aren't there too few spells out there?

[With a box]

in this list (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?414221-Complete-List-of-3-x-Wizard-Spells-%28Last-updated-11-06-2015%29) made by Pippin, there are 1903 sor/wiz spells in dnd 3.5 and if we scribe every sor/wiz spells in spellbooks, it's less then 8,000 page (7,352 pages of 3.5 spells+544 pages of outdated 3.0 spells)
and thats means you need 80 spellbooks(240lb) or 8 boccob's blessed books(8lb) to scribe every spell a wizard can use.
it would fit in a single library bookshelf. or type I bag of holding. or in a backpack if we use blessed books(or modern paperback). which doesn't make sense.
like, you visited to boccob's library and found there is only one bookshelf assigned for spells.

[INoKnowNames]

A spell uses up 1 page per spell level. Even Cantrips use up a single page.

I am curious what the final math would look like, though. Care to do it for us? :smallbiggrin:

Edit: Wait, I see what you're saying. That -is- far too few spells...

I had to go back and do the math myself just to make sure you weren't joshing me. Only 80 Spell Books to hold every single spell... They have to be those massive Bible sized Spell Books that little kids can sleep on. They are 10 lbs, after all. You could have your library that way.... though the blessed Book does shoot a hole in that image...

[With a box]

A spell uses up 1 page per spell level. Even Cantrips use up a single page.

I am curious what the final math would look like, though. Care to do it for us? :smallbiggrin:

like I said in upper post, 7,352pages need for scribe every 3.5 spells
level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 total
3.5e 28 196 294 276 247 226 165 129 99 101 1761
28+196*1+294*2+276*3+247*4+226*5+165*6+129*7+99*8+ 101*9= 7352

[INoKnowNames]

like I said in upper post

Hey, I caught my mistake; this doesn't count as being ninjad if I fix it in time.

I suppose the easiest in story justification is that there might be that few spells, but those are just official spells. You've got unofficial versions, versions that only work with certain races, homebrew spells, versions in other languages.... spells are also probably meant to be somewhat rare, as while there a lot of notable wizards and sorcerers, the population is probably much much larger than just them.

[MesiDoomstalker]

Personally, I've always made a distinction between a 'finished' spell and research notes. That massive library full of spellbooks? Most of those books have detailed notes on the development, testing, and perfecting of a given spell. What goes in the Wizard's Spellbook is the simplified recipe, like in a cookbook. For every level 1 spell in his spellbook, there's an entire book back in his library just on his notes and experiments in developing that spell. Not to mention not every book has to be spellbooks. Some could be historical texts, gossip mags, or trade magazines. A well read wizard has a wide berth of reading subjects.

[Bullet06320]

that list is missing dragon magazine content, dungeon magazine content, the kingdoms of kalamar books(which fit in a weird place anyways)and the diablo books(3.0)
so that is probly a couple more pages at least
granted all those sources are nonstandard but are all WOTC or WOTC licensed at least

then take into account the spell research rules, basically homebrew rules for making new spells, so the possibilities there are endless
then there is older edition material that's easily converted, but not 3.5 official

and then if we get into 3rd party material, which verys wildly in balance, availability and allowability

not to mention, most spell libraries would have multiple copies of the more common spells, and you would have to search out the more unique ones
and as MesiDoomstalker mentioned, lots of research notes as such. For example in the 2nd edition book pages from the mages, there is a section including ink recipes for magical scrolls, and in volo's guide to all things magical, there is a section on the magical properties of gemstones, so many books may have similar notes

[ngilop]

so because spells in a spell book take up hardly any space you think there needs to be MORE spells?


that's crazy.

Instead of focusing on the fact that there needs to be more spells for wizards to put in their spellbooks so said collection of spell books take up more than just a bookcase worth of stuff in a library.


maybe you should instead look at it as if the number of pages required maybe followed a sort of Fibonacci sequence?

so instead of 28+196*1+294*2+276*3+247*4+226*5+165*6+129*7+99*8+ 101*9= 7352

you'd get 28*1+196*1+294*2+276*3+247*5+226*8+165*13+129*21+9 9*34+101*55 OR
28+196+588+828+1235+1808+2145+2709+3366+5555=18458

so 2.51 times as many pages. which means ~201 books instead of 80.

[Arbane]

Personally, I've always made a distinction between a 'finished' spell and research notes. That massive library full of spellbooks? Most of those books have detailed notes on the development, testing, and perfecting of a given spell. What goes in the Wizard's Spellbook is the simplified recipe, like in a cookbook. For every level 1 spell in his spellbook, there's an entire book back in his library just on his notes and experiments in developing that spell. Not to mention not every book has to be spellbooks. Some could be historical texts, gossip mags, or trade magazines. A well read wizard has a wide berth of reading subjects.

Makes sense to me, but unfortunately it's not backed up by the game rules. Which bugs me, because it just seems wrong to me how little D&D wizards NEED Tomes of Eldritch Lore. They should be blowing all their money on books and lab equipment the same way their more muscleheaded compatriots blow all their loot on ale and whores.

