BrOSR

Well, the old school advancement always ended up meaning that much of the level range might as well not exist for most people. That didn't much matter with fighters (a third level fighter and a ninth level fighter only played differently to the extent their density of magic items had probably changed significantly) but it always felt odd that all those spell levels above third might as well not be there for most people. I'm not always comfortable with the modern advancement pace, but I can see why a lot of people prefer it.

(As I recall I got to see 7th level spells barely with my most advanced character before I bailed out of D&D, but that was after playing him a lot more than most people probably ever got to).
Yup. Although I'm sympathetic to the view that the extra three spell levels (7-9) added in Greyhawk are somewhat superfluous and the original spells levels (which M-Us can reach all of by 12th, and Clerics by 10th level) are enough for most people's needs, we're still usually talking about years of play to even get there unless your DM is unusually generous.

IME most of us who came along in the 80s took Gary's remarks in the DMG and that editorial very much to heart, and I never had a character earn their way past the single digit levels until 3E.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Well, the old school advancement always ended up meaning that much of the level range might as well not exist for most people. That didn't much matter with fighters (a third level fighter and a ninth level fighter only played differently to the extent their density of magic items had probably changed significantly) but it always felt odd that all those spell levels above third might as well not be there for most people. I'm not always comfortable with the modern advancement pace, but I can see why a lot of people prefer it.

(As I recall I got to see 7th level spells barely with my most advanced character before I bailed out of D&D, but that was after playing him a lot more than most people probably ever got to).
Well, after a year, or maybe a year and a half, you'd be at 9 to 11th level. That means fifth level spells. Though perhaps the schedule is a bit aggressive. Maybe two years is a better thought. That is playing every other week on average.

Personally, I kind of like that range of advancement. Now 14th level will take you another equal amount of time. That is of course another playstyle choice though I suppose. I am very blessed that the common style was the one I liked when I started. If 5e had come first I might not have stuck with roleplaying.
 

Yup. Although I'm sympathetic to the view that the extra three spell levels (7-9) added in Greyhawk are somewhat superfluous and the original spells levels (which M-Us can reach all of by 12th, and Clerics by 10th level) are enough for most people's needs, we're still usually talking about years of play to even get there unless your DM is unusually generous.

Well, it was to be noted I only barely ever saw those 7th level spells (if I played that character three times after I got them I'd be surprised), but even getting to the point of using 4th level spells was far from trivial.

IME most of us who came along in the 80s took Gary's remarks in the DMG and that editorial very much to heart, and I never had a character earn their way past the single digit levels until 3E.

And I suspect for a lot of people that felt like kind of being robbed; that even those 4th to 6th level spells were, effectively, walled off for the GM.
 

On criticism seemed to be super rapid advancement. That idea though has won out these days everywhere. Campaigns are often one year or less and they end at or near 20th level.

I'm in that camp. And it has nothing to do with wanting the young 'uns to suffer like I used to. It's because I have fond memories of how momentous it used to be to earn a level, and I miss that feeling.
 

IME most of us who came along in the 80s took Gary's remarks in the DMG and that editorial very much to heart, and I never had a character earn their way past the single digit levels until 3E.
I did not have the same experience. That might have been because my groups had a lot more BX and BECMI influence to them, though. Particularly Mentzer -- when 3 of the 5 boxed sets don't start until the mid-teen levels, it does subtlety communicate to you that maybe these levels are supposed to be played. Same of course with AD&D's upper level spells, more powerful monsters, and epic magic items & artifacts, I suppose.

