Names for proficiency "ranks"

[Greywander]

For another project I'm working on, I've organized characters into tiers according to their level, where each tier is exactly four levels. By coincidence, this happens to line up such that each tier starts with a bump to your proficiency bonus. This means if I know what tier you're in, I know what your proficiency bonus is. This got me thinking about expanding the labels for each tier to include every possible proficiency bonus, even those normally unachievable by PCs.

PC proficiency bonus runs from +2 to +6, for five total tiers. So far, I'm pretty set on the first four tiers being Novice, Veteran, Elite, and Heroic. I have a couple ideas for the final tier for PCs, but monsters' proficiency bonus can go up to +9, which means we actually have three more tiers beyond even that. I'm not totally sure which labels to use for these final four tiers, or which order to put them in. I'm pretty sure I want both Legendary and Mythical, with Mythical being a higher tier. Other possibilities include Fabled, Exalted, Godlike, Eternal, etc. If you have ideas for other names, or which order to put them in, please share them.

There's also room for a hypothetical tier below Novice, where your proficiency bonus is only +1. Likely this would only be used for things like children, animals, or very weak monsters. I'm having a little trouble finding a good word that simultaneously encompasses the ideas of being young, untrained, and incompetent without necessarily being all three at once, and also without it being framed in a somewhat insulting way. Something like "inept" is kind of mean to apply to a child, while "juvenile" isn't an insult but also wouldn't apply to someone who is an adult and is just incompetent. "Unskilled" is about the closest as far as definition, but doesn't feel like it fits with the other labels I've chosen.

[Darc_Vader]

Maybe apprentice for the low one, or possibly make it +2 and move novice down to +1.

For the upper tiers, maybe something like Demigod or Deific.

Edit: also I do like Fabled.
Maybe something like this could work?

Novice, Apprentice, Veteran, Elite, Heroic, Legendary, Mythical, Fabled, Deific

[Unoriginal]

There's also room for a hypothetical tier below Novice, where your proficiency bonus is only +1. Likely this would only be used for things like children, animals, or very weak monsters. I'm having a little trouble finding a good word that simultaneously encompasses the ideas of being young, untrained, and incompetent without necessarily being all three at once, and also without it being framed in a somewhat insulting way. Something like "inept" is kind of mean to apply to a child, while "juvenile" isn't an insult but also wouldn't apply to someone who is an adult and is just incompetent. "Unskilled" is about the closest as far as definition, but doesn't feel like it fits with the other labels I've chosen.

"Amateur" could work

[PhantomSoul]

Maybe apprentice for the low one, or possibly make it +2 and move novice down to +1.


"Amateur" could work

I really like Amateur, but I think Novice may be better, since Amateur could confound "non-professional" with "limited proficiency or wholly non-proficient". Really, both seem good though!

[Greywander]

I feel like Novice, Apprentice, and Amateur are all a bit too synonymous. The first two indicate someone who's just starting in a field, but are definitely being trained, while amateur is someone who practices as a hobby rather than a profession. They all indicate a small amount of skill and/or is in the process of learning. Of those three, I think Amateur sounds the best for the bottom tier, while Novice remains the first PC tier. I feel like there's got to be a word that works better. There are words like Uncouth, Lowly, Menial, Craven, Inept, or Vulgar that kind of circle around what I'm looking for, but don't quite hit the target exactly. What about something like Simple?

Personally, I like Novice for the first PC tier, as I think it accurately reflects those first few levels. You're just starting out, already with a couple tricks (instead of starting with nothing), and although you're pretty flimsy, you're not helpless. It's sort of the feeling of someone who's trained at boot camp and is finally getting deployed to war for the first time; you know all the skills they taught you, but have yet to actually apply them to real situations where the danger is real and one wrong step could mean death. You don't really know what you're doing, but you just keep doing it as long as it keeps working. By the time you reach Veteran tier, you're more hardened, and know much better from experience what works, and, more importantly, what doesn't.

