TheRPGSite

I was going back over my PHB.  Can someone explain page 10, Intelligence Table II:  Ability for Magic-Users....?
The text seems to indicate that a 1st level MU would take his INT and find the appropriate "Chance to KNow each spell" and then go through the 30 spells (1st level) and roll for each.  
Any failed rolls meant you could not learn that spell.
Is that a correct reading??

Is there any text which indicates which spells a 1st level MU is supposed to know from the 1st level list??  Or was that by DM fiat.

Thanks
Tim
P.S.  I was ignorant back then to the MU rules as I usually went with thieves or fighters..

You more or less have it. The chance to know really is a chance to learn. Whenever your MU comes across a spell which is new to them and is a level they can cast, you roll to see if they can learn it. If you fail, you can't learn it.

But every MU is limited by the minimum and maximum numbers of spells of each spell level; you always know something, but your knowledge is always limited.

For starting spells, see the DMG, p.39.

MUs begin with Read Magic (whatever their rolls, they must have this, since without it they can't read their own spell books and could never have become MUs), then a roll is made to give the MU one each of offensive, defensive, and miscellaneous spells, there are nine in each category and the tenth option is that the player chooses. It notes,    "If your campaign is particularly difficult, you may wish to allow choice automatically. You can futhermore allow an extra defensive or miscellaneous spell, so that the characer begins with 5 spells."
When an MU gains a level, they get to add one spell of their choice. Anything beyond that starting 4-5 +1/level the MU must find during the campaign, succeed at their learning roll, and then scribe in their spell book. The spell book is required each day when they memorise their spells.

Yes, that's a correct reading.  However, you don't have to roll for all 1st level spells.  You only have to roll until you either reach the Minimum Number of Spells/Level or the Maximum Number of Spells/Level.

In the section Chance to Know Each Spell Listed under the section Notes Regarding Intelligence Table II, it states that the player may choose to roll for a spell in any order in a group (i.e. 1st level at creation).

So, according the PHB a character can choose his spells known at 1st level, as long as he rolls under his percentage chance to know that spell.

Quote from: timrichter9;254817Is there any text which indicates which spells a 1st level MU is supposed to know from the 1st level list??  Or was that by DM fiat.

DMG p 39, "Acquisition of Magic-User Spells"

The above are the official rules.  In practice, it was common for DMs to let the player pick read magic + 3 spells and either not use rolls at all or use them only for learning new spells from books/scrolls.

There's some disagreement over whether you're supposed to check all spells at once (upon character creation for 1st level spells, upon achieving 3rd level for 2nd level spells, etc.) or if you check each spell as you find it (in a scroll or spell book). In the former you know right away all the spells your character will ever be able to learn and it's just a matter of finding those spells; in the latter you find the spell first, then determine if you can learn it. I prefer (and think the original intent was) the latter, but a straightforward reading of the text seems to suggest the former, so there you have it.

Quote from: T. Foster;254863I prefer (and think the original intent was) the latter, but a straightforward reading of the text seems to suggest the former, so there you have it.

I agree that the straight text seems to indicate that you run through all of them when you advance the level.  Ahhh...reading the old PHB brings me back, including all the rules disagreements.

Ciao

The big advantage of old school games is fast chargen and I always felt that the rolling for all your spells at once was slow.   I gave the player a starting spellbook with a number of first level spells of their choice equal to their defined INT minimum.   Fast and easy.

I only used that percentage for new spells found along the way in the campaign.  Spend one day with the weird scroll and make the roll.  Or go pay a sage a big bag of coins to decipher it for you!  

Also, if the mage found a scroll he could not understand, I always gave him another roll at his next level to try to decipher it with his new advanced knowledge.  It was fun to have mages wander about with mysterious tomes that even they could not decipher.

There is no disagreement as to what to do. The player's book says one thing and vaguely; the DM's book says something else and clearly.

In a game where the DM is advised to deal with annoying players by means of blue bolts from heaven, attacks of etheral mummies by surprise, and reducing their character's Charisma stat ("appropriately", the guide adds parenthetically), and where the DM is also told that the players must never gaze in the DMG, and if they do their characters should lose coin and magic items as "payment to sages", in such a game there can be no doubt that the DMG overrides whatever's said in the PHB.

When in doubt, always go with the DM's book. Just as the DM controls what happens at the game table, the DM's guide controls what happens in the rules.

