You're a breath of fresh air, TY!

Can we also operate off the "sorcery" approach to MU spell casting? Where you don't have to memorize specific spells each day. Rather, you basically have spell points that can be used on anything in your spell book, where 1st level spells cost 1 point, 2nd level spells cost 2, etc.

So starting as a 1st level character, you can basically cast any of your spells each day, 1x4, or 4x1, or 2x2, etc.?

(Forgive me if this has become the standard approach. It's slightly different from the original EGG rules, and I just want to make sure.)

In reply to Ereth (msg # 52):

In general, I am open to alternatives to the original D&D magic system, but I am not quite sure I understand this one. However, my dwarf will almost certainly not be casting spells anyway, so it is not a big issue to me.

In reply to Ornwin (msg # 53):

It's basically just a question of whether you have to choose your spells each day. I'm currently playing in two other campaigns, and each DM does it differently.

It can hurt a lot more from NPCs. And 5e reflects that by giving Socerors less slots. I'd say leave it as is.

In reply to Otis (msg # 55):

Hmm. Not sure I understand, but ok. Maybe I shouldn't have used the term "sorcery."

I know basically nothing about D&D that happened after the release of Unearthed Arcana in 1985, so if that's a 5e concept I didn't realize it. I just like the idea of having access to all of the spells you know, with the only limitation being physical/emotional drain from casting. It's easier for gameplay and also seems more logical to me.

With that said, I'm good with whatever the host says. I mainly just want to be clear on house rules so I can play the part properly.

I'd rather face a foe that has a 3rd level spell selection of "Detect Magic and Fireball" rather than one than can hit me with a pair of Fireball.
This message was last edited by the player at 08:14, Wed 20 Apr 2022.

In reply to Otis (msg # 57):

I certainly understand that, if taken in a vacuum. But, looking at the bigger picture, the spell caster in your party is with you for 100 out of 100 combat scenarios, whereas the theoretical spell casting foe (I assume you mean monsters rather than NPC's) appears in 1 or 5 or maybe 10, out 100 combat scenarios? Seems like a good trade off.
This message was last edited by the player at 08:52, Wed 20 Apr 2022.

Not if one dies in the second one. It alters the power balance to that of MUs which has always been a problem in D&D (arithmetic versus geometric power climb).
Anyway, I've had my say, so I'm going mute on this topic.
This message was last edited by the player at 08:49, Wed 20 Apr 2022.

I don't have anything further to add either. And as I said, I'll defer to the host. Maybe we could incorporate this slight friction into our PC's relationship, just for fun. :)

OK, we can explore that.
Can you offer a feature (other than just being a human or just being a mage) to which Otis could take exception?
e.g. predominantly a necromancer..

Necromancy sounds fun! But it's probably not well-suited to gameplay.

Our characters are the same height, and I am somewhat attractive, so you might have reason to resent me on that basis alone. I am happy to adopt a thinly veiled general dislike (and mistrust) of half-breeds as well. That should suffice.

In fact, I thank you for your inspiration. I just realized my character is a bit of a snob.
This message was last edited by the player at 09:35, Wed 20 Apr 2022.

I'm fine with the traditional D&D racial animosisty although being halforc, I don't want to resent all humans (that makes the group thing strained) but resenting being disliked because I am a half orc is fine.

I'm happy to go with that. Doesn't mean I wont heal you. Just dont expect to be first. (Sound about right?)

Absolutely!

Agreed then.

I do remember the addition of the sorcerer class way back when with its exchange of quantity (fewer number of spell slots) for flexibility (no pre-selection of spells). Where did the original spell slot approach come from, though?

Why it came from the master of fantasy and science fiction, Jack Vance, from his stories of Dying Earth. And with Jack Vance being, on some days, my favorite author, the spell slot systems remain sacrosanct.

I also think having to choose which spells to prepare on a given day adds an element of strategic planning to the day.

Roger that on spells.

