That's why I compered it to a Rogue who steals something valuable.
The Wizard gets the spells for free, but then they become part of his gear and, thus, count against his WBL.
I have to disagree with this statement for several reasons. Free spells per level is a class ability. By this I mean under the description of the wizard class it says they get 2 free spells per level without having do do anything.
While the ability to steal valuables is given to the rogue as a class ability the actual valuables are not. To obtain valuables the rogue has to use his abilities against an NPC. At which point he is receiving treasure for overcoming an encounter. Now the difficulty of the encounter versus the value of the reward is I feel an entirely different argument.
Another example, to show why I feel that spells that wizards automatically gain for free should not count against their wealth by level. For purposes of this argument I will assume each spell is valued the same as a scroll of that spell would be valued at. Assume I am creating a 11th level non-specialized NPC wizard using core rules only. He will have 20 cantrips, 9 1st level spells, 4 each 2nd/3rd/4th/5th level spells, and 2 6th level spells, plus a spellbook valued at 15g. This brings him to a total wealth by level of 13190g. Looking at NPC wealth by level for a heroic 11th lvl NPC is 16350.
Using RAW by your definition I am basically limited in giving an 11th level NPC wizard enemy a Cloak of resistance +1 and a ring of protection +1?
Each class needs to be balanced, period.There is no point in a game that forces you to divide the treasure in different ammounts for each character because one WBL table for each class says so.
If we have to balance things cheating with the treasure then something is wrong, and the solution isn't messing with the WBL tables but fixing the origin of the problem.
i don't know were you got forcing players to divide treasure in different amounts but there ARE reasons why a party might do this willingly and not because a class is weaker. i run a party right now with a runeblade "3pp", a dwarf barb/wizard going for runesmith, a rogue going for shadow dancer, an oracle of war, and a class i designed that is like a light armored elementalist but wildshapes into elemental forms. all the party except the rogue can cast spells and the whole party wears armor. while a lot overlap in sword/magic powers there all uniquely still different. I let the party decide how they want to distribute THERE treasure i dont use WBL to say "no you can't give the rogue that magic item cause he has to much gear already". some parties are not as balanced as the the traditional fighter,mage,thief cleric,party. in fact in 15 years of playing D&D i've never had a balanced party. some groups, like the one i run now, may realize there weak in combat strength or weak in magic and CHOOSE to dump a lot of items on a curtain player to balance out the need of the party, not necessarily because that player is weak. This party im running actually tanked the rogue out with almost all there gear to turn him into a more viable fighter. Is it really fair to say "no you can't give him that".
having a non traditional party also is another reason i hate using random treasure or not altering treasure in aps. If random treasure is bracers+2 and no one can wear the damn things they might as well just be a gem or gold. Random treasure i have found just gets pawned into gold and this adds to magic items being degraded. I use WBL as a minimum and mainly just use the treasure per encounter chart for designing random encounters. My players LOVE treasure and magical items so im sure there way over there quota. i prefer the old style of "magic is rare" but if treasure is what the party really likes why should i make it unfun for them? The game is about making the players have fun so i do.
I'm actually starting to wane off of the old school idea of magic is rare/ i look at it this way. if use humans now in this age could use magic WE WOULD HAVE MAGIC EVERYTHING! magic clothes, magic toasters, remotes that levitate to you, cars that don't need fuel, it would be in everything. to believe wizards could create magic items but somehow magic is super rare just doesn't jive with me since i know how humans love there toys. i see the avg D&D world would actually be more like Final fantasy, magic and technology every where.
WBL is based on wealth you have acquired by deed, not wealth you possess, i.e. game adventuring wealth the DM hands out. Inheriting a great estate gets you something very valuable, that doesn't contribute to WBL...just look at what Kings in Eberron wear!
and spells gained by level are not priced out...you simply GET them. Spells you acquire by theft or killing are definitely included in WBL..they are not a class benefit. Class Benefits have no GP value attached unless stated so.
