Spellbooks and Fringe Cases

[YellowJohn]

I have a wizard who wants All The Spells (TM) in their spellbook.

1) I have a scroll of Tasha's Hideous Laughter, but it was scribed by a bard (as a first level spell). What happens if I try adding it to my spellbook?

2) I find a Divine scroll of Dispel Magic. Can I add it?

Now I take my first level of Silver Pyromancer - which adds all Paladin spells to my class list.

3) I find a divine scroll of Lesser Restoration. Can I add this?

Your opinions are valued :-)

[Telonius]

Not certain on #1. It's a magical writing and also on the Wizard list, but I'm not sure if you can copy it if it's a Bard scroll. (If you can, it would definitely be a second-level Wizard spell and take up two pages in the spellbook. No reducing spell level via the Bard list).

2: No. You'd need an arcane scroll of it if you want to copy it. (You could still potentially use the scroll if you make the appropriate checks).

3: No. In order to get it into your spellbook, you'd need to get it as one of your two free spells at level-up, find an Arcane scroll of it (probably written by another Silver Pyromancer), or get it by independent spell research.

[Jervis]

Rules compendium probably has something to say here as it’s the reason wizards can’t add off list spells to their book (which they could previously do by raw because of an omission) so I’d check there. I can’t do it now because I don’t have my pdf library handy but I’d say yes to most of those.

Also if you want all the spells then a 2 level chameleon dip lets you add one spell to your book per day via the extra spell feat, just add it to your book with the feat and when you change it the spell stays there. Though I personally require a wizard to play the ink cost to scribe it if they want to keep it.

[Telonius]

Rules compendium probably has something to say here as it’s the reason wizards can’t add off list spells to their book (which they could previously do by raw because of an omission) so I’d check there. I can’t do it now because I don’t have my pdf library handy but I’d say yes to most of those.

Also if you want all the spells then a 2 level chameleon dip lets you add one spell to your book per day via the extra spell feat, just add it to your book with the feat and when you change it the spell stays there. Though I personally require a wizard to play the ink cost to scribe it if they want to keep it.

Yeah, here's the quote from p. 160:


Spellcasters who use spellbooks can add a spell to their book whenever they find one on a scroll or in another caster’s spellbook. The spell to be copied must be on the copier’s class spell list.

So between that and the SRD for magical writings, that's a pretty definitive "no" to 2 and 3. Still not totally watertight on 1, since the spell is the right type (arcane not divine) and is on the Wizard spell list.

[Biggus]

I've looked everywhere I can think of and there doesn't seem to be an official answer to 1). To me the rules imply that the answer is no if the spell is a different level, as higher-level spells take up more space in a spellbook, which suggests they involve a different and more complex formula to get the same result.

[Telonius]

I've looked everywhere I can think of and there doesn't seem to be an official answer to 1). To me the rules imply that the answer is no if the spell is a different level, as higher-level spells take up more space in a spellbook, which suggests they involve a different and more complex formula to get the same result.

I'd probably allow it; if the Wizard makes the checks to decipher the scroll and understand it, they've got a pretty good idea of how they'd need to cast the thing. But in the spellbook I'd require that it takes up the full two pages (and counts as a 2nd level spell) as though it were a Wizard2 spell, not one (for Bard1). I'd describe the "fluff" difference as being, "The Bard scroll has musical jargon that Bards can figure out as a matter of course, but you're going to need to write down extra explanatory notes if you're going to remember and prepare it later."

[YellowJohn]

Yeah, here's the quote from p. 160:
"Spellcasters who use spellbooks can add a spell to their book whenever they find one on a scroll or in another caster’s spellbook. The spell to be copied must be on the copier’s class spell list."

So between that and the SRD for magical writings, that's a pretty definitive "no" to 2 and 3.

See, that doesn't strike me as a definitive no here. I have found the spell on a scroll, it is on the copier's spell list. I'll have a proper look at RC when I get time, but nothing here says the scroll must be arcane - only that the spell be on my class list (which Dispel Magic definitely is, and Lesser Restoration probably is for a Silver Pyromancer)

[Fouredged Sword]

Scrolls scrub the original caster's class. There are not "Bard" scrolls and "Wizard" scrolls. The only division is between arcane and divine. A wizard can thus copy a scroll written by a bard into his spellbook so long as that spell is also a wizard spell. The spell becomes the spell level appropriate for a wizard, even if the spell was of higher or lower level for the bard.

