Post/Author/DateTime	Post
JamesMaissen 09-21-06, 08:16 PM	Alright I have a few questions as to the changes in access to limited spells found via scrolls and spellbooks. 1. If a wizard purchases a spellbook with a limited spell, then copies that spell into his her spellbook, do they need to retain the original spell for 'access' to the limited spell? If so, why don't sorcerers and other casters? 2. Suppose a wizard finds a scroll of a limited spell. This serves as access for him to be able to cast the spell. However to do so he must scribe it into his spellbook, doing so destroys the scroll. Now the wizard doesn't have access to the spell?? Does this seem in any way comical? 3. What is the point of making this change and what does it benefit? Until now one never had to purchase something for access. In fact the opposite was true that purchasing an item did not constitute access. For example if a favor were used to purchase a holy sword the owner and wielder of that sword is (was?) considered to never have seen one for purposes of item creation. Why the deviation and why the limitation on the deviation? Most importantly is that I would like to know the thinking going into this and know what problem (if any) it is solving. It seems ill-advised as it stands and I would like to understand the other thinking about it that mandated this change. -James
Arvagor 09-21-06, 08:35 PM	2. Suppose a wizard finds a scroll of a limited spell. This serves as access for him to be able to cast the spell. However to do so he must scribe it into his spellbook, doing so destroys the scroll. Now the wizard doesn't have access to the spell?? Does this seem in any way comical?No, not really... By purchasing a scroll, you have a written record that you purchased the scroll (the AR where you purchased it) You've scribed it into your spellbook, so you still have the spell in written form Now, as long as you don't decide to destroy your spellbook(s), you retain access to the spell Why does everyone over-think campaign decisions/clarifications like this? :confused:
jhorred 09-21-06, 08:58 PM	No, not really... By purchasing a scroll, you have a written record that you purchased the scroll (the AR where you purchased it) You've scribed it into your spellbook, so you still have the spell in written form Now, as long as you don't decide to destroy your spellbook(s), you retain access to the spell Why does everyone over-think campaign decisions/clarifications like this? :confused: because that's not what the Dispel Confusion says...
WotC_Tulach 09-21-06, 08:59 PM	Alright I have a few questions as to the changes in access to limited spells found via scrolls and spellbooks. 1. If a wizard purchases a spellbook with a limited spell, then copies that spell into his her spellbook, do they need to retain the original spell for 'access' to the limited spell? If so, why don't sorcerers and other casters? No. Once it's in one medium, it can be copied into others. As long as any medium is retained for a wizard, they're OK. 2. Suppose a wizard finds a scroll of a limited spell. This serves as access for him to be able to cast the spell. However to do so he must scribe it into his spellbook, doing so destroys the scroll. Now the wizard doesn't have access to the spell?? Does this seem in any way comical? See answer 1. 3. What is the point of making this change and what does it benefit? Until now one never had to purchase something for access. In fact the opposite was true that purchasing an item did not constitute access. For example if a favor were used to purchase a holy sword the owner and wielder of that sword is (was?) considered to never have seen one for purposes of item creation. Why the deviation and why the limitation on the deviation? There was a lot of confusion as to what constituted access. We often ran into questions like "If I find a scroll of embrace the wild, do I automatically have access to the spell?" Basically, under some interpretations, you'd receive "double" access - access to a magic item, and access to the spell - without spending any gold. This was not the intent. We wanted to clarify that you need to actually purchase the item in question to get access to the spell, so you might have access to a scroll of embrace the wild, but until you actually purchase the scroll, you don't have access to the spell.
