| 9 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Wizards cannot cast spells from divine scrolls (not unless they use UMD or something similar).
But can a wizard add a spell from a divined spell scroll into his spellbook (provided that it IS on his spell list)?
Wizards cannot cast spells from divine scrolls (not unless they use UMD or something similar).
But can a wizard add a spell from a divined spell scroll into his spellbook (provided that it IS on his spell list)?
Gut answer number one: A wizard can research new spells all he wants, if one happens to match a divine spell, that's between player and DM.
Gut answer numbet two: I don't beleive he would be able to LEARN it from a cleric source. He can clone it, but not steal it...
MAJOR question after actually READING all the question... (provided that it IS on his spell list)?
ARE there spells that cross over cleric/wizard? If so, would there actually be anything saying that THIS is a divine scroll and NOT a wizard scroll? For that matter do they even differentiate divine and Arcane spells anymore? I thought it was all one big appendix, and each class got their 'lists'. I'm honestly not sure... I would think 'Spell XYZ' would be mechanically listed as Wiz 1, bard 1, druid 1) or however they list it.. if it's part of HIS thing... I would probably allow it...
Of course I've had little experience with scrolls yet... (Sorcerer and Rogue so far...) so I guess I really don't know.
Many of the cleric Domains have spells that are on the sorc/wiz list. So it could come to pass that a cleric makes a scroll of his domain spell.
I am unsure of the RAW answer myself.
As far as houserule territory goes, if i had a cleric player want to make a scroll of one of his spells and let the party wizard "learn it" that way... i'd say sure.
I believe that "Read Magic" does not differentiate between divine and arcane magic. I see nothing in the rules that would prevent a wizard from learning a spell on their spell list from a divine scroll. "Protection from good/evil etc." is a spell on both the cleric and wizard list. So I would expect a wizard could learn the spell from a cleric scroll.
Of course a GM might rule differently and that's fine too.
In our particular case, I'm an inquisitor with Scribe Scroll and dimensional anchor, which the party wizard wants.
I'm tempted to give him my scroll so he can add it to his spellbook, but it's a divine scroll, not an arcane one, so I asked.
In our particular case, I'm an inquisitor with Scribe Scroll and dimensional anchor, which the party wizard wants.
I'm tempted to give him my scroll so he can add it to his spellbook, but it's a divine scroll, not an arcane one, so I asked.
I would probably allow this in my campaigns. "Read Magic" is necessary for one wizard to read another's spell book because each wizard translates the spell into their own unique "language" for spell writing. If they can read the scroll, and the spell is on their spell list, I see no reason why a cleric scroll they read is treated any differently than any other scroll they read which they then translate into their own "language" to write into their spellbook.
|
Wizards cannot cast spells from divine scrolls (not unless they use UMD or something similar).
But can a wizard add a spell from a divined spell scroll into his spellbook (provided that it IS on his spell list)?
An arcane spellcaster with use magic device could maybe cast the spell, but never learn it.
I see it this way, an arcane spell scroll is tons of magical theory the workings etc; a divine scroll is the proper prayers and supplications etc.
In short they are totally different, if your GM allows it cool, but I think its pretty clear the rules say no.
Since scrolls do have arcane/divine types, and it is stated quite clearly that an arcane caster can't use a divine scroll, I'd include 'use' to mean scribing into spellbook, as well.
As anything, it's ultimately down to GM fiat of course, but I'd say per the rules this is not allowed.
I think its pretty clear the rules say no.
I'd say per the rules this is not allowed.
Mind quoting these rules?
Sounds like supposition, not rules, to me.
This has already come up and been shot down before. I do need to know if you are asking because you think it is intended to be allowed by the rules are just another mental exercise out of boredom.
Sounds like supposition, not rules, to me.
Your FACE is supposition! :p
As I said, it's quite clearly stated that an arcane caster can only use arcane scrolls. Use obviously refers to activating the scroll, but as I also said, I'd interpret 'use' to include all uses, including scribing into spellbooks.
