Level titles first appeared in original (1974) Dungeons & Dragons, seemingly inspired by the various types of figures available in the "Fantasy Supplement" to Chainmail (1971), about which I may make a separate post later. These titles, in themselves, have no mechanical purpose whatsoever, serving solely as a verbal way to distinguish between two characters of the same class but of different levels. Consequently, they disappeared entirely from AD&D's Second Edition (1989), but were present in all editions of D&D until the Rules Cyclopedia (1991), when they disappeared (though they did reappear in the brief and often forgotten The Classic Dungeons & Dragons Game in 1994).
Since I've lately become very interested in the degree of continuity between the various editions of D&D, I thought looking at the level titles of the various classes might make for an interesting series of posts. To start, let's look at fighters (fighting men) and thieves. Here's the level title chart for the former from Volume 1 of OD&D:
In the AD&D Players Handbook (1978), the list is identical.
However, in the 1981 David Cook/Stephen Marsh-edited Expert Rules, we get this list of level titles, which is only nearly identical. The 3rd-level title, Swordsman, becomes Swordmaster, probably for the same reason the 9th-level title, Lord, gains the parenthetical option of Lady. All later editions of D&D (1983, 1991, 1994) use these same level titles.
Thieves first appear in Supplement I to OD&D (1975) and use the following level titles:
Of the two character classes examined today, it's the thief that shows the most changes in its level titles between their first appearance in Greyhawk and later versions, though, even there, the changes are small. Meanwhile, the fighter changes barely at all. The same cannot be said of clerics and magic-users, as we'll see in the next post in this series.
To my mind, what stands out from the fighter titles is that a first level fighter is a 'veteran.'
ReplyDeleteThis squares with the idea that levelled characters are unusually skilled, even at first level.
A highly reliable, veteran, unit of men at arms could comprise first level soldiers with second and third level NCOs.
But the fighter level titles don't square with the rest, for as we can see a first level thief is a mere apprentice.
Right, 1st level fighter should be something like "Plebe."
DeleteThats literally textual.
DeleteThe mercenaries section of the 1ADD DMG is explicit on how many men and sub officers can be commanded by sergeants and leutinants amd captains , and correlates those ranks to hit dice
"Pleb" is a mild class based insult in British English. All of my fighter PC would be very annoyed.
DeleteI think in this case "plebe" is a reference to the term used in US military academies for young cadets.
DeleteIt strikes me that level titles were inspired by the military practice of titles based on experience and capability given to various units that Miniature wargamers like Len Patt and Gary would have been familiar with. I think it was creative to eventually consider each character class as it's own branch receiving unique titles. I remember taking great pride in referencing my character's title when discussing his exploits as a young teen player. It was just one more thing that seemed to bring the character to life, making them "real" (within the context of the game, of course - which I had to explain often to my mother and other adults, at the time).
ReplyDeleteNote that "swordsman" is the only gendered fighter title, which is not the case with "swordmaster" in the Expert rules. Similarly, the removal of "magsman" makes all thief titles gender-neutral. While that may or may not have been an intentional choice, the de facto result is slightly greater inclusivity and fewer gender assumptions about PCs - all many years before WotC supposedly ruined D&D with their ironically misnamed "PC agenda" as some grognards insist.
ReplyDeleteNot supposed. I can think of many other ways they ruined D&D. It's not just DEI.
DeleteSpot on, blackstone. DEI is bad enough, but their sins go beyond that (big though it is).
DeleteTo which I say "Sez you." Hasbro WotC has been a nightmare that puts the worst behavior of They Sue Regularly to shame, but the early stretch of their run brought a dying game back from the grave its previous owners dug for it. There would be no OSR without Peter Adkison's purchase and support of the OGL, and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves. Current WotC is as different from what they were in 2001 as TSR was between the eras of Gygax, the Blumes, and Williams.
DeleteLen lakofka wrote up a chart for female names in dragon issue 3 iirc. - verdugo
Delete"Swordmaster" is male. Female would be "swordmistress."
DeleteToo many kidd don't learn their native language nowadays.
I don't know why, but when level titles were dropped later, I think a certain amount of detail was lost. I think it gives the PC some sense of uniqueness. To me "Yar, a Fighter of great renown." sounds plain compared to "Yar, a Fighter of great renown who achieved the title of Myrmidon." Sure it's more wordy, but it has some flair.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if that has to do with a generational change in the fiction that gamers are drawing inspiration from. In the early days, pulp F&SF was the inspiration, and titles like that abound in that fiction. In newer F&SF fiction, there is less use of titles like that (at least to my perception).
