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

[Chaosmancer]

They are vague things in my games. I like the ability to tell players that "these people are bad@*&$% and you should tread carefully". However, NPC's might not be able to tell the difference. Think of it as all classes having a limited version of the Battlemaster's skill, but peasants won't. So to them a thug with a sword will be a thug with a sword, whether he is level 1 or level 9. This has led to some interesting moments when my players have tried to bully someone or been attacked on the road where if the difference in strength had been truly known things would have gone differently.

The opposite can be true though, people used to dealing with expeirenced adventurers will be able to tell the difference and might scoff at Pc's of low-level thinking they are "all that" when the NPC knows they still have a ways to go.

 

[Shasarak]

The creatures in game have no knowledge that they are merely pawns in a game (unless you're going for comedy, but the game does not assume that!), and cannot know about 'combat rounds' or that at 5th level (whatever that is!) fighters get the Extra Attack class feature.

Except that a 'combat round' is a set measure of time in which certain things can happen, so absolutely you can measure things like number of attacks.

Well, maybe not an 8 Int Fighter - but everyone else.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Except that a 'combat round' is a set measure of time in which certain things can happen, so absolutely you can measure things like number of attacks.

Well, maybe not an 8 Int Fighter - but everyone else.

That presumes that each attack roll made represents exactly 1 offensive gesture with a weapon made in-game, which has traditionally not been the case for D&D, where each round was (and may still be, I haven't checked) various bits of form, flourish, and fury, and each attack roll merely represented a portion of all that violence going on no matter what level you are which had a meaningful chance of impacting the course of the battle.

So the measuring that you are talking about is, traditionally, not measure whether the guy made 1 attack or 5, but whether the guy made a more skillfull seeming set of 5 attacks.

 

[Shasarak]

That presumes that each attack roll made represents exactly 1 offensive gesture with a weapon made in-game, which has traditionally not been the case for D&D, where each round was (and may still be, I haven't checked) various bits of form, flourish, and fury, and each attack roll merely represented a portion of all that violence going on no matter what level you are which had a meaningful chance of impacting the course of the battle.

So the measuring that you are talking about is, traditionally, not measure whether the guy made 1 attack or 5, but whether the guy made a more skillfull seeming set of 5 attacks.

Yeah, so your 8 Int Fighter has no idea what is going on but the 18 Int Wizard standing behind knows exactly what is happening.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Yeah, so your 8 Int Fighter has no idea what is going on but the 18 Int Wizard standing behind knows exactly what is happening.

Well, no... my 8 Int Fighter has no trouble telling what is going on because he exists in a world where an 8 in an ability score maps to being a touch behind the average, not outright deficient, and the 18 Int Wizard has no clue what is going on because he's currently more concerned with double-checking his math to see if tonight's meteor shower is the one that signals the end of the imprisonment spell keeping an ancient evil out of the world, or if it is actually the meteor shower that should happen in 2-ish years, which is of much greater importance than exactly how well Brutus is taking to his sword training at the moment.

 

[Shasarak]

Well, no... my 8 Int Fighter has no trouble telling what is going on because he exists in a world where an 8 in an ability score maps to being a touch behind the average, not outright deficient, and the 18 Int Wizard has no clue what is going on because he's currently more concerned with double-checking his math to see if tonight's meteor shower is the one that signals the end of the imprisonment spell keeping an ancient evil out of the world, or if it is actually the meteor shower that should happen in 2-ish years, which is of much greater importance than exactly how well Brutus is taking to his sword training at the moment.

As long as you are happy with me playing my Genius level character the way I want, I have no problem with that.

 

[delericho]

The level of a spellcaster is obvious to other spellcasters the moment they cast their top-tier spells

Of course, Wizards being subtle as well as quick to anger, they'd probably deliberately avoid breaking out those top-tier spells for anything but the most serious threats. Because in the move-v-countermove schemes of Wizards, it would be best if the enemy didn't know exactly what tricks you have to play.

 

[Arial Black]

So the measuring that you are talking about is, traditionally, not measure whether the guy made 1 attack or 5, but whether the guy made a more skillfull seeming set of 5 attacks.

Agreed, and the set of 5 attacks that seem most skilful would be the ones that hit over the ones that miss, and that would not be based on attack modifier, but the results of the attack rolls, and they may very well have the poor fighter hit while the better fighter misses.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Agreed, and the set of 5 attacks that seem most skilful would be the ones that hit over the ones that miss, and that would not be based on attack modifier, but the results of the attack rolls, and they may very well have the poor fighter hit while the better fighter misses.

The result takes into account the opponent's response as well. If we assume they are using a practice dummy that they can't miss skill is more obvious than luck, which means mod not die result.

 

[Mercule]

The question does not compute. Levels are a purely meta-game concept.

Sure, people can tell that some folks are better fighters/mages/whatever, just like IRL where some people are better welders, programmers, or even warriors than others. But, no one would try to apply quanta to it any more than we would.

In 1E, I just looked at the level titles as a kinda source list of alternate names with a very soft ordering. Name level was a meta-game, mechanical construct for PCs.

In 5E, the tiers are meta-game guidance. Bounded accuracy makes them pretty squishy. That said, someone could, conceivably apply such terms like we would with "local performer", "regionally known", "national celebrity", and "international superstar". There really aren't any hard boundaries, but they convey some meaning.

I suppose you could argue that OD&D levels were similar to 5E tiers, but I think that's stretching it.