Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8337831" data-attributes="member: 93670">I think you have lost sight of the economic  issue of a market rate for copying npc/library spellbooks & vice versa and moved on to arguing that sorcerers are so poor & oppressed that the stormwind fallacy should handle that instead.  Frankly I don't understand why you seem to be arguing that there should not be a market rate to copy spells from npc/library spellbooks or an income producing downtime activity that involves a wizard PC letting others copy spells from their spellbook.If that's not your point I have no idea what it is.<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Some spells are really powerful"<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">mmhmm... which is why the wizard would choose those over more niche ones that might be useful.   The wizard doing that with must take spells removes or reduces their ability to pull out ritual spells in 10 minutes & niche spells tomorrow. The wizard not doing that with the must take spells of course removes or reduces their ability to contribute outside of those niche situations.  Either wizards are expected to scribe additional spells into their spellbook or they are not and get class features accordingly instead of a gold sink they can only use if the GM decides to give them a bit of treasure that may or may not be useful once they spend a bunch of gold scribing it</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Spells in the spellbook are forever"<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">[spoiler="and?"][ATTACH=full]140316[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]140317[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]140318[/ATTACH] So is a class spell list. [/spoiler]</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"no sane player would let an npc walk off with their spellbook"<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Hence downtime where a sane PC sits there watching a paying NPC copy spells from their spellbook or vice versa</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"that kind of treasure disparity is a bad dm."<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I point you to the ALPG written by wotc for AL where a character could have a +1 weapon adamantine armor, & an extremely magical ring like ring of protection free action or evasion among other things before a wizard can get a spell scroll at level 17.  It's literally a problem that wotc encourages & without a market rate for copying spells  wizard PC has no way of pushing back when a DM follows wotc's lead.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Level Up is fixing a lot of things by reintroducing WBL or similar & magic item prices"<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Indeed, that is the reason why it is even more important to have a market rate a wizard can point at to copy spells & to have their spells copied.</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Scribing a spell to a spellbook improves a wizard's power"<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It doesn't allow them to prepare more spells.  If unprepared it only does anything if prepared or if the spell is a ritual spell.  If you give a fighter or something a magic item not as good as the magic items they use regularly it absolutely does not "directly improve" their power by sitting in their pack waiting to maybe get used.  Exactly how does an unprepared nonritual spell "directly" improve a wizard's power?</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Having more spells in the spellbook "more versatility and flexibility in your casting choices"<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This is factually incorrect, the rules simply do not support that.  A wizard can't cast any nonritual spell unless it is first prepared.  Preparing spells is only done during a long rest.</li> </ul></li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification