Can a wizard start without a spellbook?

[Elbeyon]

I was looking over a wizard's wealth generation via rolling. Things get weird/complicated. The wizard have the feature: "Spellbook At 1st level, you have a spellbook containing six 1st-level wizard spells of your choice." Seems straight forward, they have a spellbook they start with that has the spells in it.

Yet, a wizard can roll for starting wealth meaning they don't get a spellbook from their equipment feature. Does the spellbook feature still apply and the wizard have a spellbook? Do wizards start with two spellbooks (one from each feature)? If a character rolls wealth is there a chance that the wizard doesn't start with spellbook (since they can't afford it)? At the same time if they always get a spellbook then a wizard's gear package is basically a minimum wealth roll with little freedom. So, rolling for a wizard's wealth might make the wizard loss access to all class features or it almost guarantees they start with more gold. Reading one way kinda makes a single choice almost always superior.

I can reach four conclusions:

A wizard only ever gets a single spellbook from their equipment feature. (Can lead to number 4.)
A wizard starts with two spell books. (One blank from equipment and one with spells from "spellbook").
A wizard always starts with a single spellbook and can roll for gold instead of equipment packages.
A wizard that rolls might start without a spellbook (and access to their class features).



Which is it? Is there another answer?

[Ashrym]

The spell book is a class feature for wizards regardless of starting wealth or equipment. It states "At 1st level you have a spell book containing..." and a feature gained at 1st level.

A second spell book could be purchased but it would be empty until the wizard scribed spells into it.

[Elbeyon]

Number 3? Disregard the spellbook under starting equipment (it serves no purpose). It's in the player's interest to roll to start with more assets.

[Giant2005]

Yes it is possible to take the wealth option, roll minimum and then not have enough money to purchase a spellbook to start with although it is very unlikely. Not only is it unlikely to roll that low in the first place, it is unlikely for anyone to actually use the starting wealth option in the first place. You get a lot more value by taking the class and background equipment packs and simply selling the crap you don't want/need.

[Ashrym]

Number 3? Disregard the spellbook under starting equipment (it serves no purpose). It's in the player's interest to roll to start with more assets.

A wizard always starts with a single spell book and can roll for gold.

The spell book is part of the wizard spellcasting class feature gained at 1st level and listed under the spell casting class feature.

Buying the spell book would be like a rogue not starting with thieves tools proficiency until investing downtime in learning the proficiency. It's free to the PC as a class feature.

[Elbeyon]

@Giant2005 Number 1? The wizard can lose over 300 golds worth of "free" spells. Parts of the spellbook feature should be ignored in this case.

[Giant2005]

@Giant2005 Number 1? The wizard can lose over 300 golds worth of "free" spells. Parts of the spellbook feature should be ignored in this case.

If you were being a super harsh DM, then sure. I'd just tell the player to take the standard equipment and be done with it. Although you could have him wait and save up for a Spellbook and give him his starting spells when he gets his hands on it - that is slightly less harsh but still needlessly harsh imo.

[Ashrym]

Ummm... It's still a class feature gained at first level. Right in the PHB. PC's don't pay for their class features. If they did, scribing the spells into the book would crush the PC's starting wealth as he begins play in debtors prison.

[Giant2005]

Ummm... It's still a class feature gained at first level. Right in the PHB. PC's don't pay for their class features. If they did, scribing the spells into the book would crush the PC's starting wealth as he begins play in debtors prison.

It is no more of a class feature than Heavy Armor Proficiency or anything else that requires equipment. If a player decides to gamble on their Fighter, they might not have enough money to be able to reasonably shell out for the equipment their class features require too. Sure you can just say "A Fighter needs heavy armor to make use of his features, he needs a martial weapon too" that is why they gave them such things in their equipment list. It is also why they gave the Wizard a spellbook and gave the Rogue a set of Thieves' Tools. If you want them for free, then you take the option that gives them to you for free. If you want to gamble away the things you need in the hopes of walking away with a little extra, then you better realize that sometimes when you gamble, you lose.

[Ashrym]

It is no more of a class feature than Heavy Armor Proficiency or anything else that requires equipment. If a player decides to gamble on their Fighter, they might not have enough money to be able to reasonably shell out for the equipment their class features require too. Sure you can just say "A Fighter needs heavy armor to make use of his features, he needs a martial weapon too" that is why they gave them such things in their equipment list. It is also why they gave the Wizard a spellbook and gave the Rogue a set of Thieves' Tools. If you want them for free, then you take the option that gives them to you for free. If you want to gamble away the things you need in the hopes of walking away with a little extra, then you better realize that sometimes when you gamble, you lose.

