Intelligence is quite similar to what is currently known as
IQ, but it also includes mnemanic ability, reasoning,
and learning ability outside those measured by the written word.
Intelligence dictates the number of languages in which the character is
able to converse.* Moreover, intelligence is the forte of magic-users, for
they must be perspicacious in order to correctly understand magic and
memorize spells. Therefore, intelligence is the major characteristic of
magic-users, and those with intelligence of 16 or more gain a bonus of
10% of earned experience. Spells above 4th level cannot be learned by
magic-users with minimal intelligence, and intelligence similarly dictates
how many spells may be known and what level spells may be known, for
only the highest intelligence is able to comprehend the mighty magics
contained in 9th level spells. The tables below allow ready assimilation of
the effects of intelligence on all characters - and with regard to magicusers
in particular.

*Non-human characters typically are able to speak more languages than
are human characters, but intelligence likewise affects the upper limit of
their abilities as well, and there are racial limitations. (See CHARACTER RACES.)

DMG:

The intelligence rating roughly corresponds to our modern "IQ" scores.
However, it assumes mnemonic,
reasoning,
and learning ability skills in additional areas outside the written word.

INTELLIGENCE TABLE I.

Ability Score	-	General Information	Possible Number of  Additional Languages (Months to learn)	Illusion/Phantasm Immunity*	Wisdom Range  for Monsters
0	Non-intelligent or not ratable	-	0	-	<>
1	Animal intelligence	-	0	-	<>
2	Semi-intelligent	-	0	-	<>
3	^	-	0	-	<>
4	^	Min. INT for a half-elf character	0	-	<>
5	Low intelligence	Here or lower the character can only be a fighter	0	-	2-8
6	^	Min.  INT for a halfling character	0	-	^
7	^	Min.  INT for a gnome character	0	-	^
8	Average (human) intelligence	Min.  INT for an elf character	1 (12 months) <+1y>	-	3-12
9	^	Min.  INT for a paladin or M-U character	1 (12 months) <+1y>	-	^
10	^	Min.  INT for use of 5th level magic spells	2 (12 months) <+2y>	-	^
11	Very intelligent	Min.  INT for an assassin character <Min. INT for an anti-paladin>	2 (12 months) <+2y>	-	4-16
12	^	Min.  INT for use of 6th level magic spells	3 (12 months) <+3y>	-	^
13	Highly intelligent	Min.  INT for a ranger character	3 (11 months) <+2y9m>	-	4-16
14	^	Min.  INT for use of 7th level magic spells	4 (10 months) <+3y4m>	-	^
15	Exceptionally intelligent	Min.  INT for an illusionist character	4 (9 months) <+3y>	-	8-18 (2d6 + 6)
16	^	Min.  INT for use of 8th level magic spells	5 (8 months) <+3y4m>	-	^
17	Genius	Max. INT for a half-orc character	6 (7 months) <+3y6m>	-	8-18 (2d6 + 6)
18	^	Min.  INT for use of 9th level magic spells	7 (6 months) <+3y6m>	cantrips	^
19	Supra-genius	-	7 (5 months) <+2y11m>	1st	8-20 (4d4 + 4)
20	Supra-genius	-	7 (4 months)	2nd	^
21+	Godlike intelligence	-	7 (3 months)	3rd	9-24 (3d6 + 6)
22	^	-	7 (2 months)	4th	^
23	^	-	7 (1 month)	5th	^
24	^	-	7 (Instantaneous) <?>	6th	^
25	^	-	7	7th	^

* Spell immunities to illusion/phantasm spells.

INTELLIGENCE TABLE II.: ABILITY FOR MAGIC-USERS

Ability Score	Chance to Know Each Listed Spell	Minimum Number of Spells/Level	Maximum Number of Spells/Level
9	35%	4	6
10-12	45%	5	7
13-14	55%	6	9
15-16	65%	7	11
17	75%	8	14
18	85%	9	18
19	95%	11	All
20	96%	12	^
21	97%	13	^
22	98%	14	^
23	99%	15	^
24	100%	16	^
25	100%	17	^

SA: All of the info on Intelligence Table II applies to rangers as well.

