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

[Shasarak]

???

A fireball can be observed in game, but what does that prove about what class the caster must be?

Because you can also observe the caster learning fireball from a Wizard spellbook.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

???

A fireball can be observed in game, but what does that prove about what class the caster must be?

Certain spells can only be learned by certain classes. Bard is the only exception to this rule--and the fact that Bards can learn spells that should be (otherwise) mutually exclusive is good reason to think that person is a Bard (whether or not "a Bard" is the term you use for them).

 

[Ovinomancer]

Because you can also observe the caster learning fireball from a Wizard spellbook.

Unless they're a sorcerer, in which case they just start doing it one day. Or a warlock, who has a conversation with something you can't see in a fevered whisper and then starts doing it one day.

Or an NPC, who just does it.

 

[Remathilis]

Unless they're a sorcerer, in which case they just start doing it one day. Or a warlock, who has a conversation with something you can't see in a fevered whisper and then starts doing it one day.

Or an NPC, who just does it.

So replace fireball with phantom steeds (which no other class so far gets). Now what?

 

[Ovinomancer]

So replace fireball with phantom steeds (which no other class so far gets). Now what?

NPCs, who just get it? Bards, who start casting it one day after they claim to have figured out some deep magical secrets (which the guy on the corner with the brightly painted cart and all those cure-all potions says every day, too).

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

NPCs, who just get it? Bards, who start casting it one day after they claim to have figured out some deep magical secrets (which the guy on the corner with the brightly painted cart and all those cure-all potions says every day, too).

Yeah, more to the point even, I don't know of anywhere it is stated that there is some final list of classes. New ones were added to AD&D all the time, and AFAIK the list in the PHBs was simply "here's what we made up for you, if you want more do it yourself", so any statement that is based on "he's doing X, he MUST BE A Y" doesn't even work for PCs, not even in 1e which has very limited options. Maybe he's some other class you never heard of. I mean they added an entire array of oriental classes, a whole slew of specialized subclasses in UA, etc. New stuff was popping up fairly often, OFFICIAL new stuff, not to even mention stuff in Dragon (semi-official) or in 3pp or homebrew. All such arguments must fail. The very argument that classes are anything but a convenience of rules must fail on the same objection as well, since there's an open-ended list of classes anything must be POSSIBLE, class just provides a rule to follow for how to get stuff.

 

[Arial Black]

Yeah, more to the point even, I don't know of anywhere it is stated that there is some final list of classes. New ones were added to AD&D all the time, and AFAIK the list in the PHBs was simply "here's what we made up for you, if you want more do it yourself", so any statement that is based on "he's doing X, he MUST BE A Y" doesn't even work for PCs, not even in 1e which has very limited options. Maybe he's some other class you never heard of. I mean they added an entire array of oriental classes, a whole slew of specialized subclasses in UA, etc. New stuff was popping up fairly often, OFFICIAL new stuff, not to even mention stuff in Dragon (semi-official) or in 3pp or homebrew. All such arguments must fail. The very argument that classes are anything but a convenience of rules must fail on the same objection as well, since there's an open-ended list of classes anything must be POSSIBLE, class just provides a rule to follow for how to get stuff.

Spot on!

Which means that an observer cannot know what D&D class a person is by observing them cast a fireball or a phantom steed.

It is impossible for observers in our game worlds to discover the contents of our worlds fifth edition Players Handbook!

 

[Aenghus]

Spot on!

Which means that an observer cannot know what D&D class a person is by observing them cast a fireball or a phantom steed.

It is impossible for observers in our game worlds to discover the contents of our worlds fifth edition Players Handbook!

It's impossible in the general case, yes. Too many different game tables with different expectations and takes on metagaming.

But in a particular game or campaign it may be possible, and even expected and rewarded, to make such deductions. I have been in previous games, D&D but not 5e, where we have learned a bad guy is a spellcaster, were able to learn his/her preferred spells and tactics with a view to disrupting them.

Some game groups don't feel any distaste with the "game" elements of a RPG, others do to various extents.

 

[Mephista]

*Peeks back inside, takes a look around* Yeeeep, same old, same old mischaracterizations on both sides. *Wanders off*

 

[Shasarak]

Spot on!

Which means that an observer cannot know what D&D class a person is by observing them cast a fireball or a phantom steed.

It is impossible for observers in our game worlds to discover the contents of our worlds fifth edition Players Handbook!

So we are just going to ignore the fact an observer just saw the caster memorise it from a Wizard spellbook because that would make it possible to discover the contents of the worlds 5e Players Handbook?