Two related questions.
Do you need to be a spellcaster to use the effect of a wand? I thought I saw the Wand of Magic Missile statblock in the Starter Set (don't have access at the moment so can't quote) say it can be used by anyone, but in the DM Basic Rules 0.1 that text isn't there. For reference, here's the wands from DMBR:
Wand of Magic Detection
Wand, uncommon
While you hold this wand, you can cast the detect magic spell at will, without using any components.
Wand of Magic Missiles
Wand, uncommon
While you hold this wand, you can use an action to expend 1 to 3 of its 7 charges to cast the magic missile spell without using any components. For 1 charge, you cast the spell as if you used a 1st-level spell slot, and you increase the spell slot level by one for each additional charge you spend.
Short of actual rules content being quoted, the standard answer is, "Expect table variation"...
By RAW, anyone can use a wand or scroll (at least the wands and scrolls listed so far), because there is nothing saying that you have to be able to cast spells to do so. Some people might get hung up on tradition, but that's their problem, and it doesn't change what the rules actually say. If it's errata'd, fine, but until then, I'm running it as written.
Spell Scroll: "If a spell is on your class's spell list..." You do need to be a caster to use a scroll. I have not seen anything regarding Staff or Wand restrictions though.
Sherman wrote:
Hmm... The sentence I'm reading is this, "If the spell is on your class's spell list, you can use an action to read the scroll and cast its spell..." followed by, "Otherwise, the scroll is unintelligble."
My interpretation is you need to have the spell on your spell list to use it, play it as you like of course.
~If the spell written on the scroll appears on your
class’s spell list, and the spell’s level is one that you
can normally cast, you cast the spell successfully.
Otherwise, you must make an Intelligence (Arcana)
check to see if you can successfully cast it. The DC
equals 10 plus the spell’s level. On a failed check,
reading the scroll only consumes its magic with no
other effect
Sherman wrote:
Sherman wrote:
Interesting. I'm reading from the Lost Mine of Phandelver. If the Basic Rules are not agreeing I'll be interested to see if that's an oversight or if they really did decide to change it right after the release. The Starter Set should have been pretty well vetted for any issues before publishing. My guess is oversight on the part of the Basic Rules honestly, Scrolls have always been usable only by those who could already cast the spell and the Thief class, I doubt they'd change a core mechanic like that.
Anyway, that is official Wizards D&D material that is RAW scrolls can only be used by casters. You choose your source until they provide actual errata.
it's in the newly released DM basic rules, so i am thinking it overwrites the starter set as far as how it works. since the DM basic rules just came out either yesterday or today.
but yes you can always play how you want, and if you only own the starter, perhaps they thought it easier for new players to not worry about scrolls. once you graduate to the basic rules, it expands a little to allow anyone to use a scroll with enough knowledge in arcanum to understand how to read it for effect.
Sherman wrote:
The dm basic stuff says it is a work in progress. The starter set has different rules for scrolls. Both cant be right. I would settle on the starter set rules for now, which is supposed to be correct..... but then you would think the dm basic stuff should be more up to date. Dang.q
so far the Thief archtype's Use Magic device to ignore class, race, and level restrictions on magic items is a waste. I was expecting wands/staffs/rods to be "if on spell list" items as well as scrolls.
Zephirum wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
silentdante wrote:
I'd say that since Rogues get an ability to use magic items they normally couldn't, then the answer is no.
We'll find out more when they release the Dungeons Masters Guide in November. Seriously, that is annoying for anyone doing home games, and not official adventures.
From what I read from the playtest and the basic rules, the DC for a spell from a wand/staff/rod is equal to your spellcaster DC, meaning if you don't have a spell DC the spell got a DC of 0?
Then if you read individual staff dexcription they say in the staff description that only class X can use it.
From the Hoard of dragon queen free supplement:
Staff of Fire
Staff, very rare, requires attunement
You must be a bard, sorcerer, warlock, or wizard to
become attuned to this staff.
