[1e AD&D]Is there any way to beat the level cap?

[motoko's ghost]

I've been playing 1Ed AD&D with an elven thief/magic-user and he's coming up close to his level cap for magic-user, I was wondering if there was any way to increase his level cap?

[Telok]

Yes. But you probably won't like it.


Real life bribery or extortion.

[motoko's ghost]

So you'd have to use rule 0 to override the rules? It might actually be doable if I swing it by the DM, most of use don't really like the concept of the level cap.

Alright I'll see if he goes for it(either abolishing it or at least extending it a few levels)

[Premier]

There's a way to beat the level cap: play a human.

There's a good reason level caps are in place: every race except for humans has a slew of bonus abilities. The ONLY thing humans have but demis don't is unlimited advancement in all classes (and multi-classing, but nobody ever does that, anyway). If you remove level caps, what reason would be there to ever play a human?

[Daisuke1133]

And that slew of bonus abilities are entirely dependent on the DM to be useful. If no such situation comes up, the demi-humans are just humans with funny physical characteristics and a level-cap.

Additionally, there is a reason folks would play a human in a game with no demi-human level limits. It's the same reason Batman keeps getting contrived into Justice League stories: Because people like an underdog character. Also, perhaps someone wants to play a class that is only available to humans. No one was saying anything about making every class available to demi-humans, just taking away the arbitrary and ill-conceived level limits.

[motoko's ghost]

I know but it does mean that a lot of characters end up being thieves or humans, which kinda bugs me. Mind you, humans also get to be any class or class combo, while the other races cant (no dwarven wizards or clerics:smallfrown:)

[hamlet]

I know but it does mean that a lot of characters end up being thieves or humans, which kinda bugs me. Mind you, humans also get to be any class or class combo, while the other races cant (no dwarven wizards or clerics:smallfrown:)

The AD&D 1e books were, almost explicitly, designed to be "D&D in Greyhawk" which is a humanocentric campaign world, and the way to ensure that people would pick humans over demi-humans most of the time was by installing level limits. It was a concious design choice, though you may disagree with it.

If you dont like level limits, talk to the DM about it. From what you've said, it sounds like he doesn't care for them either, so maybe you can swing a deal. Perhaps he'll let you break the limit normally, or perhaps he'll let you advance at 50% pace to compensate the humans in the world or something. Or you can crack open the Unearthed Urcana and use the rules for exceeding level limits due to high ability scores in there.

The rules are guidlines, really, not rules so much. Bend them, twist them, break them. That's what they're there for.

[motoko's ghost]

:smalleek:...You can exceed level caps for high ability scores? Sweet, I rolled an 18 for INT:smallbiggrin:(and It's very likely I'll be getting some magic item boosts to that soon)...this just might work:smallamused:

Thanks.

[Lapak]

I know but it does mean that a lot of characters end up being thieves or humans, which kinda bugs me. Mind you, humans also get to be any class or class combo, while the other races cant (no dwarven wizards or clerics:smallfrown:)Well, two things:

- Humans can't be any class combo; they can only be single-classed. (They can end up with more than one class, but only one at a time.) The ability to even BE a magic-user/thief is unique, and being able to continue advancing as a thief while having potent spellcasting is nothing to sneeze at.

- As others have said, negotiating further advancement is certainly possible. Or at least getting the DM to waive the 'still only get to put half XP towards thief even though magic-user is stalled out' bit should certainly be doable.

[hamlet]

:smalleek:...You can exceed level caps for high ability scores? Sweet, I rolled an 18 for INT:smallbiggrin:(and It's very likely I'll be getting some magic item boosts to that soon)...this just might work:smallamused:

Thanks.

You can. Don't get too excited since, according to the rules, it's only an extra level or three, really. And as written, it specifies single classed, so that might be a sticking point.

But in the end, the best (and really only) answer is talk frankly with the DM and ask him if he'll allow you to keep moving forward, or if he has some other idea. Who knows, he might actually have a plan on what to do about it himself!

[motoko's ghost]

You can. Don't get too excited since, according to the rules, it's only an extra level or three, really. And as written, it specifies single classed, so that might be a sticking point.

But in the end, the best (and really only) answer is talk frankly with the DM and ask him if he'll allow you to keep moving forward, or if he has some other idea. Who knows, he might actually have a plan on what to do about it himself!

Actually if I can get at least a 4 point boost it's 6 extra levels(which is roughly where the DM's hinted the campaign will end), which would really help.

