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

[TheCosmicKid]

Wizards are nerdy, and nerds love quantifying everything they can. So wizards know all about the differences in spell levels, and by extension class levels -- not in those precise terms, though.

Other characters, no. They understand "powerful people" and "weak people" in the same vague sense that we do.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

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

The trouble I have with this is: does it mean that every character with followers is at least 9th level?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Levels mean nothing to characters in-setting beyond their ability to measure in comparative sense, along the lines of "that guy is a much more talented swordsman than even the King's elite guards", but not in such finite degree that in-setting characters can spot the difference between level X and level X+1.

Beyond that rough comparative gauge, level only serves as a means for the player to clearly understand the character's capabilities, and to provide a reward to the player in the form of new game bits to play with.

 

[S'mon]

Depends on edition. I think with 5e, meaning attaches more to the Tiers (Novice/Heroic/Paragon/Epic), not the individual levels within each Tier.
My Classic D&D Karameikos game uses Level Titles, although Aaron Allston in GAZ1 tells me not
to. Wizard, Wizard Lord, Fighter Lord, Master Thief, are all meaningful in-game.

 

[delericho]

Inspired by the recent thread on classes. Do levels mean anything in your game?

Sort of. People understand the difference between an apprentice, a journeyman, and a master, and so...

Do the imaginary people in your game world know the difference between a low-level character and a high-level character?

In broad terms, yes.

As I've mentioned before, adventurers are the rock stars of my world. Low level characters are like a group of kids who've formed their own band: it's not something the majority do, but it's something that a lot of people at least think of, and most people probably know someone who has at least tried. Of course, very very few of them get anywhere.

Mid-level characters, then, are like those few bands who manage to get signed to an agent. They're much rarer, but again it's not unheard of. And now people start coming to you with gigs...

High-level characters are the big established artists, who are pretty much household names. While the highest-level characters are the Beatles, Queen, or U2 of the world - they're vanishingly rare, but pretty much everyone has heard of them.

That said, it's not a perfect understanding, because a wannabe with a really good publicist could become a big name despite an utter lack of talent. I'll let you decide who I'm referring to here...

Do the spellcasters really have different "levels" of spells that they unlock?

It's complex, because IMC you only have PC class levels if you're an adventurer - Luke Skywalker became 1st level the moment he declared, "I want to come with you to Alderaan. There's nothing for me here now. I want to learn the ways of the Force and become a Jedi like my father." And he didn't hit 1st level until that point - everything prior to that was just background.

Non-adventuring NPCs may have powers and abilities that look like those of adventurers (and especially the ability to cast some higher-level spells), but they're not members of the Cleric, Wizard, or whatever class.

That said, there is some difference between the acolyte who can cast cure wounds and the high priest who can raise dead. People are aware that the latter is the greater miracle. But they wouldn't refer to it in terms of levels, and they also wouldn't be able to put together any coherent categorisation of what spells lie in which levels - it's entirely possible that that high priest may be able to raise dead but has never mastered the 'trick' of cure wounds!

 

[wedgeski]

With regards to spell levels, yes. From a narrative point of view, it's nice to be able to say a wizard has "advanced to the third circle" or whatever you want to call it.

With regards to PC experience, no. Or at least, no more than, "That guy could obviously kick that other guy's butt."

 

[Mephista]

Sort of. Levels 1-4 are part of one's apprenticeship, so I treat those level characters as still working under a mentor, being trained, etc. At level 5 we have a graduation ceremony into a journeyman, where you go out and do the work you trained to do. This is where the bulk of traditional adventuring comes in for my games. Level 11 graduates you to Master level, and you start getting a shift in the style of play - you're expected to hold titles and responcibilities, such as training apprentices yourself, leading armies, visiting other planes, etc. Level 17+ is archmastery level, and considered effectively god-level.

This is true for everyone in my game world as well. Everyone has levels, not just adventurers. Mind you, non-combatants would still have low HP, but professional guards are all trained beyond apprentice level in Fighter or some other appropraite class level. Clerics leading a temple anywhere are at least level 5. And so on.

Spellcasting level is another thing - that's something that everyone is aware of, in game. Its not unusual for someone to say they have acess to 6th tier magic, and most spellcasters understand what is meant.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

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

Definitely yes for spells. Fireball is known to be in the 3rd level/quanta/circle of spells, and the terminology is understood as well as modern chemists understand valence shells for electrons. For PCs, levels are harder to measure and might not be spoken of as such, but it's definitely understood (by those in the know) that (demi)humans, under some circumstances, absorb life energy from participating in the death of other creatures, and that life energy makes them better/stronger/faster than they would be otherwise. Hence, levels.

 

[Tony Vargas]

While levels have very real effects, the number, itself, has no concrete meaning in the game. Even if you could theoretically infer it from within the game-world, statistically ("I have surveyed all the world's wizards, had them rank all known spells on a scale of 1-10, and then ranked the wizards on a scale of 1-20 based on the most powerful spell they could cast and the number of times they can cast it in a day"), it wouldn't have a concrete meaning.

 

[I'm A Banana]

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

They've got the same meaning as classes do: people generally understand the concept and can tell the difference between low and high level, but it might get a bit fuzzy at the boundaries. Certainly someone can tell the skill difference between a first-level fighter and a 20th-level fighter.

Part of this is mitigated by the rarity of 20th-level fighters and the like. Most folks are in the 1-4 range, so most people are roughly in the same range of skills, but it's easy to see that the legendary 20th level warrior who rode into town is clearly in a different category of power.