Sorxores wrote:
I have never seen more deliberate obtuseness. The Basic PDF and DM document are the official rules and they supercede the starter set by virtue of being the latest thing published.
By RAW, as of yesterday, anyone can try to throw a spell from a scroll. Only those who already have the spell on their class list can do it with no chance of failure. If you would prefer your PCs not be able to throw spells from scrolls not intended for them, that is your choice at your table, but RAW has been established.
I know none of you recalcitrant buzzards really need to be told this because trolls gotta troll, but come on people!!
eleran wrote:
I think it rather makes sense that an intelligent fighter trained in arcana would have a decent chance to cast a spell from a scroll.
Sorxores wrote:
eleran wrote:
right... but if you are using a work in progress rules, wouldnt it be common sense to figure the rules they started with when creating rules in progress, was the finished rules?
they arent making 2 games, it's all the same ruleset, the starter set was finalized 2+ months ago to account for printing shipping etc. now they have taken the rules that is based on and released official basic rules for you. one being in progress, evolving, or working in progress does not mean it;s lesser or it's starting over from some other idea, it takes the rules from the starter set and the books, and updates them to the newest set of rules to use.
silentdante wrote:
Thanks everybody for your input. It's clear to me that not everybody's interpretation of this is going to be clear. As written, if interpreted as if it were carefully stated logically, anyone can attempt to cast from a scroll. However, that feels a little off to me, because that's different from both prior editions (at least 3e that I'm familiar with), and from the recently published Starter Set. I feel it may just be unfortunate wording, possibly an attempt by an editor to avoid complicated run-on sentences.
Again, for reference:
If the spell written on the scroll appears on your class’s spell list, and the spell’s level is one that you can normally cast, you cast the spell successfully. Otherwise, (...)
Hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I have been scouring my 5e PHB and I simply cannot find a single entry on wands or scrolls.
You need to have the spell on your class list. The "Otherwise" refers to spells that are at a level above which you can cast. I do agree, however, that the wording is terrible.
pedro2112 wrote:
eleran wrote:
Dane_McArdy wrote:
I agree as written it seems like anyone can cast a spell from a spell scroll by making an Intelligence (Arcana) check.
The intent i'm sure is that you have the spellcasting feature and you're able to cast spell already, but its not saying so.
Personally I don't have a problem with non-spellcasters using scrolls assuming that they are a limited and valuable resource like potions. Now if the party mage starts making scrolls of fireball and hands them out to commoners ... hmmm ... evil spell caster + scrolls of polymorph + kids being told it's just a fun game = an interesting adventure!
Dane_McArdy wrote:
Plaguescarred wrote:
Dane_McArdy wrote:
Also, here is a picture of the actual text. Reading this, it's pretty clear. If the spell isn't one that you can cast, it's unintelligible.
Dane_McArdy wrote:
Wait.
I proved something.
On the internet?
On the D&D forums?
Wonders of wonders.
Plaguescarred wrote:
Polaris wrote:
Dane_McArdy wrote:
I found them and downloaded them.
I'm just going to put this out there.This is just so people can play without waiting 2 months for the rest of the books.
These are also free rules meant to help get people into the game.
When the actual DM's guide is out, then well see what it says. There's nothing saying those rules put out a few days ago, replace anything previously put out. It's not being called erratta as far as I can tell
But again, the rules of English still apply. You have one paragraph. The subject of the paragraph is someone that has the spell on thier class list of spells. Not just ANYONE using a scroll.
Dane_McArdy wrote:
Polaris wrote:
Polaris wrote:
Dane_McArdy wrote:
There is no OR. There is Otherwise. Otherwise and Or are not interchangable and give the same effect.
You've just mixed two subjects, when you agreed there is only one.
It comes down to this.
If a person wants to read it to mean anyone can use a scroll by making a DC Arcana check, then that's what you've decided.
But that's not what the rules are saying.
As for mixing the Basic Rules with the PHB. You can, but that seems less then optimal since the Basic rules is clearly different than the PHB.