JamesMaissen 09-21-06, 10:43 PM	No. Once it's in one medium, it can be copied into others. As long as any medium is retained for a wizard, they're OK. So for example a wizard that copied a limited spell from a spellbook prior to this ruling would retain access to the limited spell? Basically how does this work for PCs who's current access to limited spells were either copied from books on ARs long since past, or even copied from metaorgs when that was available? I assume from what you're saying that 'they're OK' but as this is new (and contrary to other rules) to everyone I just want to make sure. I don't understand how this is different from NOT purchasing the spellbook, but copying the spells from it and then having them in your book. There was a lot of confusion as to what constituted access. We often ran into questions like "If I find a scroll of embrace the wild, do I automatically have access to the spell?" Basically, under some interpretations, you'd receive "double" access - access to a magic item, and access to the spell - without spending any gold. This was not the intent. We wanted to clarify that you need to actually purchase the item in question to get access to the spell, so you might have access to a scroll of embrace the wild, but until you actually purchase the scroll, you don't have access to the spell. So I still don't fully understand, though I think I'm finally seeing where this came about from. It seems a strange way to rule things however. Never before did one need to purchase an item to have access to it. As it stands if I get this correct you're saying it was preferable to have the character purchase the scroll of embrace the wild and then turn around and sell it immediately back to grant access to the spell?? Would it not have been simplier to say that by having access to the scroll (or spellbook) that you had sufficient time to study it and thus have access to it? Much in the same way that by having access to that holy sword you have access to craft holy weapons? The same case of 'double access' is true for crafting access is it not? That would seem to be in keeping with other rules and rulings rather than being something separate. It also would avoid the sillyness I just described of someone selling an item immediately after getting it. (I just have to add as I always think of LG rules in terms of how I would and will have to explain them to new players: You realize how utterly insane it will be to explain to someone new to LG that they automatically sell everything back for half, then need to buy this scroll for full to sell it back for half again so that they could cast the spell? I know that's not a top concern or driving factor in how you make these rulings, but it seems extreme.) Is there something else involved here that this is circumventing or could we just alter this rule to make life much simpler for everyone? Thank you for your prompt reply, -James Maissen
Howie23 09-22-06, 12:44 AM	Alright I have a few questions as to the changes in access to limited spells found via scrolls and spellbooks. Chris, thanks for the prompt response to James' first questions on this. Can you please confirm that this is in reference to limited spells only? In other words, scribing core spells from an NPC book that is found in the mod, but doesn't appear on the AR...that still works without buying the book? Thanks, David
WotC_Tulach 09-22-06, 12:51 AM	Chris, thanks for the prompt response to James' first questions on this. Can you please confirm that this is in reference to limited spells only? In other words, scribing core spells from an NPC book that is found in the mod, but doesn't appear on the AR...that still works without buying the book? Thanks, David Right, all other methods of obtaining access still work. You just need to actually purchase the media in order to gain access to the spells within it.
zigspatty 09-22-06, 12:58 AM	Q: If I find a spell in a spellbook, on a scroll, or in some other written form, do I have access to it? A: If you find a spell in a written item, once you purchase that item, you now have access to the spell. Is this true even for divine casters? If I buy the scroll of a limited spell, then my cleric can cast it, correct? But she can never actually use the scroll because then she'd forget how to cast it or something? Patty
pedr 09-22-06, 02:38 AM	Is this true even for divine casters? If I buy the scroll of a limited spell, then my cleric can cast it, correct? But she can never actually use the scroll because then she'd forget how to cast it or something?Q: I understand now that I can get access to spells from written items. What happens if I lose the item, sell the item, or it is destroyed? A: It depends on the spellcasting character’s class. Wizards and other spellcasters that prepare spells from a spellbook lose access to the spell. Clerics, druids, and other divine casters that prepare from a list do not lose access – once they’ve found and purchased the item, it is considered a known spell for purposes of preparing spells. Sorcerers, bards, and other arcane casters that spontaneously cast spells must have already added the spell to their list of spells known in order to continue to use the spell; otherwise, they lose access, and cannot add the spell unless they find access again.So once a cleric buys a scroll of a limited clerical spell they can cast it from that point on without consuming the scroll. They could then sell the scroll or cast from it without losing access. A sorcerer or favoured soul would have to keep the scroll until they gain a level and choose that spell as one of their known spells. Then they could sell the scroll or cast from it. A wizard has to scribe the scroll into their spellbook to be able to prepare it, which consumes the scroll.
