D&D 5E Highest Class Title and name level

[Minigiant]

In the past, classes would get a title depending on their levels. One of these titles was the name level were a character could be truly be considered member of their class, has the iconic features for their class, and would be high enough level to be a major player in the world stage as a guild leader, stronghold master, or have access to major spells.

I mean, can you even call yourself a wizard seriously if you don't have the slots to shoot fireballs. Not a fighter until you at least got a second attack. And sorry runner, you aren't a ranger 'less you rangered long enough to get spells.

Then there was the class title were you got one of those big titles. Some dude announces himself as Grandmaster of Flowers and you don't interrupt his audience with the king.

The older editions had nice charts. 3rd soft capped their prestige classes at 6 and so you didn't get 5levels in them until level 11 (just about where the sweet spot ended). 4th let you take a paragon path at 11 and epic destinies at 21.

So when do you feel the name level of the classes are in 5th edition?

What level do you see as the master class? And what is if called?

For the most part, I wouldn't consider anyone to have their class' name until level 5. 5th level is where every class gets access to their first pump in power: extra attack or 3rd level spell.

But when could a druid call himself an archdruid and not be a faker? What do you call a master warlock? An archmage or would that offend wizards and stoke the wizard/sorcerer/warlock wars?

 

[Prism]

Well after 5th the next big level that helps define the class seems to be 11th. Its at this point fighters get their 3rd attack, barbarians ignore death, paladins weapons glow with radiant power and the casters all get their 6th level spells. That seems to be a good level to claim the full name if you wanted to do it

 

[DEFCON 1]

From everything that's been said in the past... there are four lightly-defined "tiers" in the game. Two four-level tiers (1-4 & 17-20) and two six-level tiers (5-10 & 11-16.)

And it's pretty much been hyped that the first tier is apprenticeship tier. So yeah, in the game world you could easily say that a character isn't really a "Ranger" or a "Wizard" yet-- at least as being looked upon as so from the peoples within the game world. I'd agree that it is 5th level (and the second tier) when you might nominally become known as your Class's name. At 5th level you are a Bard. You are a Druid. You are a Fighter. Because that's when you get your iconic abilities that define the class (extra attacks, 3rd level spells etc.)

I'd then say that "Name Level" (as per AD&D) is most likely gained when you reach the third tier and 11th level. However you might define "name level" and whatever term you might use-- "Grandmaster", "Archmage", "Master Thief" or whatever. Then finally... once you reach 17th level and the last tier, your PC has moved on from petty terrestrial concerns, and so who needs titles at that point? You're moving on to become one with the planes, so I think pretty much your PC's NAME is all the title you need. Does Elminster need a title? Does Tenser need a title? Does Drizzt need a title? Nope. They have their name. That's all the title you need.

 

[Minigiant]

So something like

Level 2 rogue: "He is Nindor, a cutpurse".

Level 5 rogue: "That's Nimdor the Rogue".

Level 11 rogue: "You want to talk to Master Thief Nimdor Whistler."

Level 17 rogue: "You want to talk to Nimdor?! Your pockets must be deep or you are crazy."

 

[JWO]

The class names are just arbitrary tags that we, as players, use to identify the specific set of abilities that a character will have. There's no reason a fighter or a bard or a rogue or whatever would ever have to be identified by those labels. They're more likely to be identified by their backgrounds if anything. In some cases it'd be more likely for their class labels to be used, like with druids, because that generally refers to a specific belief system as well as identifying their class, or rangers, because that can refer to the character's job.

I see class names as being part of the meta-game vocabulary (sorry to be pretentious) rather than being a part of the in-character vocabulary.

 

[steeldragons]

Good point on the above 17, "Name name level", [MENTION=7006]DEFCON 1[/MENTION] .

I'd be inclined to, basically concur with what's been said already. In AD&D, your "name level" was 9th. As [MENTION=9501]Prism[/MENTION] noted, 5e throws in a nice boon to pretty much every class at 11.

So, split the difference and say 10th level is "Name Level." When the strongholds, temples, and guilds are established. When you reputation best matches that of kings and renown, as the heroes of old. Your powers in your chosen field/calling are beyond repute and none can question your skills/faith/knowledge/force.

Theoretically, XPO advancement then also takes a nosedive in speed. That is, getting from 10th to 15th level should take a while, as compared from 5th-10th...and a veritable snail's pace compared to 1st-5th.

So, yes, at 5th level, you are a Mage. At 10th you are a Wizard (as opposed to a sorcerer or warlock or illusionist or necromancer). I would say, then, beyond 15, you are an Archmage...and, as noted, over 17th it really doesn't matter if someone refers to you as "the Archmage Ringlerun" or, simply, "Ringlerun." At most you'd get, "You mean the Ringlerun?"

Just for fun...let's see what I can come up with for actual terms...probably be falling back on 1e's titles for some help...

