[3.5] Knowing the entire wizard spell list

[Mountain]

Of all the threads and advice out there on the interwebz about the "best" wizard spells, the one thing they all have in common (other than glitterdust) is that they list more than two spells per level.

I would like to know all of the various ways for a wizard to gain more spells, aside from buying scrolls or finding spellbooks, because those are up to the DM allowing you to buy a given spell. What I'm looking for are RAW methods of gaining more spells; preferably without spending feats or class levels.

I know of:
Elven Generalist
Wyrm Wizard (doesn't even have to be a wizard spell)
Domain Wizard from UA gets his domain spell for free
Extra Spell feat

[supermonkeyjoe]

the Collegiate Wizard feat is the main one, gain 4 spells per level rather than 6 on top of starting with 6+int spells and a +2 on knowledge arcana checks. It's in Complete arcane which also has Mage of the Arcane order which gives a couple of extra spells

[SouthpawSoldier]

Elven Generalist Collegiate Domain wizard is the base for the "E-Z Bake" Wizard.

Here's the Handbook by gorfnab that sums up the process. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?325933-Easy-Bake-Wizard-Handbook)

Frome that thread:


Spells Known Per Level:
Spells known per level with basic Easy Bake Wizard set up (Elf Racial Sub + Collegiate Wizard + Domain Wizard)

Level. Spells known
1. 7+Int mod 1st level spells, 1 1st level spell from domain, all cantrips
2. 5 1st level spells
3. 5 2nd level spells, 1 2nd level spell from domain
4. 5 2nd level spells
5. 5 3rd level spells, 1 3rd level spell from domain
6. 5 3rd level spells
7. 5 4th level spells, 1 4th level spell from domain
8. 5 4th level spells
9. 5 5th level spells, 1 5th level spell from domain
10. 5 5th level spells
11. 5 6th level spells, 1 6th level spell from domain
12. 5 6th level spells
13. 5 7th level spells, 1 7th level spell from domain
14. 5 7th level spells
15. 5 8th level spells, 1 8th level spell from domain
16. 5 8th level spells
17. 5 9th level spells, 1 9th level spell from domain
18. 5 spells of any level
19. 5 spells of any level
20. 5 spells of any level

Total: 111+Int mod spells known, all cantrips *Edit by South: DnDtools lists 32 3.5 cantrips, IIRC.*

Spells Per Day:
Spells per day with basic Easy Bake Wizard set up (Elf Racial Sub + Collegiate Wizard + Domain Wizard)

Spells per day = Normal Wizard + 1 slot per level able to cast usable for Domain spells only (Domain Wizard ACF) + 1 additional spell slot of highest level able to cast (Elf Racial Sub)

I'm in the process of using DnDtools fantastic search and sort features to put together a list of 3.5 spells (my group doesn't use 3.0 material). By my figuring, depending on INT bonus spells known, your spell book will be full around 6th level or so, if you're not doing the exact EZ-bake route.

[Mountain]

the Collegiate Wizard feat is the main one, gain 4 spells per level rather than 6 on top of starting with 6+int spells and a +2 on knowledge arcana checks. It's in Complete arcane which also has Mage of the Arcane order which gives a couple of extra spells

That's the feat I was trying to think of. Thank you.


Elven Generalist Collegiate Domain wizard is the base for the "E-Z Bake" Wizard.

Here's the Handbook by gorfnab that sums up the process. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?325933-Easy-Bake-Wizard-Handbook)


Thank you for that. I couldn't locate any relevant information with google searches.

I have a wizard who can cast his spells spontaneously, but that's not too impressive unless he has access to a huge list from which to cast.

[Socksy]

Play a Psion, grab Leadership, get a StP Erudite cohort. Profit.

[SouthpawSoldier]

You may want to look into the EZ-bake; it has a similar feel to a spontaneous wizard, but without the gimp to spells known that comes with spontaneous casting. Spells are still prepared, but they're prepared from memory, instead of a spellbook.

[Slipperychicken]

There are, to my knowledge, two ways to go about getting more spells without spending feats, class features, or other character options. You can research spells in your downtime, or you can pay NPC wizards to let you copy from their books (generally 50gp per page). Joining a wizard guild may make both easier.

Also, here's a handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?325933-Easy-Bake-Wizard-Handbook) for any easy-bake needs you might have (like getting 6 free spells per level while casting spontaneously without material components or a spellbook). It could be better formatted, but it's more efficient to link it than spend 30 minutes crafting a post about it. I'm pretty sure I posted a build or two in that thread anyway.

