normal xp; any other class (except berserker) is viable for them to take, but they do so at a -10%XP penalty.

RPGPundit

Sounds like a good plan.

Out of curiosity, how do you mean to implement MW ideas and classes with RC where there's no "Dwarf Fighting-man", there's just "Dwarf" (or Dwarf cleric if you're using whatever Gaz the Rockhome supplement was)

Quote from: estar;387008I generally agreed. However the +10% bonus for Humans felt right for the Majetic Wilderlands which is the main reason I added it to my current campaign.  It reflect the advantage humans have over other races in a way that it is D&Dish (my opinion of course).

I'm not trying to say that whatever house rule you or Pundy come up with is badwrongfun. I'm just saying that one should refrain to systematically anticipate issues with the game that might actually not pop up at all in actual game play. That said, indeed, if you feel the need to house rule and it works in practice, then there's no problem with that either, is there?

Quote from: Benoist;387104I'm not trying to say that whatever house rule you or Pundy come up with is badwrongfun.

No sweat I understood that from the previous post.

Quote from: Benoist;387104I'm just saying that one should refrain to systematically anticipate issues with the game that might actually not pop up at all in actual game play.

Again I agree with this. Just used the opportunity to explain why I added my Human XP house rule. Sorry about appearing defensive about your comment.