Thanks for the help with this

[Premier]

And that slew of bonus abilities are entirely dependent on the DM to be useful. If no such situation comes up, the demi-humans are just humans with funny physical characteristics and a level-cap.

Could you please support your claim with an actual argument? Just because in my experience - and I play 1E regularly -, most of the racial abilities come up all the time.

[Daisuke1133]

Let's start with the easiest to counter the usefulness of: Infravision. Infravision is only useful if a character is in an area without light. Lighting conditions are determined by the DM. If the DM wants, any existing light sources are impossible to extinguish.

Extra known languages I grant can be made very useful by the players.

I chalk up Ability Score Bonuses and Penalties to simple physiological differences among the different Races.

On Dwarfs:
The Dwarf's special detection abilities are mostly predicated on being in a dungeon. A dungeon's layout & content are again determined solely by the DM.

A Dwarf's combat bonuses depend on fighting the following: Half-Orcs, Goblins, Hobgoblins, Orcs, Ogres, Ogre Magi, Trolls, Giants, & Titans. If the DM doesn't want your character to encounter these creatures, you won't.

The Dwarf's saving throw bonuses are only going to be useful if the character is the target of an effect that targets a saving throw.

On Elves:
The resistance against Sleep and Charm spells depends on someone actually casting those spells, and adventuring parties don't often comprise solely of elves.

The bonuses with Bows, Short and Long swords give some agency to players, but this agency is easily negated by a DM creating a situation to take the weapons away and give no possibility replacement.

Detection of secret doors. The DM decides if there are secret doors to be found in the first place.

The negation of the stealth ability will require unreasonable contrivances.

On Gnomes:
The Saving Throw bonuses, Underground Detection, & Combat bonuses face the same limitations as those of Dwarfs.

On Hobbits:
The Underground Detection & Saving Throw bonuses face the same limitations as those of Dwarfs.

The negation of the stealth ability will, again, require unreasonable contrivances.

In conclusion, I see more abilities that require a cooperative DM than those that do not.

[hamlet]

Could you please support your claim with an actual argument? Just because in my experience - and I play 1E regularly -, most of the racial abilities come up all the time.

The greatest asset to a thief character is infravision. Nothin' like being able to sneak up on somebody in the dark without needing a light source yourself.

[Premier]

Daisuke, I'm not quite sure if you're joking. I mean, the entirety of your argument is that "if he wants to, the DM can create a situation where you CAN'T use it"?!?

This "logic" is ridiculous. Going by your line of reasoning, the Fighter's good THAC0 and ability to use any weapon and armour is also "highly circumstantial" because the DM might run a game where there's no metalworking and therefore none of these items have been invented. And the Magic User's spellcasting ability also depends on the DM's mercy, since he could run a game where the entire planet is covered by an Anti-Magic Field. Hell, having a high HP score is can be "neutered" when an evil DM decides never to have anything attack the party at all!

You're implying that games where ALL light sources are unextinguishable, giant-class monsters, poisonous creatures, hostile spellcasters, dungeons and secret doors do not exist at all, and where the party gets disarmed ALL THE TIME are somehow frequent, or at least conceivable. Yeah, sure such games happen... In Bizarro World. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bizarro_World)

You've set up an extremely unlikely constellation of DM decisions and claim that since demihumans would be without their abilities under these circumstances, those abilities are somehow inherently deficient. This is just intellectually dishonest.

[Daisuke1133]

Tell me. Where did I say that the DM was imposing all of these? I was merely stating how each of these could be negated should the DM so choose.

You are inferring things that I neither stated nor intended.

[Particle_Man]

You can. Don't get too excited since, according to the rules, it's only an extra level or three, really. And as written, it specifies single classed, so that might be a sticking point.

There was an errata to the UA in a dragon magazine that upped the level limits even further and basically said "add 2 more to the limit if you are single-classed)".

Option 2 in game . . . wishes? I think the Rogue's Gallery for 1st ed AD&D specifically had a character that sought out wishes to beat a level cap.

[hamlet]

There was an errata to the UA in a dragon magazine that upped the level limits even further and basically said "add 2 more to the limit if you are single-classed)".

Option 2 in game . . . wishes? I think the Rogue's Gallery for 1st ed AD&D specifically had a character that sought out wishes to beat a level cap.

They were a method, but as I recall it involved one wish per level (i.e., to advance from 7th to 8th level, you needed a full 8 wishes), but that might be my memory playing tricks on me.

