D&D General Why are spells grouped into "levels"?

[Harzel]

So, I’m still unclear on why talking about spell levels in character is meta, outside of the meta-feeling name?

and I say meta feeling because...it isn’t actually necessarily a name that wouldn’t exist in game. It wouldn’t be especially wierd if a martial art used levels rather than something more esoteric.

It might be meta, or it might not be. It depends on how you think the fictional world actually works. While I understand that there is a good deal of fantasy fiction in which spell levels, and even sometimes spell caster levels are real things that fictional characters talk about, to me that feels weird and artificial* and that's not how my worlds work. Just as having discrete, well-ordered values for AC and HP and abilities are convenient approximations for the sake of the game, so too, for me, are spell levels and character levels.

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that many if not most players would agree that having a PC talking about having an 18 STR is meta. I just happen to feel the same way about spell levels.

As to the original point, I was just surprised at the assertion that whether or not talking about spell levels in character was meta hinged on the terminology used. The term used can certainly change the feel, but whether the discussion is actually meta again seems to me to depend on how you think the fictional world works.

* If it helps any to understand my viewpoint, it sort of feels to me the same way it would if, say, all the continents on a world were perfect squares and all mountains and hills had, exactly, one of a dozen heights, without any explanation, as if that were a plausible outcome of natural processes.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It might be meta, or it might not be. It depends on how you think the fictional world actually works. While I understand that there is a good deal of fantasy fiction in which spell levels, and even sometimes spell caster levels are real things that fictional characters talk about, to me that feels weird and artificial* and that's not how my worlds work. Just as having discrete, well-ordered values for AC and HP and abilities are convenient approximations for the sake of the game, so too, for me, are spell levels and character levels.

I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that many if not most players would agree that having a PC talking about having an 18 STR is meta. I just happen to feel the same way about spell levels.

As to the original point, I was just surprised at the assertion that whether or not talking about spell levels in character was meta hinged on the terminology used. The term used can certainly change the feel, but whether the discussion is actually meta again seems to me to depend on how you think the fictional world works.

* If it helps any to understand my viewpoint, it sort of feels to me the same way it would if, say, all the continents on a world were perfect squares and all mountains and hills had, exactly, one of a dozen heights, without any explanation, as if that were a plausible outcome of natural processes.

I don’t grok the POV, but I respect it.

To me, I just have trouble seeing what could be artificial about there being known categorization of spellcraft in a linear progression. That doesn’t have to be how a world works, obviously, but it certainly is a way worlds can work.

Anyway, I’m sure we can just continue not agreeing in respectful peace. It is what it is.

I wish I could square this circle, but for now at least I can’t.