As for the high tiers, it's tough because a lot of these words are more or less synonymous and don't have a clear hierarchy. Would it make more sense for the highest level PCs to be Legendary, or Exalted? So far, the highest CR monsters that have been statted are CR 30 and include creatures like the tarrasque, Tiamat, and a few archfiends. The gods would be a higher tier even above that (though isn't Tiamat a god?), so I don't know that Deific should apply, though Divine or Demigod might. Although I do remember seeing someone do videos about the strongest monsters in D&D, and IIRC the CRs went upward of 50, with I think a couple in the range of CR 75. Still, CR 30 appears to be the cap in 5e, and something like a god probably just won't ever be statted (at best, an avatar might get statted, but the true god would be much stronger).

[Darc_Vader]

I feel like Novice, Apprentice, and Amateur are all a bit too synonymous. The first two indicate someone who's just starting in a field, but are definitely being trained, while amateur is someone who practices as a hobby rather than a profession. They all indicate a small amount of skill and/or is in the process of learning. Of those three, I think Amateur sounds the best for the bottom tier, while Novice remains the first PC tier. I feel like there's got to be a word that works better. There are words like Uncouth, Lowly, Menial, Craven, Inept, or Vulgar that kind of circle around what I'm looking for, but don't quite hit the target exactly. What about something like Simple?

Plebeian maybe? Or rookie? It’s a bit hard to break down skill levels this finely lol.

[Minice]

4th edition had heroic, paragon and epic as names for thier tiers.

Master and grandmaster might be workable too.

So, apprentice would be before starting.

Then novice, veteran, master, hero, paragon, legend, epic, mythic?

[Greywander]

What about Naif? Seems it has the same etymology as the word "naive", and basically means "a naive person". So, someone lacking worldly experience. Usually, this would just mean a low WIS score, but this could describe a child or and adult who is ignorant or incompetent.

Some other ideas might be Common, Civilian, Mundane, or Humble. Should probably avoid Common, so as not to cause confusion with other places that word is uses (languages, magic item rarity, etc.). Don't really like Civilian, as even a commoner should be at least Novice tier, albeit not trained for combat or adventuring, specifically.

It's not really that we're trying to break this down so finely, it's more that the PC range is already pretty ideal, going from beginner to superhuman. The problem is trying to find something that's below the lowest, and above the highest. If we just look at the PC tiers, the jumps from Novice to Veteran, Veteran to Elite, or Elite to Heroic are all pretty substantial. It's literally "beginner" to "experienced professional" to "best of the best" to "superhuman", and that's not even including the final tier. When you already have good picks for the highest and lowest tiers, it's difficult to find options that allow you to extend beyond that normal range.

Well, thanks for the help so far, everyone. It kind of feels like we're stuck, but maybe if we just keep spitballing ideas we'll find something that works. Or maybe I just need to sleep on it.

[Unoriginal]

I feel like Novice, Apprentice, and Amateur are all a bit too synonymous. The first two indicate someone who's just starting in a field, but are definitely being trained, while amateur is someone who practices as a hobby rather than a profession. They all indicate a small amount of skill and/or is in the process of learning. Of those three, I think Amateur sounds the best for the bottom tier, while Novice remains the first PC tier. I feel like there's got to be a word that works better. There are words like Uncouth, Lowly, Menial, Craven, Inept, or Vulgar that kind of circle around what I'm looking for, but don't quite hit the target exactly. What about something like Simple?

Oh, I get it.

The word you want is probably "Mediocre".



As for the high tiers, it's tough because a lot of these words are more or less synonymous and don't have a clear hierarchy. Would it make more sense for the highest level PCs to be Legendary, or Exalted? So far, the highest CR monsters that have been statted are CR 30 and include creatures like the tarrasque, Tiamat, and a few archfiends. The gods would be a higher tier even above that (though isn't Tiamat a god?), so I don't know that Deific should apply, though Divine or Demigod might. Although I do remember seeing someone do videos about the strongest monsters in D&D, and IIRC the CRs went upward of 50, with I think a couple in the range of CR 75. Still, CR 30 appears to be the cap in 5e, and something like a god probably just won't ever be statted (at best, an avatar might get statted, but the true god would be much stronger).

Tiamat is indeed a true goddess. The statblock is far from covering all her powers, though.

