Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - Dwarf and Elf Proficiency Slots
    Canonfire Forum Index -> Greyhawk- AD&D 2nd Edition
    Dwarf and Elf Proficiency Slots
    Author Message
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Tue Feb 07, 2012 5:34 pm  
    Dwarf and Elf Proficiency Slots

    Hello All,

    This is a rather LONG posting...

    This is truly specific to 2e and the use of kits and proficiency slots as outlined in The Complete Guide to Elves and The Complete Guide to Dwarves. I like both books equally well and use them in my campaigns.

    As you probably know, both dwarves and elves, long-lived races by human standards, have extra proficiency slots to reflect these enhanced lifespans. I like this ruling and implement it; however, what makes it tricky is if one uses the 2.5 system of CPs from the Skills and Powers book.

    Page 70 of the Elven book talks about extra proficicies. To reflect this in the Options system, I allow elves 5 added CPs during character generation, limiting those points to those skills of some type of craft or artistic skill. Also, it seems that all elves, save perhaps the sylvan subrace, also have Reading/Writing Elvish for FREE.

    Now to the bearded folk as outlined and detailed in their own handbook. My understanding is that dwarves get BOTH Endurance and Dwarf Runes (equivalent to Reading/Writing Dwarvish) for FREE, regardless of character class. However, my main player and fellow DM noted something else that I seemingly overlooked. On page 39, it mentions that 'a dwarf may choose one craft from that list at no cost in proficiency slots.' I take that to mean they automatically get a craft of their choice (from that list), FREE of charge. Personally, I am perplexed why armorer and weaponsmithing skills cost different amounts...but that is me.

    Do you all read and interpret this the same as I do?

    Furthermore, for those of you with access to the soft-backed supplement Greyhawk: Player's Guide (the one with the blonde-haired lad and his greyhound dog on the cover), there is a complete, detailed section featuring the dwur of the region (Dumadan, Greysmere, and Karakast). Reading that, you discover that dwarves get more free proficiencies (some must come from a specific list, though)! What a deal! For instance, according to this booklet, all dwarves of Greysmere automatically speak AND read/write Common (personally, I disagree). Furthermore, they earn Local History (clan) as well (the Endurance is already covered in the Dwarf Handbook).

    Another query comes to mind with dwarves who are of the Clansdwarf (fighter) kit. If Clansdwarves get to double up on a craft of their choice (ex: blacksmith) but dwarves already earn a free craft skill to begin with, does that mean that Clansdwarves earn a total of three slots, or does the double slot supercede the initial one? That makes more reasonable sense to me...

    Anyhow, thanks for reading this post, and offering your own suggestions and interpretations, if you so desire.

    -Lanthorn, Elfkind

    P.S. I definitely do not have the singing proficiency... Wink
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:10 pm  

    Received your note and after reading your thread. help me define the goal before I submit a rebuttal.
    Is it your goal to have discussion for inclusion of the "complete" series supplementals as they would pertain to GH? or an in-general as to how they relate to 2e?
    Although I don't have the CDwf handy (will dig it out of storage this week) I seem to recall these were already structured in 2e? Athough they, as I also recall, do encompass many realms of the dwarf sub-races ( ie sundered, and gully ) that are not really defined as racial sub-types in greyhawk.
    So help me frame out where you hope this discussion is to lead.... happy to follow. Happy
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:11 pm  

    This is exactly why I say that they are Guidelines. They are not “Rules.” Why?

    Because Earnest Gary Gygax DOES NOT tell me how to play my game. (Incidentally, he never wanted or tried to either). So, where does that leave Wizard's of the Coast?

    Reading and Writing Elvish? Of course they can. What kind of question is that? The only real question is, whether or not the xenophobic Elves can read and write Common. Speak it? Probably, given all the years they have to learn things. But read and write a human language -- one undoubtedly invented by humans?

    Some of them – sure. Especially Adventures – like those found in your game. But the rest? I wouldn't think so. For the most part, they do not even allow humans to enter the hearts of their Kingdoms, or their sacred places. So, no, most elves probably cannot read or write Common – by choice.

    I allow ALL of my human characters a “free” language, however. Why? Do you really think that an “honest to goodness” Mexican – living in the United States – can't speak Spanish? You're kidding, right?

    Common is always given “free,” and that's nonsense. All Adventurers speak Common, certainly. But a nobody NPC plow-boy from Keoland? Who never has and never will travel anywhere? Who could never afford an education? He speaks his native language and nothing more.

    NPC Merchants and their apprentices and bonded servants? That's another matter entirely. It behooves them to learn Common -- speaking, reading and writing. They are in Keoland today, but they'll be in Ket next month.

    All my PCs speak Common as well as their native language. Those two are free. Any others cost skill points. Reading and writing? That's called “literacy” and costs a skill point. Even in the 21st Century everyone does not go to school and learn reading, writing and 'rithmatic. Just because you are a PC does not mean that you know how to read and write.

    As for extra proficiencies? That depends on their age. Yes, age. Elves and Dwarves are not born knowing how to do those things any more than humans are. Age? Is he/she old enough to have learned how to do all of that.

    “I can lay brick, drive truck, spent four years in college and six years in the Army and another 10 years building houses.”

    “How old are you?”

    “24.”

    Yeah. Right. Bull droppings.

    The same for Elves and Dwarves. How old is your character? I do not and would not give them all of those extra “goodies” at the beginning of my game. I would perhaps handle it thus:

    When all of my PCs earn another proficiency, give the Dwarf or Elf character “two.” What? You say your Elf character is 70?

    The “glorious” Elves are not different than humans – teenagers are teenagers. Just how much “paying attention” did your “child” Elf do in class? Not much more than a human teenager I'll wager. Dwarves too. A 70 year old Elf is a 24 year old human. The same for a 40 year old Dwarf.

    What? Elves equate with Vulcans? Did you never watch any of the Star Treks episodes (or the new movie) which show Spock as a kid? Did you see the other kids -- pure blooded Vulcans -- pick on him? Torment him?

    Adult Vulcans do not behave in such a manner. Vulcans learn their stoicism -- they are not "born" with it. Neither are the immature elven and dwarven children "born" with it. A 70 year old Elf and a 40 year old Dwarf are nothing more than "young adults" and will behave accordingly and "know" what a young adult would know. Nothing more.

    Well, I've “talked” long enough – because Lanthorn asked me too. And opinions are just like another orifice of the human body -- everyone has one. So, I'll close with: There are no “rules,” there are only Guidelines.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Tue Feb 14, 2012 3:06 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar has inspired me to respond to questions of philosophical theory here, rather than to specific rules content. Regarding the long-lived races and proficiency slots, I believe each DM has at least the following two ways of looking at things:

    First, as Mystic-Scholar points out, a teenaged elf or dwarf may be considered comparable to a teenaged human in personality and learning capacity. The same thing goes for each of the advanced age categories: young adult, middle aged, senior, elderly, for example.

