Class spell lists: in the class entries, in spell chapter, or in spell descriptions?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Given a D&D-like with class-based spell lists.

Would you prefer them:
a) at the end of the class entry. This makes it easy to find, it's a one-stop shop.
b) in the spells chapter. This makes them easy to compare between classes.
c) on the spell descriptions. This makes it easy to decide "is this one of my spells", but hard to figure out what you're comparing to.
d) something else entirely (and no, "don't have class spell lists" isn't an option here).

Oh, and hyperlinks between spell name and entry are assumed to exist. Because it's PDF and LaTeX is great for that.

[JNAProductions]

A and B. If you're doing a physical book, I can see cutting it to just one or the other, but as a PDF or other digital document? Make it easy as possible for the user.

[Notafish]

If they are short lists, next to the class entry, especially if there is little-to-no overlap between lists.

Spells chapter if it's a long list, if there is overlap, or if there are systems where multiple classes can access the same schools/disciplines/circles/whatever.

If there are a lot of spells - particularly if there are a lot of descriptors - a digital reference - even a spreadsheet with a pivot table - could be a handy thing, too.

[Telok]

If you're stuck with D&D like stuff then how D&d 3.x did it was good. AD&D 1e was OK because it was such limited small lists. AD&D 2e, 4e, & 5e have all been right pains in the ass to work with. D&D 3.5's summary/index at the start of the PH magic chapter was good (could have used page numbers tho, but you'll have links).

Also, if you're using links from an index then remember to put a breadcrumb on the page. Not all pdf readers support back button like functions.

[Anonymouswizard]

What proportion of classes use spells? If it's one or two out of nine either with the class or in the spells chapter. If it's the majority with the classes and on the spells (especially if like in 3.X different classes have spells at different levels).

Basically the more specialised casting classes are the more I want to compare their spell lists when picking a class, and the less I want to flip between the front and back of the book.

[Kurald Galain]

b) in the spells chapter. This makes them easy to compare between classes.

Presumably some classes are going to share some spells? This means having a spells chapter is good. If you don't do that, you may end up with (e.g.) five or six different spells that are all Fireball but with slightly different parameters, and that doesn't really help.

[MoiMagnus]

Given a D&D-like with class-based spell lists.

Would you prefer them:
a) at the end of the class entry. This makes it easy to find, it's a one-stop shop.
b) in the spells chapter. This makes them easy to compare between classes.
c) on the spell descriptions. This makes it easy to decide "is this one of my spells", but hard to figure out what you're comparing to.
d) something else entirely (and no, "don't have class spell lists" isn't an option here).

B is IMO the least useful of the bunch. You still need to search through each of the class list to compare them.
Additionally, it works badly as soon as you have spells granted by subclasses or other stuff.

So I prefer "both A & C".

Oh, and hyperlinks between spell name and entry are assumed to exist. Because it's PDF and LaTeX is great for that.

If assume it will be a pdf, please scrap alphabetical order for the spell descriptions (and just include an alphabetical index with hyperlinks). Because most of the time, peoples will simply use the search function, making alphabetical ordering pointless.

Ordering the spells by level is much better, as it is something that is much harder to easily simulate with the search function.

If spells that are common are rare enough, you should even go further and split spells according to their class (so duplicating the rare spells in common, which can be done by creating a latex command for each of those duplicated spells). But if it's anything like D&D, that would lead to way too much duplication to be worth it.

[KorvinStarmast]

A and C. I also agree with the suggestion to have a full spell's chapter (with the descriptions) and each spell should identify which class/classes have it. This allows you to do some overlap and make it user friendly.

Also, if you're using links from an index then remember to put a breadcrumb on the page. Not all pdf readers support back button like functions.

Also a good suggestion.

[Quertus]

If you're stuck with D&D like stuff then how D&d 3.x did it was good. AD&D 1e was OK because it was such limited small lists. AD&D 2e, 4e, & 5e have all been right pains in the ass to work with. D&D 3.5's summary/index at the start of the PH magic chapter was good (could have used page numbers tho, but you'll have links).

