Wizard scribing prepared artificer spells?

[Dork_Forge]

Hey, so, can you calm down? You're assuming A LOT of me here and it feels aggressive. It's not even my thread, dude.

Point to the rule that says I can't, rather than the fluff that doesn't say I can't, and I'll stop arguing.

Who the OP is is irrelevant, I quoted you because I was replying to you.

And regardless how my post clearly came across to you I'm not angry or anything else towards you, I use short clipped statements to emphasise a point, not to express emotion that I didn't have.

And the burden here is not on the people saying you can't, it's on you, the one that seems to think they can. The Wizard's entry tells you how you can add to your book outside of level up, and it's 'finding spells' with the examples being a scroll and a 'duty tome.' You are attempting to extend logic to extrapolate the effects of multiclassing.

When the game tells you what you can do, tacking on what you may think to be sound logic to get to a result you want outside of what the rules says is not a recipe for RAW/RAI. but let's address your concerns and what you've labeled as facile, shall we?

I guess my counter to that would be referencing Wizard/Warlock spell interactions. I can cast a prepared Wizard spell using my Warlock slot, but I'd have to use my Cha-based save DC/attack bonuses. So, I think class dependent stats and effects are tied to the spell SLOT, not the spell. The artificer/wizard could still not prepare a non-wizard spell into their wizard slots, nor could they prepare any wizard spell (even if they know it as an artificer) unless it is prepare from their spellbook.

This has already been shown to be a fundamental misunderstanding of spellcasting.

The Arcane Cleric you mention gets spells added to their spell list, but those spells are also on the Wizard spell list. So, if I learn the spell as a Cleric, I'm "finding a wizard spell" that I can spend GP/time to put in my spell book.

You are getting spells from the Wizard list. Here's something you're skirting around. The Arcana Cleric, Bard, and all examples of class/subclasses that hand you cross list spells explicitly call out that they are making those spells X spells, where X is your actual class. Class tags are how we explain it, because it makes sense, but it is a very real aspect of the game that is evident any time the game crosses the lists.

When you multiclass you have to cast with whatever the DC and stat of where you learned it is, because when you multiclass you treat spells you learn/prepare as if you were single-classed in that class.

Here is where you are falling into a another fundamental understanding, you are regarding 'Wizard spell' as a spell from the Wizard's spell list. If that is what the game meant it would say that. I'm going to assume you'll want an example, so look at the Divine Soul Sorcerer:

'Your link to the divine allows you to learn spells from the cleric class. When your Spellcasting feature lets you learn or replace a sorcerer cantrip or a sorcerer spell of 1st level or higher, you choose the new spell from the cleric spell list or the sorcerer spell list. You must otherwise obey all the restrictions for selecting the spell, and it becomes a sorcerer spell for you.'

It explicitly refers to the list. It doesn't just say you learn 'cleric spells' and leave it there, the closest it gets is at the beginning, which is typically where WotC shoves flavorful descriptions before more specific rules text.

Why does it say Sorcerer spell? Because that matters.

If you were a Red Dragon Sorcerer and you took a level in Wizard to learn Burning Hands, would you assume your Elemental Affinity feature would apply? Even though the spell is on both classes' spell lists?

And, if the argument is still "spells are one class at a time," then why would a scroll remove the tag? In the Absorb Elements Artificer/Wizard example, wouldn't the Artificer's scroll still be the Artificer-only version of the spell, rather than having all 5 class tags on it? If it can be written down as a tag-less spell, why not written directly into the spellbook with no tag?
Actually, looking at the entry for Spell Scrolls: "If the spell is on your class’s spell list, you can read the scroll and cast its spell without providing any material components. Otherwise, the scroll is unintelligible." So, here, we're seeing that spells, regardless of who scribed them, are usable by any class whose list contains that spell. So, scrolls aren't tagless, they are tagfull.

It's about how you learned the spell that gives it a tag. If you've created a scroll, then it exists outside of your character, it is the spell in isolation, and if you want to you can then learn that spell in a different manner to accommodate your multiclass.

