This is actually a legitimate question. It's come to my attention that most GMs gloss over the fact that magic is written in its own magical notation and that one is supposed to use read magic or make a sufficiently high spellcraft check in order to read magic.
For example, the fact that spellbooks are written in this language or that language makes very little sense, when magic is its own thing. That some commoner can just look at your spellbook or scroll and know what kind of spell it is should never be able to happen.
I actually had a conversation with another about how you should decipher scrolls ahead of time. And then there was the question of why. Well first off you have to use read magic, concentrate on the spells you want to read and spend a full round action deciphering it. Then it turned into, why you would even need read magic. And I explained that it was a DC 20 + spell level to decipher. He thought that was stupid high check especially if the spell is in your spellbook (in that case it needs a UMD check as well). It went on a couple of tangents but it came down to that most GMs play magical writing as being perfectly legible language which would make Read Magic pretty stupid and pointless.
So yeah, in home games, how many players actually use read magic and how many GMs enforce that rule?
I do
I thought you didn't need read magic for your own spellbooks?
I've always interpreted "magic writing" as something similar to trying to read an Elder Scroll. If you're not trained enough (ie. have a high enough Spellcraft check), it just looks like pretty lines and gibberish writing, or you could use Read Magic.
I don't think it's come up in any of the games I've been in so far, but no one has ever brought up anything about it, so it's most likely unchanged.
That said, how the hell does Explosive Rune actually work? Does the person setting off the rune actually have to say the words "Explosive Rune" when he's reading it or can the runes be literally anything that just happen to explode when read? Because if it's the first one, why the hell would anyone in their right mind consciously trigger it by saying it out loud?
I thought you didn't need read magic for your own spellbooks?
Well there's a reason why read magic is the 1 spell that all wizards can prepare off of memory and why divination can never be a forbidden school.
That said, how the hell does Explosive Rune actually work? Does the person setting off the rune actually have to say the words "Explosive Rune" when he's reading it or can the runes be literally anything that just happen to explode when read?
It's pretty much anything that is written (it can even be traced into a map according to the book example). I was never sure if it had to be said out loud or if the spell is a sentient mind reading magic. But read magic is the easiest way around it.
No, I've never used Read Magic in my games, nor have I ever seen it used. To be honest, I kind of hate the idea of spell trigger/completion items. When I started playing D&D, anyone could pick up a scroll and read it to cast the spell--Wizard, Rogue, Fighter, whoever. I miss that--a lot.
I thought you didn't need read magic for your own spellbooks?
You don't.
Also remember Wizards don't even need to study Read Magic from their book, they can prep it from memory.
No, I've never used Read Magic in my games, nor have I ever seen it used. To be honest, I kind of hate the idea of spell trigger/completion items. When I started playing D&D, anyone could pick up a scroll and read it to cast the spell--Wizard, Rogue, Fighter, whoever. I miss that--a lot.
What type of D&D did you play?
As I remember it even the most early versions thieves had a read scroll ability.
You could play that type of D&D again if you wanted to, since it was breaking the rules then too.
What type of D&D did you play?
As I remember it even the most early versions thieves had a read scroll ability.
You could play that type of D&D again if you wanted to, since it was breaking the rules then too.
Thieves weren't even in the first D&D, so I think you're incorrect.
... what was?
EDIT: Opened up my old red box basic set, yes thieves were in the most basic set of D&D. They persisted in 1e.
Again, what ruleset were you using that allowed every class to use scrolls?
... what was?
EDIT: Opened up my old red box basic set, yes thieves were in the most basic set of D&D. They persisted in 1e.
Again, what ruleset were you using that allowed every class to use scrolls?
You're looking at AD&D 1e, from 1977, but D&D was first released in 1974. You know, back when Elf and Dwarf were classes of their own?
In that game, there were no such thing as "skills." Everyone did everything, just using their attributes. Thieves were added early, yes, in 1975 with the Greyhawk supplement, but I have no experience with pre-1e Thieves.
