Do characters know their class level?

[jasper]

good example of levels in real life. Last time at the range I could only shoot Marksman. Today and after 6 months of training I shot Sharpshooter.
Megagame 6 months ago I only had 10xp and was 1st level. Today I became 2nd level.
So yes anyone in the D&D world knows their level. They may not use that word.
Another examples
Kevin Bacon in "Footloose" to kevin bacon in Xman first class.
Oprah 25+ years ago as local tv show host. Oprah today as megamillionare with her own network.
Now we may not gain hit pts in real life but we do gain levels.

 

[Umbran]

Kevin Bacon in "Footloose" to kevin bacon in Xman first class.
Oprah 25+ years ago as local tv show host. Oprah today as megamillionare with her own network.
Now we may not gain hit pts in real life but we do gain levels.

Not necessarily. Maybe Bacon and Oprah are playing in a point-buy system! They could change and improve over time, but never gain a "level", per se.

I generally play with character level being a metagame thing. If you don't force folks to examine things too closely, the fact that the power curve in D&D is a step function instead of a continuous line can be reasonably glossed over.

 

[Arrowhawk]

We don't know how magic REALLY works, and we'll never find out. And that's how I like to keep it in my games.

Interesting. It seems you're wanting to insert a level of abstraction. My perspective is that Wizards know exactly how magic works, but they don't know why it works the way it does. Kind of like quantam mechanics in our world. Quantam mechanics is one of the most well understood/predictable aspects of physics. We just don't know why nature quantizes things. I see magic as the same thing. Every single Wizard can cast the same spells, given the intellect, and has done so since Wizards first crawled out of the sea. There is zero variation in how spells work. Zero. The radius of the spell is always Xft, the distance is always Yft + Z/level. Even with Sorcerers there is zero mystery in what is going to happen. Their spells work exactly the same as Wizards. Bards, same exact thing. In fact spell duration in D&D is so predictable you can set your clock by it i.e. any 1 minute duration spell would essentially allow you to do so.

It's too bad that magic isn't more of a mystery in D&D. It would add flavor to have a lot more variation in how spells worked, other than rolling for damage. So I can understand your wanting magic to operate differently than how it does. But my take is that this is the game. Magic is this unknown force which behaves with atomic precision and Wizards have figured that part out. Gee, kind of like our own scientist with nature...

Moving on, I thought you played 1e? Did you think that the named levels were in-character devices? Did Gygax & Co. intend for Rangers to think of themselves as Runners, Striders, Scouts?

 

[Umbran]

People really think Wizards wouldn't say, I'm a 1st Order, or 3rd Order Wizard? I certainly can understand that they might not use the exact word "level" but nobody thinks that they wouldn't have strict classifications for their level of ability...given that the level model describes it perfectly?

If the setting has some organization that quantifies such things, they probably would. If there are schools or magic, or guilds, in which a hierarchical structure would likely exist anyway, then it would only be natural.

If your wizards are rare, trained in apprenticeships rather than schools, and pick up more from field work than tomes, then such naming conventions wouldn't make as much sense.

 

[Arrowhawk]

If the setting has some organization that quantifies such things, they probably would. If there are schools or magic, or guilds, in which a hierarchical structure would likely exist anyway, then it would only be natural.

Which is my thought exactly. Clerics, Druids, Monks, Wizards, would all naturally adopt and be aware of their transitions and progressions in power/ability. Commoners, on the other hand, aren't going really benefit from knowing their level or attempting to deduce it.

1e made it seem like there were actual Fighter schools or Ranger schools. 3e..with its glut of classes and more open class system seems to strain the notion of schools.

If your wizards are rare, trained in apprenticeships rather than schools, and pick up more from field work than tomes, then such naming conventions wouldn't make as much sense.

You mean like the distinction between Wizards and Sorcerers?

 

[Jacob Marley]

In my campaign (which is based on the distributions from the Dungeon Master's Guide), the vast majority of characters are 1st level - IIRC, around 95% of the population; somewhere around 99% of the population will be of 3rd level or lower. Typically, those of a higher level than 1st will be known as Veterans, Masters, and other such terms. They understand that they are more skilled than others, but they do not know their own level. They are known to have had experiences beyond that of the average person, however.

Re: wizards and other caster classes - most wizards in my campaign are 1st level and are largely located in rural regions. Most of these wizards can best be described as hedge mages and witches. Their magic is utilitarian in nature, and their primary role in society is to serve as apothecaries, alchemists, engineers, sages and other similar roles. Very few study magic for its own sake. Most will never advance beyond 1st level.

Those who do advance to higher levels may have some understanding of the different “circles of magic” (as you put it), but, more than likely, have discovered these higher magics through exploration of ancient dungeons and forgotten tomes. The player will know what time stop is, the character will not. The character will see strange arcane symbols that need to be deciphered. This is something which may or may not happen in his career. The player knows that he is not high enough level; the character just knows he does not understand the arcane formula.

(Clerics and druids work similarly.)

 

[Jimlock]

Interesting. It seems you're wanting to insert a level of abstraction. My perspective is that Wizards know exactly how magic works, but they don't know why it works the way it does.

as I said above

I'm not saying that wizards can't be precise about their art, I'm just saying that I don't like being precise about how the art really works.

The level of abstraction that I want, is not necessarily an "in-game" abstraction, in a sense that wizards can (not always) be very precise and know (not always... again) exactly what they are doing, but what we players decipher through levels and rules, has nothing to do with how wizards actually decipher and perceive magic and the supernatural in the fantasy world they live in. This why i don't like rule-words and mechanical terms in "in-game" conversations. The wizards decipher things (even with great accuracy), but this deciphering/knowledge/know-how, has nothing to do with how, we players, decode spells and magic, the simplest way possible, so as be able to play.

To put it simply: Wizards know what they doing, we players don't.

 

[Arrowhawk]

The level of abstraction that I want, is not necessarily an "in-game" abstraction...

Right, I got that. Magic is a black box to the player, but not the character. It was clear from the original post. I was quibbling over the fact that they do know "how" but not "why." Based on your response, I think we agree.

The other point to make here, or that I thought I was implying, was that somethings aren't abstractions. Some things are, just as they are described. Of course with D&D...you can change anything you want.

 

[Mystic Lemur]

Magic is the easy part. It doesn't take (too much) metagame knowledge to walk up to Magic Mart and say "I need a scroll that will let me cast a missile, unerringly, at up to three separate creatures." or "I need a potion that will surround me with armor of force, for at least six hours."

The hard part is how to gauge the wizard's companions without resorting to level. How many times out of 100 must you be able to strike the combat dummy before you are a suitable companion for a master of the 5th circle? If I can charm the swordsman reliably, I should look for a stronger willed companion. (i.e. one with Iron Will, or a higher base save, or whatever)

 

[Dandu]

Magic Jar

While in the magic jar, you can sense and attack any life force within 10 feet per caster level (and on the same plane of existence). You do need line of effect from the jar to the creatures. You cannot determine the exact creature types or positions of these creatures. In a group of life forces, you can sense a difference of 4 or more Hit Dice between one creature and another and can determine whether a life force is powered by positive or negative energy. (Undead creatures are powered by negative energy. Only sentient undead creatures have, or are, souls.)

I'm pretty sure that there are more spells that can be used to gauge someone's "level" more or less directly.