Selling a spellbook

[Galnörag]

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

As you can also get a spell into your spell book by copying it from another wizard. The book recommends either a spell swap, or a paying 50% of the scribing value for the spell.

That works for and against you, the sells for less, but you could also by a book with spells for less.

We've had a character do "mail order spell book" where he specified the spells and he paid the cost to scribe + mark up + the book cost, and still was less then the scroll. He still had to pay the scribing cost to copy it into his book so that he "KNEW" the spell. But once done, he is able to sell the book back and recoup some of his costs.

[Goth Guru]

Buying a spell into memory means you get your good night's rest, go to where the spell book is, pay, memorize the spell, go home, and write it into your book. Same costs, but you keep your book in it's secure location.

[spalding]

You want headaches? Wait until you get a magus book.

A magus can free prepare spells without a spellbook, and then copy them into his book for inscription costs.

This means he can build a book without having to pay for either a scroll or the ability to copy from another caster.

[Galnörag]

Goth Guru wrote:

Buying a spell into memory means you get your good night's rest, go to where the spell book is, pay, memorize the spell, go home, and write it into your book. Same costs, but you keep your book in it's secure location.

that doesn't work:

prd wrote:

Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks

A wizard can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell he already knows and has recorded in his own spellbook,

The wizard can't prepare the spell unless he already knows it, you could use this method to rebuild your spell book if it was damaged, but not to learn new spells.

[Goth Guru]

Galnörag wrote:

Goth Guru wrote:

Buying a spell into memory means you get your good night's rest, go to where the spell book is, pay, memorize the spell, go home, and write it into your book. Same costs, but you keep your book in it's secure location.

that doesn't work:

prd wrote:

Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks

A wizard can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell he already knows and has recorded in his own spellbook,

The wizard can't prepare the spell unless he already knows it, you could use this method to rebuild your spell book if it was damaged, but not to learn new spells.

I fully expect the spell purchaser to have to make a spellcraft roll to memorize from someone else's book. That's why the spellbook renter will get their money upfront, and have a no refunds sign up in case the spellcraft roll fails. It's dicey at best, and against RAW at worst. All of my characters will stick to the traditional direct copying just to try and douse the flames here.

[spalding]

Another issue -- borrowed books and your own book being destroyed.

player: "But I did did copy it into my own book so I can prepare it out of this borrowed book."

gm: "But your book is destroyed."

plater: "That doesn't matter I did scribe it in, which is all I have to have done."

[Gjorbjond]

Wizards are always writing new spells into their spellbooks. Many of those spells will be of the "2 free / level" variety. Quite a few spellbooks will outlive their authors.

It makes sense that most captured spellbooks will end up the property of arcane libraries or wizard guilds who will charge fees for wizards to learn from them. I personally consider the likelyhood of a particular spell being available at one of those institutions to be much greater than the likelyhood of a scroll of a particular spell being available.

If you use the scroll price instead of the copy fee to base your spellbook prices off of you end up really inflating the sale prices. It costs a wizard 115 gp to scribe a copy of 10 first level spells into a new spellbook. Using the scroll price as a basis for the sale price of the spellbook, he could sell it for 182.5 gp. If you use the "copy fee" method, he can only sell it for 82.5 gp. It's even worse if the spell has an expensive material component, which is included in the cost of the scroll, but not in the fee to copy it.

[Goth Guru]

I believe the name you are looking for is Haney. A savy business man will make a big deal of how he is not charging you the material component fee to copy a spell.

[Nigrescence]

Magicdealer wrote:

Really? No, actually, when you buy a game these days, you are purchasing a license to use the program, not the rights to the program itself. You don't own the program, you don't own the knowledge in the textbook. Your attempt to render it down to physical components of paper or disk are not relevant. Check any game EULA these days.

You're clearly having trouble thinking about even this simple concept. You still own that copy. That's identical to the concept of the spellbook. You can only ever use the spells in a spellbook if you still have the spellbook around. If the spellbook is destroyed or otherwise removed from your possession, you can no longer prepare from that spellbook until you get it back again. Just as if you have the storage media that contains the program you bought, you can still install it as long as you have that storage media, or if you have the textbook, you can still study it whenever you want to refresh your knowledge. This is remarkably similar to the Wizard's spell preparation. If the textbook is destroyed, you still have whatever you remember from it, and you can even copy down what you remembered from it (just as you can copy down into a spellbook a spell that you have memorized, if your old spellbook is destroyed).

Oh, and you literally know nothing about copyright and those related concepts of ownership, given the statements you have made, so I suggest that you avoid commenting on such ideas in the future.

The EULA is not the law of the land. It cannot force you to give all of your money to the company just because the EULA says you must and you then "agree" to it.

But these are complex issues and, as I said, I don't really want to get into it, especially when someone like you clearly is in over their head yet confident without reason that they even know anything about the subject.

Magicdealer wrote:

Stuff that is completely wrong.

You're still ignoring the absolute fact that I proved how your proposed system for the value differing from where you get it is internally inconsistent.