No. It's specifically part of the spell casting class feature. Level 1, spellcasting on the chart. Sub heading under spellcasting is the spell book. That sub heading clearly states, "At 1st level, you have a spellbook containing six 1st-level wizard spells of your choice."

No other class feature states they have armor or thieves tools. The other features you mentioned state proficiency in those items as the class features.

I can say the wizard has a spellbook because the class feature it's part of specifically says "you have a spellbook". It doesn't say "if you buy a spell book" or anything other than "you have a spellbook".

[ImSAMazing]

I was looking over a wizard's wealth generation via rolling. Things get weird/complicated. The wizard have the feature: "Spellbook At 1st level, you have a spellbook containing six 1st-level wizard spells of your choice." Seems straight forward, they have a spellbook they start with that has the spells in it.

Yet, a wizard can roll for starting wealth meaning they don't get a spellbook from their equipment feature. Does the spellbook feature still apply and the wizard have a spellbook? Do wizards start with two spellbooks (one from each feature)? If a character rolls wealth is there a chance that the wizard doesn't start with spellbook (since they can't afford it)? At the same time if they always get a spellbook then a wizard's gear package is basically a minimum wealth roll with little freedom. So, rolling for a wizard's wealth might make the wizard loss access to all class features or it almost guarantees they start with more gold. Reading one way kinda makes a single choice almost always superior.

I can reach four conclusions:

A wizard only ever gets a single spellbook from their equipment feature. (Can lead to number 4.)
A wizard starts with two spell books. (One blank from equipment and one with spells from "spellbook").
A wizard always starts with a single spellbook and can roll for gold instead of equipment packages.
A wizard that rolls might start without a spellbook (and access to their class features).



Which is it? Is there another answer?

Well, the PHB says that if you lose your Spellbook, you only know the spells you have/had prepared and you unlearn the other spells. Of course the Wizard starts with a spellbook, else it would be really poor DM'ing...

[Giant2005]

No. It's specifically part of the spell casting class feature. Level 1, spellcasting on the chart. Sub heading under spellcasting is the spell book. That sub heading clearly states, "At 1st level, you have a spellbook containing six 1st-level wizard spells of your choice."

No other class feature states they have armor or thieves tools. The other features you mentioned state proficiency in those items as the class features.

I can say the wizard has a spellbook because the class feature it's part of specifically says "you have a spellbook". It doesn't say "if you buy a spell book" or anything other than "you have a spellbook".

Yes. That same passage also goes into great detail regarding the penalties a Wizard suffers for not having a spellbook. If the spellbook was some indestructible, infallible object, it wouldn't need such rules.
Just because a class ability refers to them having a spellbook doesn't mean that they are guaranteed to have a spellbook unconditionally. If you add that line of thought to other classes, things get really weird for example, the line "You have resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage" would give the ability to the Barbarian permanently if we ignored the conditional modifiers in the same way that you are choosing to with the Wizard.

[Alerad]

If your Wizard doesn't have enough money for a Spellbook, have him or her choose 6 spells and have (1 + Int modifier) of them prepared.

First quest for the Wizard - recover your missing Spellbook. 50gp seems reasonable reward for a side quest for 1st level characters ;) Your Wizard doesn't lose a class feature and can't abuse the starting wealth system.

[D.U.P.A.]

If the wizard does not start with spellbook, then DM should stop feigning and just say wizards are not an option in his campaign.

[Yagyujubei]

Yes. That same passage also goes into great detail regarding the penalties a Wizard suffers for not having a spellbook. If the spellbook was some indestructible, infallible object, it wouldn't need such rules.
Just because a class ability refers to them having a spellbook doesn't mean that they are guaranteed to have a spellbook unconditionally. If you add that line of thought to other classes, things get really weird for example, the line "You have resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage" would give the ability to the Barbarian permanently if we ignored the conditional modifiers in the same way that you are choosing to with the Wizard.

except that before the damage resistance bullet its clearly stated to be in effect only when raging...

"While raging, you gain the following benefits if you aren't wearing armor"
bullet
bullet
bullet

this is very different then the wizard entry which says:

Spellcasting: as a student of arcane magic, you have a spellbook containing...

and then:

spellbook: at 1st level, you have a spellbook containing...

the bit of text talking about losing and replacing your book is in a sidebar, not the actual class feature section, and it even states IF you lose your book or it is destroyed. This seems to elude to the fact that the "default state" would be having one to me.

[Giant2005]

This seems to elude to the fact that the "default state" would be having one to me.

