There are always questions about the rules as written, or the intent of rules. No usable rules can be written comprehensively enough to not give raise to such questions. Here are some answers from Gary's blog posts on the various, classes races and on alignment. You can see the problem areas easily -- there are few about fighters, but lots and lots about Paladins and Alignment.
Classes
The broad range of fantasy encompassed by the D&D game was no accident, I assure you. Just consider the names for the class levels...a device to take arrows from the quivers of would-be competitors #6032
I did the Thief, Assassin, Monk, Cavalier, Barbarian all by myself, as I'd done the three basic ones in OD&D. Same for the demi-humans. Tim Kask had a hand in creating the Bard class. Most of the new material was introduced into my campaign first, then done in DRAGON as articles, then appeared in the PHB or UA. #1214
Yes, we had a cavalier character in the Greyhawk Campaign, just about every one of the classes in the rules, and the same for demi-human characters. I once played a half-orc cleric-assassin, as a matter of fact. Indeed, we played weapon specialization even before I wrote it up in Dragon Magazine. By the time that article hit a couple of PCs in the campaign were doubly-specialized... #1737
I did the level increase steps based on a lot of intense play over about four years. The variations you note were determined for purposes of game balance. Druids, for example, have a limit on their ultimate progress. [11]
Fighter
IMO the other classes needed no strengthening. The fighter was played a lot, and the class had turned out to be the weakest of the lot, lacking anything potent to make it unique. So weapons specialization came into the rules. #1749
As for Strength in OAD&D, I did indeed use reasoning along the lines you suggest, and exceptional strength was reserved to the fighter class for exactly the reason you note--training. [11]
Because the PCs are assumed to be superior, the maximum strength being had by 1 in 216 is more like 1 in 21,600. Then apply the percentages, but assume that about 90% of those with 18 strength will be Fighters. [11]
Magic-User
In OD&D only the lack of armor and slow gain in chance to hit were factors. The magic-user with a dagger did as much damage as a fighter with a battle axe. [11]
Early in the developmental stage of OD&D I allowed non-mages to use wands, needing to rolll their Intelligence or less on 3d6 to make the device function. I dropped the concept as being incoingruous with the class-base of the game. #1890
The M-U going up a level is assumed to do so through training with a mage of higher level, or at worst the study of arcane lore. In this process the character gains knowledge of one new spell of the highest level he is able to cast. If by advancement the character is also able to cast one or more lower level spells, he will have to make do with those he has in his spell books. He does not gain any new ones in those lower levels, only the capacity to memorize more of them. Thus the M-U character should always to be seeking the acquisition of spell books (likely with new and different spells recorded therein) or else scrolls with spells on them that he can record into his library. #1904
If you see a gaggle of young, fresh-faces chaps in pointy hats it is also a good idea to beat feet immediately, as one is sure to fail at least one saving throw against charm person #8294
A fledgling m-u will likely be a good deal older than a 1st level fighter. So for beginning PCs I suggest age 18 or so for a fighter or thief, age 21 or so for a cleric, and age 25 or thereabouts for a magic-user. #8273
However, added spells upon level gain as given in the OAD&D PHB are reasonable. A magic-user doesn't just spring up full-blown. One must be an apprentice, so there are plenty of higher level mages around. The m-u's former master, or an associate of his or hers, will assuredly train and provide the fledgling wizard with one or more new spells for a service and perhaps some added payment in magic items. Also there might well be a m-u's guild in many of the larger cities. At such place the PC spell-caster can petition for membership, pay initiation fee and regular dues, and be entitled to use the guild library. #7897
Powerless magic-users at first level? Ha! That's an old question, and one I can deal with easily using the OAD&D rules, the main origination of the m-u in most play. Questioner, you be an ogre, a big strong 4th-level monster. I am a poor weak magic-user. We are at 30-foot distance. You move to attack, I cast my Sleep spell. You loose. So, now I'll be any other sort of PC, and you remain the ogre. You win...unless my character succeeds in running away.