For the others: I would avoid "Legendary", to avoid confusion with creatures who have Legendary Saves/Actions. And I suppose "Mythic" would create confusion as well, due to the mechanics with a similar name from Theros.

For what it's worth, both of the two most common examples of 5e's Titans (as in, the divine tier for beings who are children/direct creations of the gods, with a divine spark, but not proper gods yet), the Empyreans and the Krakens, have +7 of proficiency mod. So calling +7 "Titanic" would be appropriate.

[BeefGood]

I think there should be a word between Novice and Veteran. Novice is just getting started and A veteran has a lot of experience. In between there’s...normal? The only word that comes to mind is Professional.
Slipping in Professional and bumping up Veteran and above would enable either Mythical or Fabled to be removed—they seem synonymous to me.

[Bundin]

My take on this:

0 - Untrained
1 - Novice (alternative for some skills/tools: Apprentice, which is more about crafts and occupations than weapons and other martial things)
2 - Trained (alternative for some skills/tools: Journeyman, which is more about crafts and occupations than weapons and other martial things)
3 - Veteran
4 - Expert
5 - Master
6 - Grand Master

No need to get gods, myths, and legends involved in my opinion, the average +6 proficient <class> or <weapon user> will still get stomped to paste by many godly/mythical/legendary opponents/challenges in this game system, when alone and mostly just relying on proficiency bonuses. Just being very very good at sticking things with the pointy end, doesn't make you a dragon slayer :)

[saucerhead]

Between novice and veteran you could maybe use journeyman.
For the upper limit you could use ascendant, as in ascending to Godhood, possibly.

EDIT: Bundin already said journeyman.

[Naanomi]

How does expertise/similar effects interact with this system?

[Cicciograna]

In the days of yore there was this computer game, Dungeon Master (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeon_Master_(video_game)). It featured ranks for the various class that the characters could have. The ranks were:

1. (no rank)
2. Neophyte
3. Novice
4. Apprentice
5. Journeyman
6. Craftsman
7. Artisan
8. Adept
9. Expert
10. Lo Master
11. Um Master
12. On Master
13. Ee Master
14. Pal Master
15. Mon Master
16. Archmaster

For ranks from 10 to 15, the "Master" titles corresponded to certain runes present in game, each with increasing "power".

[Bundin]

How does expertise/similar effects interact with this system?

Well, Prof bonus is only past of the equation. It would not make sense, when using my list some posts above, to call a high Elf non-Bladesinging Wizard a Grand Master swordsman, just because the Prof bonus is +5.

Bracketing on total bonus makes a lot more sense (permanent bonuses only, temporary effects would make one only equivalent to the higher 'rank'). A total bonus increase because of expertise would bump you up a bracket or two, so you'd end up with a more fancy title.

[Greywander]

Oh, I get it.

The word you want is probably "Mediocre".
Kind of? But maybe even below that. Something like Wretched might be more accurate, though again, it would be weird to apply that label to a creature that is simply too young to have much experience.


For the others: I would avoid "Legendary", to avoid confusion with creatures who have Legendary Saves/Actions. And I suppose "Mythic" would create confusion as well, due to the mechanics with a similar name from Theros.
Not a bad idea, I'll have to keep this in mind. I would still like to have both Legendary and Mythic or Mythical as tiers. Heck, maybe I could go through and deliberately rename these mechanics after the tier the monster is in. For example, only Legendary monsters would have Legendary Actions/Resistance, while Mythical monsters would have Mythical Actions/Resistance. They'd work the same, but the higher tier ones would be stronger or have more uses. I'd like to make some changes to Legendary Resistance anyway. I'll have to look up this "mythic" mechanic from Theros to see how it fits into this.


For what it's worth, both of the two most common examples of 5e's Titans (as in, the divine tier for beings who are children/direct creations of the gods, with a divine spark, but not proper gods yet), the Empyreans and the Krakens, have +7 of proficiency mod. So calling +7 "Titanic" would be appropriate.
This possibility occurred to me as well. I'd also considered extending the size categories with Titanic as one of the larger sizes. I probably wouldn't want to do both.