    First, I'd like to point out that every child (yes, even teenagers) learns a lot during that early period of their life. I learned how to read and write in two languages, all kinds of other academic skills from school and Boy Scouting, many different physical skills from sports and Boy Scouting, and innumerable esoteric skills from other aspects of my environment. Most of those don't transfer over into adventuring skills, but it must be assumed that if I, as a human, can be focused enough on learning as a teenager to develope such skills adequately, elven and dwarven teenagers have an equal capacity to do so. Except that they have between three and ten times the number of years in which to do so. As many skills as Mystic-Scholar listed as having learned in his middle age, any dwarf would have the time to triple and an elf could multiply by ten just during their middle age.

    This could be tempered a bit by my earlier claim that most of the skills that I have learned as a human don't transfer over to the life of an adventurer, so perhaps you could cut the bonuses in half, but by that reasoning, it is quite 'realistic' to ascribe more skill points to the longer-lived races than are granted to shorter-lived races.

    An alternative viewpoint may be reasoned in that elves and dwarves have been created by their respective deities with different temperaments than the human deities endowed within their creations. These different temperaments affect the various races' ability to learn new skills and advance old ones.

    For example, elves, being chaoticly aligned, tend to be flighty, easily distracted, attention deficit disordered, if you will. Because of their natural inclination to shift their attention from one project or exercise to another after only a short while and somewhat randomly, it requires more time for them to attain a level of skill in any particular endeavor than it would require of their human counterpart who is more focused on that same endeavor.

    Dwarves have an opposite effect that ends up with a similiar result: because of their lawful temperament, they tend to focus on one thing to the exclusion of most anything else. Though this allows them to exceed human capacity in such endeavors over a long period of time, this is actually a hindrance in the short term. It is well-known by those who study the liberal arts that a well-rounded education allows the learner to develope a greater skill at creative, critical, and analytical thinking. Such synergy also applies to learning specific sets of skills. When you have a broader base of knowledge from which to draw, you can learn new skills sets more readily. Thus, it takes the average dwarf longer to learn a new set of skills than it does the average human.

    By this reasoning, an elf or dwarf of any age learns as many skills as a human does during that same age category. The problem with that is that once a mixed party is adventuring together, they are earning experience points at an equal rate and this messes this second philosophy up. One solution may be to argue that the presence of human companions tends to both focus their elven compatriots' more upon the tasks at hand while at the same time broadening their dwarven compatriots' world view, thus enabling both demi-human races to learn new skills at a rate equal to that of humans.

    Well, that's my offering for your consideration. Take it or leave it as you feel appropriate to your own campaign philosophy. Smile

    SirXaris
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Tue Feb 14, 2012 8:53 pm  

    SirXaris wrote:
    . . . it must be assumed that if I, as a human, can be focused enough on learning as a teenager to develope such skills adequately, elven and dwarven teenagers have an equal capacity to do so. Except that they have between three and ten times the number of years in which to do so. As many skills as Mystic-Scholar listed as having learned in his middle age, any dwarf would have the time to triple and an elf could multiply by ten just during their middle age.


    Not necessarily. Let me add this:

    In "the books" we are told that Elves and Dwarves think that humans rush everything, that humans are always "in a hurry." And they blame it on our "short lived" life spans. By the time elves and dwarves reach the "young adult" stage, humans are dying of old age.

    So, while you, the short lived human, did 22 math problems in school today, the elf and the dwarf each did only one. Why? Plenty of time to do the others later.

    We are told -- in the books -- that an Elven party involving feywine can last for days, even weeks! What did the young elves learn during that "week long" festival? How to hold their liquor?

    That might come in handy during their adventuring days, though I don't think it's a skill a PC can list: 1 skill point spent on "Can Hold Liquor."

    The learning curve for long lived versus short lived races does not equate. You, as a human, learned all that you did in a 10 year period because you don't have any time to waste doing anything else. The elves and dwarves do, so they always "put off until tomorrow" what you -- the human -- must do today.

    The comparison is "false," an illusion. A comparison is being made between the relatively leisurely lifestyle of the elves and dwarves to the hectic, fast paced lifestyle of humans. Elves and dwarves are not in a hurry to learn anything.

    Humans -- by force of nature -- are.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Tue Feb 14, 2012 10:02 pm  

    Well, Mystic-Scholar, that seems to make sense too. I'll count that as a third possible fantasy worldview. Wink

    SirXaris
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:25 am  

    Thanks, Sir Xaris. I'll accept that "sideways" compliment. Laughing

    Another added point is this example:

    In Pathfinder's Golarion, the elven nation has a "great enemy." They tried a war against him and lost too many elves, so now, they fight him passively.

    Their reasoning?

    They'll simply "wait him out." They live for a thousand years, you see.

    A human nation with such an enemy could never afford to 'wait for him to die,' or 'go away.' Quite literally, generations would pass before that happened.

    The reality, or validity, of the elven view point is not my point -- it's the attitude. Elves and dwarvs are simply not in a hurry for anything. Their children do not spend 7 hours a day, five days a week in a classroom. They have plenty of time to learn and plenty of time for other things too.

    Humans don't. Humans have to squeeze all that learning into a very short time period.

    In our game world, human "Adventurers" can start as young as 16 or 17 years of age. I doubt any elf under the age of -- say -- 35 is even allowed to leave their village to go off "adventuring" all by themselves. Such a young elf is not considered an "adult" by the elven people.

    In comparing ages, I'll just say this: A human and an elf are born on the same day in the same year. The 70 year old elf finally leaves his village to adventure.

    This 1st level elven Ranger finally meets his counter part -- the 70 year old, 24th level human Wizard who was born on the same day and same year as the elf.

    If they should chose to be enemies, who do you think is going to win the fight?

    Yes, the elven Ranger is 70 also and has been honing his Ranger skills -- no doubt. But, as we have discussed in other forums -- the elven Ranger has no XP. The 21 year old boxer, with no fights, has no business getting into the ring with the 30 year old boxer who has 52 victories, 35 by knock out. Bad mistake.

    So I'm simply saying; we're comparing apples and oranges. An unfair comparison, because some people prefer apples, while others prefer oranges. Wink

    Having thought about it more, however, I think I would allow an elven, or dwarven, character more starting skill points -- but they would have to be spread out.

    For instance, Elves spend more time than humans -- as youths -- learning archery and tracking (i.e.). But archery and tracking do not teach them that 2+2=4.