The low-level magic-user is mainly a one- or two-shot weapon, but the "artillery" is potent. This fits well with a balanced party of low-level PCs, none of whom are really very strong singly. #100
I chose to use a system of magic inspired by the worls of Jack Vance because it fit the whole of the game I devised. For example, think of an archer with a quiver of arrows. When one is shot, it is gone. Magic spells, more potent than arrows, are much the same. So archers need to select their arrows before going forth to battle, so too the m-us in the game. #100
In seeking clear class distinctions I did indeed proscribe m-us from the use of the sword, and clerics too. This made the archetypes distinct, balanced the character classes, and worked well enough for game purposes, methinks. #127
What do more cautious and retired mages do? Why they make magic items to earn a handsome living, of course. So indeed thate are perhaps 100 each of various sorts of +1 swords--easy to enchant for a moderately able caster. As those blades don't wear out or get destroyed easily, many are likely to be several decades old, some older, some newer. And those +1 swords are scattered over several kingdoms with many millions of inhabitants. [11]
This of course does not at all fit with his guidance that no magic items can be bought in town, they have to be earned by adventuring and risking your live. If that is the case, whom are those retired magic users selling their creations to? And why would they not sell them to adventurers with hands full of hard cash and jewelry?
Specifically to the point, magic-users are not allowed to wear any form of armor or use any form of weapon other than daggers. We have amended our treatment to allow them to use staves as weapons as well. Characters able to operate in two or more classes at once do not fall under the injunction against armor and weapons. [46]
Cleric
The original reason for allowing clerics blunt weapons only was one of game balance, and I used Bishop Odo of Normandy as the exemplar--no shedding of blood. [11]
Actually the cleric was based losely on Bishop Odo, brother of Duke William of Normandy, the fictitional Friar Tuck, and a religious proscription against the shedding of blood.
The paladin was likewise loosely drawn from the Paladins of Charlemagne and the Code of Chivalry.
Changes in both archetypes were mandated by the game system for which they were designed. As they two are quite different archetypes, criticism of these classes on grounds of similarity is fatuous. The purpose of each class in the campaign milieu is quite different. #8285
As far as I am concerned the terms cleric and priest are interchangable for the AD&D class. Consider many of the spells available to the cleric--clearly meant to provide for the general population. #8295
I usdually allowed most PCs and all important NPCs to be versed to some extent in teir alignment tongue. All Clerics know it backwards and forwards. #7538
Generally its assumed by most, as clerics are adventuring, they sleep through the night, say their morning prayers before the new day's action commences, and thus have their spells renewed, even as magic-users are cracking open their spell books to memorize their new ones for the day. [11]
I always envisaged the power of turning Undead to be restricted to clerics, not held by shamans and witchdoctors. The latter would have spells that proscribed Undead from areas, but not the capacity to turn/destroy them by their very presence. [11]
As the AD&D game developed, the cleric became less of a spell-casting fighter, and so by the time UA was published there was no reason for concern about balance between classes if clerics could use edged weapons. [11]
Thief
In the original D&D game there was no thief class, and the traps were not as frequent or complex. A 10' pole in cautious hands and a dward PC were usualy sufficient to spot most of them. #3629
My campaign players were the testers of all the new ideas, so the thief and assassin were played by me as NPCs in the middle of the year, 1974, as I began to compile material for a supplement to the D&D game. The thief was immediately popular, so quite a number were played before GREYHAWK hit in 1975. One or two assassin PCs were played also, but the party was always charry about them. Minor pilfering of party treasure was tolerated, but having a PC offed by an assassin was most annoying. That happened once, maybe twice, with the offending PC then leaving the game, the player returning as a different character. #288
The Thief was based on Jack of Shadows (Zelazny) and Cugel (Vance) with a touch of REH's Conan, rather than solely on the Gray Mouser. Mouser was too good a swordsman to serve as the pure model. #1814
The thief is a strong archetype in fantasy and adventure stories in general. The main drawback to having one in the party was...theft! Otherwise, we always appreciated a thief PC being able to scout ahead, check for and remove traps, pick locks, climb up where the rest of the PCs couldn't reach easily, and even pop out of shadows to strike a dangerous opponent for added damage.
As encounters became more complex and dangerous, the party's thief became a lot more in demand. Just being able to have a member go ahead, see what was awaiting, and return to warn the other PCs was often the difference between success and failure.
Thief characters that prospered understood that their purloining had to be kept to a reasonably modest "extra share," or else the other PC would grab them, turn them upside hown, and shake them :D Of course when I was DMing I did my best to encoutrage thieves to be greedy, so as to give the party problems from within, that seeming logical when they had a sneaky stealer of wealth along. #1979
If the thieves expect to be protected by the other party members, healed by clerics, given a share of party treasure, their pilfering from their comrades should be greatly limited. It is up to the other PCs to lay it on the line to the rampant thieves. The majority of the party might well dictate death for theft from any party member, and carry out an execution of a guilty party without loss of any Good and/or Lawful alignment [11].
