Reworking the spell schools: a probably unoriginal idea

[Lysander]

There's a lot of confusing things about the magical school system. Some spells seem like they're in the wrong school, or could fall into multiple schools and are arbitrarily given to one over the other. Therefore I suggest this: No schools. Just descriptors.

A descriptor is a basic element of what's going on in a spell, and the more complex a spell is the more descriptors it would have.

For example let's say Suggestion has just the [Control] descriptor, which deals with altering the behavior of creatures. Makes sense right? But now Summon Monster I would have [Conjuration] since you're summoning a creature and [Control] since you're controlling that creature's actions. Command Undead would be [Necromancy] and [Control] Etc.

All current descriptors would stay, plus a few new ones. Here are some potential additions in no particular order:

[Communication]
[Movement] Fly, Telekinesis
[Force] Wall of Force, Grasping Hand
[Control]
[Animation]
[Time]
[Space] Teleportation, and creating extradimensional areas
[Anti-Magic]
[Transformation] Altering something's shape
[Illusion] Now reduced to manipulating optics, making holograms. If an illusion spell creates sounds it would also have the [Sonic] descriptor.
[Perception] Phantasms
[Conjuration] Now just bringing something from nothing
[Divination] Most Divination spells would have this descriptor. But some would gain others also. For example Contact Other Plane would gain [Communication]
[Necromancy]
[Body] Stat boosts or penalties

And lots more.

As I said, I doubt this is original but I think it's a good idea. Thoughts?

[Edge of Dreams]

Not that far off from what 4e does with its keyword system, really (which actually originated in Magic: The Gathering).

What's nice about a system like this is it makes it easy to write feats/class features/etc. that do things like "Reduce the spell level of all spells with the [flying] descriptor by 1" or whatever and not worry about listing every single spell that is or isn't affected.

You do have to watch out though that things like "select one descriptor to represent your banned school" doesn't let people get away with banning, say, [acid] spells, which wouldn't really be much of a loss.

[Dimers]

Summon Monster I would have [Conjuration] since you're summoning a creature and [Control] since you're controlling that creature's actions. Command Undead would be [Necromancy] and [Control] Etc.

In the 3rd-edition GURPS Magic book, a system is roughed out that provides an alternative to their "colleges", which are the same concept as D&D schools. Using this system requires combining magical verbs and nouns, selected from the following lists:

Create, Communicate, Control, Heal, Move, Protect, Sense, Strengthen, Warn, Weaken

and

Air, Animal, Body (referring to people, not animals), Earth, Fire, Food, Illusion, Light/Darkness, Magic, Mind, Plant, Sound, Undead, Water

If translated into this system, your examples would become Create+Control+(Animal or one element) and Control+Undead. There's much more to see in this concept than just the list of Words O' Magic -- the book is well worth a read. That particular portion is the "improvised magic" chapter, including runic magic.

I think the list also needs "Soul" as a noun, and lots of existing D&D descriptors and types could be used if you want a longer, more detailed list (acid, phantasm, teleportation ... fey, dragon, humanoid ... enhancement, insight, luck ...).

[Lysander]

You do have to watch out though that things like "select one descriptor to represent your banned school" doesn't let people get away with banning, say, [acid] spells, which wouldn't really be much of a loss.

Here's an idea I like. A caster's bonus spells can only be comprised of their speciality descriptors. Every level they can pick one new descriptor to specialize in, but they must also pick two new ones to ban. At any point a caster can choose to stop taking new specialities but they lose the ability to specialize forever.

So a caster can have very few banned descriptors, but they'll also have a very small number of spells they can cast with their extra slots. Or they can widen the range of spells they can cast with the extra slots, but cut off more of the spell list.

[taltamir]

I like it, a lot.
I think Illusion could be clearer if it was called optics, or just light. Darkness would, interestingly enough, be light (technically)... and fire and ice should both be [temperature]

[Vorpal word]

[energy]
This should have subtypes for whatever energy forms you employ.
[force]
Should be a separate area for things like wall of force/telekinesis. Maybe a subcategory.
[light/darkness]
In my opinion, these should be separate from illusion. Otherwise, how do you justify undead getting killed by illusions?


