D&D 5E Do Classes Have Concrete Meaning In Your Game?

[Arial Black]

Novels written specifically for the various editions of D&D have certainly alluded to game mechanics to a greater or lesser extent, and some have even had the characters voice some of these mechanics. Some of the FR novels toward the end of 3.5 did that.

But the Forgotten Realms is not a rule of D&D!

Sure, certain game worlds have been published as game aids, but you cannot say that "If you aren't playing in the Forgotten Realms then you're not playing D&D".

When Gygax created the game, he was making a system that a.) allowed a game to be played, and b.) allowed us to create characters like the ones in the books he read.

In the back of the 1E AD&D DM's Guide was a whole list of fantasy novels which inspired the game: Poul Anderson, Michael Moorcock, Jack Vance, et al, all influenced the game, and now the game allowed us to create characters from those worlds.

I used to have Deities & Demigods, the one with Elric and The Grey Mouser. It had Arthurian knights and heroes of ancient Greece and Norse gods and so on, and it was a great aid to those who set their games in those environments.

To model Elric from the novels, for example, someone had to sit down and try to stat him up in D&D terms. IIRC, they said he was a 17th level magic-user, 10th level assassin, fighter...I can't remember, but I think it was around 13th or so. BTW, it was impossible to be all those classes by the rules, but since the Elric books weren't written with D&D rules in mind, it shouldn't surprise us that he doesn't fit D&D class descriptions perfectly.

The point is this: given that the writer of Elric's D&D stat block was making it up as he went along, and could've come up with different stats/classes/levels, how can the game mechanic of 'class' be known to the characters in The Young Kingdoms?

Does Moonglum ever say anything like, "Elric, why don't you stab him in the back? Assassins of your level do three times as much damage when they backstab, don't they?" "Hey, Elric, can you cast 9th level spells yet?"

If Moonglum asked, "Elric, what class are you?", would, could Elric ever reply, "I'm a magic-user 17/assassin 10/fighter 13"?

No, classes are not a real thing in character, unless you deliberately (and perversely, IMHO) add it in. It would be just as absurd as characters knowing their own hit point total.

 

[Yardiff]

No, classes are not a real thing in character, unless you deliberately (and perversely, IMHO) add it in.

No, classes are a real thing in character, unless you deliberately (and perversely, in my opinion) leave it out.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Most editions just used spells for the majority of powers with the odd exceptions for things like Dragons breath, Swallow Whole, Rend etc.

I seem to recall very few spell-casting monsters. There were things like demons, devils, death knights, etc that had innate "spell-like abilities" but they didn't have spell books or 'cast' their spells. Then there was another group of creatures that had abilities that were SIMILAR to spells, but not identical and were actually spelled out in their stat blocks (ala 4e). Then there were some with what 3.x called 'supernatural' abilities that were nothing like any spell usually, and then there were things that emulated a class feature, and yes, finally there were some actual genuine spell-using creatures, dragons mostly, but there is a smattering of other monsters that ACTUALLY cast spells. There are of course also, possibly, NPC wizards and clerics.

Now, the situation with CLERICS in pre-4e actually makes no sense at all. They don't have a book, they can get ANYTHING, but what's the list? There's NEVER an explanation of why a PC cleric can't just invent the name and effects of a spell on the spot and 'pray for it' right then and there. Presumably the list of existing spells is open-ended (it got added to a lot). I'd be a LOT more concerned about THAT than about 4e's non-issue.

And 4e DOES have spell books. You can certainly collect the spell books of enemies, they're physical things, assuming you find an NPC wizard or the DM provides such to promote verisimilitude of some sort. Its not actually stated what you can DO with a captured spell book. Can you swap powers out of it? Could you use it like a scroll? Is it a useful reference work? I'd say these are all possibilities and worthy of Arcana checks.

