|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I know this has popped up a time or two before, but I couldn't find an official answer or group consensus on how it should work, so I'm asking.
In the Magic chapter, under Adding Spells to a Wizards Spellbook, it says if the spellcraft check fails, the wizard must wait until he gains a rank in spellcraft to try again.
Under the Spellcraft skill it says the wizard must wait a week before trying again.
There seemed to be three schools of thought on the issue - the largest group thought the spellcraft version was correct, as it is new and the Magic section is the same as 3rd edition. Two smaller (but still significant) groups said either both rules applied or that there was no clear answer.
So, firstly is there an official answer to this question? I believe not, but I'm asking just in case.
Secondly, what in your opinion is the correct ruling?
Thirdly, why does the rule exist at all? A wizard can take ten on this check, correct? And spellcraft is a very useful skill for wizards to have, so most will keep many ranks in it even without this rule, so what purpose does it serve? Why provide consequences for failure at all?
It wouldn't be a big deal, except for that third part. It's bugging me. Inconsistent leftover rules from an obscure and rarely referenced part of an older edition I get; sure, it's a tiny little bit annoying, but it happens all the time, and we wanted something more like 3.5 and less like 4th, so it's all good. What I don't get is why the rule even exists in the first place, and why they kept it in at all.
I believe in the old old days if you failed your int roll to learn a new spell you would have to wait until next level to try again. this changed into the skill point raise which was the attempt to streamline things and get rid of another chart, or heading on the ability score charts. it is still holding on in its current form, but i think its been a bit of a non-issue so no effort has seriously been made to examine the rule.
i dont know where i stand on it. i haven't put any effort in either.
~S
Any PC Wizard *should* have sufficient Ranks in Spellcraft (and a sufficient Int Mod) to study any spell of a level he can cast using Take 10 for automatic success.
Wizards who neglect to keep up on Spellcraft, NPC Wizards who may not have PC-scale stats, PCs who are taking a dip into Wizard to qualify for a Prestige Class...any of these could run into difficulties.
I would consider anything that was changed from 3.5 to be changed for a reason, and thus the official pathfinder rule, while anything that contradicted that to be in error. Its far more likely that they made an error copying and pasting and forgot to change one rule that referenced another than that they made a deliberate change to one section that they changed their minds on later.
In the Magic chapter, under Adding Spells to a Wizards Spellbook, it says if the spellcraft check fails, the wizard must wait until he gains a rank in spellcraft to try again.
Under the Spellcraft skill it says the wizard must wait a week before trying again.
There seemed to be three schools of thought on the issue - the largest group thought the spellcraft version was correct, as it is new and the Magic section is the same as 3rd edition. Two smaller (but still significant) groups said either both rules applied or that there was no clear answer.
So, firstly is there an official answer to this question? I believe not, but I'm asking just in case.
I'm not aware of an official one either, but there is enough of an inconsistancy that I have flagged this for FAQ.
Secondly, what in your opinion is the correct ruling?
Both rules references could be correct. You have to wait the greater of either, 1 week or gaining a new Spellcraft rank.
Thirdly, why does the rule exist at all? A wizard can take ten on this check, correct? And spellcraft is a very useful skill for wizards to have, so most will keep many ranks in it even without this rule, so what purpose does it serve? Why provide consequences for failure at all?
Agreed, it does seem un-needed. Perhaps they intended to not allow a wizard to take 10 for learning spells. Even at level 1, a dim-witted 14 Int wizard taking 10 will will be at +16 (10 + 1 rank + 3 class skill + 2 Int) to make a DC 16 check for a 1st level spell. Of course, I am assuming a wizard would take spellcraft... which makes me wonder... has anyone ever created a wizard without spellcraft?
|
|
Taking 10 on a spellcraft check to learn a spell certainly seems an appropriate use of Taking 10. The character is not in immediate danger or distracted, and it's a situation where a particularly high skill roll doesn't give any extra benefit.
Until there is an official ruling, I intend to follow the guidelines given under the Spellcraft skill description, as it represents a change from 3.5, and so it seems likely intentional on the part of the designers.
It also makes more sense to me. If I were to give you a complicated, encrypted document to try to decode (for example), and after studying it for a day you found you were unable to do so, it would seem that taking extra time to try to decipher the code would be reasonable. Saying "sorry, level up first" seems kind of weird and artificial to me.
But really, this should only come up with characters that neglected to develop the skill sufficiently.
|
|
Well, I don't know about "failed to develop the skill sufficiently". That doesn't make sense to me, and here's why. The DC to scribe a 9th level spell into a spellbook is only 24 (15+9); Assuming the caster can take ten (there's nothing to indicate they can't), that means the wizard only needs a +14 modifier. In order to cast a 9th level spell, a wizard needs at least a 19 intelligence so +4, and spellcraft is a class skill so +3; that works out to only needing 7 ranks. For a 9th level spell.
If the "requirement" is so incredibly minimal, why bother having it at all? It just doesn't make sense to me. I mean, heck, the spellcraft DC to scribe a 9th level scroll is 22 (CL 17) to 25 (CL 20). Why is the spell harder and easier to write than a scroll of the same spell?
I don't understand why the mechanic exists or what it adds to the game. It doesn't make sense, from a logical point of view. Leftover rules I get, that's fine, it happens; but the mechanic in it's entirely is...not confusing, but...annoying? Misleading? Frustrating? It just doesn't seem worth the bother.
|
The two rules do not contradict each other so I believe they should both apply.
Those rules don't make sense if you can take 10 on them for most practical purposes. Though I note as written you can copy a spell of _any_ level even if you can't cast it yet. So the mechanic would make it hard for a first level wizard to copy a ninth level spell.
As you say not sure the mechanic adds anything to the game.
Agreed, it does seem un-needed. Perhaps they intended to not allow a wizard to take 10 for learning spells. Even at level 1, a dim-witted 14 Int wizard taking 10 will will be at +16 (10 + 1 rank + 3 class skill + 2 Int) to make a DC 16 check for a 1st level spell. Of course, I am assuming a wizard would take spellcraft... which makes me wonder... has anyone ever created a wizard without spellcraft?
We assume that all wizards will max out their spellcraft. Rules like this tell us what happens when we don't. For a smart, skilled, wizard doing things within their abilities there are no problems. Rules like this only show up for extreme cases. Those bad wizards who didn't study, cursed with bad stats (or damaged ones) or those who do crazy things (like try to scribe 9th level prohibited scrolls into their books)
If this rule didn't exist, there would not be a reason wizards -needed- spellcraft. There are other classes who get it, and how many people in the party need to have it? While a high INT gives wizards a lot of skill points to play with, there are other things they can spend them on that other party members might not have access to (like all the knowledge skills) Spellcraft, however, is the iconic wizard skill. So they should be good at it.