On a separate note, in light of his newfound snobbery, I think Ereth will have heightened respect and affinity for Ornwin, since he comes from a distinguished family.

And speaking of the House of Unwin, was that name inspired by the LOTR publisher? (If so, I think it's clever. Solid fantasy name, and the reference is probably pretty obscure at this point.)

Follow up questions for the host:

1. Will I have 1 spell per day (as per the 1e rules) or 3 spells per day (as per OSR) or other (house rules)?
2. Are we incorporating cantrips?
3. Will we be outfitted with any scrolls, potions, or magic items to give characters with a 10 AC and 4 HP a chance to survive the first week?

1-Neither, to be precise. 1 per day per OSRIC, our ruleset.

https://osricrpg.com/files/OSRIC.pdf

2-Yes for color, no for anything combat-related. IE you could cast a "Flaying of the Follicle" to remove split ends, but you do not get endless mini-bolts that ping for 1-2 force damage.

3-Nope.* It's not easy to kill an OSRIC PC with direct damage. Check out the damage/death section. In my experience, melee characters are at greater risk.** I will note that this is not a "low magic" campaign and you should reasonably expect potions, scrolls, etc.

*If you're that concerned with survival, swap your dex with your int.
**Consider a typical encounter with giant centipedes.
This message was last edited by the GM at 22:05, Wed 20 Apr 2022.

In reply to The Host (msg # 69):

Thanks for the feedback. It's been a while since I played a 1st level MU by the book, so I appreciate your patience with the questions. In hindsight I should not have mentioned the term "sorcerer" since that's not really what I had in mind. I wasn't hoping for more power, just more options. In my experience, having access to all of the spells you know leads to more role playing, not less. Without it, I'm likely to memorize magic missile every day for practical reasons.

Not asking you to reconsider your approach, but just for edification, these are the house rules in place in the other campaign I'm currently a part of.

==========

Magic User Spells:

We will be using Spontaneous Casting.

The premise is simple, take your normal spells allowed per level and consider them "points". I have two first level spells, thus I can burn a point and cast a magic missile while later in the day, we need some serious magical detection and bang! burn my second point. The points come back with sufficient rest, that is 4 hours plus 15 minutes per point X level of spell. Same basic time as recovery and memorization. The variable time may be relaxing, sleeping, contemplating magic or reading one's spell book (which is preferred).

Spells and spellbooks, general rules:

1. MU gets intel bonuses just like Clerics get wisdom bonuses, so, at first level, you may have up to 3 spells per day.

2. MU casts read magic on a scroll, it's permanent.

3. Write is used to copy a spell, learned or not, into the spell book.

4. Special ink is needed, 1 vial per level of spell, 100 gp per vial for the copy.

5. The spell vanishes if cast or copied.

6. If the mage fails to learn a spell, he may try again at the next level up.

7. Detect Magic, Light, Mending, Wizard Mark, Alarm, Read Magic and Write are treated as Cantrips.

8. The MU will receive 4 Cantrips to start with: Detect Magic, Read Magic, Write and one other being automatically recorded in his spellbook.
This message was last edited by the player at 02:01, Thu 21 Apr 2022.

In reply to Otis (msg # 63):

My understanding is that dwarves dislike halforcs more than they dislike elves, but Ornwin is reasonable where loyal party members are concerned. His CHA is 10, which to me makes him a little gruff but not downright ornery.

In reply to Ornwin (msg # 71):

Did you see my question about the name Unwin?

In reply to Ereth (msg # 72):

Sorry, I had missed it. Yes, the name Unwin was inspired by the original LOTR publisher. I liked the connection and the fact that (to me) it sounded like the kind of traditional Germanic name that would fit into LOTR-derived culture (which includes most fantasy gaming culture, at least the kinds of games I play).

In reply to Ornwin (msg # 73):

I love it!

In reply to Ereth (msg # 74):

Thanks you! (Ornwin bows deeply sweeping his hood before his feet.)
This message was last edited by the player at 03:09, Sun 24 Apr 2022.