When a magic-user casts a detect magic
spell, there is a 10% chance per level of the
spell caster that he will also learn the type of
magic involved (alteration, abjuration,
etc.). In the case of magic spells, this is a
simple, if troublesome, matter to deal with.
A door that has been wizard locked, for
example, will be seen as being affected by
alteration magic, and a person who has
been charmed is under the influence of an
enchantment/charm type of spell. These
things can be determined by looking up the
appropriate spell description in the Players
Handbook.

It isn?t quite as easy as that when detect
magic is cast on a magic item. What response
would be received if the spell was
used on a rod of cancellation? A crystal
ball? Drums of panic? The descriptions of
these and other items do not mention the
types of magic involved. To give players all
of the information to which they are entitled,
it is necessary to understand the rationale
behind the system of classification.

Among the magic-user spells listed in the
AD&D® Players Handbook, there are 9
types of magic: abjuration, alteration,
conjuration/summoning, divination,
enchantment/charm, evocation, illusion/
phantasm, necromantic, and possession.
Cleric spells include all of these except
possession, and add one more: invocation.

A study of the spell explanations establishes
a logical pattern within this system of
classification, but some of the listings are
not consistent with the pattern. Also, some
spells are difficult to classify because their
manner of functioning does not clearly fit
any of the defined magic types. This article
will first define the pattern, then discuss the
inconsistencies and ambiguities, and finally
will address the matter of magic items.

According to Webster's Unabridged
Dictionary, "abjuration" is a rejection or
denial. In AD&D game terms, a spell is of
the abjuration variety if it eliminates or
prevents something. Protection from evil,
for example, prevents evil creatures from
touching those who are protected by the
spell. Remove curse will eliminate a curse,
cure blindness and cure disease will eliminate
the conditions of blindness and disease,
globe of invulnerability prevents spells from
penetrating, and protection from normal
missiles bestows complete protection from
nonmagical missiles.

Note that the various cleric spells that
cure wounds (light, serious, or critical) are
not abjuration, for these spells do not eliminate
injuries. Instead, they heal a certain
(random) number of hit points. This healing
might be enough to restore the creature
to full health, but this is not assured. And
though the magic-user shield spell functions
in a manner similar to protection from
normal missiles, the shield spell is not abjuration
because it does not provide complete
protection ? it merely gives the recipient a
better armor class against certain forms of
attack.

Divination is any sort of magic that provides
information. Detect anything (charm,
evil, invisibility, lie, magic, snares & pits),
find the path, find traps, identify, know
alignment, legend lore, locate object, and
predict weather are examples of divination
spells. This is a rather straightforward
classification.

Illusion/phantasm spells are those that
make things appear other than they truly
are. Audible glamer and phantasmal force
are obvious examples of illusion magic.
Invisibility gives something the appearance
of nothing. Hallucinatory forest or terrain,
Leomund?s trap, and ventriloquism are
other examples of illusion/phantasm spells.

Outside of the AD&D game, necromancy
usually refers to divination with the aid of
dead spirits. Within the game, any spell
that deals with dead things is considered
necromantic. Animate dead, raise dead,
reincarnation, resurrection, and speak with
dead deal directly with dead creatures.

The necromantic aspects of other spells
might be less obvious. The cleric and druid
spells that cure wounds can be considered
necromantic because they repair and restore
life to dead cells and tissue, and regeneration
functions in a similar fashion.-

Spells of the enchantment/charm variety
are used to dominate the will of other creatures.
Charm spells will cause the victim to
treat the spell caster like a trusted friend,
geas will force a creature to carry out some
service, and Otto?s irresistible dance will
make the victim dance involuntarily.

A while back, letters printed in ?Out on
a Limb? debated the manner in which the
hold spells function. The fact that the hold
spells are of the enchantment/charm type
provides an answer, albeit one that might be
a little hard to swallow. Since the type of
magic is that which dominates a creature?s
will, perhaps the victim merely believes that
it is impossible to move. The same reasoning
might apply to spells such as sleep and
finger of death. However, it might seem
more reasonable to suppose that these spells
belong to a different classification.

Evocation and conjuration/summoning
are similar but distinct forms of magic. Both
types of sorcery call forth something of a
different type.

Evocation brings forth energy; a magic
missile is an energy projectile, shield is a
barrier of energy, and lightning bolt is a
flash of electrical energy.

If we choose to accept the classification of
certain spells as evocation magic, that definition
can give a clue as to how those spells
function. Each of the Bigby?s hand spells
evidently brings forth an energy field in the
shape of a hand. The cleric?s blade barrier
and the magic-user?s Tenser?s floating disc
would be constructs of energy, rather than
of matter. The creations of the fireball and
delayed blast fireball apparently are purely
magical fire, since there is no physical substance
to burn ? evocation does not create
matter.

