D&D 5E Some recent tweets.

[Bawylie]

So a spell scroll must have a spell from the PH on it.

While a scroll of blah blah, can blah blah for anyone, provided blah blah isn't a spell in the PH.

Yes?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

So a spell scroll must have a spell from the PH on it.

While a scroll of blah blah, can blah blah for anyone, provided blah blah isn't a spell in the PH.

Yes?

Basically, yeah.

If it duplicates a spell that exists, it's a spell scroll. If it does something else, even something that is basically a spell effect but applied in a different way than typical, it's just a scroll.

 

[Delazar]

should have probably give them different names, like "scrolls" and "parchments"...

or potato...

 

[CapnZapp]

It's completely stupid and needlessly confusing.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

It's completely stupid and needlessly confusing.

How would you have handled the difference between spell scrolls and protection scrolls or any other form of theoretically possible but not listed in the DMG expendable items in the shape of a scroll?

 

[Uchawi]

I agree, whatever natural language they chose, if any, is very confusing. But the way it appears they handled it is based on early editions, for nostalgia purposes? Versus making any sense out of it.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

How would you have handled the difference between spell scrolls and protection scrolls or any other form of theoretically possible but not listed in the DMG expendable items in the shape of a scroll?

I'd probably take the World of Warcraft route, which differentiates written-things-which-give-a-buff (scroll) from written-things-which-hold-gear-enchantments (vellum, if coming from Enchanting; inscription, if coming from Inscription), and also from written-things-which-hold-permanent-character-benefits (glyphs).

Although it would mean a minor change of wording compared to the traditional form, I think it would be perfectly reasonable to call all written-things-with-general-use-buffs "glyphs" or something like that (inscriptions, vellums, sigils, whatever) and continue to call the written-things-which-are-spells "scrolls."

 

[CapnZapp]

How would you have handled the difference between spell scrolls and protection scrolls or any other form of theoretically possible but not listed in the DMG expendable items in the shape of a scroll?

Use different names?

You know, calling things that work in different ways different things?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I'd probably take the World of Warcraft route, which differentiates written-things-which-give-a-buff (scroll) from written-things-which-hold-gear-enchantments (vellum, if coming from Enchanting; inscription, if coming from Inscription), and also from written-things-which-hold-permanent-character-benefits (glyphs).

Although it would mean a minor change of wording compared to the traditional form, I think it would be perfectly reasonable to call all written-things-with-general-use-buffs "glyphs" or something like that (inscriptions, vellums, sigils, whatever) and continue to call the written-things-which-are-spells "scrolls."

So instead of one item category with some shared general rules, you'd establish numerous item categories of a much narrower scope?

So like if you decided that rings could only allow duplication of spell effects like a ring of invisibility, and any piece of jewelry that had a different effect like +1 AC and saving throw bonus would actually be some non-ring thing like an earring of protection?

I don't see how that adds anything to the game but more chances for players to get confused.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Use different names?

You know, calling things that work in different ways different things?

I am confused as to how that isn't what WotC did. "protection scroll" and "spell scroll" are different names, just like "ring of protection" and "ring of invisibility" are different names.