I agree that there’s value in what 3e did (and feel like I’ve had this conversation really recently), but 2e had spells divided by class, Spell level, school - it’s hard to find an edition more organized than 2e, to give you every search order you’d care about, without moving away from hard copy into digital spread sheets… at which point, if you know what spell you want, you can just search for it. What made 2e a bad experience for you? From my PoV, it was an example of paper design excellence.

Given a D&D-like with class-based spell lists.

Would you prefer them:
a) at the end of the class entry. This makes it easy to find, it's a one-stop shop.
b) in the spells chapter. This makes them easy to compare between classes.
c) on the spell descriptions. This makes it easy to decide "is this one of my spells", but hard to figure out what you're comparing to.
d) something else entirely (and no, "don't have class spell lists" isn't an option here).

Oh, and hyperlinks between spell name and entry are assumed to exist. Because it's PDF and LaTeX is great for that.

So, it depends.

Obviously, the optimal solution is a customizable interface, where you can look at 2nd level cleric’s necromancy’s “can be cast while bound and gagged” spells, if that’s what you need to know. Or, if you’re playing more of a Mystic Theurge type character, who is bound and gagged, and looking for what necromancy or illusion spells (the only schools useful at the moment) they can cast with the shots they have left, the query might be a tad more complex.

But let’s assume you’ve already built that too. Now what? The question is how do players learn their characters? One would think that option A, placing the spells at the end of the class entry, would be optimal for learning a new class. And, for short spell lists, I agree with this technique. However, I do not like this method when muggles are not given similar treatment, when mundane classes inherently get much shorter entries than their magical counterparts, or when the Spell lists bog down the page.

For comparing spells by class, for comparing spell lists, having those lists right next to each other is handy. So B has value.

Let’s say I read something cool, like Animate Dead or Mindrape, and decide it’s my favorite spell ever. Well, I’ll want to know who can cast it, and when, so C is clearly important.

Are expansions a possibility? If so, expansionn classes won’t have their spell lists next to the other caster classes. And existing spells that they can cast won’t reference these new classes. So B&C get devalued here. And expansion spells won’t automatically be linked by existing classes, and their spell lists won’t automatically update, so even A has issues. Only D, the searchable database, maintains its value.

How about homebrew? Presumably, I’m not going to be editing the source book, so any homebrew caster classes will suffer the same way expansions do.

Short answer: A&B&C&D, much like 3e did it (plus Spell database with pre-built good user interface). With the above caveats.

That said, given the digital format, “A” could be accomplished with a link to B. So maybe just B&C&D?

[PhoenixPhyre]

A few notes

1. There will be tremendously fewer spells than, say, 5e. Because a chunk of the utility effects got moved outside the spell lists entirely and I've moved everything else above 6th level into a special grouping called Legendary Effects that aren't on spell lists[1].

2. When I say "spell lists", I'm not talking about the actual entry containing all the details. That's only going to exist in one place, the spellcasting chapter. How that's organized is still yet to be decided[2]. I'm talking about the mapping information between spell name and class, ie "who can cast which spells".

I think I'm going to go with (as a first try) something near between A+C--

In the class entries will be a summary table, organized by cost[3]. Each summary table will have the cost, name, a tag (damage, control, movement, defense, healing, etc), a range/area note, and either an attack or save note. If room permits, the damage expression as well. Names hyperlinked to the full spell description.

In the spells chapter will be the master list of these spells, in similar format. Only difference is adding the classes (with hyperlinks back) that natively get access. The details may differ slightly depending on what fits and looks good.

Oh, and a key, because the areas are going to have to be symbolic for space.

[1] classes will still have access to them (or similar effects). Some will get them as class features (magical or not). Others as things like "mystic arcana" (picking from subsets of the whole list).

[2] options are really by cost[3] and then alphabetical or by cost and then by type. Although I may just be lazy and leave them purely alphabetical as they are right now.

[3] I'm ditching spell levels and going with something closer to a spell-point regime where costs are non-linear. The current (WIP) default mapping for existing 5e spells is

level -> cost
1 -> 2
2 -> 3
3 -> 5
4 -> 8
5 -> 12

with upcasting (what I'm calling overcasting as a defined term) being generally more efficient and common than it is in 5e.

