Tome Pact in Actual Play

[Warlock'sFriend]

To anyone who has played a tome pact warlock before, did you genuinely that ritual spell scrolls were common enough to make it worth it? If so, how did the DM provide them? Where they found randomly as loot or through local magic shops? What about gold and downtime for adding them to your book, did you have enough of that to make it function?

I like the idea of a wizardy warlock, but on it's face with the invocation tax and the reliance on specific magic item availability, it seems like it may be good in theory, but not in practice.

Thoughts?

[Segev]

Scrolls are fairly common random loot, though how many are ritual spells is spottier. You will find spellbook with wizard rituals a little more often, in my experience, and any time you meet another wizard, you can try trading for spells.

[Gignere]

My experience playing a few wizards, is that depends on the DM, 3 out of the 4 DMs I had pretty much really easy access for level 1 scrolls and 2 of them had easy access up to level 2 spell scrolls. Higher level ones were more spotty. So speak with your DM and get a sense how easy and available spell scrolls and learning from wizards in cities/towns would be.

1 of them didn’t give anything other than random loot until I bitched and moan about not seeing a single spell scroll or wizard book as loot when we were obviously fighting wizards. Finally I got a single spell book and a level 1 scroll dropped at level 6.

[Skrum]

I've never played a Tomblock, but I have played wizards and other classes that get rituals.

IMO, rituals are near useless. Like the definition of a ribbon ability. One, there isn't enough of them. Two, several of them fall into "narrative" spaces (I'm gonna risk cast floating disk so I don't have to carry stuff, etc), and don't actually affect the outcome of anything. Three, the casting time means the useful ones end up in the same weird space that short rests are - the DM has to go out of their way to make sure you have time to ritually cast prayer of healing, so it's probably not making a difference in any particular way.

Gift of the Protectors, that's a good invocation. The rest of the Tomb invocations I wouldn't bother with.

Edit: oh, cantrips are also bad lol. Unless you're committed to the concept of a Tomb warlock, I would recommend another option

[Cheesegear]

To anyone who has played a tome pact warlock before, did you genuinely that ritual spell scrolls were common enough to make it worth it?

If you're playing off of pure random loot tables...No it wont be worth it.
If you're playing a module; You're almost better off playing an actual Wizard, since then you can use the whole Spellbook.

If you're playing homebrew; How long is a piece of string?
The vast majority of NPC spellcasters - even the Wizards - don't need Spellbooks, and most DMs are gonna forget that they even have them, let alone have Ritual spells in.


Where they found randomly as loot or through local magic shops?

You're not really supposed to have "Magic Shops" in 5e.
But my players have commissioned a Wizard or two to write Scrolls they can copy or use. But that requires giving the players a few days of downtime to wait...And finding a Wizard that knows the spell they want.


What about gold and downtime for adding them to your book, did you have enough of that to make it function?

In my experience most DMs don't hand out downtime during an adventure. Downtime is one of those things that happens "Between Campaigns."

The most in-campaign downtime I've ever given is three days. Once.

"It takes two Long Rests to get all your Hit Dice back." ...Well then two Long Rests is all you're getting. Then the story is gonna start happening again.


Thoughts?

Reliance on random loot (Scrolls) is one of the reasons I don't like Wizards in actual play - and to a lesser extent that would also apply to Tomelocks.
Yes. Theoretically, a Wizard's Spellbook can have any Spell they want, and a Wizard is basically just Batman and with enough prep time they ca-
No.
No they can't... And a Tomelock is an even more restrictive version of that.

[Segev]

I play a level 8 wizard who makes extensive use of floating disk because he has six strength.

We also use the ritual casting of comprehend languages and detect magic pretty frequently.

For one stretch, we even used phantom steed as a ritual. We have a four-person party. It was about as awkward as I expected, but was faster than without it, at least.

[animorte]

Scrolls are fairly common random loot, though how many are ritual spells is spottier. You will find spellbook with wizard rituals a little more often, in my experience, and any time you meet another wizard, you can try trading for spells.
Yes, communicate with your DM about whether or not it will be worth it. Generally only a couple rituals are really necessary to feel worth it.

When I played TomeLock, I just wanted as many cantrips as possible and it was kind of silly, but I had a lot of fun and was always useful, in combat or otherwise.

[Pex]

Tomelocks can cast rituals from any list. Look to temples to find clerical ritual spells. Some DMs might be particular with faith, so look towards the gods of magic who want to spread magical teaching. The Church of Tyr may not give your Archfey Warlock access to spells, but if the Church of Mystra is denying it to you then you may yell at your DM.

Druid spells might be more difficult to get, but it's not uncommon for an NPC druid to seek the party's help. You can ask for ritual spells as your compensation instead of gold pieces.

[solidork]

It depends largely on your game master, so talk with them and set expectations. I found several scrolls as loot (the biggest one being Commune with Nature) and used downtime to acquire some on my own.

I used several of the rituals extensively, so it was very much worth it. I picked a Snake for a familiar for flavor reasons, so it wasn't as useful as one that flies would have been. The cantrips were also excellent; Shillelagh was a linchpin of my build, and I used almost all of them regularly.

The individual effects of most cantrips and rituals might seem modest, but there is a lot of value to me in a character having a thing that they can ALWAYS do because that lets you pin characterization to it. On a related note, the Warlock "at will" invocations that I've tried have all been much better and more fun than I expected - at will Detect Magic was absolutely essential to my magical detective Warlock, very character defining. At will Disguise Self and Silent Image have both been a blast on my theater/actor warlock.

[Leon]

GM dependent (like almost everything is)

Not played a Tomelock but have a long time ago played a class that was dependent on scrolls to learn more than a few cleric spells and in the space of time before I just changed to being a cleric so I could have more than a pittance of spells i had been given 3 divine scroll all for spells I already knew (healing spells) and in the same space of time 5 arcane spellbooks were found (DM was also a player and played a wizard...) The DMs knew I needed divine scrolls to diversify my spell lists and decided to not let me even research or buy scrolls.

[RogueJK]

I've played several Tomelocks, nearly all of whom took Book of Ancient Secrets.

My DM is very accommodating for individual requests. So if you say "Hey, my character wants to rely on lots of rituals", they'll find ways for you to get them. As stated, the Tomelock has access to all rituals from all classes, so it's often just a matter of finding NPC casters, church priests, and magic shopkeepers who are willing to let you purchase scrolls or copy from their spellbooks.

But if you're playing strictly by random loot drops, or sticking solely to things like AL modules or published adventures, you'll won't have as much of that DM customization.


In addition to Book of Ancient Secrets, Tomelocks also have access to two fantastic other exclusive Invocations: Far Scribe and Gift of the Protectors.

Far Scribe is free castings of Sending, usable all day every day, to a limited number of recipients. Depending on the campaign, this is exceedingly helpful/powerful, allowing you to freely communicate with a number of allies and connections all over the world.

Gift of the Protectors is a great "Get out of Death Free" card, 1x/day. Especially handy if you're playing something like a Celestial Tomelock and you're the primary healer for the group, as it saves you from having to spend an action and resources to yo-yo a downed party member, or it saves the party from having to get their healer back up if you're the one that drops to 0.

[RazorChain]

I've never played a Tomblock, but I have played wizards and other classes that get rituals.

IMO, rituals are near useless. Like the definition of a ribbon ability. One, there isn't enough of them. Two, several of them fall into "narrative" spaces (I'm gonna risk cast floating disk so I don't have to carry stuff, etc), and don't actually affect the outcome of anything. Three, the casting time means the useful ones end up in the same weird space that short rests are - the DM has to go out of their way to make sure you have time to ritually cast prayer of healing, so it's probably not making a difference in any particular way.

Gift of the Protectors, that's a good invocation. The rest of the Tomb invocations I wouldn't bother with.

Edit: oh, cantrips are also bad lol. Unless you're committed to the concept of a Tomb warlock, I would recommend another option

I must digress, rituals are great. I mean as a tomblock you have access to ALL ritual spells if you can find them. The DM's I have been playing with make it pretty easy to buy scrolls of level 1 to 3.

Find familiar, Identify, Detect Magic, Comprehend Languages, Alarm, Tiny Hut, Water breathing, Unseen servant. All great utility spells.

Of course you're milage may vary, if you are playing a game that doesn't reward utility and problem solving then it can bee seen as useless.

[Pex]

What it comes down to is if the DM is denying you ritual spells then get a new DM. Either the DM is playing with you or against you. It goes for being a Wizard too. If the DM is denying you spells get a new DM. You should not be having to argue with the DM about this. You can give him the benefit of the doubt once. He may Honest True not be realizing he's not giving access to (ritual) spells. If he makes the effort of providing (ritual) spells after talking to him, great. If he's still denying you then deny the DM of a player.

Obligatory:
If for whatever reason the DM loathes a spell with a passion to want to ban it so you can never have it, fine he can do that, but that is not the same thing nor permission to deny you all other (ritual) spells.

[Tanarii]

Massively DM dependent on how the DM generates loot, if they have Wizard spellbooks lying around as extra loot on top of what the DMG assumes, and if they use the Xanathar's downtime rules and your characters will have time to use them.

If they're running a DMG treasure table campaign, generates spells in found scrolls randomly, does not assume extra free spellbooks as loot, and you won't have significant downtime to search for magic items for sale (Xan rules method or otherwise), the Ritual Caster feat and Ancient Secrets Warlock Invocation are not very valuable. And Wizards are far more balanced in general, but that's another matter.

There's nothing wrong with a DM that does that, but definitely worth finding out if they're not going to give you free rituals beyond what's normally expected to be found as loot (almost none being the standard given to DMs) AND you can't find any in downtime (the standard before Xanathar's) or you won't have any downtime to find it (even with Xan).

[Kane0]

In my experience scrolls through random drops are not frequent enough to make build decisions around unless you have prior knowledge from your DM, especially if the spells are randomized on top of that.

Purchasing magic items is also extremely DM-dependant, but more common in my experience.

So it's a pretty hard sell being a Tomelock without DM buy-in, unless you're really wanting those cantrips or can get rituals from a party-mate.

