Spellbooks [D&D 3.x]

[Deepblue706]

These are 3.5's rules for writing new spells into a book:

Writing a New Spell into a Spellbook ((That's the link form for anyone who wants to check the exact source))

Once a wizard understands a new spell, she can record it into her spellbook.

Time
The process takes 24 hours, regardless of the spell’s level.

Space in the Spellbook
A spell takes up one page of the spellbook per spell level. Even a 0-level spell (cantrip) takes one page. A spellbook has one hundred pages.

Materials and Costs
Materials for writing the spell cost 100 gp per page.

Note that a wizard does not have to pay these costs in time or gold for the spells she gains for free at each new level.

Compare them to the 3.0 rules:

Time
The process requires 1 day plus 1 additional day per spell level. Zero-level spells require 1 day.

Space in the Spellbook
A spell takes up 2 pages of the spellbook per spell level (so a 2nd-level spell takes 4 pages, a 5th-level spell takes up 10 pages, and so forth). A 0-Level spell (cantrip) takes but a single page. A spellbook has 100 pages.

Materials and Costs
Materials for writing the spell cost 100 gp per page.

Note that a wizard does not have to pay these costs in time or gold for the spells she gains for free at each new level.

I was curious what the Giant community might think of the impact upon wizards in a game where the DM decided upon implementing this 3.0 rule in an otherwise by-the-book 3.5 game. Does it serve as such a detriment to a Wizard's power, that it somewhat hinders their ability to dominate what you would deem to be a typical game, without it being really, really annoying? Why, or why not?

[Kelpstrand]

In a typical game, by my standards, people have plenty of spare time, and various tricks are used to not pay for inks from WBL, because it's a stupid rule that makes no sense. So this would have no effect at all.

[Kylarra]

Outside of very rare occasions, downtime will be more than enough to copy down sufficient spells (and on those rare occasions, increasing the time it takes is meaningless). So fundamentally, it does nothing other than provide a tiny increase in cost for scribing spells (which can still be avoided),

[Myou]

Honestly, the scribing rules are awful, and nothing but an annoyance. You'd just make it even more important to get a Blessed Book.

[Aharon]

It's a minor inconvenience till 5th level. After that, if the mage is really bothered by the cost, he takes Secret Page and writes all his new spells over his old spells.

It's slightly cheesy, but I haven't seen a convincing argument why it couldn't be done.

[Starbuck_II]

Disjunction and dispel magic...

[Sallera]

Well, if you're getting hit with Disjunctions, you've bigger problems than the cost of ink. The dispel worries, however, are solved by simply keeping your books in a Bag of Holding or somesuch.

[Myou]

It's slightly cheesy, but I haven't seen a convincing argument why it couldn't be done.

Because to do that you'd have to know exactly what the complicated arcane writings look like, and to know that you have to know the spell, and to know the spell you have to learn it, and to learn it you have to write it into your spellbook.

[Gralamin]

Because to do that you'd have to know exactly what the complicated arcane writings look like, and to know that you have to know the spell, and to know the spell you have to learn it, and to learn it you have to write it into your spellbook.

Recursion!

Or, Spell mastery I suppose.

[Myou]

Recursion!

Or, Spell mastery I suppose.

Spell Mastery?

[Kylarra]

Spell Mastery?

Feat that allows you to choose a number of spells equal to int mod that you can now prepare without a spellbook.

[Myou]

Feat that allows you to choose a number of spells equal to int mod that you can now prepare without a spellbook.

I thought that was what it did, but you still need to book to learn them so how does it help here?

[Gralamin]

I thought that was what it did, but you still need to book to learn them so how does it help here?

Spell Mastery -> Scribe Scroll -> Copy from Scroll into Spellbook. Or (Possibly) use the scroll to view the secret page (If the DM allows it).

[Kelpstrand]

You don't need to have them in your book to learn them.

You need to know them to write them in your book.

The way you know them is by making the spellcraft check while analyzing a copy.

[Grumman]

Does it serve as such a detriment to a Wizard's power, that it somewhat hinders their ability to dominate what you would deem to be a typical game, without it being really, really annoying? Why, or why not?