The spell must be of the correct type (arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters (wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells, and divine spellcasters (clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers) can only use scrolls containing divine spells. (The type of scroll a character creates is also determined by his class.)
Then there's this:
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).
Note that to write a spell into your spellbook from a scroll, you must decipher the magical writing as detailed in the Arcane Magical Writings chapter. The Arcane Magical Writings chapter deals exclusively with, you guessed it, arcane magical writing.
To decipher an arcane magical writing (such as a single spell in another's spellbook or on a scroll), a character must make a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + the spell's level). If the skill check fails, the character cannot attempt to read that particular spell again until the next day. A read magic spell automatically deciphers magical writing without a skill check. If the person who created the magical writing is on hand to help the reader, success is also automatic.
Of course, there's also this:
Divine spells can be written and deciphered like arcane spells (see Arcane Magical Writings). A Spellcraft check can decipher divine magical writing and identify it. Only characters who have the spell (in its divine form) on their class spell list can cast a divine spell from a scroll.
Which suggests that the Arcane Magical Writings chapter is more of a general guideline. But again, also, refers to scrolls by exclusive type.
I agree that it is not explicitly stated that you can only write arcane scrolls into your spellbook, but I still think it is strongly inferred that this is supposed to be the case. You have to be reaching more than usual to bend it any other way.
But in the end, it's your game. Do with it what you want.
No. becasue it is not written in the correct form..i.e. draconic or whatever passes for the language of arcane magic. Clerical scrolls are more in the form of invocations of the divine. (or profane as you will)Wizards cannot cast spells from divine scrolls (not unless they use UMD or something similar).
But can a wizard add a spell from a divined spell scroll into his spellbook (provided that it IS on his spell list)?
But I see no evidence of this anywhere in the rules.
I could just as easily argue all magical writing is the same, but for personal notations.
I believe the rules specifically say that the type of scroll is determined by the spell. For spells that are on the spell list of both divine and arcane classes, this can be interpreted as saying that a scroll of "protection from evil" is BOTH an arcane and a divine spell. However the rules then get less clear because they say a scroll type is ALSO! Determined by the class of the scriber, but then in the PRD it says that divine spells can be read and used by an arcane caster with a spellcraft check.
I suppose this means multiple interpretations are equally "right." I would rule that a wizard can read and learn a spell from either an arcane or divine scroll so long as it is on their spell list. If you really want to hedge your bets, have the arcane caster make a spellcraft check first.
|
Wizards cannot cast spells from divine scrolls (not unless they use UMD or something similar).
But can a wizard add a spell from a divined spell scroll into his spellbook (provided that it IS on his spell list)?
The Core Rulebook states in multiple locations the distinction between Arcane and Divine magical writings. As you pointed out, Wizards cannot cast spells from divine scrolls. On pg. 221 we find this:
Divine Magical Writings
Divine spells can be written and deciphered like arcane spells (see Arcane Magical Writings). A Spellcraft check can decipher divine magical writing and identify it. Only characters who have the spell (in its divine form) on their class spell list can cast a divine spell from a scroll.
Though it's not directly stated, it is implicitly made clear that Arcane casters cannot cast ("use") divine spells, and vice versa. If they can't cast it directly from the scroll, there's no reason to believe they can copy it from the scroll, then suddenly be able to use it. If that's the case, might as well just toss the divine/arcane distinction out the window and let them cast it right from the scroll.
Incidentally, there's another way to address this question: 1) Are you the GM seeking clarification on the rules, or 2) Are you a player challenging the ruling made by the GM, or 3) None of the above.
1) The rules are pretty clear about the distinction between Arcane and Divine magic. It seems logical to carry that distinction through to scrolls. Though the spell might be "shared" - the means to cast it are radically different. Then again, as GM, you can decide otherwise as you see fit.
2) Tough. If the GM has ruled that you can't, then you can't. The rules serve the GM, not the other way around.
