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".

 

[cbwjm]

For an FR game, I quite like the term layer. Weave also makes me think of threads, as in plucking threads of magic from the weave to cast your spells.

My favourite term though, is circle because I can use it as a title or a threat. The PC wizard might be Mallacos, Initiate of the 3rd Circle; the party might be facing off against someone who yells "You dare face Balthazar, Master of the 7th circle!".

 

[pukunui]

For an FR game, I quite like the term layer. Weave also makes me think of threads, as in plucking threads of magic from the weave to cast your spells.

My favourite term though, is circle because I can use it as a title or a threat. The PC wizard might be Mallacos, Initiate of the 3rd Circle; the party might be facing off against someone who yells "You dare face Balthazar, Master of the 7th circle!".

That does have a nice ring to it. The only problem is that now it clashes with the name for druid subclasses.

 

[jgsugden]

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

[Spell level +1] squared.

Cantrip is [0+1] squared. 1st level is [1+1] squared = 4 .... 9th level is [9+1] squared = 100.

In my setting there are two types of humanoids: Normal and God Touched. God Touched have the potential to advance like PCs do. Normal humans might spend an entire life devoted to studying the arcane in order to become a 5th level spellcaster capable of 3rd level spells. When I settled upon using the idea of the Spell Weave (which I thought I took from the FR setting, but I used years before they introduced it, so I'm not sure how I came to use it as I'm not familiar with pre-FR usage source materials - I may have stolen it from another DM?) I began to ask what spellcasters did with the weave. Weaving, manipulating, folding, etc... all made sense, and I played around with the idea. When I thought about what one of these 'masterful' 5th level normal human wizards might be doing while spellcasting, I played out how much a person might be able to do within a few seconds to cast a spell - and I felt like the number of manipulations per second made sense to tell a good story around spellcasting.

A 3rd level spell takes ~16 manipulations in a few seconds, or 3 to 5 per second. If you look at someone that has mastered something like a Rubic's Cube, you can see them make about that many moves per second over a few seconds.

Having this as a foundation allows me to apply it to how the rules work to make the story of my setting fit the mechanics. Over the decades I have developed a huge amount of lore surrounding how my magic works that provides explanations for why psionics and supernatural magics are not impacted by Dispel Magic, how a quickend spell works, and how a cleric and druid are different. It even explains things like why intelligence based spellcasters tend to have more trouble with healing magic (because the manipulation it requires is hard to do when trying the meticulous sequesntial spellcasting of a wizard while it is easier with magics based upon force of will or divine intervention).

A wizard and/or artificer is a precise caster that uses precise sequential manipulations to carefully craft each and every manipulationat blistering speeds. A sorcerer exerts their force of personality/will on the weave causing several manipulations to manifest at once. A warlock is touching the weave, but the manipulation of it comes from their patron. A cleric or paladin calls out to the divine and the divine manipulates the weave. A druid or ranger is one with the weave (from the source of it in the Positive Energy Plane to the end of it in the Negative Energy Plane) and understands how to let the natural flow of magic within the weave manipulate itself as needed - opening the floodgates in the right way to allow the magic to flow as needed rather than manipulating it or forcing it through will or divine intervention. Psionic magics, on the other hand, don't touch the spell weave, so are independent of it (and are generated from within a being instead of prom an external source).

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

[Spell level +1] squared.

Cantrip is [0+1] squared. 1st level is [1+1] squared = 4 .... 9th level is [9+1] squared = 100.

Thanks for the insights and math. It is interesting thematically, but I suppose I'm looking for a way to keep the existing numbers relevant, while using/creating terminology that clearly differentiates previously similar terms. I guess I'm not as comfortable adding more math and numbers that don't have a mechanical benefit. I'm glad it's been working for decades for you!

 

[Yaarel]

Some think it is less than ideal for the word "Level" to have multiple definitions for PC use.

I like psionics, namely the power of ones own mind to alter reality by means of intention and wish.

Psionics is autonomous and doesnt rely on the Weave.

The Weave is the ambient magical potential that is inherent in all that exists. Wizards exploit the Weave analogous to how reallife scientists exploit physical properties such as molecular bonds and radio waves. Clerics exploit the Weave by means of language and symbols, namely the power of cultures and the meaningfulness of creation.

The Sources of magic are Arcane, Divine, Primal and Psionic.

• Arcane and Divine rely on the Weave.

• Primal and Psionic rely on the existential and transcendent aspects of ones own Mind.

In the case of Primal, inanimate objects such as a river, a mountain, a tree, have minds in an animistic sense. Their minds arent human − the river wants to flow like a river − but they entangle the properties of consciousness and have a kind of will.



Regarding the term for more powerful spells, I find myself using the term spell "slot" instead of spell "level". For example, Fireball is a "slot 3 spell".