MUs begin with Read Magic, one offensive, one defensive, and one miscellaneous spell; if the campaign is particularly dangerous, they get one more of either of the latter two, and may even get to choose which of the spells they get.

...You know, I found it wierd that 3rd edition wizards could learn every single Sorcerer/Wizard spell. Well, aside from favored/forbidden school options.

(Nowhere near an old-school gamer)

That is just the progression of all sorts of games towards munchkinism, Narf. Once video games came along with cheat codes it was all downhill from there. The wussy whiny players Gygax took Charisma points off grew up to be game designers, and made it so they'd never have to fail.

Hmm. I've never had a problem with cheat codes. Sometimes I play for gonzo; sometimes I play for real. Never in multi-player, though.

I think my best D&D would be a mix of old and new school. There's things I like about both - Granted that the closest I've gotten, other than reading, to old school is Curse of the Asure Bonds on the Amiga 500.

Anyway, I like the idea of general case task resolution; I like flavor over mechanics; I like never feeling useless (Or, more accurately, why should a Magic-User run out of spells? Run out of big, important spells, sure); I like real consequences; I like a gameworld I can sink my teeth in.

New-school wins on the first one, it's mixed on the second (Although 4e takes a nose-dive), old-school and 3e take a nose-dive on the third; 3e and 4e are penalized on the fourth, don't know about old-school; can't really judge on fifth.

I'm getting closer to trying out old-school, but my mind likes to poke things with sticks first. And race/class restrictions seem...Pointless to me.

Well, the race/class restrictions are just the beginning of attempts at dealing with munchkins, in combination with ensuring everyone had their little niche to explore. Bear in mind that all this AD&D1e stuff was written with a dozen players at a game table being quite normal.

With that many players, it's hard for the GM to make sure that nobody is finding a loophole in the game system and pushing their 25th level half-dragon-half-drow lesbianstripperninja with twin katanas and 18/00 Strength through it, and also a lot harder to make sure everyone gets a fair chance to do something interesting and fun in the game session.

With the more typical four or so players of nowadays, it's a lot easier for GMs to keep an eye on things to slap munchkins down and bring everyone into the events of the session.

I think it was common to ignore lots of AD&D as written, and actually play something more like Basic D&D but with extra options from AD&D (a point from jrients' blog). I think Gary Gygax himself more usually played OD&D(?)

So if you find a rule that you can't imagine anyone using, it might actually be that it wasn't commonly used.

Yeah, I'd throw them (R/C restrictions) out if I ran, or make a serious pitch to the GM about it.

Hmm...You know, I'm looking for gaming. And there's these .pdfs that aren't legally the original game...

...Anyone running a PBEM or PBP old-school game around here?

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;255086...Anyone running a PBEM or PBP old-school game around here?

Narf-
There is a Castle Amber (old module X2) basic set being organized by Stormbringer.

It's at http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=11719

Or search for {Olde School} I think

I did. :)

I'll probably join after I get some sleep; up all night working on fixing a hard drive.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;254821You more or less have it. The chance to know really is a chance to learn. Whenever your MU comes across a spell which is new to them and is a level they can cast, you roll to see if they can learn it. If you fail, you can't learn it.

Ever? If not "ever," how quickly can you try again?

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;255073...You know, I found it wierd that 3rd edition wizards could learn every single Sorcerer/Wizard spell.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;255076That is just the progression of all sorts of games towards munchkinism, Narf. Once video games came along with cheat codes it was all downhill from there. The wussy whiny players Gygax took Charisma points off grew up to be game designers, and made it so they'd never have to fail.

Well, to be fair, I think they made it so that you can only fail in different ways. Shadowrun lets any magician of any type learn any spell [well, okay, there are some restrictions for certain rare types of mage, but these are entirely for flavor, and actually act as a net disadvantage; one of those cases of the setting influencing the rules, as I feel it should be], but to say you'd never have to fail in the game would be an overstatement.

Quote from: Engine;255427Ever? If not "ever," how quickly can you try again?

If you've checked every spell of that level and haven't reached your minimum # of spells known then you're allowed to re-check spells until you reach the minimum. Also, if your Intelligence score increases you're allowed to re-check spells.

Quote from: T. Foster;255472If you've checked every spell of that level and haven't reached your minimum # of spells known then you're allowed to re-check spells until you reach the minimum.