    So, if I start an elf, or dwarf, character with more skill points than a human one, the elf, or dwarf, could not take all those extra skill points in a single skill -- he'd have to spread them out amongst several. My thinking is that the elf, or dwarf character could reasonably have more skills than his human counter part, but not, necessarily, overtly greater skills.

    The human PC, having fewer skill points to spend, opts not to take one in "Archery." The elven PC, on the other hand, opts to take 2 skill points in "Archery." Already the elf is the far better archer. I would, therefore, not allow this 1st level elf to take 10 skill points in "Archery." For me, he's too "young" for that. He can take another skill point, or possibly two -- as I've said before -- in "Archery" when he advances a level.

    The long lived elf, or dwarf, might have learned a few more skills than his human counter part, but they would not, necessarily have "perfected" their skills. So the skill points would be dispersed among several skills, not congregated in a few.

    But that's just my orifice, err, I mean -- opinion. Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:57 am  

    @ Mystic-Scholar:

    Yes, I agree with you that your reasoning makes sense (though my previous two alternatives make just as much sense in a fantasy world, in my opinion). However, there are two problems I see with the practical implementation of your reasoning in the game. I don't have the answers, so I'm throwing them out for anyone to work up a plausible solution to.

    First, longer-lived races are unlikely to feel the need to spend 7-8 hours a day learning academics as humans (in our real world) do, so such skills as those related to knowledge would not necessarily be any greater than those gained by humans of the same age category. However, living requires just as much work each day for someone that expects to live to be 1,000 years old as it does for someone only expecting to live to be 70. Physical skills that relate to craftmanship and professions would require the same amount of time dedicated to them each day from a dwarven shoe maker or an elven cabinet maker as it would require from a human craftsman of the same caliber in a human community. An elven hunter or farmer would need to spend the same amount of time hunting or cultivating food as a human engaged in the same capacity in order to provide sustenance for himself and those he's responsible for feeding. Therefore, such skills would be learned at the same rate as a human (unless you accept my reaoning #2 in a previous post) and the 70 year old elven farmer/dwarven shoe maker would have just as many skill points as the 70 year old human farmer/shoe maker.

    The second problem is how to explain the sudden increase in the rate of skill point gain as soon as the demi-human ages to the point that it can begin adventuring. Suddenly, the elf and dwarf are gaining experience, levels, and skill points as quickly as their human counterparts. Every explanation I've read so far sounds like too much of a stretch to be believable (via suspended disbelief, even Razz ). Then, again, you must explain why a demi-human stops adventuring at about the same level as its human counterpart. Realistically speaking, there should be a far greater percentage of high level demi-humans than there are humans simply because the demi-humans can live long enough to attain those levels while humans suffer the ailments of age and death too quickly. Imagine, if a human has the capacity to reach 20th level and so do his elven and dwarven compatriots and they wish to continue adventuring, eventually the human will age too far and die while the demi-humans are still in their prime. It is unreasonable to imagine that they just lose interest in adventuring and stop gaining experience. If rare humans can attain the power of Mordenkainen, Rary, Robilar, & Warduke, there should be hundreds of demi-human adventurers that have attained such power and many that have advanced far beyond human capabilities.

    So. How to solve those problems in a manner that isn't just a game balance mechanic, but one that seems to make sense from a fantasy worldview?

    SirXaris
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:44 am  

    @SirXaris & Mystic-Scolar
    I must say I have enjoyed this "ring side seat" of debate on this.. And do agree with many of the points you both table but the one element that has collectively gone unadressed (in my "orfice's opinion (sorry just had to use that!!! Wink) is that there are also cultural differences. You both elude to the fact that both Demi Races are in no hurry, but (IMO & IMC) some of the rational along skill limits (as you both have articulated well) and Racial Level limits ( I know a touchy topic) could easily be "rectal-fied" by this premise.
    With the low birth rates of both races, they do feel an instinctual compulsion to further there own coexistence and return home to the nest for periods (and possibly permanency) of time.
    The rational being, that there is still a finite Fertile window (though larger in time but less in potency)for the procreation and gestation of the race. There could be many clan / family obligations that are structured around such events and these would have to consume the immediateness of time line over those "items" that could bet learned or done later. Even the "vulcans" couldn't avoid the call... hehe
    So in effect, during their Prime Adventuring window is probably there best opportunism at procreation and continuance of their race as well. So maybe they are in a hurry for just that part of their lives?
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:50 am  

    So in game terms, I do give racial mods for their longevity, but they are also subject to the "call" as a possibly occurring as well.
    akin to feat versus flaw effect.
    This gives some game balance, otherwise you eventually would have world filled with 30 level elves and dwarves
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:56 pm  

    DLG

    That is a good explanation to justify ending a demi-human's adventuring career at a level consistant with most human careers from a game mechanic point of view, but I'm still not feeling it as a really believable natural truth in a fantasy setting. (Maybe it's just me and that will work for everyone else, including my own players. Neutral )

    I'm still not seeing why such a 'calling' would prevent such a long-lived race as an elf from returning to adventuring after producing several children over the course of 500 years.

    An elf beings adventuring at, say, 200 years of age. In 40 years of adventuring with his human and demi-human allies, they have all reached 20th level. The elf feels the 'call' and returns to his community to raise a family while the humans retire in their old age. He spends 500 years rasing five children. Now, he's the equivalent of a late-middle aged human. He can return to adventuring and gain another 20 levels easily in the same 40 years it took him to reach his initial 20 levels! Saying that the 'call' is simply irresistable is as appealing to me as Tolkien's elves being drawn away from Middle Earth. I always felt like they were abandoning a sinking ship and leaving the rest of the goodly races to fend for themselves instead of committing themselves and their resources to the weal of all. Mad Not cool, in my mind.

    SirXaris
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:22 am  
    LONG & Wordy Rebuttal

    *LONG & Wordy Rebuttal*
    SirXaris wrote:
    DLG
    I'm still not seeing why such a 'calling' would prevent such a long-lived race as an elf from returning to adventuring after producing several children over the course of 500 years.

