LuYangShih said:
My opinion is that, were it not for Boccobs Blessed Book, Wizard scribing costs would be far too prohibitive. As you say, the Wizard will only have a few more spells than the Sorcerer, and will be hamstrung because he spent most of his gold attaining those spells, while the Sorcerer was free to spend it on other magical gear.
Yet, here you sit, insisting the Wizard will have every spell under the sun, which makes the wizard
far superior to the Sorceror ...
... yet you balk, when the balancing
cost of having all those spells is pointed out to you.
Boccobs Blessed Book is brought up in almost any discussion regarding the balance between Sorcerers and Wizards. In all of those discussions, I haven't even seen one person disagree that Boccobs Blessed Book does not allow free scribing of spells.
Not true anymore.
And I daresay, tonight is not the
first time I've seen objections raised in regards to the whole "Free to scribe" issue, either.
Just because a majority of people believe something doesn't mean it's right, but if there was a question in the FAQ for every single disagreement made about the rules, it's length would be far too great. The most obvious (and therefore the most likely) meaning of the paragraph about Boccobs Blessed Book indicates that you are able to scribe spells freely (IE at no cost).
Fine, you can freely scribe scrolls. But "Freely scribe" != "scribe for free" (see Hyp's post above).
Besides, scribing costs are described as buying the pens and
inks needed. You sitll have to pay thos ...and wow, they cost 200gp per level of the spell. How convenient!
Unless they change this in the FAQ, which I doubt they will do as almost no one disagrees about the interpetation of the paragraph, I am going to assume the rules work as stated. You can wrangle about the meaning of the paragraph as you wish, but to me at least, the statement is clear enough.
Fine, assume that.
The problem is not with how the rules are stated, the problem is
how the stated rules are interpreted[/quote]. Don't even TRY and paint this as an issue of Hyp or I wanting to CHANGE the rule.
We simply UNDERSTAND it differently than you do.
PS
Freely can mean just that, freely.
"The Trolls would would charge travelers 100 GP if they wished to cross the bridge, but Ogres were allowed to pass freely."
Exceedingly bad grammar, to imply that "pass freely" refers to the FEE. It means the Trolls choose not to IMPEDE the Ogres (the Ogres may have paid in advance, for example).
From the Mirriam-Webster online:
Code:
[color=white]Main Entry: free·ly
Pronunciation: 'frE-lE
Function: adverb
Date: before 12th century
: in a free manner: as a : of one's own accord <left home freely>
b : with freedom from external control <a freely elected
government> c : without restraint or reservation <spent freely on
clothes> d : without hindrance <a gate swinging freely>
<currencies are freely convertible> e : not strictly following a
model, convention, or rule <freely translated> [/color]
Show me where in there it mentions ANY even
remotely economic, financial, mercantile, or related meaning.
Clearly, "freely accepts" means:
- spells may be scribed without restraint or reservation
- spells may be scribed without hindrance
That is, it means one of the above,
if you can agree we're all speaking English ...