[Zhorn]

Best recommendation I can make it talk with your DM about wanting to have ritual scrolls and spell books containing rituals be available enough for the feature to feel useful.

If the DM cares about their players enjoying the build they are trying to achieve, they will at the very least put some effort into making sure it's not a dead feature to have.

This advice goes for many class related choices. Always talk with the DM and make an effort to be working together on achieving character concepts. Best way to steer clear of any potential misunderstandings and the resentment building that leads to toxic player vs DM mentalities.

[kingcheesepants]

I like tomelocks, they're probably the warlock with the most utility. I DMd a player who had one and he asked me beforehand about acquiring rituals and I made sure that when they fought wizards and went to temples he had the chance to learn the spells of that level. I definitely would have overlooked that though if we hadn't talked about it (and him saying things along the lines of I'll use my downtime to look for phantom steed etc). When I play wizards I also like to collect lots of spells and yeah without talking to the DM it's iffy at best, but most DMs are happy to oblige in my experience.

[Cheesegear]

What it comes down to is if the DM is denying you ritual spells then get a new DM.

"The DM isn't giving me what I want, so I quit." ...Uhh. Maybe don't go that far?


If the DM is denying you spells get a new DM.

Partial disagree.

Another part of me says that if a player is demanding that I give them specific loot for their character...That player doesn't know how loot works.

Furthermore, it shows blatant favoritism. Do I have to give other players specific magic items? Potions? Other consumables? Non-consumables?


You should not be having to argue with the DM about this.

Hey DM, I want to play a TomeLock, where I get a bunch of Ritual Scrolls throughout my journey.
...Uhh, you're basing your character on your ability to find specific loot? ...I'm not sure that's a great idea. I'm certainly not going to hand out Ritual Scrolls like candy. If that's what you think is gonna hap-
Say no more. That's all I need to hear. I'll think of a different character.

You're right. No argument is required.

[Zhorn]

"The DM isn't giving me what I want, so I quit." ...Uhh. Maybe don't go that far?

To be fair, I'm pretty sure Pex is coming from the position of the DM already knowing the player is wanting to invest in the particular build. ie; the communication phase has already happened; and the DM is actively participating in the feature being a dead feature.
It's doesn't need to be raining ritual spells constantly, just their presence within the campaign isn't like pulling hens teeth to obtain.

example: fight a spell caster. Post combat looting; is it reasonable that the caster was a wizard of some description? Would it then be reasonable that they would have a spell book on their person? Would it be feasible that this wizard happened to have a utility spell in their notes somewhere?

It needn't be a mass amount of work on the DM's end. Knowing a handful of spell that have the ritual tag (plenty of online filters give those in a couple of clicks). When the player asks to search the body, if they inquire about a spell book and it makes sense that one would be present, selecting one that feels appropriate for the specific npc is very simple. No need to go above and beyond in making sure every spell presented is one not yet collected, just a random choice here and there will allow them to collect enough that the feature feels a worthy investment.

[Ogre Mage]

The usefulness of the tome pack is based on two things.

1. Is the DM giving out ritual spell scrolls? Talk with the DM before taking the Tome Pact/Book of Ancient Secrets invocation.
2. Is there a wizard in the party? If there is the Book of Ancient Secrets is mostly irrelevant.

[TyGuy]

The usefulness of the tome pack is based on two things.

1. Is the DM giving out ritual spell scrolls? Talk with the DM before taking the Tome Pact/Book of Ancient Secrets invocation.
2. Is there a wizard in the party? If there is the Book of Ancient Secrets is mostly irrelevant.

There are useful rituals outside the wizard's spell list.

I haven't seen it mentioned yet. But I believe there is something that skews the usefulness of rituals. Published modules vs homebrew.
I think rituals have more potential in written adventures. As an example, the written modules might have magic items tucked away in the most bizarre locations. Making detect magic extra useful. Or a predetermined ambush waiting for adventurers that try to sleep in the dungeon, giving tiny hut value. Homebrew is typically created with the party taken into some consideration. I personally don't prepare a lot of "slim chance" content like published work. Where the party needs to dive 200 feet into a water filled cavern before randomly deciding to dig in the sediment to uncover a bag filled with goodies. The majority of parties miss that obscured treasure. But the ritual caster might have low/no cost methods to discover it.

[Ogre Mage]

There are useful rituals outside the wizard's spell list.


Wizards have the largest number of ritual spells and the lion's share of the best ones. Some of the other classes have a few good ones exclusive to their list but if there is a wizard already in the party the usefulness of the Book of Ancient Secrets invocation is greatly diminished.

[animorte]

It's funny to me how this thread has begun discussing so heavily the stigma of DM dependent loot when the exact same thing applies to Wizards and somehow that's never a concern in the Wizard supremacy discussions.
:smalltongue:
Oh, nevermind. That's because Wizards always live in the white room!

Anyway, all of this is a good reason (proof even) that Pact of the Chain is just more reliable, without the DM's help, and still quite versatile.

[MoiMagnus]

To anyone who has played a tome pact warlock before, did you genuinely that ritual spell scrolls were common enough to make it worth it? If so, how did the DM provide them? Where they found randomly as loot or through local magic shops? What about gold and downtime for adding them to your book, did you have enough of that to make it function?

Not "local magic shops", but the only campaign where I've seen this pact, the PCs had an employer that had a network of influence, so for low level rituals (level 1 & level 2) they just asked the NPCs for them and got them. For higher level rituals, it would have been more complex but the player never tried to get them as far as I remember.

[Gignere]

It's funny to me how this thread has begun discussing so heavily the stigma of DM dependent loot when the exact same thing applies to Wizards and somehow that's never a concern in the Wizard supremacy discussions.
:smalltongue:
Oh, nevermind. That's because Wizards always live in the white room!

Anyway, all of this is a good reason (proof even) that Pact of the Chain is just more reliable, without the DM's help, and still quite versatile.

For wizards as long as you start with the 6 initial and 2 spells known on level ups, it has generally been fine. Yeah you need to make some sacrifices but that’s ok and in my experience most DMs make it fairly simple to get first and second level spells available for learning which is the lion’s share of the rituals for a wizard. Some of the level 3 ones like phantom steed and tiny hut, if necessary you can just use a higher level pick to get them.

[nickl_2000]

At my table, the tomelock was great and had access to whatever rituals cash could buy. That being said, we allow the buying of magic items and access to buy scrolls and access books via libraries in downtime. So, ya, easy for both Wizards and Tomelocks to fill out their books with money and time.

[stoutstien]

Are you talking about pack of tome or just the book of secrets invocation?

[Unoriginal]

Tomelocks do get nice things beyond the "can collect rituals from all the other spell lists" capacity, tbf.

[stoutstien]

Tomelocks do get nice things beyond the "can collect rituals from all the other spell lists" capacity, tbf.

Yea. It's a good invocation but hardly a tax like the pact of blade need.

[Joe the Rat]

None of my Tomelock players went BoAS, but that has more to do with temperament than specific choice.

So we refer to our analog - Wizards.
I typically don't have a lot of scrolls popping up in loot, but I am running a city-hopping campaign. In addition to being able to purchase minor (low level) spells scrolls, players also have the opportunity to research spells. This typically adds a little time and cost, but lets them pick what they want to pursue. Any ritual could be found in this way by perusing the (in)appropriae sections of the local scriptorium or biblioplex.

The one thing you need to give them is downtime. And then find something for everyone else to do for a couple of weeks. I recommend finding some of the more ...esoteric carousing tables. Those usually turn into mid-downtime adventures of their own.

[diplomancer]

There's a fundamental difference between giving spells as loot to the Wizard and to the Pact of the Tome Warlock; a Wizard, just by being a Wizard, has an interest in getting more spells. A Warlock has two spend two different class features on it, both the Pact Boon and an Invocation.

For that reason, I believe DMs should be somewhat more accommodating to the Pact of the Tome Warlock, or he will just switch to a different Pact Boon as soon as he can.

[Segev]

The Tome Warlock is also not getting two new wizard spells each level; he is even more dependent on the loot finding aspect than the wizard.

That said, a wizard limited to two spells per level is definitely not the schroedinger's wizard of white room horror stories.

[Skrum]

The Tome Warlock is also not getting two new wizard spells each level; he is even more dependent on the loot finding aspect than the wizard.

That said, a wizard limited to two spells per level is definitely not the schroedinger's wizard of white room horror stories.

I think finding extra spells was far more of a factor in 3e. In 5e, a wizard limited to only 2 spells per level is still going to have more spells than they can prepare each day, and also have the vast majority of spells they'll actually use.

[Psyren]

The usefulness of the tome pack is based on two things.

1. Is the DM giving out ritual spell scrolls? Talk with the DM before taking the Tome Pact/Book of Ancient Secrets invocation.
2. Is there a wizard in the party? If there is the Book of Ancient Secrets is mostly irrelevant.

I concur with this litmus with a couple of additions:

1) Rituals don't have to be sourced purely from scrolls. Ask your DM if there's a ritual on that weird inscription on the wall in the ancient tomb, or if the grateful elven magister knows one they'd be willing to teach, or if there's a particularly inspiring arrangement of stars and planets overhead, or even if their patron has visited them in a dream to impart some knowledge that they can scribe at the first opportunity. You shouldn't badger your DM of course, but you don't have to try mandating the treasure from each fight either - be curious about their world, engage with it, and that will keep your feature top of mind for most.

2) I'm much more likely to pick Tomelock if the rest of the party's ability to access rituals is limited, e.g. if I am the group's only or primary ritual caster. I completely disagree with the earlier poster who dismissed rituals as ribbon features - having someone in your group capable of using them is extremely handy, doubly so if that someone can access them without needing to spend a feat, and in some campaigns may even be vital. Even at high levels, rituals like Tiny Hut, Telepathic Bond, and Divination/Commune remain useful.

[Segev]

I think finding extra spells was far more of a factor in 3e. In 5e, a wizard limited to only 2 spells per level is still going to have more spells than they can prepare each day, and also have the vast majority of spells they'll actually use.

I didn't say a wizard with only those spells was nonfunctional. I said he's not the shroedinger's wizard of white room discussion.

[Pex]

"The DM isn't giving me what I want, so I quit." ...Uhh. Maybe don't go that far?