[Biggus]

Scrolls scrub the original caster's class. There are not "Bard" scrolls and "Wizard" scrolls. The only division is between arcane and divine. A wizard can thus copy a scroll written by a bard into his spellbook so long as that spell is also a wizard spell. The spell becomes the spell level appropriate for a wizard, even if the spell was of higher or lower level for the bard.

You phrase this as though it's a fact rather than an opinion. Do you have a citation for it?

[Eurus]

Scrolls scrub the original caster's class. There are not "Bard" scrolls and "Wizard" scrolls. The only division is between arcane and divine. A wizard can thus copy a scroll written by a bard into his spellbook so long as that spell is also a wizard spell. The spell becomes the spell level appropriate for a wizard, even if the spell was of higher or lower level for the bard.

I partly agree with you - most scrolls that I've seen referenced in game material just specify arcane or divine and don't specify class, so I think that might be the intended reading. But I'm not sure that's actually relevant, because scrolls definitely retain spell level. A scroll of Hideous Laughter scribed by a caster who has Hideous Laughter as a 1st-level spell is cheaper and has a lower DC than a scroll of Hideous Laughter scribed by a caster who has Hideous Laughter as a 2nd-level spell, even if the quality "made by a bard" or "made by a wizard" isn't directly retained.

That spell level is the relevant part here. Can a wizard copy a 1st-level scroll of Hideous Laughter to their spellbook even though Hideous Laughter is not a 1st-level wizard spell?

As for questions 2 and 3, I had assumed there was a rule that a wizard could only copy arcane scrolls into their spellbook, but I can't actually find one anywhere now that I look. So... I guess it works? :smallconfused:

[RandomPeasant]

The non-arcane spells thing worked until Rules Compendium changed it. Why WotC felt that was the thing that needed fixing at the end of the game's lifespan and not, I don't know, planar binding, I couldn't tell you.


You phrase this as though it's a fact rather than an opinion. Do you have a citation for it?

As far as I can tell, it doesn't matter in the context of the question. The question isn't whether a scroll of hideous laughter is a scroll of a bard spell or a scroll of a wizard spell. It's whether it is a scroll of a 1st level spell, which it demonstrably is because of how it is priced and the DC it has. I am further confident that it is possible to learn spells at levels other than the ones for which they are normally available to your class (otherwise a great many domains, Earth as a PHB example, are dysfunctional), and therefore don't see a basis to deny a Wizard who has found themselves a scroll of Trapsmith haste the right to learn it as a 1st level spell. Certainly if you are going to allow an Artificer to scribe it as a 1st level scroll simply because Trapsmiths exist at all, I can't see any practical basis for demanding that Wizards not get to do their version of the same trick.

[redking]

The non-arcane spells thing worked until Rules Compendium changed it. Why WotC felt that was the thing that needed fixing at the end of the game's lifespan and not, I don't know, planar binding, I couldn't tell you.



As far as I can tell, it doesn't matter in the context of the question. The question isn't whether a scroll of hideous laughter is a scroll of a bard spell or a scroll of a wizard spell. It's whether it is a scroll of a 1st level spell, which it demonstrably is because of how it is priced and the DC it has. I am further confident that it is possible to learn spells at levels other than the ones for which they are normally available to your class (otherwise a great many domains, Earth as a PHB example, are dysfunctional), and therefore don't see a basis to deny a Wizard who has found themselves a scroll of Trapsmith haste the right to learn it as a 1st level spell. Certainly if you are going to allow an Artificer to scribe it as a 1st level scroll simply because Trapsmiths exist at all, I can't see any practical basis for demanding that Wizards not get to do their version of the same trick.

The good 'ole Trapsmith. Allowing wizards a 1st level haste spell as a known spells seems dodgy somehow. I take your point about the Artificer, but perhaps the Artificer is the exception that makes the rule.

