"Your Class is Not Your Character": Is this a real problem?

[Coroc]

In the game of D&D as written, they are something real within the fiction of the world. If they weren't, they would just be a collection of mechanics with nothing else attached. The rules might then give you ideas of different ways to play certain sets of mechanics.

Yes, but they are not part of the mechanics but of the fluff. see my post 1 up

 

[Maxperson]

I mean from an immersion point of view what's the difference between a cleric and a paladin if they are members of the same religion? Would any NPC treat them differently if they show up the vanquish the evil controlling their town? Tell declared wants to call himself a paladin for narrative sake who cares.

Depending on the rarity of PC classes, the NPC might not know the difference. That doesn't mean the difference isn't there. As for how they might be treated, that would also be dependent on the NPC in question. Perhaps an Oath of Vengeance paladin killed that NPCs father and he hates paladins. In such a situation, that NPC would indeed treat a paladin savior different than a cleric savior. He might thank the cleric and not the paladin. Give the paladin dark looks, while inviting the cleric into his home for a feast. And so on.

 

[prabe]

This boils down to competing ways of playing for which there is no right answer: is class a purely game mechanic way of describing a character, or is it something that is real within the fiction of the game world?

I think this is something of a false dichotomy (how often do you see the word "dichotomy" without the word "false" in front of it? it's like finding an escutcheon without a blotch). Class is mechanical, in that it has mechanical effects within the game, but it also reflects roles in a party and probably roles in a broader culture/society.

Looking more closely, I think you were making roughly the same point.

 

[Maxperson]

I think that you may be getting confused between what a character refers to themselves as, and the name of their classes on the character's character sheet.
A Rogue can absolutely call themselves a priest of Kord. The Acolyte background is practically made for that, but isn't even necessary to do so.
A Cleric can refer to themselves as a Paladin. Who is going to tell them that they aren't?

I already agreed that you can call yourself whatever you like. As for who is going to tell them that they aren't. Perhaps an NPC who knows the difference between a cleric and paladin and observes the cleric using an ability that paladins don't have, but clerics do.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

In the game of D&D as written, they are something real within the fiction of the world. If they weren't, they would just be a collection of mechanics with nothing else attached. The rules might then give you ideas of different ways to play certain sets of mechanics.

"Different ways to play certain sets of mechanics" is pretty much what everyone has been referring to when they talk about "refluffing" or "reflavouring".
If this is just another case of words meaning different things to different people, then perhaps we should sort it out now. It looks like the last few hours of discussion might simply have been you having a rather heated agreement with several people.

 

[Coroc]

Depending on the rarity of PC classes, the NPC might not know the difference. That doesn't mean the difference isn't there. As for how they might be treated, that would also be dependent on the NPC in question. Perhaps an Oath of Vengeance paladin killed that NPCs father and he hates paladins. In such a situation, that NPC would indeed treat a paladin savior different than a cleric savior. He might thank the cleric and not the paladin. Give the paladin dark looks, while inviting the cleric into his home for a feast. And so on.

Sure, the thing is maybe the paladins are called rose knights in this world.
If the character in question refers to himself to be a paladin the NPC would act like you described. But not because the NPC would analyse the combat or healing skills of the character.

 

[Stoutstien]

Depending on the rarity of PC classes, the NPC might not know the difference. That doesn't mean the difference isn't there. As for how they might be treated, that would also be dependent on the NPC in question. Perhaps an Oath of Vengeance paladin killed that NPCs father and he hates paladins. In such a situation, that NPC would indeed treat a paladin savior different than a cleric savior. He might thank the cleric and not the paladin. Give the paladin dark looks, while inviting the cleric into his home for a feast. And so on.

I mean the PC could have been anything and killed said NPC father for zealous reasons and have the same effect. Would said NPC hate paladin's or hate anyone who calls himself a paladin and is a member of a certain sect.
so said Cleric introduces himself as a paladin the NPC would hate him the same unless the NPC has metaphysical awareness.

 

[Maxperson]

The smite mechanic is a concept for paladins to dish out damage. You need some spell slots for that.
No one hinders you to put the smite mechanic to another class (crunch) and calling it differently e.g. slam
The latter being pure fluff and probably the xy class of game world z does slam opponents with spellslots akin to what a paladin does but might be different in everything else e.g. cowardly, egoistic, have no principles or measure.

5e doesn't do that, though. Where more than one class has the same ability, it has the same name. Expertise is Expertise for both bards and rogues. Unarmored movement is the same for both barbarians and monks. Fast movement and unarmored movement, both movement increases, have different names due to having different mechanics.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure, the thing is maybe the paladins are called rose knights in this world.
If the character in question refers to himself to be a paladin the NPC would act like you described. But not because the NPC would analyse the combat or healing skills of the character.

If you home brew that there are no paladins in a world, but rather that they are called rose knights, then sure. That NPC would treat the rose knight differently than a cleric, since now it's a rose knight that killed his father. And yes, that NPC could tell through analysis the difference between a rose knight and a cleric, assuming the rose knight used lay on hands or another ability unique to rose knights.

 

[Stoutstien]

5e doesn't do that, though. Where more than one class has the same ability, it has the same name. Expertise is Expertise for both bards and rogues. Unarmored movement is the same for both barbarians and monks. Fast movement and unarmored movement, both movement increases, have different names due to having different mechanics.

Actually, mechanics under the same name can be different. Bards can't take thieves tools with expertise, monks can't apply shield to unarmored defense, and such. At the same time extra attack, evasion, and the like have identical text.
There's very little consistency when it comes to editorial style in 5e.