Quote from: K Peterson;6956908th level, chief. At least if you're going by the Expert rules. 10th level elves are Wizard/Lord.

I forgot I switched them because nothing is as awesome as a Superhero Necromancer.

The 7th level Champion Sorcerer comes close but who are we kidding.

Quote from: flyerfan1991;695350Damn.

We always avoided the Elves mainly because they seemed weaker than the other classes --who'd want to wield a sword and wear cloth armor because they wanted to cast spells-- but now I can see how much more powerful they are.

The one to avoid if you're worried about weakness is the human MU! (Why play one when you can play an Elf instead, especially if you're allowed to "reskin" it as human?)

Quote from: Phillip;695827The one to avoid if you're worried about weakness is the human MU! (Why play one when you can play an Elf instead, especially if you're allowed to "reskin" it as human?)

Because by the time you get 2nd level spells, the elf has just barely reached level 2. For most of their career the elf is going to be about 1 spell level and 2 character levels behind the MU.

Quote from: SineNomine;695866Because by the time you get 2nd level spells, the elf has just barely reached level 2. For most of their career the elf is going to be about 1 spell level and 2 character levels behind the MU.

Not really. It levels out doesn't it (certainly is in 1e AD&D)

Because D&D level XP limits double as you level up the differences narrow quite quickly.

If the party has 12,000 xp on average then (in AD&D)

Human figther  = 4th level
Human MU = 4th level
Elven F/MU = 3/3

But if the party has on average 20,000 xp then

Human F = 5th
Human MU = 4th
Elven F/MU = 4/4

Does it really matter? Who wants to play a fruity elf, anyway? Mechanically, elves destroy humans in all possible ways. So what. In all my years of playing D&D, I can't ever remember playing an elf character...I did have a bunch of human wizards, though.

Quote from: jibbajibba;695881Not really. It levels out doesn't it (certainly is in 1e AD&D)

Because D&D level XP limits double as you level up the differences narrow quite quickly.

Well, let's take a look at the exact B/X differences from levels 1-10. Wizards hit 6th level spells at level 11 and elves will never get that outside of Elves of Alfheim-type optional rules, so from level 11+ they're flatly better spellcasters. We'll use the MU XP ratings and see where the elf is at each leveling breakpoint.

When the MU just barely reaches level...
2: The elf is 1,500 xp behind.
3: The elf is 3,000 xp behind
4: The elf is 6,000 xp behind
5: The elf is 12,000 xp behind
6: The elf is 24,000 xp behind
7: The elf is 44,000 xp behind
8: The elf is 100,000 xp behind
9: The elf is 100,000 xp behind
10: The elf is 150,000 xp behind

By the time the elf hits 10th level, the wizard is 11th, and from there on out the wizard is simply better in all magical respects. XP does not actually double at all levels- in fact, it takes hardly more XP for an elf to get from 7th-8th level than it takes for them to get from 8th-9th, while for a MU it actually more than doubles. Still, it's true that the elf only spends most of his career one level behind the MU rather than 2.

At 600,000 xp, the elf gets to wear armor and swing a sword, but he's only got 8 more HP than the MU and doesn't have access to 6th level spells. I'd agree that the elf is mechanically better than the MU for any given level 1-10, but actually surviving to reach that level is a non-trivial feat.

(N. B. For Mentzer Expert the gap gets strange- Mentzer MUs don't get 6th level spells until 12th level, and they also have fewer low-level spells per level at 10th level than the elf- but one more 5th level spell. Which the elf doesn't get at all until 10th level. So the Mentzer MU gets 5th level spells at level 9, and then no new spell level until level 12.... The differences between the Mentzer Elf and MU spell tables are interesting.)

Yes, I always saw elves as a trade-off of versatility, more than power.

I really don't understand this idea that elves need to be nerfed in B/X... and I do see it popping up once in a while on forums around the web.

So, more or less cross-posting myself from goblinoid games forum:

A comparison between elves and human classes (imagine that the fighter, elf and cleric have all the same armor -plate and shield?-, MU has none and Thief has leather). This comparison assumes all characters have average hit points and average ability scores.

At 0xp
HP:Elf 3.5 Ftr 4.5 Cl 3.5 Th 2.5 MU 2.5
AV0: E 19 Ftr 19 Cl 19 TH19 MU19

at 1.25K xp
HP:Elf 3.5 Ftr 4.5 Cl 3.5 Th 5 MU 2.5
AV: E 19 Ftr 19 Cl 19 TH19 MU19