==Aelryinth
WBL is based on wealth you have acquired by deed, not wealth you possess,In your house rules, probably.
RAW, however, makes no such distinction.
The Wealth By Level table is used to detail the GP value of equipment a character or NPC might reasonably be expected to have, at levels higher than 1st. Furthermore, players might use it as a gauge, to see where they stand at any given level.
I saw something on another board which piqued my interest earlier, a thread about wands, but it wound up going into a tangent about WBL, or Wealth By Level. It got me thinking... There are a lot of different opinions out there about wealth by level, or colloquially "By X level you need to have Y amount of treasure n' magic items." Many seem to feel that if you have less than this amount, you just aren't competitive and the DM is putting the screws to you and your character. Others seem to be more like me, and interpret the WBL as akin to the Pirate's Code: that is to say, they're more like guidelines than actual rules. I'm curious to know if others out there share my views on this, or are the Wealth-By-Level charts considered incontrovertible gospel?
Fellow DMs and some of you more knowledgeable players, what is your position on this?
I've always felt that WBL was to be used as a guideline for DMs, not players. If a PC has less than what he thinks he "deserves" based on WBL he may think that he's behind according to some standard. But really, it's the DM who sets the difficulty of the adventure so if you're not having to run away from every encounter, what's the difference?
Now, when playing published adventures (APs) or as part of PFS then there *is* a standard which you should try to keep to. The nice part for the DM is that this is already done for you since the published adventures already include treasure as well. The people at Paizo make sure that the treasure the PCs obtain is on par (or close enough) to what they should be getting to meet the challenges in the adventures.
I guess this means that if you want to write adventures to be published by Paizo as part of their PFS or an AP, then yeah, you'd better consider the WBL charts as gospel and make sure you've included just the right amount of treasure for the PCs to find. In this case, it should be equal to 4x(starting wealth - ending wealth).
Ok, now time for a bit of a rant. The thing which bugs me the most about WBL is how some people refuse to budge from it when a PC takes feats which are specifically designed to circumvent it. A wizard who takes Craft Wondrous Item is giving up a feat to increase his wealth with respect to these types of items. If you then restrict this character to his alloted WBL, you've basically told him: I'm sorry, that feat doesn't work.
If over the course of a given wizard's adventuring career, let's assume about 1/3 of what he finds is in the form of useful magic items, another 1/3 is less useful magic items and the final 1/3 is in gold or gems. At 8th level, that's 11000gp worth of each type which he can then use (given time) to further equip himself. If the less useful items are sold, he would have:
11000gp worth of useful magic items
16500gp worth of gold which can be made into 33000gp worth of wondrous magic items. This brings his wealth up to 44000gp.
If, on the other hand such a wizard wanted to spend that feat on something that augments his spells/skills or combat ability he would be stuck with:
11000gp worth of useful magic items
16500gp worth of gold which can be used to purchase magic items. This brings his wealth to 27500gp.
The first wizard has given up a measure of personal power in order to focus on creating and using magical items instead. Even with a 16500 gp difference between them, the wizards will be of roughly the same power level so we shouldn't enforce WBL in this case.
Tem: interesting that you bring up Item Crafting. I don't think it has to be as bad as you outline. There's really no guarantee that a Wizard will have the time or resources that he needs to craft. If he does, I expect he'd be spending time making stuff for his party as well as himself.
Just seems to me like it's not a big issue.
About WBL - it's really just an indication of where you might be at X level. I think characters will either be over or under WBL, but rarely will they be right at it.
In your house rules, probably.
RAW, says the opposite
Actually, the rules don't say anything of the sort. They're quite silent on the topic of whether or not a wizard's level-gained spells are included in WBL or not. I'd say that the text does more to imply the opposite, in fact, since descriptive text talks about weapons, armor and protective devices, other magic items, and disposables. Nowhere does it refer to spells (other than as disposable scrolls). On top of that, WBL for 1st level characters refers to table 6-1, which does NOT include a wizard's spells in its calculations of starting wealth.