[Lapak]

Tell me. Where did I say that the DM was imposing all of these? I was merely stating how each of these could be negated should the DM so choose.

You are inferring things that I neither stated nor intended.You stated that they require a 'cooperative DM,' one who is actively causing the ability to be useful. Premier is arguing that this is not the case, that the situations where these abilities are useful are going to either come up naturally or be within the PCs power to create/influence - that it would take an actively antagonistic DM to prevent them from being useful. Since you questioning their usefulness, he's assuming that YOU are assuming an antagonist-DM.

I don't think you are, but I do think that he's a lot closer to the truth of how easy the abilities are to bring into play in AD&D. Which is to say that I agree that it would take a DM actively negating the various strengths to make them useless in a 'standard' game. In a variant campaign where (say) neither dungeons/dark places nor giantkin/evil humanoids were going to be present, the DM would also want to adjust demihuman benefits to account for that.

[Daisuke1133]

The usefulness of these abilities is not what I question (mostly). What I question is if that usefulness is really worth the level cap. I've yet to see any argument that convinces me that it is.

[Lapak]

The usefulness of these abilities is not what I question (mostly). What I question is if that usefulness is really worth the level cap. I've yet to see any argument that convinces me that it is.A few things to consider:

- Relatively few campaigns could be expected to actually hit the level cap for your non-thief best class as a demihuman, due to the way that 1e/2e experience scales.

- Other than magic-users, classes don't actually get that much stuff once you get past name level. Hit dice stop and class abilities pretty much peak at name level with the follower/stronghold business (except, notably, thief abilities). In many ways, there's less difference between a Level 10 Fighter and a Level 15 Fighter than there is between a Level 4 and a Level 6.

So that's the argument that the level cap isn't as crucial as you'd think - or as it would be in 3rd or 4th edition. Now, as to ability pros:

- In by-the-book old-school play (as much as there is such a thing) the abilities really can be game-changing.

That one needs more elaboration.

Infravision: Early D&D states outright that monsters in the dungeon automatically see in the dark and PCs need a light, for example; being able to avoid the giant neon sign that says ADVENTURERS by staying outside the lantern-lit area and/or dispensing with light altogether is a major advantage.

Weapon Bonuses: AD&D was a bonus-poor environment - the kind of buff-stacking that was the name of the game in 3e and later just wasn't there. Every +1 counted for a lot more survival-wise, because there weren't that many ways to acquire them. Even ability bonuses were noticeably harder to come by.

Stonecunning stuff: In classic dungeons, it was not uncommon for there to be subtle slopes that caused a dungeon-level change and/or multiple paths down, some of which skipped a couple of levels - and given the way monster encounter tables were tied to dungeon levels, that was Serious Business. A dwarf's ability to tell where he was underground could be life-saving on a regular basis.

Add to this the fact that there were fewer (a LOT fewer) ways to replicate these abilities, and they really stand out.

[Daisuke1133]

Okay; aside from that first one, those are arguments in favor of balancing the demi-human abilities I could at least respect. But I still think that the method they chose comes off more as "we want to force people to play humans while tricking them into thinking they have a choice". I feel that TSR could have found a better method than putting leash on a character's level advancement, though.

[ngilop]

I have two things to add.

First off. how ar eyou gettign these CRAZY HUGE bonuses to your stats? nothing like that existed in 1st/2nd ed, you were lucky if you ever got an item that gave you a +1 to a score, let alone a fregging +4 ( after all abiites were capped at 25)


second, just pay double the xp, I might be wrong and that is the 2nd ed 'fix' but it is offical that I am sure of, not too many ( really if any) DMs will say no to letting you advance in levels by paying twice the exp.


though this DM scares the bejeeezees out of me with you bneing able to get a +4 toa stat.. who knows what other kind of crazyness is going on.

[LibraryOgre]

1) Wish to be human or polymorph into human, fail save to turn mentally human.
2) Wish to raise your level cap by 1.

Level limits were not a good solution to the "demi-humans get a bunch of abilities"; it didn't negate the abilities, just created a dynamic unbalance.

[Saladman]

Step 1: find a trustworthy, high level druid (gold helps too).

Step 2: commit seppuku.

Step 3: druid casts reincarnation.

Step 4: check if human. If yes, success! If no, repeat steps 1 - 4.