Partial disagree.

Another part of me says that if a player is demanding that I give them specific loot for their character...That player doesn't know how loot works.

Furthermore, it shows blatant favoritism. Do I have to give other players specific magic items? Potions? Other consumables? Non-consumables?



Hey DM, I want to play a TomeLock, where I get a bunch of Ritual Scrolls throughout my journey.
...Uhh, you're basing your character on your ability to find specific loot? ...I'm not sure that's a great idea. I'm certainly not going to hand out Ritual Scrolls like candy. If that's what you think is gonna hap-
Say no more. That's all I need to hear. I'll think of a different character.

You're right. No argument is required.

Failing to understand the difference between a player not getting everything he wants and a player never getting anything that he wants. Nothing exists in the gameworld without the DM's permission. I stand by my statement of get a new DM if he never gives you what you want.

[Slipjig]

It also seems extremely reasonable for a Patron who creates Tomelocks would provide ritual scrolls as their preferred "Gold Star" type of reward any time they do something that makes the Patron happy.

[Segev]

It also seems extremely reasonable for a Patron who creates Tomelocks would provide ritual scrolls as their preferred "Gold Star" type of reward any time they do something that makes the Patron happy.

Heck, if it's a reward from the Patron, the Patron could add the rituals to the Patron-granted Tome directly.

[sambojin]

I'd just give the tomelock with book of secrets a free ritual known every level (any list, up to the level of spell they could cast) and a free cantrip every two levels from any list. Every Warlock level, that is.

Does this give them heaps of cantrips and rituals after a few levels? Yes. Is this OP? No, not really. And it would make it a fun sub/class to play (they've already paid an invocation tax and chosen a "weak'ish" pact, let them have their fun screwing around like a daemon empowered hedge-wizard. Rituals are great and useful, but they're only so powerful. Even stuff like Phantom Steed or Commune fits well enough and doesn't really break too much by lvl5/9. It's not like others can't just ritual this stuff out, all day, any day. And they didn't really have to base their character around it, just make a simple choice each day or 1-out-of-2 on level-up).

This is assuming they remain single classed. I'd probably take the extras away if they strayed too far from their patron's power in other odd magical ways. But at least you always get something every level for sticking with them (almost like every other caster does without any RP baggage or reasons).

[solidork]

I've got no idea why people in this thread seem to think that Tome is weak. You can get a lot of the benefits of the other two pacts with extra stuff on top of that.

I'd only ever take Blade or Chain if I've got something very specific in mind that requires them. Tome is just so versatile and generically powerful that its the default choice for most Warlock builds I consider.

[sambojin]

Same. Or maybe chainlock, because they're good in so many situations too. But would more rituals or even cantrips actually break anything?

Not that I can see. And since it makes it a fun character to play (ie: you just choose them on level-up, instead of your DM having to specifically hand out items or RP patron stuff in an adventure "just for you", I'd prefer it if BoS tomelock was this way, as a DM or a player). It makes it simple, and it works, and it isn't overpowered, so meh?

(Aren't all the pacts "weak'ish"? Not really, but some extra free low-power stuff couldn't hurt too much. I mean, they're only warlocks. Possibly weaker than nearly any other caster...)


Honestly, if Tome + BoS *was* the default, and you added pact stuff on top of that, it'd be a really interesting magical class. But it's not, so I don't mind adding stuff to the default, because it's a choice you have to make, that may as well be a bit better than it is.

[diplomancer]

I've got no idea why people in this thread seem to think that Tome is weak. You can get a lot of the benefits of the other two pacts with extra stuff on top of that.

I'd only ever take Blade or Chain if I've got something very specific in mind that requires them. Tome is just so versatile and generically powerful that its the default choice for most Warlock builds I consider.

Only reason why Chain is not considered more powerful than Tome is that DMs actively (though mostly unconsciously) nerf it. Intelligent invisible familiar with opposable thumbs is so good of a Scout that DMs refuse to give all the information they'd be entitled to.

[Unoriginal]

Only reason why Chain is not considered more powerful than Tome is that DMs actively (though mostly unconsciously) nerf it. Intelligent invisible familiar with opposable thumbs is so good of a Scout that DMs refuse to give all the information they'd be entitled to.

Intelligent invisible familiars with opposable thumbs are good, but far from as great as you're implying.

It's not a question of "nerfing it", it's just that what they're actually capable of is less amazing than one would expect from the summary.

[diplomancer]

Intelligent invisible familiars with opposable thumbs are good, but far from as great as you're implying.

It's not a question of "nerfing it", it's just that what they're actually capable of is less amazing than one would expect from the summary.

In far too many situations, you'd get a mostly complete map of whatever it is you're exploring without raising any suspicions. Which DMs are, understandably, very loathe to do... they can either play it out (and the game gets stuck while the Familiar goes in his mini-game) or just give up the map (maybe after a couple of rolls)... and both options are bad.

[Thunderous Mojo]

I stand by my statement of get a new DM if he never gives you what you want.

Lo, it was written in the Book of Mick, that one can’t always get what one wants. But, if you try,(sometime), you can get what you need.🃏

[Pixel_Kitsune]

In far too many situations, you'd get a mostly complete map of whatever it is you're exploring without raising any suspicions. Which DMs are, understandably, very loathe to do... they can either play it out (and the game gets stuck while the Familiar goes in his mini-game) or just give up the map (maybe after a couple of rolls)... and both options are bad.

Which you can do with a normal familiar and a touch of luck, while also using Shillelagh to have a cheat on the PactBlade as well. AND you have at least one other Ritual and 2 more Cantrips.

I love the idea of the Chainlock, but playing it it's just... okay. I've only had a lot of fun with it in two situations. One was playing a Celestial Lock and being the Healer on purpose. Got the DM to allow me a Lantern Archon and just leaned heavily into the Angel Theme with Invocations to support that.

The other one involves Third Party Material. Took 3 levels of Chainlock, then Multiclassed to Wizard and took Kobold Press' Familiar Master. THAT was having fun with a familiar as a concept. But that build doesn't care about or need the Lock, I just did it to get a Sprite.

[diplomancer]

Which you can do with a normal familiar and a touch of luck, while also using Shillelagh to have a cheat on the PactBlade as well. AND you have at least one other Ritual and 2 more Cantrips.

No, you can't. A regular familiar is unintelligent, and, therefore, incapable of correctly conveying information, understanding what other people talk about, etc. You can circumvent that by using the familiar senses, but that has enough of a short range (and requires your action every turn) that you can't really do it safely.

With a Pact of the Chain familiar (and specially with Voice of the Chain Master invocation) you can just send your invisible familiar into the dungeon/castle/cave, etc and wait safely outside for him to convey you the information.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

No, you can't. A regular familiar is unintelligent, and, therefore, incapable of correctly conveying information, understanding what other people talk about, etc. You can circumvent that by using the familiar senses, but that has enough of a short range (and requires your action every turn) that you can't really do it safely.

With a Pact of the Chain familiar (and specially with Voice of the Chain Master invocation) you can just send your invisible familiar into the dungeon/castle/cave, etc and wait safely outside for him to convey you the information.

Exactly how is it that if your plan with the Chainlock is to wait outside that it's "too unsafe" to use your turn every round and just get the first 100' of the place mapped?

Not saying the Chainlock Familiar isn't better, I'm saying it's not so much better that it's the default best choice.

[diplomancer]

Exactly how is it that if your plan with the Chainlock is to wait outside that it's "too unsafe" to use your turn every round and just get the first 100' of the place mapped?

Not saying the Chainlock Familiar isn't better, I'm saying it's not so much better that it's the default best choice.

Quite simple: 100' is way too close for safety. Goblins see your familiar and deduce something's iffy? You're getting attacked that very same round.

And this is even without going into the invisibility side of things. Or a door.

But if you're say, 500' away (still quite close, you can get there easily enough in less than two minutes, so it's not like things are going to radically change from the time of scouting to the time the party's getting to the dungeon) and someone by chance discovers your invisible familiar? Well, you just pull back and try again later. As you're in constant telepathic communication with your familiar, you are even free to use your Action to get him out of dodge safely (some times at least) if the gig is up.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Quite simple: 100' is way too close for safety. Goblins see your familiar and deduce something's iffy? You're getting attacked that very same round.

And this is even without going into the invisibility side of things. Or a door.

And all of that trumps Ritual Casting, Extra Cantrips and such?

Also, tactically sound or not, is your table cool with everyone just killing time while the Lock tries to search?

[diplomancer]

And all of that trumps Ritual Casting, Extra Cantrips and such?

Yes, yes it does. Specially, to go back to the thread, if the DM does not reward your Pact of the Tome Warlock with Rituals somewhat regularly. It's definitely better than 3 Extra cantrips, (regular) Find Familiar, and one more 1st level Ritual. I can see that it would probably be worse than those features AND, let's say, 10 more Rituals of the Warlock's choice.


Also, tactically sound or not, is your table cool with everyone just killing time while the Lock tries to search?

Which was a point I've already made. It's so good that it leaves the DM in a bind of either doing what you suggest (which the party probably will not enjoy, as you point out) or handwaving it with a couple of rolls and giving you a map of the dungeon (which the party probably WOULD enjoy very much, but kinda takes away from the exploration side of the game). So both solutions are bad for the game. For that reason, DMs "compromise" by nerfing the feature, making a couple of rolls and then giving you far less information than your familiar would otherwise get.

[animorte]

I'm not going to go into each and every spell the Chain can simulate effectively while having its own goodies (some in the form of invocations). I love both Chain and Tome, and always debate between the two when I'm constructing yet another Warlock. (I have rarely touched Blade and Talisman was worth building around to a degree.)

It really comes down to how creative you can get with what you have available and how much your DM will allow/provide in any given circumstance.

[Tanarii]

(Aren't all the pacts "weak'ish"? Not really, but some extra free low-power stuff couldn't hurt too much. I mean, they're only warlocks. Possibly weaker than nearly any other caster...)

Not pacts. Pact Boons.

And yes they're all weakish without investing Invocations to make them better. And in the case of Blade, Str or Dex to back it up.

