What's the logic behind this?I understand it was a simplification in Basic DnD, but why do some OSR games keep it?
>>97143427>why do people keep the simplification Keeping it simple stupid.
>>97143427If you have to ask this question, please just stick to 5e with the rest of the retard-children.
Because it makes them different from "Human but short" or "Human but long-lived and with pointy ears".
>>97143427Makes 'em feel unique in a party.
>>97143427>Demi-Humans as classesall elves are fighter/magesall dwarves are fighter/thief-something minerall hobbites are fighter/thievesetc
>>97143479He asked for why, not for what. Retard
>>97143427Multiclassing, feats, and traits separate from your class weren't a thing back then.If you wanted to play a character, you needed an entire class dedicated to it.
>>97143427>but why do some OSR games keep it?Old Good New Bad
Always seemed kind of lame to me and has the same issue as seen in other types of games when the racial traits are way too overbearing so you end up with every character of a certain race being the same.
>>97143811>every character of a certain race being the same.Solution is easy: 1 snowflake race per party.
>>97143427Nostalgia
>>97143427Same logic as any archetypal Classes, as an easy way for Bob to play a Conan, a Gimli or a Gandalf.It is only an issue if you've already played a Dwarf or played with a Dwarf, and now you're thirsty for more and the idea of playing Durin Felkuzbad, Dwarven Defender and Priest of Moradin, suddenly appeals to you more than seeing "a Dwarf" for the third time. 2 campaigns later and nothing less than Pyro Elfeater, Demonist Dwarf and Cannibalist of Yeenoghu, can appease your thirst.
>>97143427The real question is "why not?" You wouldn't make an Elf Barbarian anyway.
>>97144263>You wouldn't make an Elf Barbarian anyway.3.5E had Elf subraces that are very well-suited to the Barbarian class (that was also less dogshit than it is in 5E).
>>97143427Because it is a good way to make make races each play differently while preventing optimization. >>97144236>Pyro Elfeater, Demonist Dwarf and Cannibalist of Yeenoghu, can appease your thirst.That tends to be more the result of build optimization than actual desire to play a dwarf.
>>97143427I think may be expedient for having the game spotlight focused on humans, as in makes demihumans filling a specific niche within the human classes lens. Basically only those with that set of abilities are the ones venturing successfully in human civilizations (where the game take place)....that said it's not exactly my problem because i try to stay away from class based games, that's gay shit.
>>97144891>human civilizations (where the game take place)The game shouldn't be taking place in human civilizations, it should be taking place on the frontier where random encounters with monsters actually make sense.
>>97144919Yes, i meant in a broader sense, the game takes place in a frontier where the human powers are trying to expand, that's way you can have patrons that equips adventurer to venture there, sponsor the ones that successfully claim/build strongolds and have all sorts of "poitics" during the dominion phase. The lens is always from the human perspective.
>>97144236Oddly enough the concept seems like the sort of thing that would work out better in more modern editions, where there are things like variant kits, feats, or subclasses to allow for more spins on a single class.In most cases though simply having class restrictions tends to be functionally similar and more flavorful. A certain race being unable to be a certain class tells you something about the setting, and is also flexible enough that it can change from setting to setting.
>>97143427>What's the logic behind this?No new heading between classes and races in OD&D. Race-classes still are only a thing in 1981 Moldvay/Cook B/X, 1983 BECMI and games aping those two, including retroclones as well as the first three editions of The Dark Eye, Dungeon Crawl Classics or Dungeon World
Instead of race-as-class, why not class-as-race?
>>97143427>What's the logic behind this?Stereotype adventurer of other races through human adventurer lense. When d&d tells you human adventurers are exceptional is because the default human class is a peasant farmer, aka normal man, aka 0 lvl human, aka (you).
>>97149236Well wizards SHOULD be class-as-race. Forsaking their humanity for unnatural powers and all that.
>>97149236When you’re a Lich you’re a Lich. Simple as
>>97144345>erm, 3e had retarded chart filling autism, that justifies chart filling autism!
>>97149236Witch species
>>97152915Wild Elves, which were flavored as "barbarian elves" to the point they got a Strength bonus, were printed as a playable race in Unearthed Arcana for AD&D 1st edition.