And no, I wasn't missing the point about that. A "shoulder call" about the value is much easier when he just looks at the inscription table and adds it up. If he has to track down the origin of every single spell in the spellbook to find out the value for each spell, then he has to do even more work. And, as I said, that method is particularly suspect.

Your suggestion is the HEIGHT of forcing a DM to spend time determining every little nuance.

As for my "rudeness", I'm actually being relatively polite, all things considered. And if nothing else, I'm trying to be more polite than I might want in some cases. Generally speaking, though, I am usually polite.

For what it's worth, I could easily accuse those who have said things that seem obviously as if they didn't read, including and especially statements that suggest I said something exactly opposite of what I did say, to be a harassment (but I generally don't accuse them of that). Reading the posts if you're going to respond is kind of important. Maybe not all of them, but at least the post to which you're directly replying.

[Goth Guru]

If you end up with 3 disks of a program marked DO NOT THROW OUT, and you have to get rid of an old copy that is no longer useful, you have to break the disk before you throw it out. Otherwise, I just copy and paste the legaleeze and promise to read it later. I don't know of many gameworlds that have spell ownership laws, so put the spam back in the can. :)

[Galnörag]

Abraham spalding wrote:

Another issue -- borrowed books and your own book being destroyed.

player: "But I did did copy it into my own book so I can prepare it out of this borrowed book."

gm: "But your book is destroyed."

plater: "That doesn't matter I did scribe it in, which is all I have to have done."

Yeah that is always dicey, I assume RAI is once the spell is known, as in copied to your book once, it is known to your character, and you could prep with a roll. By RAW, i guess it is scribed in your book, your book has just undergone a state change that makes it unreadable.

At least wizards aren't witches...

[leo1925]

I have heard of another way to calculate the cost of a spellbook.
The cost of purchasing means the cost of the scroll without the cost of the material component (if the spell has one).
I don't agree with that but i thought it would be fun to throw a little more wood in the fire. XD

[AionicElf]

So, there seem to be three schools of thought for what "cost of purchasing" refers to:

1) The cost that a wizard customarily charges to have the spellbook borrowed.

2) Nothing. It's just the inscription cost.

3) The cost of a scroll (possibly sans material components).

Is there anything at all definitive to back up one of these three positions?

Edit: I'm assuming there is nothing definitive. Otherwise, the debate wouldn't have raged and it wouldn't be a 4x flagged FAQ candidate.

[Sean K Reynolds]

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

[wraithstrike]

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

So the purchase price is not the price to purchase the spell, but the price of the book? <---Asked to specifically counter the "he did not exactly say that" argument that will surely come up later.

[reefwood]

AionicElf wrote:

So, there seem to be three schools of thought for what "cost of purchasing" refers to:

1) The cost that a wizard customarily charges to have the spellbook borrowed.

2) Nothing. It's just the inscription cost.

3) The cost of a scroll (possibly sans material components).

Is there anything at all definitive to back up one of these three positions?

Edit: I'm assuming there is nothing definitive. Otherwise, the debate wouldn't have raged and it wouldn't be a 4x flagged FAQ candidate.

Yeah, it seems like this is still open to debate. Based on what I've read on this thread, I would amend my opinion to perhaps include the cost of the actual spellbook (in addition to the borrowing and writing costs).

A spellbook doesn't seem to be part of the one-time "cost of purchasing" for individual spells, but then again, you need the spellbook to inscribe the spells, and if your spellbook runs out of pages, you do need to buy a new one to learn and copy more spells. Plus, a standard spellbook doesn't cost enough to make a big difference in price in most situations, so it's not a big deal. And at the same time, if for some reason there was an expensive spellbook (that perhaps did something special?), it could matter, so it makes sense to be included in the selling price.

One thing that is clear is that there are different ways to get a spell into a spellbook (aside from the "free" spells you gain each level), and these have different costs.

Perhaps a guide to help determine the answer is whether or not items in general tend depend on the cheapest price or the most expensive price?

For example, a potion of cure moderate wounds made a Cleric at his earliest possible level (2nd-level spell, CL 3 = 300 gp) is cheaper than the same potion made a Druid as her earliest possible level (3nd-level spell, CL 5 = 750 gp). And I believe the default pricing for this potion is the 300 gp Cleric version.

Is this how Pathfinder usually handles the pricing of items? If so, then perhaps the cheapest way to purchase spells is the one to use.

Another thing to consider is what the shopkeeper would be able to do with the used spellbook. If you sell the 300 gp potion, you will get 150 gp for it. Then, the shopkeeper will sell that potion to another adventurer for 300 gp, so he makes a 150 gp profit.

What can the shopkeeper do with the used spellbook? Or at least, what can he most likely do to earn his money back on it? Loan it out for borrowing? Anything else? I don't know the answer to this, so that is why I am asking, but I'm guessing the shopkeeper wouldn't buy it for more than he could reasonably earn from the spellbook. Granted, he could loan the spellbook to several wizards over the years to continue to earn income from it, so this is kind of a funny case where he can "sell" it over and over again.

