How to identify the class of a character in character?

[Nikarus]

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?

Seems to be a question my DM doesn't understand too well. DM seems to think it should be immediately apparent what class they are, but I can't figure it out. Discuss.

[Jormengand]

It's at least implied in D&D 3.5 that a relevant knowledge check (for example, knowledge arcana for the classes in the tome of magic) will help you discern what class someone is, at least by knowing some relevant facts about the different classes the person could be.

That said, classes tend to be a metagame concept in a lot of other cases. While the difference between "Wizard" and "Truenamer" is well known and defined, and "Assassin" and "Red wizard" and "Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil" are actually organisations ("Must kill someone for no other reason than to join the Assassins"), there's no clear divide implied between barbarians and fighters, really. No-one's going to be trying to discern whether someone's a barbarian or a fighter in-character any more than you would in real life.

[Jay R]

Why should my character care? This is a stranger with whom he has no business.

Besides, my character probably doesn't even know what a "class" is. He assumes that the man can fight both in melee and at range, and probably (not definitely) can't cast spells. I don't assume that there is a thing called "horizon Walker", any more than there are things called "hit points" or "skill ranks". These are simply game mechanics for determining what my character can do.

He's a fighter; he can clearly fight. He's a ranger,. He just came to town, so he's been out ranging. These are common English words, but my character doesn't necessarily know what a Fighter or Ranger class is, despite the fact that my current PC is both.

[Sajiri]

If you're roleplaying, I dont really like the idea of defining a character by their class. Sure their class defines their abilities, but in character they can be many different roles or stations. Miko in OotS is a great example, classwise she's a paladin, but her role in the setting is a samurai.

I have pathfinder's NPC codex and I think its really neat, it has an npc for each level of a class, but despite all being the same class the characters are wildly different. The npcs in the fighter class, for example, include such titles as superstitious mercenary, cautious archer, adventuring blacksmith, spell hunter, griffon rider, scheming fencer, brutal warlord, arcane pretender, failed disciple and infernal champion. These are all fighter class npcs, yet these titles conjure up images of wildly different characters that you really cant define their class immediately by what weapons they have on their back or what they're wearing.

Chainshirt, longsword, longbow and a horse could be anything really. There are certainly classes that would be more likely than others but you dont necessarily know. The 'arcane pretender' npc I listed up above, for example, is a fighter who always wanted to be a wizard, she studied, practiced and memorized but cant cast spells. She passes herself off as a fighter with sorcerer abilities while using magic items to pretend as though she's actually casting spells. If you spotted this character you wouldnt necessarily immediately assume or know she's a fighter.

[2D8HP]

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?....

.
Well obviously he's a Fighting-Man, unless you allow for the classes added after the LBB's with Greyhawk or any if the other supplements, in which case I can't tell.

[Mr Beer]

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?

Seems to be a question my DM doesn't understand too well. DM seems to think it should be immediately apparent what class they are, but I can't figure it out. Discuss.

It sounds like you want a thread full of people telling your GM that he is wrong about it being immediately obvious. That's probably not the best way to resolve in-game disagreements. FWIW based on the information provided in this thread, no it's not obvious. Maybe it is obvious in whatever system and/or setting your DM is running, have you tried asking him?

[Mordaedil]

Generally one can assume a class dresses up as what they are, otherwise they are wearing a disguise of some sort. I can assume since the character wasn't adorned in holy symbols, wearing animal skulls or covered in leafs, he must be a mercenary type. The armor gives away that he isn't a spellcaster and he lacks an instrument to sell him as a minstrel, so I've narrowed it down to a fighter.

[Berenger]

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?

C'mon, it's obvious. Light armor, sword, bow, travels long distances: Ranger. Specifically, Aragorn, true king of Gondor.

Or a low-level fighter without money for a suit of full plate.

Or the local aristocrat passing through the town on the way from the manor to his favourite hunting spot.

Or an elven wizard if that chain shirt is mithril.

But, most likely, it's Aragorn.

[Frozen_Feet]

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?

Seems to be a question my DM doesn't understand too well. DM seems to think it should be immediately apparent what class they are, but I can't figure it out. Discuss.

1) Chainshirt, longsword, large horse = expensive, implying this man is reasonably wealthy. So probably a member of the upper classes.

2) Longbow = this dude has a lot of time to invest in training with his weapon. A longbow is typically used for hunting game or on the battlefield. So either he's a forester, or some sort of a professional soldier.

1) + 2) He's probably both a forester and a professional soldier due to being part of lower nobility. Nobles are both required to serve their liege as military, and frequently given forest areas to look over as well as exclusive rights to hunt big game.

