D&D General "Effect as per the spell"

[Shardstone]

Sure. if we are talking specifically about introductory products meant to teach people the art of play, you do things a little different. I would still go for short concise descriptions (not just for spells, for everything) because I can't think of anything more intimidating to new players than a massive tome of rules and exceptions. But I would include some flavor tools. "When you first learn magic missile, you determine what form the missile takes (examples: glowing arrow, screaming skull, miniature dragon, etc)."

You're making one big mistake: assuming that this only applies to introductory players. There are many players who love D&D but will never fully grasp the ideas of reflavoring or on-the-spot idea creation within an introductory game's timeframe. I've had players who I've moved mountains to try and "get there" and still didn't' after 6 months to a year. And for many players who only play in short bursts of 6-10 sessions before putting the game down for a while, this skill will never be built up. Thus, keeping it to introductory adventurers is ignoring the reality of the customer base.

 

[Reynard]

You're making one big mistake: assuming that this only applies to introductory players. There are many players who love D&D but will never fully grasp the ideas of reflavoring or on-the-spot idea creation within an introductory game's timeframe. I've had players who I've moved mountains to try and "get there" and still didn't' after 6 months to a year. And for many players who only play in short bursts of 6-10 sessions before putting the game down for a while, this skill will never be built up. Thus, keeping it to introductory adventurers is ignoring the reality of the customer base.

Do you think that for those people the 350 word description of Detect Thoughts is key to their enjoyment of the game?

 

[Tony Vargas]

I feel pretty much the opposite way. The less detail the game gives beyond the basic mechanics of the thing, the more interesting it can be at the table. Maybe it is years of playing games like Hero, where you brought your own trappings to the powers, but in my opinion the best thing a spell description can do is tell me the numbers and get out of the way. For example, magic missile or spiritual weapon should not describe the thing at all. What appears to do the damage is based on the magic of the character, their god, the milieu, etc... The book telling you it is an arrow or the cleric's holy weapon or whatever actively gets in the way.

One of my players back in the day was really excited about a spell, Sense Shifting, that came out in some 2e supplement. It let you change what your other spells looked like. He liked to change the appearance of his phantom steed or, the one that stuck with me, make his fireball look like a laughing green skull instead of a pea-sized orange bead.

 

[Reynard]

One of my players back in the day was really excited about a spell, Sense Shifting, that came out in some 2e supplement. It let you change what your other spells looked like. He liked to change the appearance of his phantom steed or, the one that stuck with me, make his fireball look like a laughing green skull instead of a pea-sized orange bead.

That definitely sounds like a 2E spell.