"Your Class is Not Your Character": Is this a real problem?

[Cap'n Kobold]

Regardless of an individual's personal preference while walking down the street, the fact they have the proficiency on their sheet reflects the fact that they have learned how to wear it effectively at some point in the past. You still went to paladin school (or whatever), even if you make a point of looking like you hadn't.

Yes, a particular piece of rules mechanics/crunch (having proficiency in heavy armour) has given paladins a common associated fluff (they are commonly heavily-armoured knights.
You can't change the crunch. (Your paladin character will have heavy armour proficiency.) You can however change the fluff: your paladin might stick to light armour and thus not follow the usual paladin flavour.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

That paladins have three spell slots at fourth level, is a reflection of the true capacity for someone with this specific training and experience, to cast spells. It is both fluff and crunch. It is the same sentence written in two different languages.

That paladins learn to wear heavy armor, which is represented by heavy armor proficiency, is both fluff and crunch.

That a paladin will follow a specified code of conduct is both fluff and crunch.

Changing the connection between a given piece of fluff, and its corresponding crunch, requires a house rule. You're changing how the game works. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's a matter for the DM to handle.)

Inventing your own crunch, to represent fluff that is otherwise not present in the book, is just home-brewing. You're adding stuff to the game. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, either, but it's also a matter for the DM to handle.)

This sounds like another issue of the same words having different meanings for different people.

That paladins have three spell slots at fourth level is rules mechanics: pure crunch.
The power that grants them those slots (and their spellcasting and powers in general) is fluff. Commonly it is a god. Sometimes it is another power that the paladin swore their oath to. Sometimes it is the power within the paladin themselves, manifesting itself from the oath. All fluff or flavour, and thus variable.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

That paladins have three spell slots at fourth level is rules mechanics: pure crunch.

In what way is this not fluff? If we're reading a novel about this character, then it will come up at some point that they can only use magic three times in a day. It's a true fact, about this person who lives in that world. As far as the narrative is concerned, it is as true as the fact that their name is Alex, or that they studied swordsmanship at the Temple of Light in the city of Haven.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In what way is this not fluff? If we're reading a novel about this character, then it will come up at some point that they can only use magic three times in a day.

Or, it might not. You might be left wondering why they didn't use an ability they displayed in one scene in another where it'd've been even more useful (of course, it'd be author force in a book, in a game, it might be an arbitrary n/day, or even n/session resource limitation).

 

[Stoutstien]

[/QUOTE]

In what way is this not fluff? If we're reading a novel about this character, then it will come up at some point that they can only use magic three times in a day. It's a true fact, about this person who lives in that world. As far as the narrative is concerned, it is as true as the fact that their name is Alex, or that they studied swordsmanship at the Temple of Light in the city of Haven.

It's crunch because it's always the same amount regardless of what you call them. The value of each spell slot is a constant and how those spell slots interact with other mechanics have numerical value that every player can relate to.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Honestly I've seen the opposite problem. Whenever the topic of multiclassing comes up around here, I see a lot of "I allow multiclassing, but only if they have a story reason to." Why? If I'm a paladin, and I wanna take levels in Warlock, why can't I just take the mechanical benefits of the Warlock class, but in-story attribute the new powers to where ever my Paladin powers come from?

You'll excuse me if I think this is just someone wanting to avoid the consequences of going into a warlock pact, right?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

It's crunch because it's always the same amount regardless of what you call them. The value of each spell slot is a constant and how those spell slots interact with other mechanics have numerical value that every player can relate to.

I didn't ask why it's crunch. I asked why it isn't fluff.

The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. They're two sides of the same coin.

 

[Stoutstien]

I didn't ask why it's crunch. I asked why it isn't fluff.

The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. They're two sides of the same coin.

Which is true for the most part. For most people the order of importance is a factor. Spell slots are crunch first and fluff second because of balance considerations where the colour of a PCs hair is fluff first and crunch almost never.

 

[Maxperson]

assuming that PC adventuring classes aren’t extremely rare...

there also may well be non-PC classes that are a lot more common in your world with any combination of abilities.

Er, I mentioned PCs being rare as an exception

I also mentioned home brew as another exception, which covers your second point.

 

[Stoutstien]

You'll excuse me if I think this is just someone wanting to avoid the consequences of going into a warlock pact, right?

it's completely possible for the warlock pact to act exactly like the relationship a Paladin already is in. Ancient pally/ fey pact seems perfectly fine.

The warlock class does not have any built-in 'consequences' than any other class. if you don't like the mechanical implications of the multi-class then just don't allow it.