I think I'll be using the Starter Set description until I see anything that is:
a) More obviously contrary to this description. + b) Worded at least as concisely.
I found the terms "magical words" and "mystical cipher" in the passage helped with my decision. I don't think just anybody without prior knowledge and/or experience can expect to sit down and crack a "5th level" cipher on the fly. lol
WibbleNZ wrote:
mycroftb wrote:
TheZigZagist wrote:
Overpromises wrote:
silentdante wrote:
So basically the yay group believes that a 1st level Barbarian with 10 Int should have a 10% chance of successfully casting a Meteor Swarm or a Time Stop in one action? I'm curious how well the rogue's use magic ability holds up compared to that?
Dane_McArdy wrote:
TheZigZagist wrote:
WibbleNZ wrote:
TheZigZagist wrote:
TheZigZagist wrote:
silentdante wrote:
The rules are completely contradictory. One camp believes Printed Material is correct, and one that Online Material is correct. Online material is more current, but has big red warnings on every other page or so saying it's a work in progress. Pick a rule until there is clarification from someone in charge, and then pick your rules anyway. It's an RPG, not a manual on rocketry. Really isn't much point in discussing this one.
!I tweeted mearls for guidance but no reply, alas.
I say most recent rule is correct, printed or not. One design goal was a living ruleset that can be updated long after printing. And the DM rules are not unclear grammatically, they have removed the clause that you cannot use the scroll if the spell isn't on your list, they wouldn't have removed that text if they meant to keep that rule. Couldn't be clearer to me.
TheZigZagist wrote:
Where it gets weird for me is that by the same logic a 1st level noncaster with a 3 Int has a 30% chance to use 1st level spell scrolls, up to 10% chance for 4th even though they probably shouldn't even be able to read let alone decode magical ciphers in 6 seconds? I mean since the second paragraph clearly states they only fail to read it on a missed DC and all. They left the port wide open, so hack away I guess fellas.
TheZigZagist wrote:
Overpromises wrote:
SilentSin wrote:
eleran wrote:
Here's another point to consider.
The Spell Scroll rule in the Basic DM guide says you have to make an Intelligence (arcana) check. That penalizes any class that uses Wisdom or Charisma for their spell casting ability.
So if you find a scroll with a spell on your list, of a higher level, you have to roll against the DC using just your Intelligence bonus.
Unless you some how managed to get the Arcana skill and can add your proficency bonus to the roll as well.
And under the Starter Kit rules, that's not happening. You get to use your spell casting ability for the roll.
Which rule do you think you are going to see in the DMs guide? One that is more balanced to all spell casters, or one that favors only intelligence based spell casters?
It's pretty clear this time around that they wouldn't want someone to have to take a skill like Arcana just to be able to use scrolls of a higher level or class, nor would they only favor Intelligence based casters for using scrolls over Wisdom or Charisma.
Also, in the Basic DM's guide, there is a call out saying:
Work in Progress!
This information from the Dungeon Master’s Guide represents
in-progress versions of the rules in that book. Updated
information will appear in future versions of the D&D
basic rules
So the rules in the Basic DM guide are NOT the final version, and will change.
So again, I really can't see them making wisdom and charisma based spell casters use intelligence to cast higher level spells from scrolls that are on their list.
We either arrive at:
- Only folks who can cast wizard spells can use a wizard scroll; I'm ok ditching this one at my table, it's just not fun.
- Only folks who can cast spells can cast a spell off of a scroll; I'm not too opposed to this. It's not as open as the "anyone can" option, but I'd want to make the anyone can option more limiting or challenging. Mechanics like limitations due to casting statistic or disadvantage on the cast seem to fit best/easiest into the system.
- Anyone can attempt to use a scroll, because a scroll is a magic item which has been given a keyword to unlock it, much like any other gated magic. If someone can successfully read the keyword, the magic is released. Now from here, you could obviously decide whether you wanted the release to be uncontrollable/random if the person wasnt used to magic, and use more wild magicky stuff. Or you could have the magic flood their minds for an instant (it IS magic after all) and determine their intents for the scroll's magic.
