But why is there an IN WORLD limitation in the first place?I can't cast fireball over and over because there is an IN WORLD limitation on the number of times a fireball can be cast.
I think we can all agree the IN WORLD limitation exists because we're PLAYING A GAME, and unrestricted fireball casting would be bad for GAME BALANCE, not to mention all the IMAGINARY FLAMMABLE OBJECTS in the game world.
Therefore, it's more accurate to say there is an IN GAME reason for traditional D&D spell slots-by-level.
We RATIONALIZE this through various supporting fictions, or by simply evoking JACK VANCE's name, and his wonderful DYING EARTH stories, whose magic system bears a CURSORY RESEMBLANCE TO the one Gygax created for D&D, and from which he borrowed a few COOL SPELL NAMES.
We also use VANCIAN MAGIC in a wide variety of SETTINGS, most of which are built using very different assumptions than Vance's DYING EARTH -- which is super-far future SCIENCE FANTASY, in case you didn't know.
Which implies D&D's traditional magic system ISN'T MEANT TO REFLECT OR DESCRIBE ANYTHING about the SPECIFIC FICTIONAL WORLD our campaigns takes place in. It's a RULES CONSTRUCT which we adapt/shoehorn our particular settings into, because it's SIMPLE, EASY-TO-USE, and STRATEGICALLY RICH.
(WHERE WAS I? OH...)
Saying spell casting is limited by in-world reasons is inaccurate at best. So if you're willing to rationalize magic being limited for purely game-y reasons, why are martial abilities fundamentally different?
BECAUSE the reason for both sets of LIMITATIONS is IDENTICAL.
(great, I'm going to typing like this for a week. I have only myself to blame...).
Last edited: