Sorcerer's Spellbook.


Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Dark Archive ***

Hi. I've just started playing in society games and I've made a charcter as a sorcerer who worships Nethys and as part of helping spread the wonder of magic (and maybe worship of Nethys) I was considering having a spellbook.

Looking at the rules for arcane magic I believe as a sorcerer I would be able to write down spells I know in a spellbook which wizards (and other arcane casters as appropriate) would be able to copy these to their own spellbook.

Would other players be able to write spells in my spellbook so that I coukd then share there spells to other players and if so who would have to pay the scribing costs.

I know I can't gain anything from this I just thought it would be an interesting idea for the character and wanted to know if it was possible.

The Exchange *****

go here.

another thread on non-wizards with spell books....

The Exchange *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

one of my posts from that older thread...the following is just MY OPINION:

In the spirit of trying to enable players to do things they consider cool - I have considered how, under the current rules, a non-spellbook PC might gain a spellbook with spells in it.

I do this mainly because I hate to tell people "No, you can't do that!", I would rather say "cool idea, let's see how we can do that in the rules!". I like to play with my players, not against them...

and I think I have two. I'm not really sure they are not prohibited in the rules someplace, but I'm pitching them out here for someone to point out why it wont work... or to help players do something "kewl!".

1) A 1st level spellbook using PC (a wizard or alchemist or magus) buys an extra (blank) book. He then scribes as many spells in it as he can afford, or gain access to. The player notes this on his 3rd chronicle and on the ITS for that PC. He then uses the re-write rules to recreate the PC as a Non-spellbook PC without changing his equipment....

2) A PC takes one level of a spellbook using class (say wizard). He then scribes as many spells as he can into his book. Perhaps he creates an extra spellbook, or buys a Blessed Book. He then uses the Re-Training rules to retrain his Wizard level as a non-spellbook using class.

I think both of those would be ways for a Non-spellbook using PC to get a spelllbook allowed in the current rules, and in both cases those would be spellbooks that he scribed.

*****

Disclaimer: it has always bothered me that sorcerers and wizards share the same spell list, surely some spells would be more or less difficult for a cha-based caster versus an Int-based caster...

Since sorcerers don't use material components, they cast spells with a similar effect as wizards, but they are inherently different in some way. To me, this means that even if a sorcerer wrote down their spell, a Wizard could not use it since it would not contain all of the information they needed. Similarly, sorcerers drive their spells through personal Charisma, not just by learning the right moves and words, and a wizard would not know how to do that.

I am all for doing cool things, but as soon as you start sharing spells with wizards I think it strains the magic system and messes with the wealth transfer issues of organized play. I would rule that it can't be done in PFS, and would come up with a system for it to work in a home game (because it is a cool idea).

EDIT: Fixed typo

The Exchange *****

2 people marked this as a favorite.

My first PC in PFS (my #-1 PC) is a Rogue with a single level in Wizard, partly so that he could have a spell book pass spells to a wizard. Before the change to allow PCs to "buy access" to NPC spell books, he was very popular with PC wizards.

Back in Season 2...:
swapping spells would often go something like this...

me to other player running a wizard as we are sitting down at the table: "here's my spell book. Look thru and copy what you want. I'd like you to note what you have that I don't on this. Pass it back when your done."

Other player: "HA! like you're going to have something I don't... wait, you've got 5th level spells in your 1st level wiz/6th level rogues book??"

Me: "yeah, I adventure with a lot of wizards. This is my 'Wizard Bait'. Anyway, if you have anything I don't just note it ok?".

Me to the Judge: "If we have time & money before the adventure - we'll copy spells, if not, we'll do it at the end afterword. Is that ok? I'll copy anything he has that I don't."

I've had more than one player say "heck, even if we stop the game now, I've had a GREAT game! I'm a lot poorer - but LOTS of new spells!"

This way it only took a couple minutes away from the RP of the table, reduced table crosstalk, did the needed bookwork, and (most important) didn't cut into the DMs time/setup/etc.

It often resulted in a Wizard player who spent the first 10 minutes of the game with his nose in a spell book - giggling to himself. But I figured this was just good role play. After all, every wizard is a little bit crazy...


