spell books vs. scrolls

[ThrorII]

I was comparing scrolls and spell books last night, and noticed something I never realized, and dont really understand:

According to the PHB (page 47, deciphering spells, and learning and copying spells) there appears to be no difference between deciphering or learning a spell whether it is from a spell book or scroll.

The PHB goes on to say (page 47, writing spells) that once the spell is deciphered and learned, inscribing it requires one day plus one additional day per spell level. Zero-level spells require one day. A spell takes up 2 pages of the spell book per spell level, except zero-level spells, which take up a single page. A normal spell book has 100 pages. Materials for writing a spell cost 100gp per page of the spell

However, according to M&T (page 87, creating scrolls) that To inscribe a spell on a scroll, the material used must be a specially prepared and cleaned piece of vellum, papyrus or paper. This material costs 100 gp per level of the spell inscribed upon it. Additionally, the ink, chalk or other material needed to write the inscription costs 50 gp per spell, irrespective of level. The inscription process is demanding on those performing the action. To inscribe a spell, 12 hours per level of the spell inscribed must be spent performing the action

My question is, why does it cost MORE and take LONGER to place a spell in a spell book than on a scroll? It costs 400gp and 3 days to inscribe a 2nd level spell in to a spell book, but only 250gp and 2-12 hour days to inscribe the same spell on a scroll. Inscribing a 4th level spell in to a spell book costs 800gp and takes 5 days, while the same spell only costs 450gp and 4-12 hour days.

What is the effective difference between a spell in the spell book and in the scroll? I know that the spell on the scroll has all of the material components and focal components imbued in it, allowing the caster to cast it using only the verbal components (ie: reading it aloud). If the spell written in to the spell book is exactly like a scroll (it has all the components written in to it), shouldnt it be as cheap and easy as the scroll? If the spell in the spell book requires all the focal and material components to cast, shouldnt it be cheaper to inscribe than the scroll spell?

Also, spells in spell books take 2 pages per level of spell, while a 9th level spell can be placed on one scroll. Actually, you can place several 9th level spells on one scroll if you wanted to (M&T, page 87) and had the gps for it.

The only explanation I could come up with, but cannot support with any written rule I know of, is that spells in the spell book do not disappear when they are cast directly from the book. This would make spell books function as permanent scrolls, which while justifying the increased cost, I believe would be seriously unbalancing.

Does anyone have any ideas as to why a spell written in to a spell book would cost more than a spell written on to a scroll?

On a slightly unrelated note, does anyone else allow a caster to cast spells directly from his traveling spell book, as a scroll?

[gideon_thorne]

A scroll is like a one shot magic item. The spell on a scroll is kind of like the trigger to a gun. The spell takes up less space since its simply an enabler to the stored magical energy in the scroll.

With a spell book, traditionally, if one reads a spell out from the spellbook like one would a scroll, its gone. Although I don't believe that is an effect that is clarified in the book.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[Jynx]

This topic really interests me. I read the rules on all this and find it somewhat confusing, so for the most part ignored it - never really needed to use any of it. However the day may come so ...

gideon_thorne wrote:
With a spell book, traditionally, if one reads a spell out from the spellbook like one would a scroll, its gone.

how can one read / study a spell that's in a spell book without erasing it? I mean... you need to read it to study it - right? I understand that the writing on a scroll is but a trigger to an effect built into the parchment it's written on, but that can't be the same for a spell book - can it? I never thought someone could cast a spell directly from a spell book. I've always had them memorize it first (if they had any spells slots still available for the day).

ThrorII wrote:
On a slightly unrelated note, does anyone else allow a caster to cast spells directly from his traveling spell book, as a scroll?

I had someone who asked this once, and I basically told them NO. They needed to take the time to read it and memorize it, then cast it. On a scroll it's probably some short phrase such as 'ALA KAZAMM' and can be executed in a combat round, whereas reading from a huge book with several pages in combat is rather difficult. Heck... even if not in combat but just standing around would take time. Bottom line as far as I know / interpret it, is a spell book is not usable as a scroll in any way.

Am I wrong? Anyone?