3) See #1 above.
Happy hunting!
|
|
But I see no evidence of this anywhere in the rules.
I could just as easily argue all magical writing is the same, but for personal notations.
True, as the GM you can make that argument. You can rule that there is no distinction between arcane and divine magic. In fact, you can rule that there is only one kind of magic. And then maybe just create a single spell list that any caster class can choose from. All of that and more is up to the GM's whim, or vision.
But, as the rules do make the distinction between arcane and divine magic in multiple locations, it's rational and easy to conclude that the distinction holds true between divine and arcane scrolls. Divine casters can use divine scrolls, and arcane casters can use (read, copy, cast, etc) arcane scrolls, and never the twain shall meet.
Red Wulf: #3. I am a player, but it's another player that is interested in the issue. We have not brought it to the GM's attention yet (though we will if we can't get a clear answer here).
Divine spells can be written and deciphered like arcane spells (see Arcane Magical Writings). A Spellcraft check can decipher divine magical writing and identify it. Only characters who have the spell (in its divine form) on their class spell list can cast a divine spell from a scroll.
Without REALLY digging into RAI, these two phrases cause my head to hurt. They clash horribly in this instance.
After actually thinking about it though, the first phrase could be taken to mean that the operations are "similar" [read: "like"] but not necessarily identical. Then the second phrase can be taken as given without so much painful clashing.
For maintaining verisimilitude though, I would rule as DM that divine scrolls do not translate into arcane spells... unless you're a cleric of a deity of arcane magic. Reason being as others have stated: whatever prayers or holy/profane scripts or loricas are written on them simply do not make sense translated into arcane mathematics and science.
...unless you can convince me with some really awesome numerology (or what have you) that the divine scrolls are actually powered by arcane theory ciphered away within the rhyme and rhythm of the chant of the prayers...
Well, I guess the question at the root of all this is "Are divine spells and arcane spells both 'magic' spells?"
In other words, wizards learn to manipulate magic directly. Clerics receive spells from their deities. But are the resulting spells utilizing the same underlying magical nature to operate?
If so, then when a wizard "deciphers" a cleric scroll, they are figuring out the underlying magical effect not the prayer or supplication which granted the spell to the cleric who wrote the spell.
There are two things in RAW that suggest the underlying magic is the same.
1. Counterspells. RAW says that counterspelling works even when the spell is divine and the counterspell is arcane.
2. Spell schools. Most spells are in a magical "school" which implies they share not only their magical nature, but a specific ASPECT of that magical nature.
I will continue to rule that once a character who can write spells or store spells (like a witch) "deciphers" a divine spell, they can store it in their spell collection.
|
Wizard section: "At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards' spellbooks to his own (see Chapter 9).
Chapter nine Adding spells to a wizard's spellbook:
"A wizard can only learn new spells that belong to the wizard spell lists.
"No matter the spell's source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings). If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into his spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook)."
Divine magical writings:
"Divine spells can be written and deciphered like arcane spells (see Arcane Magical Writings).
Arcane Magical writings:
"A read magic spell automatically deciphers magical writing without a skill check."
"Deciphering magical writing allows the reader to identify the spell and gives some idea of its effects"
Writing a new spell into a Spellbook
"Once a wizard understands a new spell, he can record it into his spellbook."
So, do you want to know what's funny about the whole thing? The spell never changes type, so even though the wizard can copy a divine spell into his spellbook, it's still a divine spell. He'll never be able to cast it until he gets an arcane version of the spell.
Well, assuming you're not going to argue about whether a wizard can cast a divine spell with an arcane spell slot. :p
Wizard section: "At any time, a wizard can also add spells found in other wizards' spellbooks to his own (see Chapter 9).Chapter nine Adding spells to a wizard's spellbook:
"A wizard can only learn new spells that belong to the wizard spell lists."No matter the spell's source, the wizard must first decipher the magical writing (see Arcane Magical Writings). If the check succeeds, the wizard understands the spell and can copy it into his spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook)."