Notes Regarding Intelligence Table II:

Each and every magic-user character must employ the Table in order to
determine which and how many of each group of spells (by level) he or
she can learn. At first, only the 1st level group of spells are checked.
Successive level groups are checked only when the character reaches a
level at which the appropriate group of spells is usable by him or her.

Chance to Know Each Listed Spell pertains to the %percentage%
chance the character has by reason of his or her intelligence to learn any given spell
in the level group.
The character may select spells desired in any order he or she wishes.
Each spell may be checked only once.
Percentile dice are rolled, and if the number generated is equal to or less than the percentage chance shown, then the character can learn and thus know that spell
(it may be in his or her spell books - explained hereafter).
    Example: A character with an INT of 12 desires to know a charm person spell
    that he finds in a book or scroll, percentile dice are rolled, but the number
    generated is 52, so that spell is not understood and can not be used by the
    character (see, however, the paragraph below regarding the minimum
    number of spells knowable).

<make a note about reversed spells here>

Minimum Number of Spells/Level states the fewest number of spells by
level group a magic-user can learn. If one complete check through the
entire group fails to generate the minimum number applicable according
to intelligence score, the character may selectively go back through the
group, checking each spell not able to be learned once again. This process
continues until the minimum number requirement has been fulfilled. This
means, then, that certain spells, when located, can be learned - while
certain other spells can never be learned and the dice rolls indicate which
ones are in each category. Example: The magic-user mentioned above
who was unable to learn a charm person spell also fails to meet the
minimum number of spells he or she can learn. The character then begins
again on the list of 1st level spells, opts to see if this time charm person is
able to be learned, rolls 04, and has acquired the ability to learn the spell.
If and when the character locates such a spell, he or she will be capable of
learning it.

Maximum Number of Spells/Level: is the obverse of the minimum number
which can be known. According to the character’s intelligence, this
maximum number which the magic-user can possibly know (have in his or
her spell books) varies from 6 to an unlimited number. As soon as this
maximum is reached, the character may not check any further in the level
group.

Anyone familiar with the ongoing debate
about I.Q. tests will know that the nature of
intelligence is problematic. In the nineteenth
century, scientists developed the
notion that intelligence was related to brain
size, and rigorous measurements were made
of the volume of the braincases of skull
specimens. In the mid-twentieth century,
the notion of a written intelligence test was
put forward, and received enthusiastically
by the scientific community. Flaws became
immediately obvious. To begin with, how
can an intelligence test in the form of a
paper-and-pencil quiz measure the intelligence
of someone who cannot read? According
to most of the theorists in the 1930s
and 1940s, intelligence was an innate, fixed
thing, inherent in the individual. In the
1950s and 1960s, a question arose about the
cultural bias of the most common tests.
Questions could be seen to be reflective of
the ethics and values of white, middle-class,
suburban men (by no coincidence, the very
group of people who had the most influence
in the design of the tests). Finally, the overreaching
question of the innateness of intelligence
arose: can intelligence be learned, or
is it something with which a child is born?
The ?nature versus nurture? issue is a
heated one to this day. For a more detailed
examination of the issue of I.Q. tests than
can be presented here, one book in particular,

The Mismeasure of Man, by Stephen
Jay Could (W.W. Norton and Company,
New York: 1981) is highly recommended.

Some common-sense observations are still
possible. Intelligence can depend on such
factors as health, the proper amount of
sleep, mental health, and surroundings.
Consider someone taking an I.Q. test in a
crowded room full of noisy people, while

suffering
from a cold, while having gotten
only three hours of sleep in the past fortyeight
hours, and while extremely worried
about the results of the test. One of the
many contributing factors to performance
on an I.Q. test is confidence. If the subject
feels confident and hopeful, he will do better
on the test. If the subject feels desperate,
worried, hopeless, or merely anxious about
the test, the results will not be as good. This
is known as the ?self-fulfilling prophecy,?
and suggests that a positive attitude may be
a strong part of appearing intelligent.

INT, in the real, uncontrolled world,
is largely a matter of appearance. We
might say that a man is "sharp as a whip",
or "very bright" if he is the first to notice
an error, the quickest to add up a column of figures,
or the one who comes up with the most clever wisecrack.
People are seen to be intelligent when they are observant,
methodical, or articulate.

