Do characters know their class level?

[Arrowhawk]

I don't know what to say, dude. You and your friend seem to be stuck in your ways, and I don't think any of us can help you.

My last suggestion is to simply take advantage of the fact that you're the other DM: everyone should just stock up on scrolls when you're running the game, if you want them at particular CLs. *shrug*

Lol. I wasn't asking for help . I was asking what people did in their own campaigns.

And last time he and I talked about it, I think some of what i said is going to get him to reconsider...especially with regards to spell casters (buying scrolls), because that's really the only place it really matters. I don't really care if Fighters don't know their level.

 

[RogueInRouge]

I'm the friend DM'ing with Arrowhawk; he pointed me to this thread to add some context to discussions we were having offline. Lots of great points in here, and I figured I'd throw in my own 2cp as well.

There are no "levels" in the game world. Imaginary it may be, but it is assumed to be like a real world, and people aren't aware of some number floating over each others heads.

I agree, and this is pretty much what I was reacting to in the game session. We'd also had characters in previous sessions say things in-game like "Well, I'm a 5th level Fighter right now. But when I level up again, I may start taking levels in a different class." I'm trying to avoid that kind of dialogue.

A Magic Missile scroll written/made/created by a 9th level wizard is very different from a 1st level MM, and the wizards and merchants sure as hell know about it.

In-game the DM, may say: "The arcana upon the papyrus is certainly different from what you've seen so far, but that's probably because you come from so far away. Still you realize this is superior quality. After going through the intricate symbols thoroughly, you do realize that the merchant is not trying to rob you... completely. This one is indeed a powerful spell."

Great example of how to represent the distinction in game terms with flavor and panache! Coming back to class levels (as opposed to spell levels), I think the same approach works just as well... I wouldn't have a captain of the guard say "The lieutenants are 5th level fighters, and the grunts are a mix of 2nd level Warriors and 1st level Fighters (which pretty much evens out because Warrior is an NPC class and gimped a bit compared to the PC Fighter class.)"

But he probably would say: "The lieutenants are battle-hardened men, each and every one. Why I've seen Kradok here chop through a score of goblins single-handed! The rest of 'em? Well, they're green recruits, aye, but they've got a good fightin' spirit in 'em! Maybe in a couple of years one of 'em will give Kradok a run for his money. If they survive that long..."

And off-game, without destroying the mood or anything, he can go: "this is a caster level 9 MM." And I don't see any harm that way.

Sure, I think a fair amount of this is inevitable. So many of the game mechanics are handled OOC that it doesn't feel like a stretch to handle spell levels that way too. In some cases, you may actually want there to be some mystery for the players as well as the characters. (They just plucked a cracked, dusty scroll from the skeletal fingers of an entombed prince. Is it really just a CL9 MM, or something... more?) But although they're related, I don't think you *have* to treat spell level and class level the same way as a DM.

From the journal of Ranth Norzor, 13th head of the Wizards Guild of Southshire, east district:
"Of those young Wizards who could not hold on to a Detect Magic spell for at least three minutes, none were found that could also master See Invisibility. Of those young Wizards who could manage See Invisibility, all could maintain Detect Magic for at least three minutes when pressed. Of those who could manage a Tongues spell, all could maintain Detect Magic for at least five minutes when pressed. I have come to the conclusion that the lowly Detect Magic spell is a remarkably useful tool for measuring the ability of a Wizard; a simple exercise with a water clock gave me a surprisingly reliable indicator of what level of skill the person had with the arcane arts, and which other spells they were likely to be able to manage."

I love this post! To me, it implicitly underscores a couple of important points:

• Characters don't pop into the world with magic level numbers floating above their heads... but given that things work the way they do, intelligent folks are going to be able to do a good job of differentiating the good from the bad, the mediocre, and everyone else in between.
• Any in-game notion of "class level" derived this way would tend to be formulated and/or adjudicated by an in-game organization. A hedge-wizard or medicine man might not self-identify as "A wizard of the 6th Circle," but an emissary from the Host Tower in Luskan might peg him as exactly that when gauging his arcane proficiency.

In practice, though, I think Arrowhawk's biggest concern is really about buying spell scrolls or paying for one-time casts of a given spell. Getting a CLW cast by a 1st level cleric won't help a battered fighter quite as much as CLW cast by one at 5th level. The characters have seen the difference, and if they're being asked to donate some gold to the temple in return, they'll want to know who's doing the casting so they can decide if it's worth it.

For temples offering this kind of service, it doesn't feel like a hindrance to roughly map OOC levels to an in-game ecclesiastical hierarchy. Or to just have the temple give a flat quote for full healing, regardless of who does it: "You appear to have sustained some serious wounds. But by the grace of Lathander we can restore you to full health... in exchange for a modest donation. Say 90 gold?"

That's a lot better (imho) than an in-game exchange like, "Hey there, looks like you've got 20 points of lethal damage. Since I'm 6th level, I can probably take care of it with a single shot of Cure Moderate Wounds. So let's see, that's 20 gold for the spell level plus 100 gold for my caster level, comes out to 120gp. Interested?"

