leo1925, the problem with your approach is that you read:
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.
as "all wizard are happy to share any spell".
Instead it say "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."
Notice how it say "in most cases" and "usually" and then it go "Rare and unique spells might cost significantly more"?
Assuming that all the spell in the Core rulebook are common and easy to get is already a big assumption. If you extend it to the spells in the other supplements (especially to the regional spells) you making things way too easy.
Sure some spell are common knowledge, especially low level spells, but in a typical shop you will find only the most common. To get one of the other spells you have to track down a guy that has it and is willing to share it. The rules say that you have a 75% chance of finding special equipment (included your cold iron kama) every week. A specific spell fall under special equipment, not basic gear (and even that can be out of stock).
So a wizard could spend several days tracking down the guy that has the spell and is willing to share it, and he can even be unsuccessful, then, depending on the situation, your character nationality and the seller nationality (sure, a Taldan can go to Katapesh to buy a combat spell every day, and he will get a really good deal ...) and a myriad of other factors, included the rarity of the spell it can be brought at minimum price or to several times that price.
CrackedOzy wrote:As far as I can tell, it states you can prepare the spell as if it was in your spell book, but it doesn't say anything about being able to scribe scrolls or add to your spell book via this ability. Personally I'm not sure how you'd make the leap of logic being able to do that at all.
Why would it need to say so?The rules that tell you how to make a scroll and how to write a spell to your spellbook are in the core.
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 Magus has never done the spellcraft check to understand the spell, so technically he can't add it to his spellbook or write a scroll.And as he can't write it down he can't try to understand it, so the problem is solved without the need to remove any ability from the class. You only need to follow the rules.
You are looking at the wrong part of the rules, look under the replacing and copying spellbooks.
Please use spoiler tags for the other issue because i think that we have threadjacked this thread enough as it is.
I am 99% sure that since we don't have a definition of what a rare and unique spells is then the book means those indepentably researched, but to give you a more defining answer for what i consider non-rare and unique i will say that everything in the books of the pathfinder roleplaying line (core, APG etc.).
If you can find a definition anywhere of what a rare and unique spell is i would be very happy but until then i take it to mean that the DM can (if he wants) charge more than half the inscribing cost in order to let another wizard copy from their spellbook. The bolded part is exactly what i have been arguing about all this time, that even for rare and unique spells the wizards can find another wizard and copy it from their spellbook. What Magicdealer was saying is that a wizard has to buy a scroll everytime he wants to get a new spell and i think we all know how expensive scrolls are.
In the basis you and i agree, a wizard can learn a spell from another wizard(s) and isn't required to go and buy the scroll.
You are looking at the wrong part of the rules, look under the replacing and copying spellbooks.
Those rules assume that you have understood the spell, as understanding the spell is a requirement to memorize it.
The magus ability bypass the understanding part.
For me that mean that he can't scribe the spell in his spellbook as if he had understood it.
At best he could create a scroll of the spell and then try to learn the spell from the scroll, but even that is a stretch, as he would be scribing a scroll of a spell he don't comprehend.
I thought of tihs ability in playtest and asked if it was intended and got an answer from Jason that he ahd not thought of the problem.
http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/olderProducts/ultimate MagicPlaytest/round3Discussion/knowledgePoolToGetSpellsToWriteInSpellbook&a mp;page=1#2
Other than the playtest version there was it goes away after a day use of knowledge pool line added to knowledge pool from the playtest. The way interpret this line is that the spell vanishes after one day if you would scribe it.
I see an interpertation of loses the spell if it is not cast to mean the spell disappears from your spellbook if you do not cast it after one day. Although there is the way around it of casting the spell then using spell recall to prepare it again then scribe it into your spellbook so that line does not happen.
The magus ability doesn't "bypass" the understanding part. The "understanding" part is an implied requirement of being able to cast a spell at all.
Besides, that argument is kind of kaput already. The ability is clearly not specific enough on the matter and needs clarification/errata. Variations on interpretation just keep reinforcing that it needs to be clearer so people can stop interpreting it in so many different ways :)
I wasn't saying that a wizard HAS to buy a scroll every time. Just that wizards are going to be cautious before handing over their books to you. It won't be a simple matter of a deposit fee most of the time.