The last thing I will add is that I don't think the "cost of purchasing" a spell should include the cost of expensive material components or focuses. These additional items are needed to cast the spell, but they don't seem necessary to learn/copy/inscribe the spell. I feel this way because a wizard can learn this spell for free as part of leveling up without ever having to obtain an expensive component or focus. And if he never gets them, he can never cast the spell, but he still knows the spell and can teach it to others by lending out his spellbook.

EDIT: Oops, looks like an official answer came up while I was typing this. So, I guess it may just be the cost to inscribe/copy and the cost of the spellbook, but no cost of actually getting access to the spell (i.e. no borrow or scroll cost).

[leo1925]

wraithstrike wrote:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

So the purchase price is not the price to purchase the spell, but the price of the book? <---Asked to specifically counter the "he did not exactly say that" argument that will surely come up later.

+1

[Galnörag]

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

Marked response for inclusion in FAQ

[Nigrescence]

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

That's an intriguing shock, but it brings up another important question.

Then a Blessed Book with a full 1000 pages of unique spells values the same as a Blessed Book with no pages filled? Or do the spells still value at inscription cost even though a Blessed Book does not require any cost for inscription?

[Abraham spalding]

Nigrescence wrote:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

That's an intriguing shock, but it brings up another important question.

Then a Blessed Book with a full 1000 pages of unique spells values the same as a Blessed Book with no pages filled? Or do the spells still value at inscription cost even though a Blessed Book does not require any cost for inscription?

Having the spells in them would still add value to the book, the spells themselves have value, even if putting them in doesn't.

[Nigrescence]

Abraham spalding wrote:

Having the spells in them would still add value to the book, the spells themselves have value, even if putting them in doesn't.

That's my guess, which is precisely why I asked that second question to get confirmation.

[leo1925]

Nigrescence wrote:

Abraham spalding wrote:

Having the spells in them would still add value to the book, the spells themselves have value, even if putting them in doesn't.

That's my guess, which is precisely why I asked that second question to get confirmation.

My guess too.

[Quantum Steve]

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

This seems counter intuitive to the wording of the text:

"Captured spellbooks can be sold for an amount equal to half the cost of purchasing and inscribing the spells within."

I'm no English major, but I think the only way to correctly interpret this sentence is: Captured spellbooks can be sold for an amount equal to half the cost of the sum of purchasing the spells within and inscribing the spells within.

If the intent was: Captured spellbooks can be sold for an amount equal to half the cost of purchasing the book and inscribing the spells within. I believe the sentence, as is, is written incorrectly.

[Quantum Steve]

Abraham spalding wrote:

Nigrescence wrote:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Galnörag wrote:

We've always gone with the cost to scribe a spell into your book + the cost of the book itself.

That's correct.

That's an intriguing shock, but it brings up another important question.

Then a Blessed Book with a full 1000 pages of unique spells values the same as a Blessed Book with no pages filled? Or do the spells still value at inscription cost even though a Blessed Book does not require any cost for inscription?

Having the spells in them would still add value to the book, the spells themselves have value, even if putting them in doesn't.

What is the value of the spells? And why do the spells in a Blessed Book have value, and ones in a regular book, seemingly (according to SKR's post), do not?

[Nigrescence]

Quantum Steve wrote:

What is the value of the spells? And why do the spells in a Blessed Book have value, and ones in a regular book, seemingly (according to SKR's post), do not?

I think it means the value of the spells IS the value of inscription. I suppose there's some sense to that interpretation, because once you've spent the gold on inks to inscribe to the book, the value of those inks has been consumed in the inscription. So I guess the inks needed to be valuable enough to hold the value of the spell... or something weird like that.

Your post immediately preceding this one was how I interpreted the statement as well, as it said "purchasing and inscribing the spells within", which strongly implies that there is a value to be used for purchasing the spells. If they meant differently, it was worded incorrectly (which is ok, but should be cleared up).

But, hey, that's why we were all scrambling around trying to decide/determine/figure what the value is for purchasing spells.

Maybe Sean K. Reynolds is mistaken, though. Until we get further clarification, there's even more mystery behind this confirmation of his.

[Goth Guru]

An NPC selling access to a spellbook would charge the cost of casting the spell minus material components. The spellmonger needen't be a caster.

Signature
Warning, my spelling is very bad.
Leave no pun behind.

[Nigrescence]

Goth Guru wrote:

An NPC selling access to a spellbook would charge the cost of casting the spell minus material components. The spellmonger needen't be a caster.

But that's wrong.

Firstly, a non-spellcaster can't charge for a spellcasting service that they can't provide, but that's wholly beside the point.

The value for an NPC selling access to a spellbook is already spelled out quite clearly.

Adding Spells To A Wizard's Spellbook wrote:

In most cases, wizards charge a fee for the privilege of copying spells from their spellbooks. This fee is usually equal to half the cost to write the spell into a spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook). Rare and unique spells might cost significantly more.

EDIT: I'm not saying you can't make that your house-ruled way of doing it, but take it elsewhere.

EDIT 2: Ok, they can't sell a service they can't provide, but they could charge someone and not provide that service. It's irrelevant at any rate because the second part of my post notes where it's already outlined.