[Bullet06320]

Makes sense to me, but unfortunately it's not backed up by the game rules. Which bugs me, because it just seems wrong to me how little D&D wizards NEED Tomes of Eldritch Lore. They should be blowing all their money on books and lab equipment the same way their more muscleheaded compatriots blow all their loot on ale and whores.

or gamers blow their allowance on splat books, lol

if you think about it in real life, doctors have medical books and journals to constantly further their knowledge, lawyers have law books, statute books, case files, copies of recent rulings,mechanics have car manuals for every new car that comes out, same goes for most professions, continuing educational materials for their respective fields. even though the rules don't spell it out (pun intended) makes for good flavor to incorporate it as house fluff

[Melcar]

in this list (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?414221-Complete-List-of-3-x-Wizard-Spells-%28Last-updated-11-06-2015%29) made by Pippin, there are 1903 sor/wiz spells in dnd 3.5 and if we scribe every sor/wiz spells in spellbooks, it's less then 8,000 page (7,352 pages of 3.5 spells+544 pages of outdated 3.0 spells)
and thats means you need 80 spellbooks(240lb) or 8 boccob's blessed books(8lb) to scribe every spell a wizard can use.
it would fit in a single library bookshelf. or type I bag of holding. or in a backpack if we use blessed books(or modern paperback). which doesn't make sense.
like, you visited to boccob's library and found there is only one bookshelf assigned for spells.

I would imagine, that every spellscaster out there, has created a few personal spells... I assume that as a player, and DM that way too. Larloch might not even use any of the official spells but uses only his own modified, personaland secret spells. The same goes for the Srinshee. Who knows what a 4500-ish year old Grandmaster of the High-mages of Cormathor has up her dress. I venture, that for every broken official spell, she has two even more broken.

[Bronk]

I agree, the spells documented in all the splatbooks are only the most common spells in the worlds we have detailed.

There's an epic organization in the ELH called the 'Order of the Book' that has 3000+ members all searching and compiling as many arcane magical spells as they can, and they've been at it for long enough for their leader to get old, die, become a lich, and become a demilich, all while constantly scribing the spells into an artifact book nonstop yet still amassing a crazy giant backlog. That seems like a lot of spells!

[Willie the Duck]

That would be the minimum space to hold just the functionally required notes to prepare the spells by an already trained and educated wizard. The whole textbook versions, with explanatory text, historical knowledge ("acid arrow was invented by an elven wizard named Melf, who..."), institutional knowledge, asides (given that most people who write this stuff have some additional institutional biases and things they think important to say), along with everything required as research material for a DC infinity Knowledge: Arcana check, along with the odd book focusing on alchemy, and then glass blowing, distillation, making magic swords, the best swords to make magical, the material science of steel, the best iron to buy to make that steel, the local economic treatises on pirate predation of trade routes and the instability that has on iron shipments from 132 years ago, plus that one book on demonology that has been shown to be factually inaccurate, but no one removes because of that really awesome succubus illustration on page 78... well that's were a wizard gets a library full of books.

[Fizban]

Makes sense to me, but unfortunately it's not backed up by the game rules. Which bugs me, because it just seems wrong to me how little D&D wizards NEED Tomes of Eldritch Lore. They should be blowing all their money on books and lab equipment the same way their more muscleheaded compatriots blow all their loot on ale and whores.
Actually it is. In order to research an original spell you need access to a library. The spells you gain on level up are supposed to be common spells, while many splatbook spells were described first as the original spells of this or that person. But once they're in a splatbook both players and DMs want to use them at will, so they are assumed to be common and require no research. If you want to actually make a new spell you have to spend weeks researching with a library and 1,000's of gp on mysterious testing in order to do so.

Of course the arcane research library only needs 200 books (3lb each) to cover all the material (Tome and Blood). So 280 books for all the arcane secrets of the universe.

[Melcar]

Personally, I've always made a distinction between a 'finished' spell and research notes. That massive library full of spellbooks? Most of those books have detailed notes on the development, testing, and perfecting of a given spell. What goes in the Wizard's Spellbook is the simplified recipe, like in a cookbook. For every level 1 spell in his spellbook, there's an entire book back in his library just on his notes and experiments in developing that spell. Not to mention not every book has to be spellbooks. Some could be historical texts, gossip mags, or trade magazines. A well read wizard has a wide berth of reading subjects.

I very much like this comparison. The 2000-ish spells would constitude the known dishes around the world. Beef Wellington being one. But new dishes are made up all the time. El-Bulli, The Fat Duck and NOMA are some of the places where they keep inventing new and exciting ways of mixing this and that. The same can be said of creative spell inventors. The possibilities are virtually endless.

[Chronos]

Quoth MesiDoomstalker:

Personally, I've always made a distinction between a 'finished' spell and research notes. That massive library full of spellbooks? Most of those books have detailed notes on the development, testing, and perfecting of a given spell. What goes in the Wizard's Spellbook is the simplified recipe, like in a cookbook. For every level 1 spell in his spellbook, there's an entire book back in his library just on his notes and experiments in developing that spell.
This also accounts for the GP cost of researching a new spell. You know those special inks and so on you need for scribing a spell in your spellbook? Well, in researching, you need many times that many pages, and so you need that much more of the special inks.