awroe 09-22-06, 04:26 AM	I must admit I'm now more confused. Let me see if I have it correctly. As a wizard I can: Purchase a spellbook with a limited access spell in - gives access Copy the spell to my spellbook - I now have a second written item, so both my spellbook and the original give access Sell the original spellbook - I still have access because I have *a* written form, even if not the original written form. Is this the intent? It's not at all clear from the dispel confusion, but it is the only explanation I can think of that fits with all the replies above. EDIT: But if there is a core spell in a spellbook on the AR (or even just in the adventure text) I do not need to purchase it to be able to scribe it into my spellbook, even if I couldn't normally by a scroll of the spell. And a request for mod authors - given this new system should apply to NPCs as well, wouldn't they be likely to make spellbooks just containing their limited spells? :D
Maesto 09-22-06, 04:43 AM	Given that we've got circle members on the line, can I ask this quick question? Do you want wizards who previously scribed spells out of books into their spellbooks without buying the book (which was a legitimate method of obtaining access to limited spells) to do anything special at this point in time? Cheers, Jolyon
chesspiece 09-22-06, 09:11 AM	First, I would like to remind and implore the Circle, Triad, and Authors. The PHB says spellbooks are bought at 50gp / page where each spell level = 1 page. PLEASE use that price on the ARs. I'd estimate that 80% of the books I've seen do not use any pricing standard - typically hosing the PCs. Second, a rules reminder to the Circle and Players of spellcasters. Per the PHB, spellbooks are bought for 1/2 the price (50gp/page). Spellbooks are also sold for 1/2 the price (50 gp/page). This means they're like trade goods or gems. If you need to buy & sell a spellbook, you don't lose money. Unless of course it was priced incorrectly on the AR. Cheers, Steve
RanielK 09-22-06, 10:45 AM	Originally Posted by Dispel Confusion Q: I understand now that I can get access to spells from written items. What happens if I lose the item, sell the item, or it is destroyed? A: It depends on the spellcasting character’s class. Wizards and other spellcasters that prepare spells from a spellbook lose access to the spell. Clerics, druids, and other divine casters that prepare from a list do not lose access – once they’ve found and purchased the item, it is considered a known spell for purposes of preparing spells. Sorcerers, bards, and other arcane casters that spontaneously cast spells must have already added the spell to their list of spells known in order to continue to use the spell; otherwise, they lose access, and cannot add the spell unless they find access again. So, wizards (and all those poor sods who cast as wizards do, i.e. from a spellbook) have to carry around a library of spellbooks, scrolls and other written form items to justify the access they have to their spells? Something else that catches my notice, the word Limited isn't in the dispel confusion. So, can I still copy Core Spells out of such sources without having to buy the whole spellbook or does this DC eliminate every source of spells except the Wizard's level up spells and items on an AR that are purchased? If so, it makes me glad I traded in my Wizard Raniel for my Sorcerer Aoaelbrandir back in Hanging Glacier.