I think there should be a word between Novice and Veteran. Novice is just getting started and A veteran has a lot of experience. In between there’s...normal? The only word that comes to mind is Professional.
Slipping in Professional and bumping up Veteran and above would enable either Mythical or Fabled to be removed—they seem synonymous to me.
I don't think the tier system needs to be this fine, and besides, I think Veteran is already fairly synonymous with Professional. The intent, at least partly, is for the name to reflect what that character's status is in the world.

Novice is levels 1 to 4: Someone who's just starting out and has a few abilities.
Veteran is levels 5 to 8: You've got your Extra Attack or 3rd level spells, so you're significantly stronger than Novice.
Elite is levels 9 to 12: This is about the highest you'll see an NPC who isn't an important side character.
Heroic is levels 13 to 16: You're larger than life with spells and abilities that most people have never heard of, let alone seen.

Novice and Veteran NPCs would be fairly common, Novice more so. Every major city would have a few Elites, e.g. if you needed an Elite cleric to cast Raise Dead on a party member, but outside large cities they'll be very rare. Any NPC in Heroic or higher tier was probably given a name and backstory before you even met them, i.e. they're a major NPC.


No need to get gods, myths, and legends involved in my opinion,
I was considering using this tier system as an alternative to CR, possibly with alternate stats for each tier so that you can scale a monster up or down more easily. You're not wrong that the PC tiers are the most important, and that they cover a pretty ideal range, but having tiers for stronger monsters will be useful I think.


How does expertise/similar effects interact with this system?
It wouldn't, nor would the Ioun Stone of Mastery. Your tier just determines your base proficiency bonus, anything that modifies that wouldn't interact with your tier.

[PhantomSoul]

What about Naif? Seems it has the same etymology as the word "naive", and basically means "a naive person". So, someone lacking worldly experience. Usually, this would just mean a low WIS score, but this could describe a child or and adult who is ignorant or incompetent.

I'd definitely err on the side of avoiding "naif" and "naive" (though it might be a stronger reaction for me and my group, since everyone in that group has some knowledge of French or is native/fluent). Like naive (feminine form in French or English borrowing), it carries strong negative connotations for me. That also doesn't feel right for someone who has some proficiency in something, give or take dunning-krugering.

[Kane0]

+0: Untrained (Unskilled, Layman)
+2: Novice
+3: Proficient (Trained)
+4: Experienced (Professional)
+5: Expert
+6: Master
+7: Supernatural
+8: Storied
+9: Godlike

[Greywander]

+0: Untrained (Unskilled, Layman)
+2: Novice
+3: Proficient (Trained)
+4: Experienced (Professional)
+5: Expert
+6: Master
+7: Supernatural
+8: Storied
+9: Godlike
For some reason, I'm under the impression that NPCs higher than 10th level are really rare, and spells of 6th level and higher are outside of the general knowledge. I'm not sure where I got this idea from, but it's one that's stuck with me. That's why I've said that Elite (levels 9 to 12) is probably the highest tier you'll find NPCs that aren't major NPCs. My problem with a list like the one above is that it implies experts, or levels 13 to 16, are somewhat common. Less so than lower tiers, but you'll always have an "expert" at the top of every business, and perhaps several more below them.

Maybe there's been some confusion that could be contributing to this: these aren't supposed to be skill ranks, but more like adventuring ranks. PCs are meant to go beyond what would normally be possible for an average person and into the realm of superhuman. This is why I feel like the top two tiers are mostly off-limits for NPCs; because most people either don't put in the effort or are actually incapable of ascending to such superhuman levels. Some do, and they usually become a major NPC that is somehow important to the plot. But part of the reason that the PCs are the heroes is because they're stronger than anyone else, which is why you can't just send a bunch of hirelings to do the PCs' job. There are expert assassins and master guardsmen, but even with all their skill they still can't compete with real heroes. I feel like the tier names should reflect this, which is why I put Elite (the highest a normal person could realistically achieve) right in the middle, and past that are the larger-than-life, superhuman tiers.

