D&D 5E Unfortunate Wording

[pedro2112]

Under using scrolls, the rule states:

"If the spell written on the scroll appears on your
class’s spell list, and the spell’s level is one that you
can normally cast, you cast the spell successfully.
Otherwise, you must make an Intelligence (Arcana)
check to see if you can successfully cast it."

I can't even begin to tell you how many people read this and think that a straight up fighter with a lucky arcana check can use a fireball scroll. Would it be that difficult to write it so as to avoid that ridiculous conclusion?

 

[pemerton]

Under using scrolls, the rule states:

"If the spell written on the scroll appears on your class’s spell list, and the spell’s level is one that you can normally cast, you cast the spell successfully. Otherwise, you must make an Intelligence (Arcana) check to see if you can successfully cast it."

I can't even begin to tell you how many people read this and think that a straight up fighter with a lucky arcana check can use a fireball scroll. Would it be that difficult to write it so as to avoid that ridiculous conclusion?

Two responses.

First, the reason people read it like that is because that is what it says: if A and B then X, otherwise Z. No where does it say there is an additional condition (such as being a fighter) that precludes reading the scroll altogether.

Second, why is this ridiculous? Why can't a clever fighter read a spell from a scroll?

 

[MightyZehir]

I agree with pemerton.

 

[pedro2112]

Quit pulling my leg, guys. It's way too late at night (or early morning) for that!

 

[Vaeron]

I agree that the wording seems pretty unambiguous. If you could learn the spell normally via your class and level, you automatically succeed. Otherwise, make an Arcana check.

 

[1of3]

I consider it an advantage, if any character trained in Arcana can use scrolls. It's certainly useful to have a Wizard for the teleports and a Cleric for raising the dead, but if you do not, you can bring scroll at least.

Also note that wands do not have any requirements.

 

[mach1.9pants]

Wording is fine, anyone can cast a spell from scroll with a successful Arcana check. If you have that spell on your spell list and of a level you can normally cast, then you don;t need to roll that check.

What is your problem with the wording? If you don;t want non casters in your game to use scrolls, then house rule 'only casters can do this' but considering every class bar one has a caster option, just let it ride. The magic is in the scroll, and if you can unlock it all good - POW - a one off spell for you.

To make it more fun (well my table more fun) create a fumble table if you fail the roll by 5 or more, maybe something like the wild magic table

 

[pemerton]

Quit pulling my leg, guys. It's way too late at night (or early morning) for that!

?? If you're talking to me, I'm quite serious. I'm not seeing what the problem is.

I consider it an advantage, if any character trained in Arcana can use scrolls.

As the rule is written, I don't think training would be a requirement.

 

[1of3]

As the rule is written, I don't think training would be a requirement.

You're right of course. I wanted to stress that learning that skill is really useful that way, because on a failed check the scroll is wasted. You probably want an expert to handle it.

 

[pemerton]

I wanted to stress that learning that skill is really useful that way, because on a failed check the scroll is wasted. You probably want an expert to handle it.

Agreed with that.