I think it comes down to DM fiat. I often wonder if DMs in the real world allow Ur-Priest or other rapid spell progression classes to be advanced with mystic theurge or other more advantageous PrCs. I certainly would not allow it at my table.

[YellowJohn]

You phrase this as though it's a fact rather than an opinion. Do you have a citation for it?

In the 'Scrolls' section of the DMG, a distinction is made between Arcane and Divine scrolls, but no such distinction is made between bard/wizard spells. Eg: where Cure Light Wounds is listed as an arcane spell (p239), it is mixed up with all the other arcane spells. No distinction is noted.

[Telonius]

The good 'ole Trapsmith. Allowing wizards a 1st level haste spell as a known spells seems dodgy somehow. I take your point about the Artificer, but perhaps the Artificer is the exception that makes the rule.

I think it comes down to DM fiat. I often wonder if DMs in the real world allow Ur-Priest or other rapid spell progression classes to be advanced with mystic theurge or other more advantageous PrCs. I certainly would not allow it at my table.

Artificer scrolls are particularly weird, since magic items created by an Artificer are explicitly neither arcane nor divine.

The only other comparable thing to the whole situation that I've been able to find is from Heroes of Horror:



Unlike a cleric, an archivist does not receive his daily spell complement from whatever deity or cosmic force he worships. Rather, he must seek out and collect new spells much as a wizard does, but from such esoteric sources as holy tablets, ancient steles, or other magical scriptures. He cannot prepare any spell not recorded in his prayerbook except for read magic, which archivists can prepare from memory.

An archivist begins play with a prayerbook containing all 0-level cleric spells plus three 1st-level cleric spells of the player's choice. For each point of Intelligence bonus the archivist has, the prayerbook has an additional 1st-level cleric spell. At each new class level, the archivist gains two new cleric spells for his prayerbook; these can be of any spell level or levels that he can cast (based on his new archivist level). At any time, an archivist can also add spells found on scrolls containing divine spells to his prayerbook, but he must make any rolls and spend the time required (see Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook on page 178 of the Player's Handbook). The archivist can learn and thus prepare nonclerical divine spells in this fashion but the two free spells he gains for advancing in class level must be selected from the cleric spell list.


The rule there says to "see Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook," so I think the implication is that Wizards can copy non-Wizard arcane spells into their spellbook in a similar manner. Unfortunately, no more clarity about what to do when the spell levels are different (how many pages they take up, and what level they're cast at).

[Tzardok]

The rule there says to "see Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook," so I think the implication is that Wizards can copy non-Wizard arcane spells into their spellbook in a similar manner. Unfortunately, no more clarity about what to do when the spell levels are different (how many pages they take up, and what level they're cast at).

I would disagree. The way it is written we start with a reference to a rule (namely, how wizards add spells) and follow up with the way the ability differs from the rule.

[Endarire]

By RAW, I haven’t found adequate proof that scrolls added to a spell book must be of the same type (arcane or divine) as the casting class. Maybe it’s my Pathfinder experience, but I could add arcane or divine scrolls to my spell books via game rulings.

[Gruftzwerg]

The rule there says to "see Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook," so I think the implication is that Wizards can copy non-Wizard arcane spells into their spellbook in a similar manner. Unfortunately, no more clarity about what to do when the spell levels are different (how many pages they take up, and what level they're cast at).
Have a closer look where that rule is: Arcane Spells (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm)

Now have a look at Divine Spells (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm):
No such rule for wizards (or any other core class).

I think this should also answer the questions:
1) yes (since it is still an arcane source and a spell on the wizard spell list)
2) no due to divine source
3) no due to divine source (and not on the wizard list)

[Vaern]

I've looked everywhere I can think of and there doesn't seem to be an official answer to 1). To me the rules imply that the answer is no if the spell is a different level, as higher-level spells take up more space in a spellbook, which suggests they involve a different and more complex formula to get the same result.

That same logic doesn't translate to scrolls, though. A single 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper will hold a scroll of any spell. The caster level and spell level of the spell stored in the scroll have no impact on how big the scroll is. A wizard's CL 3 scroll of the 2nd level version of this spell would be no more complex than the bard's CL2 scroll of their 1st level version. It's just more difficult for the wizard to learn the spell himself because he actually has to be funny, whereas everyone already wants to laugh at the bard.


