D&D 5E A contradiction in spell scroll entries in the DMG?

[SkidAce]

And that's why I said "a lot of gamers" rather than "all gamers".

Like it or not, a huge share of players will have cut their teeth on 3rd and 4th edition. These players will be confused. Just like this thread amply illustrates.

Put simply, a "scroll" for many players is something simple and straightforward. Trying to wind back time, to make us call scrolls "spell scrolls" so other magical scrolls can exist is simply a bad design decision.

Quite a needless one too, since I'm sure you would still be here even if your precious whatevers of protection were called something other than "scrolls".

I wan't trying to take the high road of "I played 1st edition" or claim keeping the term would be "precious".

I guess what I mainly was trying to say was: it was new to us (just like your example of 3rd and 4th cutting their teeth) at the time...and I don't recall anyone having trouble with it.

Thats all.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

I don't think there's a contradiction in terms.

Basically, it's saying that anyone who can read a language can read magical script... but, also, that scrolls are written in ciphers that reflect certain ways magic works; that's why a scroll not on your class list is unintelligible (you're unfamiliar with the way that the magic works for that particular spell, and thus don't know how to activate it). This is also why you have to roll if it's a higher level than you can cast.

However, rogues have the nice ability to fake being of the appropriate class, and thus can ignore that restriction.

 

[CapnZapp]

I wan't trying to take the high road of "I played 1st edition" or claim keeping the term would be "precious".

I guess what I mainly was trying to say was: it was new to us (just like your example of 3rd and 4th cutting their teeth) at the time...and I don't recall anyone having trouble with it.

Thats all.

Sure, but this time the game doesn't start with a clean slate.

So what was an uncontroversial design decision then, is an outright bad one now.

Thanks,

 

[miniaturehoarder]

Bringing in assumptions from previous editions is going to cause confusion for lots of things. The only problem is if the devs didn't make it expressly clear to DM. Or maybe if the casters are being selfish jerks.

Fighter: Here take this, Morthos, this paper looks like its probably magical. I didn't look too close at it since you warned me these can be bad news.

Caster: Yes, I think it is a magical scroll, Rath, let me look it over.

DM: Morthos's studying of the paper lets him realize this is a Scroll of Protection against Rust Monsters. It's actually simple enough anyone who takes some effort to understand it can make use of it.

Caster:Thankfully it is not cursed like the last few we found, it can help defend against an obscure monster, I'll use it if we encounter more of them than we can handle.

Rath's Player: Maybe my character should hang onto it since he can use it.

DM: I did state "Morthos's studying of the paper let him realize" what it was, please act in character so I don't have to waste time taking players outside the room for EVERY little bit of privileged information.