[Telok]

, but 2e had spells divided by class, Spell level, school - it’s hard to find an edition more organized than 2e, to give you every search order you’d care about, without moving away from hard copy into digital spread sheets… at which point, if you know what spell you want, you can just search for it. What made 2e a bad experience for you? From my PoV, it was an example of paper design excellence.

This is specific to the AD&D 2e books: If you want to look up a spell but don't recall it's level it's a bitch. If the spell exisis on different lists it got printed twice and might or might not have differences. Even if you know what level the spell is there's no page references and no page header for "3rd level priest spells", meaning you have to pass back & forth until you find the right page. In short, using the book at the table to find a spell is a bloody nuisance.

AD&D 1e had... around half or 2/3 the spells? And it worked OK, but all the spell lists fit on one page compared to 2e's three pages. So I think there was some sort of upper bound on the lists. Sort of like how bubble sort is fine on short stacks because it doesn't matter much which sorting is used, but gets quite bad on large data sets.

But the 3e condensed info index at the start of the spell descriptions was very nice to use in book format. Easy to compare across class & level. Much much better than any dead tree format for 4e & 5e that I ever saw. Of course the pdf & links format changes things a bit, but the 3e short descriptions worked best for easy comparisons and searching.

Basically there were three possible things to know when looking up a spell; name, level, and class. The 3e PH lists worked if you knew any one thing. The AD&D 2e PH and other WotC PHs were annoying to use if you didn't know certain parts or were trying to compare say, warlock vs sorcerer or abjuration vs healing.

[Quertus]

This is specific to the AD&D 2e books:

Of course.

If you want to look up a spell but don't recall it's level it's a bitch.

You mean, if you want to find a spell in the huge hundreds of pages of spell description, it's hard if you don't know the spell's (class and) level? Sure. That's... not how you find a spell... *ahem* ... that's not the optimal way to find a spell that you know the name of.

If the spell exisis on different lists it got printed twice and might or might not have differences.

Yes, that is a fact. That fact is not inherently good or inherently bad. Would you like to say something about this fact?

Even if you know what level the spell is there's no page references

No, there are. Or, rather, there aren't on p. 126-128 of the 2e PH¹ (just as there aren't on its 3e counterpart (where it's easy to argue they'd be more needed)), but there are on p. 242-243, and i think on every other such list. AFAICT, if this is a complaint, this is an area where 2e comes out ahead of 3e.

¹ Which RPG deity should I thank for surviving with only minor bruising the multi-system book avalanche that ensued when I attempted to look this up? Tzeentch? Boccob? Thoughts?

and no page header for "3rd level priest spells", meaning you have to pass back & forth until you find the right page.

Um... is your book on drugs? My book has such page headers.

Are you sure you're not complaining about some other edition, and singing the praises of 2e?

In short, using the book at the table to find a spell is a bloody nuisance.

I can see that using Telok's Cursed Book that Pretends to be 2e D&D is a bloody nuisance. I'm so glad I used an uncursed version of the tome. I advise you to create a protective circle, cast Remove Curse, and be prepared to perform an Exorcism on whatever evil inhabits your book.

But the 3e condensed info index at the start of the spell descriptions was very nice to use in book format. Easy to compare across class & level. Much much better than any dead tree format for 4e & 5e that I ever saw. Of course the pdf & links format changes things a bit, but the 3e short descriptions worked best for easy comparisons and searching.

3e had some good points. "Learning (to play a character) for the first time", however, was superior in 2e, because you could read all the spells you cared about, and none of the ones you didn't, with ease.

Basically there were three possible things to know when looking up a spell; name, level, and class. The 3e PH lists worked if you knew any one thing. The AD&D 2e PH and other WotC PHs were annoying to use if you didn't know certain parts or were trying to compare say, warlock vs sorcerer or abjuration vs healing.

