D&D General Is character class an in-world concept in your campaigns?

[jsaving]

People are mixing up two different questions here. One is whether adventurers understand themselves to be members of a class rather than simply an arcane caster, axe wielder, etc. The other is whether 0-level people have enough familiarity with uncommon occupations to correctly distinguish wizard from sorcerer, fighter from barbarian, etc.

There's plenty of precedent in D&D novels and modules for classes being an in-game concept. Salvatore even sometimes uses character level, or at least readily recognizable 1st edition and 2nd edition level titles, as an in-game concept. So sure, we follow these precedents and assume people with class levels understand themselves to be members of their class. However, we don't assume random citizens can necessarily distinguish between classes, any more than random real-world citizens can correctly distinguish optometrists from ophthalmologists or osteopaths from orthopedists.

 

[Yenrak]

Not really.

I think that in-world people recognize different types but not anything as strict as character classes. An elf fighter and an elf rogue wouldn't necessarily think they were different classes but perhaps just folks with different fighting styles.

 

[cbwjm]

In some cases I use the classes as something distinct, mostly between spellcasters. My Draconis Sorcere faction is a faction of sorcerers with the draconic bloodline and they will not accept bards, wizards, or warlocks into their ranks.

However, a thieves guild might be made up of all kinds of classes, all called thieves. Warriors of all kinds might be knights or mercenaries or soldiers. So really it depends on a case by case basis.

 

[Celebrim]

Yes, and no.

No, in the sense that it is impossible to devise a spell like "Detect Class" that would successfully detect the class or classes a character in universe has. Class exists only in the metagame and is a simplified abstraction representing typical combinations of skills and backgrounds that exist in the fictional universe. Class exists for reasons that are strictly metagame, such as insuring that all characters will have broad skills rather than simply narrow and deep ones.

Yes, in the sense that spell-casting classes do really have different traditions that lead to very different sources of their power. While ultimately they are all practicing the same sort of magic, how that magic is empowered varies greatly between classes. An in universe character can recognize when a character is practicing shamanic magic and differentiate it from say wizardly magic, sorcerous magic, or clerical magic. In character, people would not say that the person's "class" was shaman or wizard, but they would be able to say (correctly) that another person was a shaman or a wizard, or that they had the profession, skills, or training of a shaman or wizard. And each person wanting to successfully practice that magic, would have certain features in common that would be shared across all other persons that practiced magic of the same sort.

So in this sense, people in universe are able to distinguish between a wizard and a sorcerer or a shaman and a cleric, in a way that they would be unable to precisely distinguish between a fighter, explorer, rogue, brute, warrior, paragon, expert or fanatic, or someone that was some combination of those things. Nor would they be able to easily distinguish between a low level wizard, a sage, and member of another class that dabbled in arcane magic without being an actual wizard. All three persons, if asked, "Are you a wizard?", might well answer, "Not really. I am only a dabbler." or else "At one time I studied such matters, but not any more." They would not understand the question to mean, "Do you have a level in the class wizard?", a question that would for the most part make sense only in the metagame.

On the other hand, someone from the wizardly tradition could answer a question like, "What is the highest level of spell you can cast?", and would understand what was meant by this question, though in the game world this would likely be asked as, "What circle of arcane mystery have you penetrated?" However, if they answered, "The 4th circle/level.", it would be possibly erroneous to guess that they were a 7th level wizard because a sufficiently high level sage can also cast 4th level spells. Attempts to exactly reconstruct what level they were by enumerating available spell slots would run into problems of exactly reconstructing intelligence and aptitude and feats that modified spell slots. So, in short, they have a vague idea that spell-casting progresses in a way that could be described as levels, and wizards in particular have a regimented program of advances that they tend to adhere to avoid magical injury, they don't exactly know and do not try to figure out what 'level' people are. And it really would never occur to them that everyone has 'levels'. In game universe, they don't really. The levels and classes are just abstractions for a more complex fictional reality.

 

[cbwjm]

I'm not the only one who calls spell levels circles. A master of the 8th circle is someone to watch out for.

I did mention the difference between organisations and allowing different spellcasting classes, however, I should note that I'm also happy to use the wizard class as a sorcerer, in this case I normally ignore the spellbook and just have a number of spells prepped and don't worry about changing them. I could also see a sorcerer with ritual casting as a "wizard". Their spells are set but they are a knowledgeable master of the arcane.

 

[ccs]

In my games, generally Yes.

Wizards, Priests, Paladins, Rangers, Assassins, Ninjas, Samaurai, Chevaliers, Monks, Druids, Alchemists etc & more are all known things.
You can easily find members of these classes or references to them.


Terms like Warlock/Witch/Sorcerer/Barbarian/Thief/Warrior/Knight/etc? They exist, but might easily be misapplied. Even by members of those classes.

