Troll Lord Games

Hi Crusaders.

I have been putting together a small encounter for my starting C&C players, basically an "origin story" if you will.
They will be kidnapped (working models: to be sold to slavers or maybe as a sacrifice for Gritznak) and forced to escape, picking up some skills, weapons and treasure - and then they are off for a life of adventure...
Probably on the road to Malforten, in fact.

Generally, I am of the mind to have all PCs start at Level-0 [ -100 xp ] and no Class but they do have a starting Trade (profession/secondary skill/whatever) that gives them a basic weapon proficiency and some skills in their future class.

woodsman = ranger, cut-purse or bandit = rogue, soldier = fighter, squire = knight,
scribe or wizard's assistant = wizard, clergy = cleric, that sort of thing.

Anyway, I seem to have found a game mechanics "Catch-22" and I would like your opinions on how to handle it.
Simply put, all arcane spell casting seems to be based on the presumption that the PC uses "Read Magic" to learn a spell.
The problem is that "Read Magic" is listed in the PHB (4th printing) as a Level 1 spell.
So... How do new wizards and illusionists know how to "Read Magic" ?!

Is it presumed that EVERY wizard and illusionist was taught the spell because they were all apprenticed somehow to other spell-casters?

Ironically, reading through "The Rising Knight" (free download, thanks to the Trolls!) it appears that "Read Magic" used to be a Level-0 Cantrip, at least according to Blodwyn Lycharn's spell book. This actually makes a bit more sense to me.

I am considering something like making "read magic" a skill, like "tracking" or something, but having the ability to cast spells be somehow beyond the comprehension of a Scribe who may be able to literally translate the pages.
Of course this can be a source of income for scribes - copying spell books, spells and scrolls.

I actually wrote up some basic rules for it this weekend but I thought this afternoon that I may be well-served by discussing it with people who have spent more than 2 or 3 weeks with the rules.

Thanks

FWIW, I fully intend to post whatever I come up with under the Creative Commons license and I would love to have Crusaders look it over and playtest it before I do so.

I think the problem you're experiencing is based on the decision to start off 0-level characters, which the current rules do not take into consideration. The assumption, per the rules, is that the campaign starts with 1st level characters and Wizards have "Read Magic" in their spell books.

One option you may want to consider is to simply make give your 0-level Wizards the ability to cast Cantrips, but not yet 1st Level spells. Then just make Read Magic a 0-level spell rather than a 1st level spell.

An even simpler solution is to have the characters simply find "Read Magic" on a scroll somewhere in your introductory adventure. Once they hit level 1 and the Wizards/Illusionists buy their empty spell books, they can transfer the spell to the book, having now "figured out" how this whole magic thing works (due to exposure to the basic principles while they were assistants/apprentices).

Hello redwullf. Thanks for the reply.

The encounter already has a Read Magic scroll AND a spell book with Read Magic in it (along with Magic Missile & Sleep).
Way ahead of you there.
I did it to keep compatibility with any other game systems or campaigns.

The question is, HOW did the first wizard Read Magic?
To take it a step further, the idea that a party of adventurers just pops into existence on the road to Hommlet cuts out a big opportunities for role playing (in my opinion) as well as all sorts of future encounters and complications.
Where are these people from? Do they have families? Does anyone miss them?
Did they leave behind a life? Enemies? Debts?

The Cantrip solution makes some sense but it leaves a few loose ends. I need to understand how cantrips differ from Level-1 spells, I think.

This is an oddity of timing.

Rising Knight, as I recall, was released before the full C&C rules had been decided upon, back when we were still arguing whether the reading of magic would be an innate class ability for wizards (illusionist as a class was also in debate) or if it would be a spell, and if a spell, of what level -- to be more like the inspired source or to follow the OGL paradigm.

