Original source for "holy" spells

[Michael Thayne]

In 4e Magic, a small number of spells (~4) have notes suggesting the GM consider allowing "holy" characters to learn the spell without the usual prerequisites. Also, Bless and Curse suggest the GM might require "holy" status as an additional prerequisite. I am trying to figure out where this idea first appeared, in part because the final version in 4th edition has some odd inconsistencies. For example, Monk's Banquet doesn't say about anything about holy people being able to learn the spell without prerequisites, but suggest non-mage holy folk might be able to use items that grant the spell. Is there any reason for this, or is this just an oddity that probably resulted from hasty editing?

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

I Is there any reason for this, or is this just an oddity that probably resulted from hasty editing?

Okay, I have gotten out my copy of Fantasy 1e.

Monk's Banquet is there and the only "Holy" note is in the Item section. If this was hasty editing it was long ago and has been cut and pasted many times since.

Bless says that "In some game-worlds this spell can be cast only by holy men or "good" wizards".

So when this first appeared would be 1986 and the source would probably be SJ himself.

There's a lot of text for 4e Magic that goes back to 86.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

Okay, I have gotten out my copy of Fantasy 1e.

Monk's Banquet is there and the only "Holy" note is in the Item section. If this was hasty editing it was long ago and has been cut and pasted many times since.

Bless says that "In some game-worlds this spell can be cast only by holy men or "good" wizards".

So when this first appeared would be 1986 and the source would probably be SJ himself.

There's a lot of text for 4e Magic that goes back to 86.

Interesting. Sometimes I wish SJ would sit down for a Q&A on the history of various GURPS rules and the thinking behind them. The sort of thing Kromm often does for rules of more recent vintage. Though by this point he may not remember his original thought-process.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

In 4e Magic, a small number of spells (~4) have notes suggesting the GM consider allowing "holy" characters to learn the spell without the usual prerequisites. Also, Bless and Curse suggest the GM might require "holy" status as an additional prerequisite. I am trying to figure out where this idea first appeared, in part because the final version in 4th edition has some odd inconsistencies. For example, Monk's Banquet doesn't say about anything about holy people being able to learn the spell without prerequisites, but suggest non-mage holy folk might be able to use items that grant the spell. Is there any reason for this, or is this just an oddity that probably resulted from hasty editing?

I see a reason and that reason is the Holy Grail. It works for a holy hermit to be able to bless the virtuous and curse the wicked. But the monks banquet is another thing. It isn't standard holy hermit kit. They usually need offerings. But when someone is the guardian of something like the Holy Grail, something too holy to see routine pilgrims, and which must be kept under constant watch, the keeper needs a way to live without eating. So why not give the holy thing that power?

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

I see a reason and that reason is the Holy Grail. It works for a holy hermit to be able to bless the virtuous and curse the wicked. But the monks banquet is another thing. It isn't standard holy hermit kit. They usually need offerings. But when someone is the guardian of something like the Holy Grail, something too holy to see routine pilgrims, and which must be kept under constant watch, the keeper needs a way to live without eating. So why not give the holy thing that power?

Meh, I'd expect a grail to produce food - as to cauldrons and cornucopias and akshayapatra do in so many traditions, possibly dating back to the paleolithic, to judge from the occassional "venuses" holding a horn.

Not [needing] food, particularly in affiliations with monks, seems more Buddhist or Tantric to me.

[ravenfish]

Originally Posted by malloyd

Meh, I'd expect a grail to produce food - as to cauldrons and cornucopias and akshayapatra do in so many traditions, possibly dating back to the paleolithic, to judge from the occassional "venuses" holding a horn.

Not [needing] food, particularly in affiliations with monks, seems more Buddhist or Tantric to me.

In its earliest appearance in the Arthurian cycle, the Grail is used to deliver a single communion wafer to the father of the Fisher King, which is all the food he needs to sustain himself. Fasting is very much a part of the Christian (and the Christian Monastic) tradition.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

Is there any reason for this, or is this just an oddity that probably resulted from hasty editing?

I'm sure that "holy" status granting the ability to cast spells without the usual prerequisites is intentional. Whether deliberate or not, it's drawn from medieval literary and "medievalish" RPG traditions which allow pious but otherwise non-magical people to miraculously cast spells. In turn, those tropes come directly from the Bible and apocryphal works like The Golden Legend.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

I'm sure that "holy" status granting the ability to cast spells without the usual prerequisites is intentional. Whether deliberate or not, it's drawn from medieval literary and "medievalish" RPG traditions which allow pious but otherwise non-magical people to miraculously cast spells. In turn, those tropes come directly from the Bible and apocryphal works like The Golden Legend.

To clarify, when I ask, "Is there any reason for this?" the "this" refers to the specific oddity around Monk's Banquet. I think if you put together things several people in this thread have pointed out you get an interesting picture. If the inspiration was medieval European literature, and that tradition didn't show holy people not needing to eat due to their innate holiness, but did show the Holy Grail dispensing communion wafers that could sustain a person all by themselves, it all starts to make sense.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by Michael Thayne

If the inspiration was medieval European literature, and that tradition didn't show holy people not needing to eat due to their innate holiness . . .

There are also legends of holy people who ate nothing but communion wafers for years at a time.

[edk926]

I've never worked on a magical style, preferring to just follow prerequisites, but this thread got me thinking about a "holy" magical style. If you were to create one, would taking the 3 "holy" spells with true prerequisites and making them zero prerequisite/level 1 in the style be potentially unbalancing?

I figure at the very least, the style would have the following: Those 4 "holy" spells; The [ethical category] spells from Thaumatology that were imported into DF (and maybe the ones that weren't); All spells that list a possible "holy item"; Many Healing spells; The stereotypical saintly-deeds spells (Bless, Bless Plants, Create Food, and Create Water); Possibly some Spirit spells; and maybe Sunbolt for fighting the "unholy".

Can you think of anything else that would fit well?