Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steampunkette" data-source="post: 8251628" data-attributes="member: 6796468">Some important NPCs have classes, sure. I don't just use the Monster Manual to build encounters, after all. A lot of foes my players fight are full on characters. But even if they weren't: The start of the NPC Statblocks section of the Monster Manual on page 246 is the Archmage.Slapping him into the Wizard's Tower or School of Magic gets across the class fantasy of "Wizard in the World" just as well as rolling him up as a level 18 Wizard would.It's not about having "Wizards" it's about having the -idea- of Wizards or Wizardly characters being a part of the setting and it's narrative. About being a part of the story and the shape of the world. Class Fantasy shaping the Cultures of the world.No. That's not the "Whole point of the discussion". I think it's pretty clear you came at this idea on a slight tangent just a few degrees off-center of where I'm aiming, and that makes sense. And it's okay.It's not about having a setting-based definition or a singular "Word" which encapsulates all that something is and excludes all that something isn't (I.E. a Name). It's about having a cultural and narrative connection to the world.Like the aforementioned Archmage NPC being representative of the Class Fantasy of Wizard, even though they're not strictly an 18th level fully statted out Human Wizard with a background and flaw. Even if no one ever -calls- them a Wizard in the game or out of the game, they're still a part of the wizardly fantasy of "Has Spellbook, High Intelligence, Not Great at Melee, Manipulates the Universe with Magic".The character identity should be a part of the world. Not exclusive to other identities, but with some sort of narrative connection to it. Most of the royalty and nobility who are part of the Sorcerous Bloodline that gives them their political authority aren't going to be Sorcerers, or might be Variant Humans with the "Magic Adept" feat for Sorcery to get a cantrip to confirm their claim. But certainly the most powerful Sorcerer of the bloodline that is alive would immediately become the magocratic center of the family, and thus rulership over their domain.It's not about making sure everyone in the world knows what a "Fighter" is. It's about giving players narrative examples of how different fighter type characters have impacted the world and shaped it's culture.Does that make more sense in context of what I've been saying across the thread?The idea is that as writers -we- should develop connections for the classes in our own settings. That we should consider all the different classes and races we intend to include as we build our campaign settings and develop ways for them to have impacted the narrative we're constructing about the history of the world and the plots moving forward. About the cultures and ideals, structures and politics, of the kingdoms, nations, and organizations we're building.And the -writer- knows whether the Gods have done it before because the Writer writes the Gods. The setting's author. Us. Gods in fiction do not do anything that we do not say that they do. Because they have no agency. Only the writer has agency.In the settings that don't have interventionist deities you generally don't have Clerics, either. Just sayin'.I'm not going to try to argue through every potential pitfall or narrative loophole you want to construct about any one of a bajillion different angles for different character concepts. The general idea is that we should connect characters to the world through writing class fantasy into the world, as well. Whether that means having a bajillion different ideas about how Sorcerers can exist or just a handful of examples and let players' imagination fly from there.</blockquote>

Verification