 

[Remathilis]

Now, the situation with CLERICS in pre-4e actually makes no sense at all. They don't have a book, they can get ANYTHING, but what's the list? There's NEVER an explanation of why a PC cleric can't just invent the name and effects of a spell on the spot and 'pray for it' right then and there. Presumably the list of existing spells is open-ended (it got added to a lot). I'd be a LOT more concerned about THAT than about 4e's non-issue.

I think the reason why clerics cannot spontaneously pray for a miracle with any effect is something to do with "game balance". That said, at least 2e tried to make priest spell lists unique to that particular faith in an attempt to keep priest of a specific faith from casting spells that didn't fit the faith of the deity (so that clerics of Thor got lightning spells and clerics of Pelor didn't get Animate Dead). Of course, they were impossible to balance properly (mostly due the haphazard nature of 2e's sphere assignment) but at least you know that a priest of a certain faith could only do things his god wanted him to. On the other hand, that assumed all priests of Thor had a standardized set of powers and couldn't be commoners, so...

 

[Shasarak]

To model Elric from the novels, for example, someone had to sit down and try to stat him up in D&D terms. IIRC, they said he was a 17th level magic-user, 10th level assassin, fighter...I can't remember, but I think it was around 13th or so. BTW, it was impossible to be all those classes by the rules, but since the Elric books weren't written with D&D rules in mind, it shouldn't surprise us that he doesn't fit D&D class descriptions perfectly.

It would indeed be strange for books written before the creation of DnD to perfectly fit the DnD rules.

 

[Shasarak]

Only the books put out by TSR/WotC should have any real resemblance to the mechanics of DnD.

There is no real restriction that prevents anyone from writing a book that resembles the mechanics of DnD.

Some people may claim that it is unrealistic but certainly no more then Elric going on a magical bender is unrealistic.

 

[Remathilis]

I think it would also be strange for any books written during the the lifespan of DnD to perfectly fit the DnD rules when the books themselves have nothing to do with DnD. Only the books put out by TSR/WotC should have any real resemblance to the mechanics of DnD.

This is because that the D&D rules is best used to emulate D&D. It's terrible as Generic Fantasy RPG Simulator; its got too many peculiarities that only exist in D&D to really be good at emulating any sort of other fantasy fiction.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I think the reason why clerics cannot spontaneously pray for a miracle with any effect is something to do with "game balance". That said, at least 2e tried to make priest spell lists unique to that particular faith in an attempt to keep priest of a specific faith from casting spells that didn't fit the faith of the deity (so that clerics of Thor got lightning spells and clerics of Pelor didn't get Animate Dead). Of course, they were impossible to balance properly (mostly due the haphazard nature of 2e's sphere assignment) but at least you know that a priest of a certain faith could only do things his god wanted him to. On the other hand, that assumed all priests of Thor had a standardized set of powers and couldn't be commoners, so...

Yeah, the difficulty is just in what was the logic for what you could ask for? Yes, 2e had spheres, which sliced priest classes (not cleric per-se, that was an 'omnibus' class that you would presumably ban in a game where priests were in use) into groups, but if the DM invented a new Cleric spell then all the Clerics around had to do was ask for it! There really is no definition of anything like a list, presumably gods know about everything? Maybe? Maybe not? Its pretty ambiguous. Not that this is a big deal, but its not really LESS of a big deal than the question "why can't I use that power the NPC is using?"

 

[empireofchaos]

Size of a classed contingent, and its impact on class organization

I was thinking that one key factor in helping to answer this question is the number of classed characters in the world, or at least the "known world", for reasons I'll explain below.

There was another thread devoted to this topic about a month ago, How Many Adventurers are in Your World? The answers varied from "no more than a dozen people in each class in the world" to something along the lines of 2/3 of the population having more than one HD (or level).

A proportion along the lines of 1 out of every 100 seems like a reasonable suggestion toward the middle of the curve, and it roughly corresponds to the size of non-productive population in pre-industrial society (on the conservative side). DM's answers to this question will obviously vary, but for two key reasons, I don't think this number will be significantly lower than this. One, even if the PCs are close to unique, the number of monsters they encounter and are aware of in the course of their career will likely have the strength to overwhelm a civilized society that has significantly fewer classed characters. And two, even if they don't, even fairly low level PCs will (even if Providence has now established Bounded Accuracy). So the critical mass is probably somewhere in the ballpark of 1%.