Of course, as a DM I encourage thieves who risk thier lives scouting and opening possibly trapped containers and all to filch a bit--say a few gems or a piece of jewelry. Reasonable PCs in a party can not seriously take offense at such relatively petty theft. [11]
On the other hand, my PCS have attacked and killed a PC thief stealing party treasure for his own gain at the expense of the remainder of the party [11]
Thieves can use nothing better than leather armor, and they may never use a shield. They may use only daggers and/or swords, magical or not. I would allow them to use a garrot or sling in some cases. Likewise, I would allow the use of a fine chainmail short of magical nature. [46]
AD&D: Paladin
As far as I am concerned, the Paladin is Lawful Good--period. The class takes vows, swears an oath, and then follows it. The concept is drawn from some legend--Authurian--and some quasi-legend--the paladins of Charlemaine plus the code of chivalry as it was written, more honored in the breach than the keeping. As described in the game system, any characyer that was of paladin class would cease being so immediately his vows were broken. #403
A Paladin played by someone that does not understand the basis of the Code of Chivalry taken to the extreme and attached to religion is likely unplayable, but that's the fault of the player, not the class.
Yes, I have played a Paladin character, but not for long, as I don't enjoy Lawful Good characters much--too restrictive for a Chaotic sort of person such as I am #1882
Following the Law. First, many a Paladin PC has been played, and that done successfully generally following the rules for the class as written. Lawful Good does not equate to stupid or foolish, It means the PC must follow the Law as determined by the deity the Paladin acknowledges, and thus promote Good according to that Law. #1882
Killing Prisoners. Playing a proper paladin is often mishandled also. They are not stupid per se, only bound by oaths. For example I did allow paladins to slay dangerous prisoners if those individuals renounced Evil. In such a state of grace, killing them is actually a Good act, for they will then go on to a better life in another world instead of being sent to some dark and dismal plane to suffer for their ways after death. While a paladin will fight to the death if necessary, they are not usually bound to suicidal valor for no pirpose. #403
A paladin can freely dispatch prisoners of Evil alignment that have surrrendered and renounced that alignment in favor of Lawful Good. They are then sent on to their reward before thay can backslide [11]
As I have pointed out at times, a Paladin might well execute a group of captives after they have converted from their former (Evil) alignment to Lawful Good, for that act saves their sould, prevents them from slipping back into error. #1882
Note that the "converted" evil humanoid" is quite unlikely to remain so, will return to its evil ways, so thus the mercy killing by the paladin to assure that doesn't happen. It is all for the good of the subject of course. The same surely holds true of evil dragons. A permanent conversion from the malign is most unlikely, the best outcome likely being a neutral creature with evil tendencies. Thus I hold that a paladin will attack on sight any evil monster of that sort...assuming he believes there is a reasonable chance of prevailing. Otherwise, the paladin will mark the location to return with a stronger force. #6706
Fleeing. A Paladin will not normally sacrifice himself, fight needlessly, unless it is a situation where honor and duty demand that. Such sacrifice would have to be demonstrably for the betterment of his deity, or else based on an oath the character made prior to the dire situation. #1882
I can't understand your problem with a rule that calls for a thinking character to retreat post-haste when in imminent danger of dying. Being brave and chivalrous does not equate to being stupid and throwing away one's life. It isn't heroic to die for no reason, and that applies to all including paladins. [11]
Speaking Truth. While in general a Paladin can not lie, that does not mean he must say anything, or can not answer evasively or mislead--if that is according to the tenets of his avowed LG deity. #1882
Detect Evil. Well, as the Paladin is supposed to be the virtuous warrior wholly dedicated to being upright and doing good, the Detect Evil capacity seemed natural. I envisaged it as being one that the Paladin must use with active thought, that meaning when he is thus engaged he can be doing nothing else. (It was not meant as an automatic sensing device akin to a Geiger counter detecting radiation level.) The Evil needs to be an active force such as in a character or a spirit entity or at worst a semi-intelligent monster able to contemplate doing wicked things, or an active magical effect that has a sentient quality that triggers it malign effect. #1315
Protection from Evil. The paladin's Protection from Evil is no different from the spell of that name in such case, so I would treat it as if it were a spell, and if the paladin purposfully broke it, the circle would cease functioning until the adversary concerned was destroyed. [11]
I do not believe that a Protection from Evil generated by a paladin will break an existing Charm spell, as it is meant primarily to assist the Paladin against the malign. As a Charm might well be cast by a non-evil person for non-evil purposes, any temporary breaking of such a spell needs be considered carefully by the DM. [
11]
AD&D: Ranger
I wrote 99% of the material in OA/D&D, so those questions are easy. Most of the classes, spells, and monsters are of my creation. Some exceptions are: Ranger based on Joe Fischer's work, the druid inspired as a class by Dennis Sustarre.