I think there's an argument to make either way but no definitive statement in the rules that the free spell gains are really part of a wizard's expected WBL.
In your house rules, probably.
RAW, says the oppositeActually, the rules don't say anything of the sort. They're quite silent on the topic of whether or not a wizard's level-gained spells are included in WBL or not. I'd say that the text does more to imply the opposite, in fact, since descriptive text talks about weapons, armor and protective devices, other magic items, and disposables. Nowhere does it refer to spells (other than as disposable scrolls). On top of that, WBL for 1st level characters refers to table 6-1, which does NOT include a wizard's spells in its calculations of starting wealth.
I think there's an argument to make either way but no definitive statement in the rules that the free spell gains are really part of a wizard's expected WBL.
Disconnect here - how could it be construed that class abilities, like a Wizard's spells, could be a component of WBL? If you're talking about scrolls, such as those found in treasure, able to be awarded to anyone who wants them, okay, I get that.
The Wizard's spells are part of his gear.
No, they're not. Spells are a class ability. A wizards spell book is gear, sort of (it can be stolen, and therefore denied to him.) Are spells given a GP value? Note, spells are not same as scrolls, which do have a GP value.
Tem: interesting that you bring up Item Crafting. I don't think it has to be as bad as you outline. There's really no guarantee that a Wizard will have the time or resources that he needs to craft. If he does, I expect he'd be spending time making stuff for his party as well as himself.
Just seems to me like it's not a big issue.
About WBL - it's really just an indication of where you might be at X level. I think characters will either be over or under WBL, but rarely will they be right at it.
Well, I don't really think that it's bad at all. The difference in wealth is just what it is. It's the type of feat that should allow a character (or even an entire party) to exceed their WBL. It's also the type of feat that should be ok'd by the DM ahead of time. If the campaign isn't going to allow enough downtime to make use of it, the DM should point that out before the player takes it (or before the campaign even begins so the PC is caught unaware partway through).
If the wizard has the time, he could convert all of the gold and unwanted magical items into more useful things for the party. My wizards aren't usually quite so altruistic, but that's a topic for another thread! In that case, the party as a whole probably has a lower fraction of their total wealth which is made up of less useful magic items. After all, something the wizard can't use may be of use to someone else. Regardless, the wizard will be able to raise the total wealth of the party above the WBL guideline (though not as much as my exmaple above). Attempts by the DM to limit this to the WBL table by either reducing future treasure or increasing the strength of the threats they face is directly working against the character (or party) and the benefit he should gain from the feat.
In summary - parties with sufficient downtime and crafting feats should almost always have a total wealth above that suggested by the WBL table. In my estimation, it should be anywhere between 15-35% higher and depend mostly on the proportion of items found which are directly usable by party members.
The Wizard's spells are part of his gear.
WBL measures the gp value of gear. The WBL does not quible -anywhere- about where that gear came from.
That would be your interpretation of the rules. But that doesn't make an alternative interpretation "house rules". Like I said, I can see an argument either way. But that's an argument of interpretation of the rules, not rules vs house rules.
That would be your interpretation of the rules. But that doesn't make an alternative interpretation "house rules". Like I said, I can see an argument either way. But that's an argument of interpretation of the rules, not rules vs house rules.
The Wizard's spells are part of his gear.
WBL measures the gp value of gear. The WBL does not quible -anywhere- about where that gear came from.
Okay - asking again; how could it ever be construed that a Wizard's Spells, which are not unlike a Fighter's Feats, could ever be considered as gear? Is it simply because an opposing caster's spellbook might find its way into treasure?
Okay - asking again; how could it ever be construed that a Wizard's Spells, which are not unlike a Fighter's Feats, could ever be considered as gear? Is it simply because an opposing caster's spellbook might find its way into treasure?
