Skip to main content

Holmes/AD&D/B/X: Spells Known

I often find rules in D&D that don’t work the way I expect them to, and blame my younger self for having been too lazy to learn the rules correctly back in the day.

Turns out, I’m usually just remembering Holmes Basic.

This came up recently, when a campaign decided to switch from LL to AD&D, and I was ready to rock this table:



My spell caster was going to get a massive upgrade to his spell book! With INT 18, he was going to go from five spells to at least 18! He had a good chance of making a clean sweep.

Then someone kindly pointed out that the above percentages apply to learning spells that you find lying around amongst owlbear pellets. It takes Gygax about five paragraphs to explain this chart, and... well, let's say that clarity is not among its virtues.


To summarize:

  1. If a spell caster finds a spell, they can roll their percentile chance to learn the spell.
  2. This roll can only be made once. If you fail to learn a spell, you can never learn it.
  3. Except you can make this roll more than once, because there’s a minimum number of spells you can learn.
  4. But when do you make this second attempt? If this is a roll you make after finding a spell, do you have to find and fail to learn every spell on your list so that you know you haven’t met your minimum, and then find them a second time to roll again? Or do you roll twice each time you find a spell until your minimum has been met?
  5. And then check out this sentence: “Although the magic-user must immediately cease checking to determine if spells are known after the first complete check of each spell in the level group, or immediately thereafter during successive checks when the minimum number of spells which can be known is reached, it is possible to acquire knowledge of additional spells previously unknown as long as this does not violate the maximum number of spells which can be known.” Jeeziz, Gary.
  6. The “previously unknown” spells referred to in that sentence are, apparently, once found on scrolls or in spell books. Which… is exactly what the previous mechanics were also supposed to be for, right?
  7. And if anything happens to change your intelligence, you have to recalculate all of whatever this mess is.

To summarize the summary: You only have one chance to learn a spell that you find, unless you have a second chance, or if you find a spell.

Here’s the previous iteration of the Spells Known Table from Holmes Basic:


 Ah. See, that makes sense. It’s a little chargen mini-game to find out what’s in your spell book.

Of course, Holmesian spell books are massive, immobile tomes that spell casters have to leave at home, and they can only recharge their spells by trekking all the way back. No one-hour study sessions around the campfire for these wizards. Given this lack of portability, it’s nice that they have a bit more selection.

And how adorable is it that you could have a magic user with INT 3?

Moldvay Basic, quite sensibly, doesn’t truck with any of this:
Each magic-user and elf has a spell book for the spells that he or she has learned. A first level character will only have one spell (a first level spell) in the spell book. A second level character will have two spells (both first level) in the spell book; a third level character will have three spells (two first level spells and one second level spell) in the spell book. The DM may choose which spells a character has in the book, or may allow the player to select them.
And Cook Expert only adds that a spell-caster has to spend a week with guild masters when leveling up to learn these new spells.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reviewing Rules for Play-by-Post Optimization

I’ve played a lot of PbP games: all your favorite flavors of OD&D, AD&D, and their retroclones, Call of Cthulhu, Marvel Superheroes, Traveller, Dungeon World, etc. ad nauseam. In almost every instance, I forgot what ruleset we were using at some point. Which is a good thing. Once chargen is over, you spend a lot more time describing your characters actions and poring over the GM’s descriptions than you spend interacting with rules. When you do roll, it’s usually a combat to-hit roll, which you’ve probably programmed into the online dice-roller as a macro. Pretty much any game will work for PbP. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t points of possible optimization. Point 1: Resolution. Anything that can keep the action moving is a boon to PbP. A game that requires a back-and-forth exchange of information to resolve an action is going to progress very slowly. A good rule of thumb is that it’ll take 2 or 3 days to get a response from any given player. At that pace, an exch

Maze Rats by Post

In my previous post , I reviewed a bunch of my favorite rulesets for optimization for Play-by-Post. It occurred to me almost immediately that I hadn't really thought about Maze Rats enough. In fact, I'd mis-remembered and mischaracterized it. Upon reflection, one of the mechanics I took issue with is actually a big strength. Re-reading the rules, it seems like just a few very simple hacks could make it a highly-optimized PbP game. As follows: Danger Rolls are rolled by the GM. Danger rolls usually fail, so it is in the player’s interest to describe their actions plausibly and mitigate as many risks as they can, in the hopes that they don’t trigger a danger roll. 2d6 + ability bonus ≥ 10 If you have taken enough precautions to have a distinct advantage in an action, but not enough to have eliminated the distinct possibility of danger, the GM will give you a roll with advantage. 3d6 keep 2 + ability bonus ≥ 10 Because each character only has 3 ability scores (S

An Exaltation of Rockets

I've been toying off-and-on with a rockets-and rayguns campaign/ruleset based heavily on the original Buck Rogers strips. I started working it up as a Black Hack, but I've since switched over to Maze Rats, which has become my ruleset of choice for Play-by-Post. I don't have a good name for it. I want something that conveys the baroque majesty of science fiction in the 20s and 30s. "Planetary Romance" is an accurate description of the genre, but needs about 20% more pulp. Pseudo-pulp magazine names seem like a good way to go, but that's such an easy well to dip into that the results can sound pretty generic. Request for feedback #1:  On this particular morning, I'm enamored of "An Exaltation of Rockets," but it may not carry the right resonances. I'd be eager to hear from you what your first impression was when you saw that as the post's title. What sort of imagery did it conjure up? What sort of world does it belong to? The prem