Again, you've apparently been using a cursed book. p. 238-241 lets you compare the 8 Schools and... 16 initial Domains to your heart's (hearts'? I think the 1st one is correct...) content. Later books had similar lists for expanded spell and domain lists.

Granted, they were lacking the blurbs 3e uses, so they required a higher bar to entry to get the same data... which... could be a pro or con, depending on your PoV. (As 3e devs tried to claim with a straight face that trap options were good for the game, I think it's fair to assume 2e should be looked at in the light of a "don't try to compare things you don't understand, noob - git gud 1st" mindset.)

So... what I've heard is, if you try to do things inefficiently, and have a cursed book, 2e spell layout is terrible. And... sure? But, unless I've missed something, my techniques on my books produce 0 of your complaints. So it's no wonder I call it design excellence, while you consider it terrible.

-----

@PhoenixPhyre - I hope this discussion of complaints and design considerations helps you get a feel for what users like and hate about certain layout choices (even if it is for a paper product rather than a digital one).

[Anonymouswizard]

A few notes

1. There will be tremendously fewer spells than, say, 5e. Because a chunk of the utility effects got moved outside the spell lists entirely and I've moved everything else above 6th level into a special grouping called Legendary Effects that aren't on spell lists[1].

So basically you have spells and feats/edges/perks/merits/advantages? And 'high power shizzles' as a third category?

Eh, it's nothing I haven't seen before.

2. When I say "spell lists", I'm not talking about the actual entry containing all the details. That's only going to exist in one place, the spellcasting chapter. How that's organized is still yet to be decided[2]. I'm talking about the mapping information between spell name and class, ie "who can cast which spells".

I mean, it could be worth putting particularly 'iconic' spells in a class description, but I wouldn't do that in anything but a supplement with a handful of new powers.

Honestly I like how Deadlands: Hell on Earth: Reloaded deals with Arcane backgrounds. The basics all ABs share (casting skill, starting PP, starting powers, potentially a key drawback), then their list of Powers, then the AB's special rules (which can sometimes be overly extensive for SW). Although Savage Worlds also really needs a Powers by Rank table somewhere.

[PhoenixPhyre]

So basically you have spells and feats/edges/perks/merits/advantages? And 'high power shizzles' as a third category?

Eh, it's nothing I haven't seen before.

Not really. There are:
* Class features (stuff owned entirely by a single class/subclass)
* Skill tricks (shared, everyone gets a few but some people get more and faster but the gating is by proficiency level, not class)--these are mostly-not-explicitly-magical "things you can do if you're good at X".
* Spells (shared, some people get access to a lot of them, gated by class)--explicitly magical, generally short-cast-time stuff. The kind of thing where you need the results relatively quickly and/or are really directly combat effective.
* Incantations (completely parallel, anyone can find them as treasure, some people get some "for free")--most of the utility effects, including a lot of condition removal, non-combat transportation, and even resurrection magics. These are explicitly magical, but explicitly not tied to classes.
* Legendary effects. These run the gamut, but are basically a catch-all meta-pool of "cool things, some of them explicitly magical, some of them not that higher level characters can do." Many of them were spells, but they're not really on anyone's spell list for normal access and don't use your standard "mana" or "stamina" pools by default. They're inspired by 6+th level spells, but not limited to them. Class access varies:
-- some classes get specific legendary effects as class features.
-- some classes get a class feature that says "pick legendary effect from <list>, can cast as spell 1x/day"
-- etc.

In this thread I'm only talking about the class spell lists themselves. The list of spells you can learn with your spellcasting feature.

I mean, it could be worth putting particularly 'iconic' spells in a class description, but I wouldn't do that in anything but a supplement with a handful of new powers.

Honestly I like how Deadlands: Hell on Earth: Reloaded deals with Arcane backgrounds. The basics all ABs share (casting skill, starting PP, starting powers, potentially a key drawback), then their list of Powers, then the AB's special rules (which can sometimes be overly extensive for SW). Although Savage Worlds also really needs a Powers by Rank table somewhere.

