D&D 5E Wizard Spells

[Dausuul]

Can two PC wizards copy all the spells in a looted spell book? And then sell it?

Sure, don't see why not.

Is there any reason a friendly wizard wouldn't say, "Sure! Copy all my spells!"

Heck yes. Spells are power. Power can be used against you. Why would you take that risk with a random stranger, or even a passing acquaintance? Besides, why give something away for free when you can demand a price? There ain't no BitTorrent in D&D.

At the very least, any NPC wizard ought to demand a trade: For every spell you copy out of my book, I want one from yours that I don't already know. And even so, NPCs might be reluctant to part with spells that could easily be turned against them. If I have a tower shrouded in magical wards, I'm not going to go around teaching people how to cast dispel magic.

As for a college of mages allowing other wizards to copy spells from its library, that seems highly unlikely to me. Knowledge is a college's stock in trade, and those spells are the most valuable knowledge in the college's possession. If you're not a member of the college (and that ain't an easy thing to become), they're not going to let you walk off with their most closely held secrets. You'd better be prepared either to pay through the nose, or to trade a new spell that isn't in the college's library... and finding such a spell will be difficult to say the least.

Living in the Internet age, I think we tend to forget how valuable information can be when it can't be replicated across the planet at the speed of light.

 

[cbwjm]

Something you might do is restrict spells to only utility type spells. More destructive magic might be restricted to members only.

Someone mentioned joining the guild. This is something that I think would be a great idea anyway and gives you a chance to use the faction rules. Perhaps only members of guild rank 2 can copy spells of 3rd level or higher, rank 1 members are restricted to only 1st and 2nd level spells so he will have to move up in the guild before gaining access to higher spell levels.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

 

[Guest 6801328]

Sure, don't see why not.

I never have, either. But the more point I was trying to make...perhaps non-obviously...is that if there isn't a mechanical reason why not, then why aren't copies of spells floating around everywhere for the 50gp/spell level it takes to copy them? (Or, really, half that because specialist Wizards would be undercutting the market.)

Heck yes. Spells are power. Power can be used against you. Why would you take that risk with a random stranger, or even a passing acquaintance? Besides, why give something away for free when you can demand a price? There ain't no BitTorrent in D&D.

And here I didn't mean story reasons, which I agree are easy to come up with, although I think this particular explanation is limited...an 18th level wizard is not going to be afraid of some 2nd level adventurer copying his Comprehend Languages, especially if that 18th level wizard is a friend/patron. I don't like the idea that if the adventurers befriend a high level wizard it means unlimited free spells.

What I really meant was, again, mechanical reasons. Is there...or, more accurately, should there be...a mechanic that would limit the number of copies that can be made, or introduce a risk of doing so? Maybe not, maybe story reasons are sufficient, but that's why I asked the question.

Living in the Internet age, I think we tend to forget how valuable information can be when it can't be replicated across the planet at the speed of light.

I totally agree, but it's not just the speed with which information is replicated but also the cost.

 

[Dausuul]

And here I didn't mean story reasons, which I agree are easy to come up with, although I think this particular explanation is limited...an 18th level wizard is not going to be afraid of some 2nd level adventurer copying his Comprehend Languages, especially if that 18th level wizard is a friend/patron. I don't like the idea that if the adventurers befriend a high level wizard it means unlimited free spells.

In my experience, if the adventurers befriend a high-level wizard, access to free spell scribing is the least of the DM's problems. It's almost impossible to find any non-hostile NPC above ~10th level in my campaigns.

What I really meant was, again, mechanical reasons. Is there...or, more accurately, should there be...a mechanic that would limit the number of copies that can be made, or introduce a risk of doing so? Maybe not, maybe story reasons are sufficient, but that's why I asked the question.

Mechanically, no, aside from the cost to scribe the spell.

 

[Nagol]

I never have, either. But the more point I was trying to make...perhaps non-obviously...is that if there isn't a mechanical reason why not, then why aren't copies of spells floating around everywhere for the 50gp/spell level it takes to copy them? (Or, really, half that because specialist Wizards would be undercutting the market.)

Because they're a niche item that has very limited demand compared to the creation cost (both in terms of coin and more importantly, time).

And here I didn't mean story reasons, which I agree are easy to come up with, although I think this particular explanation is limited...an 18th level wizard is not going to be afraid of some 2nd level adventurer copying his Comprehend Languages, especially if that 18th level wizard is a friend/patron. I don't like the idea that if the adventurers befriend a high level wizard it means unlimited free spells.

But he may be worried about giving a stranger access to something so personally precious to him. Even if you mean no harm (and can he really be convinced of that? Hard to get to 18th level without making enemies), you might simply screw something up and destroy the book by accident.

What I really meant was, again, mechanical reasons. Is there...or, more accurately, should there be...a mechanic that would limit the number of copies that can be made, or introduce a risk of doing so? Maybe not, maybe story reasons are sufficient, but that's why I asked the question.

Personally, I hate adding mechanical effects such as this because it unduly targets a few classes to jump through hoops without adding similar inconveniences to the rest (like saying the no one in the party can wear the same type of armour as anyone else...). The spell book is its own liability. No reason to make spell acquisition even more onerous/costly than the game presents it.