Basically it's the ability to use found magical martial weapons, 3 cantrips, or an improved familiar.

Personally I find Blade to be the most "powerful" of those three, but that's because I'm subconsciously discounting the required stat investment, and I value the use of found magical weapons more highly and cantrips far less than others. Plus I'm also biased because warlocks are the coolest GISH. :smallamused:

Familiars are almost a ribbon tho. Chain lock requires a lot of the playing the DM game to get good use out of.

[sambojin]

Meh. Invisible, smart (Int7-14, wis10'ish+), has hands, has talky, has motivation, familiar isn't just Find Familiar. It's certainly++.

But +3 cantrips and +2 rituals does sort of make it feel like you should have just taken a level of Arcana Cleric at some point. Or Druid 1. Or Wizard 1. If you're not in a "Wizards should have *more* spells, !definitely!, !!!" magic candyland of scroll givings from your DM. I would prefer it slowly scaled level-wise as a Book of Secrets Tomelock, on the player's behalf, because it should.

But yeah, take a level of Wizard, if your DM won't work with you. Hell, take 5, after you're sick of "not getting ritual scrolls"....

For the other pacts, the sheer shenanigans you can pull off with an invisible familiar or a slowly scaling magic weapon does scale plenty well, as well. And precisely how much ritual time do you have from Tome? How is casting the right cantrip not weaker than casting the right spell?

Just saying.... Tome could use the buff I mentioned, to make it really cool to be a warlock, with every level-up.



I'd just give the tomelock with book of secrets a free ritual known every level (any list, up to the level of spell they could cast) and a free cantrip every two levels from any list.
Every Warlock level, that is.
This works.


I'm also just saying, "you know if you have Int13+ on a character, you can just take a 1 level dip into Wizard, don't you?". You get 6 spells known, and some extra cantrips, and ritual casting, so pick your spells, and choose the good rituals...
I mean, my fix is fine "for the class and pact", but there's perfectly usable options here in 5e. The "I don't want to multiclass or build for it or use resources for it" is a mindset. Still, my "fix" above works fine, and doesn't break anything, but there is always the "just take Wiz1" thing, that is abhorrent to most. Even to me.

But it's not like you can't reflavour things to be tasty, on the character you want to play, on the crunch but yum. 🍔🌮🍗🥐🍜🥪🍲🍧🍭🍬🍿
You do you. Make your character taste what you want it to feel like. Don't be constrained by "this class means that!" on your shizzle. Funk it up, so you're the best boy/girl/alphabet for your patron :)

[CTurbo]

I'm a big fan of the Tomelock and think it's great in actual play. Rituals are extremely helpful and useful.

I think any good DM is going to cater to their players' characters' wants and needs to an extent and the Tomelock is no different. When I DM a Tomelock, I give the character chances to gain rituals here and there. They may not always be cheap and easily, but the opportunity is there. Both times I've played a Tomelock, the DMs were reasonably accommodating with ways to add to my Book of Shadows.

A bad or oblivious DM can ruin any character. I once played a roll20 campaign with a group of guys I'd known for several years, but this was the first time playing DnD with them. The DM was a great story teller, but he was terrible at knowing the characters he was DMing. We had a PAM Fighter in the party and we were at level 8 and the only magic item he had was a +1 Longsword. The DM wouldn't let us buy any magic weapons or armor, but also refused to add anything specifically useful for the party to loot. IMO, no character that took the PAM feat should make it all the way to level 8 without acquiring at least a +1 Halbred/Glaive. The player was obviously annoyed by then, and kept making comments about it, and was wanting to change his character. I actually PMed the DM and asked him why he hadn't given the guy a +1 reach weapon and he didn't really have a good answer. Even my Cleric had a +1 Warhammer.


Anyway, the Tomelock is consistently GOOD all the time. The Chainlock is way more varying. The Chainlock can go anywhere from useless to overpowered depending on the situation. An intelligent flying invisible shapeshifting familiar with opposable thumbs can totally shut down or completely bypass entire encounters. In a lot of ways it's probably more powerful than the Tome, but the Tome is definitely more consistent and reliable, and I think both are better than the Bladelock.

[Psyren]

A bad or oblivious DM can ruin any character. I once played a roll20 campaign with a group of guys I'd known for several years, but this was the first time playing DnD with them. The DM was a great story teller, but he was terrible at knowing the characters he was DMing. We had a PAM Fighter in the party and we were at level 8 and the only magic item he had was a +1 Longsword. The DM wouldn't let us buy any magic weapons or armor, but also refused to add anything specifically useful for the party to loot. IMO, no character that took the PAM feat should make it all the way to level 8 without acquiring at least a +1 Halbred/Glaive. The player was obviously annoyed by then, and kept making comments about it, and was wanting to change his character. I actually PMed the DM and asked him why he hadn't given the guy a +1 reach weapon and he didn't really have a good answer. Even my Cleric had a +1 Warhammer.

Definitely agreed, especially when he's handing out +1 weapons to the other party members.



Anyway, the Tomelock is consistently GOOD all the time. The Chainlock is way more varying. The Chainlock can go anywhere from useless to overpowered depending on the situation. An intelligent flying invisible shapeshifting familiar with opposable thumbs can totally shut down or completely bypass entire encounters. In a lot of ways it's probably more powerful than the Tome, but the Tome is definitely more consistent and reliable, and I think both are better than the Bladelock.

Agreed here too, and I love the creepy yet useful abilities the tome confers like being able to keep tabs on your group.

[MoiMagnus]

A bad or oblivious DM can ruin any character. I once played a roll20 campaign with a group of guys I'd known for several years, but this was the first time playing DnD with them. The DM was a great story teller, but he was terrible at knowing the characters he was DMing. We had a PAM Fighter in the party and we were at level 8 and the only magic item he had was a +1 Longsword. The DM wouldn't let us buy any magic weapons or armor, but also refused to add anything specifically useful for the party to loot. IMO, no character that took the PAM feat should make it all the way to level 8 without acquiring at least a +1 Halbred/Glaive. The player was obviously annoyed by then, and kept making comments about it, and was wanting to change his character. I actually PMed the DM and asked him why he hadn't given the guy a +1 reach weapon and he didn't really have a good answer. Even my Cleric had a +1 Warhammer.


I can see how one would end up with this GMing style. If magic weapons are rare, and the PCs are not special fate-chosen heroes, they have no realistic reason to be "lucky" and find exactly the magic item they need. And in this mindset, the player was "wrong" to chose PAM that early before looting a magic Halbred/Glaive and should have taken a feat adapted to whatever they find. Of more precisely, taking PAM that early is not "wrong" but is a gamble, and if you loose a gamble you can't complain about the consequences.

But on the other hand, if such a GM does not clearly announce it early in the campaign, they are completely oblivious to the expectation of the average players. This is not how the average player is expecting the campaign to go, so obviously they will complain about "loosing the gamble" because in their mind they were not gambling anything.

And it probably deadlocked because the GM did not consider himself "giving" magical items to the player, they were randomly and/or logically determining what the universe look like, expecting the players to adapt. And they perceived the player's complaint about not looting the weapon they want in the same way as one might complain about rolling a 1 on a d20. Bad luck is part of the game.

[Dork_Forge]

I've seen a tomelock going Cha sad with Shillelagh and a scagtrip do really well. I wouldn't take the invocation for rituals unless I was content with only the rituals I was getting initially. Choosing to build a character around loot isn't a good idea imo, and I don't really support catering to characters to that degree all the time. Would one get a scroll every now and then in my games? Sure, but that's gravy, not something to rely on.

Also this thread really highlighted to me that people so strongly associate tomelock with the rituals, never occurred to me before the assumption was so strong

[Pixel_Kitsune]

But +3 cantrips and +2 rituals does sort of make it feel like you should have just taken a level of Arcana Cleric at some point. Or Druid 1. Or Wizard 1.

Because you might not want to delay your spell casting a level for that? Depends on the build and the planned level cap really but if your goal is JUST Cantrip master+Rituals, then yeah, the MC is good, but you're holding back your more powerful class abilities coming into play. At that point I'd more likely say you want to Start Warlock for EB and then just go Wizard.

[strangebloke]

If you're rolling for loot you'll get a lot of scrolls.
If your DM does a naturalistic game where loot is derived from the sorts of enemies you fight, there will be spellbooks and scrolls if there are enemy wizards - which there almost always will be. Or you can buy scrolls from existing spellcasters.
If your DM tailors their loot to their party, you'll receive scrolls because its what your character wants/needs.

Rituals are, of course, very good. Phantom steed can give the whole party a lot of movement options both overland and in some combat encounters. Water Breathing is incredibly useful in the right situation. Find Familiar, Detect Magic, Identify, Silence - all among the most useful spells in the game, particularly because they're rituals.

The only reason this feature is bad is if your DM is weirdly obtuse about loot and refuses to give you give you the one thing you want (or has you operating in a weird setting where magic is super rare) OR if you just don't care about rituals/utility at all. Which, if you don't care about utility, I think its obvious that you shouldn't take this feature. Like, duh.

[Psyren]

I can see how one would end up with this GMing style. If magic weapons are rare, and the PCs are not special fate-chosen heroes, they have no realistic reason to be "lucky" and find exactly the magic item they need. And in this mindset, the player was "wrong" to chose PAM that early before looting a magic Halbred/Glaive and should have taken a feat adapted to whatever they find. Of more precisely, taking PAM that early is not "wrong" but is a gamble, and if you loose a gamble you can't complain about the consequences.

But on the other hand, if such a GM does not clearly announce it early in the campaign, they are completely oblivious to the expectation of the average players. This is not how the average player is expecting the campaign to go, so obviously they will complain about "loosing the gamble" because in their mind they were not gambling anything.

And it probably deadlocked because the GM did not consider himself "giving" magical items to the player, they were randomly and/or logically determining what the universe look like, expecting the players to adapt. And they perceived the player's complaint about not looting the weapon they want in the same way as one might complain about rolling a 1 on a d20. Bad luck is part of the game.