GM Lamplighter wrote:
Disclaimer: it has always bothered me that sorcerers and wizards share the same spell list, surely some spells would be more or less difficult for a cha-based caster versus an Int-based caster...

There are sorcerer and wizard only spells in both 3.5 and pathfinder. The ones limited are based on bloodline or the way they cast spell though.

That said, there is the arcanist from the ACG which mixes wizard spell prep with spontaneous casting.

Dark Archive ***

Thanks for linking that thread nosig. Had a read through, hadn't realised that the rules start talking about characters and arcane spells but then all the actual rules talk specifically about wizards. Until checking that and rereading it.

Guess while most people agree its cool, it is all gray area and so not a good idea for organised play.

The Exchange *****

Bero Vaski wrote:

Thanks for linking that thread nosig. Had a read through, hadn't realised that the rules start talking about characters and arcane spells but then all the actual rules talk specifically about wizards. Until checking that and rereading it.

Guess while most people agree its cool, it is all gray area and so not a good idea for organised play.

yeah...

hay, it's less then "Optimal", but maybe consider taking a level of Wizard... if you have any INT to speak of. that would net you a lot of extra spells, and the Wiz abilities. Makes you a lot stronger at 2nd and 3rd levels, but then sort of tapers off and you'll hate the level dip later.

Then maybe you could re-train the wizard level to Sorcerer...

RP wise you could say your Sorcerer was so much into magic that he made a study of it (got a level of wizard) before letting his blood call him back to the "Art" and away from the "classroom"... or something like that.

That would get you the spell book, and you could shair spells with any "other wizard" that you encountered. But still give you the spontanious casting of the sorcerer for most of your spells.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
GM Lamplighter wrote:
Since sorcerers don't use material components, they cast spells with a similar effect as wizards, but they are inherently different in some way.

So when a wizard takes Eschew Materials (which is a feat, not a class feature) and the sorcerer has an archetype that doesn't get it as a bonus feat, I'm curious how it impacts this viewpoint.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Eastern Eurasia-Africa

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I once put a magical tome in an adventure and on the cover it said "Simon the Sorceror's spellbook" and inside it there were

contents:

EXPLOSIVE RUNES!


@Auke Teeniga, Dammit!

Scarab Sages ***** RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16

Auke Teeninga wrote:

I once put a magical tome in an adventure and on the cover it said "Simon the Sorceror's spellbook" and inside it there were ** spoiler omitted **

And then a magic mouth appeared and said "Simon didn't say you could read his Spellbook!"

Grand Lodge *****

Auke Teeninga wrote:

I once put a magical tome in an adventure and on the cover it said "Simon the Sorceror's spellbook" and inside it there were ** spoiler omitted **

The real question is...

Spoiler:

...did the runes glow in red, yellow, blue, and green lights in a random pattern before exploding?

Silver Crusade **

Seth Gipson wrote:
Auke Teeninga wrote:

I once put a magical tome in an adventure and on the cover it said "Simon the Sorceror's spellbook" and inside it there were ** spoiler omitted **

The real question is...

Spoiler:
...did the runes glow in red, yellow, blue, and green lights in a random pattern before exploding?

Spoiler:
Beep, doop deep boop boop boop beep...eeeng
Grand Lodge **** Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

Jiggy wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:
Since sorcerers don't use material components, they cast spells with a similar effect as wizards, but they are inherently different in some way.
So when a wizard takes Eschew Materials (which is a feat, not a class feature) and the sorcerer has an archetype that doesn't get it as a bonus feat, I'm curious how it impacts this viewpoint.

Yep. Eschew Materials, False Focus, spells from bloodlines and/or specialty schools.

Isn't it only Spellcraft or read magic required to read a spell from a scroll or understand a spell from a spellbook?

And sorcerers and wizards both can use the same arcane scrolls to cast the same spells.

And, in regular PF, sorcerers can take the same feats for crafting as wizards, yes? And the scroll scribed doesn't care whether it was written by a sorcerer, wizard, or even a bard ort witch.