I see it as a worse detriment to the game than to the wizard's power. He still gets his free spells for free, so that's no problem, but there's no bloody reason that a superhumanly intelligent wizard should take eight hours to transcribe a single page of text regarding the simplest of magics. If I was going change something like this, I'd make it take (spell level)^2 hours to transcribe. You can transcribe a 0th level spell in 15 minutes, but a 9th level spell takes 81 hours, just one hour more than the 9+1 days under the base 3.0 rules.

[Myrmex]

In my experience, it will certainly impact the game. Writings the wizard finds in the field during an adventure will be unlikely to be added to his book, so you can have him face opponents without him automatically knowing any spells they have after he defeats them.

This can be useful if you design a dungeon that could be defeated by a couple spells he could use by copying them down after he finds them after an encounter.

In general, though, the wizard is going to a) put the really great spells in his book (teleport, glittergust, dispel magic, time stop, mindblank), and b) find the or make the time to put in spells he finds.

[BobVosh]

except he can use other peoples spell books at like a DC 15 spellcraft.

[olentu]

except he can use other peoples spell books at like a DC 15 spellcraft.

If I recall it is 15 plus spell level but a wizard can only prepare a spell that he knows and has recorded in his spellbook from a borrowed spellbook.

[Kami2awa]

I've always thought that the way to make spells less dominant would be to increase casting time rather than preparation/scribing time, make concentration checks harder, and get rid of Quicken Spell. In 2e, many spells took a long time to "charge up" and if you were hit or distracted whilecasting, the spell failed (and you lost it, too, as if you had cast it).

This gives the melee classes a much more important role; preventing the bad guys distracting the spellcaster. It also makes rogues and monks more useful as they can use their special abilities to get to enemy spellcasters before they can cast.

The GM would, as usual, have to be careful not to make the casting time too long, otherwise the wizard is rendered useless in combat, but even doubling current casting times would help redress the balance. There are exceptions; for instance, Feather Fall is useless unless it can be cast QUICKLY, the Power Word spells are obviously pretty quick since they are one word*, and some spells (e.g. Control Weather) retain long casting times even in 3.x.

* ONE WORD!!!!

[boomwolf]

Most wizards hang around with multiple spellbooks, so the page limit is irrelevant, and you can have the same spell on multiple books to insure it's safety.

I agree that the way to handle brokenness of magic is higher casting times. even a full-round action is harder then a standard one.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

If I recall it is 15 plus spell level but a wizard can only prepare a spell that he knows and has recorded in his spellbook from a borrowed spellbook.

15 + spell level:Prepare a spell from a borrowed spellbook (wizard only). One try per day. No extra time required.

No mention of it having to be in 'his' spellbook. And since you can take 10 on this, you never miss that roll.

@OP: This wouldn't help. A lot of optimization done here is forced to assume only the 4 spells/spell level. We still break the game with it. As a player, I'd just take Collegiate Wizard, maybe Grey Elf Generalist, and not even notice the scribing costs.

[Tiktakkat]

No mention of it having to be in 'his' spellbook. And since you can take 10 on this, you never miss that roll.

That is because the applicable rule is not under the skill description:

Wizard Spells and Borrowed Spellbooks
A wizard can use a borrowed spellbook to prepare a spell she already knows and has recorded in her own spellbook, but preparation success is not assured.

That is in the Magic Overview Chapter, the section on Arcane Spells.

For the OP:

The answer is, it depends on how relevant you consider a wizard's potential spell selection to be, and how fast paced your game is.

In my experience, most players will frenzy to get enough blessed books to make the Libary of Congress look like your local branch, and even then they will want more spells. That they never use a tenth of them is pretty much irrelevant.
For me, that is enough to tell me that perhaps blessed books need a backwards revision (like many of flawed elements in 3.5), and instead of reducing the cost of scribing spells the books just hold more spells, and provide better saves to them if they might be damaged.
In the long run, a wizard's spellbook can wind up being a significant chunk of his wealth by level, and doubling the page count of spell will have a major impact on that.

As for time, many campaigns wind up having less downtime than your average scribing wizard might like. This is reflected in most published adventures covering two levels, often with little real opportunity for downtime at the level gain point. While other classes can put off equipment changes during that time, wizard's get hit very directly being unable to add anything but their automatic spells. Adding more time to that will have a very significant impact.

