Also, saying that failing a will save is less of a problem than losing a spellbook, that's all dependent on circumstances.
A wizard who's had a full nights rest losing his spellbook still has lots of spells prepared to escape and get a new one.
A fighter losing a save to a Dominate Person is another spellcasters biatch.
I'd much rather be the wizard. Of course, if the spell was just a Bane spell, I'd prefer the fighter. It all depends on circumstances.
And as said, both have means to minimize the risk for things like this; the wizard has spell mastery (which I think most wizards should get at some point) and blessed book, the fighter has iron will and cloak of protection.
Exposure to extreme elements will have it take damage, and if it takes enough damage, it will lose it's physical integrity and the magic will have nothing to bind to.
Alright, good. According to my Core Rulebook, normal water deals 0 damage. Looks like that book is good, RAW.
I've once or twice dropped a book into water.
Good to know. Was that book made of materials costing 15 times the average low-class worker's weekly pay? And were the inks made of special reagents that cost upwards of ten times the amount of the book? If not, I'm afraid it's not quite the same comparison.
I never said that the wizard's spellbook can't be targeted. By all means, target it. But unless you're making the fighter useless for taking a swim with his sword, you're being unfair to the wizard. From a balance standpoint, destroying a spellbook to the point where it imposes any sort of penalty (or worse) should be at least as difficult as destroying the fighter's magical sword. And if you're a realism junkie (in a game with magic), then you should do actual research, as other posters have, and realize that medieval tome materials (arcane inks aside) were far, far FAR more durable than modern book materials, because they HAD to be. It's always been my opinion that judging D&D physics by modern norms is a slippery slope.
I have a few instructions for you. Get a piece of steel, and a book. Drop both into a filled bathing tub. Pick them up.
I can tell you one will be destroyed and one will be fine, and you can guess yourself which is which.
Actually, my PHB has been dropped in the bath several times! (hey, for a while it was the only place I could have enough peace and quiet to read). Once I only found it the following morning - the kids dropped it in the bath the night before (teach me not to drain the tub!)
It was wrinkled for a while, and now it appears to be much thicker than it used to be, but it is still bound and I still use it! Wizard of the Coast actually made good bindings!
As it comes to books, mold is a worst enemy than water is.
If I have to buy scrolls to relearn all the spells, that will cost an additional 3,412.5 gp to relearn the spells.
Not to mention 58 days scribing all of them (assuming you don't fail any checks).
Note that the PRICE of the inks and/or book have no relevance. Write a book with ink made of gold and diamond dust and you'll still have a book that can be spoiled by water.
Actually, my PHB has been dropped in the bath several times! (hey, for a while it was the only place I could have enough peace and quiet to read). Once I only found it the following morning - the kids dropped it in the bath the night before (teach me not to drain the tub!)
That's interesting to hear and a much better argument than "it's expensive so it should be durable".
Also, now that I read the description again, and read up on parchment, I realize that the pages are made of leather, where I thought parchment was more closely related to papyrus or paper. The kind of leather-paper that parchment is, I thought that was called vellum.
Thus, I withdraw my assessment that the pages would be quickly destroyed in a RAW spellbook. In my home games though, we still use pages of papyrus.
Alright, good. According to my Core Rulebook, normal water deals 0 damage. Looks like that book is good, RAW.
I don't see anyone claiming normal exposure to water is going to be a problem, but complete immersion of book with pages and inks that absorb water (which even the normal spell books would have unless special measures were taken) is going to cause some problems. The extent of those problems is usually going to be minor and the solutions simple enough, provided the owner is aware of the situation and has taken appropriate measures to guard against such things, but that does not mean the same as water can't harm the spell book.
Not to mention 58 days scribing all of them (assuming you don't fail any checks).If I have to buy scrolls to relearn all the spells, that will cost an additional 3,412.5 gp to relearn the spells.
Actually 58 hours, unless I'm reading the rules wrong - with an extra day of delay for every failed check.
In 3.5, this same book would cost 5,815 gp for just the book, and another 4,225 gp for the scrolls.
As a 16th level character's "standard wealth" is about 16,00 gp - I don't mind the Pathfinder expense the way I would object in D&D.