Divine magical writings:
"Divine spells can be written and deciphered like arcane spells (see Arcane Magical Writings).Arcane Magical writings:
"A read magic spell automatically deciphers magical writing without a skill check."
"Deciphering magical writing allows the reader to identify the spell and gives some idea of its effects"Writing a new spell into a Spellbook
"Once a wizard understands a new spell, he can record it into his spellbook."So, do you want to know what's funny about the whole thing? The spell never changes type, so even though the wizard can copy a divine spell into his spellbook, it's still a divine spell. He'll never be able to cast it until he gets an arcane version of the spell.
Well, assuming you're not going to argue about whether a wizard can cast a divine spell with an arcane spell slot. :p
Funny thing about all this is that a priest spell, first and foremost is a prayer to a deity. A wizard may be devout. But he or she lacks the fundamental connection to a deity that would allow him to utilize the divine scroll in it's given format. By the same token, clerics are unable to make the necessary intellectual conclusions inherent with casting an arcane spell.
As mentioned above, a wizard can decipher a divine scroll, and do the necessary research to create an arcane version of the divine spell, but the arcane scroll generated would not resemble the divine scroll at all.
Wizards can copy spells from a Divine Scroll into their spell book. It may take a little extra time to decipher it, but it should be possible.
A Wizard however, and every other purely Arcane caster is unable to CAST a spell from a divine scroll even if they spend the time to decipher it.
After copying the spell into their spell book, a Wizard is capable of casting the spell as an Arcane spell because he has already done the needed calculations.
A Wizard is unable to copy any healing spell, or other divine only spells into their spellbook regardless of the source as it is not on their spell list. They simply do not understand those forms of magical energies enough. Should you have the proper background and invest enough time into it, as well as convincing the GM.. I don't see why you couldn't eventually use Spell Research to accomplish heal spells in an Arcane manner.. In which case I would say you bypass the normal limitations. :P
Ofc that's my opinion on magical energies/writings. It's all the same. Clerics just get their inspiration from the divine, not from study.
Wizards can copy spells from a Divine Scroll into their spell book. It may take a little extra time to decipher it, but it should be possible.
A Wizard however, and every other purely Arcane caster is unable to CAST a spell from a divine scroll even if they spend the time to decipher it.
After copying the spell into their spell book, a Wizard is capable of casting the spell as an Arcane spell because he has already done the needed calculations.
A Wizard is unable to copy any healing spell, or other divine only spells into their spellbook regardless of the source as it is not on their spell list. They simply do not understand those forms of magical energies enough. Should you have the proper background and invest enough time into it, as well as convincing the GM.. I don't see why you couldn't eventually use Spell Research to accomplish heal spells in an Arcane manner.. In which case I would say you bypass the normal limitations. :P
Ofc that's my opinion on magical energies/writings. It's all the same. Clerics just get their inspiration from the divine, not from study.
Yes, this is how I see it, except that I don't see clerics being "inspired" I see their deities as literally granting the spell in castable form into their minds, where wizards have to put it there themselves.
IMO this lies in the GM's realm and could go either way.
But, there is a hard line between arcane and divine magic, and I could see a GM wanting to uphold that.
Would you let a Wizard use Read Magic and copy a scroll of Cure Light Wounds into their spellbook?
It's a divine spell you want to scribe in a spellbook.
In my opinion, the fact that a spell exists on the class lists for both Inquisitors and Wizards is irrelevant. They are different spells, from different magic types and have a different process to cast them.
Dimensional Anchor (Divine) =/= Dimensional Anchor (Arcane)
IMO this lies in the GM's realm and could go either way.
But, there is a hard line between arcane and divine magic, and I could see a GM wanting to uphold that.
Would you let a Wizard use Read Magic and copy a scroll of Cure Light Wounds into their spellbook?
It's a divine spell you want to scribe in a spellbook.