So this man's a warrior, more specifically a ranger or a knight.

Or if in Japan, armor + horse + longsword + bow is dead giveaway for a Samurai. For most of the same reasons.

[bulbaquil]

The way I do it is: you don't.

NPCs don't know that classes, feats, levels, etc. exist, and certainly can't optimize for them. Bill the Blacksmith no more knows that he is a Fighter 2 with such-and-such feats, a STR score of 15, and the like than he does whether there's life on Mars. There are Barbarians (class-wise) who live in town and get arrested for drunken tavern brawls on a regular basis; likewise, there are barbarian outriders who are mechanically Fighters, Rangers, or something else. The term "bard" means a singer, musician, or orator who publicly performs and may or may not actually have the Bard class. "Monks" are people who live in monasteries and may not know the first thing about unarmed fighting*, and "wizard" can refer to any prepared arcane spellcaster.

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?

He has a large horse and metal armor, so clearly not "lower", and since the weapons don't appear to be peacebonded, he's likely a knight and/or a noble of some kind. The longbow and longsword suggest warrior by trade, which also fits with kniguht - either that or he's an elf, because everyone knows elves are good at archery by virtue of being elves.

Alternatively, if he doesn't carry himself as a knight and doesn't present himself as a mercenary for hire, there's a fairly good possibility that the horse, and possibly the bow as well, are stolen and he's a bandit looking for a chain gang to join.

*(Although some would argue this is true about the Monk class as well).

[Darth Ultron]

I go with: You Don't.

Class is one of the game things, like Hit Points, that a character does not and can not know.

And in any setting that has more then four very obvious classes, it is a bit pointless. And this is very true in D&D, where a character can have a couple classes. What does a fighter 2/ Wizard 2/Cleric 2 look like? How about a Warlock 3/Fighter 2? A Wizard 5/Sorcerer 3?

[Anonymouswizard]

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?

Seems to be a question my DM doesn't understand too well. DM seems to think it should be immediately apparent what class they are, but I can't figure it out. Discuss.

I agree with 'class is a game construct', and this is how I'd go through it (I'm assuming D&D 5e once I get down to 'what class did their player* pick').

So he's wearing armour, we can assume he's not a magician right off the bat. Most magicians can't cast magic while carrying too much or wearing heavy armour.

Further it's metal armour, so if he's a priest he's unlikely to be a D&D-style druid.

He's wearing decent armour and has a weapon of the nobility, so I'd assume he's not a commoner, but on the other hand his armour's not the upper tiers and might be a bit outdated, and he doesn't appear to have any retainers, so he's probably a lesser noble, I'd also assume he's one of the younger sons if he's out questing and not learning how to run the land. Plus he has a good horse, those are expensive.

He has a bow, which actually tells me little more than he expects to have to hunt or engage enemies at range.

Now, to narrow it down from 'archetype' to class, let's look at the equipment in detail. He's not wearing light armour, so he's unlikely to be a Ranger or Rogue. He's using a one-handed weapon, so he's unlikely to be a Barbarian. The fact his weapon is different to what most priests can use doesn't matter, clerics with martial proficiency are more likely to be questing. So I'd go for one of the following three classes:

Cleric
Fighter
Paladin

In alphabetical order because, really, we don't get the description to work it out past that. Most clerics wear their holy symbols openly, but some do keep them under their armour and we don't really have enough of a description to know if he has one (although if he does it doesn't disqualify either of the other classes). The gear fits more with the classic idea of a fighter, but most paladins would also carry a ranged weapon, and the lack of a shield mentioned mentioned could mean he either has some spellcasting ability or focuses more on grappling and shoving.

Now from personal experience I'd assume fighter until proven otherwise, but I know some people run much higher magic worlds than I'm used to (or indeed like).


* Which could be the GM

[Jay R]

He can afford a horse, and knows how to ride it. He is upper class.

[Mordaedil]

You don't actually need ranks in ride to ride a horse in D&D.

I still say there's a lack of leaves being described to nail him as a ranger.

[2D8HP]

Large Man: Who's that then?

Dead Collector: I dunno. Must be a king.

Large Man: Why?

Dead Collector: He hasn't got @#$& all over him.

[Calthropstu]

By smell. Obviously the unwashed masses have no class.

But seriously, you can't identify exact classes, but you could identify class type. The lithe suppleness of a rogue, scout etc, the confidence with a blade that a fighter, ranger or paladin has, the arcane spell components an arcane class has.

The only ones identifiable on sight would be clerics, (openly displaying holy symbols and praising their god), bards and monks.

