Cheap Spell Book

[Winternight]

Two questions:
a spell book has 100 pages, right? why does it cost 15 gp when a single page costs 4sp.
100*4= 400 = 40gp + binding = 15 gp


The second more important one:
How can I reduce those 200gp per level, for new spells? Can i make the ink, ... for my own?
Thanx.

 

[melkoriii]

Actualy its 100gp per lvl now.

Spells only take 1 page per spell lvl in 3.5

 

[Thanee]

Boccob's Blessed Book is the wizard's best friend!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

I think the cost for spellbooks works fine, once you realize, that spellbook pages must be fractions of the pages you can buy seperately (i.e. half or quarter thereof).

The more important question is, why does it cost more to write a spell into a spellbook (nonmagical) than to write the same spell onto a scroll and imbue it with power (magical)!

Or why is a (found) spell book worth less than the cost to scribe a new one!

The whole scribing stuff or wizards is just messed up completely!!!

Bye
Thanee

 

[melkoriii]

Well you could look at it like this for the cost per page.

100 page book is actualy 50 pages that are folded in half to make a book.

And that because your buying in bulk you get a discount.

I though you could cast a spell from a Spell book just that it goes away like a scroll after the casting?

 

[Thanee]

Yep, 100 pages folded and written on both sides makes only 25 sheets of paper. And with those the spellbook cost is about right.

No, you cannot cast spells from spellbooks.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Li Shenron]

The reason why it has a cost is IMHO just for balance: they did want the Wizard to have a cost when learning extra spells, they choose a cost in term of Gp and time (but for example not in Xp), and they decided to integrate the cost into the roleplay/flavor side of the game by saying it is spent for scribing.

I think that if they had chosen to say that the cost is spent in experiments to develop/learn the spell (which instead are costless or negligible) and made scribing itself costless, it wouldn't have change the cost obviously, but it would have had less problems.

Not just the scribing ruleset is messed up completely, but rather the whole spellbook thing! Let's remember that by associating the cost for new spells to scribing them, for the Wizard her spellbook becomes a matter of life-or-death*: if it is stolen, lost or destroyed, you cannot really play once you have used up the spells still prepared (it's similar to the Divine Focus, except that it is much more difficult replace, and not all divine spells require DF).

Also, it was the cause of introducing the most no-brainer item in the game, which Boccob's blessed book exactly. An item which works like this: you pay some money to get a discount. Very clever. If it was a feat it would be much better: you could choose between paying full price, or wasting a feat for a discount, but what sense does it make to pay Xgp to save Ygp? If X>Y no way, and if X<Y it is just a must have item, no reasons not to. Is this a proper strategic choice?

edit: *here I mean this... why the wizard can prepare spells only with the spellbook, while the divine casters can do it while naked and castaways on a desert island in the middle of the ocean, provided they have a comfortable hour of time? This could be the case even if the cost for new spells was disassociated from the spellbook, but still it is a thing that I don't understand why is here in the first place.

 

[Silverglass]

Also, it was the cause of introducing the most no-brainer item in the game, which Boccob's blessed book exactly. An item which works like this: you pay some money to get a discount. Very clever. If it was a feat it would be much better: you could choose between paying full price, or wasting a feat for a discount, but what sense does it make to pay Xgp to save Ygp? If X>Y no way, and if X<Y it is just a must have item, no reasons not to. Is this a proper strategic choice?

edit: *here I mean this... why the wizard can prepare spells only with the spellbook, while the divine casters can do it while naked and castaways on a desert island in the middle of the ocean, provided they have a comfortable hour of time? This could be the case even if the cost for new spells was disassociated from the spellbook, but still it is a thing that I don't understand why is here in the first place.

But isn't the reason for Blessed Books one of alleviating the problems that face high level wizards and their spellbooks. At low level the spellbook adds to the roleplay of a Wizard but at high levels the expense of scribing duplicate spellbooks is immense and the potential for destroying a players fun means that there should be an "official" way of working around it without bankrupting the PC.

As it is it seems a balanced way of making a mid-high level wizards spellbook important, as losing it does cramp your style a lot, without crippling the character (as you are out 6,250gp per Boccobs rather than the 25,000 gp for a normal spellbook). Being unable to prepare any new spells for a few days is tense and fun, being forced to rebuild your spellbook from scratch for 150,000 gp is not.

As for the second point a Wizards power comes from within and is the manipulation of arcane forces by mental ability. A Priests powers are granted to him by his deity (as I force all divine casters to have a deity IMC) so the power of their spells comes from outside them, which is why a deity can deny a priest spells.

 

[Li Shenron]

I am not familiar with high-level play, but I can understand that the cost for scribing becomes too much. But BBB is a boring item because there is just no reason to use normal spellbooks if you can craft or buy a BBB.

Furthermore, I don't see why the Wizard absolutely must need a spellbook to prepare spells. It is probably a sacred cow, but I don't remember much precedence in movies or books (I may be wrong... I am not expert in fantasy literature). The dependence on one object is in my opinion not very flavorful in general, at least not for all the wizards around the world. I think it would be more appropriate for Adepts, which are supposed to be much worse spellcasters than PC classes.

Anyway, in my (little) experience I have never seen in a game the master causing the loss of a spellbook, because I think it just raises stress in the player rather than fun, and it would be quite a cheap trick from the DM. Also, the presence of the feat Spell Mastery is just terrible: if you don't take it, the DM is morally compelled not to have your spellbook lost; if you take it, the DM is morally compelled to have your spellbook lost, otherwise you just wasted a feat. A couple of times I saw instead the spellbook rules alone being the ultimate reason why a (I have to say - unexperienced) player choose the Sorcerer instead of the Wizard.

It's just my opinion, of course, but I think it's not a nice idea... and I am curious how many other RPG have the Spellbook-bound Wizards if it is such a traditional flavor.

 

[Aaron2]

Furthermore, I don't see why the Wizard absolutely must need a spellbook to prepare spells. It is probably a sacred cow, but I don't remember much precedence in movies or books (I may be wrong... I am not expert in fantasy literature).

While preparing spells from a book may have little precedence (I never read Vance), the idea of reading a spell from a book is very common. It happened in the Mummy and various Cthulhu stories. Also, the image of a wizard pouring through a dusty tome to find the answer to a magical mystery is also common. It would probably suck to force wizards to read spells directly from a book. The simplest solution (baring the binary Spell Mastery) is to allow a wizard to prepare a spell from memory with a Spellcraft check, similar to using a borrowed spell book (but harder, obviously).

To make things fair, IMC I require a Cleric to have a Spellbook (called a Book of Prayers). Since the prayers are simpler, the scribing costs are less (5 gp per page, 1/2 as many pages as a wizard's spell).


Aaron