Ideal spells for each level in a D&D manual

[Zulgyan]

Basic/Expert D&D had 12 different spells for each level in the case of M-U and 8 in the case of cleric. This numbers went down with the higher level spells.

AD&D and OD&D has an irregular number of spells in each level and sometimes more tha 30 spells in a given level.

What do you think is ideal? If something like BX is done, with an uniform number of different spells for each level. How many is ideal? 10? 12? 18? 20?

So far, I have found that 12 is a very nice spot, but in some levels I seem to need some more. But I really like the elegance of an equal number of different spells in each level. It looks cool on the books.

[tank]

You know, I prefer an irregular number of spells for each level. It makes sense that there will be more lower level spells because everyone has access to more of them, and there are more lower level magic-users and clerics to boot. Having a tidied up system starts to feel less like OD&D to me; in fact, it reminds me a little of that discussion we had on six ability scores, six primes. Magic spells should be wild, unpredictable, and unregulated, which is really encouraged by the brief spell descriptions in M&M.

[Finarvyn]

Tunnels & Trolls has a pretty neat model similar to Tank's thought -- lots of lower level spells and progressively fewer as spell levels rise. Of course, T&T is a different game than D&D and their spell levels go up to 20 or so, but there are only 1-2 spells at the very top.

One thing I tried once in a campaign was to take each spell list and sub-divide it into two smaller spell lists. (I think it was an AD&D list, so 9 spell levels became 18.) What was neat about this was that each time a magic-user gained a level they got access to a new spell list. I like that in some ways a lot better than the current "new list every other level" model.

In general I would think that a dozen or so is a decent number. You want to allow some variety in spells but not to the extent that AD&D does it.

[dwayanu]

A consideration might be how you're using the lists.

Having started with the 3 LBBs, I early on got the impression that spell creation by players was a big part of the game. It's one thing that makes advancement in level groovy, because along the way you get enough gold to fund research. If an MU has allies, that can be a good investment for them, too.

Limited numbers, odd numbers, and leaving out of the "standard" lists some pretty obvious and nifty effects, may contribute to that.

[coffee]

Jul 1, 2008 7:02:25 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

In general I would think that a dozen or so is a decent number. You want to allow some variety in spells but not to the extent that AD&D does it.

Exactly.

I never really felt comfortable playing a magic-user in AD&D; there were just too many spells (and reading the spell descriptions puts me to sleep -- I don't know why, it always has).

But OD&D, I think I can get my head around that.

Plus, with fewer spells, it encourages the player to create his own. Of course, that's how the lists get bloated, but in a campaign-specific way, that's okay.

[dwayanu]

The "bloating" of a character's grimoire with unique spells IMO serves the end of an interesting game in ways that a longer standard list does not.

[coffee]

Jul 1, 2008 9:42:36 GMT -6 dwayanu said:

The "bloating" of a character's grimoire with unique spells IMO serves the end of an interesting game in ways that a longer standard list does not.

That's what I was trying to say, yeah.

[Deleted]

Jul 1, 2008 11:46:25 GMT -6 coffee said:

Jul 1, 2008 9:42:36 GMT -6 dwayanu said:

The "bloating" of a character's grimoire with unique spells IMO serves the end of an interesting game in ways that a longer standard list does not.

That's what I was trying to say, yeah.

Indeed. In fact, I only use the spells listed in M&M.

Everything else is research, research, research.

[hackman]

The idea of spells through research is something that occur to me read M & M for the first time. I remember thinking that the great thing about OD&D was the small number of spells and that this would force players to create their own spells.