Personally, I think the addition of Thief skills really hurt the game overall, because it was the first class that said, "no, you can't do that." I mean, how can your Fighter sneak around when the Thief had a Sneak around skill the Fighter doesn't have?
But this isn't about roleplaying philosophy and history--it's about Read Magic. And I've never seen it used, as I said.
Well for your own spellbook you don't need read magic. It's more for reading someone else's magic and learning other people's spells (which is kind of important for a wizard). Thus if you buy a scroll or someone else's spell book, you'd need to decipher it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I use it every time I loot a scroll (wich is quite often) just to identify it.
Well for your own spellbook you don't need read magic. It's more for reading someone else's magic and learning other people's spells (which is kind of important for a wizard). Thus if you buy a scroll or someone else's spell book, you'd need to decipher it.
Oh okay. The answer then is yes, I do make sure players use read magic when they come across a new spellbook or scrolls.
I started playing the basic set, and yes there was a thief.
He had a read scrolls percentile ability, just like his other thief abilities. Thats where move silently came from, and hide in shadows, and open locks... at any rate, its okay to be wrong sometimes.
~~~
I use read magic to let players bypass the need to use spellcraft or read an NPC's spellbook.
It doesn't come up all the time but I certainly have players use it.
I don't let players gain skills or abilities that they need to spend skill points or feats to get.
In this case I figure read magic is there for a reason, so lets give people the chance to use it.
This really came up when referencing bought scrolls and where I typed spellbook I meant to type spell list.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
My Eldritch Knight always prepares read magic - he wants to be able to scribe from a captured spellbook if he gets the chance, as new spells are expensive in PFS.
My cleric? Not so much. Usually someone can identify a potion (often using perception instead of spellcraft, since I can pretty much count on at least one person per table maxing it out). Have decent odds on scrolls too, but those come up less often and it's not as big a deal if we fail to ID a scroll since I'm not missing an opportunity to add a spell to my book.
I thought you didn't need read magic for your own spellbooks?Well there's a reason why read magic is the 1 spell that all wizards can prepare off of memory and why divination can never be a forbidden school.
Diviniation can be an opposition school for a specialist wizard. Read Magic is of the Universal school.
I would say that the GMs I've played with forgot about Read Magic about 99.9% of the time. The remaining 0.1% is mostly covered by Spellcraft checks, in my experience.
I would say that the GMs I've played with forgot about Read Magic about 99.9% of the time. The remaining 0.1% is mostly covered by Spellcraft checks, in my experience.
Pretty much this.
I force every caster (not just wizards--sorcerers, witches, etc.) to make sure they have read magic prepared as a cantrip.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
and why divination can never be a forbidden school.
I think you're referring to a 3.5 memory remnant. In Pathfinder there are opposed schools, not forbidden ones, and Divination can be an opposed school.
About the reason why it makes sense that you make checks and use Read Magic, I think anyone who does programming or website building can agree that when you look at the code of someone else's work, one of the hardest parts is deciphering how the code, despite being universal, has been used and to what end.
Well, translating it into the game world, consider that the code of magic is not even a stricly mathematic one. It has simbology, the caster's personality, references to external forces, and all sorts of things. So, nothing strange about having to roll skills and use a spell to get a grasp of it. Even in the case of a spell that is already in your spellbook (back to the programming code example), if I tell two different programmers "make me an application that does this and that", they'll come up with two different codes, because each person will do it in his own way (think of the differences between YouTube and the old Megavideo... same basic purpose, two largely different websites). Spells are no different, in that perspective. Your Magic Missile looks like a flying banana, mine like an umbrella. Both do the same thing, though.
I use read magic. I avoid any chance to fail that I can.
I thought you didn't need read magic for your own spellbooks?Well there's a reason why read magic is the 1 spell that all wizards can prepare off of memory and why divination can never be a forbidden school.Diviniation can be an opposition school for a specialist wizard. Read Magic is of the Universal school.