If you're having to buy scrolls to start over completely from scratch, you get what you deserve. If in all time you failed to make at least one backup copy somewhere or make friends with other wizards or contacts within a wizardry school somewhere that could help mitigate the losses, you have only yourself to blame.
I stick with my first notion.....
Put the blasted book into a
Bag, waterproof
Source Adventurer's Armory 8This leather sack sealed with tar or pitch keeps delicate items from being ruined by water. Items kept inside remain relatively dry, making the bag ideal for carrying maps, scrolls, spellbooks, and the like, although the bag is not impervious and can only be completely immersed for 10 rounds before enough water seeps in to ruin such items.
for a mere cost of 5 silver!
Or assume that a PC with an INT score of 18-20 would be smart enough to protect book in several ways!
This to me tells me that the designers' intent is that a spellbook CAN be ruined by something as mundane as water. Otherwise, why mention it possibly being ruined by water in the waterproof bag entry?
If you really step back and think about it, this whole "OMG you're a jerk DM because you're saying the books are ruined because they got wet" is a toxic byproduct of the whole Vancian system of magic.
If books were simply repositories of knowledge you'd read once or twice to learn spells (and then the knowlege resides in your mind, to be drawn upon at will), this wouldn't be a problem.
Heck, one could even say you could easily re-codify into books or scrolls the spell formulae which you had already learned. They'd simply be useful to pass down to other generations, or to sell, or to refer to if you had gotten rusty, etc.
I guess since this is the dreck we have to work with, we're calling the act of rain making the ink run in wizard's spellbook a "ref's vindictive 'crime'"?
A Spell Bag.... aka Large Wine Skin.
A bug repellent .... aka Natural bug spray
A Flame Resistant... aka Leather/wine skin.
Also, now that I read the description again, and read up on parchment, I realize that the pages are made of leather, where I thought parchment was more closely related to papyrus or paper. The kind of leather-paper that parchment is, I thought that was called vellum.
OT, IIRC vellum is made from calfskin whereas parchment is from sheepskin. Or they are all basically skin-based writing materials, which are also collectively referred to as parchment.
Note that according to a brief trip to Wikipedia I just took, paper became widely used by the end of the Middle Ages so you could have paper books as well, but if it's traditional to have parchment spell books, so be it. I can see an evil necromancer writing on limed, pressed human skin...
Note that the PRICE of the inks and/or book have no relevance. Write a book with ink made of gold and diamond dust and you'll still have a book that can be spoiled by water.
Intrinsically, no. You are correct.
On the other hand, I would expect that better books that are alchemically treated, reinforced and bound with superior strings/glue would cost more.
So while a more expensive book may not be more durable, more durable books would likely be more expensive. I thinks this is what the previous posts were hinting at.
Apart from that, I think Ravingdork is right about the fact that the mere existence of a waterproof pouch for spellbook suggests that immersion in water should damage a spellbook by RAI.
Also by RAW, bookworms destroy spellbooks at a pace of 1 page per round (and therefore 1 spell level per round)! I'm not sure if that's supposed to be a mundane "attack" mode or if the worms have some kind of spell-sucking ability however. At any case, a parallel could be made with total immersion in water.
'findel
I've once or twice dropped a book into water.
You're comparing apples to cars, here. The books you're talking about are almost certainly produced using the cheapest paper possible (paperbacks, which are designed to fall apart after a decade or so, less with repeated reading) or just a step above that (trade paperbacks, which aren't much higher quality than their smaller cousins). Even hardcovers don't have very high quality paper.
A wizard's spellbook, given its very high price just for the book itself, is going to have pages made from vellum or other similar high-grade materials. Vellum is not easily damaged by water, as it is a form of leather, which is animal skin and thus naturally not terribly vulnerable to water. The pages won't really be affected. And, since the ink costs ten times what the entire book costs, it's entirely reasonable to assume that they're fairly waterproof as well.
|
Technically, it should be.
but it's a kind of a dick thing to do to people, might as well steal their spell component pouch while you're at it.Ya gotta love how anytime anyone dares to suggest attacking a WIZARD'S weakness, they're called a dick and it's considered bad DMing.
Spam a fighter with will saves? Encouraged.
