D&D General Warlocks' patrons vs. Paladin Oaths and Cleric Deities

[Maxperson]

Which is entirely meaningless as a statement. Can I claim that if I use houserules in character creation that those houserules exist in your world because they exist somewhere? No, of course not.

So we have, in any particular world, a bare handful of Fighters (class), and a whole load of fighters (english word). And just like the real world, where not every EMT, bricklayer, coder, bookseller, garbage man, middle manager, actuary, nor HR rep has the same progression, neither do "fighters" in world.

It's not meaningless.

First, house rules are unique/semi-unique rules at specific tables. The rules I'm referring to are the default rules for the game. The default rules apply to every table unless specifically changed by the DM. House rules specifically do not unless adopted by the DM. That's a very important difference.

Second, regardless of how many fighters the class there are in a specific world, and depending on the DM it could be anywhere from 1 to millions(PCs and NPCs with class levels), all PC fighters use the same progression. Just like all NPC Bandit Captains use the same progression. The problem of PCs and NPCs using the same progression still applies to both.

 

[Maxperson]

Never mind.

 

[Maxperson]

Where is the desire for druids to fight other druids to gain levels? For monks to remain poor and donate all but a fraction of their treasure to worthy causes? For rangers to be good aligned and only own what they can carry? For barbarians to be illiterate and not be able to rage if they become lawful? (Or better, attack magic users on sight!) For bards to follow druidic teachings and be partially neutral?

No idea. None of this is related to any prior edition. This is all about 5e and what 5e says. People incorrectly trying to connect it to prior editions is most, if not all of the problem, depending on the person.