I'm not going to put spells details in a class description unless they're not really spells. So the oathbound (paladin replacement) might get Find Steed as a class feature, where I'll basically copy and paste the spell description and remove it from spell lists entirely. Similarly, eldritch blast (the warlock staple) is going to be a class feature not a spell. That's because my warlock is going back to the 3e model of blast + blast shapes + extra effects + invocations to pick up other effects a la carte. They'll be the only ones who get to browse across class spell lists, but only have a very limited number of such spells. They won't be fully at-will, however--using their bigger blast shapes + effects or some of the invocations will cost their "mana" resource.

[Pauly]

My answer depends on a number if factors.
1) how many spells are there?
2) how many spell casting classes are there?
3) are a similar number of spells available to each class, or do some classes get a lot of spells and others a small humber?
4) what proportion of spells are locked to a specific class and if there is overlap how many classes can access each spell?
5) are the spells further split into subcategories such as schools of magic?
6) do spells change level requirements between caster classes? ( eg spell [X] is level 3 for class A, but level 4 for class B).

[Telok]

Um... is your book on drugs? My book has such page headers.

"Appendix 4: Priest spells" across every page of them, so useful. [/sarcasm]

Apparently you have a different version or perhaps are mixing the 1e & 2e versions. And please don't chunk posts like that, I can barely read that disjoined meandering diatribe. Look, you're possibly the first person I've ever hear hold up that book as any sort of non-terrible organization. The 1e AD&D PH was fine, fewer spells I think and these people in the house won't shut up for two minutes. But the 2e

[PhoenixPhyre]

My answer depends on a number if factors.
1) how many spells are there?
2) how many spell casting classes are there?
3) are a similar number of spells available to each class, or do some classes get a lot of spells and others a small humber?
4) what proportion of spells are locked to a specific class and if there is overlap how many classes can access each spell?
5) are the spells further split into subcategories such as schools of magic?
6) do spells change level requirements between caster classes? ( eg spell [X] is level 3 for class A, but level 4 for class B).

1) ~150. +- a lot. Call it 200 after things are done.
2) 7 right now that get native access (ie their own spell lists)
3) Mixed, but relatively even.
4) heavy overlap, but some unique ones.
5) Not really. I did away with the schools of magic because they're basically vestigial.
6) No.

@Quertus & @Telok--I don't have access to the AD&D (either edition) PHB. So either of those aren't very useful to me as reference points without lots of further examples.

As to 3e...wow that typography and layout sucks. It's almost unreadable. That aside, I like the short descriptions in the list. I don't like the different levels per class. And I hate the fact that the sorcerer and wizard list are the same

[Pauly]

1) ~150. +- a lot. Call it 200 after things are done.
2) 7 right now that get native access (ie their own spell lists)
3) Mixed, but relatively even.
4) heavy overlap, but some unique ones.
5) Not really. I did away with the schools of magic because they're basically vestigial.
6) No.

@Quertus & @Telok--I don't have access to the AD&D (either edition) PHB. So either of those aren't very useful to me as reference points without lots of further examples.

As to 3e...wow that typography and layout sucks. It's almost unreadable. That aside, I like the short descriptions in the list. I don't like the different levels per class. And I hate the fact that the sorcerer and wizard list are the same

Based on this I would like (a) and (b).
Once at the end of the class description and once again at the start of the spell chapter.
Edit to add.
In the system described there are 2 basic questions which would make me reference the spell list, either as a GM or player.
1) I have chosen class X. What can class X do?
2) I am comparing class X, Y and Z? What are the advantages/disadvantages of each class.

[Quertus]

@Quertus & @Telok--I don't have access to the AD&D (either edition) PHB. So either of those aren't very useful to me as reference points without lots of further examples.

Huh. Sadness.