Joe Fischer played in my group, and he did an article in THE STRATEGIC REVIEW introducing the Ranger Class for the D&D game. From that I built the AD&D version. #1214
The answer is easy;) OAD&D got it right in regards to the Ranger class. #1261
The Ranger class was originally devised by Joe Fischer, then a regular in my D&D game group. I published his initial treatment of the class in The Strategic Review, thereafter revised it and included it in the core game rules. Of course it is apparent that Joe based the class on JRRT's work and Aragorn. Likely a forester of some sort would have been created at some point, but it would have been quite different from the Ranger as it appeared. certainly. #1814
The ranger's bonus of +1 damage per level was very annoying to me as the DM, but that encouraged the logical addition of damage for the big old giant class members, so that a couple of solid hits from a member of same could flatten the cheeky little ranger attacking him. #2646
As for broading the ranger and druid classes to include elves, it is logical that the memebrs of the demi-human race in question would assume such roles because of their association with humans. Of course that assumes a human-dominated world--which is the case in the vast majority of campaign worlds I know of. [11]
Rangers are plenty potent without double weapons specialization [11]
Not druidical spells, no. Only magic-user spells demand spell books. [11]
AD&D: Druid
Dennis Sustarre was not a member, but he corresponded with me, and did a DRAGON Magazine piece on the Druid Class. (I had them as NPC "Monsters" in D&D before that.) From his material I crafted the new PC class.
It is because the scimitar is as close a sword weapon I could come up with to match the druids' mistletoe-harvesting sickle. #6792
The implication in regards "The Old Faith" is that it was a shamanistic religion that had no formal pantheon of deities. The original inhabitants, the Flan, were indeed those that were the principle adherants to that belief system. It wasn't explored because it was not particularly meaningful to the module or the setting.
Pretty much the same as happened in actuality in ancient times here on earth. Adonis and Isus, for example, were made a part of a pantheon previously foreign to them, In AD&D terms that would simply make the deity in question that much more potent.
IMO druids do not serve any deity other than Nature and its manifestations. #6543
AD&D: Monk
All of the titles for the Monk Class were taken unabashedly from mah jjong, one of my favorite games. As flowers are honors tiles, delicate and beautiful, I thought it fitted well with an Eastern aesthetic martial artist, the object belying his actual prowess. #1940
What I was contemplating was a non-Oriental sort of Monk character to replace the clearly Eastern martial artist one featured. The class would likely have been a sort of dedicated warrior-spy with a few elements of the original Monk class, new abilities of more European sort to round it out. that way the Scarlet Brotherhood would not have had to lost its warrior-monk component. #1978
Anyway, as to the original Monk class, I envisaged them mainly as wanderers from afar, some few being established in monestaries in the non-Oriental (or whatever nomer one might choose to describe a place of like cultures, states and societies). If you ever saw the TV series Kung Fu, that was rather the model I used for the monk PC as far as general interaction in the campaign--sans the racism.