    Oh I AGREE, That is why I don't have it a hard fast rule so much as a percentile guide. As you both have pointed out the attention spans of demihuman races differ, combined with the "call", clan / family commitments, and tiring from being on the "road" ( I can attest to that one in particular) would create an increasing chance of 'retirement. but that chance would certainly be applicable in the inverse as well. Subject of course to possible age and "lack of applied" adventuring skills adjustments on their return.
    From a game machanics side, I never understood (nor did my players) why if the elves & dwarves lived so long why there wer not more high level NPC ones in varied Modules. (That is another topic). So to that, I have a % chart that is progressive from 12th, for lack of a better disscriptor Named level, that I use based on character level/age.... as they level up or have a birthday, they do the "call check" as it is refered to IMC. Now at 12th level its only like a 2% chance modified by Constitution & age category. At 20th level (epic as it became referred to in later editions, I picked 20 as a benchmark because the exp tables only went that high then!) it varies by race from about 55% for Humans, down to about 40% for Dwarves.
    SirXaris wrote:

    An elf beings adventuring at, say, 200 years of age. In 40 years of adventuring with his human and demi-human allies, they have all reached 20th level. The elf feels the 'call' and returns to his community to raise a family while the humans retire in their old age. He spends 500 years rasing five children.

    A child/100years, that's reasonable.
    SirXaris wrote:
    Now, he's the equivalent of a late-middle aged human. He can return to adventuring and gain another 20 levels easily in the same 40 years it took him to reach his initial 20 levels!

    Perhaps, but as we all can attest at middle age the mind is willing the body protests! hehe At 740 he would be the "geriatric equivalent" of a 50-60 year old human. Not ready for the grave, but no spring chicken either. Plus his "old adventuring buddies" are no longer there, he has to wait for these upstarts to grow into the role, develop new alliances, etc.. abit slower but still not unmanageable. I don't disagree with your logic, but think these would be the exceptions as opposed to the rule. (as are all adventurers for that matter)
    Utilizing the 1e tables as an age progression reference I think even at 450-650 years of age (middle age span depending on elf sub-type) would all begin to seek simpler less physically demanding "hobbies".
    The counter to this would be they only felt the need to have one child to carry on the name and could return to the realms of man some 300 years sooner, still in their prime.
    SirXaris wrote:
    Saying that the 'call' is simply irresistable is as appealing to me as Tolkien's elves being drawn away from Middle Earth. I always felt like they were abandoning a sinking ship and leaving the rest of the goodly races to fend for themselves instead of committing themselves and their resources to the weal of all. Mad Not cool, in my mind.

    lol true, "hey good luck with that ring problem".... but As you both have prose earlier, they would carry a strong wait and see attitude, thinking that, in time, things would change again. I suppose that is why death is more finite to an elf as it doesn't enter into their lives as often as short-lived races.
    "the call" table was my response years ago when switching from 1e to 2e... the first thing I noticed was the shift in the age tables (1e p13 & 2e p24 respectively), more specifically around the age categories (middle age old age, etc) and how drastically they shifted and how even TSR did the Tolken exit strategy for elves. It didn't sit well with me either.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:36 am  

    I still have to digest everything that's been said, but I felt compelled to give a "quick thought" in response to some of what I've read.

    I will have to find the exact publication, mind you, but I remember reading in a Canon source that Elves and Dwarfs only adventure in their youth. To them, it is akin to "sowing their wild oats," as we humans say.

    In other words, they eventually "get it out of their system" and lose interest in such things. Like I said, I need to find the exact publications for you.

    And Dark Lord? I'm going to have to sue for "copy right infringement!" Laughing Laughing Laughing
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Thu Feb 16, 2012 10:59 am  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    I will have to find the exact publication, mind you, but I remember reading in a Canon source that Elves and Dwarfs only adventure in their youth. To them, it is akin to "sowing their wild oats," as we humans say.

    Like you I recall that as well.. maybe an ecology of article in an old dragon?

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    And Dark Lord? I'm going to have to sue for "copy right infringement!" Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Sue? mawa? As the archaeologist would say, "hey its not grave robbing, its historical study!!!"
    And you can sue only if I get to pick the arbitration judge, Tharizdun maybe? of course we will have to wait untill he is out on parole.. and by then it might be a mute point... hehehe Evil Grin
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Feb 16, 2012 2:18 pm  

    SirXaris wrote:
    Physical skills that relate to craftmanship and professions would require the same amount of time dedicated to them each day . . . An elven hunter or farmer would need to spend the same amount of time hunting or cultivating food . . . Therefore, such skills would be learned at the same rate as a human . . .


    I disagree. The 70 year old human is an adult and has been for some 40 years – or more. The 70 year old Elf equates with a 20-something human.

    When you were a teenager, Xaris, you did not pay one minute of attention to anything your father told you or taught you, your mind was ALWAYS elsewhere. And that's true of all of us.

    I say that it's the same for the teenage elf or dwarf – thus my earlier example of the Vulcans. A 70 year old elf is barely out of his teens. Thus, a 1st level (70 year old) Elven Ranger does not have THAT many more skill points that his 1st level (18 year old) Human Fighter companion. Some more, yes. A great deal more? No.

    A real world example: To get your CDL (Commercial Driver's License) requires 120 hours of instruction (Federal Law). Why then are some Schools 6 weeks long, while others or 8 and even 10?

    Depends on how many hours a day class is held. Wink

    As you somewhat agreed -- elves don't go for 7 hours a day. So, learning to "trap?" That requires "25 hours of study." Humans will do that in less than four days. Elves will take 4 weeks. No hurry.

    SirXaris wrote:
    The second problem is how to explain the sudden increase in the rate of skill point gain as soon as the demi-human ages to the point that it can begin adventuring. Suddenly, the elf and dwarf are gaining experience, levels, and skill points as quickly as their human counterparts.


    To this, I refer you to my comments above. You are under the impression that an Elf or Dwarf will "adventure" for 200 years or more. Not according to the books you refer too so much.

    Contrary to popular myths, Adults do learn more quickly than children -- because they pay attention more. Adults and children learn differently and by different methods, so it is unwise to compare the two.

    However, I've taught Truck Driving for Mesa State College of Grand Junction, Colorado and Sage Technical College of Pennsylvania, as well as Schneider, Werner and Swift, three of the largest trucking companies in the U.S.

    I taught adults and those who would have us believe that they are "adults." My older students always learned better and faster than my younger ones. The younger ones wanted to "play" too much and wouldn't pay attention.

    SirXaris wrote:
    Every explanation I've read so far sounds like too much of a stretch to be believable . . .


    In a Fantasy game? Really? Want to “rethink” that statement?

    SirXaris wrote:
    It is unreasonable to imagine that they just lose interest in adventuring and stop gaining experience.


    But according to the "books" you rely on, that's exactly what they do. Just as in Tolkien, the elves disdain humans' constant grasp at "power." And, according to Tolkien, dwarves are not all that interested in "power." They "grasp" for gold, which attitude the elves also sneer at.