Come up with situations that call for a spell that the sorcerer doesn't know? Encouraged.
Put the paladin in a situation where he can either do a kamakazi run and die or end up falling? Encouraged.
But dare to screw with the board-appointed "win-button" called the wizard? F#@K NO! YOU'RE A HORRIBLE DM! YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!
Christ, why bother actually playing the game? If someone says "I think I'll make a wizard" at character creation, just declare them the goddamned winner.
If you as a DM are playing to "win" you are doing it wrong.
I don't think that anyone's arguing that spellbooks are (or should be) completely impervious to damage from water or other liquids. My point of view would better be described as "casual immersion in water should not destroy a spell book". There are other substances that might be very damaging, such as acidis or alkaline materials, alchemists' fire, or the like.
I expect my GMs to impose realistic consequences for bad luck or unfortunate choices, but not to eliminate my characters' defining equipment without seriously considering whether less-damaging alternatives seem realistic. Consider that spell books aren't the only items that could suffer from exposure to the elements.
* Scrolls could be destroyed.
* Arrows could warp.
* Wood shields could delaminate.
* Composite bows could break down.
Should wizards suffer an "equipment tax" other classes do not? Isn't it less hassle to conclude that adventuring mages' spellbooks are generally sturdy and resistant to the environment?
If you as a DM are playing to "win" you are doing it wrong.So is the player with the notion that playing a wizard will let him "win", which seems to be a fair number of those who go for the wizard. After all, Raistlin and Elminster are practically gods, why shouldn't they be the same?
Ya gotta love how anytime anyone dares to suggest attacking a WIZARD'S weakness, they're called a dick and it's considered bad DMing.
Spam a fighter with will saves? Encouraged.
Come up with situations that call for a spell that the sorcerer doesn't know? Encouraged.
Put the paladin in a situation where he can either do a kamakazi run and die or end up falling? Encouraged.
The difference between your examples and nuking a wizard's spellbook is a matter of scale and context.
* Hit a fighter with a Will save and you typically mess him up for a few rounds.
* Put a sorcerer in a situation where his spell mix isn't ideal and you nerf him for one fight.
* Put a paladin in a "lose your paladinhood or die" situation? Only a jerk does that. Good GMs balance the "moral quandary" encounters their paladins face.
Take away a wizard's spellbook and you cripple the character's ability to function in his chosen role. Sure he can eventually acquire new spells, but you've taken control of the character away from the player and put it into the GM's hands, in effect saying "You'll get more spells when I deign to give some to you."
Destroying a spellbook is similar to destrying a melee-type's fancy magical weapon: There may be times when that's appropriate to preserve the game's realism or drama, but such actions have to be balanced against the player's frustration.
Nobody likes having their stuff taken away. If I'm running a wizard and you take away my spells as part of the villain's evil scheme, I'll go along with that. If you nuke my spellbook because I was caught in a random downpour or fell into a river, I'm going looking for a different GM.
Wow, much ado about nothing, it seems. Seriously, it's a non issue. DMs listening, follow the rule: don't be a dick. Players listening, try this alternate rule: don't be a dick.
On books: most books are definitely harmed by immersion in water. This really is a gimme, unless the DM is feeling awfully generous. Seriously, a player who also happens to be a human being from planet Earth should not have to have this spelled out for them. Furthermore...
A spellbook is a weakness, and the wizard should take care to protect such a valuable, nigh irreplaceable item. Failure to do so is the player's fault. Complete Arcane had rules for spellbooks, and I liked them, but hey, in lieu of having that, just work something out with your DM. Simple, yes? Just pretend that your wizard is a genius who would have a reasonable contingency plan to insure the safety of his most prized possession. Congratulations! You're not being a dick.
DMs: don't relentlessly target the wizards spellbook. Once in a while is fine, but be reasonable; and of course it's fair to punish the player whose wizard uses his spellbook as a snowboard, or a floatation device. Unless you would fling endless hordes of rust monsters at the party fighter nonstop, or assault the party rogue with an army of angry intelligent constructs who are immune to sneak attack, its not cool to decide that "The Guild of Thieves who Really Want to Steal Wizard's Spellbooks All Day" is going to declare open season on the wizard. Use reason, and try to make the game fun for all. Congratulations! You're not being a dick.
See how easy that was?
On books: most books are definitely harmed by immersion in water. This really is a gimme, unless the DM is feeling awfully generous. Seriously, a player who also happens to be a human being from planet Earth should not have to have this spelled out for them.
Modern books and medieval books have very little in common as far as construction is concerned. In fact, water is often used to repair vellum and parchment.
EDIT: Note, I'm not trying to contradict your overall point, just pointing out that "a human being from the planet Earth" doesn't necessarily automatically know what a wizard's spellbook is like.
On books: most books are definitely harmed by immersion in water. This really is a gimme, unless the DM is feeling awfully generous. Seriously, a player who also happens to be a human being from planet Earth should not have to have this spelled out for them.Modern books and medieval books have very little in common as far as construction is concerned. In fact, water is often used to repair vellum and parchment.
EDIT: Note, I'm not trying to contradict your overall point, just pointing out that "a human being from the planet Earth" doesn't necessarily automatically know what a wizard's spellbook is like.
Well, since we're getting nitpicky...
Immersion is the key word here. Immersing a book made of paper/vellum/parchment in water of a dubious lineage is bad. But - point taken, from a bibliophile point of view. I was, however, operating under the assumption that the OP wasn't exactly looking for the technical ins and outs of medieval book construction.
I always assumed that the standard fantasy roleplaying paradigm was closer to early Renaissance than true medieval, anyway.
But since you made it clear that you're not trying to contradict my overall point, I shall graciously refrain from having my Loyal Servants hunt you down and chastise you most emphatically. And I wlll now stop being thin skinned.
|
|
If you as a DM are playing to "win" you are doing it wrong.
So is the player with the notion that playing a wizard will let him "win", which seems to be a fair number of those who go for the wizard. After all, Raistlin and Elminster are practically gods, why shouldn't they be the same?
I never said otherwise, I'm simply challenging Kthulu's implied assertion that the GM should play to win against the PC's. I'm saying that his priorities in playing this game are out of whack, and if he would like to keep his players, he should reconsider his stance on attacking each players specific weaknesses.
It's one thing to build a plot around denying a wizard his spellbook (take Elminster in Hell as an example), it is clearly another to arbitrarily target the wizard's spellbook because he did something to piss you off earlier...
Nevertheless, with the 150 gp per level worth of rare ingredients (alchemical?) necessary to write a spell in a spellbook, it think it would be fair to assume that part of that "cost" covers alchemical waterproofing, insect-repulsion, fire-retardation and other basic considerations.In other words, a wizard adventurer's spellbook should be made to last and survive such mundane "attacks", even if the basic 2 spells per level are given out for free for simplicity sake.
Just wanted to point out this is not correct. The cost of inscribing a spell in PF is equal to the level of the spell squared times 10 gp. 10gp for 1st lvl, 40 gp for second level, etc. See Core Rules p.219
It's one thing to build a plot around denying a wizard his spellbook (take Elminster in Hell as an example), it is clearly another to arbitrarily target the wizard's spellbook because he did something to piss you off earlier...
I don't see anyone trying to arbitrarily take a wizard's spell book away. Most posts I've seen have recognized that the situation posed in the original question is fairly easy to avoid, and should be used sparingly. The answer of what happens in the rare circumstance that it does come up, which is what the original question was, seems to be that the spellbook is not completely immune to taking damage, and that the wizard is indeed expected to take reasonable steps to prevent that damage from being crippling. No where in that answer do I see "target the wizard's spellbook just because you feel like it."
...
I've once or twice dropped a book into water. If you grab it quickly, then it's will still be legible (although it swells up like a b%*~~, and never returns to normal). However, if it's left for more than just a minute or two, I'd probably rule that at least half of the pages are ruined. And if you leave it for 20 minutes or so, I'd call the whole thing a loss....
From personal experience I know modern books can be soaked in a puddle of water (not fully immersed) for a few hours and still dried out, although as you say, they swell something fierce and are likely to fall apart later. Separating the pages for drying can be difficult, often ripping pages and having a few stuck permanently together. Ink runs or not depending on it's quality. You've got to start drying them as soon as possible or the pages will become completely inseparable. It wouldn't have to be a total loss.
at 10gp per page minimum that had better be some damn good ink
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Question What do you do when your clothes are wet?
