D&D 5E How much space (pages) does a spell use up in a Wizard's spellbook in 5th edition?

[Sword of Spirit]

I suppose one might say that the higher level a wizard gets the better they get at condensing their spells. That would allow one to keep the idea that higher level spells inherently take up more space, but since the wizard's evolving compression algorithm makes it unlikely he's going to need second book for a long time, you can still hand wave away keeping track of it.

 

[rmcoen]

(I cast Animate Thread....)

I always felt that "one page per spell level" was right. Generic mundane spellbooks had 100 pages, but the magic item boccob's blessed book was super awesome - but had the limitation of only 50 pages. (Cantrips were either "1 page" - i.e. the cantrip spell - or a half page each.)

I feel like I played a game where spell took up a random amount (still based on level), but I don't remember the details. It was either like "d6+SL" or maybe as rough as "d4/SL". (Cantrips were just 1 page.) Finding an enchanted grimoire wasn't just valuable for the spells therein, but also because they frequently contained more spells "normal" given the pages. Like maybe the creator wizard spent lots of time distilling the spells down to their most essential components, so ten 3rd level spells only took up 40 pages. Or maybe, like @Minigiant said earlier in the thread, Pages 1-5 were "Zabir's Theory of Icyfication", and then all the ice-based spells in the book only required a page or two of implementation notes!

In Angband (ASCII exploration game), spellbooks were all themed, and each took up a vital one of your 26 inventory slots. You might only need /want one spell from each book, but if you didn't have the book, you had none of the spells. But... books weren't necessarily exclusive: "Ye Basik Magik, Vol 1" might have magic missile, phase door, detect evil, for example, while "Tenser's Teleportations" might have phase door, teleport self, and teleport other; you might be able to switch out books for a more efficient weight/slot choice later. I found that little "minigame" fun (sometimes frustrating), because it made finding the next spellbook interesting despite having loads of spells - it might be more efficient for my playstyle!

Sadly, I think 5e's inherent design is what @Athinar said (paraphrased): "Me got book, it have spells."

In the three 5e campaigns I'm in or running... there is one wizard, he's 5th level, and spellbooks are not an issue even if spells take d6+SL pages!

 

[tetrasodium]

Back in old editions when spells were megapowerful the size of a spellbook was an important limiting factor on magic users/wizards. in 5e spells rarely even rise to the level of notably strong & have a laundry list of limitations built into the spells/spellcasting classes themselves (ie concentration prep slots etc). at my table wizards use this

 

[Stormonu]

There is some serious Mendella effect going on here, and this is a resurrected thread! I could have sworn the “1 page per spell level” was mentioned in the sidebar on the Wizard class. Anyways, that’s what I use for my games, though having drafted up a mock spell book for my players 1/2 page per spell level seems far more ”realistic”. You’ve really got to have large handwriting or spells are serious complex if they’re taking up multiple pages of formulas, gestures and the like for one spell.

 

[auburn2]

I can't find any information on how many pages a spell of a particular level takes up in a Wizard's spellbook. It doesn't seem to give that information, either in the sidebar on spellbooks or anywhere else! Is this info somewhere in the PH or DMG, or did WOTC screw up and leave it out? Should I go by what it says in my 2nd or 3rd edition books... the info is there? Has this been given an official update or errata anywhere?

Seeing as it is magic, I just rule that the number of pages and size of the text conform to the book magically. Since it is 3lbs, that makes it about the size of the DMG.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

You know, it takes one minute per spell level to prepare a spell. I'm assuming you need to reference most of what you have recorded, and that you can't just speed read/scan it. Unless you write very large, it seems to me that one page per level is just too much to reference. I'd probably say half a page per level or less.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I like 5e's version of "you have a spellbook, it holds all your spells," especially since Xanathar's introduced the idea of these kinds of spellbooks:

Long straps of leather on which spells are written, wrapped around a staff for ease of transport.

Small stones inscribed with spells and kept in a cloth bag.

My own wizard character is an Indiana Jones style archaeologist who learns how to unlock the arcane power of artifacts he has found in various ancient tombs and dungeons. So his "spellbooks" is his collection of small statues, trinkets, amulets, etc that he keeps on his person and takes out to cast various spells.

Oh, and scribbled copies of spell scrolls they've encountered, though he's always misplacing those!

 

[el-remmen]

I do one page per spell level, but in my games spellbooks also contain notes for unlocking certain heretofore unknown cantrips (i.e. stuff from later books not available when the characters were made) and potentially magical item recipes.

I have talked about this this in another thread that hardly got any traction, so I am sharing my example here as well (also attached as a PDF).

 

[delericho]

Those are among my favorite articles ever. I even like a lot of the more flavorful articles from the "Spellcraft" column all throughout the 2E/3E/3.5E era, like the Fire Eye Scrolls (2E, Dragon #123) or Volume Veneficus (3E, Dragon #331). And who can forget the Demonomicon of Iggwilv (1E/2E, The Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; 3E/3.5E, Dragon #336; 4E, Demonomicon and Heroes of the Elemental Chaos)?

One of the many things I've considered, but never done anything with, was the idea of getting rid of the idea that wizards know spells at all (excluding cantrips), and also the notion of copying them from one book to another.

Instead, wizards would be able to prepare spells from any spellbook they had on hand. So if they captured another wizard's book that could significantly expand the set of spells they have available. (And if you also used suitably tight encumbrance rules, could make for some interesting choices - which spellbook does the wizard take with him on this adventure?)

That then has the advantage that all those lovingly-detailed tomes of magic will have some residual value in the campaign - they're not just there to copy the spells and then discard. Plus, it gives lots of motivation for wizards to seek out and to hoard various spellbooks, because if you now have the only copy of some spell, you have a leg up on the competition...

 

[tetrasodium]

One of the many things I've considered, but never done anything with, was the idea of getting rid of the idea that wizards know spells at all (excluding cantrips), and also the notion of copying them from one book to another.

Instead, wizards would be able to prepare spells from any spellbook they had on hand. So if they captured another wizard's book that could significantly expand the set of spells they have available. (And if you also used suitably tight encumbrance rules, could make for some interesting choices - which spellbook does the wizard take with him on this adventure?)

That then has the advantage that all those lovingly-detailed tomes of magic will have some residual value in the campaign - they're not just there to copy the spells and then discard. Plus, it gives lots of motivation for wizards to seek out and to hoard various spellbooks, because if you now have the only copy of some spell, you have a leg up on the competition...

for what it's worth I didn't run into any problems removing the gold cost with scribing & mostly handwaved the time.