We could probably go on for a while with "A simple casting of this spell would detect that." and "And then he could do this to counter it." And every one of those cast, counter, and counter casts ends up being a few more pages lost to the owner. For example, a *secret page* casting keyed to the last phrase of read magic could make it appear to the caster that he was now reading the translated page. Of course, there are various skill checks to convince you that you don't need to check, and sleight of hand to recover the pages from your person once you've provided the refund... Like any arms race, victory goes back and forth. However, victory to the caster means appropriate payment, while a loss means the absence of spells and the cost of replacing them.
Now, as to the "In most cases, wizards charge a fee for the privilege of copying spells from their spellbooks."
I interpret that to mean that when you copy a spell from another wizards spellbook, they usually charge a fee. I don't interpret that to mean that all wizards will allow you to copy spells from their spellbooks. The line doesn't say anything about whether or not a particular wizard allows you to use his book. Only that if you do copy a spell, there is usually a charge involved.
My wizards do gain spells through scrolls and enemy spellbooks, and the occasional wizard that has reason not to distrust them. They just don't get automatic access to any spell they want. The spells they gain from leveling become more meaningful, since they can't be certain to get all the spells they want, they have to make sure they choose the ones they really like. The point, again, isn't about charging them more, but controlling the access to spells to keep the class features interesting and valuable. They're more likely to get spells from an opponent they killed rather than an npc wizard, but that's more about how they interact with the npcs. Interestingly, with the dead opponent, they don't have to pay the cost for "borrowing" the spellbook as they would with most wizards. So they probably end up paying less for their spells than if they hit up an npc wizard. The point, again, is to find the balance between handicapping your wizards by restricting all spells found entirely, and giving them free access to any spell they can afford to buy.
Well, whether a spellbook is magical or not is almost unimportant because of the nonmagical item rules. Page 460 CRB
"Nonmagical items and gear are generally available in a community of any size unless the item is particularly expensive, such as full plate, or made of an unusual material, such as an adamantine longsword. These items should follow the base value guidelines to determine their availability, subject to GM discretion." Interestingly, you *should* roll for that cold iron kama, being an unusual material and all.
Though there is an argument that while a spellbook isn't magical, any spells inscribed within are magical. That would be from "read magic" page 330, "You can decipher magical inscriptions on objects--books, scrolls, weapons, and the like--that would otherwise be unintelligible. This deciphering does not normally invoke the magic contained in the writing..."
That implies that any "magical inscriptions" are "magic contained in the writing", which makes them magical.
Additionally, page 219, top, 'To decipher an arcane magical writing (such as a single spell in another's spellbook or on a scroll)..."
Spells inscribed in a spellbook are arcane magical writings. There's that magical word again.
A smart player, knowing me, wouldn't be trying to game the system in the first place :p Usually my players start off at, or near, level one, before they've had much time to *travel* the world. Backstory is all fine and well, but there's no guarantee that a particular city will still exist when it's time for a player to go hunting for spells. For example, in one of my more entertaining campaigns, the players accidentally triggered a world-wide cataclysm which wiped most of the above-ground cities away. Some few druid groves, and the occasional city protected by powerful wizards survived, but damage was widespread. Things only got more fun when the creatures living underground started to appear on the surface, escaping the wreckage of their homes and the now-crumbling cave systems.
Mmm... I think the inevitable problem that people have with the sorcerer is the comparison to the wizard. They are very different classes, with very different focuses. The wizard is like the fighter. Tons of spells/feats, able to be useful in a variety of situations.
Meanwhile, the sorcerer is more like the rogue. Lots of interesting abilities, but only really useful when flanking/specialized.
One thing I WOULD like to see with the sorcerer is either the same casting progression as a wizard, or the addition of bonus spells known from having a high cha score. Of course, I'd also like to see the rogue with good bab progression :/
Deliberate Necro. I suspect the RAW doesn't reflect the RAI, but it's just a guess.Are others having trouble getting doctor wu's link above to work?
Yes I am. The link itself is not a valid URL - if you look at it, the end of the URL is something like "My discussion with Jason". \
I tried copying and pasting the URL in, but it looks like the post may have been removed or the URL was wrong, as it just takes me to the main Paizo page.