In C&C, it is not mandatory that a caster have read magic as they can, at level advancement, gain a new spell. Lacking the spell, things like scrolls and the like, such as determining written command words for example, may be impossible or difficult. However, most Castle Keepers realize this and allow the character to have the spell anyway as it is very archetypal (which should be encouraged.) This would mean the known spells number should increase by 1, as one of the spells should be read magic. Some also consider the same for detect magic but I do not hold that same opinion.

I would make it a cantrip, as it should be something the caster can do, readily and easily, if the spell is available during that memorization period. After all, it cannot be too powerful... even those who cannot cast at all, such as the rogue, can unmagically do the same with possibility of error.

OK, that is 2 votes for the Cantrip solution so far.

I am going to read that section again tonight when I get home.
Is the presumption then that the ability to use Cantrips are somehow inherent to casters?
Meaning that a fledgling wizard or illusionist (even an unsuspecting, Level-0 one) has the possibility of spontaneously pulling off the occasional cantrip on accident?

If so, then I can have a lot of fun with that! Heh-heh-heh...
Spontaneous "DANCING LIGHTS" and "GHOST SOUND"s ... small things levitating for no reason

I also find Read magic annoying. I will not get into beyond that. If cantrip works for you use that, or just make it a skill or instead make "magic" a unified language like Latin (Draconic usually works well) and have the budding mage know that.

-Mike

mgtremaine wrote:I also find Read magic annoying. I will not get into beyond that.
-Mike

I'm glad I am not the only one. Thanks Mike!
But now I am intrigued by what other details you are not going into. LOL

Thank you everyone for the suggestions & feedback.
Please keep it coming.

Personally, I like the idea of having a patron. They've finished their apprenticeship and are now ready for the big bad world. In their studies part of it would be, "read magic" as one of their teachings. In other words it is in the characters history and it has a built in NPC that has a relationship with the character.

So, it isn't like they'd have to keep running back to their patron to help them decipher a 1st level spell. They can do it on-the-fly.

My only question is, if you give this ability to a magic-user then would you not have to give something similar in regard to the other classes?

Sir Ironside wrote:Personally, I like the idea of having a patron. They've finished their apprenticeship and are now ready for the big bad world. In their studies part of it would be, "read magic" as one of their teachings. In other words it is in the characters history and it has a built in NPC that has a relationship with the character.

That is why I have the "Trade" idea in place -potential magic-users can be apprenticed to other wizards at the start of the game. I am not at all opposed to them having a patron or "mentor" - in fact I mention such an arrangement for some cases.
The problem I see with it goes back to the overall campaign though: it implies you can only learn arcane magic if you study under another spell-caster.

Sir Ironside wrote: My only question is, if you give this ability to a magic-user then would you not have to give something similar in regard to the other classes?

That is why I am asking if the ability to "use" magic is considered to be somehow "innate" to individuals. Rogues aside, being able to use the Rosetta Stone to literally translate the Book of the Dead is not the same as understanding the overall meaning of the hieroglyphs in context.
The idea that a wizard has the ability to read and cast spells is not the same as the ability to just read them, right?
Two different skill sets.

As mentioned, I am fully aware that this degree of complexity exists because I am trying to make sure everyone has a back-story. I am just trying to prevent future contradictions if I can.
The chicken-and-the-egg Read Magic problem was there before I undertook the task though.

I can (of course) have the PCs abducted at Level-1 with no equipment, etc.
It just does not explain when and why they went from "Zero to Hero"...

kajukenbo wrote:The problem I see with it goes back to the overall campaign though: it implies you can only learn arcane magic if you study under another spell-caster.

I still don't see the problem, as long as everyone has to do the same thing. Your talking about a sliver of your campaign world where the focus is on the PC everyone else is ancillary. The problem I could see if you only had 5 wizards, in your world and not hundreds. (Could be different levels, alignments, schools etc.)

Is it like Harry Potter or Conan type world?

Other than that, I'm sure that your imagination could fill any holes that you've constrained yourself in the world you created. If you just want your PC's to just read magic, then cantrips are a good solution. You want something more colourful then the patron idea is a good solution.

In the end it is what you want and what is best for what you are trying to achieve.

