Do you let magic-users cast spells in hand-to-hand combat?

[delta]

I tried asking this previously, but based on the prior comment thread, it seems like most people interpreted that question differently than I intended. Here I'm trying to clarify the situation.

Do you let magic-users cast standard spells while in an immediate, direct, hand-to-hand combat situation? For example, say you have an open room with no other combatants. One magic-user is being fought by one enemy fighter, and they stand toe-to-toe with each other. The fighter is alert, active, armed with a sword, and within sword-swinging range of the magic-user (e.g., say 5 feet; or base-to-base miniature contact). The fighter is intent on cutting the magic-user at the earliest opportunity, as violently and efficiently as possible, while protecting themselves as competently as they can. Meanwhile, the magic-user would like to cast a spell such as a charm, hold, polymorph, or something like that which would be useful to end the fight.

On their turn, can the magic-user cast one of their spells in this situation in your game?

Edit: I'd suggest that responses like "if the fighter goes first and hits then the magic-user can't cast" be recorded as "Maybe, depends on some die-roll".

[delta]

And feel free to comment on any related issues.

For example: Is the answer different if the opponent is another magic-user, armed and trying to strike with a dagger?

[tkdco2]

The magic-user can cast the spell, but he loses it if he is struck before he can complete it.

[delta]

Nov 22, 2023 12:33:44 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

The magic-user can cast the spell, but he loses it if he is struck before he can complete it.

Thanks for the reply. I'd think to interpret that as "depends on some die-roll"?

[waysoftheearth]

By the book (and assuming OD&D and/or Holmes-like play), I would say: No. MU's cannot cast spells in melee contact.

CM2 p29 (and CM3 p32): "In order to cast and maintain any spell, a Wizard must be both stationary and undisturbed by attack upon his person".

Holmes p29: "If a magic-user is not involved in the melee he can get another spell off ... If he is personally attacked he can't concentrate to use his magic but must draw his dagger and defend his skin! However, if the magic-user had some magical device--such as a wand or staff--it could be used in lieu of the dagger as an attack weapon."

However, a slightly more nuanced view might be:

If this was the first moment of initial contact, then there could be a question of whether the MU could throw their spell before contact is made. This would likely be situational, and might come down to encounter distance, move rates, relative dexterity scores, and/or an initiative die (as suggested by M&M, the FAQ, and Holmes).


I was tempted to go with the "depends on some dice rolls" option because combat encounters almost always involves that initial step of "getting into contact" where the MU might be able to use a magic spell before contact.

On the other hand, it appears the OP describes a situation where the MU is already in melee contact.
So, I voted no (although more realistically i would say: "No, almost never").

[jamesmishler]

Yes, they can cast spells in melee, but, in my initiative system, spells always go after all movement, combat, and all other actions.

So, in your example, the fighter would always get a chance to attack the magic-user first; no need to roll initiative. If the magic-user is hit and survives, his spell is lost.

If the fighter misses, the magic-user may cast his spell.

Here's my initiative order:

INITIATIVE: Spellcasting must be declared BEFORE initiative is rolled. Initiative is group d6. The Dungeon Master then determines order of movement & combat based on circumstances, Dexterity, and movement speed. Spells go off after all combat. Order of initiative is:

1. Declare Spellcasting
2. Roll Initiative
3. Winners move and do combat
4. Losers move and do combat
5. Winners cast spells
6. Losers cast spells

[delta]

Nov 22, 2023 19:59:40 GMT -6 jamesmishler said:

Yes, they can cast spells in melee, but, in my initiative system, spells always go after all movement, combat, and all other actions. So, in your example, the fighter would always get a chance to attack the magic-user first; no need to roll initiative. If the magic-user is hit and survives, his spell is lost.

Thanks for the reply, this was helpful.

I've edited the question a bit to suggest that rulings like this be recorded as "Maybe, depends on some die-roll".