Or, to frame it another way, say the BBEG hires a group of "elite" mercenaries, the best of the best, to fight the heroes. How often in movies, TV shows, video games, etc. does it turn out that the heroes just plow through these "elite" soldiers like any other mook? It's not that they're bad at their job (though results may vary), it's that the heroes are just on a completely different level. One aspect of being a hero is accomplishing feats that would be impossible for a normal person.

Is this making sense? It's not a bad list, and I hope someone's able to find a use for it, it's just not quite what I'm looking for. I don't want to discourage people from chiming in, I do appreciate every reply so far. I do sort of feel like it's in the nature of the question that most of the replies won't end up being helpful (partly because of the difficulty in articulating exactly what I'm looking for), but all we can do is keep throwing things out there until something sticks.

For the highest tier, what about Forgotten? I kind of feel like Legendary, Mythical, and Forgotten form a thematic trio, where each tier gets progressively less well known and less certain that it's even real. Apocalyptic might be another option.

What about Scullion for the sub-Novice tier? Nominally, it's a kitchen servant who does menial work, but it seems to also have undertones of a rapscallion, which could be an unruly child or a roguish knave. Seems like it's broad enough and isn't necessarily demeaning (but could be, depending on context). On the other hand, if I just dropped the connection to children, then something like Wretched or Inept would work fine. Though I do kind of feel like, for example, a child helping in their parent's trade probably merits a lower proficiency bonus than a novice adult.

[Kane0]

Sounds like Inept works better IMO

Whats your current list as it stands now? Might be easier to narrow down the parts your jeeding

[Greywander]

+1 Inept?
+2 Novice
+3 Veteran
+4 Elite
+5 Heroic
+6 Exalted?
+7 Legendary?
+8 Mythical?
+9 Forgotten?

(PC tiers are bolded for easier reading.)

Sadly, it seems like little progress has been made since the OP, though I think the discussion so far has helped a bit. If I just go with Inept for the lowest tier, then all that's really left is setting the higher tiers. We have enough names, it's just a matter of settling on which ones to use, and which order to place them.

[PhantomSoul]

+1 Inept?
+2 Novice
+3 Veteran
+4 Elite
+5 Heroic
+6 Exalted?
+7 Legendary?
+8 Mythical?
+9 Forgotten?

(PC tiers are bolded for easier reading.)

Sadly, it seems like little progress has been made since the OP, though I think the discussion so far has helped a bit. If I just go with Inept for the lowest tier, then all that's really left is setting the higher tiers. We have enough names, it's just a matter of settling on which ones to use, and which order to place them.

Maybe Inept would be for +0 (or anything below +1)? Essentially, it would then be another term for "Untrained"/"Non-proficient". (With modifiers, it feels like it should be if your net bonus is a negative modifier that!)

[Lord Ruby34]

My suggestions would be:

+0: Untrained
+1: Novice
+2: Journeyman
+3: Professional
+4: Expert
+5: Master
+6: Legend
+7: Superhuman
+8: Titan
+9: Deity

The logic of that first level PCs are already trained in their fields, and are already no longer novices. By fifth level the PCs are already moving towards the top of their chosen skillset.

[Unoriginal]

My suggestions would be:

+0: Untrained
+1: Novice
+2: Journeyman
+3: Professional
+4: Expert
+5: Master
+6: Legend
+7: Superhuman
+8: Titan
+9: Deity

But most titans have +7.



The logic of that first level PCs are already trained in their fields, and are already no longer novices. By fifth level the PCs are already moving towards the top of their chosen skillset.

That is true.

[Greywander]

There's not really a reason to have a tier for +0, as this would be the same as not having any proficiencies. I suppose you could have a character who has proficiencies, but doesn't benefit from them until they level up to the next tier, but this seems exceedingly niche. You'd never use it for NPCs (NPCs don't level up, and you could just strip away all proficiencies instead), and I don't really see many players wanting to start with a +0 bonus (and again, you could just strip away all proficiencies until they reach a certain point or complete a specific goal).

If you wanted to, I'm sure you could invent a use for a +0 tier. I don't see myself needing to do this, and I don't even see the +1 tier being used all that often (though it does still have a useful niche).

