To magic missile or not to magic missile

[Zulgyan]

I'm having hard time deciding if MAGIC MISSILE, presented in Supplement I, should be included in my game or not.

MAGIC MISSILE, such an iconic D&D spell, we all love it.

But, there are really some good reasons for not to including it in the game...

Without magic missile, magic-users got no direct damage spells until level 5, when fireball and lighting bolt become available.

Before level 5, they got mostly utilitarian spells. The certainly also have combat spells. But this spells are more "indirect" and require more thinking or group cooperation to use them correctly and to great effect. The spells are more "subtle", and aren't just slinging away magical arrows all over the place. They require more brain-work and creativity from part of the magic-user if he wants to become a successful adventurer.

Flavor-wise, I also like the concept of having less direct damage spells in the game, as magic missiles gets to be cast a lot in a regular D&D game where the spell is available. Without magic missile, the magic user is much more in the tone of the swords & sorcery genre, where magic is used in more subtle, indirect strategies instead of just blowing everything up. The wizard must rely on charmed servants, illusions, his own party as he casts a sleep spell, holding portals to escape from that mean random encounter, read thoughts to anticipate action, get invisible and do all kinds of nasty stuff, etc.

Ok, I hope I make my point. The inclusion of magic missile certainly changes the way magic-users are played, since it's a very common spell choice, because direct damage is easier to play on part of the player and does not need clever strategies.

What say you?

[foster1941]

Agree with every word of it. MM is not on the spell list in my D&D.

[jrients]

I agree that Magic Missile has come to be an iconic spell with deep meaning for many players. I say let those players spend the time and money researching the spell if they like it so much!

Slightly off-tangent, but my current houserules demand the kind of lateral thinking you desire by insisting that no single spell can be memorized more than once a day. Thus a 2nd level magic-user can't learn 2 sleep spells. The M-U must choose sleep and something else.

[Zulgyan]

jrients said:

I agree that Magic Missile has come to be an iconic spell with deep meaning for many players. I say let those players spend the time and money researching the spell if they like it so much!

Could certainly be the way of dealing with it as a referee.

[Zulgyan]

Moreover, Fireball and Lighting Bolt DO require more brain-work and strategic thinking, because you can't cast them in complete safety as MM.
In the dungeon environment, the party must have a coordinated assault plan, so as to not get blow up by their own fireball.
Lighting bolt is also a dangerous spell to be handled with care, because if bouncing becomes wild, it can kill more than just 1 of your party members or even yourself!

[carjack]

I also am leaving MM off the spell list. At lower levels, the wizard of distinction isn't casting puny little bolts of energy all over the place. He's cunning and also will have a few men-at-arms handy to do his fighting for him while he plots from behind a wall of armored men.

[Zulgyan]

Yeah!! That makes for a much more S&S spellcaster indeed!

Slightly off-tangent, but my current houserules demand the kind of lateral thinking you desire by insisting that no single spell can be memorized more than once a day. Thus a 2nd level magic-user can't learn 2 sleep spells. The M-U must choose sleep and something else.

Hmmmmm... more food for thought.

[coffee]

I absolutely agree. I won't have Magic Missile on my (beginning) spell lists, either.

I like the idea of a Magic-User hiding in the back of the party and not getting into melee. I also like the idea of him (or her) needing to be subtle, because that's all they've got.

A disturbing trend I've noticed lately (although this may just be in the games I've been in) is the creation of a whole class of "Battle-Mages", who can wear armor and cast lots of offensive spells. The guy becomes a mobile artillery piece, who can stand up to melee and still blast everything in sight. And the first thing blasted is any semblance of game balance.

To me, that's not D&D. (Actually, that's one of the reasons I'm here...)

Whoops, sorry to rant on like this. We now return you to your previously scheduled thread.

[makofan]

In OD&D, a magic user standing in the back and throwing daggers is very effective, as his daggers do the same damage as the fighting man's sword. Plus, good use of the Charm person spell provides you with your minions. Who needs MM? I agree with the others who say "you want it, research and create it".

[ffilz]

Jeff, interesting idea. One modification that might be interesting, that would make intelligence a bit more useful, allow a mage with a 15 intelligence to memorize a spell twice. Limited form is he may memorize one single spell twice (in that form, perhaps for each point of intelligence above 14 he can memorize one more spell twice).

How high level have you played with this rule? Do high level mages start to get frustrating to play because they have to start memorizing rarely useful spells?