JamesMaissen 09-22-06, 12:08 PM	So once a cleric buys a scroll of a limited clerical spell they can cast it from that point on without consuming the scroll. They could then sell the scroll or cast from it without losing access. Could someone explain why this 'hokey pokey' kinda step is being required? What is gained by doing this strange method over just stating that finding access to such a scroll gives access to the spell in much the same way that finding access to an item gives access for crafting? It just seems silly to have people buying scrolls to turn around and sell them, doesn't it to you? Thanks for the responses, James Maissen
pwilcox 09-22-06, 12:19 PM	So I understand how most of this DC is just a clarification of the access rules - if you find a scroll on an AR, you actually have to buy it to gain access to the spell. Also rather clear about spellbooks found on AR's, that you must buy the book to copy spells at a later date. The only part that's still a little unclear to me: the last mod I played had a spellbook on the AR; it contains 2 limited spells and 5 or so core spells. The LGCS says spells may be copied at the end of an adventure without buying the spellbook. The DC isn't entirely clear; do I now have to purchase the entire book to gain access to these 2 spells, or may I simply copy them and have it noted on my AR? (It would cost about 2000gp extra to learn these spells, if I have to buy the book)
Sieylianna 09-22-06, 12:29 PM	The only part that's still a little unclear to me: the last mod I played had a spellbook on the AR; it contains 2 limited spells and 5 or so core spells. The LGCS says spells may be copied at the end of an adventure without buying the spellbook. The DC isn't entirely clear; do I now have to purchase the entire book to gain access to these 2 spells, or may I simply copy them and have it noted on my AR? (It would cost about 2000gp extra to learn these spells, if I have to buy the book) You must purchase the spellbook to have access to the lmited spells. You could continue to copy the core spells without purchasing it. Ed
Arvagor 09-22-06, 12:59 PM	The only part that's still a little unclear to me: the last mod I played had a spellbook on the AR; it contains 2 limited spells and 5 or so core spells. The LGCS says spells may be copied at the end of an adventure without buying the spellbook.That's not what the LGCS says (entirely); it does say "If a spellbook appears on a cert, adventure cert, or adventure record, and it is purchased, then spells can be copied at a later time." (page 69) If you want the Limited spells, you have to buy it.
pwilcox 09-22-06, 01:15 PM	Ah ok, thanks for the clarification. (Good thing I'm not interested in those spells)
jhorred 09-22-06, 05:58 PM	At the same time, it seems you can buy the book, copy the spells and then sell the book and still have access since you still have the spell in a written form. With the new clarification, I don't see how this really changes how I've been doing my spell books...
WotC_Tulach 09-22-06, 11:37 PM	Given that we've got circle members on the line, can I ask this quick question? Do you want wizards who previously scribed spells out of books into their spellbooks without buying the book (which was a legitimate method of obtaining access to limited spells) to do anything special at this point in time? Cheers, Jolyon Nope. All your old stuff stays as is.
WotC_Tulach 09-22-06, 11:39 PM	At the same time, it seems you can buy the book, copy the spells and then sell the book and still have access since you still have the spell in a written form. With the new clarification, I don't see how this really changes how I've been doing my spell books... It shouldn't. It affects classes other than wizards more than wizards, as many of them were under the assumption that by having access to a written item with the spell, it was the same as having access to the spell, which it isn't.
WotC_Tulach 09-22-06, 11:47 PM	Could someone explain why this 'hokey pokey' kinda step is being required? What is gained by doing this strange method over just stating that finding access to such a scroll gives access to the spell in much the same way that finding access to an item gives access for crafting? It just seems silly to have people buying scrolls to turn around and sell them, doesn't it to you? Thanks for the responses, James Maissen If players want to do that, it's fine. At least there's now a cost associated with getting access to the spell (1/2 the cost of the written item). It also seems silly to find all this treasure, and convert it to gold rather than give the characters magic items they want - but it's the nature of an organized play campaign of this magnitude. The problem was, there were two basic schools of thought on this one - one group thought that providing the written item on an AR gave _no access_ to the spell (except for wizards, who could scribe it and thus circumvent this interpretation) and another group thought that providing the written item on an AR gave access _without purchase_ (which was really unfair to wizard characters, since they needed to purchase the media to scribe the spells). So, this is the ruling that evolved to provide consistency with these items in the campaign. Neither other ruling worked to the satisfaction of everyone, and gave one spellcasting class a distinct advantage over the other. The other problem this solves is length of access when you tie a spell to a magic item. Before, I'd get questions like this: "I just played an adventure that gives access to a scroll of brambles. It says that the scroll is adventure access. How long do I retain access to the spell? For 3 adventures after the adventure I found the scroll, for as long as I have a copy of the scroll, or forever?" Now, this question is simply answered. You purchase it, you have access to the spell.