When it comes to purchasing scrolls, it stands to reason that any specialty shopkeep will charge a different price for a scroll that creates three magic missiles than she would for a scroll that creates just one. The question is, unless she's a wizard herself, how will she know the difference? I don't like the idea of introducing a worldwide equivalent of Underwriters Laboratories into the campaign (perfect for FrobozzCo in the GUE, but not what I'm looking for in Faerun.)

So the merchant will have to trust some kind of magical authority, whether it's the scribes in Candlekeep or the Red Wizards of Thay. And caveat emptor -- take a minute to review that scroll before you plunk down your purse. Of course, if it's waaay over your head, you may not understand it well enough to assess the difference. (Make a spellcraft check. And if you fail, you can choose to trust the merchant, take a gamble, or just walk away.)

 

[kitcik]

Everybody is entitled to run their own game their own way.

If you want your world to have people that are self-aware about their levels, that train to achieve another level, or that constantly gauge themselves against others, that's fine too.

I don't think there's a conclusion here, it's just a case of what do you want to do?

 

[airwalkrr]

To answer the OP, to each his own. For those who favor more immersion and role-play, maybe talking about levels in-character is a bit off-putting. But it isn't completely impractical either. I mean, there must be a way, in-character, to gauge a caster's relative power. It should be obvious when a 5th-level wizard reaches 6th-level and discovers his fireballs deal more damage.

Addressing the specific situation in question, perhaps the characters in question wouldn't use the term "level," but might simply request the items with the longest durations, most damage potential, and greatest range. Those are things that should certainly be quantifiable in-character and therefore easy to determine out-of-character. One could also request those with the most expensive material component costs for items dependent on such things, such as wands, which use the caster level of the creator.

But IMHO D&D is more a game than an exercise in character immersion. And shopping is always one of those things that I have required very little in-character conversation to accomplish. If a player asks to buy a wand with a caster level of 5, then that's what the player gets, so long as he can afford it and the wand is available for sale. I assume the character has some means to gauge these things and expresses them to the seller in a way that is understandable to both.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

For temples offering this kind of service, it doesn't feel like a hindrance to roughly map OOC levels to an in-game ecclesiastical hierarchy. Or to just have the temple give a flat quote for full healing, regardless of who does it: "You appear to have sustained some serious wounds. But by the grace of Lathander we can restore you to full health... in exchange for a modest donation. Say 90 gold?"

That's a lot better (imho) than an in-game exchange like, "Hey there, looks like you've got 20 points of lethal damage. Since I'm 6th level, I can probably take care of it with a single shot of Cure Moderate Wounds. So let's see, that's 20 gold for the spell level plus 100 gold for my caster level, comes out to 120gp. Interested?"

I hear what you are saying, and I'd fully encourage the first RP example over the second, if possible.

However, doesn't this come down to the level of imagination and RP sophisitication coming from your players? If Billy who's playing a Bard just isn't witty enough to create impressive dialogue for his character, it is what it is. You can encourage Billy and give him examples of what you're looking for, but it wouldn't be reasonable to hold him to a standard of dialogue he can't achieve.

 

[Aran Thule]

The way i see it is that the 'level' system is there to help us calculate things and run the game smoothly and things are standardised to increase simplicity.
How much of this crosses over to in game is down to the players and DM.

Imagine mages x , y and z all finish their training and become mages after researching an attack spell.
X develops a spell that creates an arrow that never misses
Y summons a small star like point of light that can penetrate armour to hit a target
Z conjures a defencive barrier to protect him from force magics and physical attacks.
They can all give the spells their own names but rules wise for us x and y know magic missile and z knows shield.

As for levels of differant character classes, if you want to avoid numbers then you can look at the class features and assign a title to it.
For example:
Rogues, evasion, uncanny dodge, imp uncanny dodge
Fighter, able to specialise, able to improve criticals
Paladin, summon a horse
Druid, shapechange
ect ect

Regarding shops, i would expect most shops selling magic items would be run by a caster of some sort, otherwise it would be far to easy for them to be conned.
Buying an item without going into numbers should be easy enough, if the characters describe what they want then the shopkeeper can reply by saying what he has.

PC: Im looking for a scroll that will fire multiple force bolts at the target and not miss
Shopkeeper: I only have one crafted by a new apprentice that creates a single bolt, but i do have a scroll to create an arrow that will spew acid for a good twelve seconds

Sorry im babbling, hope this is some help

 

[Dandu]

I have been digging around some more. Anyone remember the Druid 1 spell Power Sight from Masters of the Wild? It tells you the target's HD.

I think it would work great as a magic item. Perhaps some sort of monocle.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

I have been digging around some more. Anyone remember the Druid 1 spell Power Sight from Masters of the Wild? It tells you the target's HD.

I think it would work great as a magic item. Perhaps some sort of monocle.

 

[kitcik]

Dandu's posts are often a case of "catch the hidden reference."

The question is, how many times have I completely missed it and made an a$$ of myself?

 

[Dandu]

I believe the number of times is indeed over nine thousand.