[Strigon]

I imagine that actual spellbooks in a library are few and far between - a real Wizard studies magic, not just spells, so there would be tomes on the nature of magic, different ways to access it, theories and theorems and prophecies galore; all so that the Wizard can understand his power.
This, of course, ignores any other books in his library on magical beasts, history, experiments, his own personal notes, etc. And then, in the case of an actual spellbook, there would be several copies of each spell lying around, with books on the finer points of when and where to cast which spells, spells cataloged by type, effect, school of magic, inventor, and whatever else the Wizard can think of - and more books that go into even more detail than you'd find in your average spellbook.

Personally, I've always viewed traditional spellbooks as the "SparkNotes" of magic - it tells you what you need to know on the spot (how to cast the spell and roughly what it does), but it's not enough to propel you through a career in the field.

[Crake]

I've always thought of spells to be, if equated to today's society, to be like code, or programs. You don't find them in libraries, but you can find so many books ABOUT them, and how to write them, and all sorts of different topics on the subject. If you think about it like that, having several thousand different programs to do little things is still pretty big, and I'd assume wizards would do things like make easy little cantrips to help them automate tasks just like programmers would write scripts and the like, storing the cantrips in things like wondrous architecture to make them financially insignificant.

[Grod_The_Giant]

For each spell, you might also have a thousand personalized versions with slightly different approaches, thematics, and similar such fluffy stuff. A big library might compile those as well.

[Flickerdart]

Most libraries (at least, public libraries) have more than one copy of each book. There will also be shelves dedicated to scrolls, which can have much more variety - polymorph into a dragon, polymorph into a hydra, extended polymoprh into a barghest, and so on.

[Jowgen]

I think there is also some wiggle-room with flawed and out-dated spells, which exists but just don't deserve printing because of their inferiority.

Some spells that people develop might just not work right all the time or have some sort of subtle draw back. Or they might have non-mechanical side effects that make them unpopular. One thing that comes to mind is one Dragon mag article on Dragon-specific spells, which mentions how those spells don't really have material components, because material components are something that lesser races needed to start employing as crutches to compensate for their lack of proper magical understanding.

In terms of out-dated spells, I imagine there are a lot of older versions of the same spell that just don't work as well as the new and improved version. For example, hot and cold environment specific endure elements; or all the things prestidigitation can do split into different cantrips.

Point is, all the spells that are printed in books are the latest gold-standard spells that are the best thing for their job that's available.

[Psyren]

Did anyone mention Geometer yet? With that, every spell regardless of level takes up a single page.

[Flickerdart]

Did anyone mention Geometer yet? With that, every spell regardless of level takes up a single page.
Actually, that brings up a good point - not every wizard writes the spell the same way. A wizard preparing or copying spells from another's spellbook runs into problems:

On preparing spells: "If the [Spellcraft] check fails, she cannot try to prepare the spell from the same source again until the next day."
On scribing spells: "If the [Spellcraft] check fails, the wizard cannot understand or copy the spell. She cannot attempt to learn or copy that spell again until she gains another rank in Spellcraft. "


This could be a huge problem for lower-level wizards rolling poorly on Spellcraft (even DC 16 is not trivial for 4 ranks + INT), who can no longer use the source for a day or even an entire level. But if there are multiple different versions of the spell scribed by different wizards, the apprentice need only walk a few steps to find a copy he might have better luck understanding.

In the real world, we have different versions based on one source material, too. There are approximately a bajillion translations of Lord of the Rings into Russian, for example, and the world's music industry more covers of John Lennon's Imagine than I would care to count.

[ericgrau]

Note that this is 8,000 pages of special materials too, so the cost to create is at least 1.2 million gp. Much more if a lot of spells had to be found on scrolls. Still a bit low for every major spell ever, but far more expensive than your typical bookshelf of books.


Actually, that brings up a good point - not every wizard writes the spell the same way. A wizard preparing or copying spells from another's spellbook runs into problems:

On preparing spells: "If the [Spellcraft] check fails, she cannot try to prepare the spell from the same source again until the next day."
On scribing spells: "If the [Spellcraft] check fails, the wizard cannot understand or copy the spell. She cannot attempt to learn or copy that spell again until she gains another rank in Spellcraft. "


This could be a huge problem for lower-level wizards rolling poorly on Spellcraft (even DC 16 is not trivial for 4 ranks + INT), who can no longer use the source for a day or even an entire level. But if there are multiple different versions of the spell scribed by different wizards, the apprentice need only walk a few steps to find a copy he might have better luck understanding.
Not really thanks to the read magic cantrip, which is good for 10 pages per caster level per casting.

[Flickerdart]

Not really thanks to the read magic cantrip, which is good for 10 pages per caster level per casting.
Read magic allows you to decipher magical writing, but deciphering is explicitly a separate stage from preparing or scribing.

[Melcar]

Note that this is 8,000 pages of special materials too, so the cost to create is at least 1.2 million gp. Much more if a lot of spells had to be found on scrolls. Still a bit low for every major spell ever, but far more expensive than your typical bookshelf of books.


Not really thanks to the read magic cantrip, which is good for 10 pages per caster level per casting.

Doesn't read magic only make is, so you understand what you read? Im pretty sure it wont help with your own scribing of the spell.