WotC_Tulach 09-23-06, 12:01 AM	Something else that catches my notice, the word Limited isn't in the dispel confusion. So, can I still copy Core Spells out of such sources without having to buy the whole spellbook or does this DC eliminate every source of spells except the Wizard's level up spells and items on an AR that are purchased? If so, it makes me glad I traded in my Wizard Raniel for my Sorcerer Aoaelbrandir back in Hanging Glacier. This doesn't change the core spell copying provision. You don't need to have the word "limited" in the Dispel Confusion because, at 3rd level, you have core access to all PH spells. Wizards, because of the way in which they learn spells, have special campaign rules on how they grow their spell library beyond their "freebies" they get for leveling up. Access for spells is really only important for limited spells.
zigspatty 09-23-06, 12:30 AM	This doesn't change the core spell copying provision. You don't need to have the word "limited" in the Dispel Confusion because, at 3rd level, you have core access to all PH spells. We also have core access to a lot of Spell Compendium spells. Do I assume correctly that if an AR has a spellbook with some core spells from the SC, my wizard will be able to copy some of them immediately after the mod without buying the spellbook? Patty
JamesMaissen 09-23-06, 01:22 AM	If players want to do that, it's fine. At least there's now a cost associated with getting access to the spell (1/2 the cost of the written item). As the other problems could just as easily been solved without forcing the purchase I'm tabling them as incidental. This is the second time you've mentioned cost. The first was 'getting access for free' earlier. I don't see how gold should be tied here, but this seems to be the motivation for it as best I can tell. Or am I wrong? And while yes there are some rules that are silly in LG, most don't have easy alternatives that are less silly. Talking with others on this it seems a common thing to bring up: 'It's LG- the rules are supposed to be silly' which I think is a HORRID way of thinking and worse as an accepted default. In my mind every rule that doesn't have to be there erodes just a bit of the fun. It disrupts emersion by a little bit more when you decide your character does something different than they would 'because this is LG' or the like. It has to be the greatest impediment to gaining and retaining players. If the ruling were simply 'finding access to a written form of a limited spell grants the character access to the spell from then on' it would accomplish everything you desired with the exception of 'making players use some cash'. Seems a strange way to handle it, but so be it.. it's just one more thing that I'll tell newbies that things don't make sense in LG about... right? Then invariably they'll ask me about non-LG home games. I'm sorry if I'm less than thrilled about this, but I do truely despise random house rules. That's why I hate the 3rd level rule, and why I wish we could keep the rest of them near to a minimum required by the nature of the game. -James Maissen
WotC_Tulach 09-23-06, 10:40 AM	We also have core access to a lot of Spell Compendium spells. Do I assume correctly that if an AR has a spellbook with some core spells from the SC, my wizard will be able to copy some of them immediately after the mod without buying the spellbook? Patty If my memory serves, the LGCS only mentions PH spells for that purpose. Edit: Patty, as I later found (didn't have access to the LGCS at the time), I stand corrected. The LGCS only makes mention of core spells, so it's a little more complicated. See the FAQ entry on page 69 (which A'Talsen quotes below) for information on how this works. The relevant text is here (bold emphasis is mine): "If a spellbook appears on a cert, adventure cert, or adventure record, and it is purchased, then spells can be copied at a later time."