Yeah, you are probably right.
I may be too worried about this detail.
Make a decision & move on...

Read magic is only needed if the writer of the spell isn't there to decipher it for the spell caster trying to read it. That's why apprentices don't need it. The "instructor" deciphers for them.

Arduin wrote:The "instructor" deciphers for them.

Hello. Thanks for the reply.

That is my point: it seems the RAW presumes all arcane casters have been apprenticed to an instructor.
I am not sure I care for this approach for my campaign. It just feels off somehow.

If a character can independently Research a spell or invent a whole new one (without the need for someone to teach them the spell, PHB 4th printing p.51) then it follows that they can figure out how to Read Magic on their own, since that is a spell.
Also, if a Rogue or Bard can understand arcane writing -without a spell and when they almost certainly were NOT apprenticed to a Wizard- then it makes little sense to say that someone with the ability to actually CAST spells cannot do it as well.

I think for my purposes, Comprehend Magic (INT) is an innate ability of anyone who can Use Arcane Magic, wizards and illusionists in this case.
Anyone with this ability will be able to figure out how to read an arcane magic spell or scroll on their own, if they are talented enough.
This is treated as Read Magic but it functions more like a rogue or bard's "Decipher Script" which only works on magical arcane writing.
To Comprehend a spell or scroll, the CL is equal to the spell level and the PC gains +1 per Level, to represent their additional experience and ongoing magical studies.
Of course, this means a Level 1 wizard will have little chance of Comprehending a Level 9 spell but a 17th Level PC (!) should have no problem.
A character can theoretically Comprehend -and therefore copy into their books- spells that are above their Level to cast (if they could do so eventually by "Taking 20", and allowed by the CK) given weeks or even months but that does not give them the capacity to cast them or make scrolls of them.
The RAW for learning new spells apply otherwise.
A player can try to Comprehend a spell they failed to decipher previously once every 24 hours, if given the reasonable time and the proper conditions.
Once Comprehended, a PC does not need to use the skill again to understand the same spell in the same book or same scroll. It is needed for the same spell written elsewhere, however.
Even a failed attempt to Comprehend a cursed scroll triggers the curse, if reading it would have done so.

Furthermore (in my campaigns) anyone with innate magical ability will have figured out 1 cantrip somewhere in their teens, plus 1 additional cantrip per INT modifier, at the CK's discretion. This obvious aptitude is why many wizards take them on as apprentices.
Those cantrips can be chosen at random, picked by the CK or selected by the PC, obviously all at the CK's discretion. Generally, only cantrips that do not need a focus or material component will be "intuitively discovered".

As a wizard's apprentice, the player has access to Level 1 spells to begin their careers (as well as cantrips with focuses or material components), but if the PC was not trained then they must work it out on their own, finding spells or beginning Research.
Eventually these PCs may actively search out other, more experienced wizards/illusionists to teach them or sell them spells. This can provide more opportunities for role-playing.

I'll work with that and see how it goes.

kajukenbo wrote:

Arduin wrote:The "instructor" deciphers for them.

Hello. Thanks for the reply.

That is my point: it seems the RAW presumes all arcane casters have been apprenticed to an instructor.
I am not sure I care for this approach for my campaign. It just feels off somehow.

If a character can independently Research a spell or invent a whole new one (without the need for someone to teach them the spell, PHB 4th printing p.51) then it follows that they can figure out how to Read Magic on their own, since that is a spell.

Well, per the CKG a MU must be at least 10th level before they can research/create a spell. So, makes sense that one is taught by an instructor as you can't research/create Read Magic" until 10th level...

Arduin wrote: Well, per the CKG a MU must be at least 10th level before they can research/create a spell. So, makes sense that one is taught by an instructor as you can't research/create Read Magic" until 10th level...

It does not say anything about level restrictions or requirements in the PHB.
Meh. It still follows logically enough for me that if a bard can read a scroll then a MU can.
The idea that the essential ability to "read magic" is a Level 1 spell -but there are easier spells (cantrips)- AND the logic that the first MU -somewhere, sometime- had to have been able to read magic WITHOUT being taught is just too inconsistent for my taste. It makes no sense at all to me, even in the context of a fantasy game.