    SirXaris wrote:
    If rare humans can attain the power of Mordenkainen, Rary, Robilar, & Warduke, there should be hundreds of demi-human adventurers that have attained such power and many that have advanced far beyond human capabilities


    That's because new people keep changing the rules. "In my day," there were limits to what demi-humans could do. For various reasons, they could not achieve the levels that humans did, except in certain areas.

    Like many others, you wish to apply 21st Century attitudes and morals to what -- at least in the beginning -- is/was a medieval world.

    That's why you're looking forward to 5e, 6e and 42e, whereas I'm happy with my older editions, which better suit the world I play in. Wink

    But, as I said before -- that's just my orifice. Evil Grin
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Thu Feb 16, 2012 5:37 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    SirXaris wrote:

    It is unreasonable to imagine that they just lose interest in adventuring and stop gaining experience.


    But according to the "books" you rely on, that's exactly what they do. Just as in Tolkien, the elves disdain humans' constant grasp at "power." And, according to Tolkien, dwarves are not all that interested in "power." They "grasp" for gold, which attitude the elves also sneer at.

    Begrudgingly, I would concur with this assessment. And since this is a 2e thread, the "tolken effect" is clearly defined in the afore mentioned table. Neutral One can not apply the sense of urgency (and thus the ascension) of obtaining more power (ie levels) to races that would not have human motivators. Those motivators would be viewed as short sighted from the dwarfish / elvish perspectives.
    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    SirXaris wrote:
    If rare humans can attain the power of Mordenkainen, Rary, Robilar, & Warduke, there should be hundreds of demi-human adventurers that have attained such power and many that have advanced far beyond human capabilities

    That's because new people keep changing the rules. "In my day," there were limits to what demi-humans could do. For various reasons, they could not achieve the levels that humans did, except in certain areas.

    Also true, Heck I remember the days when Dwarf & Elf were classes not races. Happy Happy Happy
    But would also counter with sometimes we change the guidelines to something that seems more real. As was the case from the Original "classes" to "races" for the a fore mentioned. I guess ultimately, its a question of what makes sense for YOC.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:03 pm  

    Dark_Lord_Galen wrote:
    But would also counter with sometimes we change the guidelines to something that seems more real. As was the case from the Original "classes" to "races" for the a fore mentioned.


    Ah ha! And there's the rub. What's "more real?"

    A simple example: Ever look at a "Core Book?" The elves are . . . "midgets." A.k.a. "short people."

    Tolkien, however, wrote his books long before "D&D" came along. His elves are taller than humans.

    So which is "more real?"

    Once again, they're guidelines and it's for each person to decide for themselves what "real" elves are.

    In these discussions, we can only offer our personal opinion . . . but that's all it is. I only joined in this discussion because Lanthorn asked me to. Why for only that reason? Because I am a long time member and avid participator on this site -- so I know that most here do not see it my way.

    But know this: Anyone who says; "Well, the book says . . ." -- needs to stop that.

    A DM is a story teller, an author . . . a Tolkien. If a person has to have a book, to give him/her step-by-step instructions, then they need to stick to playing the game and letting someone else DM.

    That is why I keep saying; "In my game . . ." I can only offer ideas of how to do it and offer explanations of why I do it the way I do.

    In the end, you have to decide that. And let me say that, as the DM -- it's your game, there is no "ours." You're not going to make all of your players happy. You need to game with a group that "sees" it your way. It isn't easy, but compromise with one disgruntled player is only going to make all the players dissatisfied -- to one degree or another.

    Play it your way and find fellow gamers that view the game in the same way you do. No, that's not easy. There are only six of us "here," within reasonable driving distance. Much compromising went on and most of the group was unhappy most of the time. Our solution?

    We take turns DMing and we each run our game, our way. If you don't like the way the game is DMed, don't play in the game. So, there are a couple of games that only have four or five of us playing them. (FYI -- I spend a lot of time DMing. Wink )

    So, our question: What to do about elves and dwarves? Ultimately, that's your decision. There are different editions of the game and -- as has been pointed out -- different rules for them.

    So there is no "right or wrong." Only what you want to do. It's your call. Wink

    2e is "more real" for me and 4e is completely unrealistic. So, there you go -- my orifice is showing again. Evil Grin
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 7:28 am  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    SirXaris wrote:
    Physical skills that relate to craftmanship and professions would require the same amount of time dedicated to them each day . . . An elven hunter or farmer would need to spend the same amount of time hunting or cultivating food . . . Therefore, such skills would be learned at the same rate as a human . . .


    I disagree. The 70 year old human is an adult and has been for some 40 years – or more. The 70 year old Elf equates with a 20-something human.

    When you were a teenager, Xaris, you did not pay one minute of attention to anything your father told you or taught you, your mind was ALWAYS elsewhere. And that's true of all of us.


    I see your point and agree with it as far as it applies to the 'average' human and demi-human. However, we both know that there are many above-average people in this world and they are generally the ones who go out and accomplish amazing things. I don't mean above-average in grades only. I'm refering to people who have an above-average capacity to learn in some way - the poor student in school may have an amazing aptitude for communicating with animals and understanding how to improve human interaction with them, for example. Above-average students in our real world typically pay very close attention to what they are being taught in school and elsewhere in life and learn as quickly as adults twice their age.

    Anyway, my point is that adventurers, of any race, are assumed to represent the above-average individuals in their respective communities. Therefore, it is not appropriate to base your argument on the belief that above-average demi-humans who are on their way to becoming adventurers are as unfocused on learning as their average, human, counterparts.

    Quote:
    SirXaris wrote:
    The second problem is how to explain the sudden increase in the rate of skill point gain as soon as the demi-human ages to the point that it can begin adventuring. Suddenly, the elf and dwarf are gaining experience, levels, and skill points as quickly as their human counterparts.


    To this, I refer you to my comments above. You are under the impression that an Elf or Dwarf will "adventure" for 200 years or more. Not according to the books you refer too so much.


    I am curious, from a personal standpoint, to know why you have the impression that I refer to 'books' so much. The only book reference I made was a passing reference to Tolkien, while you have specifically mentioned D&D rulebooks earlier in this thread. Do you have the impression that I am a 'rules lawyer'? Does that impression come from other posts? If I have read more into your above statement than you intended, then I am very sorry. In that case, I'm obviously being defensive. Embarassed

    Quote:
    SirXaris wrote:
    Every explanation I've read so far sounds like too much of a stretch to be believable . . .


    In a Fantasy game? Really? Want to “rethink” that statement?


    In my own campaign, Wink I prefer to create a fantasy world that is as believable as is possible to the extent that magic and monsters are believable. Razz

    Quote:
    SirXaris wrote:
    It is unreasonable to imagine that they just lose interest in adventuring and stop gaining experience.