Particularly starting as kids (and not having access to any of the admonitions against high level play except what was in the rulebooks proper), we initially didn't get the notion that the game was more focused on the single-digit levels. Once we got to those levels and found that much of the system didn't necessarily work as well as when we were low-level dungeon-crawlers, I think we retroactively got some of it.
I'm in that camp. And it has nothing to do with wanting the young 'uns to suffer like I used to. It's because I have fond memories of how momentous it used to be to earn a level, and I miss that feeling.
I'm moving towards slower advancement as well, but for different reasons.
Decades of experience with any number of TTRPGs (including many that don't have levels), other games (physical and digital), and even narrative fiction like TV shows is teaching me that racing for the endgame position isn't necessarily the most fun. Most things work best in the messy middle where everything is established and all of the pieces are up and running, but nothing is really running away with the system/plot/etc.
Advancement ought to serve a purpose (sometimes just variety, but either way, some purpose) or else I don't necessarily need it. I'm almost tempted to run a game where there is no level-up and most of the advancement is acquiring a new spell or magic item -- because those almost always have a really enjoyable 'look at this new thing I got!' feel to them.
 

Like the introduction to the PHB?

"Naturally, every attempt has been made to provide all of the truly essential information necessary for the game: the skeleton and muscle which each DM will flesh out to create the unique campaign. You will find no pretentious dictums herein, no baseless limits arbitrarily placed on female strength or male charisma, no ponderous combat systems for greater "realism", there isn't a hint of a spell point system whose record keeping would warm the heart of a monomaniacal statistics lover, or anything else of the sort."--Gygax, AD&D Player's Handbook, p. 6
It was a while since I read this book but I'd call at least "you will find no pretentious dictums herein, no baseless limits arbitrarily placed on female strength[...], no ponderous combat systems for greater "realism"" are all lies because those things do exist in the book.

Well, okay, I'll give him a rare inch: the ponderous combat systems is in the other book.
 


It was a while since I read this book but I'd call at least "you will find no pretentious dictums herein, no baseless limits arbitrarily placed on female strength[...], no ponderous combat systems for greater "realism"" are all lies because those things do exist in the book.

Well, okay, I'll give him a rare inch: the ponderous combat systems is in the other book.
HIS dicta weren't pretentious, you see!
HIS limits placed on female strength clearly not baseless or arbitrary!
And of course the ponderous combat system in the DMG very clearly and explicitly wasn't trying for realism. ;)
 

HIS dicta weren't pretentious, you see!
HIS limits placed on female strength clearly not baseless or arbitrary!
And of course the ponderous combat system in the DMG very clearly and explicitly wasn't trying for realism. ;)
And of course psionic points are completely different from  spell points!
 

And of course psionic points are completely different from  spell points!
Interestingly while I was checking my sources for comment #97, I came across a couple of forum references to how Dave Arneson said that Blackmoor originally used a spell point system, and in that same letter to A&E in July '75, Gary opined that spell points would be a more flexible and logical system, but would be too complex and detailed.

Gary Gygax, A&E #2 (July 1975):

We allow magic-users to employ the number of spells shown on the table, so a 1st level m-u gets exactly one 1st level spell to use once before he must go back to his books and prepare to use the spell once again -- or a spell once again. To allow unlimited use of the spell is to make the m-u's too powerful. There is a better solution, of course; one I have been aware of since the first. That is to utilize a point system based on the m-u's basic abilities and his or her level. Spell cost is then taken as a function of the spell and the circumstances in which it is cast and possibly how much force is put into the spell. All that would have required a great deal of space and been far more complex to handle, so I opted for the simple solution.

But in April '76 in The Strategic Review, in that detailed article on the D&D magic system, Gary makes no mention of spell points at all.

And by January 1980 in The Dragon #33, AD&D's Magic System: How and Why It Works, he openly disparages spell points as unbalanced:

When it came time to translate the rather cut-and-dried stuff of Chainmail’s “Fantasy Supplement” to D&D, far more selection and flexibility had to be delivered, for the latter game was free-form. This required me to back up several steps to a point where the figure began a career which would eventually bring him or her to the state where they would equal (and eventually exceed) a Chainmail wizard. Similarly,some basis for the use of magic had to be created so that a system of spell acquisition could be devised. Where should the magic power come from? Literature gave many possible answers, but most were unsuitable for a game, for they demanded that the spell-caster spend an inordinate amount of time preparing the spell. No viable adventurer character could be devised where a week or two of preliminary steps were demanded for the conjuration of some not particularly mighty spell. On the other hand, spell-casters could not be given license to broadcast magic whenever and wherever they chose.