Strictly speaking, conjuration and summoning
should be considered 2 different 
types of magick.  Both types call forth matter, 
but each does so in a different fashion.  The 
druid spells fire seeds and wall of thorns 
create matter, and thus might be considered 
conjurations.  Most of the other conjuration/summoning 
spells simply entice or compel 
creatures to come to the spell caster.  Cacodemon, 
conjure elemental, find familiar, 
invisible stalker, and summon insects are 
examples of spells that summon creatures. 

Because only one spell is classified as
invocation magic, we don?t have enough
information to discern a pattern. This spell
is spiritual hammer, and according to the
description, ?the cleric casting a spiritual
hammer spell brings into existence a field of
force which is shaped vaguely like a hammer.
? This sounds very much like a process
of evocation, and no clear reason is evident
for why this is not an evocation.

Perhaps a hint can be found later in the
spell description, where it says ?The material
component of this spell is a normal war
hammer which the cleric must hurl towards
opponents whilst uttering a plea to his or
her deity.? Perhaps this spell is not considered
an evocation because the energy is
supplied directly by a deity. However, by
that reasoning, any evocation spell usable
by a cleric would actually be an invocation.
There are only two cleric spells defined as
evocations: blade barrier and flame strike.
Perhaps a reasonable consistency could be
achieved by redefining these as invocations.

But the power for any cleric spell comes
from the cleric?s deity, so if we follow that
line of reasoning to its logical conclusion all
cleric spells would be considered invoca-
tions. This is not necessarily an unreasonable
suggestion, since both the Players
Handbook and Dungeon Masters Guide
make references to "cleric spells" and "magic
spells" as two distinct systems of spell
casting. Perhaps cleric spells (including
druid spells) are a completely separate
system, and thus do not belong in a classification
framework that features terms such
as abjuration and alteration.

However, the DMG also states that "All
magic and cleric spells are similar in that
the word sounds, when combined with
whatever patterns are applicable, are
charged with energy from the Positive or
Negative Material Plane. When uttered,
these sounds cause the release of this energy,
which in turn triggers a set reaction. The
triggering action draws power from some
plane of the multiverse. Whether the spell is
abjuration, conjuration, alteration, enchantment,
or whatever, there is a flow of
energy . . ." In this respect, the two systems
of spell casting are identical.

Ultimately, the individual DM will decide
which system is more appropriate to his
campaign, but it seems more logical to
retain the current system -- where cleric
spells are defined in the various categories
of magic -- while possibly eliminating the
invocation category, and considering the
spiritual hammer spell to be an evocation.

The category of alteration magic contains
more spells than any other group, and the
classification appears to be a catch-all; the
pattern seems to be that if a spell does not
fall within the definition of any other category,
then it is an alteration. But perhaps
we can do better than that.

Start with the name: "alteration" implies
that something is being altered. That isn't
much help, because all spells alter something.
To get more specific, it might be said
that spells which directly alter the properties
-- the actual properties, rather than the
appearance, as is the case with illusions --
of some creature or object can be considered
alteration magic. The key word here is
"directly." A fireball spell will certainly alter
the properties of creatures and objects, but
it does so by evoking a magical fire. Similarly,
a lightning bolt spell will alter properties
by evoking a bolt of electricity. But
neither of these spells operates directly on
that which is being altered.

In contrast, astral spell simply alters the
spell caster's location within the planes.
Continual light alters the properties of an
object to make it glow, feather fall alters the
weight of the recipient, the polymorph spells
alter the form of a creature, and teleport
alters the location, to give a few examples.
In each of these cases, the spell?s effects
operate directly on that which is to be
altered,

But even this does not fully explain the
distinction of the alteration classification.
By the reasoning given here, it can be argued
that all enchantment/charm spells are
alterations. After all, they directly alter the
victim's will. One might say that the enchantments
dominate a creature's will by
affecting its mind, and thus the effects are
not direct -- but this sounds like a feeble
exercise in semantics. There doesn?t seem
to be any single rule for classifying spells as
alterations, except that they do not fit into
any of the other categories.

This brings us to the ambiguities and
inconsistencies in the spell classifications.
Comprehend languages is listed as an alteration,
when it might seem to be divinational
in nature. Perhaps this spell functions by
altering the spell caster?s intellect, rather
than merely providing the spell caster with
information. Some might find this rationale
difficult to accept, and they might want to
place comprehend languages in the category
of divination.

If we choose to accept the comprehend
languages spell as an alteration, perhaps
other divination spells could also be classified
as alterations. Clairvoyance "empowers
the magic-user to see in his or her mind
whatever is within sight range from the spell
locale chosen." Furthermore, light is a
factor in determining what the spell caster
will see. So, clairvoyance does not merely
provide the caster with information, such as
what is in the area that he has chosen to
scan. The spell alters the magic-user's perception,
allowing him to actually see another
place. Could clairvoyance then be
considered an alteration spell?