    But according to the "books" you rely on, that's exactly what they do. Just as in Tolkien, the elves disdain humans' constant grasp at "power." And, according to Tolkien, dwarves are not all that interested in "power." They "grasp" for gold, which attitude the elves also sneer at.


    I understand your point and must concede it, but still wonder why you think I keep basing my arguments on rulebooks. I specifically stated in my first post in this thread that I wasn't arguing from a rules standpoint, but simply from one of game philosophy. Confused

    Quote:
    SirXaris wrote:
    If rare humans can attain the power of Mordenkainen, Rary, Robilar, & Warduke, there should be hundreds of demi-human adventurers that have attained such power and many that have advanced far beyond human capabilities


    That's because new people keep changing the rules. "In my day," there were limits to what demi-humans could do. For various reasons, they could not achieve the levels that humans did, except in certain areas.

    Like many others, you wish to apply 21st Century attitudes and morals to what -- at least in the beginning -- is/was a medieval world.

    That's why you're looking forward to 5e, 6e and 42e, whereas I'm happy with my older editions, which better suit the world I play in. Wink


    I agree with your point above, but again, you're ascribing qualities to me personally that aren't true. I enjoyed every edition of the game from the Basic and Expert boxed sets to 3.5e/Pathfinder, which I am now content with, and have no interest beyond mild curiosity in later editions of the game.

    SirXaris
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 7:49 am  

    <STANDING> Bravo! Well Penned! And that Dear MS is why we do seek you out. The truths, unvarnished.
    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    Dark_Lord_Galen wrote:
    But would also counter with sometimes we change the guidelines to something that seems more real. As was the case from the Original "classes" to "races" for the a fore mentioned.

    Ah ha! And there's the rub. What's "more real?"
    A simple example: Ever look at a "Core Book?" The elves are . . . "midgets." A.k.a. "short people."
    Tolkien, however, wrote his books long before "D&D" came along. His elves are taller than humans.
    So which is "more real?"

    EXACTLY...
    And as you put it.....
    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    Once again, they're guidelines and it's for each person to decide for themselves what "real" elves are.

    @ Lanthorn,
    So Really my friend, as Ms and SirXaris have already counseled, the choices are your own. It is up to you as to what fits within your world. you must decide what is "right or wrong" with in it.

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    In these discussions, we can only offer our personal opinion . . . but that's all it is. I only joined in this discussion because Lanthorn asked me to. Why for only that reason? Because I am a long time member and avid participator on this site -- so I know that most here do not see it my way.

    Like you, I too entered the arena with respect to Lanthorn's request and to be honest, to parlay with two of the CF learned greats was too tempting to avoid. Evil Grin The only thing missing would be Rasgon and his mountain of knowledge, Argon and his Barbarian Talent for Poetry, and Cebrion Reminding us to stay on task. Wink Cool
    But I do disagree with one point you penned.
    I don't think" most don't see it my way" is true at all and even those that may not, certainly see the strength of metal in the words you bring. Can't speak for anyone else (where was that damn ventriloquism scroll anyway?) but I for one, have always enjoyed your counsel and value it. That I think is why we seek you out.
    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    So, our question: What to do about elves and dwarves? Ultimately, that's your decision. There are different editions of the game and -- as has been pointed out -- different rules for them.


    Lanthorn wrote:
    This is truly specific to 2e,,,,,The Complete Guide to Elves and The Complete Guide to Dwarves,,,,, soft-backed supplement Greyhawk: Player's Guide

    @Lanthorn
    If these are the tombs that you wish to use as your guides, its your call, as has been said, its your game. There is no one right answer. All Items, ever published, have had their inconsistencies. It is what gives us, the theologians of canon, something to discuss and debate, but it is up to you as to how our words influence you. Wink
    If based on the long life's of both, you feel they get five slots and tie them to the rising of Celene on Growfest then that's ok.
    Personally, ( and yea its my orifice making an appearance) the more slots you pile on via the a fore mentioned literature, the more akin you get to skills and feats as defined in later additions. Which I'm not saying its right or wrong, its just a different level of detail and a way to manage that detail. If you think about it, the complete series additions to 2e were simply the grandfathers of skills & feats and kits in later additions. They were created in the day because somebody somewhere wanted a different level of detail and a way to manage it.
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 8:06 am  

    SirXaris wrote:

    I am curious, from a personal standpoint, to know why you have the impression that I refer to 'books' so much. The only book reference I made was a passing reference to Tolkien, while you have specifically mentioned D&D rulebooks earlier in this thread. Do you have the impression that I am a 'rules lawyer'? Does that impression come from other posts? If I have read more into your above statement than you intended, then I am very sorry. In that case, I'm obviously being defensive. Embarassed

    @Sirxaris>Humm, I didnt see his response that way at all, I took MS's references to mean the books referenced described elves and dwarves in the context he was defending. As aloof, self-serving and isolationists (for elves) and demure and gold oriented when it comes to dwarves. All the tombs mentioned view these races this way... didn't see it as a rules lawyer quote.

    SirXaris wrote:
    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    SirXaris wrote:
    Every explanation I've read so far sounds like too much of a stretch to be believable . . .


    In a Fantasy game? Really? Want to “rethink” that statement?


    In my own campaign, Wink I prefer to create a fantasy world that is as believable as is possible to the extent that magic and monsters are believable. Razz

    I think the appropriated word searched for is plausable
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 12:32 pm  

    SirXaris wrote:
    I am curious, from a personal standpoint, to know why you have the impression that I refer to 'books' so much.


    @Xaris,

    My friend, I apologize if I have offended by way of my lack of clarification. I rushed my comments a bit.

    The "you" was a generalization, aimed at all those few who might read my comment, which wasn't, necessarily, aimed at you specifically. Many here at Canonfire wish to 'reach for the Rule book' of their favorite edition (even though this is a 2e thread).

    Every edition differs, but every edition is that same, too. In example . . . Tolkien.

    Many like to say -- or think -- that Tolkien influenced D&D. If so, it was subtle. How so? The elves. In all editions of D&D -- they're "midgets." So, any influence Tolkien may have had on D&D elves is purely subtle, and not overt -- otherwise, the elves of Greyhawk would be taller than humans, not shorter. Wink

    So, E.G.G and his cohorts definitely had their own ideas. Tolkien's influence on them -- I believe -- would have simply been the "social" aspect. For the most part, before Tolkien, elves in our mythology were mostly leprechaun like creatures. Not merely "small," but hidden and seldom seen, "fantastical." In Greyhawk City? Anyone can and probably will bump into an elf. Tolkien did that.

    Ever since the days of T.S.R. others have been adding their own ideas of what they "believe" it should be. My ideas differ from theirs -- greatly.