Okay, so I totally missed the removal of that restriction from 3.5 with divination now available for an opposite school. Read Magic is still divination though. I guess if you chose divination as your opposite school you have to prep it by memory and in two cantrip slots.
I just noticed something -- since Read Magic is a Divination spell and not a Universal spell as I originally thought, a specialist wizard who takes Divincation as an opposition school could conceivably fail to learn it, especially if we take the simplest path of assuming that the erroneous reference to "prohibited" schools under the Spellbook entry in the wizard class description actually refers to opposition schools. If we simply delete that line, then all wizards would know that spell.
I just noticed something -- since Read Magic is a Divination spell and not a Universal spell as I originally thought, a specialist wizard who takes Divincation as an opposition school could conceivably fail to learn it, especially if we take the simplest path of assuming that the erroneous reference to "prohibited" schools under the Spellbook entry in the wizard class description actually refers to opposition schools. If we simply delete that line, then all wizards would know that spell.
That just means it's not in their spellbook. They can prep it from memory, so I guess there's really no need for it to actually be in their spellbook.
Good point -- so the only inconvenience they would suffer would be having to dedicate two zero level slots to prepare it.
No, I've never used Read Magic in my games, nor have I ever seen it used. To be honest, I kind of hate the idea of spell trigger/completion items. When I started playing D&D, anyone could pick up a scroll and read it to cast the spell--Wizard, Rogue, Fighter, whoever. I miss that--a lot.What type of D&D did you play?
Don't know about 1e AD&D and prior editions, but 2e AD&D had a handful of magical scrolls (mostly protection) that could be used by all types of characters. These were not spell scrolls, which were of a different kind.
As for the OP, I never enforced the read magic clause, but always acknowledged it as "how magic works".
'findel
i forget what edition but lesser divination (levels 1-3) were exempt from opposition.
i forget what edition but lesser divination (levels 1-3) were exempt from opposition.
That was 3.0. In 3.5, some spells were moved to the newly created Universal school and the Lesser Divination school was eliminated.
Also, 3.5 prohibited taking Divination as a prohibited school. Pathfinder evidently did not carry that over, which potentially leads to some uncertainty in regard to wizards who do take Divination as an opposition school. It is not 100% clear that from the class wording that all wizards in fact know Read Magic, although I would agree that that is the most reasonable interpretation.
Also, 3.5 prohibited taking Divination as a prohibited school. Pathfinder evidently did not carry that over, which potentially leads to some uncertainty in regard to wizards who do take Divination as an opposition school. It is not 100% clear that from the class wording that all wizards in fact know Read Magic, although I would agree that that is the most reasonable interpretation.
"A wizard begins play with a spellbook containing all 0-level wizard spells"
"He cannot prepare any spell not recorded in his spellbook, except for read magic, which all wizards can prepare from memory.""A wizard who prepares spells from his opposition schools must use two spell slots of that level to prepare the spell."
It's all very clear to me.
Excellent -- problem solved!
|
I have always used and expected Read Magic to be used.
I have had GM's enforce is as recently as last month. When everybody looted a bunch of scrolls the GM started asking for spellcraft checks to identify. He was surprised when I had read magic on my list of prepared spells. I always have it.
See, this is exactly why I haven't cast Read Magic since 1999. Nine times out of ten, any character of mine with access to Read Magic is going to be putting points into Spellcraft anyway, so why bother memorizing a spell when I've got a perfectly good skill that can do the same thing?
There's no penalty for failure to decipher a scroll, it can be done ahead of time, and it's only a full-round action, so if I find a new scroll I'll just take 20 and spend two minutes looking at it to figure out what it is.
Learning or preparing a spell from a captured spellbook is only DC 15+spell level, and even with just a 14 intelligence it's possible to take 10 and pass that check from level 1 on.
There's no penalty for failure to decipher a scroll, it can be done ahead of time, and it's only a full-round action, so if I find a new scroll I'll just take 20 and spend two minutes looking at it to figure out what it is.