[erik542]

Nigrescence wrote:

Goth Guru wrote:

An NPC selling access to a spellbook would charge the cost of casting the spell minus material components. The spellmonger needen't be a caster.

But that's wrong.

Firstly, a non-spellcaster can't charge for a spellcasting service that they can't provide, but that's wholly beside the point.

Because there are no unscrupulous NPC's ever. [/nitpick]

[Quantum Steve]

Nigrescence wrote:

Quantum Steve wrote:

What is the value of the spells? And why do the spells in a Blessed Book have value, and ones in a regular book, seemingly (according to SKR's post), do not?

I think it means the value of the spells IS the value of inscription. I suppose there's some sense to that interpretation, because once you've spent the gold on inks to inscribe to the book, the value of those inks has been consumed in the inscription. So I guess the inks needed to be valuable enough to hold the value of the spell... or something weird like that.

A Blessed book has no inscription cost. That's the purpose of the item. You can scribe for free.

Is the value then the regular inscription cost (which your not paying)? That would be a great way to make extra GP, buy the book, spand a few weeks scribing for free, then sell the book (at half price) for 2 or 3 times what you paid for it.

[Nigrescence]

Quantum Steve wrote:

Nigrescence wrote:

Quantum Steve wrote:

What is the value of the spells? And why do the spells in a Blessed Book have value, and ones in a regular book, seemingly (according to SKR's post), do not?

I think it means the value of the spells IS the value of inscription. I suppose there's some sense to that interpretation, because once you've spent the gold on inks to inscribe to the book, the value of those inks has been consumed in the inscription. So I guess the inks needed to be valuable enough to hold the value of the spell... or something weird like that.

A Blessed book has no inscription cost. That's the purpose of the item. You can scribe for free.

Is the value then the regular inscription cost (which your not paying)? That would be a great way to make extra GP, buy the book, spand a few weeks scribing for free, then sell the book (at half price) for 2 or 3 times what you paid for it.

I know that a Blessed Book has no inscription cost. I even explicitly said just earlier that it has no inscription cost. I'm asking exactly because it has no inscription cost.

I don't think your money-making scheme would make nearly as much money as you are expecting, especially if you are buying the book to begin with.

[Magicdealer]

Nigrescence wrote:

You're clearly having trouble thinking about even this simple concept. You still own that copy. That's identical to the concept of the spellbook.

Oh, and you literally know nothing about copyright and those related concepts of ownership, given the statements you have made, so I suggest that you avoid commenting on such ideas in the future.

The EULA is not the law of the land. It cannot force you to give all of your money to the company just because the EULA says you must and you then "agree" to it.

But these are complex issues and, as I said, I don't really want to get into it, especially when someone like you clearly is in over their head yet confident without reason that they even know anything about the subject.

You're still ignoring the absolute fact that I proved how your proposed system for the value...

No, that's incorrect. You purchase the rights to use a program as long as you stay within the EULA/TOS. If you violate those agreements, you lose the right to use the program online or offline. A simple google search will reveal many, many lawsuits about this very thing. Guess who they've sided with.

Also, I'll ask you again to stop the insults. I understand you've only been posting on the forums for a month or two, so maybe you don't know this. Read the notification at the bottom of the page when you're creating a new post, and you'll see a list of the forum policies, and the consequences for violating them. If you don't think you're being rude, go and reread some of your posts. They contain unnecessary, antagonistic language.

Additionally, a shoulder call is the pinnacle of ease for the dm. Instead of having to determine every little nuance, he decides whether he wants a cheaper or more expensive spellbook, and then applies that broadly to the whole book. Of course, this was in an earlier post.

I think the blessed book issue is kind of funny. The blessed book entry says "this book is never found as randomly generated treasure with spells already inscribed in it."

So, theoretically, one can only encounter it with spells when the dm deliberately places it with spells inside. As far as the spells inscribed in a deliberately placed book, they still have the normal costs to inscribe. However, the magic of the book just means you didn't have to pay the cost. That cost doesn't cease to exist.

Or in other words, fine-hashing cost and payment as two separate things.

[Nigrescence]

Response to Magicdealer's Personally Directed Attacks/Complaints, Hidden For The Sake Of Everyone Else:

Magicdealer wrote:

No, that's incorrect. You purchase the rights to use a program as long as you stay within the EULA/TOS. If you violate those agreements, you lose the right to use the program online or offline. A simple google search will reveal many, many lawsuits about this very thing. Guess who they've sided with.

You also have purchased the physical media itself, and I'll remind you yet again that the EULA is not the be-all-end-all law of the land, and there are some things that cannot be enforced through it. The fact that the extent of your "research" is googling it is indicative of the level of your knowledge (i.e. none), else you'd be well aware of the huge controversy surrounding the EULA and its usage. I see that you also blatantly ignored my example which tried to bring us back to the actual topic at hand, and instead you opted to continue down this irrelevant route towards derailing the discussion.

But, as I've already said, this is irrelevant and I do not want to get further into complex issues that you clearly and demonstrably do not understand even slightly.

I'm not incorrect at all, and you're still ignoring the fact that I proved the internal inconsistencies in your proposition.

