Needless to say, this was irresistible to my youthful, Gygax-loving, TSR fanboy self. I'd been playing AD&D – or, at least, using AD&D books to play a game we called "AD&D" – since sometime in 1980 and had, during that time, had dutifully acquired all its available volumes. The prospect of a new volume and one penned by Gygax himself filled us with excitement. That he was now sharing monthly glimpses into what this volume might contain in the pages of Dragon more or less assure that I'd be paying careful attention to the magazine from now on.
Of course, this first article in the series of previews didn't really interest me all that much. For whatever reason, my friends and I weren't all that keen on magic-users. It's not that we never played magic-users – well, I didn't, but that's another story – but that our favorite classes tended to be fighters, thieves, and clerics. With one exception, I can't recall a single player character who was a single-classed MU. All of the magic-users amongst our characters were multi-classed elves and even these were pretty uncommon. Consequently, I couldn't get too excited about cantrips, since I knew they wouldn't see much use at our table.
And I was correct in thinking this. Early on, shortly after the article was published, I suggested that we give these new minor spells a whirl to see if they'd actually be useful. As Gygax presents them, a magic-user can memorize four cantrips for every first-level spell he's willing to forgo. At that very favorable exchange rate, a couple of players thought it worth a try, selecting cantrips like exterminate, knot, tangle, and wilt in place of a single detect magic or light. The consensus, as I recall, was that some cantrips had value in certain limited situations, but that, by and large, few magic-users would ever willingly give up a spell slot for them. After that, I don't think we ever thought much about cantrips.
Nevertheless, this remains a memorable and important article for me even now – because it was the first article that suggested to me that the AD&D game's rules might change or evolve in any significant way. You must remember that, by the time I started playing, all three of AD&D's rulebooks had already been released. While both Deities & Demigods and the Fiend Folio came out after my introduction to the hobby, I didn't pay either of them much heed and indeed made comparatively little use of either of them. More to the point, neither one changed much of anything about the AD&D rules, so they could be safely ignored. However, this Gygax column from issue #59 heralded the dawn of a new era, one in which AD&D would, at last, change through the introduction of new character classes, spells, magic items, etc. That was a very big deal to me at the time, hence why I can recall reading this article for the first time, even more than forty years later.
Always thought that cantrips from this article would have worked better if they were added as an "addition to" spell slots, instead of "in place of." Giving a 1st level MU four additional cantrips in addition to a 1st level spell makes that character more useful, without being overpowering. And at higher levels, the MU will probably not bother with them anymore. (Although, cf "With A Single Spell" by Lawrence Watt-Evans).
ReplyDeleteAgreed, giving the. 4 limited use spells in addition to the one 1st level spell give a MU something to do besides cower until it's time to cast sleep.
DeleteMore importantly it pushes creativity and out of the box thinking.
That's effectively what wound up happening in the long run, with casters getting a set of dedicated 0-level slots for cantrips and orisons. Took a while for TSR to catch on to the concept, though.
DeleteThese days cantrip has largely come to mean at-will spell, which is another concept that took far too long to appear in D&D. Not without its flaws either, but better than the pseudo-Vancian approach that's been the main approach for ages.
In my house rules, I add them like you suggest
DeleteThere's a recent video with Jeremy Crawford (or was it Mike Mearls?) where he talks about how a number of 4E concepts like "at will" spells that were rejected by the D&D players back in 2007 were rebranded for 5th edition (i.e. "cantrips*) and enthusiastically accepted by the player base in 2014. 😁
DeleteNever liked that particular cover of Dragon. If you take away the background, it just looks like a hold up gone wrong at a rural gas station. On those few occasions when I broke from Ranger to play another class, Magic User was one of the alternatives. Never liked cantrips much. Just needed to get that sleep spell and we were golden at first level. Nowadays, I think something like comprehend languages would be awesome.
ReplyDeleteDefinitely showcasing an Outland/Alien sci-fi vibe, with the satin-finish jackets, scraggly hair and ball caps.
DeleteGary's old articles and accompanying illustrations in Dragon magazine are very cool. These articles were watered down and/or transcribed incorrectly and/or given inferior art in Unearthed Arcana. I have replaced my copy of UA with my own cobbled-together AD&D EXPANSION VOLUME:
ReplyDeletehttps://dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=92983
Now that is pure, unfiltered Gygax.
I continue to marvel at the vast landscape of this game. We seemed to literally live and die by the creatures of the Fiend Folio as we considered them more exotic (we also had an albino white-tailed deer in our woods - with red eyes and a broken antler - and that could be a touch bowel-loosening when you wake up in your hammock at four in the morning and that thing is munching grass twenty feet away) and we collectively agreed that cantrips, which we called gypsy tricks, were a dash of pepper in a salty world. They were sort of . . . fun.
ReplyDeleteAn entire other forum might focus on the way low-level magic users were embraced, protected, utilized and cultivated within each gaming landscape. I can't be the only one who offered to trade a point of Constitution for a left-handed dwarf to protect the fledgling magic user deep underground.