As soon as you say an instructor taught someone the next question should be something in the vein of "What makes them qualified to teach it?" Essentially: "Where did they learn it?"
It it the "chicken-and-the-egg" and no one thus far has given any explanation for how the first MU could read (or write) magic. Without that, the skill cannot have been passed on.
As an instructor, I will say that eventually it comes down to people figuring it out on their own and experimenting.

If you want to say that Arcane Magic is a special language that ONLY MUs know and understand (Language of the Dragons or something) and therefore they MUST be taught how to read it (why wouldn that be?) then you get stuck with the idea that bards and rogues have a chance to decipher it.

I'm going to run it my way for a while. I'll adjust it as I go and keep my "skill" above updated in case anyone is interested.

I am not dicounting your opinion. It just creates more questions than it answers.

Thanks

kajukenbo wrote: It does not say anything about level restrictions or requirements in the PHB.
Meh. It still follows logically enough for me that if a bard can read a scroll then a MU can.
The idea that the essential ability to "read magic" is a Level 1 spell -but there are easier spells (cantrips)- AND the logic that the first MU -somewhere, sometime- had to have been able to read magic WITHOUT being taught is just too inconsistent for my taste. It makes no sense at all to me, even in the context of a fantasy game.

1st you must understand WHY it is difficult to read. Once you do, you understand why Bards have a chance you understand why an MU doesn't without a spell.

kajukenbo wrote:As soon as you say an instructor taught someone the next question should be something in the vein of "What makes them qualified to teach it?" Essentially: "Where did they learn it?"

Experience makes they "qualified". They learned it by spending MANY years practicing.

kajukenbo wrote:It it the "chicken-and-the-egg" and no one thus far has given any explanation for how the first MU could read (or write) magic. Without that, the skill cannot have been passed on.

Not really. The 1st MU wasn't reading others spells. So, no read magic needed. Also, one doesn't need Read magic in order to write a spell. A misunderstanding on your part. Do you know why an MU uses read magic to be able to understand another's spell written in a spell book?

Your assertion therefore, is that the first MU invented the entire language of arcane magic and that it has been passed down from there in a fortunately, unbroken line.
So I ask again: why did this individual manage to figure out the language of magic but no one else can?

Even if this "person" was not reading someone else's writings, he still had to come up with the language to record his own spells.
He should have been able to read and write his own "original" magic to pass it on, correct?

If the "original magic" was passed on just by word of mouth (and reading / writing it came later as a convenience, maybe for storage so the knowledge itself would not be lost due to the death of a MU) then again, "read magic" as written is flawed (IMO) because you would not actually need to write it down AT ALL to pass on spells. No real need to keep them in a spell book.

To me, Read Magic is an unnecessary and contradictory mechanic.

Do it your way. I am not trying to "convert" you to my way of thinking, but as a teacher and someone involved in the Esperanto movement (which gives me some insight into how and why languages came to exist and evolved) my reasoning and logic is sound.
I do not pretend to understand every nuance of "why" a bard can read magic. In the context of a fantasy game, I am not EGG or even one of the Trolls, so I do not pretend to understand "why" they made the decisions they did either.
Perhaps you were there and you worked out some details with them that I am not privy to, but you have not yet presented that information in any sort of cohesive, rational, logical argument.

For the record, it takes more than just experience to teach something. Just because you think you have learned how to do something does not mean that you learned how to do it well/correctly or that you are qualified to teach it. I am speaking as an authority on the subject here. My job is to teach other instructors. Practice does NOT make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect.
The ability to perform a task and the capacity to teach that ability to others are 2 different things. People learn differently, so the way you learned and understand something may be totally incompatible with another person's way of thinking, no matter how good you are at the task. Teaching takes far more that just being able to do something well.