- Lastly, playing into the first two: can you cast a scroll of a higher level spell than you can cast now? I say yes, because that;s more fun, but it should be challenging and have consequences for failure.
The only real reason to restrict it is in a low magic campaign, or if you believe whats in a spell book is the same as what;s on a scroll (I don't, see magic item scroll explanation). I also feel differently about Rituals, and so does the game because you're a feat away from being able to ritual cast numerous spells.
Their list of spells which can ritualized is also smallish compared to what I would prefer; essentially, if it's not something which is immediately usable in combat, it's probably a ritual. I'm a little torn on spells like Clone, which is NOT a ritual spell, but completely seems like it should be on one hand, with the components for ritual versions possibly expanding on those within the book or just upping the ante there to be adventures unto themselves.
House Rule:
(If you cannot normally cast spells, maybe as the first line, to note that this restriction doesnt apply to someone with spell knowledge), your casting stat - 10 must be equal to or greater than the level of the spell on the scroll for you to have a chance to comprehend the writing. Otherwise, it's unintelligible.
After all, the only casters who naturally incorporate reading into the verbiage of their spells are the wizard and the tome warlock. The divine folks can be hand waved away from even having their spells available on scrolls (pen the words of a God? are you mad? Oh, hello Cyric). The wizards are the obvious example, as their entire lore revolves around study, copying spells, and reading. If anything, a campaign that only dropped wizard spells on scrolls would be perfectly acceptable. Anyways, happy gaming.
Dane_McArdy wrote:
Irithil wrote:
In AD&D, anyone could use a wand. At least, that's how the Balder's Gate computer game handled it (I never played AD&D rules except for the Black Isle/BioWare games)
In 3rd edition, anyone could try to use a scroll if they put even one point into Use Magic Device. For this purpose it seems Use Magic Device skill got rolled into Arcana, and the 'Emulate Class, Race, or Alignment' options got rolled into the Thief Rogue's Use Magic Device ability.
Seems pretty straight forward to me - in the spirit of 'taking the best from all editions of D&D'
shivafang wrote:
Irithil wrote:
There is no jump, swim or climb skill, it got rolled into athletics. There is no search skill, it got rolled into perception. There is no Disable Device skill, that got rolled into a completely new mechanic of Tool Proficiencies.
Skills get rolled and combined all over the place, and it's clear from the wording in the DM Basic Rules that the one of the effects of Use Magic Device (anyone can use scrolls with a check) got rolled into Arcana.
Since you're still hung up on the word 'otherwise', here is the definition "in circumstances different from those present or considered; or else."
Having the spell on your class list and being a high enough level has already been presented and considered. Thus, the procedure after "Otherwise," happens if the spell is not on your class list or you do not have a high enough level.
It seems you are 'stuck' on something that doesn't match the basic understanding of the English language because it is what you want to believe is true. Go ahead and rule that at your table when DMming, but it is quite clear from the DM Basic Rules that anyone can make the check. We'll have to wait until the full DMG comes out to see if the text matches the DM Basic Rules or the Lost Mines of Pendelver rules - though given that the Basic Rules matched the PHB nearly perfectly, I'm pretty sure the DMG will match the DM Basic Rules.
As for the jab about THAC0 - the key words in what I wrote were "Best of", not "Worst of".
shivafang wrote:
And you know, when the DM's guide comes out, we will know for sure what WoTC intends for scroll usage.
So at this point everyone has two versions of the rule, and choose which one they want to use.
One is pretty clear, the other is vague.
The Basic Rules are the regular rules. I would say the rules in Lost Mines of Pendelver (a supplement to the rules) are the irregular ones. Again, we'll see which the DMG follows, but again since the PHB was word for word with the Basic Rules, I can pretty much guarentee that the DMG will follow the DM Basic Rules.
The list of options in the skill conditions are not exaustive, they are examples (and pretty shallow ones that that - the Athletics skill says you can use it to jump an unusually long distance but doesn't say what rolls you need for how far). I'm pretty sure the full DMG will have more specifics on how you can use the skills.
