|
In my home games I use a very easy fix.
In my home games a wizard can copy spells provided they are on his spell list from an alchemsit's formula book. A wizard cal also draw spells out of a witches familiar as well and scribe them in his spell book. A wizard can also copy spells from a Magus's spell book, and when I add them to my games, a wizard can also copy spells from an arcanists spell book.
But I am curious, why did the designers decide that an alchemist can copy the magical formulae from a wizards spell book (or Grimoire) to his alchemical and magical formula book and decide that a wizard cannot copy the magical alchemical formulae from an alchemists formula book?
I cannot think of a single good reason for this.
what do you all think? are there any good reasons?
thanks
IIRC, there's a trait or feat that allows wizards to copy from an alchemist's formula book.
I think the reason for it is to prevent making healing spells as spells wizards can cast. I mean, just imagine how much worse it would be if wizards could also heal the party.
I do not think being able to learn from formula books would allow wizards to learn healing spells.
The wizard's spellcasting class ability states:
"A wizard casts arcane spells drawn from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."
The general rules for writing spells into spellbooks does nothing to change this.
Even an arcane scroll of CLW from a bard/witch does not allow the wizard to go beyond the sorc/wiz spell list.
This is my opinion on healing wizards, and not all share it. I do not agree that it would be (more) overpowered or (more) game breaking to have healing wizards, I am just saying the rules do not support them. AFAIK.
EDIT: to answer the actual thread question :P
I think the reasoning is flavor; the wacko alchemist is copying magic with alchemical hacks combined/activated with his own magic. These "hacks" are unintellingible to schooled wizards.
|
|
Marcus Janus, thank you, as Don Duckie pointed out, the spells a wizard could copy out of an alchemsit's book would be spells already on the wizards spell book, so Aunt Haul, which I don't think is a wizard's spell, could not be copied.
Don, I suppose flavoring is as a good idea as any.
Jokingly in our home campaign, we say that if you catch a witch's familiar, and after the witch has been dispatched, you can squeeze the familiar, to make it cough up balls of paper,which were the crumpled up scrolls that it was fed to learn new spells, so you can "retreive" spells from a witches familiar :D
Isn't there a stipulation somewhere that says a player, with DM permission, can learn spells outside of the sorc/wiz spell list if they do appropriate research? Or am I remembering incorrectly?
|
Jokingly in our home campaign, we say that if you catch a witch's familiar, and after the witch has been dispatched, you can squeeze the familiar, to make it cough up balls of paper,which were the crumpled up scrolls that it was fed to learn new spells, so you can "retreive" spells from a witches familiar :D
What a great image, especially given the wide variaty of familiars availible now.
IIRC, there's a trait or feat that allows wizards to copy from an alchemist's formula book.
I think the reason for it is to prevent making healing spells as spells wizards can cast. I mean, just imagine how much worse it would be if wizards could also heal the party.
There's a wizard arcane discovery in Magical Marketplace that, among other benefits, allows a wizard to learn spells from formula books.
DonDuckie and ElyasRavenwood, I know that.
At the same time, I suspect it is to prevent people from allowing wizards to research it normally.
But, then, keep in mind I'm guessing; there's really no reason, even for flavor, that I see it as necessarily being done. Especially since an alchemist copying what a wizard wrote shows they have very similar styles of recording. And this wouldn't be the first nonsensical balance item to crop up.
Mechalibur, thank you!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Isn't there a stipulation somewhere that says a player, with DM permission, can learn spells outside of the sorc/wiz spell list if they do appropriate research? Or am I remembering incorrectly?
With GM approval: all is possible :D
I don't know of any rule that allows wizards to expand the spell list, I think even the create new spells section recommend not to steal the spotlight from others.
The sorcerer has a wording that allows for spells from other classes. (As I interpret it, others disagree):
"A sorcerer casts arcane spells drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."
I bolded what I consider the key word to allow sorcerers to choose a minority of his spells from any spell list in the game, which I think is in line with the nature/spirit of the sorcerer class.