[delta]

Nov 22, 2023 17:10:26 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

By the book (and assuming OD&D and/or Holmes-like play), I would say: No. MU's cannot cast spells in melee contact...

Right, and Moldvay Basic alludes to a similar ruling: "... because the words and gestures must be repeated exactly, spells cannot be cast while performing any other action (such as walking or fighting)" (p. B15).

[waysoftheearth]

FWIW, CM and Holmes both suggest that that merely being "attacked" is enough to prevent spell casting. They don't say the MU has to be successfully hit, although that's a common enough house rule.

[ThrorII]

I play B/X, which might apply differently to OD&D. If they win initiative: Yes. If they loose initiative, yes IF they don't get hit. They cannot move while casting.

[hamurai]

Nope.

This is what's crucial for me:

The fighter is alert, active, armed with a sword, and within sword-swinging range of the magic-user
The melee is pretty much already happening.

If this was a longer campaign and a life/death situation for the unlucky MU, I might allow some dice roll, or better yet, a choice to sacrifice an item (like a wand or grimoire) to save their hide for one round to be able to cast that spell. But that would also depend on why this situation happened in the first place. If it was pure stupidity/greed/arrogance I might just let the player learn the lesson.

[talysman]

Nov 22, 2023 22:15:07 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

FWIW, CM and Holmes both suggest that that merely being "attacked" is enough to prevent spell casting. They don't say the MU has to be successfully hit, although that's a common enough house rule.

That's the way I interpret it. Spell casting is interrupted by any attempt to engage the MU for any reason: attack, splash with a bucket of water, shouting in the MU's ear, etc. If I'm feeling generous, I might allow a player to attempt to complete the spell, but any act against the MU, including an attack, succeeds without a roll.

My off the top of my head ruling on whether a spell is ruined by an attack: if the damage roll is higher than the spell level, the spell is lost and ruined.

Surprise, of course, creates a different situation. A spellcaster who surprises an opponent is not in melee and therefore can cast one spell.

[waysoftheearth]

Related question:

Can various monsters use their spell-like powers in melee, or are they subject to the same restrictions as M-Us?

E.g., it seems (from recent discussion) that a medusa could use their gaze attack in melee, but could a harpy sing in melee?

[rhialto]

Nov 27, 2023 17:59:23 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

Related question:

Can various monsters use their spell-like powers in melee, or are they subject to the same restrictions as M-Us?

E.g., it seems (from recent discussion) that a medusa could use their gaze attack in melee, but could a harpy sing in melee?

I think it's dependent on the monster and the power, but in the case of a harpy: I would rule it could not try and sing to attract a victim already in melee with it (then touch it to charm it). The fact that a creature is already engaged in melee with a harpy implies it's already indisposed to being charmed by that harpy. Now another, non-engaged harpy, trying to attract the engaged victim, would be tricky...but I'd still probably rule no effective singing. It seems to me to be a pre-combat charm power. But I do think a medusa could use its gaze power in melee, and simply because it's not charm-related.

[delta]

Nov 22, 2023 22:15:07 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

FWIW, CM and Holmes both suggest that that merely being "attacked" is enough to prevent spell casting. They don't say the MU has to be successfully hit, although that's a common enough house rule.

Without wanting to bias the results, another thing on my mind is that Swords & Spells also says: "Similarly, a spell, even from a device, cannot be cast if the spell caster is engaged in melee" (p. 11). That's the same language I used in my prior poll, to which most everyone said "yes, allowed".

[delta]

Nov 27, 2023 17:59:23 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

Related question:

Can various monsters use their spell-like powers in melee, or are they subject to the same restrictions as M-Us?

E.g., it seems (from recent discussion) that a medusa could use their gaze attack in melee, but could a harpy sing in melee?

That's a fair question. I think based on intent I'd judge, "yes they can". The similar dragon-subdual examples in both OD&D and AD&D have a party strike in melee twice (for subdual), and then the dragon still gets to breathe on them while they're in direct contact with ready weapons.