Regardless of that, this is a case of specific beats general. Even if I took what you said at face value that Arcana doesn't let you use the scroll - then a caster with a spell on their spell list without a high enough level to do it can't use Arcana to do it either.
So I will again say - rule this at your tables
I think the assumption that the Basic DM rules supersede the rule in the starter set may be an incorrect one. Something printed in the Basic rules is not necessarily errata. Many have referenced the "living ruleset" to support the assumption that the online rule should be used as the ultimate authority. However, I reviewed that article and found the following:
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/living-rule-set
"If a rule is unclear, we can include an update in a FAQ or similar resource. If a number is wrong or a rule is missing a keyword, we can update future printings of the relevant books and compile a list of errata. For changes of this magnitude, we’ll aim to provide annual updates. We’ll make actual rules changes (as opposed to updating a FAQ) only when absolutely necessary. If players and DMs feel they need to replace their books because of these changes, we’ve gone too far."
Emphasis mine. The reason I emphasized that portion of the quote is that if they did change the rule from what is in the Starter, that is a major change that I don't think they would handle by simply dropping the new (less clearly written) rule into the online Basic DM guide (that has the disclaimer of being a work in progress).
It seems to me, what we have here is a situation where it is unclear whether or not the rule found in the Basic document is the "final" rule. My guess is if this is pointed out to WotC they'll get this clarified. Also, it is very important to note that the DM basic rules say very clearly that it is a "work in progress" and that is enough for me to not assume it is errata or replacing the rule in the Starter. The problem though is that the the Basic rules are meant to be standalone rules that can be used without conflicting with the more "advanced" rules in the core books and other supplemental material. So someone who does not have access to the Starter box could reasonably interpret the wording as anyone can attempt to use the scroll. The "work in progress" disclaimer is enough for me to not be too concerned, I'm hopeful they will have it cleared up before the rule goes to print in the DMG.
All of that said, it is in the DM portion of the Basic rules, so someone running the game can decide how they want to implement scroll usage. Of course it would still be beneficial to us all to have it clarified by an official source.
The reason people believe the DM Basic Rules are the more correcet ones is because they were published most recently (two days ago), and it is believed that the Lost Mines of Pendelver are held over from an older version.
In my opinion, since the Player's Handbook was word-for-word the same with the Basic Rules for any content that overlapped - the DM Basic Rules is probably pretty much what is in the Dungeon Master's Guide.
I will grant that it is entirely likely that the scroll rules in the DMG will be written to match those in Lost Mines of Pendelver, but it seems less likely than the alternative.
" If players and DMs feel they need to replace their books because of these changes, we’ve gone too far."
You mean, like when they completely rewrote the stealth rules after publishing the 4e PHB, and then included those rules in the PHB2? That was aggravating. The new stealth rules WERE better, but still. (I know they put the rules in the errata, but it was a completely different set of rules.)
shivafang wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because Personal attacks are a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
Dane_McArdy wrote:
eleran wrote:
I've already had this issue addressed, with a second level fighter who decided in a flurry of dice-rolling that he was rolling an Intelligence (Arcane) check to cast fireball from a scroll the group had found and telling me he beat DC 13 on the roll so he was going to start rolling for the damage. He pointed out his copy of the DM Basic Rules with "It says so right here."
My take on this was that as he'd succeeded in his check, he'd found the writing unintelligible, and that the scroll harnessed arcane energies his fighter did not have any understanding of or training in dealing with or directing. I also noted that players who read the DM Basic Rules or the upcoming DMG are perfectly welcome to interpret the rules on scroll use however they wish to when they are sitting in the DM chair, but when I am sitting in the DM chair, I will adjudicate that rule.
My interpretation is that if the spell is on your class list and of a level you could normally cast, you may cast it successfully. If the spell is on your class list and is of a level you could not normally cast, you may make an Arcana check (using your spell casting ability) to attempt to cast it from the scroll. If it is not on your class list, you may not attempt to cast it.