[Psyren]

This could be a huge problem for lower-level wizards rolling poorly on Spellcraft (even DC 16 is not trivial for 4 ranks + INT), who can no longer use the source for a day or even an entire level. But if there are multiple different versions of the spell scribed by different wizards, the apprentice need only walk a few steps to find a copy he might have better luck understanding.

Nah it's not hard, they can have a high mod and just take 10 to guarantee success. They have to be in a peaceful area to even attempt scribing anyway, so there won't be "threats or distractions" preventing them.

[ericgrau]

I was going to say some things but then the above 3 covered it. They are correct.

[Flickerdart]

they can have a high mod
Yeah, that works great for Johnny Player Character, but a 1st level NPC wizard with Int 11-13 will not be able to take 10 to learn a 1st level spell - the DC is 16 but his modifier is only +4 or 5, assuming that he has max Spellcraft ranks. If there is nobody available to Aid Another him, he may very well bungle up the scribing. Lower-INT wizards aren't that surprising if you consider, for instance, multiclass characters who are a rogue or fighter first and only recently began to study the arcane arts.

In fact, if it's a place where newbie wizards scribe spells, there's another simple reason to have multiple copies - multiple wizards trying to copy it at the same time.

[ericgrau]

Yeah, that works great for Johnny Player Character, but a 1st level NPC wizard with Int 11-13 will not be able to take 10 to learn a 1st level spell - the DC is 16 but his modifier is only +4 or 5, assuming that he has max Spellcraft ranks. If there is nobody available to Aid Another him, he may very well bungle up the scribing. Lower-INT wizards aren't that surprising if you consider, for instance, multiclass characters who are a rogue or fighter first and only recently began to study the arcane arts.

The check result when taking a 10 is 13+level+int mod, so that starts around 16-18 and goes up from there faster than the difficulty goes up. So practically every spellcraft check is an auto-pass.

Johnny NPC with a 13 int starts at 15 but as soon as he hits level 2 he auto-passes all his checks. At level 3 and 12 int, the minimum, he is making DC 17 checks and auto-passing. So we only need extra copies of 1st level spells.

In fact, if it's a place where newbie wizards scribe spells, there's another simple reason to have multiple copies - multiple wizards trying to copy it at the same time.
That's a better reason, except that even 1st level wizards are pretty uncommon. This would have to be a pretty major hub to even have extra copies of 1st level spells, and wizards capable of handling higher level spells become increasingly rare. For them it makes more sense to copy a different spell in the meantime in the rare situation that someone else wants exactly the same spell. Perhaps a signup sheet.

[Flickerdart]

The check result when taking a 10 is 13+level+int mod
Only if the character in question is maxing Spellcraft. There is no guarantee of this.

[ericgrau]

Only if the character in question is maxing Spellcraft. There is no guarantee of this.
:smallconfused: Not an absolute guarantee, but the pointing and laughing from the other wizards at the shock of a wizard who hasn't helps a bit.

I have done this before. Once. On a sorcerer. In a party full of casters to insure that someone else had spellcraft. A couple more times I have skipped even knowledge(arcana) while keeping spellcraft. It's a bit essential for "What the heck did he just cast". Now that I think about it, why the heck was the party scout the one to roll spellcraft against the custom spell I made in one campaign? Maybe he multiclassed.

[Platymus Pus]

There are at least 5000+ spells, there are likely many more than that in records and actual spell creation which you can do yourself for homebrew.

[Psyren]

Only if the character in question is maxing Spellcraft. There is no guarantee of this.

There's no guarantee that the wizard prepared read magic either. There's some assumptions that would simply be unreasonable for an exercise like this, and not investing in Spellcraft is one of them.

[Flickerdart]

:smallconfused: Not an absolute guarantee, but the pointing and laughing from the other wizards at the shock of a wizard who hasn't helps a bit.

I have done this before. On a sorcerer. In a party full of casters to insure that someone else had spellcraft.
Consider the NPC wizard with crappy scores. With an Int mod of +1 or +2, he has 3-4 skills to invest in, 5 if he is human. There are many places to put them:

"Primary research" wizards - the physicists and mathematicians compared to Spellcraft's engineers - value Knowledge: Arcana and many other Knowledges.
"Archaeology" and "ethnography" wizards - those who research magic of other civilizations, extant or extinct - would enjoy having Decipher Script available.
"Craftsman" wizards - those responsible for making magic items - may invest in Craft so they can be self-sufficient and not rely on outsider smiths.
"Assistant" wizards - those who work at a university in a non-research role - may well want Profession so they are better at their job, and probably some other Knowledges too.
"Guards" wizards - those who use their magic to defend the library - would want Concentration.
Then there are all sorts of cross-class skills a wizard may covet - Diplomacy and Bluff for an enchanter, for instance.

[Zanos]

Yeah, that works great for Johnny Player Character, but a 1st level NPC wizard with Int 11-13 will not be able to take 10 to learn a 1st level spell - the DC is 16 but his modifier is only +4 or 5, assuming that he has max Spellcraft ranks. If there is nobody available to Aid Another him, he may very well bungle up the scribing. Lower-INT wizards aren't that surprising if you consider, for instance, multiclass characters who are a rogue or fighter first and only recently began to study the arcane arts.

