Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WaterRabbit" data-source="post: 7571464" data-attributes="member: 2445">I noticed that you conveniently left off the cogent part, The Book's AppearanceYour spellbook is a unique compilation of spells, with its own decorative flourishes and margin notes. It might be a plain, functional leather volume that you received as a gift from your master, a finely boundgilt-edged tome you found in an ancient library, or even a loose collection of notes scrounged together after you lost your previous spellbook in a mishap.There is no requirement that the spellbook is a single tome.  There also isn't any requirement that copying a spell into the spellbook is required to learn.Now that may be your houserule, but it isn't a general rule for the game.  All of the language of the game is "can" and "may" not must.  All that is required to learn a spell is time.In 5e spellbooks are not magical in and of themselves like prior editions. There aren't any requirements for special magical inks and whatnot.  There are only two reasons to copy a spell. The first is that it is on a scroll and casting a spell from a scroll "destroys" it.  The second is to make it more portable/less likely for a wizard to be deprived of it.I think you are reading prior edition rules into this edition.  In 5e a wizard's spellbook is whatever they define it to be, which could include books they have added to their collection from other sources.Furthermore, it doesn't make that much since in a world in which wizard spells are treated as a learnable discipline like science.  All of the spells from any particular wizard school are going to use the same or similar notation.  If magic can be treated and analyzed as a discipline, there would be a common language among different universities and so forth to transfer that knowledge.  This is certainty the case for settings like Forgotten Realms and Eberron.In a setting like Dark Sun, your house rule makes more sense since wizards are outcasts and basically all hedge wizards.  Magical knowledge is fiercely guarded and treated with suspicion.  So I could such a house rule for similar settings.But for the general rule, the spellbook is whatever the character defines it to be, which is probably why the designers didn't ascribe much value to them.In Dragon Heist, they assign the retail value for spells at:1st - 25 gp2nd - 75 gp3rd - 150 gp4th - 300 gp5th - 750 gp.So take a 5th level wizard that has only acquired spells through level up. That is 8 1st level, 4 2nd level, and 2 3rd level spells for a total of 200 + 300 + 300 = 800 gp compared to 1,100 gp to copy them and 44 hours to learn them.  I bet in most campaigns the 44 hours is the more important cost.I get that there are few money sinks in this version of D&D.  But charging wizards the overhead for copying spells to learn them doesn't even make sense.  Martial classes aren't charged for using weapons and armor they find.  Martial classes don't have to spend 2 hours / 50 gp of equipment they find learning them.Finally, I can tell you anecdotally, that every wizard I have given spellsbooks to insist upon copying the spells into their own book so they can sell the found spellbook.  So, in the long run it is a bit of a moot point.</blockquote>

Verification