The player has decided his fighter is going to become an eldritch knight at third level as a result of his failed attempt to use a scroll (he was originally leaning towards champion). I'm all for that, as it's a logical expression of both his desire to be able to use spells with his fighter character and of his character's newfound desire to gain an understanding of arcane magic.
As a note, I think it might be fun to interpret this rule differently for a later campaign, but I don't currently choose to interpret the general rule to allow any commoner off the street to pick up a scroll and cast a spell.
Dane_McArdy wrote:
thewok wrote:
Dane_McArdy wrote:
FYI Jeremy Crawford confirmed on twitter that the Starter Set is the correct version;
@Plaguescarred DMBasic p60 saysspell scroll can be cast by anyone but StarterSet p53 say not anyone, must be on spell list-Which one true?
@JeremyECrawford The Starter Set's version of the spell scroll is on target.
Plaguescarred wrote:
What a difference a week makes. While there's been a somewhat official clarification, I've been rethinking my position on this. Some things occured after discussing how this session turned out with my players, and I've been considering some different goalposts for playstyle.
In the past week, I've decided that some things needed to change to precipitate my continued enjoyment as a DM. It's not as fun for me to DM a game where the players are less active participants and more reactive participants. So I've decided to change up my GMing style and move towards a different approach.
It seems to have brought more of my players out of that reactive shell, and they are enjoying that as much as I am.
Thee's still a little more murderhoboing going on than I'd like bu all in all things are looking better.
So to sum it up, I've begun to allow the Arcana check to use a scroll to cast a spell if the player says their character is reading the scroll. If it is a class spell of a level they can cast, there isn't any roll as there's no chance of failure. If it's a class spell of a higher level than they can cast, then there's the standard roll, DC 10 + spell level. it's not a class spell, then there is a roll with a DC 15 + spell level. If ithey have no class spell list whatsoever, it's a DC 20 + spell level.
I vary the attribute for the roll based upon the attribute used for the class of spell that is on the scroll itself.
One note is that part of what instigated this change in viewpoint was a careful read of the Augury spell, and the warlock player's desire to use it. It does say in the description of the spell that it summons an "otherworldly entity". Archfey are rather otherworldly, I think.
My group has said that sounds fair to them. And now the fighter can use scrolls, which makes him happy with his character. He's still going Arcane Knight, though, so he can start using spells better ;)
(link to Twitter clarification)
Thanks for getting that info, Plaguescarred!
Still feels weird to tie all scrolls to an Arcana check, though. Yes, the Basic Rules's "Intelligence (Arcana) check against DC 10 + spell level" is going to be easier for a wizard than the Starter Set's "Spellcasting ability check against DC 10 + spell level" due to skill proficiency. But what about a first-level cleric trying to cast Lesser Restoration (a second level spell on the cleric list) from a scroll? Hm, maybe this would be one of those cases where a DM could bring in the Skills with Different Abilities Variant:
Variant: Skills with Different Abilities (Player basic rules p 59)Normally, your proficiency in a skill applies only to a specific kind of ability check. Proficiency in Athletics, for example, usually applies to Strength checks. In some situations, though, your proficiency might reasonably apply to a different kind of check. In such cases, the DM might ask for a check using an unusual combination of ability and skill, or you might ask your DM if you can apply a proficiency to a different check. For example, if you have to swim from an offshore island to the mainland, your DM might call for a Constitution check to see if you have the stamina to make it that far. In this case, your DM might allow you to apply your proficiency in Athletics and ask for a Constitution (Athletics) check. So if you’re proficient in Athletics, you apply your proficiency bonus to the Constitution check just as you would normally do for a Strength (Athletics) check. Similarly, when your dwarf fighter uses a display of raw strength to intimidate an enemy, your DM might ask for a Strength (Intimidation) check, even though Intimidation is normally associated with Charisma.
I was right. Thanks Plaguescarred.
mycroftb wrote:
Dane_McArdy wrote: