|
Awesome Mike!!!
That said, before I get excited in thinking you changed the rule for getting new spells and did what myself and others have been asking for 3+ years, I am a little confused on some wording.
In the rare instance of a wizard charging a fee for the privilege of copying spells from their spellbooks, this fee is equal to half the cost to write the spell into a spellbook (see Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook). Rare and unique spells do not change the fee in PFS.
The use of the word rare is throwing me off, because I can tell you this will not be rare but the Norm. Is there some meaning behind that use or am I seeing something there that is not there?
Can I now at the end of the scenario (or during) when I am in an appropriate city just tell the GM I am buying the privilege of copying spells from a wizards spellbook? Or is it something that will only come up on rare occasions in the story of the scenario or as a boon on the chronicle sheet?
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No secret meaning behind the word "rare." Just ignore that one word and I will remove it when I get back to the office after Winter Fantasy.
When in an appropriate city, and at the end of an adventure, have the GM notate on your Chronicle sheet whatever purchases you make, including copying spells from spellbooks.
|
One more question Mike. Witches unfortunately are unable to learn from spellbooks; rather, their third method for learning is to have their familiar commune with another witch's familiar. Is this an avenue available to them for spellbook-sharing prices, or are they still required to purchase scrolls for spells they don't receive while leveling?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
One more question Mike. Witches unfortunately are unable to learn from spellbooks; rather, their third method for learning is to have their familiar commune with another witch's familiar. Is this an avenue available to them for spellbook-sharing prices, or are they still required to purchase scrolls for spells they don't receive while leveling?
Good catch - the class description makes it out to be a spell-for-spell trade; I never noticed that.
Stupid witches, always causing problems. ;)
|
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
One more question Mike. Witches unfortunately are unable to learn from spellbooks; rather, their third method for learning is to have their familiar commune with another witch's familiar. Is this an avenue available to them for spellbook-sharing prices, or are they still required to purchase scrolls for spells they don't receive while leveling?
Yes it is available.
|
|
So, my understanding is that a 2nd level wizard spell obtained from an NPC spellcaster sharing his spellbook to a PC in a large city like Absalom would be 60gp (40gp as the copying cost, and half of that for the privilege 20gp).
I would assume that a PC should have a minimum fame of 5 to do this, as his Maximum item cost is capped at 0gp until he reaches a fame of 5.
Would that make sense?
Thanks
|
|
This really shouldn't need to be clarified, but can you put a line that says "PCs may not charge other PCs to copy spells from their spellbooks" It should be clear and obvious but common sense isn't that common :)
It's against the rules to charge another player for anything, so it doesn't specifically need to be called out in this case.
|
|
Very glad to see that spellcasters can now pay for copying spells instead of purchasing scrolls to copy. Those higher level spells get very expensive, even when you are getting them for free from a fellow player. Thanks Mike!
Agree with Benrislove. Some players will see the FAQ as a specific rule that counters the general no player-player economy.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Some players will see the FAQ as a specific rule that counters the general no player-player economy.
There is a certain threshold of minimum rational capacity, beneath which misunderstandings should be addressed by word of mouth or messageboard clarification rather than by FAQ entries or paragraphs in the Guide.
No matter how clear a rule is, there will be some non-zero population of players who misunderstand it. That fact does not necessarily mean a rule is unclear or that a new one must be written.
|
|
Some players will see the FAQ as a specific rule that counters the general no player-player economy.There is a certain threshold of minimum rational capacity, beneath which misunderstandings should be addressed by word of mouth or messageboard clarification rather than by FAQ entries or paragraphs in the Guide.
No matter how clear a rule is, there will be some non-zero population of players who misunderstand it. That fact does not necessarily mean a rule is unclear or that a new one must be written.
I agree.
I think ultimately this is a non-issue and the no player-player economy is a sacrosanct rule that just can't be broken.