Answer prestidigitation.
Question What do you do when your hair is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.
Question What do you do when your familiar is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.
Question What do you do when your spell book is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.
Let's be unreal for a moment. This is D&D. We've got three decades of iconic storytelling that includes adventurers delving into decrepit, musty ancient dungeons, defeating the resident monsters, and looting all kinds of neat stuff. The day we as a community invalidate three decades of found scrolls, found maps, found magical clothing, found potions that haven't destabilized, and most importantly found spell books... that's the day being a wizard in the rain is allowed to do damage to his book.
Question What do you do when your clothes are wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your hair is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your familiar is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your spell book is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Let's be unreal for a moment. This is D&D. We've got three decades of iconic storytelling that includes adventurers delving into decrepit, musty ancient dungeons, defeating the resident monsters, and looting all kinds of neat stuff. The day we as a community invalidate three decades of found scrolls, found maps, found magical clothing, found potions that haven't destabilized, and most importantly found spell books... that's the day being a wizard in the rain is allowed to do damage to his book.
LOVE THIS!
|
I stick with my first notion.....
Put the blasted book into a
Bag, waterproof
Source Adventurer's Armory 8This leather sack sealed with tar or pitch keeps delicate items from being ruined by water. Items kept inside remain relatively dry, making the bag ideal for carrying maps, scrolls, spellbooks, and the like, although the bag is not impervious and can only be completely immersed for 10 rounds before enough water seeps in to ruin such items.
for a mere cost of 5 silver!
Or assume that a PC with an INT score of 18-20 would be smart enough to protect book in several ways!
Except of course that is the ONLY mention of protecting one's spell book and it's from a pretty perifery source. Assuming your using the core set of core rules, GMG and APG, then your screwed as there are no rules...yep thats right zero zip zilch nada...on how to waterproof one's spellbook. So using that rule set, as you have NO option to prevent said damage, and to go well you have no options, but blam I'm taking your spellbook away IS a dick move. IF the players are made aware of the item or other rules for proection and choose not to use it, then it's fair game.
|
|
Question What do you do when your clothes are wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your hair is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your familiar is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your spell book is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Let's be unreal for a moment. This is D&D. We've got three decades of iconic storytelling that includes adventurers delving into decrepit, musty ancient dungeons, defeating the resident monsters, and looting all kinds of neat stuff. The day we as a community invalidate three decades of found scrolls, found maps, found magical clothing, found potions that haven't destabilized, and most importantly found spell books... that's the day being a wizard in the rain is allowed to do damage to his book.
Agreed :) Let's try to keep this in perspective. The DM starts to mess with specific weaknesses. Ok, now the players are going to start the "arms race" to outdo you and the cycle continues until you have to find a new group because no one wants to play with you.
Reputations in a fairly close knit community spread fast. Do you want to be the one that everyone avoids because the perception is you are an assbag of a DM? I prefer to not treat the PC's as the opposition and instead try to give them a good challenge while advancing the story in the most fun way I can manage.
Question What do you do when your clothes are wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your hair is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your familiar is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your spell book is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Let's be unreal for a moment. This is D&D. We've got three decades of iconic storytelling that includes adventurers delving into decrepit, musty ancient dungeons, defeating the resident monsters, and looting all kinds of neat stuff. The day we as a community invalidate three decades of found scrolls, found maps, found magical clothing, found potions that haven't destabilized, and most importantly found spell books... that's the day being a wizard in the rain is allowed to do damage to his book.
OK.. you just proved how BROKEN Prestidigitation is... :oP
|
|
Technically, it should be.
but it's a kind of a dick thing to do to people, might as well steal their spell component pouch while you're at it.Ya gotta love how anytime anyone dares to suggest attacking a WIZARD'S weakness, they're called a dick and it's considered bad DMing.
Spam a fighter with will saves? Encouraged.
Come up with situations that call for a spell that the sorcerer doesn't know? Encouraged.
Put the paladin in a situation where he can either do a kamakazi run and die or end up falling? Encouraged.