WotC_Tulach 09-23-06, 11:00 AM	I don't see how gold should be tied here, but this seems to be the motivation for it as best I can tell. Or am I wrong? -James Maissen Yes, gold and access are the standards for campaign balance. Benefits generally have a cost associated with them, and in this case, the benefit of having free access to spells without purchase was not optimal. Wizards already had to pay to get the item, and pay for scribing, whereas other classes paid nothing. The easy alternative (letting all classes have access to spells contained within written media) was not very balancing, and it was also a bit confusing (see my previous post discussing length of access). Actually, this system makes more sense than just getting free access through the item (especially if the item wasn't even really encountered in the adventure per se). Now, you have to actually purchase the media to get access to the spell - meaning, you have to have ownership of the item to unearth its secrets. Using the LG purchase model, no one's going to let you study an item that you sold to them to copy the spell off of it. The obvious retort would be "What about the magic item creation system? You get access to items you encounter." Well, in order for the magic item creation system we use in LG to work the way it does, it has to be like that. Otherwise, crafting magic items becomes too costly for practical use. Personally, I would've preferred the much more elegant system that the D&D Campaigns programs use, which simply states that if you are capable of crafting the item, you may purchase it for 3/4 cost. But, it's not something that neither I nor the rest of the Circle is willing to change whole cloth, since players have a lot of investiture in this system.
A'Talsen 09-23-06, 11:34 AM	We also have core access to a lot of Spell Compendium spells. Do I assume correctly that if an AR has a spellbook with some core spells from the SC, my wizard will be able to copy some of them immediately after the mod without buying the spellbook? If my memory serves, the LGCS only mentions PH spells for that purpose. LGCS, pg 69 Q: How do I determine what spells are available to copy into my wizard’s spellbook during an adventure? A: If an NPC doesn't have a spellbook listed in inventory, spells cannot be copied. If an NPC does have a spellbook listed in inventory but the spellbook is not certed, spells can be copied immediately after the adventure only, for the usual costs. Same applies for unattended spellbooks found as treasure. If a spellbook appears on a cert, adventure cert, or adventure record, and it is purchased, then spells can be copied at a later time. Scrolls that are found in an adventure should be "obviously" copyable during the course of the adventure (removing their gold value from the party treasure), but cannot be copied after the adventure unless they are purchased from the AC or AR. --- No mension is made of PHB or even Core spells in the LGCS for the purpose of copying.
WotC_Tulach 09-23-06, 12:28 PM	No mension is made of PHB or even Core spells in the LGCS for the purpose of copying. My memory does not serve me well, but the LGCS quote you used is actually trumped by another FAQ entry in the LGCS (on page 68). Here's the relevant text: Q: Can my wizard copy a non-core spell out of another PC’s spellbook and have it noted in the play notes section on my adventure record? A: No. You must have campaign or regional documentation to have a spell appearing on the limited list. A note in the play notes section of your adventure record does not qualify. This also applies to copying spells from NPCs. You always must have campaign or regional documentation to have anything that is limited. However, core spells are OK (as long as you're 3rd level), so Spell Compendium spells that are core can be copied. I will make sure that the wording of the entry you posted is clarified in the next LGCS.
zigspatty 09-23-06, 01:46 PM	This also applies to copying spells from NPCs. You always must have campaign or regional documentation to have anything that is limited. However, core spells are OK (as long as you're 3rd level), so Spell Compendium spells that are core can be copied. I will make sure that the wording of the entry you posted is clarified in the next LGCS. Thank you for clarifying. To make sure I'm understanding correctly.... In an adventure, we kill Bad Wiz and his Flunky Apprentice. Bad Wiz's rather expensive spellbook appears on the AR with 3 limited spells and a lot of core spells from the SC & PHB. Although Flunky is listed as having a spellbook in the mod, it does not appear on the AR. So.... If my wizard buys the spellbook, he has access to all the spells in it and may either copy them