Bad luck is part of the game, but so is coming into the game with a particular character concept in mind (PHB 11.) If I tell the DM I want to play an archer, build my character around archery, and because they never gave me a magic bow I'm forced to use a magic dagger or club instead because they keep putting nonmagical resistant or immune enemies in front of me, I'm going to feel immensely shortchanged.

[stoutstien]

You can slowly feed off rituals form the party so they can free up spells known/prepared over time. Sure it cost a little time and money but for a single invocation that's a lot of flexibility.

[strangebloke]

I just struggle understand why you would never have access to scrolls or rituals?

like,

they're common with rolled loot.
if the DM is tailoring loot, they'll give you scrolls
if the DM is doing a naturalistic/integrated setting, any spellcaster can make and sell scrolls so it seems like something you could buy or find??
party members like clerics have lots of spells they can only cast as rituals if they prepare them - and they might not want to prepare them. So you can have them make scrolls and copy them into your book so that they don't have to prepare Purify Food and Drink or whatever.


You might not get every ritual but the situation where you get zero mileage out of this ability seems really rare. Either your DM has a really specific idea about how their setting works and shouldn't have allowed you to take BoAS in the first place, or you're frankly not even trying.

[Unoriginal]

Personally, if a player comes up with a character concept using a specific kind of weapon, I'm much more likely to tell them "sure, you can search for magic versions" rather than change the adventure to have them conveniently find the weapon they need/want.

As in, sure, you can meet an enemy warlock with a Rod of the Pact Keeper, but if you absolutely want/need one, you're better off specifically tracking info about where to find one, then either trade with the owner or wrestle it off them.

[Psyren]

Personally, if a player comes up with a character concept using a specific kind of weapon, I'm much more likely to tell them "sure, you can search for magic versions" rather than change the adventure to have them conveniently find the weapon they need/want.

As in, sure, you can meet an enemy warlock with a Rod of the Pact Keeper, but if you absolutely want/need one, you're better off specifically tracking info about where to find one, then either trade with the owner or wrestle it off them.

Sure but just to note, there's a big difference between RotPK and a generically magic polearm/bow though. Not only is the former highly specific compared to the latter, even if the Warlock never gets the former they're still primarily doing force damage and thus don't really have to worry about resistance or immunity. But the martial who is either stuck with a mundane weapon, or who gets a magical one they didn't build around, is a lot worse off.

[Tanarii]

they're common with rolled loot.

Spell scrolls are fairly common as rolled loot.

There's no guidance for which spells are in the loot other than spell level. So if e.g. DM randomly rolls among all spells of that level, you're pretty unlikely to find rituals. Getting a Wizard spell is fairly likely with that method though, since there are more of them than any other. But if the DM rolls for full casting classes then spell, odds of even that go down.

[strangebloke]

Spell scrolls are fairly common as rolled loot.

There's no guidance for which spells are in the loot other than spell level. So if e.g. DM randomly rolls among all spells of that level, you're pretty unlikely to find rituals. Getting a Wizard spell is fairly likely with that method though, since there are more of them than any other. But if the DM rolls for full casting classes then spell, odds of even that go down.

Why would you ever roll class first?

But yeah like 1/10 low level spells are rituals and you don't care about class, so your odds of getting a few rituals randomly aren't bad. Sure its only like 2% on any given loot roll but ritual scrolls have good odds of showing up.

Like, this is a single invocation. Even if all you get is find familiar and detect magic the invocations done its worth, and if you're able to get 3-4 more rituals on the invocation its frankly top notch.

[Tanarii]

Okay, I'll do the actual numbers if finding at least one ritual spell on a scroll before level 5, assuming 10% of spells are rituals. Maybe you're right. Typing this part before doing the numbers. :smallamused: (I actually think it's a bit more than that for level 1 spells btw)

per treasure roll on 0-4 table, of which you get 7 before level 5:
24% Table A, 1d6 rolls, 24% chance of 1-2 scroll.
15% Table B, 1d4 rolls, 10% chance of 3-4 scroll.
10% Table C, 1d4 rolls, 12% chance of 4-5 scroll.
10% chance it's a ritual spell.

(1-(1-.24*.1)^3.5)*.24+(1-(1-.10*.1)^2.5)*.15+(1-(1-.12*.1)^2.5)*.10 = 2.6% of finding at least one scroll with a ritual on it.
1-(1-(.026))^7 = 16.8% of finding at least one spell scroll with a ritual before level 5. Roughly.

Edit: fixed math which gave about double odds of my first stab at it.

[Willie the Duck]

I've played Pact of Tome warlocks (notably the Celestial and Undead ones, both with moderately armored) to relatively positive results. Both them and Pact of Chain warlocks I liken to Lore Bards -- they have some really useful abilities, but you struggle with what to do* during a combat round where you don't want to expend a spell (and warlocks in general really suffer for that long stretch before you get 3 levelled spells per SR).
*Actually you know what to do -- eldritch blast for the umpteen millionth time, it's just that it is boring and only moderately helpful.


IMO, rituals are near useless. Like the definition of a ribbon ability. One, there isn't enough of them. Two, several of them fall into "narrative" spaces (I'm gonna risk cast floating disk so I don't have to carry stuff, etc), and don't actually affect the outcome of anything. ... oh, cantrips are also bad lol.

Wizards have the largest number of ritual spells and the lion's share of the best ones.

I think warlocks in general work best for people who can find uses for "narrative" spells. If you get a class-build option, and perk up at the ability to cast disguise self at will or read all writing, that's the kind of person for whom a warlock really flourishes. Tomelocks are just that in their specific ability as well (Chainlocks as well, it's just that more people know what to do with an invisible attacking familiar). And yes, wizards have most of the best (and the most of) ritual spells and cantrips individually aren't always great, but the tomelock has the advantage of synergizing them in a way that you would need lots of feats or massive multiclassing to accomplish. The simplest being that they can pull off shillelagh-booming blade/GFB, using their preferred stat, without needing a feat (or primal savagery if you want to only spend one cantrip slot). While not competitive with bladelocks, much less fighters, it is solid enough to make them second-tier combatants if you can get their AC up (see moderately armored, above). Beyond that, you can get guidance along with all the arcane cantrips people generally consider valuable for social or dungeon-crawling purposes (minor illusion, shape water, mold earth, mage hand, prestidigitation). With the number you get, you can have a melee and ranged combat cantrip and still have space left over for a lot of utility. Among ritual spells, yes obviously detect magic/identify/find familiar/leodmund's hut get the most digital ink spilled; but there's plenty of use in having comprehend languages, speak with animals, augury, phantom steed, water breathing, and Rary's telepathic bond (especially having all of them in one class). Part of that is situational based on party composition -- now the party doesn't need a full-levelled cleric, druid, and wizard around all the time to get coverage in these things. Another part of it is situational in what the DM throws at you. Comprehend languages can save a party from going down the wrong passageway in a dungeon -- if there are warnings written in languages the party otherwise doesn't know. Speak with Animals can give the party incredible recon information about the enemy lair-- if the DM rules that yes there would be an animal about who has been flitting back and forth and has seen what goes on inside.

[strangebloke]

Okay, I'll do the actual numbers if finding at least one ritual spell on a scroll before level 5, assuming 10% of spells are rituals. Maybe you're right. Typing this part before doing the numbers. :smallamused: (I actually think it's a bit more than that for level 1 spells btw)

per treasure roll on 0-4 table, of which you get 7 before level 5:
24% Table A, 1d6 rolls, 24% chance of 1-2 scroll.
15% Table B, 1d4 rolls, 10% chance of 3-4 scroll.
10% Table C, 1d4 rolls, 12% chance of 4-5 scroll.
10% chance it's a ritual spell.

(1-(1-.24*.1)^3.5)*.24+(1-(1-.10*.1)^2.5)*.15+(1-(1-.12*.1)^2.5)*.10 = 2.6% of finding at least one scroll with a ritual on it.
1-(1-(.026))^7 = 16.8% of finding at least one spell scroll with a ritual before level 5. Roughly.

Edit: fixed math which gave about double odds of my first stab at it.

Math checks out. lower than I would've thought but still not impossible. To repeat this for levels 5-10...

18 rolls
15% Table A, 1d6 rolls, 24% chance of 1-2 scroll.
18% Table B, 1d4 rolls, 10% chance of 3-4 scroll.
10% Table C, 1d4 rolls, 12% chance of 4-5 scroll.
10% chance it's a ritual spell.

(1-(1-.24*.1)^3.5)*.15+(1-(1-.10*.1)^2.5)*.18+(1-(1-.12*.1)^2.5)*.10 = 2.0%
1-(1-(.026))^18 = 37.8% of finding one from levels 5-10, or 50/50 when combined with earlier levels.

Overall doesn't seem that my notion of generally getting a few rituals via rolling is really true, though you are going to end up with a lot of GP in a rolling-for-loot scenario and consumables like scrolls are for sale if anything is.

I'd generally still regard a "you can get no scrolls ever" campaign as being a bit unusual - not wrong but definitely something that would come up in session zero.

[Dork_Forge]

Math checks out. lower than I would've thought but still not impossible. To repeat this for levels 5-10...

18 rolls
15% Table A, 1d6 rolls, 24% chance of 1-2 scroll.
18% Table B, 1d4 rolls, 10% chance of 3-4 scroll.
10% Table C, 1d4 rolls, 12% chance of 4-5 scroll.
10% chance it's a ritual spell.

(1-(1-.24*.1)^3.5)*.15+(1-(1-.10*.1)^2.5)*.18+(1-(1-.12*.1)^2.5)*.10 = 2.0%
1-(1-(.026))^18 = 37.8% of finding one from levels 5-10, or 50/50 when combined with earlier levels.

Overall doesn't seem that my notion of generally getting a few rituals via rolling is really true, though you are going to end up with a lot of GP in a rolling-for-loot scenario and consumables like scrolls are for sale if anything is.

I'd generally still regard a "you can get no scrolls ever" campaign as being a bit unusual - not wrong but definitely something that would come up in session zero.

Does the math factor in the chance that the scrolls are redundant, since Book of Ancient Secrets gives two freebies, or would that not be statistically significant?

I don't think a no scroll campaign would really be that weird, it can be a pretty niche consumable item, I think it could be accidentally omitted really easily. Though, if I was planning on taking something like BoAS or Ritual Caster, I'd probably double check with the DM or if there are party members that can stack my book.