Grand Lodge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Class Deck, Companion, Maps, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber

It is my understanding also that you only need Spellcraft (successfully used) to put a spell in a spellbook (along with the appropriate inks, represented by the scribing cost) such that someone else could then copy and use it (or make the checks to be able to prep from that specific book on that particular occasion). Also, Sorcerers DO have some use for a spellbook - Mnemonic Vestments. :)

And I am so stealing the Simon Says Spellbook for a homegame someday... 'cause I'm evil like that.

Liberty's Edge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Subscriber
Farrindor wrote:
It is my understanding also that you only need Spellcraft (successfully used) to put a spell in a spellbook (along with the appropriate inks, represented by the scribing cost) such that someone else could then copy and use it (or make the checks to be able to prep from that specific book on that particular occasion).

Sadly, by RAW, this is simply not true. In order to put spells in a spellbook, one needs the Spellbook class feature, which sorcerer's do not possess.

*****

Jiggy wrote:
So when a wizard takes Eschew Materials (which is a feat, not a class feature) and the sorcerer has an archetype that doesn't get it as a bonus feat, I'm curious how it impacts this viewpoint.

Spoilered to avoid derail:
Well, it's obviously not my viewpoint in PFS! But from a philosophical point of view, I've always liked the idea that sorcerers were more primal and wizards more intellectual about the way they use magic - this is supported by the differing casting stats, lack of material components, etc. Maybe not as different as the difference between arcane and divine, but still different in subtler ways. Pathfinder's bloodlines have gone a long way to helping distinguish sorcerers from wizards, which their spell lists don't do.
*** Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover aka Hayato Ken

There is one item, ring of spell knowledge, for spontaneous casters, which at least suggests that those can have a spellbook.
Most probably, the same rules as for wuzards would apply.
Meaning you have to gather, write down (roll spellcraft) and pay for the spells. And have that noted on chronicle sheets.
You could also buy scrolls though for that item i guess.

The Exchange *****

Benjamin Falk wrote:

There is one item, ring of spell knowledge, for spontaneous casters, which at least suggests that those can have a spellbook.

Most probably, the same rules as for wuzards would apply.
Meaning you have to gather, write down (roll spellcraft) and pay for the spells. And have that noted on chronicle sheets.
You could also buy scrolls though for that item i guess.

outside of PFS, it is possible for a Sorcerer to get a spell book. Just take it from a PC class that can make it. In home games these are sold all the time. Defeat the NPC wizard, sell his stuff. Or keep the spellbook.

This does not mean the Sorcerer can make it. Any more than a Fighter can make a magic shield ...

and inside PFS, the spellbooks gained in loot are always instantly converted into gold (they never appear on the chronicles). This should indicate that in PFS, none book using PCs can't gain spellbooks... but that is just my opinion.

Silver Crusade **

Benjamin Falk wrote:

There is one item, ring of spell knowledge, for spontaneous casters, which at least suggests that those can have a spellbook.

Most probably, the same rules as for wuzards would apply.
Meaning you have to gather, write down (roll spellcraft) and pay for the spells. And have that noted on chronicle sheets.
You could also buy scrolls though for that item i guess.

I don't see where you have to write down anything for the ring. Could you expand the thought?

Ring of Spell Knowledge

ring of spell knowledge wrote:
A ring of spell knowledge is only a storage space; the wearer must still encounter a written, active, or cast version of the spell and succeed at a DC 20 Spellcraft check to teach the spell to the ring. Thereafter, the arcane spellcaster may cast the spell as though she knew the spell and it appeared on her class’ spell list.

Silver Crusade **

nosig wrote:
Benjamin Falk wrote:

There is one item, ring of spell knowledge, for spontaneous casters, which at least suggests that those can have a spellbook.

Most probably, the same rules as for wuzards would apply.
Meaning you have to gather, write down (roll spellcraft) and pay for the spells. And have that noted on chronicle sheets.
You could also buy scrolls though for that item i guess.

outside of PFS, it is possible for a Sorcerer to get a spell book. Just take it from a PC class that can make it. In home games these are sold all the time. Defeat the NPC wizard, sell his stuff. Or keep the spellbook.

This does not mean the Sorcerer can make it. Any more than a Fighter can make a magic shield ...

and inside PFS, the spellbooks gained in loot are always instantly converted into gold (they never appear on the chronicles). This should indicate that in PFS, none book using PCs can't gain spellbooks... but that is just my opinion.