Class: @ 5th level/@10th level/ >15th
Fighter: Fighter, Lord, ...um...still a Lord? Highlord?...King?
Barbarian: Barbarian, Warlord, Jarl
Paladin: Paladin, Crusader, Saint
Ranger: Ranger, Ranger, Ranger (they don't care much for the importance of political titles
Thief: Thief, Master Thief, Guildmaster (if creates a guild) or "King of Rogues" (if wanderer/solo)
Assassin: Assassin, Master Assassin, Grandmaster or Something campaign specific/relevant but equally "grand" sounding: Grandmaster of Flowers, Grandmaster of Shadows, the Bloodmaster Raven, Grand Shadow of Thel, etc...
Bard: Bard, Master Bard,...Master Bard with some elaborate/flamboyant/self-proclaimed greatness.
Cleric: Pretty much all of these are anything/something campaign/religion/mythos specific: So you might have: Cleric/Priest/Shaman, High Priest/Archbishop/[still a]Shaman, "Lightlord" [for a sun god]/Pope/Spiritwalker...there are really too many to have/use one.
Druid: Druid, Archdruid, Hierophant
Monk: Monk, Master, Something campaign/setting specific "Grandmaster of the Seventh Wind"/"Dragon Warrior"/"Phoenix Lord", as with clerics there's just no way to pinpoint 1.
Wizard/Sorcerer [as in my games/world they are the same thing and in other worlds, differentiations would be setting/campaign specific anyway]: Mage, Wizard, Archmage.
Warlock: Warlock, Warlock, Warlock...no matter how powerful you become, you are still the pawn of your master...you are still a Warlock.

 

[Minigiant]

I am a fan of the old "Runner - Ranger - Ranger Knight - Ranger Lord".

That old school rangers guild thing felt cool.

 

[DEFCON 1]

The class names are just arbitrary tags that we, as players, use to identify the specific set of abilities that a character will have. There's no reason a fighter or a bard or a rogue or whatever would ever have to be identified by those labels. They're more likely to be identified by their backgrounds if anything. In some cases it'd be more likely for their class labels to be used, like with druids, because that generally refers to a specific belief system as well as identifying their class, or rangers, because that can refer to the character's job.

I see class names as being part of the meta-game vocabulary (sorry to be pretentious) rather than being a part of the in-character vocabulary.

You absolutely could go in that direction certainly... but at the same time the class names themselves do make for very solid in-game designations of careers and titles of respect. I mean, in LotR one of the guys says of Strider "He's one of them rangers..." giving the impression that "ranger" is a job or title you have earned. Likewise, in 5E they set the bard subclasses as "Colleges", which does give the impression that those character have gone and done *some* training and study, and thus there could be a designation following "graduation" of the college. So saying that at level 5 you indeed are now a "Bard" (rather than just a wandering minstrel or musician) could be a part of your in-game fiction.

It's not something that is hardwired into the game, and indeed some of the class names (like barbarian perhaps) could be seen more as generic terminology than a title you earn once you reach the second tier... but if you do like the idea of emphasizing the amateur and apprenticeship part of levels 1 through 4... class name at 5th level isn't a bad way to go about it.

 

[JWO]

You absolutely could go in that direction certainly... but at the same time the class names themselves do make for very solid in-game designations of careers and titles of respect. I mean, in LotR one of the guys says of Strider "He's one of them rangers..." giving the impression that "ranger" is a job or title you have earned. Likewise, in 5E they set the bard subclasses as "Colleges", which does give the impression that those character have gone and done *some* training and study, and thus there could be a designation following "graduation" of the college. So saying that at level 5 you indeed are now a "Bard" (rather than just a wandering minstrel or musician) could be a part of your in-game fiction.

It's not something that is hardwired into the game, and indeed some of the class names (like barbarian perhaps) could be seen more as generic terminology than a title you earn once you reach the second tier... but if you do like the idea of emphasizing the amateur and apprenticeship part of levels 1 through 4... class name at 5th level isn't a bad way to go about it.

Yeah I'm with you on that. I think some class names definitely lend themselves more to an actual title that people would use than others like ranger, druid, monk, wizard, etc., whereas others seem a bit more abstract like fighter, rogue, barbarian. There's no doubt that someone might call them by those names but it seems more likely that they'd be using them as descriptive terms rather than titles.

All just my opinion of course!

 

[Minigiant]

Well some classes with the more generic names could have names based on subclass.

Instead of Jameson the Fighter, you have Eldritch Knight Jameson to Eldritch Lord Jameson.

"Do you know who you are speaking to? I am Battlemaster Wukane Moranto. Now let me through that door. And touch me again if you want to see how I earned my title."
---

"It's Master Assassin Moley. I didn't murder all those people including my mentor to be called a regular assassin."
---
"The door's barred from the other side. Is anyone on this boat a berserker?"
"Me Berserker Khan. Out me way."
CRASH!