[gideon_thorne]

Jynx wrote:
This topic really interests me. I read the rules on all this and find it somewhat confusing, so for the most part ignored it - never really needed to use any of it. However the day may come so ...


how can one read / study a spell that's in a spell book without erasing it? I mean... you need to read it to study it - right? I understand that the writing on a scroll is but a trigger to an effect built into the parchment it's written on, but that can't be the same for a spell book - can it? I never thought someone could cast a spell directly from a spell book. I've always had them memorize it first (if they had any spells slots still available for the day).

When someone reads out (as in out loud), a spell book, which is different from studying it, the spell vanishes.

_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[serleran]

Or, it could just be that the ink used to make a scroll imbues it with magic, whereas the ink used for a book simply makes it legible. You don't need some metaphysical distinction between the two, unless you're allowing a spellbook to be used as a scroll.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

[Treebore]

I allow using a spell book as a scroll. With spell books being so expensive in comparison to scrolls, and once its used its gone until the spell caster finds another version to copy, its only used as a desperate situation kind of usage.

So has rarely happened in any of my games. Twice over 24 years of gaming.

Why do I say it works? Because the "keys" that you find in a scroll are also in the spell book version, just the spell book version has a whole lot more to it, telling you how to hold those keys in your memory until they are released. However you can skip all the extra stuff and go straight to the "keys", activating them, and destroying/erasing that copy of the spell, just exactly like they do when written to a scroll and activated.

Huh?

Spells, when written in their "spell book format" have not only the "keys" of the spell, and these keys are the actual "words/gestures of power" that actually calls forth the spell energy. Then the rest of what is written are guidelines on how to hold this power within your mind, until you repeat those "words/gestures of power" and release the energy upon the world.

Scrolls only have the words/gestures written on them. Since the caster isn't trying to store them to memory, all they have to do is mimic those words and gestures to release the power.

When a spell caster is desperate enough to use a spell from their spell book as a scroll, that is all they are doing, reading through the spell saying the words and performing the gestures. The only difference being is if a spell component is required for the spell, it must be supplied when the spell book is used, the special inks of scrolls integrate the component(s) into them.

Scrolls, in my game, cannot be used as a spell book, though. Due to all the missing script/instructions found in spell book versions. So scrolls are triggered by being read in their entirety. Spell books are triggered when just the key parts are actually invoked.

Now I have had a player who had their spell books work almost exactly as scrolls because he integrated the cost of special scroll inks into his spell book costs and creation.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[anonymous]

The whole idea goes back to 1st ed DMG thinking, where nearly every rule is designed to fleece PCs out of as much money as possible in order to provide them with incentives to keep going in search of monsters so as to kill them and take their stuff. However, the rule is now clearly a "Murphy". No spellcaster would ever possess a spell book, only a collection of scrolls. If spells cannot be cast from books (like scrolls) then there is no logical reason to pay the "magic item" cost of creating what amounts to a normal book.

[dunbruha]

Tenser's Floating Disk wrote:
No spellcaster would ever possess a spell book, only a collection of scrolls. If spells cannot be cast from books (like scrolls) then there is no logical reason to pay the "magic item" cost of creating what amounts to a normal book.

Except if you can't memorize a spell from a scroll, which is how it works in my game.

[Omote]

Which is something that has always been a problem. The section in the PHB regarding writing scrolls, copying to spellbooks, etc needs to be completely rewritten IMHO. It is very confusion and has caused lots of problems in games before. Sinch that writing up PB!

God knows I've suggested it enough.
-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

[ThrorII]

gideon_thorne wrote:
A scroll is like a one shot magic item. The spell on a scroll is kind of like the trigger to a gun. The spell takes up less space since its simply an enabler to the stored magical energy in the scroll.

See, that's where I disagree. According to the PHB, you can copy spells found on scrolls to your spell book. That means that scroll spells are more than just triggers. They have the entire spell available to be copied.

[Jynx]

ThrorII wrote:
See, that's where I disagree. According to the PHB, you can copy spells found on scrolls to your spell book. That means that scroll spells are more than just triggers. They have the entire spell available to be copied.

That got me confused as well. This is how I see it...