What if you've reached your minimum? Can you only re-check once your intelligence has been raised?

Quote from: Engine;255481What if you've reached your minimum? Can you only re-check once your intelligence has been raised?

Yes, if Intelligence is permanently raised or lowered, then you must re-check the spells in each group.

He edited his post to include the answer. Bit sloppy. People don't generally check that.

So, if I find a new spell on a scroll somewhere, and read it, but roll under what I'd need to learn it, but I already have my minimum number of spells, I can't try to learn it again until my intelligence goes up? What is the in-setting justification for this, and why is my chance to learn - which should be dependent on intelligence, apparently - also dependent on whether I've reached my minimum spell allotment?

Uh, no - You get a minimum number of spells. You also roll to see which spells you can and cannot learn, in the abstract, future sense. If your intelligence goes up, you can re-roll again for the spells in the group.

Or at least, if I've interpreted correctly. And I'm not sure what 'spells in the group' means.

Quote from: Engine;255493So, if I find a new spell on a scroll somewhere, and read it, but roll under what I'd need to learn it, but I already have my minimum number of spells, I can't try to learn it again until my intelligence goes up? What is the in-setting justification for this, and why is my chance to learn - which should be dependent on intelligence, apparently - also dependent on whether I've reached my minimum spell allotment?

I think that you are confusing the minimum number of spells and maximum number of spells known.  :)

If you haven't reached your maximum number of spells known and you find a scroll or spellbook with a new spell in it, then you can roll to see if you can learn the spell.  If your roll succeeds, then you can add that spell to your list of known spells and inscribe it in your spellbook.

If your Intelligence score changes (up or down) permanently, then you have to re-check all spells.  It's possible to lose a known spell this way, and it's also possible to gain a spell that was previously unlearnable.

Quote from: Drohem;255498I think that you are confusing the minimum number of spells and maximum number of spells known.

No, I was referring to T Foster's post:

Quote from: T. Foster;255472If you've checked every spell of that level and haven't reached your minimum # of spells known then you're allowed to re-check spells until you reach the minimum.

I understand why, if your intelligence goes up or down, you'd have to re-roll to make sure you understand your old spells, and re-roll to see if you can't learn some new ones you weren't able to learn before. But T Foster is saying that if I haven't reached my minimum yet, I can re-roll until I reach it.

The whole thing just reads like mechanics to me, with only a little thought to how those things map to the setting. Which is, I guess, why I don't play D&D.

hmm...I guess it was a rhetorical question then because your post indicates that you already knew the answer.  The reason why you re-roll because the minimum number hadn't been reached yet, and, by definition, you need a minimum amount of spells known.  As to how it maps to the setting, I'd venture to guess that it's rooted in the Vancian magic concepts.

Anyway, I was just trying to be helpful.  :)

Quote from: Drohem;255513hmm...I guess it was a rhetorical question then because your post indicates that you already knew the answer.

Well, I guess I knew what happened, I just didn't know why, although I think I have a better idea now.

Quote from: Drohem;255513Anyway, I was just trying to be helpful.  :)

You succeeded. :) Thank you!

Quote from: Engine;255500The whole thing just reads like mechanics to me, with only a little thought to how those things map to the setting. Which is, I guess, why I don't play D&D.

It is just mechanics stuff. The min and max are mostly likely there so lessen the impact of random rolls plus the whole rolling made intelligence matter to mages. But it was also one of the things often ignored in 1e. I think we just rolled for each new source after character creation - can you figure out that mage's spell book.
 
I think we had that at creation you picked spells equal to your min spells as it sucks to not know a spell or two critical to your character concept. Then keep adding from sources until your max was hit. Knowing more spells didn't throw the power off much as you still had limits on casting but it gave the mage more things to play with when planning their daily spells.

First of all, that's AD&D 1e, not sure it's any of the other versions.

The confusion here is due to the dual interpretation that T. Foster refers to. Either

a) You check the entire spell list to see what spells you're capable of learning, or

b) You check each spell as you come across it.

The problem with (a) is that it seems to tell the player too much; I'd be tempted to have the DM do this instead of the player. But with (a), you can at least make sure that the Magic User will be able to learn the minimum number of spells without running into a sort of paradox that can arise with (b).

