How many spells/scroll?

[Hypersmurf]

As an exercise (albeit a very silly one), 16 clerics of 1st level, with a 12 in wisdom, could technically produce, in a day, a single scroll containing 80 orisons. One cleric would act as the scriber, while the 15 others would provide the spells to be scribed (the scribing cleric would of course provide the feat, the XP, and his own spells).

You could do the same with :

a. a single 20th level cleric with a 44 Wisdom, or
b. a single 1st level cleric with 2 wands of the spell in question.

-Hyp.

 

[Magic Slim]

You could do the same with :

a. a single 20th level cleric with a 44 Wisdom, or
b. a single 1st level cleric with 2 wands of the spell in question.

-Hyp.

Of course

Slim

 

[LokiDR]

Let's say that a scroll with multiple spells on it is considered a single item in terms of Magic Item Creation (per LokiDR) and that the scriber of the scroll need not have the spell memorized, but that another caster can provide said spell (per Hypersmurf).

As an exercise (albeit a very silly one), 16 clerics of 1st level, with a 12 in wisdom, could technically produce, in a day, a single scroll containing 80 orisons. One cleric would act as the scriber, while the 15 others would provide the spells to be scribed (the scribing cleric would of course provide the feat, the XP, and his own spells).

Slim

Wow, 80 orisons. Gee, isn't that powerful Seriously, all it does is trim the useless time out of making scrolls. Are scrolls so broken that making them effectively faster than you thought really be a problem?

 

[Magic Slim]

I did say my example was silly.

My point wasn't to show that scribing more than one spell on one scroll is broken.

My point was (still is) that I don't think the rules are clear as to if it is possible or not to scribe multiple spells on a single scroll.

As a DM, I'd probably even rule that way (multiple spells on a scroll, but the scriber has to provide the spell (sorry Hyp ), if my players did indeed take the time to create magic items.

Let's not make this about my perception of what might be broken or not, because it isn't.

Slim

 

[LokiDR]

Let's not make this about my perception of what might be broken or not, because it isn't.

Slim

But it is, and you are making it that way. All it really amounts to faster scribing effectively. So what? The scriber still needs to find some way to get that many spells, and has to pay the materials and XP costs. It only really means that the party doesn't have to wait as long for the wizard to scibe what he wants.

 

[Magic Slim]

I reiterate, and then I'm done:

My point was (still is) that I don't think the rules are clear as to if it is possible or not to scribe multiple spells on a single scroll.

The Orisons example was a vastly exaggerated scenario, but still a possible one.

Scribing multiple spells on a Single scroll (and thus, in a single day) is fine by me. It's just not clearly put, that's it. Can we at least agree on that?

As a side question (I'll probably regret it), why is it that you can only find scrolls with 1d3/1d4/1d6 spells on it, if it is clearly possible that you can put much more spells than that?

(I'll say it again: Multiple Spells on Scroll = OK. As a DM, I wouldn't really care anyway since Item Creation is probably done in Down Time, when nothing else happens)

Slim

(I hope everyone is laughing at the pointlessness of it all)

 

[D'karr]

I reiterate, and then I'm done:
As a side question (I'll probably regret it), why is it that you can only find scrolls with 1d3/1d4/1d6 spells on it, if it is clearly possible that you can put much more spells than that?

Probably because anything larger becomes unwieldy.

A single spell scroll measure about 11 inches in length. Each additional spell adds an additional 12 inches to the length of the scroll. A 6 foot long scroll might still be a bit unwieldy but an 80 foot one definitely is.

 

[Magic Slim]

Probably because anything larger becomes unwieldy.

A single spell scroll measure about 11 inches in length. Each additional spell adds an additional 12 inches to the length of the scroll. A 6 foot long scroll might still be a bit unwieldy but an 80 foot one definitely is.

yeah you're right, plus it asks the question of where the heck are you going to get a 80'-long piece of paper?

Slim

 

[Hypersmurf]

yeah you're right, plus it asks the question of where the heck are you going to get a 80'-long piece of paper?

Fabricate...

-Hyp.