If you want a fluffy way of thinking about this, or just a different way to understand it: As an Artificer you understand it as casting the spell through method X, when you scribe a scroll you do it in method Y, and a Wizard must understand that fully and recode it into method Z in order to put it in there book.

There is a big difference between being able to cast a spell once through a magic item and actually learning that spell and being able to cast it with your own slots. It's kind of like saying you know how to speak French because you can use a translator app. That doesn't mean you actually know how the French language works and can deploy it independently of your aid.

Also, I just found this line: "A wizard spell on a spell scroll can be copied just as spells in spellbooks can be copied. When a spell is copied from a spell scroll, the copier must succeed on an Intelligence (Arcana) check with a DC equal to 10 + the spell's level. If the check succeeds, the spell is successfully copied. Whether the check succeeds or fails, the spell scroll is destroyed."
So, by with my opposition's ruling, if ArtiWizarficer knows the spell, they must spend time and resources (16 hours and 25gp) to write it down on a scroll that anybody can read, then they must succeed on an (luck dependent) Arcana check to decipher their own spell, spending time and resources again (2hrs and 50gp per spell level), or lose the scroll. Restarting a MINIMUM 18 hour and 75gp process, just to prepare Absorb Elements into a different spell slot.

I bolded that part because it's important, I'm not sure if that's you explaining what you mean muddily, or if it relates to your misunderstanding with spells being tied to slots, not how you learned them. In case it's the former:

Yes, that's how that works, you need to make a check because you're copying it from a single use item, a volatile disposable source, rather than something more stable like another Wizard's spellbook.

You treat this as ridiculous, but it's part of the game's balance. There are very, very real benefits to just being able to scribe directly. This MC would already allow you to cast Absorb Elements, wanting to do so as a Wizard spell is seeking to bend that balance and increase the power of the MC.

Dork_Forge's accusation that I'm seeking power-creep by changing rules is facile. Not only am I not changing rules (because there's no actual rule on this, hence the discussion), I'm pointing toward the logical absurdity of this middle step that is a drain on resources and time to keep a wizard from having more 1st level spells. The most min-maxed thing in the ArtWiz combo would be a handful of level 3 spells? Maybe 4th level spells if you're a 20th level character (Art13/Wiz7) now maxing out at one 4th level slot from each class. Rather than 9th level Wizard spells.

In my opinion, the power-creep doesn't exist here. It's a severely weaker character. Forcing this scrolling step to keep the wizard from being too powerful? C'mon, be real. It seems like a reactionary judgement to hamper the Wizard's versatility based on the notion that Wizards are too strong because their defining class feature is versatility.


I wasn't trying to make that justification. I was refuting the accusation that I was changing the rules by asking to be pointed to the rule I was changing.
And, I saw the "Replacing the Book" bit, but I'm already being accused of powercreep and that bit would actually make my way cheaper.

I took the liberty of editing your quote to correct the spelling of my username.

What you want to do is not how the game works, there is a consensus on that in this thread. The game is not super clear on how it delivers the rules sometimes, so multiple members have tried to point out that what you want is very much against how the rules work, and in addition, not how they're intended to work.

You see it as illogical because you're only thinking of it as 'my character already knows this spell' with no thought for in universe differences for how the same spell is cast differently by different casters. This MC is the starkest example:

Knowing how to craft a wrist-mounted, spring-loaded energy shield out of spare parts doesn't teach you how to create the same effect by extorting arcane forces and bending the Weave to your whim.

One more analogy just in case it avoids any more of this:

A speakeasy can have different passwords depending on a person's profession. All passwords open the door, but learning one from your lawyer colleagues doesn't automatically tell you the password your college alumni use. You could find that password out, you are alumni after all, but you'd have to put the effort in to find out (learn that spell as Wizard).

Now, let's address the fallacy this isn't powercreep:

The Wizard's thing is spell versatility. That does not entitle them to learning spells from other classes in ways the book does not give them.

Doing it this way makes it quicker, cheaper, and more reliable to convert spells. This allows them to work with any relevant class features, such as ritual casting without preparing, but it also frees up your Artificer half to prepare spells that the Wizard wouldn't get the opportunity to learn, like Sanctuary.

