memorizing the same spell more than once

[Zenopus]

Is there anything in OD&D that suggests you can or can't do this? In AD&D, of course, you can memorize the same spell twice - but was it always played this way from the beginning in OD&D?

I can't find anything concrete in Holmes. When I was a kid I assumed you could only memorize each spell one time. The part with Malchor doesn't really say either way, but I think the implication is towards memorizing a different spell at second level. And all of the spell-casters in the Sample Dungeon and B2 memorize each spell only once. Not until I played AD&D did I learn otherwise.

I was thinking that if you limit the spell-caster this way you might get more use of a range of spells. Healing would certainly be harder for clerics, but they would be less of healbots.

[llenlleawg]

In the article "Questions Most Frequently Asked About Dungeons & Dragons Rules" in The Strategic Review 1:2 (1975): 4, Gygax wrote the following:

A magic-user can use a given spell but once during any given day, even if he is carrying his books with him. This is not to say that he cannot equip himself with a multiplicity of the same spell so as to have its use more than a single time. Therefore, a magic-user could, for example, equip himself with three sleep spells, each of which would be usable but once. He could also have a scroll of let us say two spells, both of which are also sleep spells. As the spelIs were read from the scrolls they would disappear, so in total that magic-user would have a maximum of five sleep spells to use that day. If he had no books with him there would be no renewal of spells on the next day, as the game assumes that the magic-use gains spells by preparations such as memorizing incantations, and once the spell is spoken that particular memory pattern is gone completely. ln a similar manner spells are inscribed on a scroll, and as the words are uttered they vanish from the scroll.

I know this does not precisely answer your questions about what the OD&D rules themselves precisely say, and that Gygax was never really playing precisely according to any of the published rules, but this above is about as close to "by the book" OD&D on your question as you can get!

For what it's worth, I think there is much to be commended in not allowing the memorization of multiple "copies" of the same spell, pace Gygax, and there is certainly nothing game-breaking about it. The fact is that the cleric can never really be a successful "healbot" in OD&D, despite his reputation to be so. If only using the LBBs, he only has two spells that cure wounds, at 1st and 4th, and he never gets too many spells of those levels anyway. The party is better off trying to find him a staff of healing than relying rather too much on the few cure spells he could memorize anyway. They're nice in a pinch, but without the spell bonus for wisdom in AD&D, relying on the cleric to provide healing for the whole party is not always the best strategy.

[Deleted]

Apr 29, 2012 15:30:46 GMT -6 llenlleawg said:

The fact is that the cleric can never really be a successful "healbot" in OD&D, despite his reputation to be so. If only using the LBBs, he only has two spells that cure wounds, at 1st and 4th, and he never gets too many spells of those levels anyway. The party is better off trying to find him a staff of healing than relying rather too much on the few cure spells he could memorize anyway. They're nice in a pinch, but without the spell bonus for wisdom in AD&D, relying on the cleric to provide healing for the whole party is not always the best strategy.

Cure Light Wounds: During the course of one full turn this spell will remove hits from a wounded character (including elves, dwarves, etc.). A die is rolled, one pip added, and the resultant total subtracted from the hits points the character has taken. Thus from 2-7 hit points of damage can be removed.

Cure Serious Wounds: This spell is like a Light Wound spell, but the effects are double, so two dice are rolled and one pip is added to each die. Therefore, from 4 to 14 hit points will be removed by this spell.

Read straight from MEN & MAGIC, the Cleric spell lasts a whole turn (10 rounds / 10 minutes) and can be used to heal multiple characters during that time.

[James Maliszewski]

When I first started playing D&D, I assumed one could not memorize the same spell twice, but I became disavowed of that notion later, after I saw an NPC in some AD&D module that had magic missile(x2) or something similar in his write-up. Nowadays, I favor not allowing memorizing the same spell twice, since it leads to more variety and presents a greater challenge.

[Deleted]

Apr 30, 2012 16:22:37 GMT -6 @radagast said:

Read straight from MEN & MAGIC, the Cleric spell lasts a whole turn (10 rounds / 10 minutes) and can be used to heal multiple characters during that time.

That's not how I interpret the quote. The phrase "a wounded character" sounds very singular to me. As for the turn being 10 minutes, there's another thread roundabouts that debates the interpretation of such terminology in the LBB, with there being combat turns and movement/exploration turns.

[Deleted]

As it was played in Greyhawk, memorizing the same spell multiple times was always allowed.

The Cure spells only worked on one target.

As far as the Cleric and "trying to find him a staff of healing," good luck. I think in 3 years of Greyhawk we found ONE.

However, competent alchemists can make potions of Cure Light Wounds. We carried dozens of those.

[thedegenerateelite]

Cure spells can be cast only on a single character, that has always been the interpretation. However, Cures can be cast ahead of combat to gradually heal the character over 10 rounds for the value rolled. I believe that this is the preferred method of use in the rules, making them preventive maintenance for the fighters rather than a magic "band-aid" after combat. It also would prevent interruption of casting during combat.


