I don't believe the rule actually exist in 1st edition, thus at the time I had to house rule it. For 3rd edition it was the same situation. As for 2nd edition, I don't recall it being in the PHB either. I didn't buy much for 2nd edition supplements so I have no idea if it was eventually covered or not.
|
I think (think) it was derived as a houserule from the DMG
As a spell is read from the scroll, its letters and figures writhe and glow, the magic is effected, and then the lines fade and are gone forever. (In order for a magic-user or illusionist to transcribe a heretofore unknown spell from a scroll to his or her books, a read magic and then a period of time equal to that necessary to place the spell on the scroll are required; this likewise causes the spell to disappear from the scroll.)
So my guess is that if they get transferred to your spell book they were then used up - thus the spells in the MUs spell book worked that way in reverse if you needed to cast them that way.
When checking on copying spells from other MU/Illusionist there is no indication that one of their spells disappear as they go into your book as they are transcribed, if that was the case a scroll would work as a better medium.
|
|
I'm not looking for "what people remember" here either, I really want a specific book and page number. I just checked over the PHB and DMG and couldn't find a blessed thing.
You'll need to delve into 1st edition's Unearthed Arcana for this one.
Magic-Users and Illusionists can read spells from their spellbooks as they would a scroll at the cost of ruining (i.e. losing) said spell; there is also a 1% per spell level culmative chance of this action costing the ruin and loss of the spell immediately preceeding and the spell directly following the spell used in this fashion.
So a 1st level spell being read from as spellbook causes the spell to be permantently lost and would have a 1% chance of ruining the spells before and after it in the spell book. A 9th level spell used in this manner would have a 9% chance of causing the same effect.
There is a final danger. There is a flat 1% chance that any time a spell is read in this fashion that the entire spellbook is ruined and all spells are lost.
Have fun with that.
|
|
The Baron is right!. Damn I forgot to check UA -since it was so end run of 1st, I always forget that damn book!
In extremis, the DM may allow a magic-user to cast a spell directly from any sort of spell book just as if the book were a scroll. The book must be of appropriate sort so that the spell matches the profession of the caster, i.e. magic-user spell, magic-user spell book. The caster must be able to know and use the spell in question. (Note that in this regard, reading directly from a spell book differs from the use of scroll spells.)
Direct casting of a spell from a spell book automatically destroys that spell. There is also a 1% chance per level of the spell that the spells immediately preceding and following the spell cast will likewise be destroyed.
There is an additional 1% chance that the casting of a spell directly from a spell book will destroy the entire book. A permanency spell, for instance, would not prevent a spell from "disappearing" when cast in this manner; even though writing might remain on the page, that writing will no longer be magical in nature. These strictures apply whether a spell caster is using his or her personal book or the book of another. Read magic is required for one magic-user to read another magic-user’s spell book, and a magic-user can learn a spell by reading it from another's book. This learning process requires 2-8 hours of study per level of the spell, after which time the spell is learned and thereby immediately usable by the magic-user who did the studying
Honestly - I don't have an issue with this. If a PC is willing to give up his spells forever (in theory) just to survive a very bad situation it should be his choice. Just by surviving he may get a chance at picking up a new book so his career isn't ruined, on the other hand dead is still dead.