A scroll holds a compact version of the spell in it's 'READY STATE' - sort of like a computer ZIP file. It has all the instructions and properties needed to cast or memorize the spell in a compact format - but this one is 'LIVE' and ready to go.

Even though he has read the few words that are written on the scroll - thereby opening the 'ZIP FILE', he has not actually cast it until he wills it to be cast. All he's done is released the energy within the scroll and placed it in his head. As long as he hasn't been disturbed he can then choose to empty the contents of his mind which have all the instructions, gestures, ingredients and even the magical properties, onto a page in his spell book. Now he has a permanent copy that can be used over and over. Once done however, the scroll is used up since it was a readied spell not a stored spell as in the spell book.

I still don't think it's possible to cast directly from a spell book without first memorizing it. The spell book doesn't contain a 'Live' spell, only the instructions to activate it along with a bit of magic that copies itself into the casters head after reading... thereby making it a live spell stored inside his head.

But that then begs the question of why can't an exceptionally smart / gifted caster just permanently memorize his spell book? Well besides the obvious unbalanced game this would create, the fact is that the magical property that got copied from the spell book into his head, is spent when he actually casts the spell, and he can only hold so much energy at a time anyhow.

There... I feel better. I think I'm going to play a caster next...

[CKDad]

One of the few good things out of Roger Zelazny's 2nd Amber series was Merlin's description of a magician's spell preparations. My imperfect recollection of it is something like this: Looking at the spell's structure, the magician would identify a few key points in the casting that can be used to trigger the spell in a hurry - words, gestures, etc. Drawing on the source of his magic, he then casts the spell, leaving out those few bits. This then causes the spell to be "hung" in his memory, requiring only those last few words or gestures to be made to cast the spell. The nature, number and power level of the spells which could be hung depended upon the experience, ability and training of the magician (though Merlin refers to himself as a sorcerer, now that I think of it).

Ever since I came across this, it's been my mental model for how spellcasting in the D&D model works.

BTW, the Amber books are must-read fantasy, though the original series is superior to the second IMHO. Avoid the more recent books done by another author - accept only original Zelazny!
_________________
"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

[anonymous]

You can't explain it logically. It's pure gamism intended to bankrupt the PCs and give them an incentive to kill monsters and take their stuff.

[moriarty777]

Tenser's Floating Disk wrote:
You can't explain it logically. It's pure gamism intended to bankrupt the PCs and give them an incentive to kill monsters and take their stuff.

Is it?

I'm not convinced and some of this stuff can make perfect sense when you think about it.

When you are inscribing a spell into the spell book for the very first time, you will have gone to great lengths to decipher and research the spell. The book will contain all of your findings, your 'keys' or 'cues' to cast the spell and so on. Everything will be there and this can take pages depending on the level of the spell.

A scroll on the other hand won't have the commentary or notes... it will be the bare essentials needed with the item (scroll) being enchanted to carry the part of the spell 'locked in' until it is 'cast' by use of the scroll. This is why a Bard (for instance) can also cast from a scroll. But more importantly, a 9th level spell inscribed on a scroll will not go on for pages like it does for a spell book. If it did, I think it would take several rounds complete the spell. No, I think it's cheaper material-wise simply because fewer amounts of materials are used EVEN if some of the materials in a scroll are of higher quality than a spell book.

At any rate, the lengths make sense and even costs make sense... paper isn't cheap nor is painfully scribing something which is so complex that it needs to be deciphered by another to even understand.

Yes... mechanically... it's set up this way in part for the game. However, I don't necessarily think it is completely arbitrary either.

As to why I don't allow my players to have their characters read spells out of their spell books? They simply aren't designed that way.

That's what I came up with at any rate.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[Jonathan of White Haven]

Tenser's Floating Disk wrote:
You can't explain it logically. It's pure gamism intended to bankrupt the PCs and give them an incentive to kill monsters and take their stuff.

It depends on how minutely you run your game. If you're really into soaking the PCs out of every CP, then by all means make them toe the line and spend, spend, spend. Of course(tm), those are the GMs or CKs who embrace every ounce of Encumbrance, make the players keep track of *all* of their daily expenses and expenditures, have them search out and find all of their spell components (as well as keep and constantly update a list of those being carried), et cetera, et cetera, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. I'm sure there are "detail wonks" out there who revel and live for such absurdity (as I see it.)

