D&D 5E Your PCs have Character Classes/Levels, and no one else does!

[Deset Gled]

In my current game world, classes are often treated like professions. For example, "cleric" is synonymous with "doctor". "Monk" is an offhand description for a martial artist, etc. These descriptions may not always be used in a technically accurate manner, but they are understood as part of normal language.

 

[Umbran]

So, I was just wondering:

Are your PCs the only creatures in the game world with character classes and levels in those classes???

For most of the games I run, classes and levels, as such, do not exist within the game world. They are an external, metagame structure for the players and GM. In that sense nobody has classes. Nobody speaks of "fighters" as if they were a thing.

As for the mechanical stat blocks I use as GM - sometimes, humanoids may be constructed with classes, often not. I rarely use classes for non-humanoids when running 5e.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Somewhere between 2 and 3, really. NPCs definitely have the things class and level represent, and most if not all of the same features. NPC paladins exist, and they have Divine Smite, Lay in Hands, and Aura of Protection (etc.) But I generally don’t build the npc using PC rules because that doesn’t really work in practice. I modify NPC stat blocks to add class features.

For NPC allies I would use PC rules.

I voted 2 because that’s close enough to what I do.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Mixed. Generally only the PC's have class levels, but I figure warlock is pretty straightforward (although if it will only be one or two levels of 'lock, I use feats instead). I typically use it on demons and devils (and the odd vampire) for a couple extra spells (that probably won't change the
CR level), and if the fiend has a weapon, it can be a bladelock, and I don't have to worry about the PC's getting its weapon. It also seems a good way for powerful fiends to bind lesser fiends to them.

Once I stat'd up a berserker using class levels when I wanted the party's fighter to have a special fight.

 

[cbwjm]

While I will use stat blocks, I'll also sometimes drop in class abilities and use them as NPCs, I like the ease of using a premade stat block. For others though, I've fully created NPCs using the rules for PCs. I have a ranger floating about in the starter town and a low level gnome illusionist.

 

[CleverNickName]

In my campaign the evil cultists aren't clerics/sorcerers/warlocks; they are just Cultists....a 'monster' with unique abilities and features, very few of which can be found in the Player's Handbook.

 

[Ath-kethin]

Do I use the character class rules to make NPCs? Yes.
Do I refer to those NPCs as Fighters, Clerics, etc.? No.

I voted No.

That being said, one thing I really enjoy is thinking of things from a commoner's perspective; average folks don't know the fine details of anyone's profession any more than I know what really separates a project accountant from an investment accountant from a CPA. A person who casts spells is known as a sorcerer or a warlock and is terrifying to the common person, whether that spellcaster styles themself a wizard, cleric, bard, or whatever.

So the players never know exactly what to expect when they are obtaining information from the locals.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

No. There is at least one other Paladin on the continent.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I voted no, but the more special NPCs are in my campaign, the less likely they will be built using class rules. Very special NPCs in my campaigns will usually have at least one or two exclusive features (it may even become a quest for a PC to learn that unique feature if the campaign allows it).

 

[Ogre Mage]

I favor an approach where characters with class levels are similar to "wild cards" in Savage Worlds. They are special and unique individuals. Most people, mooks, etc. don't have class levels. But there are other individuals besides the PCs who have them. An NPC with class levels is significant for some reason.