I might come up with more later, but it looks like a good idea. Just two questions:

a) How do you split up arcane magic, divine magic, nature magic (I don't consider ranger/druids divine), psionics, and things like warlock magic?

b) How much casting limitation? Do you use the 4e "at will, encounter, daily" system? The v3 "spells/day"? Or some other system I haven't heard about?

Please go on with this, I'd like a fix I can use myself if possible.

[Lysander]

[energy]
This should have subtypes for whatever energy forms you employ.
[force]
Should be a separate area for things like wall of force/telekinesis. Maybe a subcategory.
[light/darkness]
In my opinion, these should be separate from illusion. Otherwise, how do you justify undead getting killed by illusions?


I might come up with more later, but it looks like a good idea. Just two questions:

a) How do you split up arcane magic, divine magic, nature magic (I don't consider ranger/druids divine), psionics, and things like warlock magic?

b) How much casting limitation? Do you use the 4e "at will, encounter, daily" system? The v3 "spells/day"? Or some other system I haven't heard about?

Please go on with this, I'd like a fix I can use myself if possible.

[Force] would be necessary to describe anything that's an invulnerable construction of magical energy like Wall of Force, Magic Missile, Grasping Hand, Explosive Runes, etc. I wonder whether simply moving things like Mage Hand, Telekinesis, and Fly should be [Movement] instead though. Maybe some spells could be [Force] and [Movement]. Magic Missile for instance should definitely have both.

Light spells like Searing Light don't harm undead because they cast illumination though. That's an aspect of them being holy magic. So for a spell like that you'd probably just want [Light] and [Good] as the descriptors.

I haven't really thought about warlocks, psionics or 4e. I suppose the change wouldn't effect clerics as much since their domain spells are more thematic than necessarily logical and wouldn't have to change. Wizardry or even sorcery seems more like a science, gaining expertise in an area of magic. Clerics on the other hand just get whatever spells their gods want them to have. The system definitely could be expanded though. Just get rid of domains and grant descriptors. For example Apollo, who handles the sun, music, and healing would be [Fire] [Light] [Body] [Sonic] and you could pick domain spells that use a combination of those.

[Lysander]

A few sample spells with their descriptors to better illustrate the system:

Haste [Movement] [Time]

Enlarge Person [Body] [Transformation]

Stone Shape [Earth] [Transformation]

Finger of Death [Body] [Necromancy]

Identify [Divination] [Magic]

Ghost Sounds [Sonic]

Silent Image [Light] [Animation] (animation would cover any spell that allows you to create movement within an object, whether physical or photon. this wouldn't include something like telekinesis where an outside force moves the object or Create Undead, where the animation is caused by tapping a power source independent of your spell)

Minor Image [Light] [Animation] [Sonic]

Wish [Magic]

Mnemonic Enhancer [Magic]

Gentle Repose [Body] [Time]

Phantom Steed [Conjuration] [Control] [Movement]

Contagion [Body]

Flesh to Stone [Body] [Earth] [Transformation]

Suggestion [Mind] [Control]

Command Undead [Necromancy] [Control]

[taltamir]

Light, Darkness, and Illusion should be [photonic].
Light description spells that are good vs undead should have a second descriptor [holy]

[Gan The Grey]

Why would illusion have anything to do with light? The way I see it, illusions work one of two ways:

1. Create something in the mind of the target. It isn't really there, the magic just fires off nerves in the brain to make them think they are there.

2. Create something that exists in the world but isn't real. The only way that even the most basic illusion is visible is if the light strikes it and reflects off of it. The illusion spell doesn't create light, it merely interacts with existing light to produce an image.

I say that if you can see an illusion in the dark, then it exists in your mind. If you turn the lights out and it disappears, it has been created into the world. Still, I don't see how illusion = light. In fact, I would split illusions into two categories: mind and shadow, and just call it a day.

Of course, I could be oversimplifying. Thoughts?

EDIT: Other Ideas

[Light] This covers positive energy in general. Light, healing, and so forth would have elements of light magic.

[Mind] Anything that targets the mind in some way or focuses on using the mind would have this as a descriptor.

[Movement] Anything that directly modifies a target's movement or focuses on moving a target would use this.

[Energy] Anything that deals energy damage of the traditional five types.