Magicdealer wrote:

Also, I'll ask you again to stop the insults.

I'll ask you again to stop ignoring things that were blatantly and clearly stated.

Magicdealer wrote:

Read the notification at the bottom of the page when you're creating a new post, and you'll see a list of the forum policies, and the consequences for violating them. If you don't think you're being rude, go and reread some of your posts.

I'm well aware of those policies, and frankly being "rude" is nowhere there. Perhaps you should read them yourself, since it seems obvious to me that you haven't.

Magicdealer wrote:

Additionally, a shoulder call is the pinnacle of ease for the dm. Instead of having to determine every little nuance, he decides whether he wants a cheaper or more expensive spellbook, and then applies that broadly to the whole book. Of course, this was in an earlier post.

Except, of course, that having him determine the origin and cost of each spell in it differently is exactly forcing him to determine every little nuance, instead of just using the same flat value for every spell of each level (which makes sense - since the spell in the spellbook is effectively the same whether it was copied from another spellbook, obtained free through leveling, or copied from a scroll). Your suggestion is the absolute worst case of forcing a calculation of every little nuance.

There is literally no reason for arbitrarily applying your variable value. It complicates things more than it has to be, and more importantly, is not even close to the RAW. Lastly, it makes no sense whatsoever. Take it to the house rules board.

[Stynkk]

Magicdealer wrote:

No, that's incorrect. You purchase the rights to use a program as long as you stay within the EULA/TOS. If you violate those agreements, you lose the right to use the program online or offline. A simple google search will reveal many, many lawsuits about this very thing. Guess who they've sided with.

Magic Dealer is correct on this. EA has been known to "lock people out" of playing games that they have paid for and have the physical copy of. Meaning they could not even play on their own machines without being online. This is easier to administrate do to the online components that have been forcibly added to games, even those that would normally be offline ones(see: Steam).

Quantum Steve's money making scheme is actually quite correct and it seems to be written in the rules as the price for the spellbook is equal to the incription + purchase [for everyone's sake ill just also write copy fee].

There is no exception for what a blessed book sells for after it has spells put into it, however, given that a Blessed Book has it's own price - which is far from the negligable cost of a standard spellbook - I'd be wary of having it fall under the standard "selling a spellbook rules".

@Nigrescence: To clarify, Blessed Books don't have an inscription cost.

[Quantum Steve]

Nigrescence wrote:

I know that a Blessed Book has no inscription cost. I even explicitly said just earlier that it has no inscription cost. I'm asking exactly because it has no inscription cost.

I don't think your money-making scheme would make nearly as much money as you are expecting, especially if you are buying the book to begin with.

Drawing from Core and APG, a Blessed Book can hold all 32 9th LV, 41 8th LV, and 47 7th LV, plus 9 6th LV and 1 1st LV spell. Inscribing for 22 hrs a day and sleeping 2 with a Ring of Sustenance (no time limit is put on inscribing spells) you could fill the book copying from your own spell book in 23 days. This book would be worth 90,940 gp. Half of which is 45,470 gp. That less the 12500 gp cost of the book is 39,270 gp profit.

Filling it with more reasonable 3rd-6th level spells. You could sell a book with a market price of 60,740 gp. Leaving you with 17,870 gp profit.

This is certainly less profitable than adventuring, but depending on the down time between adventures you could reasonably crank one out between adventures and even inscribe a little while adventuring during meals and watches of the night.

[Nigrescence]

Stynkk wrote:

Magic Dealer is correct on this. EA has been known to "lock people out" of playing games that they have paid for and have the physical copy of. Meaning they could not even play on their own machines without being online. This is easier to administrate do to the online components that have been forcibly added to games, even those that would normally be offline ones(see: Steam).

No, he is not correct on this. As I said, this is a complex issue, one that you are doing a disservice by attempting to simplify into a blanket statement that if a company does it it's OK and legal. It's not that simple. Just for example, buying from Steam is different from buying a standalone box. There are extra stipulations involved with Steam, but Steam itself is a separate service, and there are Terms of Service conditions associated with that. Steam cannot lock you out of non-Steam games, for example. You're oversimplifying and horrendously misrepresenting things.

But, as I've already said, this is all a derailment and I have no interest in discussing this with those unfamiliar with this topic.

Stynkk wrote:

Quantum Steve's money making scheme is actually quite correct and it seems to be written in the rules as the price for the spellbook is equal to the incription + purchase [for everyone's sake ill just also write copy fee].

There is no exception for what a blessed book sells for after it has spells put into it, however, given that a Blessed Book has it's own price - which is far from the negligable cost of a standard spellbook - I'd be wary of having it fall under the standard "selling a spellbook rules".

I wasn't saying it's incorrect. I was saying it's indeterminate (something I noted by asking Sean to clarify about the Blessed Book itself) and not as effective at making money even if it was a valid method.

Stynkk wrote:

@Nigrescence: To clarify, Blessed Books don't have an inscription cost.

I know that they don't have an inscription cost. Had you even been reading, you would have been well aware of that. I have noted and explicitly mentioned this several times.