In my opinion, the fact that a spell exists on the class lists for both Inquisitors and Wizards is irrelevant. They are different spells, from different magic types and have a different process to cast them.
Dimensional Anchor (Divine) =/= Dimensional Anchor (Arcane)
Barring a specific ruling from Paizo, I think this could go either way. I see a difference between how spells are obtained between divine and arcane, but I don't see any difference in the spell itself when they are on both arcane and divine lists. They are identical whether cast by a cleric or wizard, one can counterspell the other and both are in the same magical school. They are literally listed in the RAW as ONE SPELL.
Could a wizard scribe a cure light wounds into his spellbook?
I don't see any reason in RAW why he couldn't. But it clearly states that he can't cast it. But I have to admit the fact that he can't cast it even if he can write it in his spellbook is a pretty reasonable point in favor of the "it's a different kind of magic" argument.
I'd love to see a developer weigh in.
Well, I guess the question at the root of all this is "Are divine spells and arcane spells both 'magic' spells?"
In other words, wizards learn to manipulate magic directly. Clerics receive spells from their deities. But are the resulting spells utilizing the same underlying magical nature to operate?
If so, then when a wizard "deciphers" a cleric scroll, they are figuring out the underlying magical effect not the prayer or supplication which granted the spell to the cleric who wrote the spell.
I would respectfully disagree with your logic here. Even if they are utilizing the same "magical nature", I don't think it's entirely acceptable to think that a wizard can just figure that relationship between whatever holy text is the catalyst for the spell and the magic involved just from reading the scroll, which is presumably something akin to a prayer or invocation of a higher power.
There are two things in RAW that suggest the underlying magic is the same.
1. Counterspells. RAW says that counterspelling works even when the spell is divine and the counterspell is arcane.
Again, it's acceptable to think that the underlying magical nature is the same, so counterspelling a divine spell with an arcane spell or vice versa makes good sense. It's the process of casting that changes, not the abstract concept of the energy behind it.
2. Spell schools. Most spells are in a magical "school" which implies they share not only their magical nature, but a specific ASPECT of that magical nature.
This goes back to my last comment.
You raise valid points about the inherent similarities in spells in general, but you can't seal the logic and make it airtight on those two details alone. The real problem here lies in deciphering arcane spell preparation from what is essentially a lyrical invocation or the like. Granted it may provide clues through somatic components, but the manipulation of that energy through the means of an arcane caster is going to be [improbable] to discern
I would respectfully disagree with your logic here. Even if they are utilizing the same "magical nature", I don't think it's entirely acceptable to think that a wizard can just figure that relationship between whatever holy text is the catalyst for the spell and the magic involved just from reading the scroll, which is presumably something akin to a prayer or invocation of a higher power.
Well, I would also respectfully disagree with your logic. It is unlikely that all the different deities would have the same holy text, prayer or invocation when preparing their divine spells. Since the divine spell can be written to a scroll that can be used to cast the spell by ANY DIVINE CASTER, no matter what deity, to me that implies that the scroll is a more general form of the magical power than the invocation and prayer. In fact the scroll is really just a spell storing device, it is not a request to the scroll reader's deity to receive a new "copy" of the spell from that deity. (Not to mention that ANYONE can cast a divine scroll if they have a sufficiently high Use Magic Device score.)
I think the only real problem with my argument is that a wizard can decipher and write a cure light wounds spell in his book, but can't cast it. That's a problem. But it's not insurmountable. It's enough to make it perfectly reasonable to rule that divine and arcane magic are inherently different though. I'm just not wholly convinced.
Since the divine spell can be written to a scroll that can be read by ANY DIVINE CASTER, no matter what deity, to me that implies that the scroll is a more general form of the magical power than the invocation and prayer.
Touche, sirrah.
I have nothing with which to defend against your riposte, though you stay your own hand with the CLW point.
A draw, then?
The Mystic Theurge prestige class can cast both arcane, and divine and even switch up the slots. Perhaps if you took a divine scroll to one of these they could then convert it into arcane?