The wizard gains the spells but keeps them in a spellbook - something that can be lost and would cost money to rebuild. They're a class feature, but they depend on a piece of equipment.
On the other hand, since they are a class feature and are obtained for free, they shouldn't count in the WBL calculation when determining whether or not the PCs are on track with gear, just like they aren't counted when the wizard is 1st level.
So like I said, I can see merits in both arguments. I find the second of the two more convincing though.
Okay, a wizard's spell book is gear. A spell book increases in value as new spells are added to it.
Do you really want to argue that a spell doesn't affect the WBL as long as the wizard never writes it down anywhere? For as soon as he does write it down in his spell book, the increased value of his spell book counts towards his WBL. If that's really what you are arguing, then it's just semantics and we actually agree.
First, I'm not arguing anything. I am trying to understand how someone would come to the conclusion that a Wizard's Spells represent treasure, for purposes of WBL. How do you determine the value of a given spellbook?
The wizard gains the spells but keeps them in a spellbook - something that can be lost and would cost money to rebuild. They're a class feature, but they depend on a piece of equipment.
On the other hand, since they are a class feature and are obtained for free, they shouldn't count in the WBL calculation when determining whether or not the PCs are on track with gear, just like they aren't counted when the wizard is 1st level.
So like I said, I can see merits in both arguments. I find the second of the two more convincing though.
Thank you, that was what I was looking for. I have always assumed the latter, and never given this subject much thought. Now though, I'll cogitate on it.
I'm trying to understand how someone could come to the conclusion that a Wizard's spell book doesn't count as gear. Or where it states in RAW that WBL doesn't count all gear.
No doubt the book is gear, and what lies within would cost money to replace. As I said above, I've always assumed that Spells, like Feats, were a Class Ability and not considered as treasure. I've certainly never seen anything to refute it. I haven't looked either. :)
I'm trying to understand how someone could come to the conclusion that a Wizard's spell book doesn't count as gear. Or where it states in RAW that WBL doesn't count all gear.
Table 12-4 on page 399 points the reader to table 6-1 on page 140 for WBL for first level characters. That table has us rolling 2d6 x10 gp for a wizard. That gives us a maximum of 120 gp. But the first level wizard's spellbook is worth 130 +10 gp per point of Intelligence bonus alone. So something interesting is being done here. A first level wizard's class feature spellbook is clearly not being counted as part of his WBL. I'd be disinclined to count any of the other spells he got for free as part of his WBL either.
So, yes, I'd say the rules support loaba's assumption.
I've always assumed that Spells, like Feats, were a Class Ability and not considered as treasure.I understand you've always assumed it. If that's one of the the house rules you want to implement, have fun with it.
All I'm saying is that RAW doesn't support your assumption.
And yet it doesn't appear like RAW supports yours either. :)
I'm trying to understand how someone could come to the conclusion that a Wizard's spell book doesn't count as gear. Or where it states in RAW that WBL doesn't count all gear.Table 12-4 on page 399 points the reader to table 6-1 on page 140 for WBL for first level characters. That table has us rolling 2d6 x10 gp for a wizard. That gives us a maximum of 120 gp. But the first level wizard's spellbook is worth 130 +10 gp per point of Intelligence bonus alone. So something interesting is being done here. A first level wizard's class feature spellbook is clearly not being counted as part of his WBL. I'd be disinclined to count any of the other spells he got for free as part of his WBL either.
So, yes, I'd say the rules support loaba's assumption.
Thanks for the info, Bill.
Also, were his book lost and he had to replace it, he would spend some of his treasure buying scrolls, for the express purpose of filling his new Spellbook. So, in the case of a lost spellbook, it takes care of itself.
Note to casters, don't lose the your Spellbook!
Lillith - no looking for grief, just find the discussion interesting.
says bunch of stuff
Huh?