Of these, being observant is perhaps the <compare to: Perception>
most readily learnable habit. People who
see what is actually right before their eyes
are in the minority. We fail to notice signs
and we tend to overlook even the most
obvious things, especially when we?re look-

for them. The joke about the person
failing to find his glasses because they are
pushed up on his forehead is a true one, as I
can vouch personally. So, quickly: What is
the license plate number of your family car?
What time of day does the daily newspaper
arrive? How often do you hear the songs of
birds or chirping crickets where you live?
Being observant is not simply a matter of
counting how many stairs there are in a
given staircase. I?m a compulsive stepcounter,
and yet I couldn?t tell you how
many trees there are in my front yard.

Being observant is, instead, a matter of
seeing the important things, at the time
they're important. Clearly an observant
person will be a better driver, and a poor
driver will be seen as a stupid driver, Seeing,
registering, and cataloging the items in
your field of vision is one important step
toward appearing intelligent.

Clear thinking is another. We all rationalize,
every day of our lives. An intelligent
person will stop, every now and then, and
review his assumptions about the way the
world works. Intelligence means reasoning
from cause to effect, or from effect to cause,
along logical paths. It is generally considered

stupidity to try to fit the facts to your
prejudices. For example, despite the thousands
of studies showing that seat-belts in
cars save lives, we still hear people saying,
over and over, "I'd rather be thrown clear
of a collision than crushed in it." The stupidity
of this idea is most evident when it is
examined closely. The people who say this
are doing no reasoning, and indeed are not
thinking the matter through from facts to
conclusions. Instead, they are trying to
justify their own unwillingness to fasten
their seat-belts. Intelligence is partly a
measure of the ability to react to the facts,
and to act in accordance with them. An
intelligent person will take the extra moment
to buckle up, knowing that it increases
his chances of surviving.

Intelligence can also be examined from
the point of view of learned tasks, or from
visual perception. The human brain is
divided into two hemispheres, each of which
controls different aspects of thought. The
left brain, in most people, governs verbal
reasoning, language skills, and logic. The
right brain governs such things as the perception
of visual relationships, music, and
the appreciation of artistic beauty. It has
been determined that most people are
stronger in one hemisphere of their brains
than in the other; thus, we find people who
are highly adept at language skills, while
others are skilled at art and music. In these
cases, although someone might have a head
start in one of these areas, the specialization
is more a matter of an advantage than a
disadvantage. For a left-brain-dominant
person to learn right-brain skills will be
more difficult, but it can be done. Practice,
as always, is the primary key to learning
any new skill.

Dragon #107b, Improving: Much of what is said above about dexter
also applies to the three "intangible" abilities --
intelligence, wisdom, and charisma.
A character can't train himself to be smarter
in all respects, but he can get better
at a specific task related to intelligence.

For instance, a character with average intelligence
finds a (non-magical) book that
contains a lot of detailed information about
red dragons. He knows the language the
book is written in, but even so he can't get much
out of the book the first time he examines it.
He puts the book in his sack of
equipment, takes it along on his group's
adventure, and spends every spare minute
reading it and studying it. After a time, he
will understand more of the book than
he did at first -- he will have made himself
more intelligent as far as reading this book
is concerned, and the extra time he's spent
should pay off in uncovering more and better information about red dragons.

Of course, there's a limit to how much
smarter someone can get in these circumstances.
No matter how long he studies the book,
a character with 12 INT won't
be able to understand as much of the writing
as someone with 18 INT could in the same amount of study time.
With the possible exception of the half-wits at the lower end of the INT scale,
anyone should be able to learn and retain more info about a subject through continued study and concentration.

The distinction may not be all that great,
but there is a difference between actual INT and the appearance of INT.
Jeff's article says that "INT
can depend on such factors as health, and
proper amounts of sleep, mental health, and
surroundings!" However, I think that
what he's talking about here is apparent INT.
Someone who messes up on an IQ test because he's in a crowded, noisy room isn't any less intelligent in those surroundings --
his INT simply hasn't fully manifested itself because his ability to concentrate was inhibited by the environment.
Compare this to a fighter with 18/00 STR who is teleported into a stone chamber the size of a telephone booth.
He still has the STR score of 18/00, but for all the good it's doing him at the moment, it might as well be a score of 3.
A character can be role-played so as to present the appearance of being more intelligent than he is,
but that has no bearing on what he can accomplish when he uses his intelligence.