But dare to screw with the board-appointed "win-button" called the wizard? F#@K NO! YOU'RE A HORRIBLE DM! YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!
Christ, why bother actually playing the game? If someone says "I think I'll make a wizard" at character creation, just declare them the goddamned winner.
+1
I have a whole section in my rules allowing player Wizards to have everything from spell staves to spell holding gems on necklaces. Want a fireproof spell book? Fire lizard skin! The loot from one adventure included a tome of necromantic spells scribed on scrolls of Sea Elf skin. Another included a robe of 'cloth of gold' with the mage's first level spells stitched into it. Want ink that won't dissolve in water? Those have only been around a few thousand years.
Yes, its complicated. So is my language system. And my spell point system. Each is modified for good reasons. Often lots of reasons. A fighter from Mahoud gets a khopesh, while one from Torenth starts with a scimitar and one from West Hamby starts with a saber. All three of these are based on real, historical cultures and flavor the game, each in its own way.
The notion that a rain drop is going to destroy a book worth a king's ransom, one that MUST be lugged through such inhospitable places as a dragon's lair, is patently absurd. My Boy Scout Handbook survived getting sodden 3 summers in a row without compromising either the First Aid section OR the shelter diagrams. And it was cheap, absorbent paper. Having worked with medieval style parchment (SCA), it is considerably more durable than any commonly available paper I have encountered (butcher's paper excluded). Personally, I think the Golem did alright with the rest of the rules. Screwing up on stupid wording and not thinking out all the ramifications of such a minor thing is utterly forgivable when one looks at the train wreck that is 4ED.
As GM, just realize that the rule is stupid and FIX it! And let your players know before you foist it on them. Heck, one might have a better solution than you do. Or grow a pair and just admit you can't handle players who want to play Wizards and forbid the class entirely.
|
I never said otherwise, I'm simply challenging Kthulu's implied assertion that the GM should play to win against the PC's. I'm saying that his priorities in playing this game are out of whack, and if he would like to keep his players, he should reconsider his stance on attacking each players specific weaknesses.
I never said that the GM should "play to win against the PCs". But I've notices a trend in these forums, a rather disturbing one. People whine and complain about the vast gap in power between the casters (and especially the wizard) and the other classes. But they seem unwilling to actually admit that the wizard DOES have weaknesses. And if they do admitt it, they somehow rule that those weaknesses are "off limits".
And who ever said that I was targetting a wizard's spellbook because he did something to piss me off? If a wizard jumps into a large body of water without taking special preparations to protect his spellbook, then the GM had nothing to do with it...the wizard has nobody to blame but himself.
The notion that a rain drop is going to destroy a book worth a king's ransom, one that MUST be lugged through such inhospitable places as a dragon's lair, is patently absurd.
Then it's a good thing that absolutely no one in this thread made such a claim.
|
|
Alright, good. According to my Core Rulebook, normal water deals 0 damage. Looks like that book is good, RAW.
If we go completely and utterly by the RAW, with no regard for common sense, a brick that falls on your head randomly bypasses DR, while a brick that's thrown at you by an angry orc does not.
There's also the fact that to include rules for absolutely every situation, the Core Rulebook would need to be so massive that it would undergo gravitational collapse, turning into a black hole. Do you really want to end all life on earth just so we can have extensive rules on submerged spellbooks?
|
|
I never said otherwise, I'm simply challenging Kthulu's implied assertion that the GM should play to win against the PC's. I'm saying that his priorities in playing this game are out of whack, and if he would like to keep his players, he should reconsider his stance on attacking each players specific weaknesses.I never said that the GM should "play to win against the PCs". But I've notices a trend in these forums, a rather disturbing one. People whine and complain about the vast gap in power between the casters (and especially the wizard) and the other classes. But they seem unwilling to actually admit that the wizard DOES have weaknesses. And if they do admitt it, they somehow rule that those weaknesses are "off limits".
And who ever said that I was targetting a wizard's spellbook because he did something to piss me off? If a wizard jumps into a large body of water without taking special preparations to protect his spellbook, then the GM had nothing to do with it...the wizard has nobody to blame but himself.