    "Canon." What is "canon?" Pause and think about that. It is nothing more than what is put out by the "person" that OWNS the game.

    Doesn't mean he's right. Wink

    I've said it before, I'll say it again: Where does it come from?

    From us. Here at Canonfire? No -- hell no. From "us" -- humans.

    Most of what is in the game concerning giants, elves, dwarves, etc. (including their very "existence") comes from our mythology. In short, neither Tolkien, nor Gygax, nor Xaris, nor Mystic Scholar invented giants, or elves, or dwarves, or the gods.

    Our ancestors did. How do you tell your ancestors they were "wrong?" They told us what elves "were." Us?

    You really believe in elves? You're kidding, right? Example: I hear you got a new car last year. You're telling me Santa brought it? Us? We don't even believe in elves. It came from our ancestors. So I can use all of it -- because it's not Canon. WotC does not "own" it. "We" do.

    I like what my ancestors gave me. The gods can and can't do this and that. Same with giants, elves, dwarves, et al. I'm not interested in inventing "new" mythical creatures.

    It's why I don't like new Monster Manuals. I have never used all the monsters in the original manuals -- and I'll bet neither have 90% of all others here. Why do "you" feel the need to create "3000" new ones? (hyperbole) You'll never use all of those either.

    I want, need, crave and desire STORY! To WotC (and others in the business) I say: Keep your fluff. My imagination is better than yours. (Again, not singling out anyone here) I don't need "your" imaginary monsters, I have my own.

    I want your story. How do you see it? How do you play? What do you think happens? What do you think happened? Postulate for me. You ask: "How do we do that MS?"

    You do it every time you post to the Front Page, my friends. Sometimes I fail to comment. I never fail to vote "stars." Ever hear of the PM? Ask me to comment and I will. I read it.

    Sometimes I fail to comment because I'm not a fan. Meaning there's something wrong with the work? No. Without naming names -- meaning I'm not a fan of Ravenloft, so . . . no comment. You want a critique of the writing? No problem . . . but I do that privately. Happy

    And that's where I'm disappointed with some here -- all they want is fluff. They can't imagine anything, they need someone else to do it for them. I find that sad, because a mind IS a terrible thing to waste.

    I encourage all, I beseech all: Stop reaching for the damn book! YOU are the "All-father." You are Odin, Zeus, Osiris, Jupiter, Perunnu, Marduk, et al.

    The books should only give you guidance and counsel on how to handle certain situations. Throw the damn "rules lawyer" out of your game. As God is my witness, you'll have a lot more fun playing if you do.

    And one final point, Xaris: Adventurers are not special. They used to be, but no more. You see, the new guys have given us 5th level "experts" and "nobility." See? More their bull droppings.

    I am absolutely sick of their "trash." No "new" editions for me. I will not play them. Period.

    Oh, and before anyone gets started; No and hell no, I'm not debating the validity of that nonsense with anyone. Enjoy all of that if you must, but I will not have it.

    @Dark Lord Galen,

    A "CF learned great?" Me? Are you off your medication . . . again? Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Thanks, but I just do my own thing. Nothing great about that. Today, we just call such a person an "individualist." Good enough.

    As for "missing" Rasgon -- he's a "rules lawyer" . . . of a different kind. And I do not mean that in a bad way. I mean he knows what the "books" say, down to a tee. But, if you put enough pressure on him, he'll give you his opinion too. And he's been known to disagree with WotC, once or twice. So, keep after him. Wink

    Well, my orifice has been open long enough -- the place is beginning to stink. Wink Evil Grin Laughing
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 1:02 pm  

    Thanks for the clarification, MS. I feel much better now. Happy

    SirXaris
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 1:23 pm  

    Xaris, I really do consider you a friend. I would never insult you. Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:26 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    @Dark Lord Galen,

    A "CF learned great?" Me? Are you off your medication . . . again? Laughing Laughing Laughing

    Thanks, but I just do my own thing. Nothing great about that. Today, we just call such a person an "individualist." Good enough.

    Well, in my part of the "woods" (TEXAS) We call that a man that has salt! And I for one find it refreshing my friend.
    And again, From where I hail, if you ask someone's opinion, you better be prepared to recieve it and not complain about the aroma.
    Evil Grin Happy Wink
    From where I'm standin it may be knee deep, but its still good stuff to grow new things in. So you, SirXaris, Lanthorn, Argon, Cebrion and all the rest keep shoveling! I got lots of good things startin to grow from all of this compost. Happy
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:50 pm  

    Shocked

    WOW.

    All I wanted was a brief discussion about clarifying, in my mind, if I read the sections correctly with respect to Complete Guide to Dwarves and their added proficiency slots, primarily pertaining to the Crafts section.

    Wink

    -Lanthorn

    p.s. I will add my own perspective about racial limits, etc. another time, as I don't think my fingers will allow such lengthy responses to all that's been written previously without getting carpal tunnel syndrome. Happy
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Fri Feb 17, 2012 6:55 pm  

    Lanthorn wrote:
    Shocked
    All I wanted was a brief discussion about clarifying, in my mind, if I read the sections correctly with respect to Complete Guide to Dwarves and their added proficiency slots, primarily pertaining to the Crafts section.
    Wink
    -Lanthorn

    And instead you got a philosophical blizzard on the longevity of the two races.... see there... no good deed goes unpunished. Razz
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 10, 2003
    Posts: 1234
    From: New Jersey

    Send private message
    Sun Feb 19, 2012 9:14 pm  

    Lanthorn,

    Nice thread! Laughing

    I think Mystic Scholar has made several valuable points. Though to get to your meat and potatoes. The complete books should be a guideline for your creation and its contents should be considered optional. Not that the same could be said for all rules.

    If your going to give all non-human playable races huge bonuses and extra proficiency slots then you have to give humans something to counter act it.

    I Like the way MS explains the difference on the races, and how ages are reflected amongst the races.

    Ultimately depends on what type of balance your looking for in your game. That is going to determine what you do. Instead of offering craft skill for free for the dwarf character just charge them the listed cost treat craft skills as a class skill for them. The same could be said for the bonus skills for Elves don't just grant them allow it as a class skill pay listed cost.

    As we know 2e and many editions have skills or proficiencies based on class. If you take a skill that is not listed for your class you pay double. If the skill is considered General allow it for half the price. So if it normally costs 1 then it could be free. Or if they get multiple proficiencies that cost 1 as a general then one is free the other must be paid for. If the proficiency normally costs 2 points they pay 1.

    I hope this helps.

