D&D General Progressive Spells?

[dave2008]

I was thinking about the magic in D&D today and how some magic in D&D comes at such a low level compared to what we see in most fiction. That lead me to the idea of requiring spells to be learned in progression. So in order to learn the fly spell, you must learn the spells: gust of wind and levitate. To learn fireball you must first learn: burning hands and firebolt. Basically, you can't learn higher level spells without first learning lesser related spells, regardless of your level. I thought it was an interesting, if not original, concept and I was wondering if anyone has tried it their campaigns.

 

[Blue Orange]

This was actually in a couple of older editions: there were spell paths. I know I've seen it in the 2e Wizard's Spell Compendium and in Dragon #216, but I'm trying to think if I've seen it anywhere else.

 

[Faolyn]

They do that in GURPS. I hate it with a fiery passion.

Most of the reasons are GURPS-only things: since there's no levels and you can start out knowing any spell you want as long as you have the points for it and at least some Magery, it means if you want to create a character who can cast a single spell, you also have to take all that spell's prerequisites as well. Also, some of the prerequisite chains are ridiculous. IIRC, you have to learn more spells in order to cast the spell Haircut (which does exactly what it sounds like) than you have to learn in order to cast Decapitate (which also does exactly what it sounds like).

With D&D, it might be acceptable, at least if you only require one spell of the previous levels rather than the convoluted mess that GURPS has.

 

[Alzrius]

Clerical domains are kind of like this. Paths of Power, from Distant Horizons Games, takes the idea and runs with it, turning virtually all magic into domain-like paths, grouped by things like creature type, alignment, narrative archetypes, etc. The book is free, and there's an expansion over in Paths of Power II: Monstrous Paths.

A compiled version of both books can be found over on Lulu.

Please note my use of affiliate links in this post.

 

[Mistwell]

I was thinking about the magic in D&D today and how some magic in D&D comes at such a low level compared to what we see in most fiction. That lead me to the idea of requiring spells to be learned in progression. So in order to learn the fly spell, you must learn the spells: gust of wind and levitate. To learn fireball you must first learn: burning hands and firebolt. Basically, you can't learn higher level spells without first learning lesser related spells, regardless of your level. I thought it was an interesting, if not original, concept and I was wondering if anyone has tried it their campaigns.

My favorite rendition of spells was in Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed/Evolved where spells kind of did this.

 

[Charlaquin]

I was thinking about the magic in D&D today and how some magic in D&D comes at such a low level compared to what we see in most fiction. That lead me to the idea of requiring spells to be learned in progression. So in order to learn the fly spell, you must learn the spells: gust of wind and levitate. To learn fireball you must first learn: burning hands and firebolt. Basically, you can't learn higher level spells without first learning lesser related spells, regardless of your level. I thought it was an interesting, if not original, concept and I was wondering if anyone has tried it their campaigns.

I’d be very hesitant about such an idea, as I worry it would lead to the 3.5e feat chain problem, where you basically have to plan out your character progression in advance, having to take the right weak spells at the right levels so you can get to the spell you actually want later.

 

[cbwjm]

I remember a spell paths article in dragon during (I think) 2e which was like this. It also let you branch into other paths when you learned a spell in more than one path. It does create a very themed spell list which I do actually like, but I also think some players might be against the idea. Definitely been tempted to implement it in the past though.

 

[Ath-kethin]

The idea in D&D was popularized (though probably not actually started) by Wolfgang Baur and Steve Kurtz in a Dragon Magazine article back in 1995. It derives from the idea that most things we learn are learned on stages, going from less complex to more complex, and spells should work the same way.

So it make sense that a wizard (for example) would learn burning hands and scorching ray before learning fireball.

I loved the idea (especially since my two favorite Al-Qadim authors wrote the article and the example lists were AQ based). But it's a very difficult one to manage in D&D, both because there are so many spells that have nothing to do with anything else and because new spells have always been added so quickly that any list published would be out of date before the ink dried.

An issue discussed upstream - having to plan out ones spell progression in advance - actually doesn't apply quite that way here. The magic paths were self-contained but had some overlap. They also had a completely different spell progression, in which you learned paths instead of individual spells.

So say that at 2nd level you could know 2 paths, and one of your choices was the Path of Fire. That path had basically all the fire spells in it, but some of those fire spells were also in other paths for various reasons.

I've made several attempts to develop a similar workup for 5e, but I have nothing to show for the effort so far.

 

[dave2008]

They do that in GURPS. I hate it with a fiery passion.

I gather you hated the GURPS implimentation, but do you think it could work for you in D&D or are there things about the concept that you "hate with a fiery passion?"

 

[dave2008]

I’d be very hesitant about such an idea, as I worry it would lead to the 3.5e feat chain problem, where you basically have to plan out your character progression in advance, having to take the right weak spells at the right levels so you can get to the spell you actually want later.

That is a good point, but doesn't worry me to much with my group. If it is a concern for others, someone mentioned spell paths that might solve that issue. For instance you learn the "fire" path and can choose from any fire spells. Personally I like the idea you have to build up your spells and plan ahead. Though I do feel it should be logical. Also, if you want to learn fireball when you get to lvl 5 and you haven't learned the required spells, you can just learn them. It is not like it prevents you from getting fireball, you just have train/retrain in the prerequisite spells first. I could easily see that being handled in downtime.