This is, however, unique to the Mystic Theurge... even still a Mystic Theurge (who is familiar with both types of magic) does not combine all spells into one uber pile. There are still distictions.
Oh,it gets even more fun than that. A spirit naga can cast all divine spells as arcane spells as a sorcerer. Let the naga learn Scribe Scroll and you can have the entire clerical list of divine spells as arcane scrolls, ready and waiting to be penned into wizards' spellbooks.
What you have to remember is a lot of this is holdovers from 1st edition. Back then, not only were scrolls typed as arcane or divine, but so were wands. Now? The wands are vanilla non-arcane non-divine just "Do you have it on your spell list or can you fake it with UMD?"
Adding extra complications are things like alchemists being able to add to their formularies by copying spells out of wizards' spellbooks. Is an alchemical formula arcane or divine and can a wizard re-derive an arcane spell from an alchemical formula?
At some point, even if they want to keep the arcane/divine divide, I think most GMs just say, "Why yes, the scroll you find in the treasure hoard is miraculously just the sort that you need" and leave it at that.
Alternately, I'd just increase the spellcraft DC to make sense of something from a different sort of magic. If you look at the 3.5 feat Southern Magician from Races of Faerûn, there's some business about casting arcane spells as divine and vice versa and a -4 penalty to make sense of them. Using that as a guideline, I'd just increase the spellcraft DC by 4 for any wizard trying to make sense of a divine scroll and have done with it.
|
This is, however, unique to the Mystic Theurge... even still a Mystic Theurge (who is familiar with both types of magic) does not combine all spells into one uber pile. There are still distictions.
The Mystic Theurge prestige class can cast both arcane, and divine and even switch up the slots. Perhaps if you took a divine scroll to one of these they could then convert it into arcane?
Well in a way thats exactly what combined spells is,it lets them have an Uber Pile. They can even spontaniously cast from arcane slots.
Not only this, but as I said befor with the new words of power idea, if a divine caster is using words of power and another arcane is using words of power this might give them some common ground.
Either way, you'll end up doing them in your game they way you want, and i'll do it my way I am really only posting so I get a picture to my name which ironiclly once I have achieved it you will not see much.
|
|
Funny thing about all this is that a priest spell, first and foremost is a prayer to a deity. A wizard may be devout. But he or she lacks the fundamental connection to a deity that would allow him to utilize the divine scroll in it's given format. By the same token, clerics are unable to make the necessary intellectual conclusions inherent with casting an arcane spell.As mentioned above, a wizard can decipher a divine scroll, and do the necessary research to create an arcane version of the divine spell, but the arcane scroll generated would not resemble the divine scroll at all.
Funny thing is, a priest spell isn't first and foremost a prayer to a deity. A cleric can pray or meditate for spells. Pg 40 CRB. Prayer is not mandatory. Flavor is flexible and can be tweaked to fit just about any situation. For example, the wizard may be copying down a complex chart of religious chants. He might not be able to invoke power by reciting them, but he can copy/paste.
Did you have a rules-based argument here, or was this just something that goes against the grain for you?
|
Under magic items: scrolls
To have any chance of activating a scroll spell, the scroll user must meet the following requirements.
The spell must be of the correct type (arcane or divine). Arcane spellcasters (wizards, sorcerers, and bards) can only use scrolls containing arcane spells, and divine spellcasters (clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers) can only use scrolls containing divine spells. (The type of scroll a character creates is also determined by his class.)
-The user must have the spell on her class list.
-The user must have the requisite ability score.
It clearly states that to "use" a scroll it must be the correct type. It is not just limited to activation. You are using a scroll when you copy from it. Another limiting factor is having the right ability score.
Divine spells usually use different material components and can be cast in armor (even full plate) while arcane cannot (barring special class abilities). So it it obvious that divine spells are different and cannot be converted over from scrolls into arcane.