I don't. Encumbrance? Unless the party starts trying to carry off every item that isn't nailed down (and prying up those which *are*), I don't bother with it. The same goes for spell components--I simply presume that the PCs have 'em. Same for spell books (both permanent and traveling books.) And note, for detail wonks, those are two completely different types of items. Where is a beginning Wizard going to keep his *permanent* books? I suppose the Mage's Guild offers semi-cheap housing (and secure storage, at a price) as part of the Annual Membership Package...

But I digress. IIRC, a spellcaster has to be at least 6th or 7th level to be able to craft a scroll--kinda like brewing potions. Fine. Unless you or the player want to game this out, one-on-one, such activities are usually done during adventuring downtime--between sessions. If you want to take care of it quickly, have the player assemble (or purchase) the needed components (vellum, special ink, spell materials, und so weiter), roll some dice, and *POOF*, it's done. Lather, rinse, repeat as required. Same same for recording spells in spellbooks (permanent and/or traveling.) I also pre-presume that permanent spellbooks (as well as blank traveling books) are available, at a nominal cost (to be determined by *me*), at the local office of the Mage's Guild. This gets the expense out of the way, up front.

And, heretic that I am, doesn't require the spellcaster to search out and learn new spells. Yep. My Mage's Guild is like the Kroger's, Safeway, Winn-Dixie, Piggly Wiggly, H.E.B., or whatever regional supermarket chain that happens to be in your area. I want to make my game easy for *me* to run. I'm lazy, and it's enough work for me to come up with adventures for my players. Why make it more difficult for myself? If my players have to keep this crap updated, *I* have to remember to remind them to do it.

As for using a spellbook as an emergency scroll, well, this has never come up in my game. If the player wants or needs to do it (though I can't really envisage a Wizard digging his traveling book(s) out of his backpack during melee combat), then I'll let 'em do it. But it had better be a *really big* emergency, and it's going to take several rounds in which to accomplish it. AND the spell is definitely going to burn off the page in the book and be gone. With, perhaps, a couple of other pages going away at the same time...
_________________
"You don't understand, Beaufingle", said Lungwort cryptically. "You ARE dinner." -- M.M. Moamrath

[anonymous]

moriarty777 wrote:
At any rate, the lengths make sense and even costs make sense... paper isn't cheap nor is painfully scribing something which is so complex that it needs to be deciphered by another to even understand.

According to the PHB, even vellum only costs 15gp per page. Ink costs 8gp by the ounce. A quill costs only a silver piece. Unless you assume that each page is using up nearly a pound of ink, the cost doesn't make sense.

[Treebore]

I think its because of what isn't spelled out that is the problem. If you go back to your 1E readings, which is where most of my inspiration comes from, inks are not normal inks. They are rare, even esoteric. They have bodily fluids of any number of creatures, squids, giant squids, trolls, whatever. It may even have powdered gemstones, and who knows what else?

Now the system just says "X" gold per page, but if we really want that price to make sense then it is up to use to write up ink formula with ingredients that make the prices make sense.

Me? I don't want to take the time to figure it out and write it up, and 99.9% of my players will never care if I do, so its assumed that it costs that much, for whatever reason, and I don't waste my time writing up the details.

If anyone has, please share.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Treebore]

If you really want to write up your own spell books here is a good place to get what you will need to get started:
http://www.thethreewisecats.com/kits.html
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[moriarty777]

Tenser's Floating Disk wrote:
According to the PHB, even vellum only costs 15gp per page. Ink costs 8gp by the ounce. A quill costs only a silver piece. Unless you assume that each page is using up nearly a pound of ink, the cost doesn't make sense.

Who says it has to be regular ink? If this is a fantasy world where magic is an everyday thing and mythological beasts of legend populate the landscape... there can be an equal probability for the *need* to use some sort of exotic process to create the ink needed. Same goes for the preparation of material to be used for the books. As for pages, who says it has to be papyrus, paper, or vellum?

Now if you don't like that explanation, the other thing to consider might be the need to specially consecrate the materials for this prior to use. That in itself could be where the expenses go.