How many classed people would that mean in absolute terms? There is a long-established precedent for viewing the standard fantasy society (like Faerun) as a representation of 14th century Europe. The European population in the 14th century was roughly 75 million. It was slightly bigger in China, so 80 million seems like a good ballpark estimate for a fantasy realm that metonymically equates itself with the whole world. This would mean that in a Faerun, or a Kara-Tur, there would be roughly 800,000 classed NPCs. If we go with another conservative estimate, and assume that 90% of these would be fighters and rogues (and maybe barbarians, depending on where you are), that leaves 80,000 characters of other types, predominately spellcasters.

Now, let's say you are church administrator or a shih - a Confucian-type scholar-official. You belong to a body that possesses a virtual monopoly on literacy, education, and the diffusion of information. You are at least vaguely informed about the key things going on in your realm. One of the main things you are going to worry about is how to manage that 80,000 (assuming the fighters are somehow being managed by various military establishments, and the rogues can be kept on the margins, possibly to police themselves). The idea that 80,000 people, with significantly greater powers than the average person, and with the potential to become truly superhuman, are just being born randomly, and continue randomly running around, murder-hoboing their way through dungeons, the wilds, and ultimately, cities strains credulity. That 80,000 is going to be one of your overriding concerns. Because any society with a pyramidal structure, where the vast majority are primary producers, is going to have to regulate those with unusual powers to ensure that the hierarchy is perpetuated, that they remain onside with those who govern (or become those who govern). And to ensure that factional strife between some of these people (who likely have pretty pathological levels of self-esteem if not tightly regulated) doesn't lead to social breakdown in a civilization which is usually just a few failed harvests away from collapse. And to ensure that the majority of the population sees the supernatural abilities of this 80,000 (or at least a majority of this 80,000) as legitimate and engaged in upholding the social order.

So to this end, you will focus a lot of effort on tracking where and when such people are born, on making sure they get proper training, on ordering them institutionally, and on establishing a system of sanctions in case any one of them is using their powers in the "wrong" way, or simply derives their powers from a source that's impossible to control or define. Obviously, clerics ordered by temple and domain, and wizards ordered by schools (which administer access to spellbooks, among other things) are probably going to be the more regulated classes (and, for all of the above reasons, they will be managed as classes of people). Sorcerers, warlocks, and druids will be on the other end of the spectrum, and less class-like - maybe. Because if they are controlled against their will (or even exterminated), they will likely develop some sort of organization to recognize their own members, and to offer some sort of resistance, to avoid being picked off individually. And if they don't do this, there is every reason to expect that institutions that claim a monopoly on knowledge, spirituality, and legitimation will crush them completely in the medium-to-long run.

Now, the number of such gifted people might be lower. The political and religious powers that be might be weaker than in the hypothetical worlds described (given the prevalence of polytheism in the typical D&D fantasy environment, and the absence of a Chinese-type centralized empire, may make political control less effective. But whatever the type of political organization, control over supernatural powers and people will be an overriding concern, societies will invest significant resources in regulating such people, and therefore, some sort of class-type organization, with distinct and non-transferable powers, rituals, ethos, and a particular place in the social hierarchy will probably form over a period of time.

 

[empireofchaos]

But do they classify them as their classes or their backgrounds? Perhaps casters are based on the type of magic they cast so that a Wizard, Sorcerer, or Warlock are all listed as practitioners of dark chi magic and grouped together. Perhaps this group also includes eldritch knights and arcane tricksters.