[animorte]

Does the math factor in the chance that the scrolls are redundant, since Book of Ancient Secrets gives two freebies, or would that not be statistically significant?
At this point, I honestly think it's already worth it, despite what this thread implies. Getting a couple others above 1st-level is just cherries on top.

[Tanarii]

I'd generally still regard a "you can get no scrolls ever" campaign as being a bit unusual - not wrong but definitely something that would come up in session zero.
I'm a fan of the XTGe downtime rules for finding magic items. Although it does make it a bit easy to find a specific magic item. But certainly it hugely increases the availability of consumable magic items for those who have the money and time, without feeling like a straight magic mart. Instead it feels like a codified method of the very traditional D&D way of finding magic items: spending time in a city working contacts, gilding the palms of rare item brokers and possibly shadier types, and coming up with some information that can lead to a deal of some kind.


Does the math factor in the chance that the scrolls are redundant, since Book of Ancient Secrets gives two freebies, or would that not be statistically significant?
The math isn't that accurate to begin with. 1st level rituals are quite a lot more than 10% of the 1st level PHB spells, so subtracting 2 (for the the redundancy) just makes the 10% closer to accurate. :smallamused:

I got too lazy to go work the actual percentage of each spell level and incorporate it (since it would have expanded the dependent clauses considerably), but I'd roughly hazard it could mean as much as 5-10% increase in chance of finding at least one scroll across the board after compounding. Especially since 1st level has the highest difference.

[Psyren]

At the risk of repeating myself, nothing in the rules actually say scrolls are the only possible way to learn rituals. You can have a "no-scroll campaign" without having a "no-ritual campaign."

Tomelocks in particular, most of them anyway, have a presumably knowledgeable entity looking over their shoulder with a vested interest in their continued power gain, even if that interest isn't immediately clear.

[Dork_Forge]

At this point, I honestly think it's already worth it, despite what this thread implies. Getting a couple others above 1st-level is just cherries on top.

I agree, I think I've already said it in this thread but I wouldn't take BoAS or Ritual Caster unless I was happy with only what they gave me, which is generally worth it, especially if it fleshes out what you wanted for your character.



The math isn't that accurate to begin with. 1st level rituals are quite a lot more than 10% of the 1st level PHB spells, so subtracting 2 (for the the redundancy) just makes the 10% closer to accurate. :smallamused:

I got too lazy to go work the actual percentage of each spell level and incorporate it (since it would have expanded the dependent clauses considerably), but I'd roughly hazard it could mean as much as 5-10% increase in chance of finding at least one scroll across the board after compounding. Especially since 1st level has the highest difference.

Oh, I didn't realise you were just counting PHB for some reason, a quick check and I think that:

- Of PHB only 1st level spells, 18.75% are rituals

- Of all 1st level spells, that goes down to 16.05%

Fun fact, going from PHB only to all sources only added a single ritual spell: Ceremony from XgtE.

[Pixel_Kitsune]

At the risk of repeating myself, nothing in the rules actually say scrolls are the only possible way to learn rituals. You can have a "no-scroll campaign" without having a "no-ritual campaign."

Tomelocks in particular, most of them anyway, have a presumably knowledgeable entity looking over their shoulder with a vested interest in their continued power gain, even if that interest isn't immediately clear.

Don't disagree with your intent or point, but one thing to correct.

There is no Lore or RAW requirement for the Patron to care about the Warlock at all. It's been clarified that you've already done whatever it is you have to do for your side of the deal to get the keys to your Warlock Powers.

The whole idea that the Patron is still paying attention or cares or continuing your education is a very cool angle but not assumed in the game.

[Psyren]

Don't disagree with your intent or point, but one thing to correct.

There is no Lore or RAW requirement for the Patron to care about the Warlock at all. It's been clarified that you've already done whatever it is you have to do for your side of the deal to get the keys to your Warlock Powers.

The whole idea that the Patron is still paying attention or cares or continuing your education is a very cool angle but not assumed in the game.

I don't deny that possibility - but it's reasonable to assume there's a greater chance they empowered you for a reason than that they didn't. In any event, it's only one avenue of introducing rituals to a scroll-free game, albeit a convenient/omnipresent one.

[strangebloke]

At the risk of repeating myself, nothing in the rules actually say scrolls are the only possible way to learn rituals. You can have a "no-scroll campaign" without having a "no-ritual campaign."

Tomelocks in particular, most of them anyway, have a presumably knowledgeable entity looking over their shoulder with a vested interest in their continued power gain, even if that interest isn't immediately clear.

you should at a minimum be able to copy out of a spellbook.

But yeah my general attitude is that 2 rituals are well worth the invocation by themselves, and the fact that it grows from there just makes it way better than it has any right to be.

[Cheesegear]

But yeah my general attitude is that 2 rituals are well worth the invocation by themselves

Strong agree.

Gain the Ritual Caster Feat.
In addition, you can cast from all class' spell lists, simultaneously.
In addition, you use Charisma as your casting ability, regardless of which spell list the spell comes from.

Is Ritual Caster worth it?
Is Ritual Caster worth it, if you remove it's two limitations?

In addition, force the DM to warp the game's loot around you.
...I don't think that should be part of Ritual Caster, and I don't think the Invocation should do that, either.

[strangebloke]

Strong agree.

Gain the Ritual Caster Feat.
In addition, you can cast from all class' spell lists, simultaneously.
In addition, you use Charisma as your casting ability, regardless of which spell list the spell comes from.

Is Ritual Caster worth it?
Is Ritual Caster worth it, if you remove it's two limitations?

In addition, force the DM to warp the game's loot around you.
...I don't think that should be part of Ritual Caster, and I don't think the Invocation should do that, either.

I thought I was pretty clear that if the DM was tailoring loot anyway you'd get scrolls, not that taking this feat means you have license to bully the DM.

Failing that scrolls are a pretty normal thing to buy, yeah? How hard is it to get a scroll of detect magic? Can't think it's that hard.

[SociopathFriend]

My thoughts are that regardless of how much you think you're not getting out of the tome itself- the Warlock class on its own is powerful enough that you won't notice it too much.

But that moment where you give the DM the finger and say, "Actually, my fellow party member doesn't drop to 0 hp"?

That's worth a lot to me.

[Kane0]

Yeah thats a good point, the Xan's and Tasha's Tome invocations slap

[Cheesegear]

Failing that scrolls are a pretty normal thing to buy, yeah? How hard is it to get a scroll of detect magic? Can't think it's that hard.

The rules for Scribing a Scroll are as follows:
- A character must know the spell.
- A character must be proficient in the Arcana skill.

1st-Level Scrolls cost a day and 25gp to make.
2nd-Level Scrolls cost 3 days and 250gp to make.
...After that it gets pretty spicy.

Up to 5th-Level Spellcasters should be...Findable...In any decent sized town. Maybe as a town's protector from the odd Goblin raid. Or the hedge wizard set up shop in that town, because no other Wizard was there and he'd be left alone...Point is, a retired adventurer looking to making a living might be commissioned for a Scroll or three. Come back after the weekend and I'll have the Level 2 Scroll you want. 300gp. Gotta make a profit.

Druids (Town Medicine Man) and Clerics (Priest) can change their spells every single day. Knowing a spell isn't the problem; The issue is that to get someone to write a Scroll for you they have to be proficient in Arcana.
...That takes a special Cleric. And a really, really, really specific kind of Druid... You might have to go on a journey if I decide that the town Cleric doesn't have Knowledge Domain for no reason.

Wizard Scrolls should be all over the place. What Wizard isn't proficient in Arcana? And what Wizard wanting to making some cash wont fork over a Scroll they can write in a day?

1d4 times on Table A for loot...Okay. Cross your fingers, team.
Can we just skip random loot and you give me Identify?
...No?

[diplomancer]

Strong agree.

Gain the Ritual Caster Feat.
In addition, you can cast from all class' spell lists, simultaneously.
In addition, you use Charisma as your casting ability, regardless of which spell list the spell comes from.

Is Ritual Caster worth it?
Is Ritual Caster worth it, if you remove it's two limitations?

In addition, force the DM to warp the game's loot around you.
...I don't think that should be part of Ritual Caster, and I don't think the Invocation should do that, either.

As far as I could find out, literally no Rituals care about your casting stat, so being able to use Cha for it is not a benefit at all. And if you're just getting two Rituals, the fact that they can come from more than one list isn't hot stuff either

Ritual Caster is an OK feat- if you're expected to get more than two Rituals over the course of the game. Otherwise it's pretty bad.

.

[Cheesegear]

Ritual Caster is an OK feat- if you're expected to get more than two Rituals over the course of the game.

Oooh. Well now it depends on the length of the campaign, doesn't it?

If you're going from Level 1 to 13 (and you don't die), how do you not have +3 Rituals by the end?
If you're playing a short, Level 5-7 dungeon crawl that takes four sessions. Then probably not.

That's actually kind of a great point.
It doesn't depend so much on your DM; But the amount of time you'll be spending with your character.

Over time, you'll find Scrolls. If you can't find Scrolls you want, buy it.
(Almost any NPC Wizard you meet in any campaign, can Scribe a scroll for you if you pay them enough. Tell your DM. Getting non-Wizards to Scribe Scrolls is a little bit more tricky, RAW. But it can be done.)

[strangebloke]

The rules for Scribing a Scroll are as follows:
- A character must know the spell.
- A character must be proficient in the Arcana skill.

1st-Level Scrolls cost a day and 25gp to make.
2nd-Level Scrolls cost 3 days and 250gp to make.
...After that it gets pretty spicy.

Up to 5th-Level Spellcasters should be...Findable...In any decent sized town. Maybe as a town's protector from the odd Goblin raid. Or the hedge wizard set up shop in that town, because no other Wizard was there and he'd be left alone...Point is, a retired adventurer looking to making a living might be commissioned for a Scroll or three. Come back after the weekend and I'll have the Level 2 Scroll you want. 300gp. Gotta make a profit.