So yes, the cultures and societies that produced Monk characters were quite different from the usual Western/Northern/Southern European models, but actually covered in the World of Greyhawk setting, for the far western states therein could well house some small number of such monastic warrior societies. #2229
The intent there was to empower the Monk character to speak as indicated [with Animals] sans use of a spell. #8673
A DM not allowing monks in their campaign world is fine, but it shows a narrow perspective. Why not an enclave of immigrants of Oriental sort producing a few such individuals? Or even why not wandering monks from far off. Of course either approach will require some considerable adjustment in regards gaing levels after 8th, but that's an easy quest to set up. #7673
AD&D: Illusionist
Peter, you did disappear from the mainstream D&D print vehicles, so I erroneously assumed that you had dropped out of FRPGing as so many did after a period of active participation. your contribution of the basis for the Illusionist class influenced the AD&D game considerably... [
11]
AD&D: Assassin
I used historical fact and a whole lot of authored fistion on the subject to devise what I deemed to be an appropriate archetypical class for OAD&D, the Assassin. assassination as a means of livelihood being inherantly evil is correct. An assassin is likely Neutral Evil, but never not evil. [11]
AD&D (special): Bard
Historically, bards were a class of druid. We don't know much at all about what the druids did in their religious practices, but we know their organization into three branches--the priests, lawyers (ovates), and bards. #2762
UA: Cavalier
The cavalier class was created mainly because all noble warriors were not in the same stamp as Sir Galahad and Roland. #4070
The short answer is that I consider well-trained, aristocratic warriors such as knights and samurai as having been very deadly fighting machines. The Cavalier class was aimed at depicting a knightly warrior of most able sort...and they were very tough indeed. #1732
Unreleased: Mystic, Mountebank, Jester, Savant, Witch / Warlock, Shamans / Primitive Spellcasters
Mountebank--a skilled liar/slight of hand trickster/minor illusionist/thief
Savant--a learned character also knowing arcane things and having minor magic-use
Mystic--an augur-clairvoyant with minor monk and cleric abilities
Jester--a gymnast-tumbler with some special spells for attention, laughter, anger, etc. #5868
I have been pestered for information on the Mountebank, Mystic, and Savant for many a year. There is no way I am ever going to publish the material, as the game they were meant to be used in became the exclusive property of TSR, and is now the property of WotC. Maybe after I have shuffled off this mortal coil my rough notes will be found and whomever acquires them will share whetever information about the proposed classes is therein. [
11]
The savant and mystic were meant to deal with critters from other planes as well. The mountebank could use disguise, impersonate, and with his patter or oration affect an audience of one or many more. The jester could use several hurled missile weapons such as daggers, clubs, knives, throwing stars, etc. with speed and accuraccy. #5889
The mystic was a marginal archetype based on what is termed Oriental Mystery and Eastern mythology. [11]
Witches really have nothing do do with modern Wiccan beliefs, something that was formulated in the last century supposedly based on Druidical paratices. As the Romans absolutely wipes out every vestage of Druidism, there is nothing of that old pagan religion to use in forming a new one save a few names.
Anyway, witches in the meddle ages were definately Satanists bent on doing the malign. That is my model for witches and warlocks in the RPG. I would certainly make it a separate class. The background for it is detailed and complex, so I again suggest regerencing the Mythus game treatment of them or else the LA game system's optional sourcebook, Shamanism & Witchery, the latter being more easily translated into AD&D mechanics. #6421
To be exact, a witch is properly one that serves evil, and a male witch is a warlock, not a wizard. There is ample evidence that during the middle ages there was indeed a cult of Satanists calling themselves witches that sought to do malign works in service of the Devil. This sort of confusion extends elsewhere to the term sorcerer, that belonging properly to one that calls up demons to perform services for him. [
11]
The limited spells for primitive spell casters is both logical and something that I personally stuck to when DMing. however... [11]
In special circumstances I would create new magic items for them--such as a ferish, mask, rattle, drum. bone whistle, skin painting, or medicine bag that had either protective or offensive capacity, or perhaps both. Thus the special primitive spell caster(s) encountered were a definite challenge for strong PC parties. [11]
Races
A human centered world
I think Gary's arguments are true -- demihumans in play end up being played as caricatures of humans, often quite one-dimensional. However, there is so much that does not work in inner-game logic like castles in a world with flight, that it would have been easy enough to suspend disbelief in this regard, too. As he did, he had to endlessly defend limiting the level of demihumans, instead of just giving humans some other extra perk, as players wanted to play elves and halflings and not be limited artificially.
The whole of the AD&D game was designed so as to center around humans. All players are human, as am I. [11]
I definitely assumed a fantasy world dominated by humans. A good reason for this is that creating a non-human culture and societies based on it is far more than I care to attempt for a game. If demi-humans had no limits to their potential, then as depicted, they would surely rise to dominate the world...and invention of their cultures and societies would be an absolute necessity. Game balance is also a factor. Demi-humans have advantages over humans, so their maximum power needs limitation for the reason noted above. [11]
Making up the origins, religions, history, mythology, legends, philosophies cultures, and societies of a non-human race, let alone races, that truly differs from that of of mankind, is an undertaking for a genius that wishes to dedicate a lifetime to that, and from which a game world might or might not eventuate. [11]
The effort needed to devise the evolution, biology, cultural history, and society of non-human races, make them truly different from humans and yet appealing to players, is well beyond my capacity. [11]
The answer is related to what I said regarding the virtual impossibility of creating a completely exotic milieu for a human-like, or even an intelligent, non-human species. There is no frame of reference from which to work.