Does beating up another player's PC to rob them of their spellbook count as PvP? :)

The Exchange *****

DesolateHarmony wrote:
nosig wrote:
Benjamin Falk wrote:

There is one item, ring of spell knowledge, for spontaneous casters, which at least suggests that those can have a spellbook.

Most probably, the same rules as for wuzards would apply.
Meaning you have to gather, write down (roll spellcraft) and pay for the spells. And have that noted on chronicle sheets.
You could also buy scrolls though for that item i guess.

outside of PFS, it is possible for a Sorcerer to get a spell book. Just take it from a PC class that can make it. In home games these are sold all the time. Defeat the NPC wizard, sell his stuff. Or keep the spellbook.

This does not mean the Sorcerer can make it. Any more than a Fighter can make a magic shield ...

and inside PFS, the spellbooks gained in loot are always instantly converted into gold (they never appear on the chronicles). This should indicate that in PFS, none book using PCs can't gain spellbooks... but that is just my opinion.

Does beating up another player's PC to rob them of their spellbook count as PvP? :)

I have a rogue with one level of wizard who has an extra spell book (got a Blessed Book and never sold my old one) that I could "loan out" during a game...

*

Is there any reason you can't buy a spellbook for 15 gold and then have other wizards or paid NPCs write in it for you?

The Exchange *****

Sitri wrote:
Is there any reason you can't buy a spellbook for 15 gold and then have other wizards or paid NPCs write in it for you?

the short answer? Yes.

the long answer...
other thread. one of several...

Shadow Lodge

nosig wrote:
Sitri wrote:
Is there any reason you can't buy a spellbook for 15 gold and then have other wizards or paid NPCs write in it for you?

the short answer? Yes.

the long answer...
other thread. one of several...

Yeah, I read that, and let me ask you this:

If I can pay the material component cost to have another player cast a heightened continual flame on one of my items, and it is allowed to carry over as my permanent continual flame effect, or even make my weapon masterwork via masterwork transformation, how is paying the material component cost to have another player scribe in my spellbook any different? Both are paying the material costs to have another player permanently alter an item I own, but you seem to think one is legal and the other isn't, with no campaign guidance that makes a distinction between to the two.

Liberty's Edge *****

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Roleplaying Guild Subscriber

The simple answer is that a Spellbook is not just a possession, but a class ability.

Liberty's Edge ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Seattle aka The Great Rinaldo!

SCPRedMage wrote:
but you seem to think one is legal and the other isn't, with no campaign guidance that makes a distinction between to the two.

Actually there is campaign guidance. The only things that can be done by one player for another and continue between adventures are masterwork transformation, continual flame, and secret page, and only one each of those. Nothing else is allowed.

The Exchange *****

SCPRedMage wrote:
nosig wrote:
Sitri wrote:
Is there any reason you can't buy a spellbook for 15 gold and then have other wizards or paid NPCs write in it for you?

the short answer? Yes.

the long answer...
other thread. one of several...

Yeah, I read that, and let me ask you this:

If I can pay the material component cost to have another player cast a heightened continual flame on one of my items, and it is allowed to carry over as my permanent continual flame effect, or even make my weapon masterwork via masterwork transformation, how is paying the material component cost to have another player scribe in my spellbook any different? Both are paying the material costs to have another player permanently alter an item I own, but you seem to think one is legal and the other isn't, with no campaign guidance that makes a distinction between to the two.

as Tony Lindman points out, there is campaign guidance on those. If there was guidance on having other PCs (or NPCs) create Spellbooks (or any other custom item) for our non-spellbook using PCs, then we would know how to do it. But, except for masterwork transformation, continual flame, and secret page, (and only one each of those) there is none. So, the reason I think one is legal and the other isn't, is that one has rules for doing it, and the other does not.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Maps, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

What's weird is that I'm currently running a PFS-sanctioned adventure where one of the adversaries has a spellbook for the sole purpose of posing as a prepared spellcaster. So it's odd that there's no way for a PC to do the same thing.

Spoiler:
In Snows of Summer, there's a Cleric/Rogue posing as a Necromancer who has a spellbook he can't use.