Historically speaking for a moment, consider some of the rites found in a variety of the books such as the Greater Key of Solomon, or Agrippa's 'Three Books of Occult Philosophy'. Note careful care on times, prayers, materials, and the purity of such materials. Everything to be used had a criteria that had to be met before it was considered. Timing was also a very important factor in terms of when certain rites could be performed.

This kind of 'logic' could easily be used for the preparation of special materials for the purposes of spell book creation.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[anonymous]

I think we need less spelled out rather than more... there's no reason it has to be "normal" ink, if the player wants it not to be. A spellbook could indeed by written in liquid gold and bound in cloud giant skin, but I don't see that it must be unless the book is to be magical in itself. If the player just wants a plain book, why not?

[CKDad]

Tenser's Floating Disk wrote:
I think we need less spelled out rather than more... there's no reason it has to be "normal" ink, if the player wants it not to be. A spellbook could indeed by written in liquid gold and bound in cloud giant skin, but I don't see that it must be unless the book is to be magical in itself. If the player just wants a plain book, why not?

I think that the point is that the book actually is a type magical object, hence the need for inks composed of rare and exotic substances. That's what I took away from 1E years ago, and probably unconsciously assumed still applied in C&C.
_________________
"I don't wanna be remembered as the guy who died because he underestimated the threat posed by a monkey."

[moriarty777]

CKDad wrote:
I think that the point is that the book actually is a type magical object, hence the need for inks composed of rare and exotic substances. That's what I took away from 1E years ago, and probably unconsciously assumed still applied in C&C.

Exactly -- the spellbook is magical or at least the writing contained within it is. This is implied by the Read Magic spell:

Quote:
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.

Like a scroll, 'Read Magic' needs to be cast the first time you look at it. Just because you are familiar with a 'Magic Missile' spell does not remove the necessity of casting the spell if you find a scroll or a different spell book that contains this spell.

Furthermore, the fact that a scroll can be read 'into' a spellbook as opposed to taking the time needed to copy the spell could be seen as reinforcing this point.

The only difference is a scroll is 'ready to use' and a spell in a spellbook has all the keys necessary to prepare and cast the spell. The only difference is the medium which is storing the spell prior to use. The scroll or the Wizard's mind.

Now... all that being said... consistency is a big thing and if we accept all this we are only left with one significant issue: the Bard. Or more specifically, the Bard's 'Decipher Script' ability.

The Bard can decipher magical script and even use the ability to cast an arcane spell from a scroll. A Wizard can't do this and specifically needs to cast 'Read Magic' before they can even make an attempt. Sure, Bard's take a -10 penalty on the check but still.

Anyone else find that a bit weird?

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[gideon_thorne]

moriarty777 wrote:
Now... all that being said... consistency is a big thing and if we accept all this we are only left with one significant issue: the Bard. Or more specifically, the Bard's 'Decipher Script' ability.

The Bard can decipher magical script and even use the ability to cast an arcane spell from a scroll. A Wizard can't do this and specifically needs to cast 'Read Magic' before they can even make an attempt. Sure, Bard's take a -10 penalty on the check but still.

Anyone else find that a bit weird?

M

I solved this decades back by simply giving the arcane type classes read magic as an innate ability. Same with detect magic really. I thought either was silly to waste on a spell. Pretty much every game group I've played with since thought the same thing.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[moriarty777]

gideon_thorne wrote:
I solved this decades back by simply giving the arcane type classes read magic as an innate ability. Same with detect magic really. I thought either was silly to waste on a spell. Pretty much every game group I've played with since thought the same thing.

I was thinking of a slightly different 'fix' that would give arcane users a similar 'Decipher Arcane Script' ability but they would obviously not get the same sort of penalty with the Challenge Level being the level of the spell. If they fail the check then they're forced to use the spell 'Read Magic'.

It hasn't really come up thus far both this and your suggestions are the easiest ways around it. Well, that end just 'nerfing' the Bard ability!
M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[gideon_thorne]

moriarty777 wrote:
I was thinking of a slightly different 'fix' that would give arcane users a similar 'Decipher Arcane Script' ability but they would obviously not get the same sort of penalty with the Challenge Level being the level of the spell. If they fail the check then they're forced to use the spell 'Read Magic'.

