D&D 5E Full-Caster Multiclassing & RP Viability

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Though with the first printing you litteraly can add that spell to your book but not prepare it.

What?

Are you trying to say that there is errata, and thus an altered second printing with different details, on the topic of putting a spell in your spellbook? Because that is incorrect - the language which prevents you from putting a spell in your spellbook is the very same language which prevents the preparation of that spell, and it is all present in the rules as they were first printed in the Player's Handbook. I know, because I've been using exactly that book when clarifying that case to people since the day the rules were officially released.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

look it up. I thought it was errated but i can be wrong.
The multiclass text speaks about preparing and knowing spells. The spellbook feature speaks about adding spells to your book of any level you can cast or so. So if you read it literally you can add spells to your book you can't prepare and thus cast using your spellslots. The wizard's ritual caster feature however allows you to cast spells at rituals when they are written in your book.

That was what i was reading in my book last time... maybe i read something wrong... i can look it up again...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Yes. looked it up in the errata. The spellbook sidebar was changed so that you can only add spells you can prepare which disallows multiclass wizards from adding higher level spells.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

What?

Are you trying to say that there is errata, and thus an altered second printing with different details, on the topic of putting a spell in your spellbook? Because that is incorrect - the language which prevents you from putting a spell in your spellbook is the very same language which prevents the preparation of that spell, and it is all present in the rules as they were first printed in the Player's Handbook. I know, because I've been using exactly that book when clarifying that case to people since the day the rules were officially released.

oh... and i was not trying to say, i said it. And it was not incorrect.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

look it up.

It's a little rude to imply I hadn't, don't you think?

The multiclass text speaks about preparing and knowing spells. The spellbook feature speaks about adding spells to your book of any level you can cast or so.

I now see what you are saying: different words are used to cover the same concept, and one might choose to ignore context found in the overall writing that indicates "known spell" and "spell in your spellbook" are the same thing.

Most strongly evidenced by this particular passage from the "Your Spellbook" sidebar: "This is just like copying a new spell into your spellbook, but faster and easier, since you understand your own notation and already know how to cast the spell." (emphasis mine)

Edit: And now that your post points to the errata which adds clarification that the implications of the other text taken in context are correct my making explicit notice, I'll admit that I hadn't realized that clarification - not rule change - was made.

 

[Ovinomancer]

It's a little rude to imply I hadn't, don't you think?

I now see what you are saying: different words are used to cover the same concept, and one might choose to ignore context found in the overall writing that indicates "known spell" and "spell in your spellbook" are the same thing.

Most strongly evidenced by this particular passage from the "Your Spellbook" sidebar: "This is just like copying a new spell into your spellbook, but faster and easier, since you understand your own notation and already know how to cast the spell." (emphasis mine)

Edit: And now that your post points to the errata which adds clarification that the implications of the other text taken in context are correct my making explicit notice, I'll admit that I hadn't realized that clarification - not rule change - was made.

Quote Originally Posted by Ovinomancer View Post
The multiclass text speaks about preparing and knowing spells. The spellbook feature speaks about adding spells to your book of any level you can cast or so.


I did't say that. Weird post attribution error.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I did't say that. Weird post attribution error.

Sorry about that. I multi-quoted in some thread hours ago and weird things have been happening every time I hit "reply with quote" since.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Sorry about that. I multi-quoted in some thread hours ago and weird things have been happening every time I hit "reply with quote" since.

Yup, been there.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It's a little rude to imply I hadn't, don't you think?

I now see what you are saying: different words are used to cover the same concept, and one might choose to ignore context found in the overall writing that indicates "known spell" and "spell in your spellbook" are the same thing.

Most strongly evidenced by this particular passage from the "Your Spellbook" sidebar: "This is just like copying a new spell into your spellbook, but faster and easier, since you understand your own notation and already know how to cast the spell." (emphasis mine)

Edit: And now that your post points to the errata which adds clarification that the implications of the other text taken in context are correct my making explicit notice, I'll admit that I hadn't realized that clarification - not rule change - was made.

I think you forgot that it was you being rude with your response. And I explicitely told you that if you read the first printing literally. I never said anything about the errata not being a clarification. Errata are just passages that replace parts of the book that are wrong in some way. In this case it was not totally clear how spellbook and multiclassing interact. My interpretation WAS as valid as yours and and answering in the way you did was especially rude. Because there was a first printing and you told be I was incorrect without reading carefully enough even though I did tell you were you could look it up.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I think you forgot that it was you being rude with your response.

No, I forgot no such thing. Asking a person to clarify a statement which appears unclear to you is not rude - if you saw any offense in me asking you for clarity, it is because you imagined it.