As I said though, both are very heavily campaign and preference dependent.
If you have tons of downtime between encounter sets, if you feel game balance is better served with wizards having access to perhaps twice the number of spells as sorcerors (and thus less than clerics), then the change will not really matter. If otherwise, it will have a very recognizable, and possibly detrimental, impact.

[Milskidasith]

I see it as a worse detriment to the game than to the wizard's power. He still gets his free spells for free, so that's no problem, but there's no bloody reason that a superhumanly intelligent wizard should take eight hours to transcribe a single page of text regarding the simplest of magics. If I was going change something like this, I'd make it take (spell level)^2 hours to transcribe. You can transcribe a 0th level spell in 15 minutes, but a 9th level spell takes 81 hours, just one hour more than the 9+1 days under the base 3.0 rules.

Uhh... 0^2 is one, not .25 (which would be fifteen minutes), and 81 hours is three and a half days, not an hour more than ten days... ten days is 240 hours.

I'm... not sure where the errors came from, but they were there.

[quick_comment]

Uhh... 0^2 is one, not .25 (which would be fifteen minutes), and 81 hours is three and a half days, not an hour more than ten days... ten days is 240 hours.

I'm... not sure where the errors came from, but they were there.

Cantrips are almost universally treated as 1/2 level spells.

[Deepblue706]

This wasn't really about the page limit. Moreso, about the increased costs in wealth and time that would be spent scribing.

I think it would certainly play into how many spells a low-level Wizard would decide to master, and when he can more easily afford these spells he would still be dealing with the issue that he has to wait a long time in order to use them.

Surely a Wizard can still get good spells through level-ups without any costs, and there are a few wizards that can still get a decent number of spells (i.e. the Collegiate Wizard). And, we can't just say none of the Wizard's scribing is done in-time for that whole level. So he'll still be able to get good spells. But, perhaps it just might deter him from mastering the entire PHB, for instance - which would mean they would be powerful, but maybe still dependent upon help from a party.

Or it could just be annoying, and not really impact the problem spells that exist regardless.

But, in any case, I was more interested in seeing how many time constraints most games have, for folks in these parts. Instead of using the simple "How much time do you usually have" approach, which I thought rather vague and hard to envision, I thought the question being within context of something we clearly define in our minds being a more suitable medium for the discussion.

[kamikasei]

Uhh... 0^2 is one, not .25 (which would be fifteen minutes)

Cantrips are generally treated as having level=0.5 for level-dependent effects involving multiplication, such as magic item costs. I would assume that's where the idea of 0^2=0.25 comes from.

[tyckspoon]

As for time, many campaigns wind up having less downtime than your average scribing wizard might like. This is reflected in most published adventures covering two levels, often with little real opportunity for downtime at the level gain point. While other classes can put off equipment changes during that time, wizard's get hit very directly being unable to add anything but their automatic spells. Adding more time to that will have a very significant impact.

I think the 'assumed' playstyle is that you might be running around very hurriedly during an adventure, but afterwards you'll spend quite a while resting- so you gain two levels during the adventure, and then spend two months crafting some new gear, updating your spellbook, and writing down some scrolls (admittedly this is largely for the benefit of your spellcasters; other classes don't need anywhere near that much downtime and usually don't get much mechanical benefit for having it.)

[Kelpstrand]

0^2 isn't one either. It's 0. 2^0 is one, but that's a whole nother ballpark.

[Gralamin]

Cantrips are generally treated as having level=0.5 for level-dependent effects involving multiplication, such as magic item costs. I would assume that's where the idea of 0^2=0.25 comes from.

Also, 0^2 = 0 * 0 = 0. Not one.

[Kylarra]

I think the 'assumed' playstyle is that you might be running around very hurriedly during an adventure, but afterwards you'll spend quite a while resting- so you gain two levels during the adventure, and then spend two months crafting some new gear, updating your spellbook, and writing down some scrolls (admittedly this is largely for the benefit of your spellcasters; other classes don't need anywhere near that much downtime and usually don't get much mechanical benefit for having it.)

Well actually... if the casters are crafting new gear, it's the non-spellcasters that are benefiting from that more than the casters.