Post/Author/DateTime	Post
camble 07-21-06, 09:13 PM	In the latest sage advise page 80 dragon magazine issue 346. The sage indicated that when a artificer uses his special ability to create magic items a scroll is what ever type the artificer chooses be that arcane or divine. My understanding has been that scrolls creatied where considered neither and it was made that way to prevent a party from feeding there wizard magical scrolls on the cheap. I never agreed with that ruling but am hesitant to accept this at face vallue. Has something changed with the nature of item creation for artificers? Thanks in advance.
utilitarian 07-21-06, 09:17 PM	As far as I know that's the standard procedure for Artificers. I think there was a discussion I read somewhere about the idea that an Artificer could teach a wizard any spell in existance via scrolls, and the counterpoint was that really all you're getting is convenience since the artiifcer still has to pay to make the scrolls and expend his precious xp reserve.
Seeker95 07-23-06, 05:14 PM	Scrolls have always been specifically arcane or divine. There has been no change for the artificer. S/he must decide whether it is arcane or divine at the time of creation. Hence the answer being either, and not both.
IMarvinTPA 07-24-06, 01:28 PM	I'm not worried about the Artificer teaching the Wizard all the Sor/Wiz spells. I'm worried about the Artificier teaching the Archivist all the spells there are! Artificier: "Oh, you want a scroll of 'Blink (http://www.imarvintpa.com/dndLive/spells.php?ID=3046)'? Let me scribble you up a divine Blink then." Archivist: "Awesome, thank you very much, here's your 375 gold." Blink, despite being an SRD spell and there being so many new domains, etc, has yet to go outside of "Brd 3, Sor/Wiz 3". So there is no such thing as a "divine" blink scroll. Since an Archivist can use any Divine scroll to add to her prayer book, she can use these otherwise impossible to use scrolls to add otherwise impossible to aquire spells. Archivist is Greater/Improved Blink, here I come! IMarv
Merestil Haye 07-24-06, 02:07 PM	I'm not worried about the Artificer teaching the Wizard all the Sor/Wiz spells. I'm worried about the Artificier teaching the Archivist all the spells there are! Artificier: "Oh, you want a scroll of 'Blink (http://www.imarvintpa.com/dndLive/spells.php?ID=3046)'? Let me scribble you up a divine Blink then." Archivist: "Awesome, thank you very much, here's your 375 gold." Blink, despite being an SRD spell and there being so many new domains, etc, has yet to go outside of "Brd 3, Sor/Wiz 3". So there is no such thing as a "divine" blink scroll. Since an Archivist can use any Divine scroll to add to her prayer book, she can use these otherwise impossible to use scrolls to add otherwise impossible to aquire spells. Archivist is Greater/Improved Blink, here I come! IMarvThis is a good point. My first reaction when I saw the thread was to wonder how to maintain the separation of arcane and divine spells. My second was to think there is no circumstance it matters in. I'd forgotten about the archivist because I don't own Heroes of Horror. It might be a reasonable houserule to state that if a spell appears only on the spell lists of divine classes that the Artificer can only produce divine scrolls of that spell, and if it appeaars only on the spell lists of arcane classes that only arcane scrolls can be produced.
Seeker95 07-24-06, 03:25 PM	Although the Archivist can make a divine or arcane spell scroll, the calss cannot create brand new spells without properly researching them. As such, the fears expressed above are no more likely to be met than any other manner of creating new spells for a cleric based on an existing wizard spell (or the reverse). The "archivist decides" aspect of arcane/divine for a spell applies to those spells for which such a distinction is possible. An archivist cannot make a non-bard arcane cure light wounds scroll and more than a cleric or wizard could.
Vegepygmy 07-24-06, 07:17 PM	Scrolls have always been specifically arcane or divine. There has been no change for the artificer.Actually, there has been. The Eberron Campaign Setting errata says: "Magic items created by an artificer are considered neither arcane nor divine." Now, I don't have access to the Sage Advice article in question, so I don't know how he arrived at his conclusion, but it certainly seems to be wrong.