THE FORUM
While I was rolling up a magic-user character
for the AD&D game, I ran upon a rule that
seems illogical to me, the “Maximum Number of
Spells/Level” rule on page 10 of the Players
Handbook. I had never encountered any problems
with this before, because the previous
magic-users I had played all had relatively high
intelligence scores and never had any problems.
This character, however, has an intelligence of 12
(I rolled him up the “old-fashioned” way, not one
of the new methods presented in the Dungeon
Masters Guide) and is approaching sixth level. <Also, Method V>
He already has 7 spells of both 1st and 2nd
levels in his books, and has found another. So, I
was forced to give some serious thought to the
maximum number of spells rule.

The rule seems illogical, both at first and after
a more careful examination. The limitation is not
on the number of spells that a character can
memorize at once, but it is instead on the number
of spells that he can keep in his books. That
doesn’t seem right.

A character’s intelligence is a measure of his
overall mental processes, including mental capacity,
reasoning power, and ability to cope with new
circumstances (see DRAGON issue #107). Intelligence
is not a measure of a character’s writing
ability (although a character with a low intelligence
would have difficulty writing well), as this
rule seems to imply. It seems to me that the
“Maximum Number of Spells/Level” should be
the maximum number of spells that a character
can memorize at one time within a spell level.
Allow me to explain further.

A character’s intelligence should certainly effect
his powers of memory. A more intelligent character
should be able to memorize more spells than a
less intelligent character. This principle comes
through in the rules in the “Wisdom Spell Bonus”
rule, whereby a cleric gains bonus spells for
having a high wisdom. Just because a magic-user
can’t memorize ten spells at once doesn’t mean
he can’t have ten spells in his books, selecting at
the beginning of a day which spells he wants to
memorize. After all, a person who is not of
exceptional intellect can still own a library.

I am definitely in favor of a limit on the number
of spells that a high-level magic-user can
carry around in his head at once. I am also in
favor of applying a little common sense to the
subject. From my point of view, the rule should
be changed to read “. . . According to the character’s
intelligence, this maximum number which
the magic-user can possibly know at one time
varies from six to an unlimited number.” Then,
to determine the number of spells that a magicuser
can know, consult the “Spells Usable by
Class and Level — Magic-Users” table on page
26 of the Players Handbook. If the chart on page
26 states that the number of spells that the character
can memorize of any given level is less than
or equal to the maximum number, then everything
is OK. If not, the character can only memorize
up to his maximum number, no matter how
many spells the chart says are usable by a character
of his level.

I do not think that this makes magic-users of
high levels unduly powerful (at least not any
more so than they already are), because of the
“Chance to Know Each Listed Spell” rule. This
rule states that if a magic-user wishes to learn
(place in his spell books) any given spell, he must
first roll equal to or less than his percentage
chance. If he doesn’t make the roll, then he can
never know that spell. Not only does this limit the
number of spells that a character will have in his
books (returning to the example of my character,
he will only make his percentage roll enough to
know an average of 10 spells per level of spell
levels 2-6), it is perfectly logical, considering that
real people “get” certain subjects better than
others (consider the student, like myself, who has
difficulty remembering dates).

There should be a limit on the number of spells
that a character can memorize, based on intelligence.
This limit should not extend to an arbitary
cut-off on the number of spells that he can have
in his books.

    Gordon Hull
    Murfreesboro, Tenn.
    (Dragon #109)

Change in Intelligence: If intelligence goes down or up for any reason,
and such change is relatively permanent, the magic-user must check again
as explained above far known spells by level group.