The rules look like they have some wiggle room, but IMHO I think it should not be allowed. For the most part it looks like the rules lean towards keeping divine and arcane separate.
Yes the wizard can read and identify divine arcane writings, but not use them. This is relevant when he is sorting through a pile of loot and evaluating it for use or sale.
From a balance standpoint I don't like the fact that you would be able to take every spell that appears on both lists and add it to your spellbook. Yes it would take time and gold to make all the scrolls and copy them down, but I feel that you should be consulting with your fellow arcanists, not priests. Not game breaking, but more of a flavor thing. I might be a little more lax with this if the game was a "spend your entire careers in the middle of nowhere" type, just so the wizard gets more then his 2/lev spells into his book.
Oh,it gets even more fun than that. A spirit naga can cast all divine spells as arcane spells as a sorcerer. Let the naga learn Scribe Scroll and you can have the entire clerical list of divine spells as arcane scrolls, ready and waiting to be penned into wizards' spellbooks.
What you have to remember is a lot of this is holdovers from 1st edition. Back then, not only were scrolls typed as arcane or divine, but so were wands. Now? The wands are vanilla non-arcane non-divine just "Do you have it on your spell list or can you fake it with UMD?"
Adding extra complications are things like alchemists being able to add to their formularies by copying spells out of wizards' spellbooks. Is an alchemical formula arcane or divine and can a wizard re-derive an arcane spell from an alchemical formula?
At some point, even if they want to keep the arcane/divine divide, I think most GMs just say, "Why yes, the scroll you find in the treasure hoard is miraculously just the sort that you need" and leave it at that.
Alternately, I'd just increase the spellcraft DC to make sense of something from a different sort of magic. If you look at the 3.5 feat Southern Magician from Races of Faerûn, there's some business about casting arcane spells as divine and vice versa and a -4 penalty to make sense of them. Using that as a guideline, I'd just increase the spellcraft DC by 4 for any wizard trying to make sense of a divine scroll and have done with it.
I don't think a wizard could make use of an arcane cure spell scroll made by a naga. It still isn't on his spell list.
...a bard on the other hand...
|
|
Red Wulf: #3. I am a player, but it's another player that is interested in the issue. We have not brought it to the GM's attention yet (though we will if we can't get a clear answer here).
Understood. Naturally, it would benefit the player to allow an arcane caster to copy divine scrolls, so I wonder how you guys will spin it when you present it to the GM. ;)
Red Wulf: #3. I am a player, but it's another player that is interested in the issue. We have not brought it to the GM's attention yet (though we will if we can't get a clear answer here).Understood. Naturally, it would benefit the player to allow an arcane caster to copy divine scrolls, so I wonder how you guys will spin it when you present it to the GM. ;)
We'll probably just ask straight up, citing that the rules seem ambiguous on the matter. Whether or not the GM gives the rules an in-depth look before making a ruling is entirely her prerogative.
Whether or not the GM gives the rules an in-depth look before making a ruling is entirely her prerogative.
Oooh, a female DM... interesting. I've met girls who play, but never one with enough interest to DM a game.
Whether or not the GM gives the rules an in-depth look before making a ruling is entirely her prerogative.Oooh, a female DM... interesting. I've met girls who play, but never one with enough interest to DM a game.
Yep. Her games are a blast. What's more they always stand out (positively) when compared to games hosted by my male friends. For one thing, there is an actual emphasis on roleplay rather than rollplay.
Many of the other games seem like Diablo in comparison.
Bards can use wands of Cure Light Wounds made by clerics.
I believe witches can also.
Well, technically ANYONE can if they have enough ranks in UMD, but I mean as a class feature.
Wands are spell trigger items and scrolls are spell completion items; they have different threshold requirements to be able to use them. Scrolls have more stringent requirements to use.
Wands are spell trigger items and scrolls are spell completion items; they have different threshold requirements to be able to use them. Scrolls have more stringent requirements to use.... including Caster Level requirements.
So you are saying a rogue can't use a scroll?