into his spellbook at his leisure (up to his level after any adventure) or try to master the spellbook. This includes the limited spells, ant the usual rules about spell lists and prohibited schools still apply. If my wizard does not buy the spellbook, he may copy some core PHB & SC spells into his spellbook during or immediately after the adventure. Once he leaves the table, his opportunity is gone. He gains no access to the limited spells. If my wizard wishes to copy a spell from Flunky's spellbook, he may only do so during or immediately after the adventure. This spell cannot be a limited spell. If one of the limited spells in Bad Wiz's spellbook also appears on the cleric spell list, then the cleric can also gain access to the spell by buying the spellbook. Is this correct? Patty
JamesMaissen 09-23-06, 08:34 PM	Now, you have to actually purchase the media to get access to the spell - meaning, you have to have ownership of the item to unearth its secrets. Using the LG purchase model, no one's going to let you study an item that you sold to them to copy the spell off of it. But Chris, they DO let PC wizards study the spellbook that the party sold off to copy spells as I understand it. (If it were via a scroll then the scroll would be gone from the party's access.) The piece from the LGCS you quoted in your prior post is only for copying these spells for 'later' and not immediately after the mod. Immediately after the mod the PC wizards can copy a number of spells upto their caster level from such books (or captured spellbooks not on ARs but in module, or even other PC wizards' spellbooks) without purchasing them. This is where it's a little wierd for me. If my PC finds a spellbook with 30 spells in it and he has all but 2 he's unlikely to wish to pay 50gp per spelllevel in the book. He will happily look to copy those 2 new spells into his book at either 100gp per spell level of those two spells, or he's taken the time to craft a Boccob's Book via TUs and gp. Now if one of those two spells is limited while the other core, he is not 'given time to study' one of them, but can freely study the other. This rationalization obviously doesn't fit so well. I can understand as an administrator you want to make sure the campaign has sufficient checks and balances in it. That is laudible. But I'm thinking that this is still off in what it's wishing to accomplish. It, in essence, is double charging wizards rather than spreading out this cost to nonwizards. Most of the limited spell access is by favor as well. For a wizard they still need to pay gold to put these in spellbooks. That's fine as that's the intended. But if the goal is to charge and have PCs expend to get these limited spells then shouldn't a cost be brought here to one and all? If it's to level the playing field for nonwizards then the price should be equal to scribing costs. Anyway, thank you very much for all of your replies here (and elsewhere). I find these explanations (even though I seem to disagree with them) much better than the rumors that circulated for months about this new ruling. I just see it as a shame, as had some of those discussions been more in the open I feel that you would be recieving far less questions and confusion now. Thank you again for all your prompt replies, the more the players understand the goals of rules to be the more we can accept them as needed (or atleast have reasonable disagreements with them), James
Qworg 09-26-06, 04:28 AM	What about favors that state something to the effect of: "You have access to study papers! You gain access to X, Y, Z Cleric/Paladin spells and access to A,B,C Wizzy spells" There's no spellbook or scrolls involved. Do you then have to buy a scribed scroll from the papers that you could just study?
Lupo 09-26-06, 08:47 AM	What about favors that state something to the effect of: "You have access to study papers! You gain access to X, Y, Z Cleric/Paladin spells and access to A,B,C Wizzy spells" There's no spellbook or scrolls involved. Do you then have to buy a scribed scroll from the papers that you could just study? a favor is always considered a legal source for spell access :) you don't need to do anything but scribe the spell in your spellbook (for wizzards) :whatsthis, learn to cast it (for sorcerer types) :teach:, or do an intense prayer to your divine power source :bow: to get it. ciao martin m.
Lightblade 09-26-06, 09:35 AM	A few questions: I have a druid in the campaign. Can I buy a spellbook that has spells also castable by druids to gain access to them? ie some of the spells scribed in the spellbook are on both the wiz/sor and drd lists. Also, I can just buy the spellbook on one AR and sell it back for half gold on the next ar, correct?