I might wrap that into the "devices like wands" distinction from "spells you cast"? Now, even that's prohibited in Swords & Spells (p. 11, which I quoted above), but it seems to be reversed in the AD&D DMG (p. 65: "Because spell casting will be so difficult, most magic-users and clerics will opt to use magical devices whenever possible in melee, if they are wise").

The harpy's a bit of a corner case because, narrowly read, arguably the singing only serves to draw people into melee range in the first place; once in melee, the goal is to hit (touch) them which is how the charm gets laid.

[howandwhy99]

To me, it's clear. Melee isn't only a combat range. Melee is a continuous action. With no means of engaging in melee a weapon-less character cannot defend themselves. The other opponent resolves their attack immediately (or delayed if they so choose, waiting for a better target).

It doesn't matter if the wizard is an archmage or casting a combat spell against the attacker. They are not in melee. The melee is being done upon them.

I voted dice roll. If the attacker misses, even with the penalty for not defending, the caster could complete their spell in time.

[waysoftheearth]

"The melee is being done upon them" makes no sense to me

In general use, a "melee" refers to a disorderly situation. Especially a disorderly crowd of people. Often involving fighting---with or without weapons. In that sense, a melee isn't something that is done to someone.

CM uses the term "meleed" to refer to figures that are contacted by enemy, implying that a melee occurs between them. E.g., If archers or longbowmen do not move and are not meleed at the end of a turn they may fire twice. Also note: Missiles cannot be fired into a melee. I.e., into a melee situation.

In relatively recent (more recent than CM, anyways) RPG parlance, a "melee attack" refers to an attack that happens in the context of a melee (as opposed to a "missile attack" which typically happens outside the context of a melee). Perhaps "melee attack" is what was intended?

The way I see it, a fighter can melee attack a M-U only when they are both in a melee. I.e., when a M-U is meleed by a fighter, both of them are then in a melee (without or without weapons), during which they can melee attack each other.

[rustic313]

In general, for me, spells must be declared prior to your opponent's action; if you take damage or are in melee the spell is spoiled; and casting requires your whole round (no moving).

I allow a small selection of spells to be cast as a standard action without being pre-declared, equivalent to an attack.

"Cast Quick Spells. Cast a cantrip, a spell with a range of “touch,” or a spell three levels below your maximum spell level. These do not need to be declared in advance and are not spoilt by taking damage."

My cantrip list draws heavily on Chainmail wizard abilities and iconic spells through the ages. Notable offensive spells would be "flaming sword" (powerful melee attack that has bonuses against the creatures in the CM Fantasy Combat Table that wizards are good vs), Shocking Grasp, etc.

The "touch" spell list is somewhat limited but has a few things like Burning Hands, Chill Touch, Scare, and a few utility/defensive spells.

The three levels below your spell level thing lets a powerful level 7 wizard start using any first level spell they want in melee -- magic missiles to the face, sleep, etc. This is the point where fighters start sweeping mobs up handily so it doesn't really seem to be an issue. An archmage with access to sixth level spells can sling Fireballs in melee -- dangerous stuff but not world breaking, and certainly representative of what we see a Chainmail caster doing on the battlefield.

[waysoftheearth]

Dec 6, 2023 17:57:36 GMT -6 rustic313 said:

...and certainly representative of what we see a Chainmail caster doing on the battlefield.

I guess this largely depends on what is implied by "representative".

A CM-Wizard's fireball functions as a large catapult hit (with saving throws for fantastic types), and presumably occurs during the artillery and/or missile segment of the turn. In the melee segment of the turn the CM-Wizard either fights as a Wizard vs fantastic opponents, or as two AF (or MH if mounted) vs normal types. In other words, the CM-Wizard doesn't throw fireballs during the melee segment of the turn. It seems to me the continuation (or not!) of this CM-distinction over into D&D-land is a fundamental element of this discussion here