In fact, if it's a place where newbie wizards scribe spells, there's another simple reason to have multiple copies - multiple wizards trying to copy it at the same time.
Shouldn't NPCs with class levels have the elite array? That gives dingus the NPC wizard 15 int, making him just make the DC 16 at level 1 on a take 10. A masterwork quill could also lend a +2 if he can afford it.

[Flickerdart]

Shouldn't NPCs with class levels have the elite array?
That is true - although then I suppose you still have the edge case of half-orc wizards, but they really have only themselves to blame.

[Psyren]

In addition, an NPC whose job description is dedicated spell-scribing should have a Headband of Intelllect.

[OldTrees1]

So the problem as I understand it is what books are in the library if they can't merely be a single full listing of every spell(dictionary model).

1) A mage's personal spellbook collection is unlikely to contain every spell. Thus Gandalf's 4th Grimore would contain different spells than Baba Yaga's 3rd Tome. This concern disappears after libraries can get scribed library edition alphabetized spellbooks.

2) Arcane theses being written on single spells teaches us that, like a dictionary, a spellbook carries the minimum amount of information about each spell. Although perhaps a spellbook is more aptly compared to a recipe book (something else that contains the minimum useful amount of information). If spellbooks are to recipe book, then surely there is room for the arcane theses to be shelved as extra detail on each spell.

3) Wait, surely these wizards must have noticed some trends in these theses. These trends could be used to write tomes on magical theories and theorems. Maybe such tomes existed as stepping stones for writing even more advanced arcane theses about each spell? (Sidenote: The undiscovered spells implied by these tomes probably dwarfs the discovered spells)

4) I am remembering knowledge arcana covering more than just spells. If similar tomes and theses were written about magical beats, dragons, and magical events/places, then that could cover even more shelf space.

5) I would be remiss if I did not take this opportunity to point out that any History of Science book is much thicker than the corresponding sections in a Science textbook but thinner than the combined pages of the relevant scientific papers on the subject. Accounting for the history tomes and the papers documenting the spell research and experimentation over the years would add a lot of shelf space.

All told, could this fit in a library?

[Segev]

Consider your own collection of gaming books.

Now consider that, to medieval people, the sheer quantity of them would make your library look enormous.

Finally, consider that a wizard's library, if he keeps a real, honest to goodness library, is going to have books of interest to him that are not just spellbooks.

[Milodiah]

The real issue here is that everyone says "Well of course, the rules say you can homebrew your own spells! That means there must be hundreds of thousands out there!"

But I rarely ever see a GM that does. I doubt most Playgrounders even do so on a regular basis, and we're often exceptions to the 'normal' GM in terms of time commitment and work put in given we frequent a forum pretty much explicitly for D&D 3.5. There's this illusion that there sure could be a spell intended to do this or that, but there usually isn't, because people wince at the idea of making their own for some reason.

[Zanos]

In addition, an NPC whose job description is dedicated spell-scribing should have a Headband of Intelllect.
I think a 4,000 gp magic item is a bit outside the means of a 1st level NPC.

[Psyren]

I think a 4,000 gp magic item is a bit outside the means of a 1st level NPC.

Why does he have to be 1st level? Elminster and Mordenkainen are NPCs too.

[Zanos]

Why does he have to be 1st level? Elminster and Mordenkainen are NPCs too.
Wasn't the discussion about a 1st level wizard having issue making scribing DCs?

[Chronos]

Quoth ericgrau:

For them it makes more sense to copy a different spell in the meantime in the rare situation that someone else wants exactly the same spell. Perhaps a signup sheet.
Yeah, but the ink you use on the signup sheet has to be made from medusa venom mixed with xorn blood and myrrh.

[Flickerdart]

The real issue here is that everyone says "Well of course, the rules say you can homebrew your own spells! That means there must be hundreds of thousands out there!"

But I rarely ever see a GM that does.
I think GMs do it all the time, they just never make it explicit. The explanation for many NPC actions is "he's a wizard" and then you just take it at face value that he can do this stuff, like cook eggs for himself while reading a book or solving the logistical nightmare of breeding an owl and a bear together, and so forth. You walk into the BBEG's tower and the skulls on the walls turn to stare at you. It's magic, but what spells? Nobody asks because it's not important.

These are spells that are never highlighted as spells nor named, never mind assigned action costs and DCs and levels. They exist somewhere on the other side of the law of conservation of detail.

[Psyren]

Wasn't the discussion about a 1st level wizard having issue making scribing DCs?

Was it? Why would a 1st-level wizard be scribing spells he can't cast (read: above 1st level) though?

[Der_DWSage]

Right around 2000 spells fitting in 8 or 80 books in their most condensed forms...actually, that makes a good amount of sense to me. Keeping in mind that the way Adventurer Wizards scribe spells is likely the most condensed, 'How do I accomplish this task?' effort ever, due to the necessity of needing to keep those spells in mind during stressful situations.

I'd see an actual library being much less constrained. There's going to be copies, for starters-it's unlikely that you'll just have 'spells, a-z' as a title. You'd instead have 'Larloch's Comprehensive Necromancy' alongside 'Drow Necromancy Through The Ages' with 'Witch's Necromancy Primer.' Each of them likely containing copies of several spells, possibly with minor differences, with more or less handholding for each individual spell. Now continue that for every element, school of magic, and theme that you can think of, as well as making the individual spells taking significantly more pages to write.

