Spellbook question

[Nicodiemus]

The spellbook is listed as having 100 pages, but there's no indication of how much space each spell takes up. Old school it was spell level + d4 pages, but I can't seem to find a rule for it. Am I missing it somewhere?

[hymer]

The spellbook is listed as having 100 pages, but there's no indication of how much space each spell takes up. Old school it was spell level + d4 pages, but I can't seem to find a rule for it. Am I missing it somewhere?

As far as I can tell, the only reason you're told there are 100 pages in a spellbook, is so you know how many time you can take it to the lavatory before you need to buy a new one. I've seen no reference to spells actually taking up space in a spellbook in 5e. But as always, ask your DM.

[Nicodiemus]

Lol. Thanks

[kaoskonfety]

Various house rules cover this off - I've never seen anything in print for 5th.

Level +d4 seems fine but it will limit what an adventurer will have in their book at the higher levels (1 ritual book, 1 general combat book, 1 rare use/oddity spells book...)

Looks like unneeded book keeping... but maybe your wizards are into that.

[Nicodiemus]

I was only wondering for AL. My bladesinger just hit 9th and I'm looking at my spell list and thinking it's getting kinda long. Just wanted to make sure my bookkeeping was squared away

[Slipperychicken]

Back in 3rd edition it took up a number of pages equal to the spell's level, or 1 page if it's a cantrip. You could also say each spell takes up one page. You could even say it doesn't matter.

Ultimately it's a pretty unimportant detail. By the time you had enough spells and cash to fill the book, you could easily afford another one.

[JumboWheat01]

I wonder why it's only 100 pages anyway. I look at my collection of books, and the hundred page ones are so... thin. Admittedly, I don't know the quality and design of paper in the various D&D settings, but surely a wizard could handle a 200 or maybe even 300 page book to have around with all their spells.

[Tanarii]

I wonder why it's only 100 pages anyway. I look at my collection of books, and the hundred page ones are so... thin. Admittedly, I don't know the quality and design of paper in the various D&D settings, but surely a wizard could handle a 200 or maybe even 300 page book to have around with all their spells.Do your books look like this?
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ea/e4/25/eae425a379e91acdcda7db9bde332fec.jpg

Edit: And that's one with rather thin pages. Google "spellbook" and check out the images.

[Thrudd]

It matters when you need to figure out how much space your spell books take up and how much they weigh, and which spells might be in a spell book that you don't have access to for some reason. I would say the DM shouldn't be messing with characters' spell books on a regular basis. But there is always the case where a character gets caught in a fireball, dragon's breath, lava, or some other damaging thing, and their equipment needs to make saving throws. A spell book's saving throws should be much higher than normal parchment and leather, but it is not invulnerable, especially to magical fire, acid, and so forth. So there is a chance, however small, that one or more of a wizard's spell books could be dropped, lost, burned, etc. Hopefully they have back-up copies of their books back at home. Otherwise, they will need to start over with just the spells that are still memorized on that day.

[Kane0]

Which is still much better than previous editions, at least now they can keep remembering the same day's worth of spells and rewrite those into a new spellbook when he gets one.

[Segev]

Consider the 5e PHB. It has more than 300 pages in it, and is roughly the height and width (if not the depth/thickness) I generally picture my spellbooks being. I picture spellbooks being massive tomes, like the one pictured above. Not being slim volumes 1/3 the width of a PHB. Even with heavy, triple-thickness paper, 100 pages would be about the size of the 5e PHB. Very roughly. Which is still about 1/4 to 1/3 the thickness I picture a spellbook at.

[kaoskonfety]

Consider the 5e PHB. It has more than 300 pages in it, and is roughly the height and width (if not the depth/thickness) I generally picture my spellbooks being. I picture spellbooks being massive tomes, like the one pictured above. Not being slim volumes 1/3 the width of a PHB. Even with heavy, triple-thickness paper, 100 pages would be about the size of the 5e PHB. Very roughly. Which is still about 1/4 to 1/3 the thickness I picture a spellbook at.

Which is probably part of the reason they got rid of the rules for pages consumed? There's a fair amount of variance on what people think these things look like - size, weight, personal writing density, doodles in the margins.

Can I keep my spells on a stack of napkins, animal skins and tatoos on the rest of the party? Well yes... but how much of Steve the Barbarian's back is needed for Power Word: Kill or magic missile? X pages of his back apparently? Weird...

When I'm first level and most of the huge ass book is empty, why am I not carrying around a lighter folio with my note for the 4-8 spells I might actually use/ know... goodbye book keeping

[Regitnui]

I like to think that a wizard has two or more spellbooks; one tome, where he keeps all the spells he knows or is learning, and a portable one where he keeps the spells he needs to know regularly. The 100-pager is his ''travel spellbook" while he keeps the backups and the tome at HQ.

[hymer]

Consider the 5e PHB. It has more than 300 pages in it, and is roughly the height and width (if not the depth/thickness) I generally picture my spellbooks being. I picture spellbooks being massive tomes, like the one pictured above. Not being slim volumes 1/3 the width of a PHB. Even with heavy, triple-thickness paper, 100 pages would be about the size of the 5e PHB. Very roughly. Which is still about 1/4 to 1/3 the thickness I picture a spellbook at.

I don't know what a 100-page book looked like in Europe around 1200. I expect paper making was far less sophisticated at the time. So paper could well have been more than three times thicker than the impressive stuff we get today, and still less resistant to wear, wet and biology.
But I don't know for sure.

[Kane0]

I like to think that a wizard has two or more spellbooks; one tome, where he keeps all the spells he knows or is learning, and a portable one where he keeps the spells he needs to know regularly. The 100-pager is his ''travel spellbook" while he keeps the backups and the tome at HQ.

Like a fieldbook and grimoire. 3.5s complete arcane featured this concept, which i thought was cool.

[JumboWheat01]

I like to think that a wizard has two or more spellbooks; one tome, where he keeps all the spells he knows or is learning, and a portable one where he keeps the spells he needs to know regularly. The 100-pager is his ''travel spellbook" while he keeps the backups and the tome at HQ.

Okay, I can totally buy that idea. It also makes a great deal of sense as well.