To break down what I've learned / been reminded of from the conversation, there are numerous use cases to consider, including

• User knows the name of the spell.
• User "knows" the name of the spell (but not well enough to spell it correctly, or otherwise use digital search functions).
• User wants to see what a class can do.
• User trying to pick a spell for their class and level.
• User knows what level of spell they're looking for (Cleric just hit 5th level, wants to know what 3rd level spells they have access to; Druid just got permanent Pass without Trace, wants to find something to replace the Pass without Trace they always kept memorized).
• User wants to create new thematic class, trying to find spells that match that theme (Pyromancer, Necromancer, Nekomancer, Cultist of Tzeentch).
• User wants to "reskin" or just repurpose an existing classes for a theme; trying to find what classes have spells that are on-theme.
• User wants to compare what 2 classes offer.
• User wants to create a character to fill a particular role/niche.
• User wants to understand what role/niche a class fills.
• User wants to know what classes get a particular spell (fell in love with Animate Dead; saw someone cast Wall of Fire).

2e and 3e both have (IMnsHO) good numbers for these use cases. 2e was optimized for certain use cases (new users / 1st access to xth level spells), while 3e was optimized for different use cases (reference by spell level, some (but not all (darn Polymorph school) related spells next to each other). But the... the set of search times for the two look very similar. Your goal should be to create a layout with a similar set of search times, optimized toward what you care more about. If you get a set that is worse, or a set with an outlier value that is worse than what you have found in the 2e&3e sets of search times / search efforts, then you have failed to produce a product of as high a quality as 2e & 3e.

So, tentatively pick something, think about what the user will need to do in order to perform each of these searches, and ask yourself whether this is a good decision.

I doubt you'll do something truly terrible, but this is a good series of tests to ensure you've made something of appropriate quality. And also, to see if something irritates you. Like, if 3e was much faster for a specific search than what you consider going with, and you find that irritates you, maybe that's something you care about being efficient in your system, and should rethink around optimizing that. In case you want a "gut feel" sanity check on top of any more metric- and requirements-driven analysis.

You said you'd need more examples - lots of them. What would help? Would explaining how 2e facilitated each of these searches help, for you to build a check-list of "yeah, my proposed idea is about that fast" / "faster here, slower there, zero-sum obtained"? I don't want to post lots of stuff that's useless to you.

"Appendix 4: Priest spells" across every page of them, so useful. [/sarcasm]

Apparently you have a different version or perhaps are mixing the 1e & 2e versions. And please don't chunk posts like that, I can barely read that disjoined meandering diatribe. Look, you're possibly the first person I've ever hear hold up that book as any sort of non-terrible organization. The 1e AD&D PH was fine, fewer spells I think and these people in the house won't shut up for two minutes. But the 2e

(flips to random page) p. 178 Wizard Spells (6th Level)

(checks front cover) Advanced Dungeons&Dragons 2nd Edition Player's Handbook

(checks other copies of same book, because owns multiple copies, because of course Quertus does, because favorite best system) Yup, all the same.

The "different version" is an interesting theory - as it turns out, there are two different versions of the 3e Psionics.... ****, of course there are. *ahem* ... there are 2 different versions of the 3.0 psionics handbook (or whatever it's called), both with the same... um... title, ISBN, and everything else, except for a few key changes. So... sure, I'll grant that this is a possibility. If so, the printing of the 2e PH you have is terrible, and I'm sorry for your bad luck. If it's somehow not the same book... the ISBN on the 2e PH is... 0-88038-716-5.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, the point of "chunking" is to make up for my disjointed babble, and provide clear context for my comments. Why is context bad?

I'll readily admit your book is bad. I think I've made that clear. But as far as my senile mind remembers, nobody playing 2e ever found a serious flaw in the brilliant layout of the multi-index spells in the dozens to hundreds of real 2e PHs we used (I played with every group I could find; between them, there were a lot of books), or the even more advanced indices in future books (that referenced spells from all books to date, unless they did so in ignorance of the existence of these features. Literally, every complaint about 2e spell layout was either ignorance / user error ("there's no page numbers" "...um, yes there are..."), zero-sum to destructive ("they could improve X by doing Y" "but that would hurt Z") (which indicates preference, not error), or impractical-to-impossible ("it's a pity the indices in the PH don't automatically update to include references to all the spells published in the new books - maybe they could publish stickers to slap overtop the existing pages?").

When it comes to finding spells, from an optimization standpoint, I think that both 2e (the real 2e, not whatever cursed book you're using) and 3e can be used to set the benchmark of how "good" a product should be.