With a bit of thought, it would be possi
ble to present arguments that could place
many spells into whatever category you
choose. But this sort of semantic exercise is
futile for our purpose, which is simply to
provide a rationale for the spell classification
system. This purpose is best served by
accepting only the simplest explanations for
placing spells in their categories, and avoiding
convoluted arguments which might
justify placing spells in whatever category
suits your fancy. In other words, clairvoyance
and comprehend languages should be
considered divinations, since they provide
information to the spell caster.

The magic-user spell fear is listed as an
illusion/phantasm spell, although its description
("causes creatures within its area
of effect to turn away from the spell caster
and flee in panic") seems to indicate magic
of the enchantment/charm variety. Perhaps
this effect is accomplished by creating an
illusion of something fearful, similar to the
illusionist spell phantasmal killer. This does
not seem likely, though, since the explanation
of the phantasmal killer spell is explicit
in the description of the illusion, while the
explanation of the fear spell does not mention
any illusion.

Certain spells that are defined as necromantic
do not seem to belong on that list.
Feign death gives the appearance of being
dead, while not actually having anything to
do with death or dead things. This could be
interpreted to indicate that the spell is an
illusion, except that it does not merely
change an appearance -- the recipient is
altered somewhat for the duration of the
spell. Slow poison also does not deal with
anything that is dead, not even to the point
of preventing death (which still would not
make it a necromantic spell). These spells
are alterations, and the druid spell cure
disease is an abjuration.

Possibly because the types of magic are
similar, there are several conjuration/
summoning spells listed as evocations, and
vice versa. Cloudkill, ice storm, stinking
cloud, walls of ice, iron, and stone, and web
all bring forth matter, and thus should be
considered not evocations but conjurations.
Evocations that are on the conjuration/
summoning list include flame arrow, maze,
and unseen servant.

The type of magic called ?possession? is
an inconsistency in itself. There is only one
spell in that category, the magic-user's
magic jar. The spell description states that
"it enables the magic-user to take over the
mind of the victim, and thus control the
creature's body." This is clearly an enchantment.
The description also states that "the
spell caster transfers his or her life force to a
special container (a large gem or crystal) . . ."
This indicates magic of the alteration
type. It would seem that magic jar should
be classified as "alteration, enchantment/
charm," and the class called "possession"
should be eliminated.

It is not clear why the spell enchant an
item is defined as conjuration/summoning
magic. No matter is brought forth, either by
outright creation or by summoning any
creature. Limited wish and wish are also
listed as conjuration/summoning spells, and
neither of these brings forth matter, at least
not directly. Defining these spells as
conjuration/summoning creates still another
pattern within the classification system.
They seem to be alteration spells, and perhaps
they belong on that list.

But consider this: Perhaps these spells are
conjuring a type of power. That sounds like
an evocation, but the spells listed as evocations
bring forth energy that is both tangible
and observable. The power brought forth
by these "strange" conjurations is neither
tangible nor observable, but is far more
powerful. Enchant an item does nothing in
itself, other than preparing an item to receive
other spells. It causes no physical or
visible change in anything, yet without this
spell it is impossible to magick an item.

A wish spell is the most powerful magic
that any mortal can cast. Depending on the
exact wording of the spell, it might invoke
other types of magic -- alteration, evocation,
necromancy, abjuration, and the like.
But the wish spell itself, in its basic form,
must first conjure the power to invoke these
other types of magic.

This is, admittedly, a departure from the
suggestion that only the simplest explanations
for spell classification be used, but this
is not a convoluted line of reasoning and
might in fact be the reason that these spells
were originally classified as conjurations.

All magic items that have been enchanted
by magic-users (as opposed to those created
by gods) will radiate more than one type of
magic. These items will all show conjuration/
summoning magic when scanned with
a detect magic spell, since the conjuration
spell enchant an item was cast as part of
their creation.

The other type(s) of magic radiated will
be determined by the spell that was enchanted
into an item. A ring of invisibility,
for example, would radiate the type of
magic of the invisibility spell -- that is,
illusion. A ring of feather falling or telekinesis
would radiate alteration magic, and a
wand of magic missiles would show magic
of the evocation type. A rod of resurrection
is clearly necromantic, a staff of curing
performs both necromantic and abjuration
magic, and a wand of polymorphing radiates
alteration magic.

Some items do not name a spell in the
description, and the type of magic must be
deduced. A rod of cancellation has the effect
of a powerful dispel magic spell, and will
radiate abjuration magic. Drums of panic
cause creatures to flee in panic, clearly
magic of the enchantment/charm variety,
and a folding boat will radiate alteration
magic.

Given this information, it should be
easier to deal with the magic-user?s detect
magic spell. This will also be helpful when
player characters or NPCs are researching a
new spell, since the DMG requires that they must have a "copy
of the spell in the same format as used in
the Players Handbook"


SEPTEMBER 1984