OD&D Jon Peterson Shares Aronson's Original OD&D Illusionist

MrZeddaPiras · Mar 8, 2019

Aaron L said:
Did the D&D writers just pick a "magical" word at random for this group of spells?

I've always thought so. You summon monsters but you evoke energies. It works, I guess.

Aaron L · Mar 9, 2019

MrZeddaPiras said:
I've always thought so. You summon monsters but you evoke energies. It works, I guess.

I guess that makes sense in some way! Summoning is for physical things, evocation is for non-physical. I guess it's as good an explanation as we'll come up with.

I kind of pictured Evokers calling upon (evoking) extradimensional spirits/powers/deities to provide the energy, like Dr. Strange. The Crimson Bands of Cyttorak as an Evocation spell? (Bigby's Hand?) Shield of the Seraphim (Shield?) Daggers of Denak (Magic Missile?)

steeldragons · Mar 11, 2019

Von Ether said:
Those tables were done on a typewriter.

I'm in awe of that level of patience and lack of mistakes.

If only he could spell "invisible."

Aaron L said:
-snip-
Did the D&D writers just pick a "magical" word at random for this group of spells?

Anyone have any ideas about this? It's always kinda bugged me.

One need only look at the 1e Magic-user class level titles to know the answer to that is a hearty "yes." hahaha 3rd level? "Enchanter." 7th level? "Necromancer." Conjurer and Evoker are both in there. "Spellbinder," I think was one. Magician. Warlock. So, yeah. "Take a magical word referring to a magical thing and we'll just stick that in."

Defining the school, and then further "flavors" of arcane magic and types of magical practice is really a 2e and significantly more 3+e thing.

trancejeremy · Mar 12, 2019

Yeah, the level titles were something seemingly taken from a thesaurus.

In Chainmail, it was Seer, Magician, Warlock, Sorcerer, Wizard

In OD&D, it was Medium, Seer, Conjurer, Theurgist, Thaumaturgist, Magician, Enchanter, Warlock, Sorcerer, Necromancer, Wizard

In AD&D 1e it was Prestidigitator, Evoker, Conjurer, Theurgist, Thaumaturgist, Magician, Enchanter, Warlock, Sorcerer, Necromancer, Wizard, and then at 18th level Arch-Mage

From Oe to 1e you can see an attempt to change the first two from a more spiritualist theme to magic, even if Prestidigitator is more state magic

Von Ether · Mar 12, 2019

trancejeremy said:
From Oe to 1e you can see an attempt to change the first two from a more spiritualist theme to magic, even if Prestidigitator is more state magic

I know that was supposed to be stage magic, but go ahead and give a GM ideas for his next game.

Aaron L · Mar 12, 2019

steeldragons said:
If only he could spell "invisible."

One need only look at the 1e Magic-user class level titles to know the answer to that is a hearty "yes." hahaha 3rd level? "Enchanter." 7th level? "Necromancer." Conjurer and Evoker are both in there. "Spellbinder," I think was one. Magician. Warlock. So, yeah. "Take a magical word referring to a magical thing and we'll just stick that in."

Defining the school, and then further "flavors" of arcane magic and types of magical practice is really a 2e and significantly more 3+e thing.

Point taken, but even in 1E the spells were grouped into Schools of Magic which were listed at the top of the spell description, and most of the names of the Schools made some kind of sense by either the traditional meaning of the terms, or at least some kind of symbolic connection... all except Invocation/Evocation.

It's not a big thing, and doesn't actually mean anything in the long run. But ever since I started playing D&D when I was 14 and I understood what the names of all the Schools meant except for Invocation/Evocation, so I looked it up and discovered what the terms actually meant, and then did further research and discovered the Roman Invocatio and Evocatio rituals (and further remembered reading the name of the "Invocation" at the top of the little church program papers we got each Sunday morning back when I went, before I was ostracized and told I was going to Hell for playing D&D by a certain large group of church members, ironically, almost a decade after the height of the D&D Satanic Panic), it's just always stuck in the back of my mind and bugged me enough to not be able to forget about it.

I think I like MrZeddaPiras's explanation the best: one summons or conjures physical objects like monsters, but one invokes or evokes non-physical things like energies and elemental forces, either calling up forces from outside (invocation) or from inside oneself (evocation.) As for conjuring Elementals, well, those are whole creatures, so it is Conjuration/Summoning magic.

Tom B1 · Mar 15, 2019

If I recall correctly, the assumption back then was always that the majority of spell energy was drawn from elsewhere and only a small amount was needed to trigger the effect (because the full amount to power a fireball would kill a mage). This was just a 'how does it work' explanation, but it might shed some light on what's actually happening:

Power is being drawn from somewhere and focused and released in the current frame of reference.

So perhaps Evocation/Invocation should be Focusing or Channeling.

Mistwell · Sep 5, 2019

Just wanted to revive this thread as I finally read the full PDF. And wow. There is a concentration mechanic in there. And scaling spells. And a much larger diversity of spells focused specifically on illusions which the general wizard doesn't get. I love it.

CapnZapp · Sep 5, 2019

* confused *
* gets it *
This thread should probably be moved out of the Pathfinder forum

Zardnaar · Sep 5, 2019

Mistwell said:
Just wanted to revive this thread as I finally read the full PDF. And wow. There is a concentration mechanic in there. And scaling spells. And a much larger diversity of spells focused specifically on illusions which the general wizard doesn't get. I love it.

2E merged the illusionist spells into the general wizard spells.

Wizards only had a few.

Color Bomb is funny I had a 2E one that invented a colour go boom spell. It was basically prismatic spray 20' radius.