Acquisition of Heretofore Unknown Spells: Although the magic-user must
immediately cease checking to determine if spells are known after the first
complete check of each spell in the level group, or immediately thereafter
during successive checks when the minimum number of spells which can
be known is reached, it is possible to acquire knowledge of additional
spells previously unknown as long as this does not violate the maximum
number of spells which can be known. New spells can be gained from
captured or otherwise acquired spell books or from scrolls of magic spells.
In the latter event the scroll is destroyed in learning and knowing the new
spell or spells. (This subject is detailed more fully in the section explaining
magic-users as characters.)

A: Not at all -- each has a different purpose.
Here's how the system works: a
new 1st level magic-user receives a Spell
Book containing 4 spells (as per the
ACQUISITION section). As the magic-user
adventures, he/she will probably
have the opportunity to gain more spells
to copy into his/her Spell Book, either
from scrolls or other mages' Books. As
he/she comes across each heretofore-
unseen spell, the magic-user must make
a percentage dice roll to see if he/she
can ever understand that spell to memorize
it (using INTELLIGENCE TABLE II).
If he/she fails, he's out of luck on that
particular spell. The Maximum Number
of Spells/Level column shows how many
spells of each spell level a magic-user
can possibly understand with his or her
intelligence score. The Minimum Number
column shows the least number he/she
can understand. If, through bad luck, a
magic-user rolls below the number
needed for comprehension on so many
spells that he/she can understand less
than the minimum indicated, he/she
should reroll for the failed spells until the
minimum is achieved for that spell level.
Conversely, if more than the maximum
are understood, the excess (at the player's
choice) must be dropped.
- LJS (Polyhedron #1)
 

A: It happens to the best of us. If your
character can find a scroll of it, and if she
knows the write spell, she can study an d
cast it without understanding it fully. Or,
you can wait a few year; using the Age
Categories (DMG pg. 13), when Intelligence
changes due to aging, you can
recheck the chance to know. Of course,
high-power magic (wishes, times, etc.)
can also change IIntelligence. Good luck!
(Polyhedron #4)

Answer: The table on page 10 shows how many spells the caster
may know due to intelligence, not how many he/she can cast. These
spells are the ones which are written in the spell-caster’s spell books.
The table on page 26 indicates what levels of spells and how many
from each level may be memorized at one time (from the spell
books) for casting at a later time. As the Magic-User increases in
levels, so does his/her ability to learn and memorize more spells. The
tables are designed to be used together, not separately.
 

A. This question covers 3 distinct
areas. The 1st is how many spells a
M-U may remember (ie. have
ready for use) at any one time, the
2nd is which spells are in the
M-U's spell book, and the 3rd
is which spells the M-U is
capable of understanding.
    The number of spells that a M-U
may have on call in his mind is
given 'Spells Uable by Class
and Level -- M-Us' table on
p.26 of the PH.
    Spells in a M-U's spell book are
simply words written on a page, like
recipes in a cookbook.  They are
initially given to the M-U by
his master. M-Us usually start
with 4 spells, 1 being read magick,
and the others being determined
by the method given on page
39 of the DMG.
    With the exception of the initial
allotment of spells, the inculsion of a
spell in a M-U's spell book does
not mean that he can use it. The
spell's underlying logic and symbolism
must be understood before it can
be learnt and cast.  This is often
referred to as 'knowing' the spell, and
the rules for determining which spells
are known are given on page 10 of the
PH.
    In order to cast a spell the M-U
must fulfil all 3 conditions.  That
is, he must have the spell in his spell
book, he must be able to understand
(know) the spell, and he must be of
high level <enough> to hold the spell in his mind.
All this is in addition to acquiring the
spell 'recipe' in the 1st place, having
any material components <needed>, and taking
time to learn the spell. Magic use is
not a quick way to power, riches &
easy living.
(Imagine #1)

<move this to perception>
Illusion/Phantasm Immunity (Immunities to Illusion/Phantasm Spells):
Beings of very high intelligence will not be fooled by illusion/phantasm
spells; they will note some inconsistency or inexactness which will prevent
their belief in the illusion. A being with a 19 intelligence will never believe
a 1st level illusion/phantasm spell, even if cast by a high-level spell-caster,
and will thus avoid all effects.
All effects noted are cumulative (e.g. a 20 intelligence gives immunity to first
and second level illusions).
 