 

[Olive]

I have always loved to play wizards and to engage with PC wizards as a DM. I love the RP opportunities that come from the negotiation over access to spells. I have always tended to limit the spells available but not too much - as long as people are making an effort to roleplay then it's all good. But as others have said, most wizards won't want cash for access - they may want other things:

Time? maybe they agree to give access in return for having scrolls made of the spell? That costs the PCs money and time (if you're using Xanthar's or the UA rules)
Spells? Maybe they want access in return? Less likely at lower levels perhaps?
Items? Maybe items are what they are after? Or materials for items as per the Xanthar's rules? This is sort of my favourite as it leads to quests and adventures...
Favours? Promises of future work? The possibilities are endless!

 

[Olive]

I've always felt this sort of thing should be the inspiration for all good wizard spell negotiations: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?58227-Tales-of-Wyre&p=1029425&viewfull=1#post1029425

The whole story hour is totally worth reading if you enjoy this...

 

[Guest 6801328]

I think maybe the point I'm trying to explore is being completely missed. Sure, you can always make up story reasons why a particular NPC wizard won't let a player copy spells, but it doesn't solve the problem (which has honestly never occurred to me until this thread) that from an Econ 101 standpoint under the current rules the cost of simply buying new spells should be 25gp/level plus some kind of profit margin, because there's nothing intrinsic to spells that keeps them from being copied an unlimited number of times.

You can wave your hands and say, "Well, no Wizard is going to do that just to make a few extra gold pieces." But imagine what would happen if an NPC offered 25 gp/spell level to copy a player's spellbook. Wouldn't most players, especially most low-level players, jump at this chance? And if they would, so would NPCs. Which means logically all they would have to do is find some low level Wizards and make an offer. The DM is free to make up reasons why they wouldn't accept the offer, but it's pretty clear to the player that the DM just doesn't want them to get spells that easily.

All I'm saying is that some kind of mechanic that imposes risk/limits on spell copying would make the current difficulty of acquiring new spells more believable.

 

[Nagol]

I think maybe the point I'm trying to explore is being completely missed. Sure, you can always make up story reasons why a particular NPC wizard won't let a player copy spells, but it doesn't solve the problem (which has honestly never occurred to me until this thread) that from an Econ 101 standpoint under the current rules the cost of simply buying new spells should be 25gp/level plus some kind of profit margin, because there's nothing intrinsic to spells that keeps them from being copied an unlimited number of times.

You can wave your hands and say, "Well, no Wizard is going to do that just to make a few extra gold pieces." But imagine what would happen if an NPC offered 25 gp/spell level to copy a player's spellbook. Wouldn't most players, especially most low-level players, jump at this chance? And if they would, so would NPCs. Which means logically all they would have to do is find some low level Wizards and make an offer. The DM is free to make up reasons why they wouldn't accept the offer, but it's pretty clear to the player that the DM just doesn't want them to get spells that easily.

All I'm saying is that some kind of mechanic that imposes risk/limits on spell copying would make the current difficulty of acquiring new spells more believable.

You're discounting labour cost and carrying cost. How much do you need to pay a scribe capable of copying a 5th level spell? How much do you need to offer to get the attention of a 9+ level Wizard to spend the time?

How long is the spell going to sit on the shelf keeping your investment frozen? What eventual rate of return will you require to tie up cash in such an illiquid investment?

 

[Olive]

I think maybe the point I'm trying to explore is being completely missed. Sure, you can always make up story reasons why a particular NPC wizard won't let a player copy spells, but it doesn't solve the problem (which has honestly never occurred to me until this thread) that from an Econ 101 standpoint under the current rules the cost of simply buying new spells should be 25gp/level plus some kind of profit margin, because there's nothing intrinsic to spells that keeps them from being copied an unlimited number of times.

You can wave your hands and say, "Well, no Wizard is going to do that just to make a few extra gold pieces." But imagine what would happen if an NPC offered 25 gp/spell level to copy a player's spellbook. Wouldn't most players, especially most low-level players, jump at this chance? And if they would, so would NPCs. Which means logically all they would have to do is find some low level Wizards and make an offer. The DM is free to make up reasons why they wouldn't accept the offer, but it's pretty clear to the player that the DM just doesn't want them to get spells that easily.

All I'm saying is that some kind of mechanic that imposes risk/limits on spell copying would make the current difficulty of acquiring new spells more believable.

A couple of points on this

1) I do tend to make most 1-3 level spells pretty easy to get. It's the high level spells that are hard to negotiate for
2) Previous editions did make it harder with spell rarity tables etc.
3) The above tends to assume that wizards are common place and still fairly common at high levels which goes against all explanations or attempts at demography I've seen
4) Specialist knowledge has been preciously guarded throughout history - guilds often protected their techniques and methods carefully and punished attempts to use those outside of the guide.
5) at the end of the day, it's a game and it's part of the fiction for spells to be hard to get. I'd be actively disappointed if my DM let me get access to the spells of any wizard around.