I'm going to move the Thieves' Cant ability from the Rogue class to the Criminal background. Rogue does not mean thief or criminal, so automatically knowing it makes zero sense.
I like that, mainly cause I tend to play against type, so if I play a rogue who's an archeologist that explores and investigates old ruins, than it doesn't make sense for them to dusk Thieves cant,
I'm going to move the Thieves' Cant ability from the Rogue class to the Criminal background. Rogue does not mean thief or criminal, so automatically knowing it makes zero sense.
I always thought of Thieves cant as a street language and not necessarily a criminal language.
Demo_n: What if in your adventures as an archeologist you would have had dealings with the black market or thieves had stolen some items you were looking for before you could? There is a reason why thieves cant can be used by non-criminals.
I would say that if the player can come up with a plausible reason his non-criminal rogue knowing it, them let them.
I'm going to move the Thieves' Cant ability from the Rogue class to the Criminal background. Rogue does not mean thief or criminal, so automatically knowing it makes zero sense.
I always thought of Thieves cant as a street language and not necessarily a criminal language.
Demo_n: What if in your adventures as an archeologist you would have had dealings with the black market or thieves had stolen some items you were looking for before you could? There is a reason why thieves cant can be used by non-criminals.
I would say that if the player can come up with a plausible reason his non-criminal rogue knowing it, them let them.
Yeah like there's definitely reasons for them to have learned Thieves cant, but I don't want to have to fit that in to their backstory.
I'm going to move the Thieves' Cant ability from the Rogue class to the Criminal background. Rogue does not mean thief or criminal, so automatically knowing it makes zero sense.
I always thought of Thieves cant as a street language and not necessarily a criminal language.
Demo_n: What if in your adventures as an archeologist you would have had dealings with the black market or thieves had stolen some items you were looking for before you could? There is a reason why thieves cant can be used by non-criminals.
I would say that if the player can come up with a plausible reason his non-criminal rogue knowing it, them let them.
Yeah like there's definitely reasons for them to have learned Thieves cant, but I don't want to have to fit that in to their backstory.
Perfectly reasonable. I don't know that I'd make that a house rule though, if I were DMing I'd probably just treat your situation as a special case and let you drop Thieves' Cant in exchange for another language of your choice.
And I agree with it for the purpose of keeping players engaged at the table.
Yeah, it’s nice to keep players engaged but it makes control spells useless. If they players can do it then the bad guys can too. If I were to ever consider it, it would have to come with a massive amount of damage. Control Spells are a core part of the game, sure it’s disappointing but it’s something the player just has to get over and deal with.
Me and my group have greatly enjoyed the rule of rolling a nat 20 on a save against a spell let's you take no damage but rolling a nat 1 causes you to take double damage.
Also we have the spell shatter deal double damage to constructs instead of disadvantage.
As DM, I don't require an arcana check from wizards who attempt to copy a spell scroll into their spell books. I figure I'm already effectively controlling the kinds of spell scrolls the story provides the player and it would be needlessly mean-spirited to have them attempt to copy a spell only to have the attempt fail and the scroll to be lost in the process.
As DM, I don't require an arcana check from wizards who attempt to copy a spell scroll into their spell books. I figure I'm already effectively controlling the kinds of spell scrolls the story provides the player and it would be needlessly mean-spirited to have them attempt to copy a spell only to have the attempt fail and the scroll to be lost in the process.
That may be a house rule in my campaign, or it may just be that the DM isn't aware of the rule, either way it benefits me,
As DM, I don't require an arcana check from wizards who attempt to copy a spell scroll into their spell books. I figure I'm already effectively controlling the kinds of spell scrolls the story provides the player and it would be needlessly mean-spirited to have them attempt to copy a spell only to have the attempt fail and the scroll to be lost in the process.
That may be a house rule in my campaign, or it may just be that the DM isn't aware of the rule, either way it benefits me,
from the rules, there is no arcana check to be made to begin with. it an optionnal rule from the DMG for those who want more mystics from magic ! the ruling in PHB only states...
it cost 2 hours and 50 gold pieces per level of the spell you are trying to copy. so by saying there is no arcana check, he's actually playing the normal ruling.
the DMG optional ruling states... "INSTEAD of the 2 hours and 50 gold per level, you can make an arcana check to see if it succeed or not." the why this exists, is because in older d&d editions, there was no cost, the only cost was, make a check and if it succeed, you get the spell, if it doesn'T the scroll is lost and you fail. nowhere does it sdays both are there at the same time, you either pick one or the other.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
from the rules, there is no arcana check to be made to begin with. it an optionnal rule from the DMG for those who want more mystics from magic !