[Tinkerer]

The only ones identifiable on sight would be clerics, (openly displaying holy symbols and praising their god), bards and monks.

Even then don't count on it. I've had many rogues who play instruments, monks who carry weapons, and non-clerics who are super religious.

To the OP though if what is being discussed here is NPC reactions another factor which could come into play is reputation. If someone has been making a name for themselves in the area word could spread of their appearance and what they are good at. "That's Caladar the Gentle. I heard he slew 10 bandits in 30 seconds with his fearsome sword and dagger style and he could knock the wings off of a fly at 80 paces with that bow. Huh, I'm suspecting the nickname is ironic."

[Psyren]

It sounds like you want a thread full of people telling your GM that he is wrong about it being immediately obvious. That's probably not the best way to resolve in-game disagreements. FWIW based on the information provided in this thread, no it's not obvious. Maybe it is obvious in whatever system and/or setting your DM is running, have you tried asking him?

This. And while the description above is very ambiguous, depending on what that character does/abilities they use, it can get narrowed down really fast.

I go with: You Don't.

Class is one of the game things, like Hit Points, that a character does not and can not know.

Does not, sure . Can not? Depends. Something being not obvious does not make it impossible to figure out.

And while exact hit points are a bit too gamey, discerning someone's overall level of injury is something that magic can do in many systems.

[Calthropstu]

Even then don't count on it. I've had many rogues who play instruments, monks who carry weapons, and non-clerics who are super religious.

Fair enough, but generally it's true. Paladins are also quite identifiable more often than not.
I actually used this in my game yesterday. I had a woman in my campaign referred to as a witch. She was an old woman, lived in the woods and used magic. So people called her a witch (it was PF which has a witch class.)
In truth, she was a wizard.

[Anonymouswizard]

Even then don't count on it. I've had many rogues who play instruments, monks who carry weapons, and non-clerics who are super religious.

Yeah, despite having a complex relationship with faith IRL I tend to play highly religious characters in fantasy games even when I don't play clerics (which is relatively rare), and even if my character's chosen religion would say they are damned. Honestly, most standard D&D settings should own some sort of holy symbol, most are religious and have chosen a specific deity to follow, although followers aren't strictly required to pray or carry holy symbols I've discovered a character's faith and relationship to their religion can really deepen a character.

I have a real love-hate relationship with divine casters in D&D, because I think they monopolise in-universe religion too much.

(On nonbards who play instruments, I also do that all the freaking time. I'm no good at them IRL, but I often play characters who would have picked up basic competence with at least one instrument, mainly due to a tendency to play minor nobles who have lost their status.)

[exelsisxax]

I go with: You Don't.

Class is one of the game things, like Hit Points, that a character does not and can not know.

And in any setting that has more then four very obvious classes, it is a bit pointless. And this is very true in D&D, where a character can have a couple classes. What does a fighter 2/ Wizard 2/Cleric 2 look like? How about a Warlock 3/Fighter 2? A Wizard 5/Sorcerer 3?

Darth Ultron is totally right, and I fully agree with him on this subject.

head explodes at the realization

[Max_Killjoy]

Besides, my character probably doesn't even know what a "class" is.

^ This.

IMO, the idea that characters literally identify themselves and others as belonging to an actual RPG "character class" belongs in farce and parody.

[Calthropstu]

^ This.

IMO, the idea that characters literally identify themselves and others as belonging to an actual RPG "character class" belongs in farce and parody.

Actually, I see it more like this:
I am a computer programmer and identify myself as such. If I were a wizard, I would identify myself as such. If I were a cleric, not only would I identify myself as such I'd attempt to convert you, if I were a fighter I would identify myself as such, If I were a rogue I would well... pretend to be something else heh. But you get the picture. It is a profession, nothing more nothing less. So yes, you would have a concept of your profession.

[Tinkerer]

^ This.

IMO, the idea that characters literally identify themselves and others as belonging to an actual RPG "character class" belongs in farce and parody.

It depends to a large extent on the system and the class. Using the core classes from D&D as an example most of them would be fairly identifiable as jobs or education and would most likely be referred to as such. I mean Cleric, Bard, Sorcerer, Wizard, Paladin, Ranger, Monk, all of those are things that I could definitely see a character being referred to as. I doubt that the Barbarian class would be referred to as such, more likely be referred to as a warrior from the northern plains or something since the entire group of people are called barbarians. The Fighter/Warrior split is much more ambiguous and they would most likely be referred to as what ever word comes to the speakers mind. Rogues would probably be referred to by whatever they do (or whatever false front they put up). They wouldn't call it a "character class", they would just call it a job or training.