Milo HoBo 07-24-06, 08:28 PM	Vegepygmy, I know your right, but what ever is most recent is 'official'. Unfortunately, even after the erreta fixed this problem, sage has had the last word. Unless he comes back and corrects this, it is how it is, ignore it or house-rule it back to its original erreta.
camble 07-24-06, 09:39 PM	IMHO I don't beleive that the sage is a official source for errata's. Generally a good guide but not what I would consider the last word on any DnD ruling. I was simply wondering if something had changed to what I believed to be the most current ruling on this paticular item creation.
Seeker95 07-24-06, 10:27 PM	Although a scroll is a "magic item", its very nature is arcane or divine. A scroll explicitly is a spell, and spells in D&D are either arcane or divine. If an archivist made scrolls that are neither arcane nor divine, nobody would be able to use them. As for the Sage comments being "the last word" -- they are as much the last word as anything else not printed in a sourcebooks. For the past three years, everything the Sage says in his Dragon column have entered the FAQ. If you don't take the Sage ruling as official, but do take the FAQ, wait a month, and it will be there too. If you don't take the FAQ as official, then it doesn't matter anyway.
Edymnion 07-24-06, 11:31 PM	Scrolls have always been specifically arcane or divine. There has been no change for the artificer.Not true, the current eratta for Artificer scrolls is that they are neither arcane nor divine, and can only be activated with a UMD check.
camble 07-24-06, 11:31 PM	Haven't seen the FAQ change yet so I guess I will wait a few months :rolleyes: Although a scroll is a "magic item", its very nature is arcane or divine. A scroll explicitly is a spell, and spells in D&D are either arcane or divine. If an archivist made scrolls that are neither arcane nor divine, nobody would be able to use them. Have you played the eberron game seeker and are you familiar with the artificer class? The class has a special ability to create any type of magical item as long as they have the proper creation feat. When the class was made it could make scrolls of any spell and they could choose from the spell list it was from to make arcane or divine versions. The errata that I was refering to changed that and indicated that when making a scroll, the scroll was neither arcane or divine and the use magic device skill was needed to make use of the scroll. The ruling made by the sage completely runs against the grain of that errata. I am sorry if I am coming over as beligerent it is not my intent but your declaration of scrolls most be either divine or arcane lead me to believe you where not aware of the background of my question. I would like to add that I never agreed with the ruling because it creates rather stupid logic issues in the game itself since artificers are the magic item makers of the world and with this ruling a caster looking for a scroll would gain nothing by buying it from a artificer shop keeper and as you said a scroll should have either a arcane or divine stamp.
runestar 07-24-06, 11:42 PM	It doesn't really matter, you still can't learn a spell from a scroll if the spell is not on your spell list. Thus, a wizard with access to an scroll of arcane cure light wounds can't scribe the spell into his spell book, since he does not have cure light wounds on his spell list. Even if the artificer chooses to scribe an arcane scroll of heal, the wizard still can't add it to his spell book. The cleric can't use it since it is an arcane scroll, not a divine one. It's only good for the rogue to UMD. ;)
camble 07-24-06, 11:56 PM	Yes I know the problem as it was explained to me and I mentioned it before in my earlier post is that a artificer could feed the groups wizard spells at a reduced cost allowing access to more spells and any specific spell they could want. I'm sorry if you got the impression that the artificer could mix and match spells for diferent classes. They have to follow the spell lists like anyone else but they can pick and choose the spell list they use.
runestar 07-24-06, 11:59 PM	I thought that was the intent behind the artificer class in the first place? To be the party's magic K-mart? You should have been prepared for a massive influx of cheap magic items for the PCs the moment you allowed it. :D
Seeker95 07-25-06, 08:19 AM	The errata addresses magic items. And while a scroll is a magic item, the scroll is also a unique exception, in that there is no such thing as a spell that is neither arcane nor divine. The errata creates a legitimacy break-down. Using UMD to use a scroll involves emulating a class. What class are you emulating to cast a not-arcane and not-divine scroll? Those are the two types of spells in the world (until the next supplement creates a "let's ignore the game rules" class.) *Nobody* could use an artificer scroll, even with UMD, since the method of using UMD does not allow it. The Sage may indeed be ignoring the errata. But it is also possible that the Sage answer addresses the incongruity of the errata as it applies to scrolls.