Or I guess if you're a giant pansy you could follow Mark Hall's advice instead. Seriously, even though I've got no great love for level caps you have options to fix this in play instead of just presenting your DM with a special unique snow flake wish list.

[vhfforever]

Find a human to cast wish, that's most likely the best option.

[Kish]

I've been playing 1Ed AD&D with an elven thief/magic-user and he's coming up close to his level cap for magic-user, I was wondering if there was any way to increase his level cap?

Change to 3.xed or 4ed. (Lest this sound like edition snobbery, it's not.)

Nonhumans aren't supposed to go as far in 1ed as humans can. They're secondary protagonists, by design (and yes, Gary Gygax did say so, before someone asks me to prove it). This question is a lot like, "How can I make higher AC be better than lower?" or, "How can I get rid of THAC0?" It's an entirely intended part of the system you're playing; there is no way within that system to get rid of it.

[MeeposFire]

1) Wish to be human or polymorph into human, fail save to turn mentally human.
2) Wish to raise your level cap by 1.

Level limits were not a good solution to the "demi-humans get a bunch of abilities"; it didn't negate the abilities, just created a dynamic unbalance.

Level limits were a terrible idea at balance (and honestly I feel that it was intended as a fluff balance for extended age than a mechanical one) especially since racial abilities were most important at low levels (at higher levels spells and items can effectively replace them) and level limits did nothing then but at higher levels it kicks in when the abilities are less useful.

Just play without level limits the game is just better that way. If you feel humans NEED to have something to be played give them a benefit rather than taking something away from everybody else. One option is to make the them gain XP faster such as 10% bonus similar to having high class ability scores. This way humans get a real benefit of learning fast or something else like that.

[motoko's ghost]

Change to 3.xed or 4ed. (Lest this sound like edition snobbery, it's not.)

It's funny because 3.5 is what I usually play anyway(this campaign was because I wanted to try a different system)

Anyway I talked it over with the DM and they said they would allow me to use the UA level-cap based off INT thing.

Thanks for all the responses, everyone

[Lapak]

It has nothing to do with game balance, but another interesting discussion that was bouncing around the old-school blog world a little while ago was about how much of level is attributable to reputation.

The idea was that a 5th-level fighter wasn't just better at fighting than a 1st-level fighter - he was better known. He had reknown, he had influence, he had the influence of the people behind him. And that part of why demihumans were level-capped was because they were unable to get the recognition they otherwise might in a human-centered society. You couldn't hit name level as a cleric because humans just weren't going to allow an elven priest to be the head of their local religious organization, and so on.

Like I said, it's nothing to do with balance or mechanical issues other than level caps, but I thought it was an interesting line of thought.

[MeeposFire]

st edition had that idea a lot considering that it wasthe edition where your level gave you a title by default. Still I am glad they removed that since level to me is about your skill and your reputation can be influenced by that but it is more influenced by other factors such as connections or money.

[viking vince]

Okay; aside from that first one, those are arguments in favor of balancing the demi-human abilities I could at least respect. But I still think that the method they chose comes off more as "we want to force people to play humans while tricking them into thinking they have a choice". I feel that TSR could have found a better method than putting leash on a character's level advancement, though.

Remember, when this was written over 30 years ago, there was nothing to compare to.

[Particle_Man]

Anyway if you thought the race level cap was hard, try the class level cap of druids, assassins and monks. Not only was there a highest level, you had to fight your way to get it! And there was always the possibility of some young punk tapping you on the shoulder to fight you and take your level from you.

In UA they kinda helped druids out with Hierophant Druid levels, but even they capped (but at least you didn't have to fight for them).

On the other hand, I don't think 1st ed was really designed for any pcs to go above 14th - were there adventure modules for higher than that? There was the expectation of retiring, building your fortress (or whatever), and letting some others do the adventuring.

Then again, wizards got spell lists for levels up to the 30s so I could be very wrong.

[Matthew]

Nonhumans aren't supposed to go as far in 1ed as humans can. They're secondary protagonists, by design (and yes, Gary Gygax did say so, before someone asks me to prove it). This question is a lot like, "How can I make higher AC be better than lower?" or, "How can I get rid of THAC0?" It's an entirely intended part of the system you're playing; there is no way within that system to get rid of it.

Exactly so. It is not a big deal if you choose to get rid of level limits, but it does completely remove the major drawback for multi-class characters. We dropped both from our games for the most part.

[ken-do-nim]

I've never played in a 1E game that used the level limit rule as written, and I've played in a lot of 1E games.