[Fire, Earth, Water, Air] Spells that function as a certain element, but don't necessarily do damage.

[Shadow] Creation of darkness, and conjuring unreal copies of things. Summon Monster spells...

[Necromancy] Life sucking, soul eating, undead creating GOODNESS! Anything with negative energy.

[Transformation] Turning one thing into another.

[Force] Force-type magic...

[Magic] A catch-all for the non-conformists.

[Existence] Creation and destruction magic.

[Fitz10019]

Silent Image [Light] [Animation] (animation would cover any spell that allows you to create movement within an object, whether physical or photon. this wouldn't include something like telekinesis where an outside force moves the object or Create Undead, where the animation is caused by tapping a power source independent of your spell)

I think [Animation] is already covered by [Control].

[Gan The Grey]

I think [Animation] is already covered by [Control].

Hmmm...maybe instead of Animation we use Imbue.

[Imbue] Temporary additions of power in the form of animation independent of concentration, buffs, debuffs, ect.

[Fitz10019]

So, anything targetted or created by a spell with [Control] and [Imbue] continues to act or to function by the caster's initial instructions, but anything with just [Control] requires ongoing Concetration-based commands from the caster.

[taltamir]

Why would illusion have anything to do with light? The way I see it, illusions work one of two ways:

1. Create something in the mind of the target. It isn't really there, the magic just fires off nerves in the brain to make them think they are there.

2. Create something that exists in the world but isn't real. The only way that even the most basic illusion is visible is if the light strikes it and reflects off of it. The illusion spell doesn't create light, it merely interacts with existing light to produce an image.

I say that if you can see an illusion in the dark, then it exists in your mind. If you turn the lights out and it disappears, it has been created into the world. Still, I don't see how illusion = light. In fact, I would split illusions into two categories: mind and shadow, and just call it a day.

Of course, I could be oversimplifying. Thoughts?

If illusions create something in the mind of the target then they are not illusions at all but a mind control effect. Things that are immune to mind affecting effects are not immune to illusions (in fact most cannot disbelieve illusions).

As to why it is light, because it manipulates light (not because it creates light), same reason why darkness is also light (it also manipulates light). I did revise it to be "photonics" instead of simply light.
by causing different frequencies to bounce off of a non existent shape to form a colored 3d image. Or make something invisible.

If something creates light than it would also release heat, even if you have pure light via magic it will heat the air around it and anything it srikes (unless it is a mind control effect), you are evoking energy.
And yes, illusions will disappear then if you turn off the light.

[Light] This covers positive energy in general. Light, healing, and so forth would have elements of light magic.

I think [positive energy] would be clearer.

[Mind] Anything that targets the mind in some way or focuses on using the mind would have this as a descriptor.

[Movement] Anything that directly modifies a target's movement or focuses on moving a target would use this.

Agreed.

[Energy] Anything that deals energy damage of the traditional five types.

[Fire, Earth, Water, Air] Spells that function as a certain element, but don't necessarily do damage.

There is really no need for a distinction between something that creates fire to do damage, and something that creates it to light a torch. Fire is fire... And Energy should be specific.

[Shadow] Creation of darkness, and conjuring unreal copies of things. Summon Monster spells...

Darkness is the absence of light. Light and darkness should share a descriptor since you are manipulating the same substance (photons)

[Necromancy] Life sucking, soul eating, undead creating GOODNESS! Anything with negative energy.


[Transformation] Turning one thing into another.

[Force] Force-type magic...

good as is

[Magic] A catch-all for the non-conformists.

Is it actually needed?

[Existence] Creation and destruction magic.

please explain

[Gan The Grey]

Here is an explanation of illusions and their various types.

[Mind] and [Control] are two separate things. An illusion that exists only in the mind is merely a [mind] affect. For example, the spell Nightmare.

I think [positive energy] would be clearer.

Agreed. Or maybe just [Positive].

There is really no need for a distinction between something that creates fire to do damage, and something that creates it to light a torch. Fire is fire... And Energy should be specific.

I was thinking that certain spells would have both descriptors, but some would only have one. Where Melf's Acid Arrow would be both [Earth](for acid) and [Energy], Stone Shape would have [Earth] but not [Energy].