    Later

    Argon
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:26 am  

    @Lanthorn,

    See what happens when you cause a spark in a dry wood pile? Tsk. Evil Grin

    @Dark Lord Galen,

    I spent my later teenage years in Baytown, TX (Houston area) and attended Lee Jr. College (now "Community") in '79, for two semesters (one "regular," one Summer) before enlisting in the Army (82nd Airborne Division).

    I was there again, for two years, up until 6 months ago, when my situation forced a move to central Pennsylvania.

    @Argon,

    But you're "biased" in my favor. Laughing Laughing Laughing
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:35 am  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    @Dark Lord Galen,
    I spent my later teenage years in Baytown, TX (Houston area) and attended Lee Jr. College (now "Community") in '79, for two semesters (one "regular," one Summer) before enlisting in the Army (82nd Airborne Division).

    Wow makes for a small world indeed, I graduated from La Porte HS and your were nearly in my back yard (deer park) only 20 mins from where you discuss, and Took some classes at that same college before transferring to UofH aka Cougar High lol.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:23 am  

    Plan: 2 years at Lee, 4 at U. of H.

    Never happened! Laughing Laughing Laughing

    I was there again in '09 and '10 -- looking for a game. Where were you? Shocked Razz

    Oh, well, we "missed" each other. Wink

    Worked for my step-father those early years -- Baytown Industrial X-ray. Worked all the refineries and chemical plants; Du Pont, Grace, Exxon, et al.

    Been in your "neck of the woods" manys the time. Evil Grin

    Later years? Spent some nights at the Truck Stop on Barber's Cut. Surprised
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 20, 2012 6:16 pm  

    It seems the old adage is true about being careful for what one wishes! Cool

    Perhaps I will tackle the 'philosophical blizzard' another time. However, as far as my "little quandary" goes with proficiencies, I think I found a balancing medium; or at the least, one that compares to what I've done with elves.

    In addition to gaining Dwarf Runes and Endurance free of charge, I will offer 3 CPs for the dwarf to spend on gaining any proficiency listed under the Crafts section. That, at least, will balance the dwarves and elves in terms of slots/CPs.

    -Lanthorn

    As a sidenote, I see that a Texas tangent has formed. Wink To add to that, I will remark that most relatives on my mom's side are all Texans, and that I have lived in both Dallas and Fort Worth for a sum of 8 yrs during my childhood and adolescence. In fact, I am flying to the Rio Grand Valley in a few days to visit my grandmother, turning 90 yrs.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 20, 2012 6:39 pm  

    I'll have to agree. Very nice read. I very much like MS's comments on the mentality of the average elven "teenager". Elves have that "flighty" reputation, and that probably comes in large part from humans mostly interacting with young elves who have yet to become properly serious about some aspect of their life, and to who going out into the wide world is some "grand adventure". Hey, that sounds just like it does for humans of equivalent age, but for elves there is a long period of "teenage" years to mature beyond (would you really want to be an elven parent?). Laughing Very alien/inhuman, and not easy to identify with, which is of course great for further differentiating the races, if one plays up the whole "a 70 year-old elf does not have the mentality of a 70 year-old human" thing. Cool

    I waffle on the idea of some racial background skills. A dwarf might not be considered an adult until they can take care of themselves underground for instance, or an elf be proficient with a bow and sword. The young dwarf has probably spent literally years toiling in a mine as though, and digging in the dirt doesn't teach them all that much other than their underground skills. Similarly, elves have probably spent years honing their skills with sword an bow, even if they will not eventually go on to make much use of those weapons. Until they reach this sort of achievement level, let alone maturity level, such youths are just not deemed fit to be let loose into the world on their own.

    We must remember that demi-humans have exceptional skills as their racial standard, which comes from them having a leg up time-wise over humans. But, a dwarf doesn't know what they do about underground areas just because they are older than a human, or because they have lived underground for decades. No, they know those things because they have spent probably decades digging mines to learn that stuff. Likewise, elves have the bonuses that they do with swords and bows because they spent a decades practicing with them. And they both speak common too, fluently mind you, because it is useful and they have had the time to learn it as well. Gnomes and halflings learn their own things too, for similar reasons.

    So, demi-humans have as a standard a few things that are way beyond what normal humans have. I think that where there is a disconnect is with adventurers. Adventurers, of any race, are exceptional individuals. Even a 1st level human is exceptional, but it takes at least an exceptional human to be on par with the average demi-human. That right there says a lot. Some don't see that as being enough though. I see it as being just about right; not only for thee above reasons, but for game balance too. If the demi-human races were that much better than humans, nobody would play a human. The rules, for every single game edition, have had to either hamstring demi-humans or give humans options/bonuses that demi-humans do not have in recompense, just so that humans would be attractive enough to play.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:26 pm; edited 2 times in total
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Mar 05, 2007
    Posts: 290
    From: The Pomarj

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:41 pm  



    Last edited by BlueWitch on Wed Feb 12, 2014 6:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Mon Feb 20, 2012 9:30 pm  

    Sure. As time goes on though, an elf will still be flighty while their human friends will be much more mature and serious. Just think, potty humor among elven children would approach the level of art form, from the human perspective, before they outgrew it. Laughing
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Wed Feb 22, 2012 1:05 am; edited 1 time in total
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:28 am  

    So, if I'm understanding your arguments correctly Cebrion, you are primarily promoting the idea I expressed in my alternative philosophy on the first page:

    SirXaris wrote:
    An alternative viewpoint may be reasoned in that elves and dwarves have been created by their respective deities with different temperaments than the human deities endowed within their creations. These different temperaments affect the various races' ability to learn new skills and advance old ones.


    Yes? Smile

    SirXaris
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Tue Feb 21, 2012 4:41 pm  

    SirXaris wrote:
    An alternative viewpoint may be reasoned in that elves and dwarves have been created by their respective deities with different temperaments than the human deities endowed within their creations. These different temperaments affect the various races' ability to learn new skills and advance old ones.


    I'm not sure I would consider that as an "alternate viewpoint," but rather, as a "given." The gods are as different from each other as are their creations.

    One group of gods said: "Let us make Man in our image."

    Another group said: "Let us make Elves in our image."

    Yet another group said: "Let us make Dwarves in our image."

    Given the (mostly) accepted cosmology of Oerth, I'd say that's a "fair" assessment of what happened. Wink

    This also explains -- in my world -- why the gods, themselves, constantly war with one another. For example; monsters. In my world, "evil" cannot "create." It can only corrupt. Much like with Tolkien, evil gods began to corrupt the creations of the Gods of Good/Law/Order/Nature et al.

    BUT -- that's just my . . . orifice. Evil Grin
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> Greyhawk- AD&D 2nd Edition All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.52 Seconds