Level Titles

[Mattachine]

I'd love to see level titles, but only if they use 4E naming conventions.

Fighter
1 Noobacious Fightyguy
2 Swordswinger Orcslasher
3 Platewearer Monsterchallenger
4 Metalhead Pointywielder
5 Axegrinder Goobsmacker
6 Footstomp Dragonpiercer
...

That sounds like Dr. Seuss naming conventions!

 

[LostSoul]

I like them because it's a method to convey information to the players. It's hard to tell how dangerous a bunch of guys in scale armour is if they're known as "Black Dougal and his band"; easier if it's "the Hero Black Dougal and his band of Myrmidons."

Though I'd like better titles.

 

[Mattachine]

The problem with the Hero Black Dougal and his band of Myrmidons is that a metagame concept, like character level, is being tied to the in-game choice of PCs and NPCs about what to call themselves.

Does Black Dougal change the name of his band when he levels up? Are all of his band the same level?

 

[LostSoul]

The problem with the Hero Black Dougal and his band of Myrmidons is that a metagame concept, like character level, is being tied to the in-game choice of PCs and NPCs about what to call themselves.

Does Black Dougal change the name of his band when he levels up? Are all of his band the same level?

Level titles can represent what title other NPCs give you, not how you refer to yourself. That title can be related to ability. Thus we have an in-game method to relay information to the players about the ability of NPCs their PCs may face in-game.

 

[Mattachine]

Level titles can represent what title other NPCs give you, not how you refer to yourself. That title can be related to ability. Thus we have an in-game method to relay information to the players about the ability of NPCs their PCs may face in-game.

Except, LostSoul, that would require that NPCs actually saw you performing actions worthy of the title. Also, that line of reasoning implies that a variety of people would all describe your level of ability with the same word. For me, that breaks willing suspension of disbelief.

 

[LostSoul]

Except, LostSoul, that would require that NPCs actually saw you performing actions worthy of the title. Also, that line of reasoning implies that a variety of people would all describe your level of ability with the same word. For me, that breaks willing suspension of disbelief.

I think the trade off is worth it.

 

[KesselZero]

I voted yes, because they're cool and weird and I miss them, but then I actually read this thread and there were so many excellent arguments against them that I started to feel bad.

So my altered vote is now to stick 'em in a Dragon article, or even better, in an article that gives guidance on how to make your own for your particular setting and a few core-class examples, maybe based on hierarchies one mind find in the Forgotten Realms (or Greyhawk or wherever).

 

[Mattachine]

I think the trade off is worth it.

Fair enough. Each DM and group should use the systems and flavor they like.

Still, there are also the tradeoffs of design time/effort, space in the text (column space is column space), and use of words that could be themes, classes, and so forth.

 

[Mercurius]

It really doesn't make any kind of sense unless the titles refer to a specific order or organization. Are all 6th level fighters "myrmidons"? First of all, the Myrmidons were ancient Greek warriors, so that doesn't make sense.

Maybe it made sense in Gary Gygax's campaign, but why make something so specific canonical? I say give guidelines in the DMG for adding that sort of flavor to specific campaigns - level titles as applied to specific orders within the homebrew world.

 

[LostSoul]

Fair enough. Each DM and group should use the systems and flavor they like.

Still, there are also the tradeoffs of design time/effort, space in the text (column space is column space), and use of words that could be themes, classes, and so forth.

Yeah, I'd like level titles in the game, but if there's something else that delivers information to players then the negatives outweigh the positives.