Druids (Town Medicine Man) and Clerics (Priest) can change their spells every single day. Knowing a spell isn't the problem; The issue is that to get someone to write a Scroll for you they have to be proficient in Arcana.
...That takes a special Cleric. And a really, really, really specific kind of Druid... You might have to go on a journey if I decide that the town Cleric doesn't have Knowledge Domain for no reason.

Wizard Scrolls should be all over the place. What Wizard isn't proficient in Arcana? And what Wizard wanting to making some cash wont fork over a Scroll they can write in a day?

1d4 times on Table A for loot...Okay. Cross your fingers, team.
Can we just skip random loot and you give me Identify?
...No?
Those are the XGTE rules for PCs, who knows how it works for NPCs. NPCs don't really have class spell lists after all.

Selling a scroll makes you a lot of money! There have to be loads of priests / scribes / cultists / wizard apprentices who are tasking with printing a few scrolls out every week. Learning the Arcana skill isn't super hard.

IDK I would assume that through level 3 spells the rituals are very plentiful in your average city. A level 1 scroll doesn't cost much more than a health potion after all.

[KorvinStarmast]

Let's see, at 10th almost 11th I have in my ritual book:
Find Familiar and Alarm (initial spells)
Skywrite, Water Breather, LTH (from a scroll), Detect Magic, Identify, and we just defeated a Diviner.. Woot, ended up with Rary's Telepathic Bond (ritual).

Duration: 1 hour
You forge a telepathic link among up to eight willing creatures of your choice within range, psychically linking each creature to all the others for the duration. Creatures with Intelligence scores of 2 or less aren’t affected by this spell. Until the spell ends, the targets can communicate telepathically through the bond whether or not they have a common language. The communication is possible over any distance, though it can’t extend to other planes of existence. we are about to infiltrate the captial, even though there is a price on our heads. :smallsmile: This will make it easier to disperse and then meet up in an agreed location but also alert one another to traps or trouble so that we can adjust the plan if need be ...

[SociopathFriend]

Yeah thats a good point, the Xan's and Tasha's Tome invocations slap

It is a rare ability that can be said to 100% prevent a party wipe and mean it.

[Pex]

Strong agree.

Gain the Ritual Caster Feat.
In addition, you can cast from all class' spell lists, simultaneously.
In addition, you use Charisma as your casting ability, regardless of which spell list the spell comes from.

Is Ritual Caster worth it?
Is Ritual Caster worth it, if you remove it's two limitations?

In addition, force the DM to warp the game's loot around you.
...I don't think that should be part of Ritual Caster, and I don't think the Invocation should do that, either.

Oh no! A DM providing treasure that PCs would actually like, use, and have fun with. The horror!

[Pixel_Kitsune]

Oh no! A DM providing treasure that PCs would actually like, use, and have fun with. The horror!

I mean isn't that expected? The guy with the Naginata should be able to eventually find or have made a magical naginata. The Wizard should be able to find scrolls, bracers of protection, etc. The Paladin should be able to find a magic shield...

Sure random items are great and lead to very interesting fun, but if certain items are part of the character there should be some expectation to get them.

[Unoriginal]

I mean isn't that expected? The guy with the Naginata should be able to eventually find or have made a magical naginata. The Wizard should be able to find scrolls, bracers of protection, etc. The Paladin should be able to find a magic shield...

Sure random items are great and lead to very interesting fun, but if certain items are part of the character there should be some expectation to get them.

I have no such expectation, personally.

An adventurer can of course search for a weapon fitting their tastes/styles/wants, but if they don't they'll mostly find what fits the tastes/styles/wants of their enemies.

[Kane0]

Yeah im currently playing an Artificer in Princes of the Apocalypse, so i'm expecting no Artificer-specific items to appear.

[Pex]

I mean isn't that expected? The guy with the Naginata should be able to eventually find or have made a magical naginata. The Wizard should be able to find scrolls, bracers of protection, etc. The Paladin should be able to find a magic shield...

Sure random items are great and lead to very interesting fun, but if certain items are part of the character there should be some expectation to get them.

Unfortunately some DMs hate ever giving players what they want. They're the DM. They have all the power.

[strangebloke]

These discussions always get incredibly contentious online for some reason when this is a trivial problem at the table. You see this invocation, you wanna take it, you probably already know how likely you are to get the scrolls. And if you don't.

"Yo, Terry, if I take Book of Ancient Secrets will I be able to get scrolls?"
"Yah"
"Kay."

Done.

Life t'would be simpler if people just asked the human being across the table (or VC chat as the case may be) what they thought.

[Unoriginal]

Unfortunately some DMs hate ever giving players what they want. They're the DM. They have all the power.

DMs decide the game, players decide if they play it or not.


Have to point out that what players want is, ultimately, to have a fun experience playing the game, and while everyone has fun differently, for a lot of people, getting all the stuff you want and expect gets just as unfun as never getting the stuff you want and expect pretty fast, once the novelty of owning the stuff wears off.

I'm sure you'll hear more people fondly remember the times they found an unexpected, weird, maybe even seemingly weak item after beating some bad guys, but still used it to help X situation (successfully or not), than you'll hear people fondly remember the times they got the [weapon of choice]+2 they expected after 5 levels of using a [weapon of choice]+1.

I had a DM who tried to please everyone by just giving them everything they wanted. No one was happy, and that got worse.

I guess my point is that DMs who give everything the player wants and DMs who give nothing the player wants, ever, both deliberately to let the player's choices have appropriate/proportional consequences, and both should be avoided as DMs if they persist once told that doesn't work out well.

[Cheesegear]

I mean isn't [giving players what they want] expected?

Not at my table it isn't.
"Expected" is a pretty strong word.

Isn't giving players what they want...A nice thing a DM can do occasionally when they feel like it.


The guy with the Naginata should be able to eventually find or have made a magical naginata.

A what? Yeah...I don't really have people in my campaign running around with Nagintas.
If you want one you're gonna have to earn one.


The Wizard should be able to find scrolls, bracers of protection, etc.

"Should" be? Scrolls, yes. Bracers, no.
Spellbooks are generally an expected find if the DM puts Wizards in his campaign, and Scrolls are fairly common as part of even random loot.

Bracers of Protection? ...Uhh...You'll get them if I say you get them. If I don't say you get them in treasure hoards, you might have to earn them some other way.


The Paladin should be able to find a magic shield.

Here's something interesting:
If I give the Paladin a magic Weapon, will they complain that it isn't a magic Shield?


but if certain items are part of the character there should be some expectation to get them.

Starting equipment is part of the character. Everything else is open.


An adventurer can of course search for a weapon fitting their tastes/styles/wants, but if they don't they'll mostly find what fits the tastes/styles/wants of their enemies.

I greatly dislike players taking Feats that use gear that they don't have yet.

I took Polearm Master so it's gonna be so good when I get magical Glaive.
I don't know why you took Polearm Master when you don't have a Glaive.
Well, you're gonna give me one.
...I'm gonna what?

It kind of reminds me of Icewind Dale (the video game), where best practice is to hold levels that grant proficiency stars, because random loot is random and you don't know what you're gonna get. So hold off on b0rking your character until you get a good weapon.


Unfortunately some DMs hate ever giving players what they want.

I love giving my players what they want.
What I don't do, is give one player what they want. Because that's called favoritism.

Also, it was brought up but not really addressed...How long do I have?
If you pick up Polearm Master at Level 4; Do you get a Glaive, +1 immediately? Or can you wait 'til Level 6? Level 7?

If you have Ritual Caster/Improved Tome ('cause that's the thread); How many Rituals-per-Session are you..."Expecting"?
What is it, exactly, that you're demanding from the DM?

An earlier poster said three Rituals makes Ritual Caster/Improved Tome worth it.
Cool. That's something I can work with.
I'm not gonna give you three Rituals in the same hoard. That's not gonna happen. So...In what timeframe are you...Expecting...An extra three Rituals? Also, do they have to be specific spells? Are you gonna accept Detect Magic, or is it "Tenser's Floating Disk or quit"?

[Unoriginal]

Spellbooks are generally an expected find if the DM puts Wizards in his campaign, and Scrolls are fairly common as part of even random loot.

[...]

I'm not gonna give you three Rituals in the same hoard. That's not gonna happen

To focus on this specifically: does it means you won't have put a Wizard NPC who has three ritual spells in their spellbook in your campaign?

[Kane0]

These discussions always get incredibly contentious online for some reason when this is a trivial problem at the table. You see this invocation, you wanna take it, you probably already know how likely you are to get the scrolls. And if you don't.

"Yo, Terry, if I take Book of Ancient Secrets will I be able to get scrolls?"
"Yah"
"Kay."

And you can always swap out the invocation too.

[Cheesegear]

To focus on this specifically: does it means you won't have put a Wizard NPC who has three ritual spells in their spellbook in your campaign?

I think you know that's not what I meant.

[Zhorn]

I think you know that's not what I meant.
But it is what some DMs may take it as meaning.
I do get the gist of what you are going for (so most of what follows isn't meant as a @you, just for the conversation as a whole); but I've also been at tables with two different DMs that altered the wizard-npc's looted spellbook after the fact because they didn't want players to have spells from them.
One even told me after I called them out on swapping spells to not include the ones used in the encounter, saying to me "I don't like the idea of your wizard learning extra spells" (I should have left sooner than I did, and kick myself that I stuck around for a while still even after that happened)
There's nuance to be considered, of course; but experiences like this are why I believe Pex is fully justified with his advice on leaving DMs and finding greener pastures when you see the red flags.

As for me and how I DM; half the time I have not generated most of npc's loot till the players start poking around. But if anything was used in the encounter, damn right I'll include it in their loot pile. NPC used scrolls in the encounter? There will be a few more scrolls tucked in their belt. Wizard Casts a specific spell? If the players bother looking for the spell book, the spells used are 100% in the book.