Lupo 09-26-06, 09:42 AM	A few questions: I have a druid in the campaign. Can I buy a spellbook that has spells also castable by druids to gain access to them? ie some of the spells scribed in the spellbook are on both the wiz/sor and drd lists. Also, I can just buy the spellbook on one AR and sell it back for half gold on the next ar, correct? when spells can come in arcane and divine version, a caster has to find the right version for access. ciao martin m.
zigspatty 09-26-06, 11:17 AM	when spells can come in arcane and divine version, a caster has to find the right version for access. Not according to the latest Dispel Confusion clarification.... Q: I have a bard character. If I find a spellbook that contains sorcerer/wizard spells, and some of them are bard spells as well, does purchasing the spellbook give me access to those spells? A: Yes. Even though you may not be able to cast the spells from the spellbook, as long as the spells are legible to the character, you have access to the spells that appear on that classes’ list. The druid may not be able to activate an arcane scroll or spellbook, but if he can read it (via read magic or spellcraft or whatever) and the spell is on his spell list, then he can cast the spell (provided he buys it and is of an appropriate level). Comments from Circle Guy Chris Tulach (Black Flame Zealot) have indicated that once you've got an AR indicating your character's purchase of the scroll/spellbook/whatnot, it doesn't matter whether or not a divine caster resells, uses, or otherwise loses it later. Sorcerers must keep the spell's source until they add it to their spells known, and wizards must keep it until they've scribed it into their spellbook. Patty
Timlagor 09-26-06, 12:29 PM	That doesn't necessarily follow for Druids. Bards Wizards and Sorcerors cast Arcane Spells; Druids don't. Scrolls do not record the Class of their Scriber but it does record Arcane/Divine. It helps to understand that this was about spell access from scrolls. It would have been better (imo) if you'd just said that learning a limitted spell from a Scroll required concentrated study that consumed the Scroll (but included copying it into a spellbook for Wizards). The buying and reselling of spellbooks is an irritating and unnecessary extra complication that doesn't seem to have been the focus of this change and may not cost the Wizard anything (depending on the AR price of the spellbook).
zigspatty 09-26-06, 01:48 PM	That doesn't necessarily follow for Druids. Bards Wizards and Sorcerors cast Arcane Spells; Druids don't. Scrolls do not record the Class of their Scriber but it does record Arcane/Divine. It helps to understand that this was about spell access from scrolls. Actually, the Druid question specifically mentioned a spellbook. But whether it's an arcane scroll or a wizard spellbook seems to be immaterial to the answer. The Dispel Confusion answer implies that all the character has to do is be able to read the spell and have it on his class' spell list. A: Yes. Even though you may not be able to cast the spells from the spellbook, as long as the spells are legible to the character, you have access to the spells that appear on that classes’ list. . The bard would actually be able to use an arcane scroll without question, so it's not much of a stretch to say he could learn it from a spellbook as well. No mention of arcane vs. divine spell versions is made or clearly implied in the answer. With read magic, pretty much ANY spell could be made "legible", so it should apply to a divine caster as well, broadening the possibilities considerably. Why else mention that you don't have to be able to cast it from the spellbook? Even wizards don't cast from a spellbook, they prepare from a spellbook. I do agree that it's not exactly clear. So please set me straight if you can find something more definitive. Patty
Iswald 10-01-06, 12:07 PM	That doesn't necessarily follow for Druids. Bards Wizards and Sorcerors cast Arcane Spells; Druids don't. Scrolls do not record the Class of their Scriber but it does record Arcane/Divine. It helps to understand that this was about spell access from scrolls. It would have been better (imo) if you'd just said that learning a limitted spell from a Scroll required concentrated study that consumed the Scroll (but included copying it into a spellbook for Wizards). The buying and reselling of spellbooks is an irritating and unnecessary extra complication that doesn't seem to have been the focus of this change and may not cost the Wizard anything (depending on the AR price of the spellbook). In response to my request for clarification, Chris Tulach posted this (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=10164506&postcount=5), which is his opinion of the rules and not a circle ruling. I don't agree with it. However, characters in a home campaign may do spell research (arcane casters could use divine material in their research), something not really allowed in LG. This seems like an ok way around the problem and should allow greater access to limited spells.
Timlagor 10-10-06, 05:57 AM	I believe Complete Divine is clear that Wizards with Domains can learn the spells from Divine Scrolls iff the spells are not ordinarily on the Wizard List.