[Stynkk]

Nigrescence wrote:

No, he is not correct on this. As I said, this is a complex issue, one that you are doing a disservice by attempting to simplify into a blanket statement that if a company does it it's OK and legal. It's not that simple. Just for example, buying from Steam is different from buying a standalone box.

This is not correct and you are trivializing the matter by saying "they can't control me foo!". They can, have and will. They have ultimate authority over your content and how you use it. They are well within their rights to take it from you. You should really read those contracts before you push OK. It is a legally binding contract.

But, as to the topic at hand, I have exhausted my argument. You may believe what you wish.

[Nigrescence]

Quantum Steve wrote:

Nigrescence wrote:

I know that a Blessed Book has no inscription cost. I even explicitly said just earlier that it has no inscription cost. I'm asking exactly because it has no inscription cost.

I don't think your money-making scheme would make nearly as much money as you are expecting, especially if you are buying the book to begin with.

Drawing from Core and APG, a Blessed Book can hold all 32 9th LV, 41 8th LV, and 47 7th LV, plus 9 6th LV and 1 1st LV spell. Inscribing for 22 hrs a day and sleeping 2 with a Ring of Sustenance (no time limit is put on inscribing spells) you could fill the book copying from your own spell book in 23 days. This book would be worth 90,940 gp. Half of which is 45,470 gp. That less the 12500 gp cost of the book is 39,270 gp profit.

Filling it with more reasonable 3rd-6th level spells. You could sell a book with a market price of 60,740 gp. Leaving you with 17,870 gp profit.

This is certainly less profitable than adventuring, but depending on the down time between adventures you could reasonably crank one out between adventures and even inscribe a little while adventuring during meals and watches of the night.

Interesting figures, since you've taken the time to work it out, but it merely confirms what I had guessed.

It takes a lot of time, requires you to have a ridiculous set of resources, and most likely you'd have to be fairly high level to do that. Even taking the more reasonable figures, you're most likely better off using other "money-making schemes".

I find that money-making schemes rarely (if ever) pan out in actual games, and are better suited for theoretical contemplation than an actual consideration for making money or breaking the game.

But you would be making a little more money than I would have guessed (and I was assuming reasonable figures, not the ridiculous max-level spells figures).

[Nigrescence]

Stynkk wrote:

This is not correct and you are trivializing the matter by saying "they can't control me foo!". They can, have and will. They have ultimate authority over your content and how you use it. They are well within their rights to take it from you. You should really read those contracts before you push OK. It is a legally binding contract.

It is correct, and the EULA is actually more restricted than you let on. It is a specific kind of agreement, not an all-powerful contract that can do anything whatsoever. I don't know if you're trolling when you say this stuff, or if you're just having trouble expressing what you're trying to say, but this is blatantly false.

It's also hilariously ironic that you're accusing me of trivializing the matter when I am explicitly making the caveat that this whole issue is more complex than what we've been discussing, and that he's doing the actual issue a disservice by attempting to simplify it.

I'm not trivializing anything by saying it's more complex than he's trying to make it. I'm doing the exact opposite.

I also never said "they can't control me foo!".

Stynkk wrote:

But, as to the topic at hand, I have exhausted my argument. You may believe what you wish.

I have no beliefs about it. Belief doesn't even enter into it.

[Majuba]

Quantum Steve wrote:

A Blessed book has no inscription cost. That's the purpose of the item. You can scribe for free.

Is the value then the regular inscription cost (which your not paying)? That would be a great way to make extra GP, buy the book, spand a few weeks scribing for free, then sell the book (at half price) for 2 or 3 times what you paid for it.

I'm just curious on the numbers here, not interested in whether it makes sense or would work:

Blessed Book, cost 12500.

1000 pages, worth a maximum sale price of 45gp each, or 45000 if you wrote 111(.1) 9th level spells.

There aren't that many, so from the Core Rulebook spells, the maximum value would be:
24 9th, 37 8th, 40 7th, 34 6th, 1 4th = 37560 gp.
Regardless of the spell levels, it takes 125 days to scribe that many levels of spells (8 hours per day). 17th level wizards probably have better things to do than earn 25 gp per hour scribing spells.

If we assume at most a 13th level wizard doing this, the maximum would be: 40 7th, 47 6th, 47 5th, 42 4th, 16 3rd, 1 2nd = 28235 gp, or < 16gp/hour.

Anyone lower than 13th runs out of spells to scribe:
47 6th, 47 5th, 42 4th, 43 3rd, 51 2nd, 39 1st, 20 0th, with 35 pages left blank = 20895, or 8.4 gp per hour (at best). And 1st level spells actually cost more to scribe in a blessed book (counting the cost per page) than a regular one. You're better off taking a crafting feat and asking your DM if you can craft long-term selling at 60% (that's 12.5 gp per hour).

[Magicdealer]

check the definition of belief.

1. An acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

If you think you're right, then by definition you believe that your statement is true. Regardless of whatever makes you accept something is true, such as facts, opinions, cultural background, or religious beliefs.

Don't we love semantics?

Again, you seem to be missing my point. The dm can broadly wave all spells into one category, instead of trying to minutely account for how each individual spell was collected.