@MagusJanus:
I didn't mean to imply that you didn't, but the "wizards can learn any spell from an arcane scroll" is a thing I've seen many claim is RAW. And so I gave my argument for not agreeing with that. (granted, using your post as an open window to talk through)
The sorcerer has a wording that allows for spells from other classes. (As I interpret it, others disagree):
"A sorcerer casts arcane spells drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."
That's there because some Bloodlines (like Celestial, for example) draw spells from other spell lists.
It's not there as justification for your Sorcerer to start stocking up on spells from whatever combination of spell lists you want.
The sorcerer has a wording that allows for spells from other classes. (As I interpret it, others disagree):
"A sorcerer casts arcane spells drawn primarily from the sorcerer/wizard spell list."That's there because some Bloodlines (like Celestial, for example) draw spells from other spell lists.
It's not there as justification for your Sorcerer to start stocking up on spells from whatever combination of spell lists you want.
Like I wrote, some disagree :P
The wording is copied from 3.5, before bloodlines and bonus spells known. The intent is to give more options. As I read it. I could be wrong, but your assertion that I'm misinterpreting the intent of the writers, is not supported.
Isn't there a stipulation somewhere that says a player, with DM permission, can learn spells outside of the sorc/wiz spell list if they do appropriate research? Or am I remembering incorrectly?
Page 219, under 'adding new spells to wizard spellbook'
Independent Research: A wizard can also research a spell
independently, duplicating an existing spell or creating
an entirely new one. The cost to research a new spell, and the
time required, are left up to GM discretion, but it should
probably take at least 1 week and cost at least 1,000 gp per
level of the spell to be researched. This should also require
a number of Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) checks
Ideally, you could probably research a spell that let you duplicate any spell from any list you wanted with DM permission.
Well, seems like the second bit of downtime ate a number of posts.
Suffice it to say, Don, the general rules for Magic say the Sorcerer spell list is the "appropriate spell list" for Sorcerers, and they can only draw from other lists with GM Fiat (something which applies to anything else in the game).
You can FAQ it if you like, but if it does get answered I very much doubt it will be the answer you want.
Well, seems like the second bit of downtime ate a number of posts.
Suffice it to say, Don, the general rules for Magic say the Sorcerer spell list is the "appropriate spell list" for Sorcerers, and they can only draw from other lists with GM Fiat (something which applies to anything else in the game).
You can FAQ it if you like, but if it does get answered I very much doubt it will be the answer you want.
I am not going to FAQ it, it's not that frequently asked and I have no use for an official ruling. And I find both interpretations to be perfectly fine. (And it wouldn't change my games. But it might shut me up in future discussions about sorcerers.)
But all other spellcasting classes have a different (and remarkably similar) wording:
"A [bard/cleric/druid/wizard/inquisitor/oracle/summoner/witch/magus] casts [arcane/divine] spells drawn from the [bard/cleric/druid/wizard/inquisitor/oracle/summoner/witch/magus] spell list"
Only the sorcerer has the wording "drawn primarily from", and I know I put a lot into that wording, because I believe the developers to be aware of it.
I believe that the disparity is because, as the alchemist in one of my previous campaigns shouted at every possible chance, "SCIENCE". Wizards know magic. Sometimes alchemy, if they invest the ranks into Craft. Pure science is outside of their field of research. I often like to think this is the case, in character, as magic is so much simpler.
@Don: Interestingly enough, Bard is the OTHER class that says "Hey it draws its spells from this list but you can change that with Fiat".
It's a very odd section to me.
@Rynjin: I found the section, and it's general rules for arcane spontaneous casters(=bard and sorcerer in core).
I attribute the weird wording of that section to the fact that CRB is and introductory product... Like: same chapter says bards and sorcerers can only learn new spells by gaining levels in their class, and in a later chapter the concept of prestige classes are introduced, and spell casting progression is elaborated.
The CRB has a lot of legacy from 3rd/3.5 PHB and DMG in the layout, and with a game this complex not everything can be clarified or even referenced everywhere it's relevant. This tends to leave odd sections. (Upcoming product "Game Strategy Guide" might help navigate some of this.)
But I believe the dev team is aware that sorcerer has a different wording in the spells section than all other classes. But with many FAQs (I think) the point is to clarify things for PFS, and opening that window (into other classes' spell lists) would cause more problems than simply leaving the word "primary" in for guys like me...