I understand it. It's just strange.

Silver Crusade **

pH unbalanced wrote:
So it's odd that there's no way for a PC to do the same thing.

[humor]The main reason, bad guys cheat.[/humor]

Grand Lodge **** Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

Tony Lindman wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
but you seem to think one is legal and the other isn't, with no campaign guidance that makes a distinction between to the two.
Actually there is campaign guidance. The only things that can be done by one player for another and continue between adventures are masterwork transformation, continual flame, and secret page, and only one each of those. Nothing else is allowed.

Short response: Incorrect.

Long answer: Please check a few things in the GtPFSOP, like putting a spell in a spell storing item. Also note that there are 4, not 3, "permanent" spells that can carry over from game to game.

At what point does writing a spell into a spellbook, at the spellbook owner's cost, count as transferring wealth?

Could a lower level wizard have a higher level wizard, with a better spellcraft skill, scribe a spell for them into their book? It would still be paid for by the lower level wizard.

The Exchange *****

kinevon wrote:
Tony Lindman wrote:
SCPRedMage wrote:
but you seem to think one is legal and the other isn't, with no campaign guidance that makes a distinction between to the two.
Actually there is campaign guidance. The only things that can be done by one player for another and continue between adventures are masterwork transformation, continual flame, and secret page, and only one each of those. Nothing else is allowed.

Short response: Incorrect.

Long answer: Please check a few things in the GtPFSOP, like putting a spell in a spell storing item. Also note that there are 4, not 3, "permanent" spells that can carry over from game to game.

At what point does writing a spell into a spellbook, at the spellbook owner's cost, count as transferring wealth?

Could a lower level wizard have a higher level wizard, with a better spellcraft skill, scribe a spell for them into their book? It would still be paid for by the lower level wizard.

there are no rules for it in PFS.

Shadow Lodge

nosig wrote:
there are no rules for it in PFS.

There are also no "rules for it in PFS" for throwing a splash weapon, opening a door, standing up from prone, etc.

There's no special PFS rules for those because the base rules cover it, just like the base rules cover writing a spell in a spellbook.

Grand Lodge ***** Regional Venture-Coordinator, Eastern Eurasia-Africa

Bero Vaski wrote:
Guess while most people agree its cool, it is all gray area and so not a good idea for organised play.

Just to make sure everyone noticed: The OPs question has been snswered and he left the thread a while ago.

Shadow Lodge

Auke Teeninga wrote:
Bero Vaski wrote:
Guess while most people agree its cool, it is all gray area and so not a good idea for organised play.
Just to make sure everyone noticed: The OPs question has been snswered and he left the thread a while ago.

Whether or not the OP left, the rest of us are still debating the question, in hopes it'll attract the attention needed to get an official answer on the matter.

Scarab Sages *

Bero Vaski wrote:

Hi. I've just started playing in society games and I've made a charcter as a sorcerer who worships Nethys and as part of helping spread the wonder of magic (and maybe worship of Nethys) I was considering having a spellbook.

Looking at the rules for arcane magic I believe as a sorcerer I would be able to write down spells I know in a spellbook which wizards (and other arcane casters as appropriate) would be able to copy these to their own spellbook.

Would other players be able to write spells in my spellbook so that I coukd then share there spells to other players and if so who would have to pay the scribing costs.

I know I can't gain anything from this I just thought it would be an interesting idea for the character and wanted to know if it was possible.

I am inferring two independant questions from your post:

1. In PFS, can a non-spellbook user class have a spellbook that he or she could collect spells in as a typical spellbook?

2. In PFS, can other players use this spellbook to learn spells from and add to their own spellbook?

I have read all the posts up to the point that I make my own, and I don't see an "absolute" answer within the responses or rules available. The best resources I have to offer are as follows:

Question 1: A blank spellbook is offered as a generic piece of equipment that can be purchased for the cost of 15 gold. PFS Guide to Organized Play lists all items in the equipment section of the Core Rulebook as legal for PFS. I have not read anything that suggests that only specific classes can make this purchase in PFS.
The cost for copying a spell is listed in Chapter 9 of the Core Rulebook for "Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook". In the section titled "Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook" it reads, at the end of the section: 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. (These costs have been summed up for you on a very helpful "cheat sheet" at http://tinyurl.com/aftermodgmref)
This, in and of itself, suggests that it *can* be done.