As far as my EULA stuff, I was pretty specific about what I was referring to. You don't own the game. You enter an agreement to use the game. And if you break that agreement, you no longer have the right to use that game.

You're actually trying to make it MORE complex than it actually is by adding in things like EULA's requiring you to give them all of their money and so on. Obviously, any contract can include elements that are illegal and don't stand up in court. However, only purchasing the right to use the game, and the right to remove access for violation the eula/tos has stood up in court. So far. As I said in a previous post, it's an easy google search. And, logically speaking, it is possible to attempt to make something appear so complex as to trivialize its value. Hence the point that Stynkk was making.

I agree with you that money-making schemes rarely work out in-game. For some reason, dm's don't appreciate it when you try to break the wealth-by-level guidelines :)

Market value is good and all, until you tell your dm what you're doing and he tells you there aren't any buyers.

I like the by-hour breakdown. It seems more sensible to spend those eight hours adventuring and making 4-5k in treasure, as well as xp.

[Nigrescence]

Spoiler For Sanity:

Magicdealer wrote:

Spam.

To begin with, you should cite your dictionaries if you attempt to use one for a definition. In your case, the Oxford English dictionary, most likely online.

To roundly counter your assertion, nowhere do I ever state that I "accept" anything to be true. I propose these things as true given what we know the rules say. As I said, belief doesn't enter into it. My comments on the rules are at best propositions/suggestions for interpretation and at worst guesses. Belief is nowhere in it.

Additionally, the one definition you give is not the only and exclusive definition for "belief". If you pick and choose whatever definition you think suits your goal, then you're cherry-picking and being dishonest.

Magicdealer wrote:

Don't we love semantics?

You certainly seem to love misusing and abusing it, but you also seem to have a penchant for displaying your lack of comprehension in general.

Magicdealer wrote:

Again, you seem to be missing my point. The dm can broadly wave all spells into one category, instead of trying to minutely account for how each individual spell was collected.

No, I'm not missing your point. Even if he throws all spells into one category, he still has to follow the pricing guidelines for the value of each spell.

Must I quote YOU for your own words on what you suggested? You certainly seem to have forgotten it.

Magicdealer wrote:

As the Dm, decide how the spellbook got the spells into it. Then use that to determine the cost of the book. It's entirely possible that one spellbook of first level spells would cost more than another one because one was created through borrowing, and one through purchasing scrolls.

This is what you had said. Using this method, they'd have to decide how each spell was obtained. Every spellbook would be wildly different, even if they could choose "all scrolls" for one, "all level up freebies" for another, and "all borrowed" for the third.

As I already said, this method also ignores the inherent value of the spells, and imposes extra values that simply do not exist (like the material cost of the spell in a scroll, ready to cast, being added to the value of the spell when copying to a spellbook) outside of the magic item itself (scroll).

You further tried to argue for your proposition with...

Magicdealer wrote:

Since there isn't an explicit answer here, and many opinions as to how the cost is valued, the only real solution to this question at the moment is for the dm to make a value judgement, determine whether he wants the book more or less expensive, and then use the appropriate method to arrive at the price.

My proposition is plenty consistent within the range of the problem, and provides a reasonable solution. Now, if we get a faq reply/errata, we can offer up that answer instead.

Until we have errata, the dm is looking at determining whether the total cost includes the blank spellbook, the cost of scrolls for each spell, the cost of hiring a spellcaster to cast the spell, the cost of borrowing a spellcaster's book who has the spell, the cost of inscribing, whether it's possible to purchase a spell in the first place, the cost of expensive material components that may have been consumed...

I haven't seen any evidence that suggests one answer over another one, just opinions on the matter. Without supporting evidence that implies it's the correct way to value...

This just confirms my accusation that you are making it more complex. He has to determine the value upon a variable that's up to a whim.

All of this with no real reason why this variable listing should ever be the case. The rules indicate a specific value for spells, not a value that can be cooked up however the DM feels or however the person acquired the spells. And I'll remind you yet again that a scroll is not the spell, but a specific magic item. Neither is a wand a spell, but a specific magic item that can cast a spell.

I'm not saying that you can't do this, but it's not RAW, and it's a house rule. Take it elsewhere.

And lastly you have given final, definitive proof that you do not understand law at all, nor do you have any comprehension relevant to a EULA, nor do you have any understanding of logic. This is the last time I will warn you to not make a mockery of these subjects with your obviously ignorant mistreatment of them. Beyond this, you simply do not merit a response. You know nothing of these subjects, and "googling" doesn't count.

Most notably, a license is not a contract. There are major differences. Just ask someone who knows anything about law.

[Stynkk]

Magicdealer wrote:

Don't we love semantics?

We do, we do. Just not as much as others.

I wonder if you could take Leadership and make a veritable blessed book and spellbook resale "sweatshop" to make gold all day for you. After giving them a master book of course.

However, no DM would let that fly, but it's entirely within the rules...

[AionicElf]

Actually...I'm pretty sure that the Blessed Book idea would not work, and is designed that way. If you look at all the crafting in Pathfinder, you cannot make a profit on it. By design. You can make something for half the market value, and you can sell it for half market value. Zero sum.