The classification would be along class lines, obviously, since the powers are associated with classes and not backgrounds (assuming people possessing the powers can emerge from any background; there can, in some settings, be a close association between certain classes and certain backgrounds, however). But the classification is the end of the process, not the beginning. It's not that you find a baby and say "that's a druid!" It's that you find a child, or even an adolescent or an adult with unshaped power, and you nudge or force this person into some sort of structure, where her being a druid is the end result of the process. And it entirely conceivable that archetypes like eldritch knights and arcane tricksters (as well as people who switch class) generate all sorts of headaches for the powers that be (this also creates an in-game reason for making multi-classing difficult, because of the social pressures). But these headaches don't mean that these classifications are entirely absent.

It sounds a lot like what you are talking about is a census. People are unlikely to announce that they are a rogue, a fighter, or a sorcerer (although they might) and instead put down their current profession. All three might be serving in the army and put down that they are soldiers. Perhaps the fighter is a sage and everyone knows that he is the one to go to when you have a question about some esoteric field of study.

Well, the idea of a census is not necessarily to be ruled out of bounds - a lot of people are about to celebrate a holiday marking the birth of someone born during a census taken 2000 years ago, and designed to group people into tribes (some of which had a monopoly on priestly powers). But it doesn't have to be anything as sophisticated. The practice of casting lots or a horoscope, or using divination to locate that special baby in a faraway village so it can be raised in a special environment is a tried and true trope in fantasy and legend alike. And again, the point isn't to place people into a priori categories, but to manage their power through institutionalization, which can be successful to varying degrees.

As far as fighters and rogues, most of us who think class has meaning accept that these are likely the least structured, most amorphous classes because they are more numerous, but also because they present less of a challenge to the social order, so they probably come in for less scrutiny.

I really don't think it is all as cut and dry as people would like it to be, at least not at every table.

Granted - that's been the subject of debate for over 560 posts now. I'm just trying to lay out how it might work on the basis of some fairly uncontroversial assumptions, and then people can adjust these to their own table as they see fit.

Now I don't think it is a problem to stick to the fluff of the classes as presented in the books and say that wizards are wizards, fighters are fighters, and clerics are clerics and everyone is aware of the differences between classes.

I didn't say or imply that everyone is aware of the differences. In fact, quite the contrary. The elites keep this knowledge, as well as most other knowledge, under careful wraps, and most of them don't see the whole picture, either. I have absolutely no problem with the stipulation that the run-of-the-mill peasant has no understanding of the differences between wizards, warlocks, and sorcerers. But just because they don't know doesn't mean the class doesn't exist.

In FR, Cormyr keeps tabs on arcane spellcasters (in 2e this was just wizards but I assume it was expanded to include the other arcane casters as well); in Dragonlance only those arcane casters who have the class of wizard are able to become high sorcerers so in these cases the classes are definitely defined.

OK, so that's one example.

I just also feel that it is also valid if someone wants to model a friar like monk who is able to tap into some kind of holy power for a short term burst of power models that by using the barbarian class without belonging to a barbarian tribe. With your above census above would they call the civilised monk a barbarian? I don't think so, although the effects are similar the source is not and they would call themselves a monk even though they have no levels in the monk class.

I think it's valid - if the GM can find a place for the character in the world somehow, and not valid if he cannot. The point isn't so much that "they" would need a name for that character's class - they would just try to tap the person early on, and to somehow control his powers (especially if they happen to be the power to rage). And it may be that the person is actually of barbarian descent (that's a possible point of compromise; there are countless others, obviously). But I don't see how restricting people from choosing classes if their concept doesn't correspond at all with the GM's concept of the class is any different from restricting classes to particular races. The latter was a common practice in AD&D, and, in one setting I run, barbarians are restricted to humanoids who live beyond the urban frontier (no humans, elves, etc.). Does this mean I have to prepare a full precis of such restrictions for every new player prior to character creation?

And names can vary, of course - there is no reason why a single class has to go by a single name, or that a class name might refer to something other than the class (we keep returning to terminology). Though if there are monks in the class sense, and monks in the social group or background sense, that can create a certain amount of confusion for the player (like it creates confusion for the in-game peasant).