[Talya]

Keep in mind to make use of collegiate wizard, you can't multiclass... no +1 spellcasting PrCs for you.

You only get the additional spells from Collegiate Wizard when you specifically gain a level of Wizard.

[Tvtyrant]

2 levels of Chameleon will get you 100% of spells if you invest in Earth Spell and Heighten. Heighten an 8th level spell to a 9th slot, leave a slot open. You can cast a 10th level spell so you use your floating feat to gain any spell levels 0-9, write it down in one of your dozen Blessed Books.

[Gavinfoxx]

Here's a better easy bake handbook:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?325933-Easy-Bake-Wizard-Handbook

[bjoern]

There's been multiple times in the past where we had 2 or 3 wizards in the group. Each level they would all pick different spells and then copy each other.

[Chronos]

I would like to know all of the various ways for a wizard to gain more spells, aside from buying scrolls or finding spellbooks, because those are up to the DM allowing you to buy a given spell.
This is equivalent to saying "you might be the only wizard in the entire world". If you ever meet any other wizard, you're likely to get access to their spellbook. If the other wizard is friendly, then they're likely to agree to trade at least some of their spells. If the other wizard is unfriendly, then being an adventurer, it's likely that you'll eventually end up killing them, at which point you take their spellbook as loot and get all of their spells.

Researching your own spells can also have a multiplier effect. When you research a spell, yes, you get that spell... But suppose you visit the Great Library, or the Arcane Academy, or some other such established wizardly institution. Ordinarily, they probably won't be interested in trading spells, because they probably already have all of the spells you're offering. But if you're the only person in the world who has a particular spell because you're the one who researched it, they'll probably even agree to an uneven trade for it (two or three spells of the same level, maybe).

[Talya]

This is equivalent to saying "you might be the only wizard in the entire world". If you ever meet any other wizard, you're likely to get access to their spellbook. If the other wizard is friendly, then they're likely to agree to trade at least some of their spells. If the other wizard is unfriendly, then being an adventurer, it's likely that you'll eventually end up killing them, at which point you take their spellbook as loot and get all of their spells.

Researching your own spells can also have a multiplier effect. When you research a spell, yes, you get that spell... But suppose you visit the Great Library, or the Arcane Academy, or some other such established wizardly institution. Ordinarily, they probably won't be interested in trading spells, because they probably already have all of the spells you're offering. But if you're the only person in the world who has a particular spell because you're the one who researched it, they'll probably even agree to an uneven trade for it (two or three spells of the same level, maybe).

No. It's the equivalent of saying "Like most published settings/campaigns*, there's no 'Ye Olde Magicke Shoppe' here. Spellcasters are rare enough in most places that magic is still a wondrous thing. Wizards are secretive and justifiably paranoid types."


* - Including Faerun and Greyhawk. Not including Eberron.

[Agincourt]

No. It's the equivalent of saying "Like most published settings/campaigns*, there's no 'Ye Olde Magicke Shoppe' here. Spellcasters are rare enough in most places that magic is still a wondrous thing. Wizards are secretive and justifiably paranoid types."


* - Including Faerun and Greyhawk. Not including Eberron.

Yes, I agree with this. I've met people who wouldn't share their recipe for apple pie. The only thing contingent on having the best pie recipe is the accolades of a few friends and acquaintances.

In D&D, it can be quite dangerous to let just anyone copy your spellbook. You could be literally handing the tools for your own downfall to your enemy. Even if the person you let copy your spellbook means you no harm, what if they turn around and give the spells to someone else who will hurt you? From a world-building standpoint, it makes more sense for wizards to refuse everyone access to their spellbook. Yes, there could be individual wizards who stray from the norm, but default response should be "no" or "absolutely not."

[Zanos]

Yes, I agree with this. I've met people who wouldn't share their recipe for apple pie. The only thing contingent on having the best pie recipe is the accolades of a few friends and acquaintances.
Except there's multiple pie guilds and organizations, and someone offers to trade you a recipe for cherry pie, which you don't know how to make.

[Agincourt]

Except there's multiple pie guilds and organizations, and someone offers to trade you a recipe for cherry pie, which you don't know how to make.

You say that like the world has to work like that. In fact, I'd say you're assuming your own premise: people cooperate so therefore people will cooperate.