The notion that a rain drop is going to destroy a book worth a king's ransom, one that MUST be lugged through such inhospitable places as a dragon's lair, is patently absurd.Then it's a good thing that absolutely no one in this thread made such a claim.
So much this.
Everyone wants advantages and no one wants to also notice the rules have counter balances so that those advantages come with strings attached.
Sometimes DM's need to pull those strings to restore balance and make players actually have to pay attention and come up with solutions for covering weaknesses.
Things exist in the game to protect/replicate spellbooks and other such things. If players choose not to use them, they risk the consequences.
+1Technically, it should be.
but it's a kind of a dick thing to do to people, might as well steal their spell component pouch while you're at it.Ya gotta love how anytime anyone dares to suggest attacking a WIZARD'S weakness, they're called a dick and it's considered bad DMing.
Spam a fighter with will saves? Encouraged.
Come up with situations that call for a spell that the sorcerer doesn't know? Encouraged.
Put the paladin in a situation where he can either do a kamakazi run and die or end up falling? Encouraged.
But dare to screw with the board-appointed "win-button" called the wizard? F#@K NO! YOU'RE A HORRIBLE DM! YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!
Christ, why bother actually playing the game? If someone says "I think I'll make a wizard" at character creation, just declare them the goddamned winner.
-1, For many reason already mentioned, mostly the nonsensical comparison between a fighter being taken out of one fight, and the wizards losing a large amount of gold, and his main class feature.
Intentionally making the sorcerer or any class completely useless is never encouraged by the majority on these boards. Making them more difficult is.
Example:Interrupting a caster's rest is fair game since the problems are very short term. Using the sudden antimagic area is not.
Putting the paladin in a lose or lose situation is also not cool. Just because some people do it, that does not mean it is widely encouraged.
PS: I am not saying never go after the wizard's bonded item/spellbook/etc, or make the paladin make a hard decision, but what Mr.K said is encouraged(implied as a popular/more than 50% of us would do) is far from true.
|
|
+1Technically, it should be.
but it's a kind of a dick thing to do to people, might as well steal their spell component pouch while you're at it.Ya gotta love how anytime anyone dares to suggest attacking a WIZARD'S weakness, they're called a dick and it's considered bad DMing.
Spam a fighter with will saves? Encouraged.
Come up with situations that call for a spell that the sorcerer doesn't know? Encouraged.
Put the paladin in a situation where he can either do a kamakazi run and die or end up falling? Encouraged.
But dare to screw with the board-appointed "win-button" called the wizard? F#@K NO! YOU'RE A HORRIBLE DM! YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!
Christ, why bother actually playing the game? If someone says "I think I'll make a wizard" at character creation, just declare them the goddamned winner.
-1, For many reason already mentioned, mostly the nonsensical comparison between a fighter being taken out of one fight, and the wizards losing a large amount of gold, and his main class feature.
Intentionally making the sorcerer or any class completely useless is never encouraged by the majority on these boards. Making them more difficult is.
Example:Interrupting a caster's rest is fair game since the problems are very short term. Using the sudden antimagic area is not.
Putting the paladin in a lose or lose situation is also not cool. Just because some people do it, that does not mean it is widely encouraged.PS: I am not saying never go after the wizard's bonded item/spellbook/etc, or make the paladin make a hard decision, but what Mr.K said is encouraged(implied as a popular/more than 50% of us would do) is far from true.
I'm going to make a separate thread, as this is an ongoing debate.
|
|
I'd also like to point out that a wizard who doesn't have at least one duplicate copy of his spellbook stashed somewhere relatively safe should automatically have his Int lowered to an appropriate level...say 8 or 9. :P
Because a level 1 character can do this HOW?!? Sorry but you just don't have enough money at low levels to have a back up spell book. And this also assumes you have a base of operations. Some APs do...but there are several that don't. The latest arc for example has you trampling all over the place and until you get teleport, stashing a backup isn't really gonna be feasible.
|
Anyone else vaguely remember something about spellbooks having pages made of some form of metal in some setting somewhere?
These guys certainly thought of it.
Anyone else vaguely remember something about spellbooks having pages made of some form of metal in some setting somewhere?
Yes.. dammit now i'm going to spend all day trying to remember where
Question What do you do when your clothes are wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your hair is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your familiar is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Question What do you do when your spell book is wet?