The cost from copying from a PC (incidentally the same cost as scribing it yourself) is explicitly just the cost of the materials to scribe a spell into a spellbook. The question is: does the cost from copying from an NPC take into account the extra service that the NPC is providing, or simply just a hike because he has a commodity that you desire? Without an FAQ adjudication on the wording and inference that these guidelines make, I would rule that the guidelines are there, and provide a cost for these services. (When in doubt, rule in the favor of the players because fun is always the first goal.)
This suggests to me that a non-spellbook user could, in fact, carry a spellbook that has spells scribed into it for legal play in PFS.

Question 2: As described above, there are guidelines in place to allow PCs to copy spells from another PC's spellbook, and keep them moving forward for legal play. Granted, the non-spellbook using PC couldn't help the copying PC translate the writings (because they're not her own), so it would be a more difficult undertaking.

The benefit, and possible room for abuse, that players could use here is that one player could potentially use his character to bank all the arcane spells available and sell them within his group at a lesser cost, but it also seems that any regular spellbook user could already do this if that was their intent.

Certainly not an "absolute" assessment, but my own interpretation...

*****

It's "transfer" of wealth because you can now allow any wizard in your party to save the money he'd have to spend on scrolls to get those spells otherwise.

Also, the cost to scribe a spell into your book from an NPC spellcaster is the cost to use his book, not the cost for him to waste his time doing it for you.

Spellbook users trade spells in their party all the time - that's part of their class feature. If you want in on the fun, take a level in the class.

***** Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston

You do not need to spend on scrolls to copy a spell. You simply pay the normal cost plus fifty percent to copy from a willing wizard. In PFS this is presumably from a wizard in the local Pathfinder Lodge.

The Exchange *****

David Neilson wrote:
You do not need to spend on scrolls to copy a spell. You simply pay the normal cost plus fifty percent to copy from a willing wizard. In PFS this is presumably from a wizard in the local Pathfinder Lodge.

well, actually the 50% addition is to play for access to an NPCs spellbook. That wizard MIGHT be from a Pathfinder Lodge (I have a PC that claims this is his day job - "Spellbook Pimp" or "Spellbook Manager") or it might not be. It is not defined. The 50% cost is defined though.

Shadow Lodge

GM Lamplighter wrote:
It's "transfer" of wealth because you can now allow any wizard in your party to save the money he'd have to spend on scrolls to get those spells otherwise.

Is getting a fellow party member to cast (non-metamagiced) continual flame a transfer of wealth, because it allows you to save money over getting an NPC to do it? What about getting a party member to cast raise dead? Under that line of reasoning, how are any of these any different that scribing a spell into a spellbook?

GM Lamplighter wrote:
Spellbook users trade spells in their party all the time - that's part of their class feature. If you want in on the fun, take a level in the class.

So THAT'S an okay "transfer of wealth"?

The Exchange *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.
SCPRedMage wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:
It's "transfer" of wealth because you can now allow any wizard in your party to save the money he'd have to spend on scrolls to get those spells otherwise.

Is getting a fellow party member to cast (non-metamagiced) continual flame a transfer of wealth, because it allows you to save money over getting an NPC to do it? What about getting a party member to cast raise dead? Under that line of reasoning, how are any of these any different that scribing a spell into a spellbook?

GM Lamplighter wrote:
Spellbook users trade spells in their party all the time - that's part of their class feature. If you want in on the fun, take a level in the class.
So THAT'S an okay "transfer of wealth"?

SCPRedMage: in answer to your question... yes, that is. and it's one of the few allowed and covered in the rules.

Originally, we couldn't cast that spell for someone else. In fact, originally we couldn't cast continual flame for ourselves and have it last past the end of the scenario (I have a 14th level PC who would cast it at the start of each scenario - realizing that it wasn't "continual" and he would have to cast it again next scenario).

Perhaps we can get the rules changed. But until they are changed (or created in the case of no rules for it), we need to play them as they currently exist. That's what being in PFS is all about.