• For example; my 1/2ling warlock has no idea that there's an actual term that describes how she learns her magic & her relationship to her patron. She might sometimes say that she's a "Magic User", but usually just calls herself "An Awesome Adventurer". She knows though that she's not a wizard.
• Meanwhile her sister, my 1/2ling barbarian, would never refer to herself by any type of class name. (She doesn't even identify as an adventurer, though she is a legit hero) She simply fights in an undisciplined, desperate, savage way as that's how she was forced to learn how to survive after being captured by orc raiders.

"Fighter" doesn't exist as it's own thing, or even really a description - rather members of this class are your soldiers, warriors, archers, spearmen, etc.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

At some point during our last game session, I turned to our warlock and said "I expected you to help us with that, sorcerer", and his answer was "I'm not a sorcerer, I'm a warlock". My reply was "warlock, sorcerer, wizard, conjurer, or mage, I don't care, it's all the same", to which he answered, "it's the same for you, who have no understanding of arcane matters".

So, is character class an in-world concept in your campaigns? Could the mightiest sorcerer in your world be in fact a 20th-level wizard? If my oath of vengeance paladin was trained as part of a monastic order, would other people disagree if he referred to himself and other members of his order as warrior monks and tell him that monks are supposed to fight unarmored?

To answer my own question, except for some very specific situations, like druids in AD&D 2e, I never treated character class as an in-world concept. In my own games, a light-armored fighter with a criminal background does not see himself as fundamentally different from someone with levels in the rogue class.

What about your own campaigns?

My answer is this: "Definitely. Sorta. No. Did you know vlad tepes officially held the rank of paladin? Also knight. Also prince. Also count. He did btw." Also a healthy dose "its complicated" is in my answer.

Consider the following: a cleric could likely be in game known as or think of itself as or be called a cleric, priest, saint, bishop, monk, or cultist and cleric is not even the most likely word for him to be known by.

Or by their other profession. Maybe a preacher, doctor, teacher, archivist or whatever. Maybe multiple.

A favored soul: cleric, priest, saint, favored soul, the chosen one (watch out for sand and evil space wizards), bishop, cultist, warlock, sorceror, demigod, godling, half-mortal, cambion, miracle man, and so on.

Or by their other profession. Maybe a poet, seer, theif, cult leader or whatever. Maybe multiple.

Paladin: paladin, cleric, saint, knight, bishop, and so on.

Or by their other profession. Maybe a veteran, war hero, soldier, protector, body guard, guard, priest or whatever. Maybe multiple.

This list goes on and on for basically most classes i can think of. Its one of those things where its kinda ingame. But it is kinda not too. And it really is character, region, and language specific. And you even have this inter classially (that is not a word. I know). In many cases a wizard is a guy who was born already a powerful sorceror and gained wizard schooling simply because his family couldnt possibly see him not going to the mage school as not being a waste of his raw talent and as a result out if game they progress as a wizard but in game they already have the innherent arcane potency and natural talent of a sorceror which is why they were schooled as a wizard in the first place but they are known by their friends to legitimately be both (as they literally have sprcerous talent but they focused it into thebdiscipline of a wizard.).

Look at vecna for example. Probably is a favored soul in the truest sense of the word. Is a god. Is a wizard. Has knowledge more fundemental than true naming. Is "sorcerous". And so on. Many things apply. Even if out of game on paper hes buolt strictly as a wizard with an undead template and divine ranks. In game hes so much more.

 

[Arnwolf666]

Berserkers were kind of a real world class in Scandinavia.

But. You can build games with societies that have caste systems where every member of a certain caste is the same class. They can be fun games.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Berserkers were kind of a real world class in Scandinavia.

But. You can build games with societies that have caste systems where every member of a certain caste is the same class. They can be fun games.

True. And they had an uncommon knowledge of performance enhancing drugs as well as medicine.

A close to real world version could be represented in game as it being a prestige class with a prereq of 1 (or another low number) level of either druid, rogue, or alchemist and an additional minimum entry requirement of (insert low number) ranks knowledge nature and the same in heal check. Add a feat for enhanced form of raging ability when under influence of recipe drug cocktail for added realism.

 

[ad_hoc]

There's plenty of precedent in D&D novels and modules for classes being an in-game concept. Salvatore even sometimes uses character level, or at least readily recognizable 1st edition and 2nd edition level titles, as an in-game concept. So sure, we follow these precedents and assume people with class levels understand themselves to be members of their class. However, we don't assume random citizens can necessarily distinguish between classes, any more than random real-world citizens can correctly distinguish optometrists from ophthalmologists or osteopaths from orthopedists.

My answer was from the point of view of 5e.

In 3e, for example, NPCs had levels and classes just like PCs did so in that world it would make sense for characters to know that they have the exact abilities of other characters. In that game each village or city also had an allotment of leveled NPCs so it was safe to assume that every town had X characters of Y level.