And it is... Unless you choose not to have one. You have to willfully ditch your spellbook for the sake of cash for this to even be an issue.

[coredump]

Yes, you start with a spellbook. Unless you choose to not take that option and roll for gold and choose to not buy a spellbook.

A Feature of a class is something about that class, it is a description of the class or what it does. It does not give you equipment.

[Elbeyon]

Unless you choose to not take that option and roll for gold and choose to not buy a spellbook.The minimum gold for a wizard via rolling is too low to buy a spellbook. If they roll they might not have enough to buy a spellbook at all. It may not end up being a choice once they roll.

[Thrudd]

A wizard starts with the spell book for free, regardless of which equipment option is selected. They receive it from their master/teacher who has taught them the spells contained within, during the course of their pre-level 1 education. They could never have learned any magic without first having a spell book.

[Slipperychicken]

I think the roll for starting wealth is intended to be in addition to the wizard's spellbook.

[EggKookoo]

Yes. That same passage also goes into great detail regarding the penalties a Wizard suffers for not having a spellbook. If the spellbook was some indestructible, infallible object, it wouldn't need such rules.

Does "starting with" equal "indestructible, infallible"?

A fighter starts with his hands. They're neither indestructible nor infallible.

[Thrudd]

Yes, a wizard could lose their spell book to damage (especially fire and acid) or theft. This is why a smart wizard regularly buys extra materials and creates backup spell books to be stored in a safe location.

[Ashrym]

A Feature of a class is something about that class, it is a description of the class or what it does. It does not give you equipment.

It is in the class features as part of the spell casting feature instead of in the equipment. "You have" isn't ambiguous.

[Naanomi]

Does a character who multiclasses into Wizard get a spellbook automatically? I read 'yes' by the wording on Spellcasting

[Thrudd]

Does a character who multiclasses into Wizard get a spellbook automatically? I read 'yes' by the wording on Spellcasting

Yes. Explaining how that works in the game world will be up to the DM and the player. I would require some significant down-time to multiclass, especially into a spell casting class.

[Giant2005]

I think the roll for starting wealth is intended to be in addition to the wizard's spellbook.

That is demonstratedly false.
The starting wealth option averages out to a similar value as the class's starting equipment. That is why walking arsenals in heavy armor start out with more cash if they take that route - the equipment they are sacrificing for that option is worth more than the average class's starting list.
With that in mind, compare the Wizard and the Sorcerer. With the spellbook excluded from the calculations, the Sorcerer has more value in their starting equipment yet they roll less starting wealth than the Wizard. With the spellbook included in the calculation, then the Wizard has more value in his equipment and the extra gold in the starting wealth makes sense.
Thus we can conclude with absolute certainty that the Wizard is expected to be purchasing his spellbook with his starting wealth rather than summoning it out of the nether. However houseruling otherwise is certainly a viable option and easy to achieve while still maintaining balance. 2D4x10 averages out to the value of a spellbook, so simply giving the Wizard a spellbook and lowering his starting wealth roll to 2D4x10 gold is the simplest and most effective solution without throwing out balance.

[Ashrym]

That is demonstratedly false.
The starting wealth option averages out to a similar value as the class's starting equipment. That is why walking arsenals in heavy armor start out with more cash if they take that route - the equipment they are sacrificing for that option is worth more than the average class's starting list.
With that in mind, compare the Wizard and the Sorcerer. With the spellbook excluded from the calculations, the Sorcerer has more value in their starting equipment yet they roll less starting wealth than the Wizard. With the spellbook included in the calculation, then the Wizard has more value in his equipment and the extra gold in the starting wealth makes sense.
Thus we can conclude with absolute certainty that the Wizard is expected to be purchasing his spellbook with his starting wealth rather than summoning it out of the nether. However houseruling otherwise is certainly a viable option and easy to achieve while still maintaining balance. 2D4x10 averages out to the value of a spellbook, so simply giving the Wizard a spellbook and lowering his starting wealth roll to 2D4x10 gold is the simplest and most effective solution without throwing out balance.

That would be an assumption. Correlation does not equal causation. It's not even reasonable correlation on which the assumption is based because the average difference in starting wealth by rolling doesn't equal the value of a spellbook.

There is still no ambiguity in the text "you have a spellbook" as listed in the spell casting class feature. It can be lost, stolen, or destroyed but at 1st level the wizard has that regardless. It's a very literal application of RAW language.

[dafrca]

After reading the arguments offered in this thread I will stick to a Wizard gets their spell book regardless of their electing to roll for gold or take the equipment listed in their class and background.