In a world where there are literally evil forces at play, I see no reason why cooperation should be the default. No one knows what evil a devil or demon or lich could undertake with each spell. It's one thing to agree to exchange access to a Invisibility spell for Web spell. It's a whole order of magnitude different to trade a Mindrape spell for an Ice Assassin spell. In the first instance, characters in my world would only trade with someone they know very well and trust and only after making them promise not to share the Invisibility spell with anyone else. In the second instance, trade is just not going to happen. As far as the character is concerned, he'd prefer it if no one else in the entire world knew how to cast Mindrape.

[Zanos]

You say that like the world has to work like that. In fact, I'd say you're assuming your own premise: people cooperate so therefore people will cooperate.

In a world where there are literally evil forces at play, I see no reason why cooperation should be the default. No one knows what evil a devil or demon or lich could undertake with each spell. It's one thing to agree to exchange access to a Invisibility spell for Web spell. It's a whole order of magnitude different to trade a Mindrape spell for an Ice Assassin spell. In the first instance, characters in my world would only trade with someone they know very well and trust and only after making them promise not to share the Invisibility spell with anyone else. In the second instance, trade is just not going to happen. As far as the character is concerned, he'd prefer it if no one else in the entire world knew how to cast Mindrape.
I assume cooperation between wizards because they focus on a style of magic which is taught and learned, and they gain more from cooperation than any other printed class in the entire game. Without methods to exchange spells, they languish with 4 spells of each level known. It is entirely illogical for them to hermit up and ignore their fellows barring extreme personalities.

In addition, the number of neutral + evil wizards is probably greater than the number of good wizards, and I doubt neutral and evil wizards care all that much about what you'll do with the spell as long as you aren't using it to mess with them specifically. This is even more true in the case of trading a spell with an adventurer because:
1. Adventurers above level 5 or so tend to have reputations, so it's pretty unlikely that the wizard in question doesn't know who they're trading with unless the character has left the area they built their reputation in.
2. Adventurers are extremely likely to die in caves somewhere anyway.

[dextercorvia]

The Apprentice Spellcaster feat lets you copy spells from your master for free (you pay for inks, but not the rights). The nature of those feats means your Mentor was once an Apprentice, and even suggests being part of a larger group as a possibility. So, take that, and assume your master, and his master's master, etc have all taken Collegiate Wizard (and you do it too). You can get massive amounts of spells this way. If you believe in the Secret Page trick, it becomes completely free.

[Vaz]

Play an Ardent, pick up a Psicrystal, use the substitute powers ACF to pick up Dark Chaos Shuffle as powers known.

Requires Spell to Power Erudites in the setting, but you don't need to interact with them for any reason. No leadership needed, and XP-free if you choose that reading of Linked Power.

[Chronos]

No, it doesn't make sense that all wizards would jealously guard their hoard of spells. Just look at the OP: He's lamenting the low number of spells known, and would like to learn more. He would, presumably, want to trade spells. And that's from the perspective of an adventurer, who are considerably more paranoid than the general population. If even adventurers are willing to trade spells, there should be plenty of NPC wizards who would do the same.

And even of those who don't want to trade, a significant chunk of them are going to be the folks the PCs aren't going to give a choice in the matter.

Also besides that, the rulebooks state a standard price for being allowed to copy spells. When someone says "I want to be a master swordsman", nobody points out that "That's tricky, because it depends on the assumption that the DM will let you find or buy a sword". It's true, of course, just like it's true that copying spells depends on the DM letting you get access to spellbooks, but the default assumption is that both swords and spellbooks are available, at the listed price.

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Mage of the Arcane Order allows you to pull spells from the spellpool and scribe them. By RAW the spellpool includes everyspell in the Player's Handbook, additional spells at DM's discretion.

[Chronos]

Actually, Mage of the Arcane Order specifically disallows scribing spells from the spellpool. There are some workarounds, though: You could cast a spell from the spellpool into a Ring of Spell Storing, then use it from the ring to make a scroll, then scribe the scroll into your spellbook. But that'll cost more, in both GP and XP, than scribing it directly.

[dextercorvia]

My favorite way to pick up a new spell requires some shenanigans and a weird PrC.

An 8th level Ardent Dilettante, get's See it Again, which allows them to duplicate the casting of any spell that targeted them or included them in the area. Mage's Lucubration allows you to recall a spell you 'used'*, then it is prepared in your mind as normal.

Now you can copy it down at your leisure. Unfortunately it only works on spells of up to 5th level. Some side advantages do exist, for instance the spell can be from any list.