Heck, I can remember when a wizard couldn't sell his (extra) spell book... because there was no rules for it. Now there is. Because we requested them, and the GM (Mr. Brock) provide us with rules to cover it. Perhaps with this thread (and the other ones) there will be enough notice created, enough need shown, that we may get rules for non-book using classes to own spell books.

Until that happens, we make do with what we can. Like my Rogue with the level of Wizard. Like my Alchemist who also has a level of wizard, just so he can return the favor when a Wizard offers to share his with me.

*****

nosig beat me to the punch, but I agree with him on why those examples are OK and spellbooks for everyone isn't.

Personally, I hope we don't see spellbooks for eveyone in PFS, because it makes the game even easier than it is, and allows one more mechanism for anuse by folks who like to play the system instead of the game. But that's my opinion; if it becomes a rule for PFS, i will follow it.

The Exchange *****

1 person marked this as a favorite.

actually, I'd like to see spellbooks on chronicles. it would be a cool trophy, to be able to say:
"i've got a spellbook from the Great Enemy - and I'll let you copy spells from it..."

Scarab Sages *

GM Lamplighter wrote:

It's "transfer" of wealth because you can now allow any wizard in your party to save the money he'd have to spend on scrolls to get those spells otherwise.

Also, the cost to scribe a spell into your book from an NPC spellcaster is the cost to use his book, not the cost for him to waste his time doing it for you.

Spellbook users trade spells in their party all the time - that's part of their class feature. If you want in on the fun, take a level in the class.

I agree with both of your points, however, I do have a caveat for each!

Your point about a non-spellbook user being able to pass spells on to any spellbook user at a reduced cost is certainly a "transfer of wealth", as far as I can see it... However, I also see any spellbook user being able to pass spells on to another player (spellbook user) as a "transfer of wealth" as well... it's just a legal "tranfer". I don't perceive "tranfer of wealth" as specifically a "class feature" and should be allowed across the board to anyone who wanted to make that sacrifice, or play up a creative role... would seem to me that the "transfer" rules should apply the same either way.

I also agree with your point that in the Core Rulebook, the cost described for copying an NPC spell into your own spellbook is intended simply for the privilege of examining the spell and not the service of the lender to actually copy the spell for you. I do not, however, believe that's an explicit interpretation of the text... and without clarification from higher sources, I would allow that it could be argued as a valid point, with rules to support it, and would therefore allow it at a PFS table I was running. (even though I don't believe that was necessarily the intent).

Certainly still a grey area that probably needs some clarification...

*****

LordIX - I just re-read the section in the CRB, and it specifically says "the wizard must...", referring to the PC. Everything later on refers to that same section. So, you pay an NPC wizard for "the privilege of copy a spell from their spellbook", and then must decipher the magical writing, study the spell for an hour, and then write it into their spellbook with the spellcraft check, expending the resources. There is nothing to suggest anyone else can do it for you.

If someone else *did* do it, the wizard would still have to decipher the spell since it is written in the other caster's style of magical writing (see deciphering a spell).

As far as transfer of wealth is concerned - yes, it's legal, and it's pretty much the only way for wizards to gain a significant number of spells without going bankrupt. I believe it is built into the system already, and does not need to be increased by allowing everyone to have a spellbook.

The Exchange *****

LordIX wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

It's "transfer" of wealth because you can now allow any wizard in your party to save the money he'd have to spend on scrolls to get those spells otherwise.

Also, the cost to scribe a spell into your book from an NPC spellcaster is the cost to use his book, not the cost for him to waste his time doing it for you.

Spellbook users trade spells in their party all the time - that's part of their class feature. If you want in on the fun, take a level in the class.

I agree with both of your points, however, I do have a caveat for each!

Your point about a non-spellbook user being able to pass spells on to any spellbook user at a reduced cost is certainly a "transfer of wealth", as far as I can see it... However, I also see any spellbook user being able to pass spells on to another player (spellbook user) as a "transfer of wealth" as well... it's just a legal "tranfer". I don't perceive "tranfer of wealth" as specifically a "class feature" and should be allowed across the board to anyone who wanted to make that sacrifice, or play up a creative role... would seem to me that the "transfer" rules should apply the same either way.