Delete"Myrmidon" is a bit of a mouthful. All the others are easy to say and interpret.
DeleteWhich brings me to another question - were the level titles in the foreign-language versions of the Mentzer Basic and Expert books in their local language or did they stay in English?
I always thought veteran was an odd choice for first level Fighters.
ReplyDeleteIt implies that a "lowly" 1st level Fighter is still someone who has seen combat, and is therefore more skilled at the martial arts than a shopkeep.
DeleteIt also supports the idea that many F&SF books use where the adventurer has retired or mustered out from the military and is now off to seek fame an fortune. For example, the movie The Man Who Would Be King.
DeleteIs it any more weird than "Fighter" itself? Prior to D&D that term was rarely used in literature compared to warrior or soldier - or veteran, for that matter. It's as artificial and gamey as the appallingly ugly "Magic-User" is.
Delete"Fighter" is the gender-neutral form of "fighting man," which itself comes into D&D (I strongly suspect) from Burrough's first description of John Carter in A Princess of Mars
Delete"[Carter] was a splendid specimen of manhood, standing a good two inches over six feet, broad of shoulder and narrow of hip, with the carriage of the trained fighting man. His features were regular and clear cut, his hair black and closely cropped, while his eyes were of a steel gray, reflecting a strong and loyal character, filled with fire and initiative. His manners were perfect, and his courtliness was that of a typical southern gentleman of the highest type."
Fighting man is a rather old-fashioned twrm for soldier, hence it's appearance when describing John Carter as a soldier. Fighter was meant to gender-neuter the term.
DeleteI suspect Magic-User, on the other hand, was used to cover the fact that it broadly covers ALL types of magic-user, from devil-summoning type to the gestures and incantations type, to the alchemist mixing concoctions.
Yes, though it does align with the idea that you only gain experience in D&D through adventuring and the gold accumulated during it. Making gold through business or slaughtering orcs in a battle where you are a foot soldier isn't adventuring.
DeleteThese titles were something we never used, which is curious because we had great fun picking names and even titles for our pack animals.
ReplyDeleteWe never used the titles, but we also rarely named pack animals.
DeleteI'm currently running a campaign which is a spinoff of a longer-running one, between which the only linking character is a pack animal. Gwendolyn. She's a donkey.
DeleteA lot of the choices are odd, especially for clerics. One of the main reasons that I never liked titles is that we don't know who is giving them these level titles. If you've got an all-encompassing fighters' or thieves' guild, then that might make sense. But two different thieves' guilds might have totally different ways of ranking their membership.
ReplyDeleteI have always disdained level titles because, in many cases, the terms that were chosen refer to specific occupations, not levels of skill, and because levels in D&D do not actually reflect status or authority, but rather how many experience points you acquire. When the level number is incorporated in the level title itself, it's doubly ridiculous. I prefer to keep levels and level titles out of in-character conversation unless they refer to something in-universe, such as the level titles of druids, which are directly connected to status within a defined hierarchy.
ReplyDeleteI love level titles. At my table, I most leave the fighter titles alone, only swapping "Myrmidon" for "Gladiator" (for no particular reason beyond I think it sounds better) and adding the high-level titles "Overlord" for an 18th level fighter and "Invincible Overlord" for 36th.
ReplyDeleteFor thieves, I use— Rogue (1st), Footpad (2nd), Robber (3rd), Burglar (4th), Cutpurse (5th), Sharper (6th), Pilferer (7th), Magsman (8th), Kingpin (9th–17th), Godfather (18th–35th), Grandfather of Thieves (36th).
Up in darkest Northumberland we embraced level titles in that you had to attain the role of your current level in order to progress (in addition to gaining the required XP). It gave OD&D a different flavour to any I've experienced since.
ReplyDeleteThat's pretty cool.
DeleteLevel titles provide a GM with a way to further define and provide flavor for a campaign. One doesn't have to use the official ones but could develop their own for a campaign. Here's one I came up with a number of years ago for Fighters that I felt fit my campaign style at the time a bit better: 1.Armsman, 2.Warrior, 3.Gallant/Ravager, 4.Champion, 5. WeaponMaster, 6. Slayer, 7. Guardian/Destroyer, 8. Battlemaster, 9. Warlord.
ReplyDelete