Page 19 of Men and Magic clearly states that the number of spells for level chart shows how many spells can be memorized each day and that they can only be USED once on the same day. This means that each spell slot if you will, can hold one spell, that can be cast one time. What the slot holds is up to the player.

Loose wording by Gygax and even looser interpretation doesn't change the implication, as verified in the FAQ from the review mentioned above.

[Zenopus]

Apr 29, 2012 15:30:46 GMT -6 llenlleawg said:

In the article "Questions Most Frequently Asked About Dungeons & Dragons Rules" in The Strategic Review 1:2 (1975): 4, Gygax wrote the following:

A magic-user can use a given spell but once during any given day, even if he is carrying his books with him. This is not to say that he cannot equip himself with a multiplicity of the same spell so as to have its use more than a single time. Therefore, a magic-user could, for example, equip himself with three sleep spells, each of which would be usable but once. He could also have a scroll of let us say two spells, both of which are also sleep spells. As the spelIs were read from the scrolls they would disappear, so in total that magic-user would have a maximum of five sleep spells to use that day. If he had no books with him there would be no renewal of spells on the next day, as the game assumes that the magic-use gains spells by preparations such as memorizing incantations, and once the spell is spoken that particular memory pattern is gone completely. ln a similar manner spells are inscribed on a scroll, and as the words are uttered they vanish from the scroll.

I know this does not precisely answer your questions about what the OD&D rules themselves precisely say, and that Gygax was never really playing precisely according to any of the published rules, but this above is about as close to "by the book" OD&D on your question as you can get!

For what it's worth, I think there is much to be commended in not allowing the memorization of multiple "copies" of the same spell, pace Gygax, and there is certainly nothing game-breaking about it. The fact is that the cleric can never really be a successful "healbot" in OD&D, despite his reputation to be so. If only using the LBBs, he only has two spells that cure wounds, at 1st and 4th, and he never gets too many spells of those levels anyway. The party is better off trying to find him a staff of healing than relying rather too much on the few cure spells he could memorize anyway. They're nice in a pinch, but without the spell bonus for wisdom in AD&D, relying on the cleric to provide healing for the whole party is not always the best strategy.

Thanks for the pointer - I was sure this was clarified somewhere since there's not much discussion of it. Being in the FAQ, it perhaps explains why Holmes didn't mention it in the Basic set. I have the feeling he never saw the SR FAQ since he also didn't use the d6 initiative from there.

Good reminder about the cleric in OD&D having much less healing. I'm currently a player in an AD&D game with bonus spells, a 2nd level Cure Moderate Wounds, and a switching of any one spell for a cure, so my C/F does a lot of healing, and that is what I was thinking of.

[cooper]

As it's been mentioned. 1 turn refers to the combat turn (1 minute) from chainmail and not the 10 min. exploration turn.

Back on subject, if you came to 0d&d familiar with jack vance's stories it would be assumed that you cannot memorize a spell more than once. The language itself ("memorize") doesn't lend someone to "memorizing" something twice. Can you memorize a poem x2?

[Zenopus]

I agree. Although casting the same spell multiple times does seem very-wizard like. Since Gygax was loathe to have a spell point system, he may have allowed the multiple "memorizations" as a middle-ground. Like others here, I find single-memorization an attractive concept.

[talysman]

May 2, 2012 20:42:58 GMT -6 cooper said:

As it's been mentioned. 1 turn refers to the combat turn (1 minute) from chainmail and not the 10 min. exploration turn.

Back on subject, if you came to 0d&d familiar with jack vance's stories it would be assumed that you cannot memorize a spell more than once. The language itself ("memorize") doesn't lend someone to "memorizing" something twice. Can you memorize a poem x2?

Actually. you can. The Vancian idea of spell memorization (which we also see in a couple other places, like Zelazny) is coming from the medieval ars memoria and ars notaria confusion. The sophisticated classical techniques for memorizing speeches were misunderstood by some people in the middle ages as having something to do with the conjuration of spirits for magical purposes. Vance and others then took this concept and went with it, imagining magicians as remembering symbolic images in a particular order. Since the ars memoria relies on imagining these symbols in specific rooms or positions of a building (memory palace,) you can take an imaginary walk through one particular building, imagining a particular symbol at each stop in the building, then take another walk through another building, but imagine the same symbol sequence. The two mnemonic sequences are not identical: your image of a woman holding up a pair of scales at the entrance to the Colosseum is not the same as your image of the same woman holding up scales at the entrance to a Roman cathedral, because they are different locations. But the memorized data in those locations is identical, so you've memorized the same thing twice.

Now, whether you want to stick to that interpretation of the process of spell memorization when playing D&D is another matter. There's no language in the D&D rules explicitly tying spell memorization to ars memoria memorization.