D&D General What is a "spell"? What isn't?

[Micah Sweet]

In-world I treat Spells as only things that arcane casters know, use and cast. Any other magic might be given the nomenclature of "spells" in the rulebooks for the ease of game clarification, but I don't consider them "Spells" in-game.

For instance... a High Elf's cantrip they get for free I just consider to be a magical effect they get for being highly magical creatures. It might have the name of an official "cantrip" in the rulebooks... but I find it kinda lame from a world-building perspective to consider that all High Elves have had to "learn" how to "cast one cantrip spell" (and that's all!) at one point in their lives... rather than just having some innate magical ability to do X. To me... they are magical, they can do X magical effect, and we only just USE the concept of cantrips and spells from the game rules perspective to make it easier for players to run and understand it as they play.

Likewise... the Path of the Totem Warrior can "cast" the beast sense and speak with animals "spells" but only as "rituals". But to me... thinking of them doing the exact same things that Wizards do is like really, really lame. That these barbarians "cast spells" just like Wizards. So I don't treat them like that at all. To me... these are both just natural abilities that barbarians have that produce the effects of what you would get from beast sense and speak with animals spells. But I don't see them as spells and don't treat them as spells. I basically treat them like their own individual class features that the rule book could have written out fully (like they do for other barbarian features like Rage or Unarmored Defense) but chose to just say "it's these two spells" because it saved space and explanation time in the rules.

And it's also the way I get around the whole "All Rangers are magical spellcasters" debate too. If having a Ranger that does not cast spells is important to someone... the easiest way to do it is just select those Ranger "spells" that can essentially be considered non-magical and treat their effects as if they were not spells and just Ranger class features. A Ranger can move an extra 10 feet a round? Sounds completely plausible. So let's just wipe away the fact that those 10 feet come from the Ranger "casting" the longstrider spell... and just say that this particular Ranger is particularly fast. Or that when the Ranger heals someone, they are using their knowledge of herbs and natural remedies to do so rather than "casting" cure wounds.

The Spells section is what it is just for ease-of-use. So I don't get hung up on it.

I really like this idea. The only problem with it is you have to adjucate between spell and not-spell on a case by case basis, which can be tedious.

Oh well. I have a 300+ book of house rules, so tedious obviously isn't a problem for me!

 

[Reynard]

[snip]

So...yeah...long story long, that's what a spell "is/is not" in my world.

This whole post is right up my alley on this subject. Thanks.

 

[Reynard]

In the like of what @FitzTheRuke said, a spell is an conscious effort to use magic in order to produce a predictable effect. Conscious intention and predictable effect(s) are keyword here, regardless whether words, gestures, ingredients, or even casting time/duration are used or not.

By this logic, most of the non-berserker barbarian rages are spells and for no good reason that just doesn't feel right.

 

[Laurefindel]

By this logic, most of the non-berserker barbarian rages are spells and for no good reason that just doesn't feel right.

You could argue that rage voluntarily induces a state, but that this state in turns provoke involuntary magical effects. Note here that « involuntary » does not necessarily means unwanted or even unexpected, a bit like a character slipping on a cloak of invisibility.

I don’t have my books, but can non-berserker barbarians choose to have a « regular rage » without additional effects, or are the effects always there regardless whether they make use of the said effects or not?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

My own head canon is that all all non divine spells are rituals that. For casters like Wizards, Warlocks and Sorcerers they are rituals that act as templates to shape magic that are held by the caster in their magic aura and released by words and gestures. So for example, with regards to counterspell, I would not allow a counter spell to a subtle spell. The caster counterspelling is relying on familiarity with magic to interrupt the other casters spell release.
Thus, the new spells, are not counterspelling because those npc casters have made the effort to make those specific magical spell impossible to counter spell.
If a pc caster wanted to do something similarly I would let them make a deception check to pull it off.
Clerics I regard as using prayer and the spell effect is the divine response, the player is acting as the god by picking the spell.

 

[Laurefindel]

My own head canon is that all all non divine spells are rituals that. For casters like Wizards, Warlocks and Sorcerers they are rituals that act as templates to shape magic that are held by the caster in their magic aura and released by words and gestures. So for example, with regards to counterspell, I would not allow a counter spell to a subtle spell. The caster counterspelling is relying on familiarity with magic to interrupt the other casters spell release.
Thus, the new spells, are not counterspelling because those npc casters have made the effort to make those specific magical spell impossible to counter spell.
If a pc caster wanted to do something similarly I would let them make a deception check to pull it off.
Clerics I regard as using prayer and the spell effect is the divine response, the player is acting as the god by picking the spell.

This works well in a vancian setting.

 

[Reynard]

You could argue that rage voluntarily induces a state, but that this state in turns provoke involuntary magical effects. Note here that « involuntary » does not necessarily means unwanted or even unexpected, a bit like a character slipping on a cloak of invisibility.

I don’t have my books, but can non-berserker barbarians choose to have a « regular rage » without additional effects, or are the effects always there regardless whether they make use of the said effects or not?

I'm not sure that's relevant. You can't cast fireball but restrict the are to 5'radius (barring some other feature). A storm barbarian (whatever they are called) does a thing with intention that creates an effect. That is a spell by the (I think) overly broad definition you cited.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

This works well in a vancian setting.

Well yeah that is the whole point. I will admit that while I was heading that way my self I was also influenced by

Warspell: The Merge a book by Gorg Huff and Paula Goodlett

 

[bloodtide]

I think the important part about a spell is that it is a set formula for making an EXACT magical effect. A person that knows how can take some magic and shape it into a very specific effect. A spell can be written down and taught to anyone that can use magic. In theory a spell can do anything, you just need to figure out the correct way to shape and cast the magic.

And a single spell is exactly the same across the Multiverse. Every single person in all of Infinity cast the EXACT SAME fireball spell....or any other spell. Sure there are variations and custom spells....but those are very clearly other spells. Travel to the other side of the world....or reality....and buy a scroll of Fireball and it will be the EXACT same spell you could have just bought right down the road at Alo's Scroll Emporium.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I tried to ask this question from the opposite direction. The results weren't particularly enlightening.

For me, a spell is a pre-defined, packaged unit of magic with a formal or semi-formal structure, at specific power levels which are interchangeable (e.g. you have "level 1 spells.") Wizards, Clerics, Bards, Warlocks, and (maybe) Druids cast spells. Personally, I'd prefer Sorcerers didn't cast spells and instead approached magic in a fundamentally different way, but I could have tolerated the D&D Next "spell point" mechanic being the Sorcerer way of doing things.

Other classes have other ways of doing magical things. Paladins have Litanies. Shamans might have "spirit calls." Etc.