A: Illusion/phantasm spells from the illusionist
?s first-level spell list are first-level
illusions, even when several classes can
cast them. Phantasmal force, for example,
is a first-level illusion/phantasm, even
though it is a third-level spell for magicusers.
(145.12)

On another note, W. Brian Barnes was quite
correct in pointing out in issue #122 how weak
beginning magic-users really are. Giving the
class a spell bonus for high intelligence is one
way to give the class a boost in playability.
Below is the spell bonus table I use for magicusers
in my campaign.

Spell Bonus Table

Intelligence score	Spell bonus
11	None
12	One cantrip
13	One cantrip
14	One cantrip
15	One cantrip
16	One 1st-level
17	One 1st-level
18	One 2nd-level

This bonus gives the magic-user much more to
do at low levels without making the class too
powerful at higher levels. I also mandate that
magic-users do not gain the ability to memorize
the same spell more than once until the 5th
level of experience is attained. This forces the
player to use a broader range of spells instead
of loading up on nothing but magic missile,
sleep, and web spells.

Len Carpenter
West Chester PA
(Dragon #126)
 

There are still a few rough spots in the AD&D
game. One of these is the handling of magic-user
intelligence and spell capacity. I have come up
with fairly simple solutions to three of these
problems, as follows:

According to Intelligence Table II, a magicuser
with an intelligence of 18 can know up to
18 spells per level. With a 19, that goes to all, a
maximum of 30. With the new spells in
Unearthed Arcana, the number becomes 40,
even more extreme. The sequence is thus 6, 7,
9, 11, 14, 18, 40; the jumps are 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 22.

Therefore, the first change I made to the
chart was to set the maximum spells known at
19 intelligence to 24. Thus, the gap between 18
and 19 is only 6 instead of 22 +.

The second major problem also involves the
new spells, both from Unearthed Arcana and
other sources. Using the maximums as they are
severely penalizes existing mage characters
who, in many cases, already know their limit in
spells. It is also a problem for gamemasters who
would like to get some of those new spells into
the game but, if doing so by existing rules,
would either have to assign mages an intelligence
of 19 or force their players to start new
1st-level characters.

Again, a simple solution. The logic is that
“knowing” a spell well enough to cast it is actually
a matter of keeping track of the astrological
data, manna fields, and other technical things
which influence the use of magic. Hence the tiein
to intelligence: the smarter mage can keep
track of more sets of data at once. It is, therefore,
possible to drop an old spell and learn a
new one in my campaign. Doing so requires
nine days per spell level. During the first third
of this time, the old spell is still usable but with
a nasty modifier on the spell blowup table I use
for spell-casting in hazardous situations. For
those who do not use such a system, use the
chance to know as chance to cast successfully,
with a –15% for the first third. During the
middle third of the learning period, both spells
are available, with an even nastier failure modifier
of –40%. During the last third, the new
spell is available at –15%, as for the first third.
All of these numbers can be adjusted to fit your
campaign. If you feel that, even with the blowup
modifiers, having both spells available for a
third of the time is too much, simply change it
to neither.

A third problem involves the idea of the mage
never being able to learn a given spell. This one
is not so much an impediment to play, as are the
previous two, but a matter of style. Again, I
have a solution which works for my campaign
and is easy to fiddle with to adapt to others.

If a mage fails to learn a spell, he can try again
if he can find another, significantly different,
version. Each such new version will allow a
reroll of the chance to know, with the chance
halved each time, to a minimum of 5%. For
example, a mage with an intelligence of 16
wants to learn charm person. He has a 65%
chance, but rolls a 68. The spell makes no sense.
Some time laster, he finds a tome containing a
significantly different version of the spell. He
rolls again, this time having a 32% chance, and
gets an 18. He can learn the spell in this form.
Research can also produce a comprehensible
version of the spell in question, but costs are
doubled and the process must also involve the
full-time help of a mage who knows the spell
and is at least two levels higher than the level
required to cast it.