I thought that if you failed at the check there was a penalty of having to wait a period of time to try again. What did I miss that there is not penalty to ID the Scroll? Can you point me in the right direction so I can dicuss with the GM?
Learning or preparing a spell from a captured spellbook is only DC 15+spell level, and even with just a 14 intelligence it's possible to take 10 and pass that check from level 1 on.
But that's only after you decipher it. To decipher it without rad read magic is a 20+spell level. If you fail that check, you can't try again until the next day.
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 + the spell's level).
What you're thinking of is...
Once a spell from another spellcaster's book is deciphered, the reader must make a spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell's level) to prepare the spell.
emphasis mine
There's no penalty for failure to decipher a scroll, it can be done ahead of time, and it's only a full-round action, so if I find a new scroll I'll just take 20 and spend two minutes looking at it to figure out what it is.
actually there is, again on that same page
If the skill check fails, the character cannot attempt to read that particular spell again until the next day.
|
I play (and GM) mostly PFS, so I'm sticking pretty close to the rules.
I agree that you can't Take 20 on a spellcraft check to decipher magical writings, because the penalty (wait 24 hours) is enough to prevent several activities. In particular it will prevent a spellcaster copying a spell into their spellbook from a scroll (or another spellbook). That's important in PFS, because the cost of doing that outside a scenario is significantly higher than the in-scenario cost.
The majority of the spellcasters I have seen have "Read Magic" as one of their prepared level 0 spells, and by far the majority of the GMs I have played under will ask for a spellcraft check (or Read Magic) in order to identify scrolls that are encountered during an adventure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I almost never pack read magic on my wizards because I use spellcraft instead.
Yes, at early levels it is difficult to use spellcraft for that purpose. So to cover that I have a single scroll of read magic right from the start of character creation. At 6.25gp for that one scroll it is all I need if I happen to run into something that I cannot wait a day to figure out.
For other classes I can do the same thing although the cost is usually slightly higher (12.5gp).
- Gauss
How did it "come to your attention that MOST" GMs don't enforce or create situations where read magic is necessary? I don't remember anybody asking me. I don't remember any polls.
Yes, not only do I enforce the use - and always have - of the read magic requirement, I also make the spell useful in many other ways, such as diaries, messages scrawled on walls, ancient glyphs on rocks, etc.
Every wizard/sorcerer/cleric in my campaigns use read magic to identify the scroll. To be exact, they try reading it with Spellcraft, and use read magic when the check fails.
Magic is written in a different notation and no commoner should be able to read it.
How did it "come to your attention that MOST" GMs don't enforce or create situations where read magic is necessary? I don't remember anybody asking me. I don't remember any polls.
Yes, not only do I enforce the use - and always have - of the read magic requirement, I also make the spell useful in many other ways, such as diaries, messages scrawled on walls, ancient glyphs on rocks, etc.
There were no polls. It was more of the fact that most GMs, that we know, don't enforce read magic. Sorry for not specifying.
I almost never pack read magic on my wizards because I use spellcraft instead.
Yes, at early levels it is difficult to use spellcraft for that purpose. So to cover that I have a single scroll of read magic right from the start of character creation. At 6.25gp for that one scroll it is all I need if I happen to run into something that I cannot wait a day to figure out.
For other classes I can do the same thing although the cost is usually slightly higher (12.5gp).
If you're a wizard, I'm not sure why you wouldn't use read magic in the first place. It's a cantrip, you can prepare it from memory (so it never even has to be in your book), only takes a standard action to cast, and lasts 10 min/level. You usually shouldn't be trying to decipher scrolls and books in combat, but if for some reason you are it makes more sense to pop some magic reading magic than to chance failure in which case you have to wait a whole day.
The spellcraft check to decipher is more for sorcerers who don't have read magic or other classes especially those who can't naturally cast magic (ie the rogue)