The rule there says to "see Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook," so I think the implication is that Wizards can copy non-Wizard arcane spells into their spellbook in a similar manner. Unfortunately, no more clarity about what to do when the spell levels are different (how many pages they take up, and what level they're cast at).

I think the implication there is that the necessary rolls and time required for recording new spells are the same as they are for wizards. Rules Compendium adds the clause that a spell being copied into a spellbook must be on the character's class spell list, which prevents wizards from learning spells from other lists. The archivist description specifies that they can learn spells from off-list, though, so they're safe from the general rule.
At any rate, the bard's scroll of hideous laughter is an arcane scroll of a spell that appears on the wizard's spell list. He should be able to copy it and add it to his spellbook as it appears on his class spell list (as a 2nd level spell).

[Seward]

I've looked everywhere I can think of and there doesn't seem to be an official answer to 1). To me the rules imply that the answer is no if the spell is a different level, as higher-level spells take up more space in a spellbook, which suggests they involve a different and more complex formula to get the same result.


Casting a spell off a scroll seems to use the scroll caster level but your class's casting stat. So a L3 8 intelligence bard can cast eagle's splendor off a scroll scribed at L3 by a wizard as long as his charisma is 12+ without making a caster level check. Barring houserules (like Pathfinder Society's simplification that any scroll found as loot is whichever of arcane or divine you want it to be) it does still have to be your style of magic, so a clerical scroll of Eagle Splendor would require UMD from the bard to cast it.

For what it is worth....in Living Greyhawk the rule was that scribing scrolls into a spellbook were always at the wizard's spell level, regardless of who crafted the scroll or what level it was crafted at. So a Bard who crafted a CL4 Heroism scroll could be cast by a L4 wizard with no caster level check and have save DC of 13 (cl2 plus minimum cha to cast a CL2 spell), but if the L4 wizard scribed it into her spellbook, she'd have to use 3 pages and scribe it as a L3 spell. And any spell that wizard scribed later of Heroism would be a L3 scroll with appropriate costs and have save DC of 14.

Living Greyhawk also limited the magic-mart for scrolls to DMG tables <750gp, so if you wanted something like a L1 tasha's laughter scroll (50gp from a bard, vs 150gp from a wizard) you had to find it as loot in an adventure or get it as a favor as result of an adventure.

[Telonius]

Have a closer look where that rule is: Arcane Spells (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm)

Now have a look at Divine Spells (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm):
No such rule for wizards (or any other core class).

I think this should also answer the questions:
1) yes (since it is still an arcane source and a spell on the wizard spell list)
2) no due to divine source
3) no due to divine source (and not on the wizard list)

Yeah, I think it's pretty clear that 1 is a "yes, you can put it in your spellbook." The mechanical questions remaining are how many pages it takes up (minor concern, but just for completeness), and what level it's cast at. My knee-jerk reaction is, "as many pages and at the spell level you'd be casting it as though it were the regular wizard spell," but I'm not finding much explicit backup for that.

(For 3, Silver Pyromancer has a specific ability that adds spells to the Wizard's spell list, so for that particular character being on the Wizard list is not an issue; the divine source is the problem).

[RandomPeasant]

The good 'ole Trapsmith. Allowing wizards a 1st level haste spell as a known spells seems dodgy somehow. I take your point about the Artificer, but perhaps the Artificer is the exception that makes the rule.

People seem to believe the same of the Archivist, the StP Erudite, and the Chameleon. I frankly don't see much of an argument that pilfering from other spell lists wouldn't work this way. It's just that you can't have both spell lists with different progression rates and classes that can pull spells from any spell list.


The rule there says to "see Adding Spells to a Wizard's Spellbook," so I think the implication is that Wizards can copy non-Wizard arcane spells into their spellbook in a similar manner.

This is absolutely correct, for the rules printed in the PHB. However, as previously mentioned, the Rules Compendium modifies the rules so that they no longer work that way. As such, I don't understand the contortions to try to disagree with this version of the rules based on the implications of how the Archivist is written. It doesn't get you anywhere! The game has been modified so that this no longer works, leaving the clear implication that it previously did work.