And as said, Adventurer Wizards are probably the single-most unhelpful type of spellbook. More concerned with the practicality of 'Will it make the Troll go boom?' than with 'Will other people be able to understand what I have written down here?' What takes them a page is essentially shorthand, and could likely fill ten times as many pages on a more helpful treatise on the same spell, likely with annotations that say 'Don't do this, unless you think you'd enjoy spending the next five minutes as a blue-throated rockwarbler with a penchant for pie.' Not to mention that there can be endless books on magical theory alone.

As for the actual 8- or 80-book series? I'd actually still see it existing. It'd be a highly coveted version of the Encyclopedia Magicka, ridiculously expensive, and possibly be worth murdering you over. But it's going to lack the nuance of spellbooks that actually walk you through WHY Magic Missile can be controlled like it is, or how to best keep your lunch down when eating that live spider for Spiderclimb. It'll be spellbooks that exist for the sake of power.

[Melcar]

The real issue here is that everyone says "Well of course, the rules say you can homebrew your own spells! That means there must be hundreds of thousands out there!"

But I rarely ever see a GM that does. I doubt most Playgrounders even do so on a regular basis, and we're often exceptions to the 'normal' GM in terms of time commitment and work put in given we frequent a forum pretty much explicitly for D&D 3.5. There's this illusion that there sure could be a spell intended to do this or that, but there usually isn't, because people wince at the idea of making their own for some reason.

Its true that my low level NPCs as a DM does not have homebrew spells, but as soon as we get close to level 12 they do. All of them. Al my spellcasting characters, as a player have made their own. My main character, a wizard, has made 9 and has more in the making. So my spellcastes do indeed create unique spells.

[Âmesang]

I'd love to give my longest lasting arcane caster a homebrew, named spell… but I can't think of anything "original." :smallconfused:

Well, actually, the thought of having a library of spellbooks containing one of each spell in alphabetical order made me think of some kind of spell transfer spell — i.e., you target a library of spellbooks with a new spell, which not only puts itself into the correct space, but if that particular book was full all following spells bump themselves forward with the last spell appearing at the beginning of the next book, the last spell of that book appearing at the beginning of the next, &c., &c…

…then again said character's a sorceress, so I guess in this case it'd be moot, less she collected such a library just to show off.

[ericgrau]

Consider the NPC wizard with crappy scores. With an Int mod of +1 or +2, he has 3-4 skills to invest in, 5 if he is human. There are many places to put them:

"Primary research" wizards - the physicists and mathematicians compared to Spellcraft's engineers - value Knowledge: Arcana and many other Knowledges.
"Archaeology" and "ethnography" wizards - those who research magic of other civilizations, extant or extinct - would enjoy having Decipher Script available.
"Craftsman" wizards - those responsible for making magic items - may invest in Craft so they can be self-sufficient and not rely on outsider smiths.
"Assistant" wizards - those who work at a university in a non-research role - may well want Profession so they are better at their job, and probably some other Knowledges too.
"Guards" wizards - those who use their magic to defend the library - would want Concentration.
Then there are all sorts of cross-class skills a wizard may covet - Diplomacy and Bluff for an enchanter, for instance.

Again we'll get some extra 1st level spells for the cruddy wizards who literally don't know magic when they see it. Also since all of the above are specializing in something other than getting more spells, they can fail a few times and it doesn't matter. They can get the few they want then stop. Even the guard wizard probably prepares the same spells every day. Though he would probably want spellcraft too to fight effectively against caster attackers.

Anyone who really needs to get a lot of different spells should invest in spellcraft or just give up on whatever their other goal is and rethink their life since spellcraft itself is more important to that goal than whatever the other skills will do. At higher level, beyond 1st level spells, even backup spellbooks will do little to help against constant failures vs. just blowing a few skill points. Plus at higher level you don't even need to max it out to take a 10. Starting around level 3 a skill point every other level will do it.

Crafters still shouldn't take the craft skill btw. It's a waste of their time. They can make silvers a day on the craft skill, or 500 gp a day on magical crafting. Just buy your non-magical parts or hire somebody.

[Darth Ultron]

Yes, officially, there are too few spells.

The basic problem is that D&D is a combat adventure game based around a small group of individuals. Nearly all the spells in the whole game are based around that idea. Nearly every spell is something a character on an adventure would cast.

The types of missing spells are legion. You won't find piratical, everyday common usage spells. You won't find simple labor saving or time saving spells. You won't even find very obvious spells that anyone with access to magic would make on day one.

Now, sure, a couple of the combat adventure spells can be used for everyday things. Levitate would be of great use for merchant shipping, but the core spell is a bit limiting. There could be 100 much better variations on the basic core spell, but you will never see them in print.

Sadly, D&D also does the idea that everyone in the whole game multiverse knows and uses the same couple handfuls of spells. It's kinda silly that a person living in a desert, and one living in a temperate forest use the same spells. And it only gets worse when you compare societies and cultures. And it goes beyond worse when you compare races. A human living on a cold arctic island should not have exactly the same spells as an illithid living in the underdark. And sure, there are a couple 'unique' spells...but only a couple.