MarkB 07-25-06, 10:06 AM	The errata addresses magic items. And while a scroll is a magic item, the scroll is also a unique exception, in that there is no such thing as a spell that is neither arcane nor divine. The errata creates a legitimacy break-down. Using UMD to use a scroll involves emulating a class. What class are you emulating to cast a not-arcane and not-divine scroll? Those are the two types of spells in the world (until the next supplement creates a "let's ignore the game rules" class.) *Nobody* could use an artificer scroll, even with UMD, since the method of using UMD does not allow it. The Sage may indeed be ignoring the errata. But it is also possible that the Sage answer addresses the incongruity of the errata as it applies to scrolls. Seeker, scrolls are the only magic items which even can be arcane or divine. So what else, exactly, do you think the errata on artificers is addressing if not scrolls? That errata item was introduced specifically in response to people pointing out that artificers could essentially allow wizards to learn any spell on their class list, no matter how obscure.
Seeker95 07-25-06, 11:12 AM	That errata item was introduced specifically in response to people pointing out that artificers could essentially allow wizards to learn any spell on their class list, no matter how obscure.The answer turns artificer scroll crafting from too useful to useless. If a scroll is neither arcane nor divine, nobody can use it. So while your statements may be accurate with regard to the intentions of the errata creator, the answer does not provide a solution to the problem of artificer scrolls. It merely substitutes a different problem. The Sage ruling may contradict the errata, but at least restores the utility of the class feature. That it is "too useful" is more a reflection of the balance issues regarding the artificer.
Cruel 07-25-06, 12:01 PM	I too gave a hardy :confused: "HuH??? :confused: are they on <illegal substance of preference> when i read the column. Artificers Scrolls could previously ONLY be used with a UMD check. The purpose of this was generally accepted to be so the Artificer simply couldn't pick any obscure spell he wanted and scribe a scroll the wizard could use/learn/enter into his book. Now The Sage Advice contradicts this. I am personally of the opinion that this is a huge blunder and will be corrected or at least clarified in a future issue. Until such time, I am running with the following compromise. Artificers now make Arcane or Divine Spell Completion Items that cannot be scribed into a book or spellshard. While i do see the sage advice as empowering and unnecessary, I can live with the advice provided they cant be scribed into a book for permanant use. <edit>Changed multiple occurences of ruling to sage advice to reflect the unclear, ambigous, conflict generating, not quite official, not quite unofficial status that the faq and the sage occupy in our favorite game system</edit>
Vegepygmy 07-25-06, 02:33 PM	The errata creates a legitimacy break-down. Using UMD to use a scroll involves emulating a class.No, it doesn't. To activate a scroll using UMD, you use the "Use a Scroll" function of UMD, not the "Emulate a Class Feature" function. The "Use a Scroll" function specifically allows you to use a scroll as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. There is no need to emulate a particular class.
Seeker95 07-25-06, 03:00 PM	No, it doesn't. To activate a scroll using UMD, you use the "Use a Scroll" function of UMD, not the "Emulate a Class Feature" functionThanks. This makes the errata more "usable" by far, and I am surprised I had not noticed it before.
camble 07-25-06, 06:00 PM	I thought that was the intent behind the artificer class in the first place? To be the party's magic K-mart? You should have been prepared for a massive influx of cheap magic items for the PCs the moment you allowed it. :D I never had a problem with the class ability as it originally stood. I was simply wondering if it had changed again.
MarkB 07-25-06, 07:06 PM	The answer turns artificer scroll crafting from too useful to useless. If a scroll is neither arcane nor divine, nobody can use it. Whilst, as you have acknowledged, this isn't entirely true (they are still castable via UMD checks), I do largely agree with the sentiment. Since 1st level artificers can only scribe scrolls as magic items, and their scrolls are basically un-sellable to other spellcasters, it is a mystery how any non-adventuring artificer who makes a profession of crafting and selling items ever makes it to second level. I much prefer the most commonly proposed solution presented prior to the errata, which was to simply rule that artificer scrolls could be made either divine or arcane, and the latter could be cast by wizards, but not scribed into their spellbooks. I still use this houserule in my campaigns.