This is why I prefer the racial classes of BX. It effectively isolates the character which minimizes the risks. Plus it allows you to create a weak class for a powerful race, something not possible in AD&D (which IMHO is why you never saw truly strange races but instead were stuck with half measures: half orcs, half ogres etc)
It's actually easier to use standard classes with monsters in Holmes because ability scores have s little bearing on play. That goes double for pre-Greyhawk OD&D, where even monsters generally do 1d6 damage. As Holmes said , the key is that monster characters start at 1st level, same as everyone else.
Wayne Rossi Enjoyed reading your thoughts here. I agree regarding "Monster Races". I think each should be as brief (or shorter) as Elf/Dwarf/Halfling descriptions in OD&D.
And I've puzzled over that "Dragon" comment in his article as well. It's clear he used an earlier OD&D printing (with Balrog in that section) given that the 1st printing of Holmes contains all of the Tolkien references (especially "hobbit"). TSR didn't even remove these references until after the 1st printing Holmes was already out. Perhaps he got a revised copy later and didn't realize it had been changed.
Well, not quite, because the race descriptions contain things not mentioned in the monster descriptions, so in combination there tends to be more. I like the idea of standard abilities described separately so you don't have to repeat them for every monster, saving a lot of space. Modern editions go this route, but they have so many special abilities it kind of defeats the object.
This is why I prefer the racial classes of BX. It effectively isolates the character which minimizes the risks. Plus it allows you to create a weak class for a powerful race, something not possible in AD&D (which IMHO is why you never saw truly strange races but instead were stuck with half measures: half orcs, half ogres etc)
ReplyDeleteIt's actually easier to use standard classes with monsters in Holmes because ability scores have s little bearing on play. That goes double for pre-Greyhawk OD&D, where even monsters generally do 1d6 damage. As Holmes said , the key is that monster characters start at 1st level, same as everyone else.
ReplyDeleteWayne Rossi Enjoyed reading your thoughts here. I agree regarding "Monster Races". I think each should be as brief (or shorter) as Elf/Dwarf/Halfling descriptions in OD&D.
ReplyDeleteAnd I've puzzled over that "Dragon" comment in his article as well. It's clear he used an earlier OD&D printing (with Balrog in that section) given that the 1st printing of Holmes contains all of the Tolkien references (especially "hobbit"). TSR didn't even remove these references until after the 1st printing Holmes was already out. Perhaps he got a revised copy later and didn't realize it had been changed.
ReplyDeleteI would go even further and say the elf, dwarf and halfling character race descriptions should be as brief as the monster entries. ;-)
ReplyDeleteNot sure what you mean there. The OD&D race descriptions in Vol 1 are roughly the same length as an average monster entry in Vol 2. Holmes too.
ReplyDeleteWell, not quite, because the race descriptions contain things not mentioned in the monster descriptions, so in combination there tends to be more. I like the idea of standard abilities described separately so you don't have to repeat them for every monster, saving a lot of space. Modern editions go this route, but they have so many special abilities it kind of defeats the object.
ReplyDelete