One thing I would be inclined to do if I adopted such a rule is to allow mages access to all spells (and not use the Greyhawk rules).

Frank

[jrients]

I haven't played with it beyond 4th level. I should also note two other features of my house rules:

1) Starting at 2nd level magic-users may 'overcast', attempting to throw a spell they have in their books but not exhausting their normal allotment of spells. Overcasting requires a successful 2d6 roll similar to the charts from Chainmail. By overcasting, an M-U may achieve the same spell effect more than once a day. But it is risky. A low enough roll causes a spell fumble.

2) Upon achieving the title of Necromancer, an M-U in my rules gains *all* the abilities that a wizard gets in Chainmail, including the ability to throw either fireballs or lightning bolts in unlimited quantity.

[korgoth]

You guys almost have me convinced.

Does anybody have an argument for Magic Missile?

[Zulgyan]

Other than bringing me back fond memories of my first gaming years, I got none.

But I'm trying to get rid of all the purely-nostalgic preferences that old-schoolers are accused of so often.

[Deleted]

korgoth said:

Does anybody have an argument for Magic Missile?

I've got nothing. The only thing I can say (& the "defense" is pretty flimsy), is that it gives the burgeoning Magic-User (1) complete & direct offensive spell to use to aid the group. If a player isn't creative enough to formulate & execute a plan with the other spells available to them, it provides a "saftey net" (so to speak) that they can use. But then again, if they want it so bad, research it.

As for your comment on mages & armor, coffee, I agree to a certain point--I notice the "walking artillery" as a trend also. Now with that being said, I've allowed (for a long time) Magic-User's IMC to utilize Leather Armor, as well as being able to use any one-handed melee weapon. The reasoning behind this is:
My campaign world is extremely low-magic; it's not that it's unavailable, but it's that there are very few people in the world with "the gift". Magic IMC is also never trusted, & is considered demonic in nature--evil absolute. More than one player's unfortunate PC was killed after the townsfolk discovered a "deciever" flaunting their power in their midst (this also goes for Clerics as well, but that requires a little more explanation, & I'll save it for another post). Magic, either of the "arcane" or the "divine" nature is treated with fear, hatred, even outright violence. Now, there is always the chance that the M-U can "prove them worng" by her/his actions, but at any rate, they'll never be asked over for dinner, or even allowed in the house, so to speak. Therefore, the reason I allow limited armor & extra weapons is that gaining spells is very difficult, & because of that, they tend to learn a little more about martial training then other M-U's in other campaigns--but "Battle-Mages" they are not. Of course all of this is also campaign-world specific to me, & I personally enjoy playing a classic Magic-User (which never happens, because nobody else runs OD&D or R.C. around these here parts anymore... ).

Just my op

Great topic Zulgyan, BTW!

[korgoth]

In (the current incarnation of) Xulrua, I'm collapsing the Cleric spell list into the MU spell list.

I think in lieu of Magic Missle I'll just allow Cause Light Wounds to be ranged. That's cooler anyway. Darth Vader doesn't shoot some dart at you. He just finds your lack of faith disturbing.

[Deleted]

korgoth said:

Darth Vader doesn't shoot some dart at you. He just finds your lack of faith disturbing.

Nice. Truer words have never been spoken.

[coffee]

oltekos said:

As for your comment on mages & armor, coffee, I agree to a certain point--I notice the "walking artillery" as a trend also. Now with that being said, I've allowed (for a long time) Magic-User's IMC to utilize Leather Armor, as well as being able to use any one-handed melee weapon.

And that's fine because that's the way ALL magic-users are treated in your game. Your game, your rules, I don't have a problem.

But what I was talking about is a guy (and really, it's one guy) who has a specific Battle Mage Class in his game (I think it's a prestige class in 3E). You can also play a regular mage, although nobody every wants to.

This goes along with another discussion about the styles of play. I prefer an old-school exploration style of play; this guy is clearly going for the all out combat thing. Just fighting is Boring, with a capital Bor.

Give me some clever exploration any old day.

But hey, that's just me.

[Deleted]

I totally agree, coffee. IMO, if someone wants to play a spellcasting warrior, play a Cleric--you get (almost) the best of both worlds. If melee is your poison, play a fighting-man.

And If I'm thinking of the same class that your mentioning, it's the "Warmage" from the 3rd. ed. "D&D Miniatures Handbook"--a complete 1-20 archetype.

Game balance=0.
Not using it at all=priceless.
There's some things money can't buy...