I also agree with your point that in the Core Rulebook, the cost described for copying an NPC spell into your own spellbook is intended simply for the privilege of examining the spell and not the service of the lender to actually copy the spell for you. I do not, however, believe that's an explicit interpretation of the text... and without clarification from higher sources, I would allow that it could be argued as a valid point, with rules to support it, and would therefore allow it at a PFS table I was running. (even though I don't believe that was necessarily the intent).

Certainly still a grey area that probably needs some clarification...

sorry, what is a grey area?

I see nothing here that is a "grey area". I do see many people (even me) wishing there were rules under which NON-spellbook using PCs could own spellbooks that contain spells... but there are no rules for this. If there are no rules for something, how is it a grey area? I would think a grey area would be something that had rules, but those rules were not understood, or were often ruled differently for different judges. (Such as the Light/Darkness rules, or the Take 10 rules, or the Perception rules).

Liberty's Edge ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

Actually the take 10 rules are not a gray area, there are only GMs that do it right or do it wrong, the rules are pretty clear,just hard to remember. ;)

The Exchange *****

Dragnmoon wrote:
Actually the take 10 rules are not a gray area, there are only GMs that do it right or do it wrong, the rules are pretty clear,just hard to remember. ;)

I am not taking that bait....

I have been burned to many times there as it is....

latest thread

Grand Lodge **** Venture-Agent, Nevada—Las Vegas aka kinevon

nosig wrote:
LordIX wrote:
GM Lamplighter wrote:

It's "transfer" of wealth because you can now allow any wizard in your party to save the money he'd have to spend on scrolls to get those spells otherwise.

Also, the cost to scribe a spell into your book from an NPC spellcaster is the cost to use his book, not the cost for him to waste his time doing it for you.

Spellbook users trade spells in their party all the time - that's part of their class feature. If you want in on the fun, take a level in the class.

I agree with both of your points, however, I do have a caveat for each!

Your point about a non-spellbook user being able to pass spells on to any spellbook user at a reduced cost is certainly a "transfer of wealth", as far as I can see it... However, I also see any spellbook user being able to pass spells on to another player (spellbook user) as a "transfer of wealth" as well... it's just a legal "tranfer". I don't perceive "tranfer of wealth" as specifically a "class feature" and should be allowed across the board to anyone who wanted to make that sacrifice, or play up a creative role... would seem to me that the "transfer" rules should apply the same either way.

I also agree with your point that in the Core Rulebook, the cost described for copying an NPC spell into your own spellbook is intended simply for the privilege of examining the spell and not the service of the lender to actually copy the spell for you. I do not, however, believe that's an explicit interpretation of the text... and without clarification from higher sources, I would allow that it could be argued as a valid point, with rules to support it, and would therefore allow it at a PFS table I was running. (even though I don't believe that was necessarily the intent).

Certainly still a grey area that probably needs some clarification...

sorry, what is a grey area?

I see nothing here that is a "grey area". I do see many people (even me) wishing there were rules under which NON-spellbook using PCs...

The rules are already incorrect, since wizard no longer means wizard for the spellbook rules.

If your PC has an appropriate amount of Spellcraft, and owns a perfectly legal spellbook (no purchase restrictiosn on them inthe Core book, as far as I can see), and has the money and time to speknd, why can't he write up the spell?

Spellcraft DC 20 to comprehend the spell in someone's spellbook.
Spellcraft DC 15+spell level to write it in a spellbook

I have a Sage Sorcerer, Int-based, whose Spellcraft skill, at first level, is +10, IIRC, he gets a racial or some sort of +2 bonus to his Spellcraft skill.

So, right out of the box, he can Take 10 to understand a spell straight from a spellbook, which is authorized both by the writing spells section, but also by, IIRC, the Ring of Spell Knowledge write-up, which says that the spontaneous caster neds to make a DC 20 Spellcraft check to understand teh spell to let the ring learn it... And the ring, IIRC, says any form of written spell source, explicitly including a spellbook in the sorcerer's possession...

1 to 50 of 55 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Roleplaying Guild / Sorcerer's Spellbook. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.