Even some basic math shows a lot. Say a typical D&D world has 2,000 years of history. Even if only one spell was made a year, that is still 2,000 spells. Though, worldwide, it is simple to say there are 100 spellcasters making at least one spell a year. Or 200,000 spells. And even if you want to say half of them are ''lost'' some how, that is still 100,000 spells.

So, yes, D&D is missing a lot of spells.

[raygun goth]

To add some more to your argument:

Okay so.


Spellbooks have 100 pages, and, according to D&D and Pathfinder, cost 15 gold pieces and three pounds.


This is laughable at best.



I know what you're thinking, “it's old, therefore it's thicker and heaver, because everything old is thicker and heavier.” No. The Chinese were making paper in 105 CE that was lighter, stronger, and more flexible than modern typewriter paper. Most old style papers were much less rugged than our own. The Mayan paper, amate, made from tree bark is actually lighter and less rugged than typewriter paper, and documents made of it need special care, which brings me to illuminated manuscripts, which are the classic image of spellbooks in everybody's heads.



Let's talk about paper weights – a poundage, or basis weight, of paper denotes a measure of unit per product, be it cloth, paper, or cardboard. In America, we are weirdos, so we measure our paper weights PER REAM OF 500 SHEETS. This is important.



The Voynich Manuscript (the closest thing to a real spellbook we have) is over 200 pages of mid-weight vellum – to compare that, the heaviest vellum we have, which is about twice the thickness of illuminated manuscript vellum, and at about three times the thickness of the “standard store bought” vellum used in the Voynich Manuscript, is 30#, or, weighing thirty pounds per 500 sheets, which means the THICKEST modern paper we could use as vellum, would weigh six pounds as an (uncut) spellbook – as a comparison, that's the same weight as an equivalent-sized block of copper. On the other hand, the type of vellum a monastery would used at the time period is only around 17#, about three pounds as an uncut spellbook.



So, that's about right, you say - it's worse than this. If it says "100 pages," that means it's made of 50 sheets, so HALVE THAT WEIGHT, unless they mean "100 sheets," in which case it's 200 pages, I guess?



Remember that factory sheets are A0 size, which is EIGHTEEN TIMES the size of your home 8.5x11 paper (which we call A4 size). So those three pounds of a hundred sheets? That's a mighty big spellbook. Thirty-six by forty-four inches, in fact. That's about the size of a card table. Or one of the expense square mats from Chessex. Darwin's notebooks from 1836 to 1844 barely clock in at 2 kilos. So, spellbook should probably be only a pound or less. Or should it?


Let's talk about spell coverage. A spell takes up “one page per level.” What exactly is a “page?” How big are these pages? In an illuminated manuscript this COULD be anything from A0 to A4 or even index card size, you know? We don't really know what “a page” is in this case.


Bearing this in mind.


Spellbooks are also only 100 pages. Most illuminated manuscripts clock in at the five hundreds or more – another thing to remember is that all books of the time period were hand-bound and were full of little fold-in puzzles, fold-out sheets with multiple images – these old books are basically Playboys with a centerfold every five pages and that centerfold is Satan. Let's look at something a little weird.


Hero wrote descriptions of combat robots, singing robots, vending machines, and steam trains in his folios – most of which were ignored by emperors and kings of his time, because what the heck is the Roman Empire going to do with a steam train you old fart? Caligula told him to go invent something USEFUL for once. Anyway, this guy could describe a vacuum-sealed water pump assembly for putting out fires that could be built from spare junk you had lying around ancient Roman alleyways with just an image and some letters. Other spellbooks we have in real life include “the Key of Solomon” which manages about FOUR “spells” per page that purport to summon demons that can do anything from making strangely-colored cubes that drive your enemies insane to firing beams of light to sear the armies of your enemies in half – you know, like an actual D&D spellbook. Even more recently, I own a hundred-page book that contains rituals of the Order of the Eastern Star, and they manage to fit about six hours of the most boring rituals in the world just the first third of the book.

So, really, what counts as a page?

[Âmesang]

…so I kind of just spaced out imagining a spellbook with a fold-out of Elizabeth Hurley as Satan.

[Melcar]

Even some basic math shows a lot. Say a typical D&D world has 2,000 years of history. Even if only one spell was made a year, that is still 2,000 spells. Though, worldwide, it is simple to say there are 100 spellcasters making at least one spell a year. Or 200,000 spells. And even if you want to say half of them are ''lost'' some how, that is still 100,000 spells.

So, yes, D&D is missing a lot of spells.

Consider Forgotten Realms, which has a history of around 30.000 years give or take, which have had dragons and creator races as planatary rulers, not to mention high elves, and yet something like 2000 spells exist. One could imagine this world to house millions of spells. Yes, most would probable be incantations or level 1 spells, but if I know the high-elves, dragons and Sarrukh, they have entire libraries with forgotten spells.

Oh... I forgot the Netherese and Imaskar too... If one only knew what wonders are kept at the Royal Vault of the Purple Palace!

[Darth Ultron]

Consider Forgotten Realms, which has a history of around 30.000 years give or take, which have had dragons and creator races as planatary rulers, not to mention high elves, and yet something like 2000 spells exist. One could imagine this world to house millions of spells. Yes, most would probable be incantations or level 1 spells, but if I know the high-elves, dragons and Sarrukh, they have entire libraries with forgotten spells.