As for the demi-human, and humanoid as well, states in the Flanaess, they are relatively few because it is assumed that humans are the dominant species on the world. Were it otherwise, then one would have to deal with the creation of one or more exotic cultures and societies that I addressed previously. the locigal level limits on non-human races is also directly related to this problem.
Personally, I do not find a cobbled-up "non-human" history, culture, and society that is plainly based on humanity particularly attractive in a fantasy world setting...even if a special language is created to give the contrived work verisimilitude. #8308
Of course all well-considered fantasy world settings are homocentric. The authors are human, and all of the actual historical information available deals only with human culture, society, and history, save for mytholoigy and folklore. Even those latter sources are homocentric in perspective.
I for one do not care to spend years of time and effort imagining and creating an exotic universe for a non-human race or races, complete with all that pertains to such a group. Just think of all the information we know and have recorded regarding humanity, and the effort needed to create a tenth of that lore for an imaginary race.
In short, that's why all the non-human races in imaginative writings such as books and games are not really very different from humans, just variants of them with some qualities exaggerated to give apparent differentiation--Klingons are fiercely warlike, Vulcans are coldly mental, Ferengi are completely crass and venal, etc. So dwarves are stout and love ale, elves are slender and nature-oriented, orcs are ugly and brutal...but have essentially human culture and societies. #8303
Creating distinct, basicaly non-human cultures and the societies that would logicaly develop therefrom is a creative endevor I have shied away from because of the demands it will make on knowledge, innovation, creativity...and time and effort to establish and rework the lot until all is suitably exoticly non-human. #6304
Novels are not truly suitable bases from which to create games. The two are basicaly opposites. [11]
Demihuman Limitations
Indeed, I do not believe that having unlimited levels for demi-humans can support a humanocentric campaign. without humanocentrism, there are no sources availabel to the GM to create his world setting. #2504
There were many players that were not happy thus, however, so that was why I tinkered with the demi-human racial level maximums. There was no way I would ever remove them entirely across the board, certainly, as the world setting was always assumed to be human dominated for the reason I have expressed many times in the past: I have never felt competant to design a world with the dominant cultures and societies being non-human. #6618
About half of the players had demi-human PCs, and that's when I saw the need to allow multi-classing more broadly, and not limit the thief level. Also some of the sub-types were created and the level limits bumped up to accommodate those who insisted on playing non-human races in a human-dominated game and world setting. Actually, I always allowed a Wish spell to bump up a level too...
It is worth noting, that most players never got PCs above around 12th level, so even an elf fighter/m-u of 5/8 was a viable member of a typical party. #1056
The expansion of non-human PC level limits covered in Unearthed Arcana was to facilitate their play in higher-level campaigns. For example, an elven fighter/magic-user/thief of 5/9/12 level equates to around 19th level. #6613
Almost all of the material in the UA book was mine, picked up from articles I wrote in Dragon magazine. As to the increase in types of demi-humans and their level limits, yes. That was of my doing. As human PCs were getting to higher levels then it seemed a good idea to allow for more potent non-human characters, while at the same time maintaining the human race as predominant. #1876
Dwarves and Elves not from Tolkien
Indeed, the number of JRRT fans who were potential D&D gamers encouraged me to include races like those in his works in the game. Dwarves, of course, are common in a lot of myth, German and Schadanavian. The elves in D&D were not those of the Rings Trilogy, but hobbits/halflings were that. As a reader of fables, fairy tales, fantasy, and myth for a long time before the work of JRRT was in print, adding another choice, the gnome, seemed a good thing, as in fantasy the former elemental had become more an archetypical "fairy" race. Inspiration came from extensive reading, and of course designing the race to fit the D&D model was not a great challenge #348
I did indeed use names that Tolkien used in his LotR books in order to attract potential players to the D&D game. When it was being written, was published, early in the 70s the Rings Triology was surely the best known fantasy work around. That said, compare the elves of the D&D game with those that JRRT extoled. Quite a difference between the two, eh? #5942
Inspiration for the D&D dwarves came from the Norse mythology, legends, and fairy tales. Elves came mainly from folklore and fairy tales.