Nice points made by you all though. I had fun reading the thread. :smallsmile:

[Giant2005]

That would be an assumption. Correlation does not equal causation. It's not even reasonable correlation on which the assumption is based because the average difference in starting wealth by rolling doesn't equal the value of a spellbook.

There is still no ambiguity in the text "you have a spellbook" as listed in the spell casting class feature. It can be lost, stolen, or destroyed but at 1st level the wizard has that regardless. It's a very literal application of RAW language.

And you absolutely do start with a spellbook in the default game. No-one is disputing that.
We are talking about using a variant rule that removes that certainty and replaces it with an option.

[Elbeyon]

And you absolutely do start with a spellbook in the default game. No-one is disputing that.
We are talking about using a variant rule that removes that certainty and replaces it with an option.Just to be clear. The rule isn't a "variant rule" like feats. It's assumed to be in the game by default though using it is optional.

[squab]

Yes. That same passage also goes into great detail regarding the penalties a Wizard suffers for not having a spellbook. If the spellbook was some indestructible, infallible object, it wouldn't need such rules.
Just because a class ability refers to them having a spellbook doesn't mean that they are guaranteed to have a spellbook unconditionally. If you add that line of thought to other classes, things get really weird for example, the line "You have resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage" would give the ability to the Barbarian permanently if we ignored the conditional modifiers in the same way that you are choosing to with the Wizard.

Yes and over the course of the game something might happen to make them lose the spellbook. They start with a spellbook. It is conceivable
that they could lose it later.

I should add this to my signature.... 5th Ed rules are not legal handbooks. They are guidelines. These guidelines are to be used alongside common sense and a consideration for what leads to the best gameplay, with the DM having the final call.

Furthermore, removing a key component of a class at level 1 due to sheer bad luck is terrible gameplay. There is a significant difference between a fighter rolling low on on wealth and buying subpar weapons and armor. A wizard without the spellbook is more like the fighter rolling so low on wealth that all that he has no weapon and no armor.

[Giant2005]

I should add this to my signature.... 5th Ed rules are not legal handbooks. They are guidelines. These guidelines are to be used alongside common sense and a consideration for what leads to the best gameplay, with the DM having the final call.
You don't need to add that to your signature - it goes without saying. As far as I know, none of us have any special powers that allow us to mind control others over the internet, so we have no actual means of controlling what others do in their games.


Furthermore, removing a key component of a class at level 1 due to sheer bad luck is terrible gameplay.
I agree, which is why I stated that if that happened in a game I was running, I'd simply let the Wizard take the standard starting equipment even after choosing to gamble and losing. However I'd also extend that same courtesy to the other players so they don't feel unduly discriminated against.


There is a significant difference between a fighter rolling low on on wealth and buying subpar weapons and armor. A wizard without the spellbook is more like the fighter rolling so low on wealth that all that he has no weapon and no armor.
Not really. The Wizard isn't really going to be so hampered by starting without a Spellbook - all he has to contend with is the need to get a lot of cash and to get that cash fast enough that he can get a spellbook and write down all of his spells before he levels up and has to start forgetting some.
The Fighter however would be using his abilities at a reduced capacity and because of it, leveling up might not even be an issue as being dead could be a very real possibility. The Wizard might have some serious financial pressures but a Str-based Fighter that is stuck in Leather armor would be taking an extra 56.2% damage from something as simple as an Orc. Considering the early levels are the levels where you are already the most prone to death, that Fighter is severely screwed.

[coredump]

The chance of a wizard not getting enough for a spellbook is 0.3% So that is not really a valid concern.
The chance of a wizard being able to afford a spellbook and nothing else, is less than 2%. So again, not really a concern.

A spellbook is equipment you start the game with, there is a rule that gives you an alternative. That rule makes no distinction between equipment you start with as a 'class feature' or otherwise. So it really doesn't matter how or why you would normally start with a spellbook, you *chose* to forsake all of your starting equipment for straight cash.

[TheOOB]

IMO the spellbook is granted by a class ability, thus the wizard should get it no matter what. I don't believe in punishing people who choosing to customize their eq.

Also random starting gold rolls are silly.

[Shining Wrath]

Yes. That same passage also goes into great detail regarding the penalties a Wizard suffers for not having a spellbook. If the spellbook was some indestructible, infallible object, it wouldn't need such rules.
Just because a class ability refers to them having a spellbook doesn't mean that they are guaranteed to have a spellbook unconditionally. If you add that line of thought to other classes, things get really weird for example, the line "You have resistance to bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage" would give the ability to the Barbarian permanently if we ignored the conditional modifiers in the same way that you are choosing to with the Wizard.