It hasn't really come up thus far both this and your suggestions are the easiest ways around it. Well, that end just 'nerfing' the Bard ability!
M

*smiles* Well, I did something entirely different with the bard, so that's not a real problem with me.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[anonymous]

The idea that spellbooks are magic items and therefore require ink compounded of dragon blood and the powdered eye of a virgin basilisk written on pages made of unicorn foal hide using a pegasus feather quill no longer works. Why not? Because the C&C rules say that proper magic items don't require any of this stuff. It's version conflict. There's no reason for it anymore, but it's been taken from the 1st ed. DMG, whose rules were designed to make everything expensive because the reasoning was that its old style sword-and-sorcery based PCs were out for money. If you can make plain and simple +5 swords, why not plain and simple spellbooks?

[gideon_thorne]

"Quality armour, shields or weapons require the additional of the cost of an expert item. If the spell to be imbued into the item has a material component, add the cost of the component directly into the price of an item"

Page 89 M&T, under the Calculating Magic Item Gold Piece Values table.

*ambles off whistling*
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[moriarty777]

Hell, even in the section of Creating Magic Items starts of by saying that the creating items are expensive. However, given the consistency of your arguments, I'm sure you'll point out that there is no logical reason to require expert quality armor, shields, or weapons to have something like these enchanted. But no matter what the item, the underlying factor that's often brought up is the expensive materials and process.

The only statement in these pages that might appear to be contradictory might be on page 88:

Quote:
Any item can be imbued with magical qualities. A sword can be imbued to conferring a bonus to damage, or a potato can be imbued so that it is always hot. Cost is not an issue unless the character desires the item to be exquisite or impressive. For instance, consider a powerful lord that commissions a wizard to create a powerful magical item for use in battle. Would the lord want a small stick to carry into combat, or a massive gilded lance made of the finest wood? The character decides.

Even then, an 'ordinary' stick for a wand might still have to be properly prepared in a certain way, during a certain specific time of the month, depending on the phase of the moon, or alignment of the planets, etc... and then consecrated in what might be a 'costly' manner. The quality of the object (wood) and purity of the materials is probably still a factor. Maybe the magic wouldn't take in a rotten potato but would in a healthy one?
I'm obviously cool with these ideas and I don't think these rules are necessarily just a money grab mechanic that has its roots in 1st edition. Actually, these could be interesting ways to add more adventures in your campaign. If a Wizard is so bloodly powerful at higher levels, couldn't this be the sort of motivation for him to leave the comfort of his tower? Of course, he could just *pay* a party of adventurers to get the stuff for him. It's all in good fun!

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

[anonymous]

These are all "coulds" and "maybes". Page 88 aside, I'm all in favour of making magic item manufacture difficult and expensive. However, the rules as they stand don't make magic item manufacture compulsorily difficult and expensive in the way they do with spellbooks, so we are left with a "Murphy" that has to be explained away and even have other sections of the rules rebuilt around it. I'm ignoring the spellbook rules; spellbooks are compulsory for wizards and illusionists and don't see anything gained by fining them in what amounts to yet another nerf the for guys in robes and conical hats. I'd much rather the expense and difficulty went into magic item manufacture so as to avoid 3E munchkinism than into the daily meat and drink of being a spellcaster.

[moriarty777]

Tenser's Floating Disk wrote:
These are all "coulds" and "maybes". Page 88 aside, I'm all in favour of making magic item manufacture difficult and expensive. However, the rules as they stand don't make magic item manufacture compulsorily difficult and expensive in the way they do with spellbooks, so we are left with a "Murphy" that has to be explained away and even have other sections of the rules rebuilt around it. I'm ignoring the spellbook rules; spellbooks are compulsory for wizards and illusionists and don't see anything gained by fining them in what amounts to yet another nerf the for guys in robes and conical hats. I'd much rather the expense and difficulty went into magic item manufacture so as to avoid 3E munchkinism than into the daily meat and drink of being a spellcaster.

Then ignore it then. I'll continue to use it because I find these to work just fine.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com