[jrients]

For the record, I'm fond of the Moldvay Basic version of Magic Missile. It has a duration of one turn, which I have interpreted as meaning one could whip up one or more volleys of missiles and they would hang around for 10 minutes or until you discharged them, whichever came first. Imagine coming around a corner in a dungeon and seeing an evil wizard with a half-dozen glowing arrows floating around his head!

But again, that's Moldvay Basic and not OD&D.

[coffee]

jrients said:

But again, that's Moldvay Basic and not OD&D.

Ah, but it could be OD&D. And that's a big part of what I love about it -- you can do anything you want!

[Finarvyn]

In my campaign I have a house rule for a "Zap spell" which is a much-weakened sort of Magic Missle. I think I posted something on this in a "House Rules" thread somewhere.

How the "Zap" spell works:
* I usually make this a free spell; no spell slot needed. Otherwise, I have played this by giving them a "Zap Wand" instead, or make the Zap Spell cost 1/5 of a 1st level spell, or other minimal cost to the mage.
* The Magic-user has to roll to hit just like a bow or sling, and Zap does only 1d4 damage.
* The spell gives the illusion that the MU gets to do more, but doesn't tend to have a big effect on combat.

My reasoning is this:
1. magic-users don't have much to do once their spells run out, and I like to run low-level games so they don't have that many spells anyway.
2. Magic-users are best kept out of melee, so they need something missle-like so they can inflict damage at a distance. That way they can "do stuff" throughout the adventure.
3. I could just let Magic-users use a sling or a bow, but both seem sort of non-MU in style. Something magical would be neat.
4. A spell with a d4 damage won't unbalance most combats significantly, particluarly if the MU has to roll to hit anyway. And such a spell is more in character with a MU anyway.

Just my two cents on the matter.

[foster1941]

Something that's mechanically identical to a sling but "feel magical" -- very clever idea!

[ffilz]

Yea, I think this is great. If you do it as an ability, you could still populate wands (perhaps with fewer than 1d100 charges) that do d6 or even, wow, d8. Perhaps even with a +1 or +2 to hit. I.e. basically a magic weapon version of their "missile" weapon.

Or heck, just let a magic user "fire" magic arrows, for d6 damage with the bonus to hit and damage the arrow has.

I'd be inclined to use this as a totally free ability.

Frank

[Zulgyan]

Hmmmm... I'm not so keen to that kind of things. Gotta think about it. It looks too high magic for my tastes. It reminds PC games where the wizards never stops shooting magic bolts and you just press the button like a madman.

Gotta think about it. I think it makes the M-U far more stronger. Because in the game, they are limited to daggers.

I would do this kind of stuff if there were some kind of limit, such as 3 per day, etc.

It's a purely aesthetic issue I got.

YMMV ;D

[coffee]

I've seen a lot of magic-users throw daggers (especially in our online games). They can use them, by the book, and they give them a ranged attack.

On the other hand, it's not a long range, so they still run the risk of getting into melee and getting killed. But hey, they have about the same number of hit points as everybody else (especially at first level).

[coffee]

Hey, speaking of Magic Missile...

I played in an AD&D game at worldwide D&D day. One of the players (a guy who doesn't seem quite all there, if you know what I mean) wanted to play a mage. When he found out that the pre-gen didn't have magic missile, he decided to play a thief instead.

Well, this same player was in my game today. When he got to choosing his spells, he was a bit miffed that magic missile wasn't on the list in Men & Magic. He asked about it, and I said in firm, DM voice "Ain't no such spell".

I was amazed when he shut up about it and got on with things. And he later used his charm person to good effect.

So it can be done; you just have to be firm with them.

[calithena]

My argument for including magic missile is as follows:

- at low level, it's a terrible spell chioce. Sleep and Charm Person are way, way better, just for starters, and your averagely bright player can probably get more use out of Hold Portal (this at least can save a party from certain death once) and several others. So putting it on the list is like 'hey, sucker, pick me! you can hurt something!'

- at higher level, it's sometimes just the thing a caster needs to take out those enemies that are immune to fire and lightning, yet there's also more flexibility to take the utility spells.

Not a great argument, and I'm not a big MM fan, but I don't think including it really hurts anything. It's just not that good a spell. In fact, I've often let it do 2d6 or the like just to make it more tempting to take at low level.

[Zulgyan]

calithena said:

- at higher level, it's sometimes just the thing a caster needs to take out those enemies that are immune to fire and lightning, yet there's also more flexibility to take the utility spells.

No magic missile can help in keeping the fighting-men more important at high level!