*language matches See it Again exactly.

[Kazyan]

I don't see why Mountain's idea of not having access to other wizards' spellbooks is unreasonable.

Let's say I'm your "typical" wizard. I live in my demiplane and only leave via Astral Projection--through a Planar Bound nightmare if I don't have 9ths--and even then, I have more buffs than friends. I have a Contingency (and some number of contingencies that aren't the spell; I'm not going to tell you exactly how many), a shrunken tinfoil hat, and a scroll of basically every useful spell I don't have prepared right now--just in case I run out of Uncanny Forethought slots. I have Foresight with a Celerity in tow, Mindsight, am currently taking the form of a Shadesteel Golem/Solar/Dire Tortoise, and have used divinations to map out every significant event in the next month.

No, you may not borrow my spellbook to copy my spells.

[Agincourt]

I assume cooperation between wizards because they focus on a style of magic which is taught and learned, and they gain more from cooperation than any other printed class in the entire game. Without methods to exchange spells, they languish with 4 spells of each level known. It is entirely illogical for them to hermit up and ignore their fellows barring extreme personalities.

In addition, the number of neutral + evil wizards is probably greater than the number of good wizards, and I doubt neutral and evil wizards care all that much about what you'll do with the spell as long as you aren't using it to mess with them specifically. This is even more true in the case of trading a spell with an adventurer because:
1. Adventurers above level 5 or so tend to have reputations, so it's pretty unlikely that the wizard in question doesn't know who they're trading with unless the character has left the area they built their reputation in.
2. Adventurers are extremely likely to die in caves somewhere anyway.

A PC wizard will still encounter enemy wizards and kill them from time to time. Dead wizards will have at least their travel spellbook and possibly scrolls and their entire compendium of spells. There's also the matter of researching spells. The DMG has rules for researching spells that already exist. (DMG 198). Even if a DM makes it impossible to buy arcane scrolls of any level (a position more extreme than what I was advocating) I see no reason a PC has to "languish with 4 spells of each level known."

As for there being more evil and neutral wizards, even if I accept that proposition as true, that undermines your point. A good wizard knows, at least, that other good wizards are unlikely to attack him. An evil or neutral wizard can only trust a very select few number of wizards in the world, and even then, can they really trust them? You just never know. Good wizards may want to see an evil wizard neutralized just on principle and everyone else could turn on you whenever it benefits them. Even a Lawful Neutral wizard that's been trusted forever might turn if their code of conduct somehow demands it. As for a Chaotic Evil wizard, you cannot ever trust them.


No, it doesn't make sense that all wizards would jealously guard their hoard of spells. Just look at the OP: He's lamenting the low number of spells known, and would like to learn more. He would, presumably, want to trade spells. And that's from the perspective of an adventurer, who are considerably more paranoid than the general population. If even adventurers are willing to trade spells, there should be plenty of NPC wizards who would do the same.

And even of those who don't want to trade, a significant chunk of them are going to be the folks the PCs aren't going to give a choice in the matter.

Also besides that, the rulebooks state a standard price for being allowed to copy spells. When someone says "I want to be a master swordsman", nobody points out that "That's tricky, because it depends on the assumption that the DM will let you find or buy a sword". It's true, of course, just like it's true that copying spells depends on the DM letting you get access to spellbooks, but the default assumption is that both swords and spellbooks are available, at the listed price.

You assume that a single player's motivations are aligned with how each character in a world would act. There are many reasons that a player might not share the same motivations as a character would in-setting. Chief among those reasons is that the player does not face actual death. Also, a player thinks about their character for a few hours a week during preparation and actual game time. In setting, the character should be concerned with survival each and every day and figuring out a way to maximize their chances.

As for there being a standard price for copying spells, in the very sentence where that is mentioned (PHB 179) it goes on to say, "...though many wizards jealously guard their higher-level spells and may charge much more, or even deny access to them altogether." I don't see how that can be called the "default assumption" that you can just copy high level spells.

[Zanos]

A PC wizard will still encounter enemy wizards and kill them from time to time. Dead wizards will have at least their travel spellbook and possibly scrolls and their entire compendium of spells. There's also the matter of researching spells. The DMG has rules for researching spells that already exist. (DMG 198). Even if a DM makes it impossible to buy arcane scrolls of any level (a position more extreme than what I was advocating) I see no reason a PC has to "languish with 4 spells of each level known."
If NPC wizards aren't in the practice of sharing spells, the NPC wizards will only have four spells known of each level. Assuming that, as wizards, they like to learn magic, it's hardly likely that they wouldn't share among colleagues. Spell research is also prohibitively expensive and time consuming.

It's also not like the NPC in question isn't getting anything for their spells. They're either getting gold or an equal level spell in compensation. I wouldn't expect to wander into a guild and say "Hey, who wants to let me copy Apocalypse from the Sky and Mindrape from their spellbook?" but fireball for haste? Teleport for greater blink? Greater Dispel Magic for Freezing Fog? I hardly see the problem, and it's not like they're getting nothing from it. Of course if you assume some spells are less likely to be offered for such a trade than others, they therefore become worth more, and then someone could learn them as a level up spell and trade them for more than they would be worth normally.

And lending out a spellbook for a couple hundred gold so somebody can copy from it is hardly outlandish either. That's a decent chunk of money to lend out some of your old spellbooks and you don't have to do an actual work to make it.

[Agincourt]

If NPC wizards aren't in the practice of sharing spells, the NPC wizards will only have four spells known of each level. Assuming that, as wizards, they like to learn magic, it's hardly likely that they wouldn't share among colleagues. Spell research is also prohibitively expensive and time consuming.

You have a very binary view of sharing spells. You seem to be saying that either sharing spellbooks is a standard practice or it is impossible. I'm advocating a cautious approach where a wizard only shares with a select few people who have earned their trust.

Also, the enemy wizard will presumably have defeated a few other wizards in the past so no, they won't have only four spells known of each level, even if sharing is never done.



And lending out a spellbook for a couple hundred gold so somebody can copy from it is hardly outlandish either. That's a decent chunk of money to lend out some of your old spellbooks and you don't have to do an actual work to make it.
Being without your spellbook for a few days or even weeks is no small inconvenience. A wizard without his spellbook is vulnerable. And what if the person doesn't return it? If you let just anyone borrow it for a nominal fee that seems to be a likely proposition. This hypothetical wizard could say they are copying, say, Dimension Door, pay 200 GP and get an entire spellbook. And the person you're stealing it from is in a weaker position to seek revenge.

[Zanos]

You have a very binary view of sharing spells. You seem to be saying that either sharing spellbooks is a standard practice or it is impossible. I'm advocating a cautious approach where a wizard only shares with a select few people who have earned their trust.

Also, the enemy wizard will presumably have defeated a few other wizards in the past so no, they won't have only four spells known of each level, even if sharing is never done.

NPC's aren't always enemies. I'm not talking about enemy wizards, just NPC's in general. Also in this system it seems like killing people is the best way to actually expand your repertoire of spells. And as far as earning someone's trust, I would again imagine that an adventuring wizard with a decent reputation would be fairly trusted among the wizarding community unless they had committed some acts that offend them specifically.



Being without your spellbook for a few days or even weeks is no small inconvenience. A wizard without his spellbook is vulnerable. And what if the person doesn't return it? If you let just anyone borrow it for a nominal fee that seems to be a likely proposition. This hypothetical wizard could say they are copying, say, Dimension Door, pay 200 GP and get an entire spellbook. And the person you're stealing it from is in a weaker position to seek revenge.
You can have multiple spellbooks. A powerful wizard could have a large number of spellbooks with lower level spells that he loans out for cash, and if someone actually steals one they'll quickly find themselves in a spot of trouble. Or you could ask for collateral if it's among colleagues who are closer in power, like a deposit. Or if you steal a spellbook you get blacklisted by the community of wizards who do exchange spells. There's many ways to manage such things.

[Mountain]

First of all, I appreciate all the feedback. I didn't think of half of these ideas.


The Apprentice Spellcaster feat lets you copy spells from your master for free (you pay for inks, but not the rights). The nature of those feats means your Mentor was once an Apprentice, and even suggests being part of a larger group as a possibility. So, take that, and assume your master, and his master's master, etc have all taken Collegiate Wizard (and you do it too). You can get massive amounts of spells this way. If you believe in the Secret Page trick, it becomes completely free.

This is excellent, at least early on. Your mentor is around level 8 minimum, IIRC, so that gives you a good start for spells.


No, it doesn't make sense that all wizards would jealously guard their hoard of spells. Just look at the OP: He's lamenting the low number of spells known, and would like to learn more. He would, presumably, want to trade spells. And that's from the perspective of an adventurer, who are considerably more paranoid than the general population. If even adventurers are willing to trade spells, there should be plenty of NPC wizards who would do the same.