I am far more interested in fitting the ability in a logical manner which is simple and in a context that fits my campaign than I am in debating this.
I started this thread for ideas, opinions and feedback which I have received and for which I am grateful.

Thank you everyone.

kajukenbo wrote:Your assertion therefore, is that the first MU invented the entire language of arcane magic and that it has been passed down from there in a fortunately, unbroken line.

No. If it were a stable codified language, you wouldn't require Read Magic. Do you know WHY that spell is required to read others spell books and the like?

Arduin wrote:No. If it were a stable codified language, you wouldn't require Read Magic. Do you know WHY that spell is required to read others spell books and the like?

No, are you implying that you do? Because it is not presented with any clarity in the PHB.

Languages evolve and mutate. That is a given. Latin was a stable and codified language but look where we are now.
There is no logical reason that a rogue has a chance to "translate magic" while a scribe, historian or clerk does not.
But if magic is somehow inherent, the ability to "translate" it does not automatically convey the ability to cast spells.

Furthermore, if a MU has insight enough to CAST a spell then they should have the capability to translate one given time and effort.
I do not like the idea of "read magic" being a spell that must be "taught" somehow. It is a contradiction.
Again, this had to be taught in an unbroken line from the first MU to now.
It also means that there is no chance of spontaneous magic-users and that does not fit into my idea of high fantasy.

[ Why did the first MU manage to figure out the language of magic, or magic itself without help but no one else can? ]
That question still has not been answered.

I'm done debating this and I tire of the same circular argument you present.
Thank you for your interest but I do not see any logic in your assertion.

If anyone has any DIFFERENT points of view on this or is willing to fill in the missing gaps then I am wiling to further the discussion.

kajukenbo wrote:

Arduin wrote:No. If it were a stable codified language, you wouldn't require Read Magic. Do you know WHY that spell is required to read others spell books and the like?

No, are you implying that you do? Because it is not presented with any clarity in the PHB.

Yes I do. Same model as was used in 3rd Ed, I believe it was. That is why a Bard can decipher while an MU can't...
Page 51.

Arduin wrote: Yes I do. Same model as was used in 3rd Ed, I believe it was. That is why a Bard can decipher while an MU can't...
Page 51.

I do not know what you mean by "3rd Ed", unless that is 3e from WoTC - which I do not have.

I have read the section on magic in the PHB (4th printing) several times and I do not recall anything that meshed with your claim.
I also studied the sections on "Decipher Script" for rogue and bard, very carefully, multiple times.
However, I will read the C&C PHB (4th printing) p51 again tonight.
I cannot imagine it filling in the holes in your assertion now when it failed to do so previously but I will give you the benefit of the doubt until I can study it some more.

That being said, you still have not addressed the rest of my questions or the root of the problem.
You are cherry-picking parts of the discussion without dealing with what I see as the overall flaw in the mechanic.
[ How did the First MU learn arcane magic? ] You keep ignoring that no matter how many times I bring it up.

It seems as if you are determined to argue the point from a Rules Lawyer point of view and it feels like you are try to convert me.
This is not religion. Besides, I'm an evolution, science and reason kind of guy.

I have already said I do not like the implications or mechanic of "read magic" and that I plan to make some changes for my campaign, as is my right.

After you reread the paragraph on page 51, here is the excerpt from 3.5 Edition:
N.B. 3.X had the Spellcraft skill that cold be substituted (no guaranteed success) in place of Read Magic for this action.

"ARCANE MAGICAL WRITINGS
To record an arcane spell in written form, a character uses complex
notation that describes the magical forces involved in the spell. The
notation constitutes a universal arcane language that wizards have
discovered, not invented. The writer uses the same system no matter
what her native language or culture. However, each character uses
the system in her own way. Another person’s magical writing
remains incomprehensible to even the most powerful wizard until
she takes time to study and decipher it.
To decipher an arcane magical writing (such as a single spell in
written form in another’s spellbook or on a scroll), a character must
make a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + the spell’s level). ... If the
person who created the magical writing is on hand to help the reader,
success is also automatic."