As Sean has stated, the cost of selling a spellbook is half the cost of the spellbook itself and half the cost of inscribing (though, if we're trying to keep this consistently zero sum, it should be half the cost of the spellbook and the full cost of inscribing - so, you're actually losing money crafting a spellbook and selling it [something I'm going to almost certainly house rule back up to zero sum now that I understand where this is all coming from]).

So, for the Blessed Book, it would be half the cost of the Blessed Book, regardless of the number and level of the spells in it. Zero sum. Intentionally. In order to keep adventurers from churning out that much profit in their downtime, to promote them actually going out and adventuring for their riches. You know, playing the game, not sitting in town, being a merchant (that's a valid game, but it's not the focus of this game).

[Diego Rossi]

MaxAstro wrote:

I'm still going with it making more sense that the "purchase" cost is the cost to purchase a scroll.

My logic is this: How much does it cost a wizard who has no access to another wizard to add a spell to a spellbook? First he has to buy the scroll of the spell he wants, and then he has to scribe the scroll into his book. To create an entire spellbook, he has to buy every scroll in the spellbook and then pay to inscribe each of those spells.

Basic D&D economy says that things sell for half as much as they cost to buy (doesn't that statement just make perfect sense? ;) ), so the sell value of the new spellbook would be half of (the cost to purchase a scroll of every spell in the book + the cost to inscribe every spell in the book).

Yes this means that if a spell has an expensive material component, that adds to the value of the spellbook, but this makes sense; again, to create a spellbook without relying on an existing spellbook, you have to buy a scroll with which to inscribe, and scrolls cost extra for their expensive material components.

Doing it this way is more expensive than borrowing the spells from another wizard; it makes sense to me that the value of a spellbook would be determined by the more costly way to create the spellbook, especially when it is also arguably the easier way (in my mind, finding a town that sells 5th level scrolls will always be easier than finding a 9th level wizard who has all the spells you happen to need).

Why I should buy your overpriced spellbook that probably contains spells I already have instead of buying spells one by one from another wizard at a way lower cost?

Your competition sell a spellbook with one level 1 spell at 7.5 GP, you sell it at 17.5 (I am waiving the cost of the actual physical book).
So you sell at 233% of the price required by the other seller.
Unless you have a spell I absolutely need I will never buy from you.

[Diego Rossi]

AionicElf wrote:

Is there anything at all definitive to back up one of these three positions?

PRD: Arcane Magical Writings

Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook

Wizards can add new spells to their spellbooks through several methods. A wizard can only learn new spells that belong to the wizard spell lists.

Spells Copied from Another's Spellbook or a Scroll: A wizard can also add a spell to his book whenever he encounters one on a magic scroll or in another wizard's spellbook. No matter what the spell's source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings). Next, he must spend 1 hour studying the spell. At the end of the hour, he must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell's level). A wizard who has specialized in a school of spells gains a +2 bonus on the Spellcraft check if the new spell is from his specialty school. If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into his spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook). The process leaves a spellbook that was copied from unharmed, but a spell successfully copied from a magic scroll disappears from the parchment.

If the check fails, the wizard cannot understand or copy the spell. He cannot attempt to learn or copy that spell again until he gains another rank in Spellcraft. If the spell was from a scroll, a failed Spellcraft check does not cause the spell to vanish.

In most cases, wizards charge a fee for the privilege of copying spells from their spellbooks. This fee is usually equal to half the cost to write the spell into a spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook). Rare and unique spells might cost significantly more.

Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook

Once a wizard understands a new spell, he can record it into his spellbook.

Space in the Spellbook: A spell takes up one page of the spellbook per spell level. Even a 0-level spell (cantrip) takes one page. A spellbook has 100 pages.

Materials and Costs: The cost for writing a new spell into a spellbook depends on the level of the spell, as noted on the following table. Note that a wizard does not have to pay these costs in time or gold for spells he gains for free at each new level.
Spell Level Writing Cost
0 5 gp
1 10 gp
2 40 gp
3 90 gp
4 160 gp
5 250 gp
6 360 gp
7 490 gp
8 640 gp
9 810 gp

Replacing and Copying Spellbooks

A wizard can use the procedure for learning a spell to reconstruct a lost spellbook. If he already has a particular spell prepared, he can write it directly into a new book at the same cost required to write a spell into a spellbook. The process wipes the prepared spell from his mind, just as casting it would. If he does not have the spell prepared, he can prepare it from a borrowed spellbook and then write it into a new book.

Duplicating an existing spellbook uses the same procedure as replacing it, but the task is much easier. The time requirement and cost per page are halved.
Selling a Spellbook

Captured spellbooks can be sold for an amount equal to half the cost of purchasing and inscribing the spells within.

-- citations end --

I don't know what you want more than that.

[AionicElf]

Diego Rossi wrote:

A long quote from the PRD.

-- citations end --

I don't know what you want more than that.

Ok...but which of the three positions does that support? The whole point of the post is that what you quoted is not conclusive.

[Ross Byers]

I think this topic has been fairly well hashed over. Thread locked.