D&D General Idea - Reframing "spell level" terminology to fit the "Weave" of magic

[Mirrorrorrim]

Some think it is less than ideal for the word "Level" to have multiple definitions for PC use. While I am not bothered, I like my fiction magic to make sense narratively, and also like when that occurs in my TTRPGs. Here are the two most common uses of "Level" for PC use:

• Class level 1-20
• Spell level 1-9
• (I'm not even counting all the other ways "level" is used outside of PC use, like dungeon levels)

I was thinking that characterizing magic as part of the "Weave" is something that can be leaned into narratively. What if spell levels were described instead as "spell layers" within the Weave. "Layers" can exist in a "Weave." Layer also has the right alliteration and syllables as "level" so it still fits into the familiar patterns of speech we use it for. Below are some ways it can be used narratively:

• Spellcasting: "At 1st level, your Wizard can reach and manipulate the Weave of magic that infuses existence. However at this level of experience and training, they can only connect to the first "layer" of the Weave. Over time, with experience, they can learn to access and manipulate the threads of magic within deeper/higher "layers" of the Weave that let them cast more powerful spells."
• "I cast my 1st-layer spell, Cure Wounds!"
• "I cast Fireball, but I reach into the 4th layer of the Weave to enhance its power, so I'm casting it as a 4th-layer spell."
• "I really want to access the 9th layer of the Weave some day and I will do anything in my power to experience that mystery first hand. Now let's kill that evil wizard so I can take his spellbook's secrets for my own. I wonder which layer of the Weave he can reach?"

Thoughts?

 

[jgsugden]

I've used something similar for decades. For me it is not about the number of layers of the weave, but it is about the number of simultaneous manipulations of the weave you're managing to control at a given time. A cantrip requires one manipulation. A 1st level spell requires you to manipulate 4 elements at once. 9 for 2nd, 16 for 3rd ... 100 for 9th.

Think of it as the folds of origami - and how many you could do within the span of an action. However, instead of folding paper, you're manipulating the weave to craft magic. I use this to explain why a typical person in my setting that studies magic their entire life might be able to manage third level magic - 16 folds in a few seconds. However, only those Touched by the Gods could manage to manipulate the weave 25, 64, or 100 times within a round.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I've used something similar for decades. For me it is not about the number of layers of the weave, but it is about the number of simultaneous manipulations of the weave you're managing to control at a given time. A cantrip requires one manipulation. A 1st level spell requires you to manipulate 4 elements at once. 9 for 2nd, 16 for 3rd ... 100 for 9th.

Think of it as the folds of origami - and how many you could do within the span of an action. However, instead of folding paper, you're manipulating the weave to craft magic. I use this to explain why a typical person in my setting that studies magic their entire life might be able to manage third level magic - 16 folds in a few seconds. However, only those Touched by the Gods could manage to manipulate the weave 25, 64, or 100 times within a round.

Interesting. What method did you use to determine manipulations per spell level?

 

[the Jester]

No thanks. The Weave is Forgotten Realms lore that doesn't apply to my game- or to many other campaign settings. I find imposing FR lore on other settings alienating and disrespectful to DMs who homebrew.

EDIT: I am fond of the term "valences" for an in-world equivalent for spell slots and levels.

 

[Vaalingrade]

IT's an interesting concept for a single setting, but I'd like the weave to not be part of the general game.

 

[Kinematics]

"Tier" is also a relatively easy-to-use alternative. It implies increased complexity as the numbers go up without trying to tie the language to a particular cosmological view of magic.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Interesting. What method did you use to determine manipulations per spell level?

Looks like it's (Level + 1)^2

 

[Pedantic]

I'm fond of "circle" but the underlying point that we should have a different word for spell "level" and character "level" is definitely something I support.

I just had a reminder of how truly unintuitive this all is when trying to help a newer player level up a warlock recently. I could actually see the lightbulb moment when I explained there was no need to put their 5th-level character features into the 5th-level spell section of their character sheet, something that absolutely could have been avoided if the term was different from the outset.

 

[el-remmen]

In the past I have used "1st House, 2nd House, etc. . ."

So "Spells of the 9th House" are 9th level spells, for example and I prefer this nomenclature for in-world/in-game reference to different levels of spell power.

 

[Stormonu]

I'm fond of "circle" but the underlying point that we should have a different word for spell "level" and character "level" is definitely something I support.

I use both Circle and Tier in my homebrew world. The circles go 0-9, with Tier 1 holding 0-3rd Circle, Tier 2 hold 4th-6th Circle and Tier 3 holding Circle 7th-9th. There is a philosophical Tier 4, which holds spells of Circle 10th and up - but that's basically just considered "God magic".