Arduin wrote:After you reread the paragraph on page 51, here is the excerpt from 3.5 Edition:
N.B. 3.X had the Spellcraft skill that cold be substituted (no guaranteed success) in place of Read Magic for this action.

"ARCANE MAGICAL WRITINGS
To record an arcane spell in written form, a character uses complex
notation that describes the magical forces involved in the spell. The
notation constitutes a universal arcane language that wizards have
discovered, not invented. The writer uses the same system no matter
what her native language or culture. However, each character uses
the system in her own way. Another person’s magical writing
remains incomprehensible to even the most powerful wizard until
she takes time to study and decipher it.
To decipher an arcane magical writing (such as a single spell in
written form in another’s spellbook or on a scroll), a character must
make a Spellcraft check (DC 20 + the spell’s level). ... If the
person who created the magical writing is on hand to help the reader,
success is also automatic."

I do not care what the WoTC books say -if I wanted to play WoTC games then I would not be on a C&C forum- but this "spellcraft" stuff looks a lot like my "Comprehend Magic" idea.
This seems to back my methodology more than yours.

kajukenbo wrote:I do not care what the WoTC books say -if I wanted to play WoTC games then I would not be on a C&C forum- but this "spellcraft" stuff looks a lot like my "Comprehend Magic" idea.
This seems to back my methodology more than yours.

Um, I posted it so you could see the rule set where the C&C description/idea originated from and, its full manifestation so as to better understand. Chill, no one is trying to force you to play WoTC games.

Arduin wrote: Um, I posted it so you could see the rule set where the C&C description/idea originated from and, its full manifestation so as to better understand. Chill, no one is trying to force you to play WoTC games.

I never said you were trying to force me to play WoTC games. I said I do not care what the WoTC rule books say.
However, this does not seem to match what "serleran" said earlier:

"Rising Knight, as I recall, was released before the full C&C rules had been decided upon, back when we were still arguing whether the reading of magic would be an innate class ability for wizards (illusionist as a class was also in debate) or if it would be a spell, and if a spell, of what level -- to be more like the inspired source or to follow the OGL paradigm."

I get the impression that I am better served by his knowledge of C&C history than with yours.

Anyway this is ridiculous and pointless. I am done discussing this topic with you.
Thank you again for your interest.

kajukenbo wrote:

Arduin wrote: Um, I posted it so you could see the rule set where the C&C description/idea originated from and, its full manifestation so as to better understand. Chill, no one is trying to force you to play WoTC games.

I never said you were trying to force me to play WoTC games. I said I do not care what the WoTC rule books say.
However, this does not seem to match what "serleran" said earlier and I get the impression that I am better served by his knowledge of C&C history than with yours.

Anyway this is ridiculous and pointless. I am done discussing this topic with you.

I agree it is ridiculous discussing with you.

I like the Read Magic spell as a cantrip more than a 1st level spell. It made sense as a 1st level spell in the days before cantrips, but since the advent of cantrips, it made sense more as a 0-level spell, being the first spell that was learned.

Why is something like read magic needed? Well simply, while there is a constant to much of the "language" of magic, there are nuances to it as well. Each wizard will ultimately have their own flair on the way they craft their spells, thus causing other wizards to have issues in understanding their works. Given time they can do it, or with a spell they can do it immediately, thus...

An alternative is to allow it to remain a spell of either cantrip or 1st level, and while the spell duration lasts, you can read (even possibly study) from another wizards spell book, or read and bring into effect a scroll that was found; however, once the duration is over the spell is just as confusing as before and cannot be used. If not using the spell, use the system you outlined to attempt to read the spell from the foreign source. I don't have my books with me, so my numbers here may be high, use spell research rules as a guide, but I would make the CL 2xSpell Level, if a spell from another caster type but the spell is on both of their spell lists (such as a wizard trying to decipher a Light spell from an illusionists spell book) add 5 to the CL . The character can check each full day of research, with a bonus of +2 for each day beyond the first. Additional bonuses include, using Read Magic +5, having deciphered any spell of a different level from the same source +2, and deciphered any spell of the same level from the same source +4. Once a check has been successful for any given spell (spell book or scroll), that spell formula is clearly understood by the character and they can freely read it at any time. Therefore, given a sufficient amount of time a 1st level wizard will eventually be able to use a scroll with a 9th level spell on it, while a 10th level wizard will still need some time to figure it out, and a 17th level wizard will generally understand it in a day or two.