And if you ever begin a campaign where the DM states the wizard must purchase his spellbook and starting spells, don't forget to grab any snacks you brought with you as you leave and never come back.

Seriously, a wizard starts with a spellbook. Always, every time, without exception.

[Xetheral]

Seriously, a wizard starts with a spellbook. Always, every time, without exception.

I agree. I don't necessarily like it, but I agree. It's similar to "a druid will not wear metal armor". There is no possibility in the rules that a wizard can start the game without a spellbook. (He can, of course, choose to burn it, lose it, or make crayon drawings in it the moment the campaign begins, but all wizards begin with a spellbook because the rules say they do.)

[Giant2005]

And if you ever begin a campaign where the DM states the wizard must purchase his spellbook and starting spells, don't forget to grab any snacks you brought with you as you leave and never come back.

Seriously, a wizard starts with a spellbook. Always, every time, without exception.

Did you even read the thread? It has nothing at all to do with a DM - it is solely the player's decision that would lead to the possibility of not having a spellbook.

[coredump]

Seriously, a wizard starts with a spellbook. Always, every time, without exception.

Unless he follows the rule option that allows the player to choose to forgo all of his equipment for a lump sum of gold instead. Or do you want to disallow that option to the player?? Or do you want to change that rule?

[EggKookoo]

Unless he follows the rule option that allows the player to choose to forgo all of his equipment for a lump sum of gold instead. Or do you want to disallow that option to the player?? Or do you want to change that rule?

Isn't the question whether or not a wizard's spellbook counts as "equipment"? Or is it a class feature?

When a Warlock gets his Book of Shadows (assuming the player picks Pact of the Tome), is that equipment or a class feature? Does it make a difference because the Warlock gets it at 3rd level but the Wizard gets his book at 1st?

Edit: I guess it does count as equipment, as it's listed under "Equipment" in the Wizard class feature list.

[Ashrym]

If the player forgoes the default equipment list that doesn't change the "you have a spellbook..." portion of the spellcasting class feature listed for wizards.

"you have" is still clear and hasn't been changed or removed in having rolled GP.

[Thrudd]

The question we need to ask is " does it ever make sense for a starting wizard to not have a spell book". If the answer is "no"(it is), then the rules should not allow for the possibility. A wizard gets a spell book automatically at level 1, period. They could never have become a wizard without one.

[Giant2005]

If the player forgoes the default equipment list that doesn't change the "you have a spellbook..." portion of the spellcasting class feature listed for wizards.

"you have" is still clear and hasn't been changed or removed in having rolled GP.

I'm sure the writers would have wrote "unless you don't have a spellbook, you have a spellbook" instead but it would have seemed insulting to their customers. It is a fair assumption that most people would intuitively understand that if you don't have a Spellbook, then any clauses relating to having a Spellbook don't apply.

[Ashrym]

I'm sure the writers would have wrote "unless you don't have a spellbook, you have a spellbook" instead but it would have seemed insulting to their customers. It is a fair assumption that most people would intuitively understand that if you don't have a Spellbook, then any clauses relating to having a Spellbook don't apply.

I withdraw my dispute. Checking with the big JC confirms you are correct and I am incorrect.

/walkofshame doh

[Dimcair]

And just in case you FIND yourself in such a situation, start as a human with the keen mind feat. All you need now is a book to write your spells down before the end of the month^^

[coredump]

If the player forgoes the default equipment list that doesn't change the "you have a spellbook..." portion of the spellcasting class feature listed for wizards.

"you have" is still clear and hasn't been changed or removed in having rolled GP.
Read the rule more carefully, it does not say "forgo the default equipment list" it says "When you create your character, you receive equipment based on a combination of your class and background. Alternatively, you can start with a number of gold pieces based on your class..."

There is no way around the fact that a wizard starts with a spellbook 'based on yout Class'. They make no distinction between equipment gained via 'equipment list' vs 'class feature'... if you start with equipment based on what class you chose, you no longer get it if you utilize the "alternative" option.

[Ashrym]

Read the rule more carefully, it does not say "forgo the default equipment list" it says "When you create your character, you receive equipment based on a combination of your class and background. Alternatively, you can start with a number of gold pieces based on your class..."

There is no way around the fact that a wizard starts with a spellbook 'based on yout Class'. They make no distinction between equipment gained via 'equipment list' vs 'class feature'... if you start with equipment based on what class you chose, you no longer get it if you utilize the "alternative" option.

Read my last post. You're a bit late to continue arguing.

[Giant2005]

/walkofshame

There is no shame on the internet.