JadedDM wrote:
But on the other hand, it also fixes the 'problem' of explaining why elves and dwarves don't rule the world as level 20 demi-gods after living for centuries without resorting to something as crude as level limits.
Oh dear god.
I was hoping
that argument would remain dead and buried, where I left it. It's like the issue that won't stay dead no matter how many times I kill it. Let's give it another go. I've posted on this extensively - I mean
extensively! - on Dragonsfoot and elsewhere so many times I've lost count.
It's a non-existent problem.
The entire 2E meme about long-lived races ruling the world is the silliest, least logical, most ridiculous topic I have ever read in all my years debating AD&D topics. It's the single most idiotic thing ever printed in a D&D or AD&D publication.
More so than even demi-human level limits, although the two are closely related. It was created in the 2E DMG and has been mindlessly repeated ever after, but rarely examined for simple logic. The arguments for a humano-centric world in the DMG are so banally stupid that it pains me to realize there's any need at all for me to refute them. In a game hailed as "Products of your imagination", the 2E writers proclaim that we're all too stupid and unimaginative to envision an alien-ish world of non-humans. It's condescending to the point of being (objectively) offensive. They actually wrote the following drivel:
"Also, if humans are weak, will the other races treat them with contempt? With pity? Will they be enslaved? All things considered, humans could have a very bad time of it."
- a stain in the 2E DMG, pg, 14
Please. That's beyond stupid. There's no English word for how stupid it is. If that were the case, humans would be extinct. Why? Because every other demi-human race lives many times longer than humans do. It's a self-contradictory piece of illogic that goes against the very format of the game itself.
First, having a long life span does not by default imply a desire to rule the world, nor the ability to do so. If that were true, the Georgians and Okinawans would have conquered all of earth by now.
Just because someone can live longer does not by default infer the desire to conquer. If anything, it's the opposite. The standard is that long lived beings recuse themselves from the world. Heirophant druids seclude themselves in the forests. Elminster is a recluse. Etc. As the powerful become older, they become more hermetic. Older people are wiser, less aggressive. I have a quote I lifted from one of my posts at DF, but not the citation for the 2E source. Trust me, it's verbatim:
"Elves often live to be over 1,200 years old although long before this they feel compelled to depart the realms of men and mortals. Where they go is uncertain, but it is an undeniable urge of their race."
Emphasis mine.
Elves don't want to conquer the world! They lose their desire to have anything to do with it.
Second, elves (and most other demi-humans) are generally portrayed as a peaceful, reclusive race. Yes, they can be lethal in combat. But they're not portrayed as an
aggressive race. In fact, from Tolkien to 1E to 2E, elves eventually tire of dealing with the world and retire from the world of man, retreating to Evermeet or whatever elven retreat there is in any given campaign setting. In 2E, elves retire from the world at about the same times dwarves, halflings, and gnomes die of old age. In fact, the laid-back nature of the longer-lived races is given as an excuse for why humans excel and have so much power in the world. The older races don't have the drive of the short-lived humans, who have a much more primal drive to conquer. Humans have just a short time to achieve their goals, so they're far more aggressive a race than elves or gnomes. That's the standard argument that is repeated
ad nauseum.
In fact, JadedDM, your change to the game (giving the same lifespan to all races) pretty much turns the standard argument against itself and requires you to change the personalties of the demi-humans, creating the very issue you originally sought to avoid. In other words, if the argument is that the only reason the long-lived races have not conquered the planet and the only reason that humans gain so much power is because the longer-lived races are laid back while the short-lived humans have to burn as brightly at they can for their brief existence, then by giving all races equal lifespans you have now created the very situation everyone was making excuses to avoid in the first place - the elves, dwarves, gnomes, etc. will now have the same short lifespans and therefore the same time-pressured drive and aggression that the humans have due to their short life spans. You've now "fixed" something that wasn't broken and created a problem. The demi-humans will now become conquering races after all. If the explanation for why humans have conquered the world is because humans are extremely aggressive due to their short life spans while demi-humans are laid back because of their extremely long life spans, you have now (by equating their life spans) created 3 or 4 races who are suddenly not only equally as driven and aggressive as humans, but with far superior abilities. Humans in your campaigns therefore should indeed become extinct, creating the insane situation the 2E DMG originally envisioned.
Then of course we have the issue of environment. Humans can settle anywhere. Elves, with their inferior Constitution, would have a harder time living in areas where the weather is more brutal. That's why in AD&D we think of them as forest beings. Good luck with gnomes or dwarves living in swampy land, or deserts. Can you picture hobbits or halflings living anywhere other than the most comfortable of environments?
Also, if we extrapolate child-bearing ages from humans to elves, elves live more than 10 times the length of humans. What logical reason would they have to raise huge families early on? An elf may choose to study or frolic or adventure for 100 years or more before settling down to have children. That's not at all an absurd assumption, given a 1,200+ year lifespan. Even if we assume a 100 year lifespan for a human, an elf at 100 years old is the equivalent of an 8 year old human, as far as life span goes. A human couple may breed, have children and grandchildren, and great grand children, long before an elf couple even mates the first time. Orcs reproduce like rabbits, humans slightly less so. Elves would logically seem to breed less often. A good DM can use any number of perfectly logical reasons why elves and demi-humans do not overpower humans in a world without demi-human level limits or in a world where demi-humans have much longer life spans.
How about levels? In your post, JadedDM, you wrote:
But on the other hand, it also fixes the 'problem' of explaining why elves and dwarves don't rule the world as level 20 demi-gods after living for centuries without resorting to something as crude as level limits.
Emphasis mine. I agree, demi-human level limits are crude (and idiotic, and nonsensical, and illogical, and...).
But high levels do not equate with ruling the world. Assuming one does use the insane demi-human level limit rules, then the long life span of demi-humans isn't a problem, now is it? And assuming the DM uses common sense and ignores demi-human level limits, the long life span of elves and others is still not a problem. Especially not in 2E, with the equally goofy spell damage caps. An elf that can rise to 100th level is still not going to do any more damage than a 10th level human wizard's fireball. Both cap at 10d6. But what if we forgo damage caps? Still no problem.
See, what people
always freaking forget is that
all races gain levels at the same pace. In other words, it doesn't matter whether you play a human wizard, a gnome wizard, an elven wizard, etc. - you still need to earn 250,000 xp to gain 10th level. You still need to gain 3,750,000 xp to gain 20th level. Now, think of how much time it takes to gain 20th or 30th level as a character in a well run, sane campaign, in
game time. Elves who want to reach 50th, 75th, 100th level will probably be old enough to want to retire themselves from the world before reaching that level. So what if there are 20 elven wizards at 100th level, and they've all retired to Evermeet? Unless you invaded Evermeet, they essentially don't exist in your campaign and certainly have no desire or reason to go conquer the world. And again, how many adventuring elves are going to survive long enough to reach those high levels?
And what about racial limits on class? Good luck to the long-lived races if they go up against humans, who have high level druids who can only be human. Being able to summon hurricanes and earthquakes is going to trump long lives, infravision, and the ability to detect slopes and passages 100% of the time.
And I can go on and on.
In over a quarter century, no one has ever been able to present to me a logical argument for why long lived demi-human races, with or without level limits, must by necessity represent a threat to a humano-centric world, or to humans at all. Never. Not once. Long-lived demi-humans conquering the world because they live so long, or because the DM allows them unlimited advancement in class - these are silly, unrealistic, unfounded, illogical, non-existent problems.