Great Discussion. To make sure I'm following everyone correctly let me bounce this back off all of you....

Kajukenbo sees some challenges with the way the Read Magic spell and Arcane Magic in general is handle. Primarily this has to do with the apparent contradiction between a non-spell caster such as a Rogue or Bard, who is somehow able to understand magic stuff, but a Wizard or Illusionist - who deals with magic all the time - is unable to without the use of a 1st Level "Read Magic" spell. Considering Kajukenbo's real world background in education and languages, the suspension of belief is further tested, because the RAW in the PHB give no reference to a prime mover or any background about how arcane spell caster ever understood the language in the first place -who taught the first wizard & Illusionist - i.e the chicken and egg. Which leads to the unanswered (as of yet) question: Why did the first MU manage to figure out the language of magic, or magic itself without help but no one else can? and yet here we have non-spellcaster able to do it (i.e. Bards and Rogues).

For reference here is the description of the Rogue, Bard, Wizard & Illusionist Arcane abilities, and of course the Read Magic Spell...

(ROGUE) DECIPHER SCRIPT (Intelligence): This ability allows a rogue to decipher writing in an unfamiliar language, a message written in an incomplete
or archaic form or a message written in code. If the check succeeds, the
character understands the general content of a piece of writing. It takes
2d8 turns to decipher each page of a script. The attempt may be made only
once per writing. A rogue may use this ability to decipher arcane script if a successful check is made at a penalty of -10. This ability may not be used to decipher divine scrolls. (page 14 from the PHB, 3rd Printing)

(BARD) DECIPHER SCRIPT (Intelligence): Bards often need to decipher and interpret legends and secret writings to acquire more knowledge. This
ability allows the bard to decipher writing in an unfamiliar language, a
message written in an incomplete or archaic form or a message written in
code. If the check succeeds, the character understands the general content
of a piece of writing. It takes ten turns to decipher each page of a script.
A decipher script check may be made only once per writing. A bard may
use this ability to decipher and then use an arcane scroll, as a wizard or
illusionist would, if a successful check is made at a penalty of -10. This
ability may not be used to decipher divine scrolls. (page 29 from the PHB, 3rd Printing)

(WIZARD & ILLUSIONISTS) DECIPHERING SPELLS: To decipher spells in another’s spell book or a scroll, a character must first cast read magic on the spell to be deciphered. Once the character successfully casts read magic, the character can learn or attempt to learn a new spell and add it to a spell book. The rules for adding new spells to a spell book depend upon the source of the spell. Even reading spells already known by a character contained in another’s spell book requires the casting of read magic, because no two spells are inscribed alike. Once a wizard deciphers a spell book or scroll, the character does not need to decipher it again to read it at a later time. Deciphering a magical writing allows the reader to identify the spell and gain some idea of its effects although the character must still learn the spell in order to cast it. If the magical writing is a scroll, the wizard can use the scroll. (page 47 in the PHB, 3rd Printing)

Wizards and illusionists learn complex, arcane formulas to harness magic
and give it effect. Their spells are known as arcane spells, and both classes
inscribe them, in their own unique language, in a spell book. Each wizard and
illusionist begins play possessing an arcane tome of spells containing those
spells they know how to prepare and cast. The number of spells of each level
in the book is equal to the number of spells of that level the caster can prepare
at one time (including bonus spells). A wizard’s spell book is typically quite
large in size and thickness, averaging about four pages per spell. New spells
may be learned and added to spell books through gaining a level, by copying
from another spellbook or from scrolls and through research. (page 46 in the PH, 3rd Printing)