Circling back to your prior points; I do agree with not giving players the perfectly match item just because it's what they wanted. For the others who are reading; I want to clarify this isn't saying I'm intentionally withholding the specific perfect matching item of their desires either. Random dice rolls are gonna random, and things will or will not pop up of their own accord however RNG'sus deems it to be. BUT, items that make sense to be present are likely to be present where it makes sense for them to be.
A spellcaster makes sense to have a ritual or two in a book that they have on their person (be they a wizard, druid, cleric or other), because having a step by step instruction for a complicated manipulation of the weave just makes sense.
There will be overlaps and double ups. It'll be a while before the party RANDOMLY comes across every single unique option, but when it makes sense to be there, it's very likely going to be there. And if they are actively pursuing something specific, that too will be likely found in a place that makes sense for it to exist in.

[Unoriginal]

I think you know that's not what I meant.

I prefer making sure I'm on the same page with the other person. Recent discussions have shown me even what seems like common assumptions can differ wildly.

[Tanarii]

Very few NPC spellcasters are Wizards. There's no particular reason they should be carrying a spellbook on them when they're encountered.

If you're making an NPC BBEG in their lair specifically a wizard, that'd be different.

Personally, wizards and tome locks gathering information on possible locations of scroll or spellbook caches on their adventures and then assembling a group of players to go on specific missions to go get them was a major incentive for player driven goals and self-organizing IMC. As were any other specific magical treasures.

If I'd specially added them to treasure rolls just because some players were picking wizards or tomelock as a class, or any other tailored magical items, it would have ruined the campaign.

[Segev]

The attitude of not wanting wizards to get additional spells is weird, to me, when clerics, druids, and paladins can pick any spell printed for their class each day.

[Dork_Forge]

The attitude of not wanting wizards to get additional spells is weird, to me, when clerics, druids, and paladins can pick any spell printed for their class each day.

Their spell lists are also much smaller/less subject to problematic spells and they have to prepare their rituals. It's not a 1:1 comparison, it's accounted for in Wizard design.

[Tanarii]

The attitude of not wanting wizards to get additional spells is weird, to me, when clerics, druids, and paladins can pick any spell printed for their class each day.
Depends if you consider wizards balanced, or even OP, before they get additional spells.

The attitude that wizards should expect party loot to be converted into spell scrolls or spell books by the DM, or worse that they should get them for free on top of party loot, is weird to me.

But the entire idea of tailored party loot is weird to me. :smallamused:

[Thunderous Mojo]

Very few NPC spellcasters are Wizards. There's no particular reason they should be carrying a spellbook on them when they're encountered.

While creature selection is going to have quite a bit of variance from Table to Table, and Group to Group, the “Wizard” Tag for NPC’s is the class tag that is most prevalent for creatures.

I can think of well over a score of creatures that have the Wizard class tag, versus something like 12 creatures that have a Cleric class tag.

Keep in mind, some obvious Wizards, such as Halaster and his apprentices in Dungeon of the Mad Mage, lack the Wizard tag in their statblock, as those statblocks were created prior to the invention of the Class Tag for creatures….Wizard NPCs are undercounted….unless you wish to make the losing argument that Halaster and friends are not wizards.

Modules written by Gary Gygax include copious amounts of scrolls and Potions of Healing. Indeed, throwing in Scrolls with minor spells, such as Knock or Skywrite, or even adding in a cache of Healing Potions to keep the action going without the need for the PCs to take a rest, are common DM practices in the history of the game.

I ran my first game for 5e, using only randomly generated loot for the first 2 years. The only exceptions were for consumable items, (I like making custom items), and Artifacts.

Randomly generated loot, is often worse narratively than placing loot.
Nothing is worse than rolling up a treasure hoard for what in game is supposed to be a legendary repository of items, and finding less than exciting items like Murylnd’s Spoon.

The Lord of the Rings would proceed quite differently if the Fellowship of the Ring defeats the Barrow Wights to only find a magic spoon that grants the ability to make a quantity of flavorless oatmeal. Sorry Merry and Pippen, no swords for you!
Witch King for the Win!

Randomly Generated loot also can generate super items, or items that perfectly foil future events. The Players in my aforementioned campaign once received a randomly generated Lantern of Revealing just before facing a naturally Invisible Foe.

By the Treasure Tables, some Bardic Instruments are Uncommon, and are easily rolled. Every Bard should have a Magical Lute…it is Uncommon, afterall.

Eberron, and Faerun have a tradition of having an abundance of scrolls being available. It is fine to have a particular game, in which magical items are rare, and always randomly rolled…but is it the norm?

I doubt it.

[Kane0]

Looking though published adventures, how many scrolls/spellbooks show up there? Id wager at least as common as your average +1 weapon or bag of holding.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Looking though published adventures, how many scrolls/spellbooks show up there? Id wager at least as common as your average +1 weapon or bag of holding.

It depends upon the module being discussed.
More importantly, I would state…modules, especially most WotC Campaigns are not intended to be ran exactly as written.

The designers expect you to not use some parts, expand on other parts, and add consumable items like scrolls or potions.

Some Campaigns such as Frostmaiden, or Dungeon of the Mad Mage, have areas that are intricately detailed, and other areas that are only vaguely detailed.

[Segev]

Depends if you consider wizards balanced, or even OP, before they get additional spells.

The attitude that wizards should expect party loot to be converted into spell scrolls or spell books by the DM, or worse that they should get them for free on top of party loot, is weird to me.

But the entire idea of tailored party loot is weird to me. :smallamused:

Given that my comment was in response to somebody's specific story about a DM who would change the loot to make sure that the PC wizard could not get new and useful spells from defeated enemy wizards, and the DM flat-otu explained this as not wanting the PC wizard to get more spells, I think your "wizards should expect party loot to be converted to spells" is an inaccurate way to portray what I was saying. In fact, I was responding to the opposite happening: a DM actively changing the party's loot to make sure the wizard did not get spells out of it.

Leaving aside whether you think wizards "deserve" this and (say) fighters do not, this would be akin to seeing that you have a sword-and-board fighter in your game and making sure that you avoid rolling any one-handed swords in the random loot (reassigning results if you do) and also making sure any longswords wielded by any enemies that are defeated are in some fashion useless, or are not one-handed swords when the party goes to collect them. (I choose "one-handed swords" here because they're probably the single most common random weapon drop in the game, just like scrolls are a very common random loot drop.)

[Amnestic]

Looking though published adventures, how many scrolls/spellbooks show up there? Id wager at least as common as your average +1 weapon or bag of holding.

While I didn't cover every module by any means, I have looked at what magic items you get in the past for another thread, and found the following from Sunless Citadel (1-3), Forge of Fury (3-5) and the first two sections of Descent into Avernus (1-6 or so). I excluded gold, gems, and other mundane loot.

"Potential" loot were consumables that are carried by enemies that they might use, but the party could also obtain if they kill them before they do so. For ease of relevant reading I've bolded the scrolls/spellbooks.


+1 arrow
Continual Flame Torch
Continual Flame Candle
7 2nd level spell scrolls
4 1st level spell scrolls
Feather Token (Tree)
3 Elixir of Health
Potion of Fire Resistance
"Night Caller" wondrous item - 1/day Animate Dead
1 Potion of Healing
Wand of Entangle

Potential:
5 Potion of Healing
2 1st level scrolls




+1 Rapier
+1 Longsword
+2 Greataxe
+1 Shield
2 Potion of Climbing
2 Potion of Healing
2 Potion of Water Breathing
Potion of Invisibility
Potion of Flying
Ring of Spell Storing(!)
Potion of Hill Giant Strength
5 1st level spell scrolls
1 2nd level spell scrolls
Wand of Magic Missiles

Potential:
3 Potion of Healing


4 spellbooks, containing a variey of 1st+2nd level spells (5-7 spells each)
1 spellbook of 1st-3rd level spells (9 levelled spells total, plus four cantrips)
3 3rd level spell scrolls
Silvered Skull Flail +4d6 necrotic and disadvantage on all saves (no save) - Kinda nuts that you get this at 2nd level, but that's what the module says.
Bag of Beans
Potion of Fire Breath
7 Potions of Healing
1 Potion of Greater Healing
Pipes of the Sewers
+1 Mace that can also shed light within 10' as an action.
+2 variable weapon that depends on the character who takes it.
Shield of the Hidden Lord (Legendary) - Shield +2, resistance to fire, can cast fireball x3 or wall of fire x1 + fireball x1 each LR, frightened aura with an action.
1 soul coin
Potion of Giant Strength (Frost)
Bracers of Defense
Elemental Gem


When I posted this last time, someone pointed out that SC and FoF were conversions from an older edition where magic item approach may not be equivalent, and likewise DiA is potentially a "higher magic" adventure due to having demons as enemies. These are perhaps fair arguments to make, though since "fighting demons" is totally reasonable for other campaigns it's likewise fair to make mention of them.

Another pointed out that from the above lootlist, a party may not discover all the items - missed perception/investigation checks, etc. Likewise, fair, though it's certainly possible that a party would find everything.

In Dragon Heist, as another adventure example, there are a number of scrolls for sale (ranging from 50gp for a 1st level spell scroll up to 1500gp for a 5th level scroll) just in general. You can also copy the spells directly from his spellbooks at half the cost of a scroll. This is available from essentially level 2, when you finish off the first little bit of the adventure, and requires no special quest to complete - the dude sells magic and his shop is nearby to your 'base', that's it. In addition, if you make friends with the Harpers they explicitly make "common and uncommon potions and scrolls available to adventurers at a reduced or deferred cost depending on the circumstances." There's also a number of scrolls and spellbooks available as loot depending on which enemy faction you're facing.

I quickly skimmed Rime of the Frostmaiden and - excluding the Scrolls of Comet and Scroll of Tarrasque Summoning - if you get every scroll I believe you're looking at ~10 total, plus a few spellbooks (2 with 9 spells, 1 with 17 spells, 1 with 10 spells, 1 with 11 spells, and one with 40+(!) spells), though someone who's actually played/read it properly would have to tell you how likely it is you'd get all of those.

[Tanarii]

Given that my comment was in response to somebody's specific story about a DM who would change the loot to make sure that the PC wizard could not get new and useful spells from defeated enemy wizards, and the DM flat-otu explained this as not wanting the PC wizard to get more spells, I think your "wizards should expect party loot to be converted to spells" is an inaccurate way to portray what I was saying.
That's reasonable. But since you didn't quote, there was no way to know the context was taking away already determined loot, as opposed to not adding loot. :smallamused: