Uncanny Forethough + missing spellbook = ?

[tuesdayscoming]

The secondary function of the feat Uncanny Forethought (EoE) lets you take a full round action to cast "any spell you know" from a spell slot you left blank when preparing spells.

So what happens when you lose your spellbook? Do you still "know" the spells you have scribed there? Is there a strict definition somewhere for just what spells a wizard (which you must be to take the feat) "knows?"

[olentu]

The PHB glossary is the only place that I can recall off the top of my head that describes what a known spell is with regards to a wizard. If I recall correctly a known spell is a spell that an arcane spellcaster has learned and can prepare and for wizards knowing a spell means having it in their spellbook.

[faceroll]

Whoa, interesting. I can't find anything in the SRD where a learned spell = spell in a spellbook.

The wording in the wizard section and in the section on spellbooks suggests that learning a spell and having it in the spellbook are related, but not the same. A spellbook, by RAW, is only necessary for preparing spells known. If you spontaneously cast from your spells known, you have no need for the spellbook.

Whether deciphering magical writing, copying that magical writing into a spellbook, or having the magical writing at hand counts as a spell "known" who knows.

By the most liberal interpretation of RAW, as I can see, having read a spell (on a scroll or in a book) counts as learning it. After that, you're just copying and preparing, neither of which are necessary for Uncanny Forethought.

[olentu]

Whoa, interesting. I can't find anything in the SRD where a learned spell = spell in a spellbook.

The wording in the wizard section and in the section on spellbooks suggests that learning a spell and having it in the spellbook are related, but not the same. A spellbook, by RAW, is only necessary for preparing spells known. If you spontaneously cast from your spells known, you have no need for the spellbook.

Whether deciphering magical writing, copying that magical writing into a spellbook, or having the magical writing at hand counts as a spell "known" who knows.

By the most liberal interpretation of RAW, as I can see, having read a spell (on a scroll or in a book) counts as learning it. After that, you're just copying and preparing, neither of which are necessary for Uncanny Forethought.

Yeah for some reason I suppose WotC decided to leave out from some to all of the PHB glossary when making the SRD.

[tyckspoon]

Yeah for some reason I suppose WotC decided to leave out from some to all of the PHB glossary when making the SRD.

Glossary isn't supposed to be relevant rules text, and thus is not part of the SRD. It's only meant to be a quick reference aid for rules that you can find elsewhere in the PHB.. unfortunately there are some rules.. uh, implications, I guess you'd call them? That only show up in the glossary. It's just more sloppy WotC layout.

[olentu]

Glossary isn't supposed to be relevant rules text, and thus is not part of the SRD. It's only meant to be a quick reference aid for rules that you can find elsewhere in the PHB.. unfortunately there are some rules.. uh, implications, I guess you'd call them? That only show up in the glossary. It's just more sloppy WotC layout.

Yeah I know a lot of things were probably not supposed to be what they actually ended up being but I can not say for sure that they left it out of the SRD just because they are bad at putting rules in sensible places instead of obscure references in the back of a book.

[tuesdayscoming]

Ahh, alright, the glossary of terms did, in fact, clear this up. Spells known are, for wizards, spells in your spellbook.

Thanks, guys!