at 1.5K xp
HP: Elf 3.5 Ftr 4.5 Cl 7 Th 5 MU 2.5
AV: E19 F19 Cl19 TH19 MU19

at 2K xp
HP: Elf 3.5 Ftr 9 Cl 7 Th 5 MU 2.5
AV: E19 F19 Cl 19 TH19 MU19

at 2.5K xp
HP: Elf 3.5 Ftr 9 Cl 7 Th 7.5 MU 5
AV: E19 F19 Cl 19 TH19 MU19

at 3K xp
HP: Elf 3.5 Ftr 9 Cl 10.5 Th 7.5 MU 5
AV: E19 F19 Cl19 TH 19 MU19

at 4K xp
HP: Elf 7 Ftr 13.5 Cl 10.5 Th 7.5 MU 5
AV: E19 Ftr18 Cl19 TH 19 MU19

at 5K xp
HP: Elf 7 Ftr 13.5 Cl 10.5 Th 10 MU 7.5
AV: E19 Ftr18 Cl19 TH 18 MU19

at 6K xp
HP: Elf 7 Ftr 13.5 Cl 14 Th 10 MU 7.5
AV: E19 Ftr18 Cl18 Th 18 MU19

at 8K xp
HP: Elf 10.5 Ftr 18 Cl 14 Th 10 MU 7.5
AV: E18 F17 Cl 18 Th 18 MU19

at 10K xp:
HP: Elf 10.5 Ftr 18 Cl 14 Th 12.5 MU 10
AV: E18 F17 Cl 18 Th 18 MU18

at 12K xp
HP: Elf 10.5 Ftr18 Cl 17.5 Th 12.5 MU 10
AV: E 18 F17 C18 Th 18 MU18

at 16K xp
HP: Elf 14 Ftr 22.5 Cl 17.5 Th 12.5 MU 10
AV: E 17 F16 C18 Th 18 MU18

at 20k xp
HP: Elf 14 Ftr 22.5 Cl 17.5 Th 14 MU 12.5
AV: E 17 F16 C18 Th 17 MU18

With average rolls, at the same xp total a Fighter is a better warrior than the Elf.
For what regards HP and AV0 the elf is practically tied with the Thief and often worse in HPs!
Personally I'd place the Cleric as second best fighter because of his slightly higher HPs even if he has less damage potential.
The MU is not that far behind the elf as you might think and after 1st level he is always capable of casting more spells than the elf at the same XP tally.

These are low-levels: 1st to 5th, you don't have to wait for high levels to see that the Elf is not so "broken" just because he can wear armor and while casting spells.

Also, an elf in front-line would have a very hard time casting spells, and if he is casting he is not fighting (plus yes, no shields or weapons in hands while casting).
An elf in the back lines casting spells is not fighting physically.
So in some way an elf always choses what he is from round to round: Fighter or Magic-user, he can't "be" both at the same time.

Multiclass characters tend to be about a level behind single class until the XP goes linear at high level.  I've been in parties where most characters are multiclass because 4/4 has more options than 5th.  The big slow down past 10th and level limits were academic as the odds of a 1st level character getting that high were low and the rate at which we leveled was slow enough that it was rare to play at those levels.

Quote from: Nicephorus;696559Multiclass characters tend to be about a level behind single class until the XP goes linear at high level.  I've been in parties where most characters are multiclass because 4/4 has more options than 5th.  The big slow down past 10th and level limits were academic as the odds of a 1st level character getting that high were low and the rate at which we leveled was slow enough that it was rare to play at those levels.

Yup
the point people are missing isn't that single classed figthers are tougher or that single classed wizards cast more spells with slightly superior effect. The point is the MU/Fght is really versitile. And in the OSR world where resource management is paramount the 5/5 F/W will be preferable to the 6F or the 6 W nearly all the time because he can cast all his spells and then take up a position in the front rank, or he can take position in the front rank and when HPs look shakey can retreat back to spell caster mode.
and before people say but its not just about combat no of course its not. But the PC with spells who can try any the player can think of will be more flexible than the PC without spells who can try anything the player can think of.

The point you two seem to be missing is that the discussion above was about B/X D&D, and there is no multi-classing in B/X.

Quote from: jibbajibba;696569But the PC with spells who can try any the player can think of will be more flexible than the PC without spells who can try anything the player can think of.

One of the cool things about spellcasters is that they could be nearly a different character the next day just by spell selection, making them generally better outside of combat as well.  (For arcane casters, this of course depends on how many spells they know, which can be rough if the DM is a tight ass about it.)
 
The armor difference is enough at low to mid levels that an elf will get hit about half as much as an MU from weapons in combat, and no more for other sources of damage.  Once the MU gets really good defensive spells and magic items that give big AC bonuses, this particular advantage disappears.  When facing monsters with +0 to +3 to hit bonuses the difference between AC 10 and AC 5 is pretty big.

Quote from: Bobloblah;696570The point you two seem to be missing is that the discussion above was about B/X D&D, and there is no multi-classing in B/X.

True, but the Basic elf is essentially a multiclass F/MU with roughly the same slowed XP progression, similarly middle ground HP, with the weapons and armor of a fighter but the spells of an MU, with extra race abilities and nigh invulnerability to aging effects.

This whole thread reeks of "modern gaming"...

Quote from: thedungeondelver;695347Elves can cast while wearing armor.

Yep. They are the original figher/magic-users. It's why I always played one (even with the terrible leveling chart).