Just because your opinion of the multiclass is low, though I'm not sure why, it's a potent one, doesn't change the fact that increasing power (particularly for no good mechanical reason) is power creep. Power creep that Wizard of all classes certainly doesn't need.

Edit: Oh, and your post comes across as if the only thing to optimizing this MC is spells. A Wizard gains a lot from MCing into Artificer besides spells, something you should consider when wanting to change things.

[Burley]

Thanks, Dork. I guess I'm wrong.

Another great conversation in the books.

[Monster Manuel]

I think the strongest argument for this kind of thing working is in the description of "Replacing your spellbook". It says: "If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook". It does not specifically say "the WIZARD spells you have prepared". So, the argument could go, since you have an ability, through multiclassing, to prepare spells from various class lists, any spell you have prepared could be copied into a "replacement" spellbook.

I don't think this argument actually flies, because it does dictate that it uses the SAME procedure as previously described, and that procedure was specifically for wizard spells. On top of that, there is still the stipulation that a multiclass character still prepares spells as a specific class, and they follow the rules for that class, and you can't scribe non-wizard spells into your spellbook. It's an interesting thought experiment, and frankly, it really doesn't break anything to allow it (I've done so in my games), but RAW I think it's a no.

[Silpharon]

I think the strongest argument for this kind of thing working is in the description of "Replacing your spellbook". It says: "If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook". It does not specifically say "the WIZARD spells you have prepared". So, the argument could go, since you have an ability, through multiclassing, to prepare spells from various class lists, any spell you have prepared could be copied into a "replacement" spellbook.

I don't think this argument actually flies, because it does dictate that it uses the SAME procedure as previously described, and that procedure was specifically for wizard spells. On top of that, there is still the stipulation that a multiclass character still prepares spells as a specific class, and they follow the rules for that class, and you can't scribe non-wizard spells into your spellbook. It's an interesting thought experiment, and frankly, it really doesn't break anything to allow it (I've done so in my games), but RAW I think it's a no.

Yeah, that line the RAI is pretty clearly "the wizard spells that you have prepared". And if you were trying to go RAW, you'd have to lose your spellbook before attempting this procedure. :)

I'm settled on this not being RAW/RAI, but that DM sentiment may lead to reduced time and/or cost. I'd likely reduce time primarily, as I think spell scroll creation time is a bit too high to begin with and in this case the spell scroll needs only to be read by the author. I liken this to scratch notes before copying the spell into the spellbook.

[diplomancer]

It's definitely not RAW or RAI, but it really doesn't break anything. You usually don't want to use your wizard preparation slots to prepare your Artificer spells; quite the contrary, one advantage of the multiclass is using your Artificer preparations to cover your first-level bases, freeing up more higher level Wizard preparation slots.

The one exception is rituals. Copying the first level Artificer ritual spells into your spellbook not only greatly expands your utility (which, to be fair, is more of a party wide benefit, so I'm personally fine with that), but also frees up your first 8 Wizard spells (from your Wizard 1 and 2 levels), so that you're not using any of those for Rituals, except those Rituals that are not Artificer spells (notably, Find Familiar). That's definitely an increase in the Wizard's power, but it's more relevant at tier 1 than later (as you won't be preparing many 1st level Wizard spells anyway, using your Artificer spells for those slots- except, naturally, for those clutch spells not in the Artificer list, like Shield), and I really don't think Wizards are overpowered in Tier 1.

[Tanarii]

Definitely need to make the scroll first.

That's translating it from an artificer known spell into the magic language of scrolls, which anyone with it on their spell list can read and cast. Which takes time and money.

Then they scribe it into their book as a Wizard spell, translating it into the wizard notes they need to prepare and cast it as a wizard spell. Which also takes time and money.

They can't just skip the first step, it's necessary before they can take the second. Known or prepared as a non-wizard spell that happens to be on the wizard spell list as well isn't the same thing as generic spell scroll castable by anyone with it on their spell list.