>>97149701 >>97149816 >>97153630Agreed.Werewolf: the Apocalypse is another classic race-as-class: barbarian/paladin. Werewolf: the Forsaken is barbarian/ranger.
>>97149236Any class which nets you supernatural powers should absolutely be treated as a race. You should stop being your original race the moment Magic/Ki/Psionics etc becomes part of your body.
What's the point of other classes besides Fighter and Magic-User?Those two classes can cover everything, you don't need more.Thief? Fighter with high dexterity.Cleric? Magic-User that heals.Bard? Fighter with high charisma.Druid? Magic-User with a fursona.Barbarian? Fighter that screams.Warlock? Magic-User that's goth.Ranger? Shouldn't even be a thing to begin with, but fighter survivalist + bow specialist because that got tacked on at some point.
>>97157354Ban magic-users, they are only meant for NPCs.
>>97157354You're almost there
>>97157530oh, now at last I truly see
>>97149236I'm going to play as a whore. My race is whore.
>>97143427A class is a fairly specific archetype that doesn't necessarily cover the nuances of other races, so fighter doesn't necessarily translate to anything that is not a human.Problem with completely divorcing class and race is that race starts to not matter, it means a lot more to be an elf in early d&d, especially the basic set, than it does in modern d&d. The elf being something that a human can't be makes it feel more foreign.Race & class restriction works in a similar way to a lesser degree.No dwarf rangers imply things about dwarven culture through gameplay mechanics, even though you could easily argue "why can't a dwarf do x, y an z", the answer is more that they just don't in that setting and playing within cultural conventions in the settings, help reinforce the setting and get you immersed.Like if I make a halfling campaign in very early d&d, I'll have 4 halflings in 2nd edition maybe I'll have a fighter, cleric and thief and fighter/thiefbut in modern d&d I'll have the same thing I would have in every other campaign unless I specifically say "you can't be that", for every class, I'll get stuff like a halfling warlock/paladin(which doesn't mean anything other than mechanics).
>>97143455by the way, Dwarves also favorably differ in longevity compared to humans, and their beards grow better than humans.
>>97143427>Demi-Humans as classesThere are so many donkey-human hybrids online and offline, they're called Onocentaurs, that they must definitely be in games as well.
>>97143427It makes sense when you realized early D&D was cludged together from a wargame and classes are basically individual unit types.Race-as-class persisted as lately as 3.5 edition in the form of playing a monster that isn't in the race book beyond a level adjustment. If you were playing a Beholder there for instance, you were effectively playing race-as-class.
>>97143729this but unironically
'class' might never have been the best term, but it's just 'classification' really: WHICH fantasy archetype is the character?halflings can hide in foliage because it says hobbits can do that in The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. same for dwarfs knowing stone. if want Martians, the Martian class might have telepathy like in your Burroughs stories.there's some abstraction like there is with weapon restrictions (to keep things simple) but think of it less like 'race + class' and more like 'fantasy role/trope'.
>>97143427gygax was a retard hope this helps
>>97143821that doesn't solve the problem. it's still the case that every member of the race is the same.
>>97144263Speak for yourself.
>>97144464Optimizing is good.
>>97152915Yes.
>>97157960What are you talking about? Of course fighter translates.
>>97143427racism. humans should dominate party compositions with their diversity. non-humans are reduced to their stereotypical roles.
>>97143427It helps to make each race feel like a distinct culture with a distinct skillset, rather than just a costume. It's also convenient for all of your character's abilities to be in one spot in the rulebook. You could achieve a similar feel but maintain a level of customization by giving each race its own selection of classes, all unique to that race. For example humans could have the typical fighters, rogues, clerics, and maybe wizards unless you prefer to make wizards their own race, dwarves could have fighter-dwarves and thief-dwarves (similar to but different from their human counterparts) as well as inventor-dwarves as their equivalent to magic users. All elves should be somewhat magical, so maybe you could have spring, summer, fall, and winter elves that do different kinds of nature magic, and maybe summer elves are the most inclined towards fighting with weapons out of all of them, while winter elves are pure casters.
>>97157354The cleric isn't a magic-user who heals. The cleric is the anti-undead class. So it's a magic-user that heals, destroys undead and wears armor.