Darkness is the absence of light. Light and darkness should share a descriptor since you are manipulating the same substance (photons)

But you cannot 'create' darkness in the real world, as darkness has no actual substance. In D&D, the darkness spell is an actual substance radiating out from a certain point, and since [Shadow] in D&D is an extradimensional energy that can be used to form something of substance, that would mean that the darkness spell is literally creating something to block the light. It isn't doing anything photonic persae. Besides, while light is decidedly positive, darkness is not necessarily negative. Maybe void would be a more apt opposite to light.

As for [Magic], I couldn't really decide where to put spells like Wish that can do nearly anything. Maybe you can come up with a better descriptor for our purposes.

[Existence] would deal with summoning spells that summon a permanent object, or creation spells that fabricate an object or create something from nothing or a small amount of a substance. However, now that I think about it, I can't really think of why I added the destruction part to that.

What have I not covered? Communication, Calling, Divination...Anything else?

[Gralamin]

I'm pretty sure Fax is already doing this in d20r.

[Fax Celestis]

I'm pretty sure Fax is already doing this in d20r.

Almost exactly. o_O You can see the first bits in my Cleric Spells thread.

[ericgrau]

Why would illusion have anything to do with light?

They don't. Best to split illusion up into subtypes and apply all relevant descriptors. [light], [sonic], [shadow], etc. Lysander's example already does this.

[Gan The Grey]

They don't. Best to split illusion up into subtypes and apply all relevant descriptors. [light], [sonic], [shadow], etc. Lysander's example already does this.

Lol Eric. I did that. Did you read the rest of my post?

Hey Lysander, have you updated your original post, showing the schools that you've chosen to include, or is that list the same that you started with?

[taltamir]

I was thinking that certain spells would have both descriptors, but some would only have one. Where Melf's Acid Arrow would be both [Earth](for acid) and [Energy], Stone Shape would have [Earth] but not [Energy].

Yea, actually that is a good idea. It is a lot simpler than splitting them ad nasium. Although, I wouldn't limit the distinction on just damage alone.
Some non damaging fire spells could probably be fire AND energy. While something that manipulate existing fires is just fire.

But you cannot 'create' darkness in the real world

Black holes, blue/red shifting, that experiment that slowed down light to the speed of a bike, and the earth's gravity bending light around it.

There are tons of way (with gravity) to create darkness by controlling the direction of the light.

[ericgrau]

Lol Eric. I did that. Did you read the rest of my post?

And then Lysander went back and edited to match? Excuse me for not keeping up with the inverse causation-ness .

[Gan The Grey]

Black holes, blue/red shifting, that experiment that slowed down light to the speed of a bike, and the earth's gravity bending light around it.

There are tons of way (with gravity) to create darkness by controlling the direction of the light.

I think you and I agree, we are just arguing the definition of 'create'. I'm saying that darkness itself is the absence of light, and therefore you can't literally 'create' it. You are arguing that darkness IS creatable due to secondary effects, as in removing light from the area by drawing it into a blackhole or putting an object between you and the source of the light. In that way, you are 'creating' an area of darkness.

I'm saying that D&D actually treats darkness as an energetic substance, that's why I'm linking it to shadow energy. To quote the Darkness spell:

This spell causes an object to radiate shadowy illumination out to a 20-foot radius.

I see that as the object literally exuding a shadowy substance, that's why I put darkness in the [Shadow] school.

And then Lysander went back and edited to match? Excuse me for not keeping up with the inverse causation-ness .

Lol did he? That Lysander is a sneaky mo-fo... I didn't think he was the one saying that Illusion had something to do with light. I think I was just arguing with Taltamir.

[taltamir]

I think you and I agree, we are just arguing the definition of 'create'. I'm saying that darkness itself is the absence of light, and therefore you can't literally 'create' it. You are arguing that darkness IS creatable due to secondary effects, as in removing light from the area by drawing it into a blackhole or putting an object between you and the source of the light. In that way, you are 'creating' an area of darkness.

I'm saying that D&D actually treats darkness as an energetic substance, that's why I'm linking it to shadow energy. To quote the Darkness spell:

Ah, excellent point... So in DnD term, you are not removing light, you are conjuring elemental magical darkness from the dimension of darkness... Ok, that works actually.