In addition to the obvious advantage to the
players, this system has a number of advantages
for the DM.  For one thing, it makes it somewhat
easier to devise treasures that are more than
just heaps of gold and gems.  There is a mage in
my campaign who is searching high and low for
a version of magic missile that he can learn;
finding it will be a greater reward than a pil eof
cash or even a magical item.  This sort of thing
also encourages good role-playing.  A second
handy feature of this system is the ease with
which PCs will part with their
money in the hopes of getting a comprehensible
version of the desired spell.  It's a good way of
removing excess cash from a campaign and does
not induce the sort of resentment that, say,
arbitrary taxation will.

Jeanne McGuire
State College PA
(Dragon #122)
 

I would like to suggest a change to Intelligence
Table II of the Players Handbook (p. 10). In my
opinion, the current data for magic-user ability
does not accurately reflect specific conditions
which should affect ability ranges listed. My
own changes which expand upon the table are
detailed in the following paragraphs.

First, the wizard?s ?base spell-power level of
efficiency? must be calculated by finding onethird
of intelligence, rounding as appropriate. A
wisdom of 18 adds 1 to the base number determined,
the result being the spell level of efficiency.
A 14 intelligence (with 18 wisdom) would
result in a base efficiency with sixth-level spells
(14/3 = 4.66, rounded to 5; 5 + 1 = 6).

What this means is that for sixth-level spells,
the magic-user?s proficiency with regard to
?maximum spells per level? and ?chance to
know spells? remains just as shown in the table,
with no modification (this does not include
experience of the mage, mentioned below). It is
well known that first-level spells are ?easier?
than second-level spells, which are ?easier? than
third-level ones, and so on. Gamers can put this
concept into a more mystic perspective: The
innate force manifestations stored within all
spells are of an increasingly arcane nature; thus,
the level attribute is assigned as a gauge of
relative complexity. With this in mind, consider
base efficiency as + 0 (0%). Each spell level
below this (i.e., the less complex incantations)
receives a cumulative + 1 (or 5%) bonus to
?max. spells/level? and ?chance to know,? respectively.
Conversely, each spell level above the
base power level (i.e., the more difficult ones) is
penalized by - 1 (or - 5%).

To make the data obtained even more progressive
or individualized, every experience level of
the mage (above first) improves the limits generated
above by + 0.2 (or + 1%); in other words,
+ 1 (5%) at 6th level, +2 (10%) at 11th level, etc.
Please note that the chance-to-know-spells
percentage may never go above 95% or below
5%, due to modifications brought about by this
new formula.

And now, the example: The same mage of 14
intelligence is also 14th level. Consulting the
magic-user ability table, we find that he has a
55% chance to know (and can learn a maximum
of) nine spells of the sixth level. (To use the
standing rules, he could illogically learn nine
ninth-level spells as easily as he could learn nine
first-level ones.) With my proposed formula, his
level (or rank, to avoid confusion) alone raises
this limit to a 69% chance and an 11-spell limit
with sixth-level spells. To rationalize, this
greater degree of ability would be due to his
extensive experience with matters arcane; a 1st
level magic-user with 18 intelligence would
justifiably find the casting of a first-level spell
more difficult than would a higher ranking
mage of lesser intelligence. Taking spell power
and character experience into account, our
exemplified mage may know 74% of the fifthlevel
spells he tries to learn, retaining a maximum
of 12 spells of that level; he may know
64% of the seventh-level spells he tries to learn,
and can retain only 10 of those spells.

It should be pointed out that the rules for
intelligence minimums needed to cast spells of
higher levels as shown in Intelligence Table I (14
intelligence limits spell-casting to spells of the
seventh level of power, for instance) are a good
compliment to this new rule, assuring that a
situation will not arise where a character is of a
level where he is able to cast spells of a certain
power but has a maximum of zero learnable
spells in that category. With that in mind, the
overriding of the ?minimum spells/level? data
should prove no great problem.

Christopher Earley
Mastic NY
(Dragon #130)

NOTES BY GARY GYGAX

A spell can be known only when the character is able to use spells.
Thus the check is done when the new PC is seeking to fill his 1st level spell book.
As new levels are gained, and with that added spells, the player again checks for the PC.

We allowed the player to decide on which spell was to be known, then dicing to see if it was.
When all slots were filled, the process ended until a new level was gained.

Cheers,
Gary