 

[jgsugden]

...It is interesting thematically, but I suppose I'm looking for a way to keep the existing numbers relevant, while using/creating terminology that clearly differentiates previously similar terms...

Can you give us an example of the concern you're thinking about when you say, "while using/creating terminology that clearly differentiaes previously similar terms"? Do you mean just avoiding using level as part of caster level and spell level? Or is there more to it?

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Can you give us an example of the concern you're thinking about when you say, "while using/creating terminology that clearly differentiaes previously similar terms"? Do you mean just avoiding using level as part of caster level and spell level? Or is there more to it?

For this thought, exercise, I was only referring to class and spell level. As an example of how confusing it has been for some, in 4E they tried to make spell levels correlate to class level (via powers), citing one of the confusing things that the word "level" was used in more than one way by spellcasters.

My idea was to not change the definition of "spell level" to match "class level", rather to come up with a different word for "spell level" that still felt familiar to "level."
.
And I know some people don't like the word "Weave" for magic but the D&D Universe is not a generic universal mechanic system. It has its own lore and mechanics as a baseline and throughout the editions, Wizards has been trying to hammer out what their base lore looks like. For example, looking at the Outer Planes in the DMG, and bringing back Planescape, makes it look like they are going back to the Great Wheel rather than the similar World Axis cosmology, but recent lore suggests they might continue to use a variation of the Dawn War with Dragons, Giants, Titans, (and maybe Primordials), Oh My!

With that in mind, Wizards has been leaning into using the "Weave" in their examples. I was just capitalizing on that. Other realms can call the weave of Magic what they want, but Wizards looks to be creating a baseline Multiverse that all worlds are a part of. Well, it looks that way to me at least.

 

[Yaarel]

And I know some people don't like the word "Weave" for magic but the D&D Universe is not a generic universal mechanic system. It has its own lore and mechanics as a baseline and throughout the editions.

The "Weave" is unique to the Forgotten Realms, even according to the 5e Players Handbook.

Other D&D settings never refer to the Weave. The D&D editions are notably silent and neutral about a "theory of magic" to explain how magic works.

Even the Forgotten Realms setting includes psionics and has lore about how psionics works. According to FR lore, a Psion manifests a personal weave, like an aura around the Psion. This personal weave is independent of the Weave and has no reliance on the Weave.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

I like psionics, namely the power of ones own mind to alter reality by means of intention and wish.

Psionics is autonomous and doesnt rely on the Weave.

The Weave is the ambient magical potential that is inherent in all that exists. Wizards exploit the Weave analogous to how reallife scientists exploit physical properties such as molecular bonds and radio waves. Clerics exploit the Weave by means of language and symbols, namely the power of cultures and the meaningfulness of creation.

The Sources of magic are Arcane, Divine, Primal and Psionic.

• Arcane and Divine rely on the Weave.

• Primal and Psionic rely on the existential and transcendent aspects of ones own Mind.

In the case of Primal, inanimate objects such as a river, a mountain, a tree, have minds in an animistic sense. Their minds arent human − the river wants to flow like a river − but they entangle the properties of consciousness and have a kind of will.



Regarding the term for more powerful spells, I find myself using the term spell "slot" instead of spell "level". For example, Fireball is a "slot 3 spell".

Yaarel, I've read lots of your posts about your home game's lore and underpinnings of your universe, and I can't help but clearly recognize that they are personal ideas that you seem to call out as truths, or state as facts for the game. What you are describing is not the lore of D&D to me, so I just look at your ideas and consider them on their own merits and what potential value they bring to me. Maybe because D&D has tried all kinds of potential lore, and I view that old lore the same way. What can it add to my own game?

For example, I see that magic alters reality, and Sorcerers alter reality even further by altering magic itself. (Which is why a psionic sorcerer subclass appeals to me. It has built in mechanics to use "subtle spell," for instance.)

Where does it say again in 5E that Psionics is a different source, rather a different way to access one of the known sources? Also, Primal does not seem to me a "Mind" power, any more or less than Divine is. Primal is the Primal forces of Nature.

Also, because this thread is about in-game narrative, what is a sorcerer actually saying if they use the word "slot"? A slot of what? To me, that word has no relevance to me in magic lore, rather it is just rulebook jargon.

In fact, just off the top of my head, I would rather call Bard spell levels "grooves" because at least thematically, grooves are slot-like, and records have grooves that the needle follows. Why doesn't a bard synch with a "groove" of magic, join the melody, and manipulate magic from those metaphysical vibrations? ... That's actually pretty cool to me.

 

[GMMichael]

Layer: better. But it's still quantitative. What about colors? Animals? My favorite so far: body parts, ascending. Head magic = level 9.