Myths & Legends

This Again? Demi-Human Level Limits We've seen the debates. We've heard the sides. We've even heard this is an artifact of the past, dead and buried. We've moved on. No more demi-human level limits. We've found better ways to "balance" things out. But is balance really what these level limits were about in the first place? If so, why do halflings pretty much get the shaft when it comes to level limits? Do we really think they would take over the game if not for such tight limits? And why, if it's so important that we don't allow Elves to level endlessly over their thousand year lifespan, are they allowed limitless advancement as Thieves? One thing I've seen missing in the arguments is the idea that "classes" are social constructs. And in a humanocentric world, those social constructs tend to be mainly human social constructs. And so it only makes sense that demi-humans would face limitations. No matter how much an advantage th

Recently, I was reminiscing about one of the greatest RPG campaigns of all time. It was the one I played with my friends between 5th and 6th grade. It was my first long-term campaign. We literally played every single day. This allowed us, without "cheating" to achieve very high levels. Our primary characters made it to the mid-upper 20's. Perhaps out of jealousy, a fellow gamer scoffed "There is such a thing as too much of a good thing. As DM I'd burn out pretty quickly having to come up with new material every single day!" And then quickly shifts to "Oh, the lower levels are for adventuring. I prefer to switch gears to politics at high levels." Or "Above 10th level, it's time to retire." And then it occurred to me. One reason DMs can't keep up the pace of playing every day is because they're weighted down by absolute crap parading as accepted and true RPG wisdom. Who could be expected to create under the constraint of 9