Spells, nonreuseable per day?

[oldkat]

P.19 states something that is potentially a nightmare. OR, I am totally misinterpreting the way its put.

"A spell used once may not be reused in the same day."

Now, naturally, it only makes sense that if I only have 1 magic missle spell and cast it, I cannot recast it again until the next day.

But the context of this comes at the end of the section, wherein multiple spells memorized and carried are discussed.

Am I justified in reasoning that, even should I be loaded up with 3 MM spells, once I cast the 1st, then the other two would be just baggage I'd have to hold till the next day?

IF that can be successfully argued, then doesn't this pretty much limit the spellcaster to 1 spell per day per type? (i.e., 1 magic missile, 1 cure light wounds, etc.)

And if that can be rationally plausible, then doesn't it seem kind of evident, that GG didn't want spell casters to become too dominant over the fighters by laying out this premise?

OR...am I just overthinking everything...
again!
;D

[Stormcrow]

You're overthinking.

If I have three Magic Missile spells memorized, then using one Magic Missile will disallow me from using that spell (the copy I cast) again that day. I am still able to cast one or both of the other copies of the spell I memorized.

In this context, "spell" means what later came to be called a "spell slot."

[Finarvyn]

No. You are overthinking it.

If you have three magic missile spells you can cast each one once per day. That's okay. What you can't do is have magic missile, sleep, and light and then decide to cast magic missile three times instead.

At least this is the rule by the book. I often allow my magic-user characters to do this because it seems a little odd that a wizard might "know" a spell but be unable to cast it because he happened not to memorize it on a particular day. In your campaign you can rule however you like.

[Deleted]

Way back in the the Official FAQ printed in TSR's "The Strategic Review" clarifies this point, stating a spell could be memorized multiple times, cast from a scroll, etc. So, you were not the only person who wondered about this.

[tombowings]

I play the way you decried. A spells may only be memorized once for a single adventure. And really, how do you memorize something more than once anyway? Even in Vance it doesn't seem to work.

[Deleted]

That's the beauty of OD&D! There's no "wrong way" to do it!

GAME ON!

[runequester]

I kinda like the idea of forcing you to memorize different spells for each slot.

[waysoftheearth]

I'm with tombowings and runequester.

There's nothing quite so uninspired as memorising 3x magic-missile spells.

I usually insist that a magic-user can only memorise a particular spell once at a time. I also like to see magic-users finding creative uses for the less used spells, and it can be fun to make them invent their own spells (if the player is into that kind of thing).

FWIW -- I consider the magic missile spell to be a bit of a sand-trap for novices. It doesn't do anything the magic-user can't already do without wasting a precious spell, so most low level players will be better off most of the time if they choose a different spell.

[oldkat]

Well, it made me wonder. And I have since gone back and researched all 3 LBBs, and find no reference to multiple memorization of spells to be plunked down in spell "slots". And by calling them slots, opens the door to the next assumption, thus allowing multiple memorization. These are not "slots"... they are the number of actual spells the mu can memorize and store per game day. At least that's how I plan to implement it in my ODD campaign. How others run their game is their fiat.

So, if SR came out later and decreed such, well, that's someone's "add on" and so be it. Even GG himself reminded us continually, that we did not have to do everything the way he and others did--and they were nortorious for not folloowing their own written guidelines.

So, if multiple memorization comes out of a SR, and is the basis for the allowance all these years, that's okay. But, it ain't mandatory to embrace as much of what SR and Dragon came out with later wasn't/isn't.

I'm just kinda surprised that multiple-memorization wasn't even mentioned in M&M.

[coffee]

Jan 29, 2013 0:11:21 GMT -6 oldkat said:

I'm just kinda surprised that multiple-memorization wasn't even mentioned in M&M.

I think you'll find that there's a lot that wasn't mentioned in M&M.

And that's because these were guidelines, written by wargamers for wargamers. The authors expected people to tinker with the rules, to make their own calls, to use them to play the game they wanted.

You can interpret anything in them however you want. But more importantly, you don't need any justification in the rules to do what you want with your game. It's your game!

And that, to me, is the beauty of the old school mindset. We can each do what we want, and it doesn't matter what the next guy does. We don't need to be a slave to someone else's rules just because they're printed in a book/magazine/supplement/web forum.