This left me with two major areas to select from. The internal power, or manna, system where each spell-caster uses energy from within to effect magic, requires assigning a total point value to each such character’s manna, and a cost in points to each spell. It is tedious to keep track of, difficult to police, and allows Magic-Users far too much freedom where a broad range of spells are given. If spell points were to be used, it would require that either selection be limited or all other characters and monsters be strengthened. Otherwise, spell-users would quickly come to dominate the game, and participants would desire to play only that class of character. (As a point of reference, readers are referred to the handling of psionic abilities as originally treated in Eldritch Wizardry. Therein, psionic manna was assumed, the internal power usable totap external sources, and the range of possible powers thus usable was sharply limited.)

Having read widely in the fantasy genre since 1950, I opted instead for the oft-used system which assumes that magic comes from powerlocked within certain words and phrases which are uttered to release the force. This mnemonic power system was exceedingly well articulated by Jack Vance in his superb The Eyes of The Overworld and Dying Earth novels, as well as in various short stories. In memorizing the magical words, the brain of the would-be spell-caster is taxed by the charged force of these syllables. To increase capacity, the spell-caster must undergo training, study, and mental discipline.

This is not to say that he or she ever understands the words, but the capacity to hold them in the memory and to speak them correctly increases thus. The magic words, in turn, trigger energy which causes the spell to work.

The so-called “Vancian” magic system allows a vast array of spells. Each is assigned a level (mnemonic difficulty) rating, and experience grades are used to expand the capacity of the spell-caster. The use of this particular system allows more restrictions upon spell-casting character types, of course, while allowing freedom to assign certain spells to lower difficulty factor to keep the character type viable in its early stages. It also has the distinct advantages of requiring that spell-users select their magic prior to knowing what they must face, and limiting bookkeeping to a simple list of spells which are crossed off as expended.

The mnemonic spell system can be explained briefly thus: Magic works because certain key words and phrases (sounds) unlock energy from elsewhere. The sounds are inscribed in arcane texts or religious works available to spell-users. Only training and practice will allow increased memory capacity, thus allowing more spells to be used. Once uttered, the sounds discharge their power, and this discharge not only unlocks energy from elsewhere, but it also wipes all memory of the particular words or phrases from the speaker’s brain. Finally, the energy manifested by the speaking of the sounds will take a set form,depending on the pronunciation and order of the sounds. So a Sleep spell or a Charm Monster spell is uttered and the magic effected. The mind is wiped clean of the memory of what the sounds were, but by careful concentration and study later, the caster can again memorize these keys.

When Advanced Dungeons & Dragons was in the conceptualization stages some three years ago, I realized that while the“Vancian” system was the best approach to spell-casting in fantasy adventure games, D&D did not go far enough in defining, delineating, and restricting its use. Merely having words was insufficient, so elements of other systems would have to be added to make a better system. While it could be similar in concept to the spell-casting of D&D,it had to be quite different in all aspects, including practice, in order to bring it up to a higher level of believability and playability with respect to other classes.
He then goes into a detailed discussion of verbal, somatic, and material components and how he thinks they make spells more balanced, believable and of "realistic flavor", and toward the end goes into a bit of speculation about how those components might be detailed more, categorized and regularized in the future, and extrapolated on to expand the magic system further.

Whereas Dave Arneson, for example in Pegasus issue 1 (1981), was still talking up the virtues of spell points and saying that's how magic was originally supposed to work in D&D.
"I also wanted to get back to using a spell point magic which had been in the original system proposed for D&D and I thought spell point superior to the system that was used (as well as simpler)."

Although if you read First Fantasy Campaign, it indicates that Blackmoor primarily used spell formulae, where you needed material components/ingredients to power the spells, such as "Super Berries". FFC also indicates that Constitution factored into how many spells you could cast.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top