[Kane0]

Would it be worth incorporating the attribute modifier into the label? That way negatives, +0 and such would have a name attached

-3 and below: Inept
-2 to +0:
+1 to +3: Novice
+4 to +6: Proficient/Professional/Talented/Trained
+7 to +9: Experienced/Veteran
+10 to +12: Master/Elite
+13 to +15: Superhuman/Heroic/Exalted
+16 to +18: Storied/Titanic
+19 and above: Godlike/Mythical/Legendary

So your average level 1 character would be Novice to Professional, your rare midlevel NPCs typically max out at Experienced/Veteran and the PCs can reach the upper limits of Mastery. To classify as Godlike you'd need to be completely top tier with Prof bonus of +9 and a 30 in the relevant stat, but you could theoretically cheat and use expertise I suppose?

[Darc_Vader]

It’s feels a bit off to me, but how about preeminent for the highest tier? At least according to google it literally means ‘surpassing all others’.

[Kane0]

Oh and also for the tongue in cheek: ‘Superlative’

[Greywander]

Would it be worth incorporating the attribute modifier into the label? That way negatives, +0 and such would have a name attached
Not in my case, though I could see someone else taking this basic idea in a different direction than I am. For my purposes, the original intent was that your tier corresponded to your level, with each tier being four levels. The relationship to proficiency bonus was coincidental. Extending the tier system above +6 and down to +1 is basically just filling in hypothetical levels that aren't normally attainable by PCs, but could be applied to NPCs, or used in homebrew. I might end up using tiers as a replacement for CR as well.

What I have in mind is a pretty big overhaul, so I should have the opportunity to go through and change a bunch of stuff (though the bigger the homebrew, the less likely it is to see completion). I could see tiers replacing levels almost entirely, with anything that normally scales with levels scaling with your tier instead. I posted another piece to this concept over in the homebrew forum, where each class is cut down to just four levels, exactly filling a tier, and every tier you'd choose a new class to level up. I'm also considering attempting to reduce HP and damage bloat by scaling hit dice/HP with tier instead of level, so that you'd start with two hit dice at 1st level (one from your race, one from your first class), and end up with only six hit dice. This will require a lot of tweaking to find the right balance between HP and damage, but it should make combat a bit more lethal, which would appeal more to certain people.

Basically, tiers might replace levels entirely as your measure of progression. If classes are cut down to just four levels, then we could even call them something else, like "quarters" instead of "levels". I'd also rename spell levels to something else. D&D really uses the word "level" too much, and it can be confusing to unfamiliar players.

But setting all of that aside, it would be an interesting idea to come up with a label that basically describes how competent you are based on your total bonus to a roll. It kind of reminds me of Fudge's trait ladder. Things like this are useful for grounding the abstract numbers in reality. We should be able to calculate what sort of bonus a professional, or an apprentice, or an expert should have to a roll, and then by assigning these labels to those bonuses, it will give players an idea of how good their character actually is. Knowing I have a +7 doesn't really mean much, but if I know that a typical professional has, say, a +8 then I know that I'm almost on a professional level. It basically informs the players how to RP their character's competency, whether they are a trained expert or just a dabbler.

[Kane0]

Okay thats some interesting context. In fact, i’ve been toying with the idea of reducing levels from 20 to 12 and prof bonus to every 3 levels instead of 4, so you could trim a lot of fat while you have the opportunity.

You could go back to AD&D and steal a bunch of class specific titles?

[Greywander]

Okay thats some interesting context. In fact, i’ve been toying with the idea of reducing levels from 20 to 12 and prof bonus to every 3 levels instead of 4, so you could trim a lot of fat while you have the opportunity.

You could go back to AD&D and steal a bunch of class specific titles?
I could look into that. Though if I'm cutting classes down to just four levels, there isn't really a need to subclasses anymore, allowing me to rework many of the subclasses into full classes. IIRC, there's over 100 subclasses right now, and although some of them might not be suitable to be reworked into a full class, I should still have plenty to work with. Once I exhaust those, then it would make sense to look into older editions to draw some ideas from there.