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

[GX.Sigma]

Inspired by the recent thread on classes. Do levels mean anything in your game? Do the imaginary people in your game world know the difference between a low-level character and a high-level character? Do the spellcasters really have different "levels" of spells that they unlock?

Levels clearly meant something in Gary Gygax's campaign, at least some of the time. In the 1st Edition PHB, for those who don't know, every level of every class had its own title. Notably, a "druid"-class character isn't officially a Druid until they reach 12th level. Also, there can only be nine 12th-level Druids in the entire world. If you gain enough XP to get to level 12 and there are already nine Druids in the world, too bad. You stay at level 11 until you can kick one of their asses. And that may seem strange to folks who've only played new-school D&D, but it's a totally reasonable rule for that specific campaign.

More subtly, Fighters start out as Veterans, then eventually become Heroes and even Superheroes. Clerics are Acolytes, then Adepts, then Priests, then Curates. Stuff like this gives an impression of what that level "means" in the world. This can be useful on the DM side (the Keep on the Borderlands refers to its cleric NPCs simply by their level titles, for example).

Of course, as the editions went on, that sort of thing fell by the wayside, as D&D shifted from basically being Gary's campaign notes, to a more generic system that can be used in many different settings and styles of fantasy. Not to mention, most (all?) video games with XP and levels use them as a purely metagame (or non-diegetic) mechanic.

What about in your game? Does level mean anything? Would you like to see a return to the old ways?

 

[Ovinomancer]

Nope, and nope. That's not to say I don't enjoy the earlier editions, nor would I turn down such a game, just that I'm very unlikely to every have levels mean something concrete in my games.

 

[empireofchaos]

Levels are a factor of class (because it's class you gain levels in). But despite the fact that I think classes should be concrete to varying extents, I'd have to say no on this one - generally speaking. I'd say level is a translation into the player's language of a much fuzzier power level in the character's language. People in-game would certainly know the difference between a 3rd level person and an 8th level person, but they wouldn't know that person A is 3rd level, while person B is 8th.

That said, one of my settings has a priest class where certain levels correspond with positions in a priestly hierarchy (and access to certain spells and powers are granted as a special power by one's superior). It seems more elegant to associate sacraments with level than to disaggregate them from level - in this case. I don't have other classes that work this way, though.

 

[Shiroiken]

Even when I played 1E, I seldom used the level titles. It just didn't always make sense, and no one remembered them anyway. I HAVE stolen them for ideas of titles and descriptions of characters, but they aren't level based.

 

[ccs]

Yes.
Orders of knights, military ranks, religious hierarces, wizard & druid circles, thieves guilds, Bard colleges, etc etc etc.
True, there could well be various fighters & rogues not affiliated with any such groups. Rogue wizards. Barbarians in general. And some monsters with class lvs (ex; a 7th lv hobgoblin fighter,or tribal shamens). And of course the average person might not know/be able to tell someones rank....
But in general yes, lv is a meaning-full, recognizable, thing in most of my games.

 

[Whirlingdervish]

i still use the the name level concept which is at 9th level you start to attract followers and can build a keep but thats as far as levels actually meaning something

 

[NotActuallyTim]

While such a thing may be useful, it's a DMing tool I rarely want or need. I have used levels as a literal stand in for status/power/whatever, but I sort of stopped doing it because I wasn't seeing point. Maybe I'll change my mind some day, so, whatever.

 

[Azurewraith]

Nope i mean people will know that ben the heroic is a 20th level fighter by the fact that he just smacked a dragon around for sport and has a +10keen vorpal long sword that sings fairytale of new york as opposed to Claire who is a first level fighter still in her chain shirt praying that a band of dire rats doesn't show up

 

[Li Shenron]

What about in your game? Does level mean anything? Would you like to see a return to the old ways?

Classes yes, levels no.

 

[Xvartslayer]

i still use the the name level concept which is at 9th level you start to attract followers and can build a keep but thats as far as levels actually meaning something

That is a great idea. The players have been liberated from the obligation of "keeping up with the Joans's " by buying a magic item. A 5e DM should give some thought to how the players spend their money.