Pardon me, but this really is the first time I've seen this assertion of yours. I'm not an expert on the Spell system, but I think Bill has the right of it, when he cites the starting money for Wizards.
The game gives Wizard's a freebie (so to speak), really because there's no way around it. Think of what this would mean to Sorcerer's, who don't have a Spellbook to lose.
As a matter of trust I try to let the players know that the more they pick up the more of it I'll count against their WBL. So if they want to have a bunch of +1 crap then they can loot everything they come across (which seems a bit -- vulgar for heroes to me) and they won't find a lot of high end stuff. But if they generally leave the mook gear alone they'll find the nicer high end bits late on.
This way they get to help decide what they want to do -- if they like the bigger prizes I'm handing out and feel that it's keeping with what matches the character then they hold of the "loot everything in the room" part -- if they feel what I'm giving them isn't up to par and want more ability to "magic shop" as it were then they start up with the looting.
As a GM aid this is great since it allows me to know how my players feel about the game.
I like this. This sounds like a really neat way of circumventing the placed-treasure in written modules and adventure paths. After all, how many times has your crew staggered around with a treasure that looks like this: "15 suits of masterwork full plate, 12 masterwork shields, 6 +1 longswords, 6 +1 greatswords, 4 +2 flails, 7 suits of +1 scale mail, 8 bracers of armor +1, 5 cloaks of resistance +1, and one +2 spiked chain that no one in the party is interested in spending a feat to learn." Yaaaawwwwwnn!
Is the party meant to look like a quartet of junk peddlers, clanking their way back to town laden with nearly 2 tons of metal stuffing their backpacks and various bags o' holding? As written, published adventures demand that players do this without fail or risk falling behind the curve, and back in town they trade in all their scraps for cash or better items, swapping them with merchants and blacksmiths like baseball cards: I'll give you 4 sets of masterwork plate and 2 magic rings for a Mickey Mantle rookie card! It just doesn't seem plausible to me...
I like the idea that I can encourage them to ignore this kind of battlefield scrounging by encouraging them that if they do pass up the small potatoes, I'll reward them later with better equipment that they can actually use to upgrade themselves. Thanks, Spalding, I'll probably give this a try in one method or another.
Frankly, I don't use the WBL guidelines for anything except introducing a character into the party at higher than first level. I find it to be one of the most misused sections of the Core Rulebook.
I determine whether the players have enough stuff by simply assessing how they are doing. If they are struggling, I'll probably introduce a bit more loot. If they are cruising I may ease off on it a bit. This isn't rocket science and I don't need a chart to tell me how to do it.
As someone pointed out, the standard spellbook of a level 11 NPC wizard would take 90% of his WBL if your rule applied.
Since the average NPC wizard has more gear then that, it's pretty safe to assume the free spells are indeed completely free. They may take money to replace, but initially, at least, they are completely free.
==Aelryinth
Ok, lets examine my 'way off' math. Let me play by your rules of character creation, though I can thumb through just about any of the modules made by Paizo and see that they don't follow the rules you just put down.
So here is my hypothetical evoker, 11th level with a 20 int. Base 18, two stat increases for a total of 20 at level 11. Since he isn't a mook, and I want him to be a recurring bad guy I need to stat out his lower level spells, but since I can't see him ever using a cantrip I will ignore them.
For every given level I will give him half as many spells as he has spell slots. If he can cast 6 spells at a certain level I will only give him a total of 3 spells for that level, while 7 spells at a level means he gets 4 spells at that level.
What does this mean, it means our 11th level wizard now has this many spells at each level:
1st-4, 2nd-3, 3rd-3, 4th-3, 5th-4, 6th-2 (remember the rules tell me to chose a variety of spells for his highest 2 spell levels)
This comes to a total of 11590g out of 16350 or roughly 70% of his wealth. Leaving him with 4760g for gear. So he can either have a +2 int headband and some potions, or 2 protective items. Leaving him no match for my level 9 players who each have roughly 46,000g in items.