The paradox with (b) is that, first of all, the likelihood that you will understand a given spell is influenced by the order that you encountered it. You have a better chance of understanding spells you encounter early in your career than later, simply because you are likely to fill up all your "slots" for comprehension before you run into those later spells.

The paradox continues with the fact that if you're unlucky with your "chance to know" rolls, you may reach a point where there aren't enough spells left in the list to fill up your minimum. While method (a) lets you go back and reroll, method (b) leads to the bizarre situation where you suddenly have a second chance to know a spell that you earlier didn't understand purely because you've gone all the way through the list in "campaign time".

I remember having trouble with these issues and deciding that (a) was the most sensible, with the DM rolling secretly, and maybe using a random method for choosing the order to roll. This keeps the player in suspense as to what spells he can ultimately know, and it doesn't artificially bias things in favor of spells that are at the top of the list. But it's cumbersome and, as a DM, I frankly wouldn't want to maintain a secret list because I like to be surprised myself.

What I think I'd do instead is this: Use option (b), but treat the "chance to know" as a "chance to know from this source". I.e., if I find a scroll, spell book, or mentor that can be a source to learn "Bigby's Clenched Fist", and I fail the roll, then I can never learn the spell from that scroll, book, or teacher. But if I find another scroll, book, or teacher, I can have another go of it.

With this solution, I'd probably also rule that any scroll or book is the same as learning from the mage who wrote it. That way you don't have silliness like asking another PC to write down a spell repeatedly until you make your roll. But I would say that if you fail to learn a spell from character A, and then character A teaches the spell to character B, you might be able to learn from character B.

Also, with this solution, I'd ditch the minimums--they don't make any sense with this approach.

With option B, just say he learned enough from the failures to get one whole spell.

Quote from: Engine;255427Ever? If not "ever," how quickly can you try again?

Never. That's it. Your character failed to learn, and that's that - unless their Intelligence goes up or down, and their current number of spells known is outside the new minimum or maximum.

Quote from: EngineSo, if I find a new spell on a scroll somewhere, and read it, but roll under what I'd need to learn it, but I already have my minimum number of spells, I can't try to learn it again until my intelligence goes up?

That's right. But even if your Int goes up, you only reroll if your current known spells are outside the min/max range of your new Int score.

Quote from: EngineWhat is the in-setting justification for this, and why is my chance to learn - which should be dependent on intelligence, apparently - also dependent on whether I've reached my minimum spell allotment?

No setting is attached to the core AD&D1e rules, so there is no "in-setting justification" for anything. It's just the rules.

No reason is given for the minimum, but I imagine it's for game balance - if some poor sap ends up knowing no spells, then the game isn't balanced. Likewise, if some Int 9 MU can know as many spells maximum as one of Int 15.

Quote from: Elliot WilenThe confusion here is due to the dual interpretation that T. Foster refers to. Either

a) You check the entire spell list to see what spells you're capable of learning, or

b) You check each spell as you come across it.

Which confusion comes from seeing the PHB and DMG as equal in clarity and authority. The PHB is written rather vaguely, the DMG much more clearly; and plainly the DMG overrules anything in the PHB.

The beginning MU gets Read Magic, and one each of defensive, offensive and miscellaneous spells to begin with, without rolling to learn them. Later on as they come across new spells, they cast Read Magic and try to see if they can learn them. If they succeed they can do so, and write it in their spell book; if not, then not.

If their failure after going through all spells possible means they've not reached the minimum for their Intelligence score, then they go through them again until they succeed that minimum number of times. If they already have the maximum number for their Intelligence score, then they don't roll when they find new spells.

If their Intelligence changes later on so that their current number of known spells exceeds the new maximum, or is lower than the new minimum, then they roll again until their success/failure has them reach their new max/min.

Each day, the MU can memorise and cast a certain number of spells from their spell book. Without their spell book, they can't memorise any spells at all.

Quote from: Elliot Wilenmethod (b) leads to the bizarre situation where you suddenly have a second chance to know a spell that you earlier didn't understand purely because you've gone all the way through the list in "campaign time".

That's called "experience". If an MU has come across and tried to understand every spell of that level, then it's easy to see that they've been through a lot - probably a few class levels, too. With experience comes understanding - including understanding things you couldn't before. Similar reasoning is present in the rule that if a PC fails to break a door, bend bars, or pick a lock, they can try again next level.