Boccob's Blessed Book and Cost per Page

[ARandomGod]

How is it so different to a single use Tome of Leadership and Influence +5 found during the aspiring sorcerer's career?

The scroll scribed into the spellbook has a lasting impact on the effectiveness of the wizard, much as the Tome has a lasting impact on the effectiveness of the sorcerer. The healing potion doesn't provide any permanent improvement to the fighter; he'd have got the same effect by going to bed for a couple of days.

-Hyp.

OOh. I want to answer that because I do something very similiar.

It's different because in my judgement as a GM, when I stop counting expended items against character wealth, there are a certain amount of expended items that I continue to count. That being, mainly, tomes and other items that have similiar effects. The tome, while no longer there, is clearly not expended... IMO. It's merely no longer transferable.

Sure I count the scribing cost of spells into the spellbook. But I don't count the cost of scrolls that the wizard found and then used.

Now, how do I determine what scolls he found though? I do it differently each time, depending on the character's background. Most often I just arbitrarily decide on a number of spells (and levels) that he gets at 'scribing cost only'.

Of cousre, I also assume that the character is never stupid enough to pay the scroll price when he *could* pay the copy from another spellbook price... even if that is a "GM option" rule... it's also one that makes sense. Why would a seller of spells insist that you but something that cost him more resources to make when you could just as easily buy something that did NOT cost him resources to make? The first one is a profit, sure... but it had initial cost, the second option is all pure profit baybee. They'd have to be sorc's to pass up that deal (Implication: int as a dump stat, additional possibility, no spellbook to begin with). And sorcs rarely waste a feat on scribe scroll.

 

[Glyfair]

One thing I've never really liked is the cost of scribing spells into scrolls. As a DM I want to be able to threaten my player's resources. One of the biggest weaknesses of Wizards is their spellbooks. If I put the Wizards in a situation they need to navigate where they might lose their spellbook, it adds suspense to the game.

In the old days, a wizard would have his main spellbook home and a "travellling spellbook" with key spells with him. Unfortunately, the game as written now means that Wizard characters don't usually have multiple spellbooks. The cost of creating one is just too high.

Because of that, if I threaten the spellbook, I'm pretty much threatening the character. Once a Wizard loses his spellbook he's worthless. He needs to start from scratch finding new spells, scribing them in a new spellbook, etc.

Yes, there are a few options available for things such as "attuning" another wizards spellbook. I don't see these used too often, though.

If I could risk threatening a wizard's spellbook on adventures, then I think the Spell Mastery feat would be used more often. The ability to have a few spells that you can memorize without a spellbook takes on an importance that makes it worthwhile.

 

[Scion]

How is it so different to a single use Tome of Leadership and Influence +5 found during the aspiring sorcerer's career?

The scroll scribed into the spellbook has a lasting impact on the effectiveness of the wizard, much as the Tome has a lasting impact on the effectiveness of the sorcerer. The healing potion doesn't provide any permanent improvement to the fighter; he'd have got the same effect by going to bed for a couple of days.

The scroll has no lasting effect, only the spell 'scribed' does. The scribed spell has its own cost, however it got there in the first place is immaterial.

Those healing potions allowed the fighter type to be able to defeat more opponents in the same day, this is a lasting effect. In essence charging the wizard for the scrolls forever would be the same as charging the fighter type for the healing potions, something that helped to get the final result but has no actual lasting influence.

A high level wizard will have even fewer funds available than you realize to scribe spells into his BBB. Think about it. He will have spent a good portion of his career without the BBB, scribing spells for full cost into his regular spellbook. Once he finally manages to scrape together enough cash to purchase/craft a brand new, blank BBB, he already has a book or three full of spells. So only the spells he acquired AFTER he got the BBB will be at half cost.

This is why a character who has been played since 1st level will always look a lot different from a character created at 20th level. People creating a 20th level character conveniently ignore things like this, and end up with a more effecient character than the one who was leveled up from 1st. Strictly speaking, though, a character created at 20th level should be created one level at a time, as though he were actually being played.

Note that you only count things that you still have against character wealth.

So, you could easily put into your background that you transfered all of your old spells into your BBB (for ease of use) at half price (I believe this is the case) and then destroyed your old book (or it was destroyed for you, it can happen, although it doesnt tend to happen very often in actual game play).

In essence, both characters could wind up looking the same, but it takes metagame knowledge that for some reason having your old spellbook limits your wealth.. so getting rid of your old spellbook actually 'helps' your character, which is complete nonsense looking at it from a real world perspective, but that is how it goes.

We have two characters, one played up from level 1 and one made fresh at level 20 who look exactly the same then, so long as the one that was built up knew to transfer his spells and destroy his old book to be a more effective character.. but then I guess it isnt any different then selling your old equipment in order to be better

 

[Scion]

there is no comparable item like the pearl of power for spontaneous casters.

you mean except for rings of wizardry which tend to help sorcs much more than wizards? (since the sorc has more spell slots to double)

After all, the ring seems to be priced with the sorc in mind rather than the wizard

 

[ARandomGod]

you mean except for rings of wizardry which tend to help sorcs much more than wizards? (since the sorc has more spell slots to double)

After all, the ring seems to be priced with the sorc in mind rather than the wizard

True. Of cousre, even for a sorc those rings are overpriced.

 

[Staffan]

Per the GM, I paid scroll prices. The "access fee" is an option the GM can allow. If your GM allows the PCs to simply copy from other spellbooks, than BBB is perhaps not as necessary. But I paid full scroll price for every spell.

The access fee is about as much an option as the Power Attack feat, IMO. Your DM forcing you to pay through the nose for spells is a fault of the DM, not of the scribing cost rules.

 

[Thanee]

you mean except for rings of wizardry which tend to help sorcs much more than wizards? (since the sorc has more spell slots to double)

I meant something comparable, which is also what I said.

After all, the ring seems to be priced with the sorc in mind rather than the wizard

I don't know what the person who did the prices had in mind, certainly nothing useful.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Scion]

I meant something comparable, which is also what I said.

It is completely comparable. Overall more spells to cast in a day. They arent exactly the same, but they are definately comparable.

I don't know what the person who did the prices had in mind, certainly nothing useful.

Going by the wording and the price it would seem that they wanted to not make it too useful for the sorc, but the wizard got left behind in the dust.

So much for a ring of 'wizardry'.

 

[ARandomGod]

Going by the wording and the price it would seem that they wanted to not make it too useful for the sorc, but the wizard got left behind in the dust.

So much for a ring of 'wizardry'.

Still, I say that even considering a sorc's casting capacity those rings are hugely overpriced. When an item costs so much that most of it's "target audience" (in this case sorcs or wizards) would rather sell it at 1/2 price (and buy another item at FULL) than keep it if they got it in a treasure, then it's overpriced. That seems to be the case with this item.

Personally I prefer a house-rule that would allow pearls to be used with spontanious casting. It's a little wrong that they don't, IMO.

 

[Scion]

Still, I say that even considering a sorc's casting capacity those rings are hugely overpriced.

Well sure, I never said it wasnt The cost of the item probably needs to be cut in half or more, it takes up a slot and only doubles the normal slots and not those gained through other means (high casting stat, specialty, etc). Maybe the ring of wizardry 1 should be around 8k. Then it would be affordable while the spells were still useful and be sortof like the fighter types +2 sword for the caster..lol