I have read all the Andrew Lang (various colors in the titles) save the Yellow Book of Fairy Tales, Andersen, and Brothers Grimm fairy tales as well as many a book on folklore and legends.
Halflings were mainly drawn from JRRT's fiction, of course. #1799
Humans
Only humans humans have souls. All living things might have spirits. Deal with such metaphysical questions as the differences between soul and spirit as you see fit. [11]
Dwarves
The Norse dwarves were like giants in their powers, and the French fey were as potent as fairies in some fairy tales. Neither is suitable for inclusion as a character race in a FRPG. #2528
After all is said and done, dwarves are so unbelievable as to be completely irrational. They live underground in caves and drink ale and eat meat. Where do their supplies come from? Where, outside of my assertion if D&D that they have a strong constitution, does that "logical" assumption come from. After all, they might be as frail as vampires when it comes to sunlight, and that's why they live underground. Many a fairy tale portrays dwarves as wholly evil, as are the svartalves of Norse mythology. #2568
Elves
I determined to have elvish PCs play a regular role in the D&D game because of JRRT's writing, that's a fact. As to the inspiration for D&D elves, no, it didn't really come from his version of elves. although I did make them foes of orcs, and shoot bows well so as to not disapoint the fans of the rings Trilogy too much. After all, in D&D elves are inferior to humans in all respects save longevity. #5993
As for the depiction of elves, I am not one who looks to Tolkien. D&D elves are not super beings, not taller or generally more powerful than humans. I used myth, legend, folklore, fairy tales, and authored fantasy such as Poul Anderson's works for inspiration in regards the paramaters of elves. Of course, the varieties develped do reflect the Professor's work. after all, I desired to have the game to appeal to his fans. #2504
From where did I get my take on elves? Mainly from fairy tales such as the one in which the 12 princesses went through a secret door into Elfland every night, dancd with elven princes so as to have holes in their slippers. Also, the folklore about etering the world of elves through a secret way under a stone that depicts elves as human-like in many respects. Much authored fantasy also treats elves in like manner, including their being soul-les. #5942
I read literally thousands of SF, fantasy, folklore, and mythology books beginning in 1950. I can not recall exact references after so many years have passed, but I can assure all that Tolkien was not the first autor to consider elves as something other than tiny little fairy folk. In point of fact, fairies in fairy tales, and the French Lutin fair folk, are usually more like JRRT's version of elves than any other sort of folklore "race" other than perhaps the Norse lysoalfar, the "light elves." Of course, as Tolkien borrowed much from Norse mythology, it is likely that both his dwarves and elves came from there. I know my dwarves surely did.
#5942
Also I believe it was Margaret St. Claire who wrote The Secret People in which elves were very much like humans. Of course, the early English folklore had elves akin to small humans, likely based on the Picts, and called stone arrowheads they found "elf bolts". #5946
I found a fair amount of information on the Seelie and unseelie courts back in the 1970s by using the local library here to tap into the Wisconsin interlibrary loan system to get old books--mostly from the U of WI. I contemplated a campaign using the information, but decided it would need a considerable amount of effort--a completely non-human environment, that of the World of Fairie. With not a vast amount of resource material to work from, I decided against spendng a couple of years developing the setting and new creature information... [11]
The Seelie and Unseelie courts share the same world, certainly. It is a sphere like earth. The highest of the Seelie court are likely the Feys...or the Sidhe, some of the latter are of unseelie nature, of course. [11]
Indeed, I believe it was in the Renaissance that elves moved from the folklore model of wild and rude, or basically tiny creatures such as in Shakespeare's A Midsummer's Night's Dream, to something more akin to the French version of fairies, tall, courtly, refined, and as civilized as humanind, if not more so. As you note, it might well have been Spenser that brought about the change. [11]
In folklore elves are soulless, so it isnt merely a game device. As a matter of fact, I would question that they have spirits. [11]
[Elves able to cast in magic armor] That rule was to stifle complaints from Tolkienists about elves in the D&D game not being super-human. Half-elves were not given such a break. [11]
The fact is that only elven chain was allowed for casting of magic-user spells in my campaign. A multi-classed elf could manage to get away with wearing even plate armor and casting, but not thieving, but not a half-elf, or gnome. [11]
Actually the booklet is quite clear in this regard. An elf can act as a Fighter and use armor, gain XPs in that class, or one can act as a Magic-User and likewise gain XPs. What isn't clear is the HD. When an advance in level is indicated, the elf gains one-half a HD whether the advance is in the Fighter or M-U class. Thus the elf is operating at a disadvantage, not an advantage, in regards HPs. [11]
As the Faerie Knights were reputedly of great puissance, you might want to go further that two levels above the indicated maximum. after all, the stats required for a cavalier are very stringent. Perhaps three levels, with one added for each 18 in Con and Dex, Str level addition also. Hey wait! that isn't in the rules... Of course I have been known to ignore them fairly often P.S. To all rule lawyers: :P :P :P [11]
Attacks and saves are at the most favorable level of the elf PC. [11]
The basic racial adjustments apply to varieties of that race, so as you note, the Wood Elf character would get +1 strength, -1 intelligence, +1 dexterity, -1 constitution. [11]
AD&D: Gnomes
Later on I added gnomes to D&D to broaden the choices for non-human PCs, as I did in AD&D. This was done because a number of players, myself included, were tired of having so many dwarves, elves, and halflings in the group of adventurers. In my campaign a party of 12 would have three front rank halflings, a second rank of dwarves, elves in the third rank, and the fourth rank the humans--mainly magic-users and clerics. #1775
Gnomes in myth were created as one of the four elementals, that of earth. I took what I recalled from fairy tales and folklore about mine spirits to create a unique race for the D&D game. Yes, there were already halflings and dwarves, but I made the gnomes sufficiently different so as to allow another choice for character race. I have used it in a PC, he being a gnome illusionist-thief. #1799
The original gnomes were earth elementals of considerable potency as well, but i modeled the D&D race after those in fable and fairy tale. #2528
As you undoubtedly know, gnomes were originally the name for small earth elementals, as salamanders were of fire, sylphs of air, and undines (I think, it's been a long time since I read on this subject) water.
Despite the origination of the gnome, I meant to make the race more attuned to nature than are dwarves. The deep gnomes, Svirfneblin, are meant to be exceptional. The balance of their cousins deal well with both nature and the subterranean.
Dwarves are miners, forgers, and somewhat mechanical.
Gnomes are miners, botanists, and highly mechanical.
Dwarves love gold and gems.
Gnomes appreciate objects d'art more than gold, although those of Zurich love to keep the wealth of dwarves and others secure. #3270
Monster PCs
Never happened in any campaign I ever ran, and none of the DMs I knew allowed such stuff either. #3859
Frankly, I find the concept of dragons as player characters of occassional human-like appearance to be absolutely out of place. No more need be said on this topic #6293
Alignment
Gary spent endless hours of discussion defending his views on alignment against all kinds of valid arguments. If it was intended as a role-play aid as he claims, making it relevant for game mechanics undermined this immediately. We back in the day found the concept comically immature, simplistic and black-and-white, compared to what is really motivating people.
Alignment was meant primarily as a role-playing tool. (Despite what some of the "mature" and "sophisticated" gamers assert, roleplay was indeed a central feature of the AD&D game from the proverbial get-go.) The player was to be guided by it when role-playing his character, and the DM had the same benchmarks to use in judging the PC's actions. The debates now make me regret that I ever included the system feature, as it is being taken beyond the pale. Better to have the character's actions speak for their ethics and morality than some letter set. #1570
The alignments presented in the DMG are not meant to be psychologically correct not a guideline for comparative ethics. they are meant only to assist the player in assuming the role of the make-believe character playing in a fantasy game. [
11]
As compared to the reasons for which I created them, alignments are generally misused by DMs and I am sorry that I did not originally stress their principal meaning and uses. [11]
Alignments are for the use of the DM in the development of the nations and the peoples that inhabit them, principally the dramatis personae that will interact with the group of player characters. It is meant to serve the DM as a measuring stick against the performance of the PCs in the campaign, after each has elected an alignment as a general template for the ethical and moral views of their game persona. In the same secondary role, they are meant to be useful in regards use of magical spells and magic items that require the imbuing of some spirit (force) in their making. [11]
When I enlarged the alignment system from the three used in D&D because chaoric does not necassarily mean evil nor lawful equate to good, I worked up the nine alignments found in OAD&D as I began work in the MM in 1976. A five-alignment system was not used by me, as the various NX slots were integral to the system I devised. #2087
A W.C. Fields line is a working axiom for evil: "Never give a sucker an even break." #1776
I would rate Elric as Lawful Evil indeed, as he knows that his sword steals souls, uses it to keep himslef alive. [11]