Finally as a GM who actually wants to challenge my players with an NPC spellcaster I would give this pauper of an 11th level NPC more than 3 2nd/3rd level spells if only so he can self buff enough to be able to present the smallest speed bump to my players.
Ok, lets examine my 'way off' math. Let me play by your rules of character creation, though I can thumb through just about any of the modules made by Paizo and see that they don't follow the rules you just put down.
So here is my hypothetical evoker, 11th level with a 20 int. Base 18, two stat increases for a total of 20 at level 11. Since he isn't a mook, and I want him to be a recurring bad guy I need to stat out his lower level spells, but since I can't see him ever using a cantrip I will ignore them.
For every given level I will give him half as many spells as he has spell slots. If he can cast 6 spells at a certain level I will only give him a total of 3 spells for that level, while 7 spells at a level means he gets 4 spells at that level.What does this mean, it means our 11th level wizard now has this many spells at each level:
1st-4, 2nd-3, 3rd-3, 4th-3, 5th-4, 6th-2 (remember the rules tell me to chose a variety of spells for his highest 2 spell levels)
This comes to a total of 11590g out of 16350 or roughly 70% of his wealth. Leaving him with 4760g for gear. So he can either have a +2 int headband and some potions, or 2 protective items. Leaving him no match for my level 9 players who each have roughly 46,000g in items.
Finally as a GM who actually wants to challenge my players with an NPC spellcaster I would give this pauper of an 11th level NPC more than 3 2nd/3rd level spells if only so he can self buff enough to be able to present the smallest speed bump to my players.
You do have a point. RAW the book counts, but looking at a few AP's the book is definitely not counted. I think the RAI was for it not to count.
A wizard's spells, specifically those beyond his free spells gained at level up most certainly DO count against his WBL. Every new spell that he doesn't get for free has a viewing cost and a scribing cost and serves to make the wizard more powerful.
I like to think of WBL as a balancing measure. If you are allowing wizards to max out there spellbooks and not counting it against their WBL, then there are going to be problems with balance in all likelihood.
Not that I particularly care about the result of this portion of the discussion, but I noticed this in the AP I'm currently running as part of a treasure horde:
The spellbook itself should be filled with a number of spells that are useful to the party’s wizards (6 each of levels 1–5)—otherwise, it can be sold for 2,475 gp.
It seems to me they're using a different system for determining the value of a spellbook.
A wizard's spells, specifically those beyond his free spells gained at level up most certainly DO count against his WBL. Every new spell that he doesn't get for free has a viewing cost and a scribing cost and serves to make the wizard more powerful.
I like to think of WBL as a balancing measure. If you are allowing wizards to max out there spellbooks and not counting it against their WBL, then there are going to be problems with balance in all likelihood.
I would like to make it clear that in no way am I suggesting that extra spells either purchased, or found shouldn't be counted against wealth by level. What I am saying is that the class ability of the wizard. That he automatically learns 2 spells per level without paying any costs or spending any time should not be counted against wealth by level. Now if the wizard wants to go out and purchase every single spell in the book that is his choice, and he uses a portion of his wealth by level doing so.
A person with Craft Wondrous Items could craft himself a pair of Blessed Spellbooks for 12,500gp and, paying only the viewing fees, learn every core wizard spell in the game for a measly 52,405gp.
That's not even counting the spells you get for free at level up, which would substantially reduce this value.
So, if your spellbook got burnt to ash and you had no backups, you could still learn every spell in the core rulebook for 64,405gp. A small fraction of your level's starting funds.
What's more, once you've accomplished this simple task, you could make backup copies for a measly 12,500gp! Over and over again!
Spell Mastery I spit upon you.
;P
| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
I did see this horse twitch yesterday, so maybe there might be some point in beating it (the horse) for another day or two.
On the other hand, there is also this nifty little "FAQ" button on the upper right of each post...