[Calthropstu]

I prefer the term battle rager or berserker, both of which would describe the "barbarian" class.

[RazorChain]

Actually, I see it more like this:
I am a computer programmer and identify myself as such. If I were a wizard, I would identify myself as such. If I were a cleric, not only would I identify myself as such I'd attempt to convert you, if I were a fighter I would identify myself as such, If I were a rogue I would well... pretend to be something else heh. But you get the picture. It is a profession, nothing more nothing less. So yes, you would have a concept of your profession.

I never understood why D&D used class as it most commonly denotes social standing or qualiy instead of profession.

Cleric just means you are ordained part of the clergy, be that priest, deacon, bishop etc.

Fighter is someone who fights

Class in D&D hasnt anything to do with profession. A Ranger could be a poacher or even a bandit. Cleric could be a traveling friar. A rogue could be an engineer specializing in traps, locks and vaults. A fighter could be a mercenary, city watch or even a monk. Paladin should be fighting alongside Roland somewhere or serving as an emperors chamberlain

My character is a monk by class but is actually not a part of any monastic order. He's a pugilist champion.

[Jay R]

Actually, I see it more like this:
I am a computer programmer and identify myself as such. If I were a wizard, I would identify myself as such. If I were a cleric, not only would I identify myself as such I'd attempt to convert you, if I were a fighter I would identify myself as such, If I were a rogue I would well... pretend to be something else heh. But you get the picture. It is a profession, nothing more nothing less. So yes, you would have a concept of your profession.

Sure, but it's a profession, not a job title.

A cleric wouldn't call himself that; he'd call himself an acolyte, priest, bishop, archbishop, or cardinal.

When I worked for Nortel, my job title was Member of Scientific Staff. In D&D-like class terms, I'd have been more-or-less a Mathematician 5 / Statistician 3 / Engineer 1 / Ranger 1*. But I thought of myself as a capacity engineer.

Similarly, my Fighter 2 / Ranger 4 / Horizon Walker 6 thinks of himself as a ranger, or a woodsman.

*Yes-- two summers as a Philmont Ranger. It had nothing to do with my career, but I did have the experience.

[Avigor]

A man with a chain shirt, and a longsword at his hip rides into town on a large horse, there's a longbow sticking out of a quiver on the horse. What class is he?

Seems to be a question my DM doesn't understand too well. DM seems to think it should be immediately apparent what class they are, but I can't figure it out. Discuss.

What world are you in?
If you're in a world where the D&D game rules are actually understood by the inhabitants (after all we have scientists who work to figure out how our world works, makes sense wizards might do the same in a D&D world and discover via mathematical analysis the d20 ruleset instead of the more vague "laws of magic" that wizards are supposed to use to develop their spells), then yes you should be able to figure it out with a Knowledge check, or by process of elimination based on what he does when you watch him for long enough (especially in combat).

If you're in a less metagamey world however, this becomes more difficult. As another said, horse + armor + sword suggests he definitely isn't a peasant and does know how to fight, and longbow suggests either military or wilderness training so some sort of martial class, chain (especially not described as recognizably mithral) instead of leather and no second weapon combined suggests to me (albeit not conclusively) fighter over ranger albeit no shield kind of leans back towards Ranger as a possibility, no described holy symbol leans away from paladin but otherwise there isn't quite enough for it to be "obvious".

As several others have said, if the world doesn't involve a metagamey understanding of the rules, in character what you will really have are skillsets, not classes, at least for the most, with only a few featuring radically different or distinct mechanics being recognizably distinct IC.

Ultimately, talk to the DM, as several others have already said.

[Mordaedil]

One of those times where the good old level titles from AD&D could actually kind of help, I suppose.

[Sebastian]

Actually, I see it more like this:
I am a computer programmer and identify myself as such. If I were a wizard, I would identify myself as such. If I were a cleric, not only would I identify myself as such I'd attempt to convert you, if I were a fighter I would identify myself as such, If I were a rogue I would well... pretend to be something else heh. But you get the picture. It is a profession, nothing more nothing less. So yes, you would have a concept of your profession.

Yes, but... you are probably an Expert, that "fighter" could be a Fighter, but could have just levels in the Warrior class, or Duelist, or other martial class with no blatant magical ability, that "cleric" could be an Adept or even just an Expert with rank in knowledge (religion) and Heal but he is running the local temple so he is the local 'cleric' of his god. and that without even considering multi-classing.

What a (n)pc identify as, and what classes he has levels in, can be totally different.