Level Titles

level titles?

  • Yes

    Votes: 42 29.2%
  • Yes if...

    Votes: 15 10.4%
  • No

    Votes: 87 60.4%

The idea is not without merit, but the execution has to be better than 1e AD&D. Gary just raided his thesaurus without much thought. For example, why is a 7th level cleric in a mostly European derived setting called a 'lama' (a Tibetan term)? A level 3 cleric's title is 'priest', but at level 4 he becomes a 'curate', who is an assistant to a parish priest. Why the demotion?

The original idea for PrCs in 3e, that they represented achievements or roles in the game world, could make them a source of titles. That's pretty cool and you don't need a title for every level. One option would be a choice of three titles when a PC reaches name level, such as 'paladin', 'avenger' or 'champion'.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



And it's worth noting that even Gary Gygax, Lord of the Infinite Thesaurus, struggled to fill up those lists. In 1E, the 5th-level slot in the cleric table is just blank.

Excuse my pedantic moment, but this is incorrect. The level title for 5th level clerics is indeed blank in some printings of the 1e PHB, but it's not because Gary couldn't think up another level title. It was supposed to be "prefect." In early printings of the PHB, a typo misspelled it as "perfect." Later printings were supposed to fix the mistake, but instead created another mistake by omitting the level title entirely.

O.K., now that I've gotten over my bought of, "Someone is wrong on the Internet!" you may all get back to your regularly scheduled thread.
 

They're kinda funny because they're so fluffy and flavorful and yet so meta at the same time.

A lot of people think that's a worst of both worlds situation it seems, but I kinda like it.

I like game systems generally that have built in flavor and assumptions, that you have to react to--work off of, strip out.

It seems like more work but it's really not. What takes a lot of work is injecting all of your own flavor into a bland and generic system.

IMO and speaking at a very general rule-of-thumb level.
 

As others have already said, they often make little sense. A lawful good magic-user devoted to a church isn't really going to call himself a necromancer...

90% sure that necromancy here ("black art") means esoteric and shrouded in mystery, not having to do with controlling the undead.

As you move up in spell levels you become a necromancer because now you're casting spells that barely anyone in the world has even heard of. I like it.
 

"Level Titles" are a setting consideration, so if the core rules are meant to not be setting specific they are problematic. This is further complicated if rules complexity and advancement can be dialed up or down based on the way individual games will be run.
 

90% sure that necromancy here ("black art") means esoteric and shrouded in mystery, not having to do with controlling the undead.

As you move up in spell levels you become a necromancer because now you're casting spells that barely anyone in the world has even heard of. I like it.
Don't know where that etymology came from, because last time I checked Necro- means "dead" as in Necrosis, Necrofagia, necrofilia, etc. Necromancy has always been and will always be related with corpses, dead things and stuff.
You could probably could have mistaken the greek Nekros with the latin Nigrum, but Necromancy is a 100% greek derivative without any trace of latin.
 

Necromancy means using the dead to gain knowledge, such as a prophecy.

"Necro-" references dead, such as in the word necropolis, and "manc-" refers to a prediction or knowledge, such as in chiromancy (palm reading).
 

90% sure that necromancy here ("black art") means esoteric and shrouded in mystery, not having to do with controlling the undead.

I think you're misreading; "Necro" is connected to death.

"Negro", or more accurately, "Nigrum", is black.

Thus, black magic would be Nigrumancy, not Necromancy.

edit:Or in other words, what KaiiLurker said
 

Remove ads

Top