Oh... I forgot the Netherese and Imaskar too... If one only knew what wonders are kept at the Royal Vault of the Purple Palace!

Very true. With the Realms you get not only 30,000 years of history, but also many more spellcasters then a normal by-the-book-world.

The DMG is after all just utterly stupid when it comes to how many spellcasters are in the world. And the Realms has more spellcasters living in a single tower then the silly book says should be in the whole town. Modern(before 1375 dr) places in the Realms have places like Thay and Cromyr that are full of spellcasters. And acient places had even more.

And there would be a lot more low level spells then higher level ones, of course.

[ericgrau]

The list of spells is probably more what is useful to the players. Consider how Mordenkain and so on made 5-10 spells each, and they all played together in Gygax's adventuring party. There should be hundreds of thousands of spells and many of them redundant because many of these wizards have never met each other. In D&D writers don't want to write something that's too redundant. There should actually be 100 versions of each spell that are similar but not quite the same. But this would be extremely confusing for a gaming system.

[Melcar]

The list of spells is probably more what is useful to the players. Consider how Mordenkain and so on made 5-10 spells each, and they all played together in Gygax's adventuring party. There should be hundreds of thousands of spells and many of them redundant because many of these wizards have never met each other. In D&D writers don't want to write something that's too redundant. There should actually be 100 versions of each spell that are similar but not quite the same. But this would be extremely confusing for a gaming system.

I could also see basically every spell with an elemental discripter to exist in all 5 plus force!

[Âmesang]

Like 2nd Edition's "Pyronomicon" which contained Keraptis' flamecone (fiery version of cone of cold), Keraptis' flaming missiles (fiery version of magic missile), Keraptis' fantastic famulus (a very specialized version of unseen servant), and phantom stalker (a sort-of fiery version of invisible stalker).

[Melcar]

Like 2nd Edition's "Pyronomicon" which contained Keraptis' flamecone (fiery version of cone of cold), Keraptis' flaming missiles (fiery version of magic missile), Keraptis' fantastic famulus (a very specialized version of unseen servant), and phantom stalker (a sort-of fiery version of invisible stalker).

Indeed... The old 2nd Spell Compendium holde alot of (fairly) easy convertible spells!

What is particularly cool about those books are, that they mention setting and how common they are. Even sometimes mentioning special spell books or libraries where the spells is thought to be found. A great piece of flawor.

[Elkad]

The real issue here is that everyone says "Well of course, the rules say you can homebrew your own spells! That means there must be hundreds of thousands out there!"

But I rarely ever see a GM that does. I doubt most Playgrounders even do so on a regular basis, and we're often exceptions to the 'normal' GM in terms of time commitment and work put in given we frequent a forum pretty much explicitly for D&D 3.5. There's this illusion that there sure could be a spell intended to do this or that, but there usually isn't, because people wince at the idea of making their own for some reason.

I've always made my own spells. Sometimes something unusual, sometimes just a minor variant on an existing one.
I can't think of a game where I DIDN'T research at least one spell, unless I was playing a complete mundane.

In earlier editions (where you needed a trainer to level up), often your level-up spell choices were limited to what your trainer had in his book. So if you couldn't find a dusty tome somewhere else, you'd find yourself researching spells that already existed. As long as you are researching it anyway, why not add some flavor? "Burning Breath" could be functionally identical to "Burning Hands", Stoneskin could turn you grey or make you glitter, etc. That was even a plot point in one campaign. The specific gestures, words, and minor effects from standard spells were an indication of who the caster learned it from (or what book), so you could backtrack the caster to their master.

When fireshield was a functional melee defense (double damage back to attacker, instead of 1d6), I would research one using the "wrong color" flames, to deceive cold/fire casters as well.

[Quertus]

Geomancer spells taking one page each makes sense, given that spells in your spellbook include both formula and notes. They would be the most efficient version of the spell.

I personally love to research custom spells; unfortunately, no one else I play with seems to care for the idea of custom content much :(

When trading spells with other wizards (back in 2e), the most popular custom spell my signature wizard had was Quertus' Spell Star. 3rd level spell, required caster level 10. Fired 5 magic missile - style projectiles at the same target. These projectiles had the properties of magic missiles, except that they dealt exactly 4 damage, and each missile dealt a different type of damage: fire, acid, cold, electric, force. Also, each missile counted as a separate spell, and so was resisted individually.

Quertus used the spell to research various monsters' magical defenses, taking notes on exactly how many times a "bay-lore" resisted the effects of the spell, which elements dealt increased, decreased, normal, or no damage to walking trees, etc. Many tomes were filed just with his sketches of many monsters, the damage patterns left by his spell, and his notes on probability of bypassing creatures' innate magical defenses.

In 3e, when "half damage" was converted to "resistance X", Quertus was at first confused, then upped the damage to 6 per missile, to at least test for things like fire resistance 5.

So, in the right library, one spell, single author, could take up one whole bookcase, once you count all the notes.

[Melcar]

I personally love to research custom spells; unfortunately, no one else I play with seems to care for the idea of custom content much :(

What a shame... Especially since its a big part of the game. Where does all the other spells and items come from I wonder!