1) ~150. +- a lot. Call it 200 after things are done.
2) 7 right now that get native access (ie their own spell lists)
3) Mixed, but relatively even.
4) heavy overlap, but some unique ones.
5) Not really. I did away with the schools of magic because they're basically vestigial.
6) No.

How many spells does each class get? Are they all "spontaneous casters"? Have you playtested this; if so, how much time does your group spend looking... no, how often do your players look up spells compared to how often they do so in other systems, especially in combat (to check for specifics like range, or for interaction/targeting effects like "does Spell Resistance apply?" or "can I Charm an Undead?") - counting every time they just ask you as "looking it up".

As to 3e...wow that typography and layout sucks. It's almost unreadable. That aside, I like the short descriptions in the list. I don't like the different levels per class. And I hate the fact that the sorcerer and wizard list are the same

3.0 or 3.5? PH? These tired old eyes are still good at reading (knocks on wood), so I don't see anything I'd call unreadable (unlike in some books). Am I misunderstanding your complaint?

The short descriptions... are nice. There's too many idiots in the world who will use that instead of the longer description, but short of placing glow-in-the-dark "Git Gud Noob" stickers on the inside of their eyelids, there's not much that can be done about such skill issues.

[Telok]

When it comes to finding spells, from an optimization standpoint, I think that both 2e (the real 2e, not whatever cursed book you're using) and 3e can be used to set the benchmark of how "good" a product should be.

Honestly, I thought about digging up images of the different versions, because they might help other in a "don't do this" sense. But I'm kinda high on cold meds and don't give a ****. I know there were at least three different AD&D 2e PHs (lost my first good one in a move, second good one got "borrowed", got gifted the current **** version) and I wouldn't be surprised at a 1e version getting included in the mess. Suffice to say, my experience with all versions of D&D PHs was that the D&D 3.x spell lists before the spell descriptions were the most useful, and the only time I didn't wish fire ant infested hemorrhoids on the writers/editors of the spell chapter. Every edition spell/power lists but that one has aggrivated me to cursing.

[Quertus]

Honestly, I thought about digging up images of the different versions, because they might help other in a "don't do this" sense. But I'm kinda high on cold meds and don't give a ****. I know there were at least three different AD&D 2e PHs (lost my first good one in a move, second good one got "borrowed", got gifted the current **** version) and I wouldn't be surprised at a 1e version getting included in the mess. Suffice to say, my experience with all versions of D&D PHs was that the D&D 3.x spell lists before the spell descriptions were the most useful, and the only time I didn't wish fire ant infested hemorrhoids on the writers/editors of the spell chapter. Every edition spell/power lists but that one has aggrivated me to cursing.

That’s an interesting take. But first, there were three versions of the 2e PH?! Wow. Did I ever know that? I’m not sure if I should be surprised / if this is an issue if my knowledge vs my senility.

Anyway, that’s an interesting take. I can’t deny that the spell list - heck, even the entire spells chapter - in 2e is inadequate. One needs the appendices in order for the glory of the design of (the good version of) the 2e PH to be complete.

Which, extremely relevant to this thread, begs the question: where should “necessary and complete” information be / what set of locations should one find to be the “necessary and complete” set of locations to use to search for spells?

One could argue that there is a certain elegance in the 3e solution of making the Spells chapter a self-contained entry, where no supporting material is required to optimize your searches (AFB, that’s true, right?); OTOH, both by “training” from other books, and for issues of search speed, one could argue that glossaries and appendices have the advantage of being “familiar tech” that doesn’t require the user to learn new methods.

Alongside a great deal of approval brilliant commentary, “In the Beginning was the Command Line” talks about how the interface for an automobile is complete rubbish… and about how a modern, familiar interface for it would also be complete rubbish. We accept learning the unique interface of the car because it hails from an era when we had fewer interfaces cluttering our limited memories, and because it greatly benefits from having an irregular, “optimized” interface.