Also besides that, the rulebooks state a standard price for being allowed to copy spells. When someone says "I want to be a master swordsman", nobody points out that "That's tricky, because it depends on the assumption that the DM will let you find or buy a sword". It's true, of course, just like it's true that copying spells depends on the DM letting you get access to spellbooks, but the default assumption is that both swords and spellbooks are available, at the listed price.

As for the first part: No, I don't want to trade. I want to hoard my spells with an iron fist, while taking them (peacefully or not) from every other spellbook-user I encounter. The murder-hobo solution though, as I said, is up to DM fiat which spells I get, and enemy books are always trapped to self-destruct in campaigns I've been in.

For the second part, that is a very good point. There is a listed price. Finding a sword, however, seems like it would be much easier than finding a particular spell that you're looking for.

[dextercorvia]

As for the first part: No, I don't want to trade. I want to hoard my spells with an iron fist, while taking them (peacefully or not) from every other spellbook-user I encounter. The murder-hobo solution though, as I said, is up to DM fiat which spells I get, and enemy books are always trapped to self-destruct in campaigns I've been in.

For the second part, that is a very good point. There is a listed price. Finding a sword, however, seems like it would be much easier than finding a particular spell that you're looking for.

Put your hands together. In my next campaign, all enemy weapons will be trapped to self destruct. But, I'll make it rain spellbooks. Every random rat and gelatinous cube will drop grimoires.

[Vaz]

As a low level wizard, the problem of advancing is having the right spells. From a CharOp purpose, a Wizard may well have access to the most appropriate spells, but a wizard who has access to a spellbook passed down through the generations might have access to Snuff the Light and Suspend Disease as her ancestor was a village healer. If she had the desire to become stronger, she'd need to get access to new spells, or more spell levels.

The DMG contains rules for creating your own, but honestly, they can be broken, and there are that many spells out there, that you should be able to deisgn your own version of them. The DMG rules for that require a library and a ton of gp. Now, the problem with that is that if you have access to that, you're likelier to have access to spells anyway, whether by purchasing the scrolls or trading spells you know for another.

As a low level wizard, your limited spells known might mean that you'll struggle to contribute to a combat. In a city which is able to field its own army, even a trained human warrior can take grand defensive actions to make them nearly immune to attacks - a wizard with the correct spells can adequately replace that. Being part of a guild or some form of other organised military capability would allow the wizards to trade spells known - and request loans of gold for the ability of researching spells, as well as having access to an immense library.

[Zombulian]

Play a Psion, grab Leadership, get a StP Erudite cohort. Profit.

Why does everyone always say use a StP to give you powers? Why not just be an StP and manifest Metaconcert?

[Vaz]

What does metaconcert do for you though?

[Raishoiken]

bit of a stretch but.. mindrape? The caster learns everything the victim knows, couldn't that include spells known? you'd Still hafta spell book them though, and probably a
fairly generous dm. And you'd hafta go around raping the minds of other casters. (oddly enough,I made a thread about using mindrape this way the other day >_>)

[Phelix-Mu]

Part of the basic problem with spellcasting = money in 3e is that it's a rather flawed market premise. How do you apply a gp value to something that, is passed onto a caster, can quickly and through many ways generate huge wealth or power that quickly renders normal wealth trivial.

Example: 5th level wizard buys scroll of fireball. He makes a wand of fireball with his Craft Wand feat. He then goes on to conquer every small village that has no one high enough level to stop him from burning it to the ground. While he will likely draw the ire of someone or other, as long as he stays away from settlements that have significant spellcasting resource of their own, he will likely succeed. He can even afford to burn down the odd village, just to make it clear he's serious.

So, for a pretty non-spectacular amount of money, a fairly low-level no one can heavily influence a region. Is this a flaw in the default setting assumptions? Maybe not fatally so, but spells are way, way more valuable than the game makes them out to be; the gp price can't really be said to correlate to actual value (as useless spells of level X have exactly the same price as totally broken spells of the same level, barring components or xp stuff).

Thus, when people suggest that something akin to market forces would drive the exchange of spells between spellcasters, I would tend to reply by pointing out that spells are more like tactical nukes than Kalashnikovs. There may be a market, but it should be so fraught with peril that normal market forces barely apply (or apply only at the pleasure of the DM).