Answer prestidigitation.Let's be unreal for a moment. This is D&D. We've got three decades of iconic storytelling that includes adventurers delving into decrepit, musty ancient dungeons, defeating the resident monsters, and looting all kinds of neat stuff. The day we as a community invalidate three decades of found scrolls, found maps, found magical clothing, found potions that haven't destabilized, and most importantly found spell books... that's the day being a wizard in the rain is allowed to do damage to his book.
Fair enough!
I think one of the whole problems of this thread is that different people are assuming different degrees of "wetness."
(And tangentially, I note our OP has run for the hills and not returned.)
I think anyone who says, "Whoops, you splashed a few drops of water on your spellbook from the fountain, you can't cast spells," is being a jerk, clearly. I doubt anyone here would disagree with that. And exactly, prestidigitation would remove any possibility of wetness being a problem in a situation like that.
I also note the folks talking about what water damage might do to a spellbook all specify serious levels of saturation. Things like, got hit by a tsunami, sank to the bottom of the ocean, sat in a tub of water overnight. Not "got caught in a light drizzle."
(And indeed--prestidigitation would still dry the book even in those circumstances; it just wouldn't undo damage done. And while we're at it, Make whole would fix physical damage but not restore writing.)
If this little detail continues to be ignored, the "argument" will go on ad infinitum with folks talking about essentially extremely different circumstances without acknowledging it.
If this little detail continues to be ignored, the "argument" will go on ad infinitum with folks talking about essentially extremely different circumstances without acknowledging it.
Fair enough too.
As far as I'm concerned, unless water is somehow wielded as a weapon (such as if it's a high pressure stream), it does no damage to magical writings. Raindrops? No effect. Fell in the bathtub? No effect. Took it through a waterfall? No effect. Dropped it off the side of a boat and had to wait until the next day to get your cleric to cast water breathing so you could rescue it? No effect.
But here's why: we don't micromanage item damage for anyone else. Where's the oil for sword-wielders to keep their weapon protected from rust? Where's the whetstone to keep it sharp? Where indeed is the sheath to keep it from hacking your leg off while you walk?
I get it that we're talking about a book. Thing is that they're magical writings. As soon as that happens I'll happily hand-wave simple conventional damage that seems realistic.
Tangent Remind me to use create water to disrupt the next caster who tries to use a scroll on me.
it does no damage to magical writings.
I get it that we're talking about a book. Thing is that they're magical writings. As soon as that happens I'll happily hand-wave simple conventional damage that seems realistic.
Note that there is NO RAW WHATSOEVER that supports it being a magical book or magical writing. Exceptional, yes, but not magical. It can be assumed, but there's no more going for that than going for gemstones in a noble's outfit to be magical. Sure, they might be, but there's nothing indicating it.
But here's why: we don't micromanage item damage for anyone else. Where's the oil for sword-wielders to keep their weapon protected from rust? Where's the whetstone to keep it sharp? Where indeed is the sheath to keep it from hacking your leg off while you walk?
A sheath is assumed to be included in the price of a sword, and the difference between keeping the sword sharp and dropping a book into water is that one is a long-term effect and the other is a short-term one. That's why we care about the Mummy Rot but not lung cancer the rogue'll get from smoking too much hookah.
Tangent Remind me to use create water to disrupt the next caster who tries to use a scroll on me.
Note that scrolls however, ARE explicitly mentioned as magical. That said, I'd reward the player who used create water to disrupt a spellcaster. I'd probably rule the scroll to reform once it dries so no permanent damage, but that's house ruling again.
I can see a strong case for considering magical writing immune to water, or even special inks, and seeing as how spellbooks are made of leather and not paper as I thought (english isn't my native language, I blame that) I've sided with "spellbooks aren't destroyed by submersion, at least not short-term" though the spellbooks in our games are still paperish and frail.But still, spellbooks aren't magical. Nothing indicates them being except for price, and that's a bad argument since many things are expensive without being magical.
One interesting thing would be to have two different kinds of spellbooks, one made in waxed parchment with heavy lids protecting from common hazards such as water and mold, and one made in paper that's much more frail but can contain many more pages in a single book.