64,405 is a substantial part of the WBL up until about 16th level.
It most certainly is. However, at lower levels, the price goes down dramatically as you aren't likely to be buying up spells you are unable to cast yet.
For example, a 10th-level wizard only interested in learning all the 5th-level and lower spells would only need 18,835gp. 6,250gp to craft a single Blessed Book and 12,585gp for the spell viewing fees. Again, the price would actually be lower than this as I am NOT counting for the free spells the wizard gains throughout his level progression.
A 10th-level character should have around 62,000gp. That's only 33% of your wealth, which may or may not be worth it to some.
Point being, by the time you are easily able to afford the crafting costs for a Blessed Book, knowing all core wizard spells appropriate to your level is an affordable option (assuming your GM isn't stingy with spellbook viewings or with character wealth in general).
I did see this horse twitch yesterday, so maybe there might be some point in beating it (the horse) for another day or two.
On the other hand, there is also this nifty little "FAQ" button on the upper right of each post...
If you mean the ones he gets for free at first level, and every level after that, than they most certainly do NOT count against WBL.
Spell Mastery I spit upon you.
I wouldn't -- it still has use for when a spellbook isn't available for whatever reason.
I wouldn't -- it still has use for when a spellbook isn't available for whatever reason.Spell Mastery I spit upon you.
I really wouldn't. I was just trying to be humorous.
I really wouldn't. I was just trying to be humorous.I wouldn't -- it still has use for when a spellbook isn't available for whatever reason.Spell Mastery I spit upon you.
How dare you.
...this is serious stuff.
I really wouldn't. I was just trying to be humorous.I wouldn't -- it still has use for when a spellbook isn't available for whatever reason.Spell Mastery I spit upon you.
Fair enough -- I do agree spell mastery isn't for everyone or every game -- but it is a nice back up.
I'm not at all sure where you're getting your WBL calculations from.
A spell going into the wizard's book from any source other then his free ones should be priced at the same value of the scroll for that spell at any level. Transcription costs are an expense on top of that.
I'm pretty sure the total cost of all the base spells is a lot higher then merely 62k. And recovering a spellbook is not more free spells, in the same way that recovering +1 plate armor is not free WBL. It all counts. A Spellbook is actually a scroll for all intents and purposes!
How many spells are of each level, subtract 4, multiply by the cost of a scroll for each level, and there's your WBL. Transcription costs are not an accurate measurement of value, no more then the scabbard on your new sword is.
40/50/42/36/43/33/36/35/24, by the SRD.
So, that's
32x25
+46x150
+38x375
+34x700
+39x1125
+29x1650
+32x2275
+31x3000
+16x3825
--------
364,475 gp, for the value of all the base spells other then a wizard's free ones by level. (I used the lowest cost per level).
Yeah, pretty damn sure 64k is nowhere near correct. Might be the cost to SCRIBE the spells...an additional expense. But whether acquired on a scroll or in a spell book, this is the VALUE of that magic for WBL calculations.
And that argument for the NPC wizard not having all the spells he's MINIMALLY ENTITLED TO by level really made me laugh. USIng quick-make rules for NPC spell selections as a reason to justify him not having, oh, READ MAGIC in his spell book, yeah, that was good...
===Aelryinth
I didn't go back very far in the thread so I may have missed something. Why would a wizard's two free spells each level count against his WBL. They are free therefore their value is, by default, zero.
A spell going into the wizard's book from any source other then his free ones should be priced at the same value of the scroll for that spell at any level.Actually this is very wrong. A spell in the spell book is worth the correct price of the spell book -- not the method that is used to obtain the spell.
After all you don't continue to charge the fighter for all the potions he used in past levels -- you don't charge the wizard for scrolls used in past levels either. The spell book has a specific price that is explained in the rules as it is -- that is the price the wizard "loses" from his WBL for the spells he knows, and that price should not include his free spells for levels in wizard (since the rules specify those spells are free).