Edit: Personally, I increase training time required after the limit is reached to simulate the demi-human's wandering attention span.

[aaron_the_cow]

What I do when I play is I keep level limit as a soft limit, and afterwards it takes twice as many xp to get to the next level. I like it because it makes it possible for other races to become powerful without overshadowing human's benefits.

[viking vince]

When I DM, I use level limits (from the UA).

Don't like it - don't play a demi-human.

[Khedrac]

I'm running on 20+-year old memories here so please bear with me, but I actually played in a party where the party lead was trying to find an elf who had broken the level caps to ask him how he did it. More to the point the DM told me...
If I remember correctly:
First off there's a 1st Ed magic item somewhere that gives you a class - it's a Hat, but more that that I can't remember. This class coming from the hat has nothing specifying that it is subject to level caps, and given that it could be any class even for a race that can't use the class it strongly suggests no cap. You track the xp for the Hat-class seperately to your other classes as you lose it when you remove the hat, but get it back at the same point when you put it back on. (There may have been something about the hat could not grant you a class you already knew.)
So method one - don't be the class you want to break level caps with - wear a hat granting you it.
Now the actual trick used in the campaign (so subject to DM approval) was the elf Ftr/MU/Thf had got hold of a hat of Cleric. He then managed to Wish his classes off him an on to his hat (so he was nothing and the Hat was Ftr/MU/Thf/Clr) at which point they don't have level caps...

[viking vince]

Better hope you never lose that hat

[Jay R]

Okay; aside from that first one, those are arguments in favor of balancing the demi-human abilities I could at least respect.

But you left off the one I heard most often since starting play in 1975 or 1976, which is this: the great fighters and wizards of legend were all human, and it was still believed to be in some sense a simulation of classical fantasy.

In essence an elven mage/thief is a thief who made a deal to have the higher thief levels cost double in order to get magic powers. The biggest benefit is that a thief has spells at all. He's an invisible, flying thief who can't be hit with normal missiles.

Thieves aren't supposed to have magic levels at all. He has a bonus of 12 magic levels.

It's not
Benefits are racial characteristics; costs are capped wizard levels.

It's
Benefits are magic abilities; costs are double xps needed for the higher thief levels.

Think of him as a thief with benefits, and recognize that what you are losing isn't magic-user levels, but that thief levels cost twice as much. Since the higher thief levels aren't that important, it's a reasonable price to pay for the magic. But you have to recognize that the character is basically a thief with extra magic skills, not a wizard who's been capped.

(I'm playing one now, by the way.)


But I still think that the method they chose comes off more as "we want to force people to play humans while tricking them into thinking they have a choice".

If so, it was singularly unsuccessful. I don't think I ever played a game that was all-human.

[Particle_Man]

I've never played in a 1E game that used the level limit rule as written, and I've played in a lot of 1E games.

Funny, I am the opposite - I have played a lot of 1E and always ran into the level-caps. We played a lot of humans. :)


First off there's a 1st Ed magic item somewhere that gives you a class - it's a Hat, but more that that I can't remember. This class coming from the hat has nothing specifying that it is subject to level caps, and given that it could be any class even for a race that can't use the class it strongly suggests no cap.

I think the DMs I ran with would simply restrict the Hat of Difference to classes your race could be, and enforce the level cap. That said, it is still an awesome hat, since unless you are a half-orc there is always Thief to advance forever, if you max out at something else.

[Jay R]

My experience is that getting past the level caps generally cost you a wish - and I never saw anybody reach that level without getting a wish along the way.

[Daremonai]

I'm running on 20+-year old memories here so please bear with me, but I actually played in a party where the party lead was trying to find an elf who had broken the level caps to ask him how he did it. More to the point the DM told me...
If I remember correctly:
First off there's a 1st Ed magic item somewhere that gives you a class - it's a Hat, but more that that I can't remember. This class coming from the hat has nothing specifying that it is subject to level caps, and given that it could be any class even for a race that can't use the class it strongly suggests no cap. You track the xp for the Hat-class seperately to your other classes as you lose it when you remove the hat, but get it back at the same point when you put it back on. (There may have been something about the hat could not grant you a class you already knew.)
So method one - don't be the class you want to break level caps with - wear a hat granting you it.

...was the hat a "level cap"?
/lousypun

[VariaVespasa]

...was the hat a "level cap"?
/lousypun

Someone kill that man! :P