D&D was the only RPG. It could afford to use - to require - custom interfaces. Now, there are a whole slew of RPGs on the market, and how much new tech you require the reader to learn is that much of a barrier to entry for potential players. Which… is neither an inherently good or inherently bad thing. I say that in all honestly, as it’s perfectly valid to advertise to your players that “you must be this talk to play” - or, at least, to get optimal value from the product.

But, yes, I hadn’t considered, and completely agree that the 2e spells section is not self-sufficient the way its 3e counterpart is. And that raises the question of how important that feature is. Kudos!

[LibraryOgre]

C&D

C, because it's very useful to be able to look at a spell and say "Oh, Heroism is a 2nd level Bard spell", and D because, instead of in the spells chapter, I'd have them at the back of the book, for easy reference.

[stoutstien]

Option A with a good index as option D mixed in. If the spell list is large enough to need it's won chapter then it should be tied directly back to the classes to begin with.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Option A with a good index as option D mixed in. If the spell list is large enough to need it's won chapter then it should be tied directly back to the classes to begin with.

It has its own chapter more than anything because it has specific rules that it uses. So shoving all of those in one place makes sense to me as a place for "ok, here are the general rules that govern spellcasting."

Just like (in this system) Incantations (which are sorta souped-up 4e rituals), Skill Tricks, and Equipment all have their own chapters.

Chapters are cheap. Spreading related information across multiple places is horrible UX. The horror stories I've heard about Shadowrun in this regard are legion. With the rules for doing things spread between sidebars in one chapter, examples in another, and tucked away in arcane places in a third. Without good cross-references.
---------

My current plan is to have a table/list at the end of each class entry that contains
1. Cost (sorta like level, but not 1:1, ranges from 0 for cantrips to 2-15 mostly Fibonacci sequenced, but with some changes)
2. Name (hyperlinked to the actual entry)
3. Short description
4. Some kind of compressed mechanical info (range+area, damage, save/attack).

With then a full similar list in the spellcasting chapter that adds in what classes it belongs to, but loses some of the mechanical bits, also linked to the entry.

And then the full entries, organized by cost (and then alpha within the cost sections). Whether or not that also gets the list of classes that get it is yet undecided.

I'm leaning towards a general philosophy of "as much as possible of what a player needs to know for day-to-day operations beyond the very general rules is found in their class entry, at least in summary form".

[False God]

The class should contain a list of spells it gets, just a list. So if say you've played before but you want to be able to cast a specific spell, you can go to the class page and see if it gets access to the spell you want. The list should contain a page number or hyperlink to the full text of the spell.

All spells should be fully written out in the spells section, in alphabetical order. Each spell should also mention which class gets it.

[Quertus]

It has its own chapter more than anything because it has specific rules that it uses. So shoving all of those in one place makes sense to me as a place for "ok, here are the general rules that govern spellcasting."

Just like (in this system) Incantations (which are sorta souped-up 4e rituals), Skill Tricks, and Equipment all have their own chapters.

Chapters are cheap. Spreading related information across multiple places is horrible UX. The horror stories I've heard about Shadowrun in this regard are legion. With the rules for doing things spread between sidebars in one chapter, examples in another, and tucked away in arcane places in a third. Without good cross-references.
---------

My current plan is to have a table/list at the end of each class entry that contains
1. Cost (sorta like level, but not 1:1, ranges from 0 for cantrips to 2-15 mostly Fibonacci sequenced, but with some changes)
2. Name (hyperlinked to the actual entry)
3. Short description
4. Some kind of compressed mechanical info (range+area, damage, save/attack).

With then a full similar list in the spellcasting chapter that adds in what classes it belongs to, but loses some of the mechanical bits, also linked to the entry.

And then the full entries, organized by cost (and then alpha within the cost sections). Whether or not that also gets the list of classes that get it is yet undecided.

I'm leaning towards a general philosophy of "as much as possible of what a player needs to know for day-to-day operations beyond the very general rules is found in their class entry, at least in summary form".

I believe that if you make the list in the spells section purely alphabetical, and include the links back to the class(es) that get the spells, that you will have your set of all searches match the set of search times for 2e and 3e.