>>97157354The "magic users" are just fighters with magic.
>>97143427>simplificationracial exemplars actually. And only B/X and BECMI did it originally, 0e and AD&D1e always had race and class separation>why do some OSR games keep it?most OSR games are based directly on B/XOSE added rules for race and class separation in the advanced rules tomepetsonally I like BECMI style race and class as class; dwarf clerics have different abilities and progression from regular clerics, halflings druids are much their own thing, elves have paragon focus classes for magic or martial, etc
What would a human race-as-class look like in a game where another race, like dwarves for instance, are the default?
>>97164373Don't need rules for them to feel distinct, of course.
>>97165306>Dwarves & Dungeons classesWarriorPriestRunemasterWardenElf Human. They gain spells at level 3, Priest Spells if they're of lawful alignment, Rune Spells if they're of neutral alignment, and Elf Spells if they're of chaotic alignment. They use the hit dice of Warrior -1, and they can wield a small shield in combination with a 2handed weapon. +2 reaction and -2 saving throws to saving throws. >Elves & Eternity classesRanger BladesingerSeerSorcererDwarfHuman. They use the hit dice of Rangers and are proficient with all weapons and armor, every day they can pick 1 other player and use their class abilities at 1 level lower than usual, the other player must agree. A Level 3 Human copying a level 5 seer is still capped at their human level.Roll 1 more 1d6 than normal for physical stats, strength and dexterity are still capped at 18, for every session(unless you start in the middle of a dungeon) roll 2d6, pick the lowest result and lower your constitution by that amount, once you reach 0 constitution you die of old age.
>>97165584That's actually really cool, my idea was more along the lines of making humans a pseudo-barbarian class, in the same way halflings were a pseudo-ranger class, to play up the "younger race looked down upon by the elder dwarves and elves" angle
>>97165584>-2 saving throws to saving throws.I think at first I was gonna say "-2 saving throws to mind spells" or something but when deleting my brain short circuited and just told me to type saving throws again.Meant to just be -2 saving throws in general, I think in relation to dwarves that makes sense for humans.
>>97165658>That's actually really cool, my idea was more along the lines of making humans a pseudo-barbarian classI think that's a good fit too, reminds me of Hero Quest which kinda went that way for the default human character. Simple warhammer board game where you could play as Dwarf, Elf, Barbarian or Wizard.
>>97165584What would a Warden be in this scenario?
>>97166017seems like a dwarf thief equivalent
>>97143729We get it, the OSR players all peaked in middle school.
>>97166017I was thinking they'd be good at picking locks.Probably as good as a warrior with using a crossbow. Not just a Thief, 2nd ed Fighter/Thief would be closer, but not exactly what I had in mind, the idea was to try not use the human d&d default and instead work from the point of what elves or dwarves would have instead of what would these existing classes be in dwarf or elf, a seer isn't just an elf cleric, and a runemaster isn't just a dwarf mage.While picking metallic locks just like a thief would be their thing, disarming traps would depend.Dwarf parties would encounter a great variety of traps, runic traps are preferably handled by the Runemaster or Elf ideally, if not then the priest.Runic traps Runemaster=Elf>Priest>Warrior=Warden>HumanStone traps Warrior=Warden>Runemaster=Priest>Human=ElfSpring traps Warden>Elf>Warrior=Human>Runemaster>PriestArcane traps Elf>Human>Runemaster=Priest>Warden=WarriorMaybe something like that, could have more categories or subcategories.>Elves & Eternity trapsA trap is a trap is a trap.Ranger or Dwarf can probably handle it.If not then have the human walk across it, he'll probably die of old age at the end of the session and have to reroll for next week anyway.
>>97166208Warden doesn't really scream good at picking locks to me. Personally, I'd swap out Fighters and Thieves for Miner and Smith classes in a Dwarf RPG. Miners are basically Fighters and Smiths are more of a skill monkey class, inheriting the Thief's skills with traps and locks, while still having a warrior's armour and weapon proficiencies.
>>97144263>You wouldn't make an Elf BarbarianNo, but I might've wanted to make a halfling abjurer.
>>97144263tfw I made 6 elf barbarians for icewind dale last time I played