USING SCROLLS. Scrolls are spells reduced to a portable form. Not only does a scroll contain the text of a spell, all the necessary components, except verbal, have been magically incorporated into the scroll. Before using a scroll, a character must decipher it by casting read magic. The character can then read the scroll aloud, casting the spell contained on it just as if the character had the spell prepared. The spell’s casting time, range, area of effect, duration and all other details and limitations are no different. A spell contained on a scroll may only be cast once. When a spell is cast from a scroll, the spell disappears or destroys the scroll. There are some limitations on the use of scrolls, of course. A character must be of a class that can cast the type of spells contained on the scroll. For example, a druid cannot cast wizard spells from a scroll. (page 48 in the PHB, 3rd Printing)

READ MAGIC, Level 1 wizard, 1 illusion
Casting Time 1; Range - Personal; Duration -10 min./lvl;
SV - n/a; SR - n/a; Comp - V, S, F

This spell allows the caster to read magical inscriptions. This deciphering does
not normally invoke the magic contained in the writing, although it may do so
in the case of a cursed scroll. Furthermore, once the caster has read the magical inscription, that writing can be read without recourse to the use of read magic. (page 89 in the PHB, 3rd Printing)

FWIW, I think Kajukenbo is onto something here that might have been missed by the Trolls. And I do think Arudin was trying to make a good point as well by mentioning the WOTC. Castles & Crusades is at it's core based off of Dungeons & Dragons 3.5's Standard Reference Document (SRD) and Open Gaming Liscense. So a lot of the langauge that is used in the SRD is found almost verbaitim in C&C. It would not be the first time, that something like this has happened. But more likely than not the Trolls have a reason for having arcane spell caster require the use of Read Magic.

Here is my take on it. So let me build my argument over a couple of posts.

In D&D 3.5, there is a skill called "Decipher Script." In that game, just as in Pathfinder, each player has a large list of skills that they are trainied or untrained in. C&C dispensed with any skill list. Rather, they use SIEGE engine and class abilities. But bear with me...Here is the description from the SRD:

Decipher Script (Int; Trained Only)
You can decipher writing in an unfamiliar language or a message written in an incomplete or archaic form. The base DC is 20 for the simplest messages, 25 for standard texts, and 30 or higher for intricate, exotic, or very old writing.
If the check succeeds, you understand the general content of a piece of writing about one page long (or the equivalent). If the check fails, make a DC 5 Wisdom check to see if you avoid drawing a false conclusion about the text. (Success means that you do not draw a false conclusion; failure means that you do.) Both the Decipher Script check and (if necessary) the Wisdom check are made secretly, so that you can’t tell whether the conclusion you draw is true or false.

Additionally, D&D 3.5 has both Use Magic Device and Spell Craft skills. Again from the SRD

Spellcraft (Int; Trained Only)
Use this skill to identify spells as they are cast or spells already in place. Check: You can identify spells and magic effects. The DCs for Spellcraft checks relating to various tasks are summarized on the table below.

Use Magic Device (Cha; Trained Only)
Use this skill to activate magic Check: You can use this skill to read a spell or to activate a magic item. Use Magic Device lets you use a magic item as if you had the spell ability or class features of another class, as if you were a different race, or as if you were of a different alignment. You make a Use Magic Device check each time you activate a device such as a wand. If you are using the check to emulate an alignment or some other quality in an ongoing manner, you need to make the relevant Use Magic Device check once per hour. You must consciously choose which requirement to emulate. That is, you must know what you are trying to emulate when you make a Use Magic Device check for that purpose. The DCs for various tasks involving Use Magic Device checks are summarized on the table below.

One example given in the SRD is following, which is releveant to our discussion:

Decipher a Written SpellThis usage works just like deciphering a written spell with the Spellcraft skill, except that the DC is 5 points higher. Deciphering a written spell requires 1 minute of concentration.