Do things in a way that makes sense to you. And if you and your players are having fun, then you're doing it right.

[Deleted]

I agree, Oldkat, but I need to correct a minor error in your statement. I am in no way arguing your point or telling you that you're otherwise incorrect in your thinking.

The material in question is an official FAQ by Gygax which was printed in SR among other places.

[Finarvyn]

Also, keep in mind that in CHAINMAIL they had a spell system whereby magic-users got a certain number of spells in much the same way as OD&D.

Specifically mentioned is the fire ball and lightning bolt (cast as a "missile" with unlimited uses) as well as rules for counter-spells and a list of 16 other spells (fewer in 1st and 2nd printing; I have 3rd handy). Also listed is a number of spells based on the level of the magic-user.

While nothing in CHAINMAIL counters your interpretation of spell use, they fact that the fire ball and lightning bolt have unlimited uses seems to reinforce the "multiple of a single spell" version somewhat.

As others have said, do it as you like.

[llenlleawg]

Jan 28, 2013 19:38:20 GMT -6 @dubeers said:

Way back in the the Official FAQ printed in TSR's "The Strategic Review" clarifies this point, stating a spell could be memorized multiple times, cast from a scroll, etc. So, you were not the only person who wondered about this.

Here's the explanation, given in The Strategic Review 1:2 (1975):4, "Spells: 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 spells 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-user gains spells by preparations such as memorizing incantations, and once the spell is spoken that particular memory pattern is gone completely. In a similar manner spells are inscribed on a scroll, and as the words are uttered they vanish from the scroll."

[oldkat]

I appreciate everyones' input.
And as I pour through my LBBs I find them--more and more--to be nothing less than inspiring.
Yes, they are guidelines.
Yes, not everything was written down(as the assumption was that wargamers would be reading them).
Yes, there is an underlying presumption that each GM/&Group will do things his/their way.

Which is why I love it!
(I only wish the Man, Man+1, 2 Men thing had been explained clearer; providing the alternate d20 mechanic was sheer genius, allowing those non-wargamers to jump in and begin playing easily)

[Deleted]

Jan 28, 2013 23:46:22 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

I'm with tombowings and runequester.

There's nothing quite so uninspired as memorising 3x magic-missile spells.

Couldn't agree more.

[Deleted]

Well now, that's a separate topic, isn't it?

[talysman]

I figure there'd be a lot of push-back from players if you went for the "no multiple copies of a spell" interpretation. But maybe meet them halfway? 1 in 3 chance when casting a spell that you forget all copies of the spell as well?

[coffee]

If you just make yourself clear from the start, you shouldn't have problems.

"This is how it works in my world."

[Finarvyn]

Jan 29, 2013 10:51:42 GMT -6 oldkat said:

And as I pour through my LBBs I find them--more and more--to be nothing less than inspiring.

This is the heart of OD&D for me. Any time I get into a gaming funk and can't feel inspired, I just pull out the LBB and re-read them. Something about the simplicity, the presentation, the fact that you don't need giganto rulebooks ... awesome. The other book that does this for me is Dave's First Fantasy Campaign. Sometimes I think that if I had only OD&D and the FFC I could game forever...

[waysoftheearth]

Jan 30, 2013 13:30:00 GMT -6 talysman said:

I figure there'd be a lot of push-back from players if you went for the "no multiple copies of a spell" interpretation.

FWIW -- I've never experienced any push-back from players on that issue.

[verhaden]

Neither have I.

[Deleted]

BX has an odd rule that the number of spells per day is the same as the number of spells the Magic-user knows. This is often dismissed as a simplification but I'm not so sure. Empire of the Petal Throne works this way. Each spell you learn can be cast once per day. You can learn the same spell twice and, thus, cast it twice per day but that counts as you learning a new spell [In this game you are limited to how many spells you can learn, not how many you can cast]. Similarly, Runequest has two different magic system, one of which is a system where each spell you learn can be cast once per day. Again, limiting the spells you can know rather than spells you can cast.

To me, this looks like some sort of regional or DM-based variant from the earliest days of D&D. The odd text in OD&D might be a remnant of this before Gary fully switched to the familiar spells known system we have today; first in Greyhawk and then carried over into AD&D.