It's not an optional rule. The Player's Handbook presents the general rule for copying things into spellbook and the Spell Scroll makes an exception to that general rule by also requiring an ability check.
the DMG optional ruling states... "INSTEAD of the 2 hours and 50 gold per level, you can make an arcana check to see if it succeed or not."
My interpretation of Thieves' Cant is that it's slang terms that you can use to talk about a crime or heist or whatever right under someone else's nose, so it doesn't make any sense for anybody who isn't an outright career criminal to know a lick of it. It's actually kind of weird to call it a language, in a way, though, since you're still speaking English/Common/whatever, just waist-deep in jargon. I think the best comparison might be to Cockney Rhyming Slang, where 'Take a butchers up the apples' is all in English, but if you don't know the slang, you have no idea that I just said 'Look up the stairs'.
@foxfireinferno depend son your vision of what a rogue is. to me it always was an Assassin / Thief. both of those have organisations backing them up. so it make sense that rogues would have a special way to contact their own organisation. what doesn't make sense is that everyone uses the same codes. so what i did was separate the thieves cant into faction can't ! and now each rogues has their own faction can'tthat cannot be used except to comunicate with their own faction.
I don't think of classes like that. A class is just a metagame construct naming a collection of abilities under a convenient moniker. I mean, you can be a Barbarian (class) without being a barbarian (personality/attitude/background), you can be an Assassin (class/subclass) without being an assassin ('hire me to kill people'), you can be a Monk without being a monk (introspective navel-gazer). It's just a skill set, flavor it how you like. And no reason, in my mind, a rogue or wizard or anybody else can't be self-taught.
Y'know, thinking about it more, I'll just change it to 'bonus language, thieves' cant is an option' in a few places.
from the rules, there is no arcana check to be made to begin with. it an optionnal rule from the DMG for those who want more mystics from magic !
It's not an optional rule. The Player's Handbook presents the general rule for copying things into spellbook and the Spell Scroll makes an exception to that general rule by also requiring an ability check.
the DMG optional ruling states... "INSTEAD of the 2 hours and 50 gold per level, you can make an arcana check to see if it succeed or not."
The DMG doesn't say that.
Tell me where it even say that it requires an arcana check ? Because i dont see it anywhere !
YOUR SPELLBOOK
The spells that you add to your spellbook as you gain levels reflect the arcane research you conduct on your own, as well as intellectual breakthroughs you have had about the nature of the multiverse. You might find other spells during your adventures. You could discover a spell recorded on a scroll in an evil wizard’s chest, for example, or in a dusty tome in an ancient library.
Copying a Spell into the Book. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can add it to your spellbook if it is of a spell level you can prepare and if you can spare the time to decipher and copy it.
Copying that spell into your spellbook involves reproducing the basic form of the spell, then deciphering the unique system of notation used by the wizard who wrote it. You must practice the spell until you understand the sounds or gestures required, then transcribe it into your spellbook using your own notation.
For each level of the spell, the process takes 2 hours and costs 50 gp. The cost represents material components you expend as you experiment with the spell to master it, as well as the fine inks you need to record it. Once you have spent this time and money, you can prepare the spell just like your other spells.
Replacing the Book. You can copy a spell from your own spellbook into another book—for example, if you want to make a backup copy of your spellbook. This is just like copying a new spell into your spellbook, but faster and easier, since you understand your own notation and already know how to cast the spell. You need spend only 1 hour and 10 gp for each level of the copied spell.
If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook. Filling out the remainder of your spellbook requires you to find new spells to do so, as normal. For this reason, many wizards keep backup spellbooks in a safe place.
The Book’s Appearance. Your spellbook is a unique compilation of spells, with its own decorative flourishes and margin notes. It might be a plain, functional leather volume that you received as a gift from your master, a finely bound gilt-edged tome you found in an ancient library, or even a loose collection of notes scrounged together after you lost your previous spellbook in a mishap.
This from the wizard.
Nothing in spellcasting in the phb says it requires an arcana check.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
You're right. It's not there. That's the general rule for wizards copying things into a their spell books. A spell scroll has a specific rule (and we all know specific beats general when it comes to rules) that applies only to copying spell scrolls into your spell book.
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.
(emphasis mine)
Anyway, my house rule is not to require it. It turns out a lot of people don't require it anyway, but I didn't know that when I posted this.
What i find ridiculous is that a wizard can copy the scroll then use the scroll... I preffer the scroll to burn away once copied. This is like old times where the people of the group to make the choice of leaving the scroll for the wizard or use it for their own use.
So yeah... No check for me unless you are not a caster with it on your spell list. And the scroll vanishes after copying.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
What i find ridiculous is that a wizard can copy the scroll then use the scroll... I preffer the scroll to burn away once copied. This is like old times where the people of the group to make the choice of leaving the scroll for the wizard or use it for their own use.
What i find ridiculous is that a wizard can copy the scroll then use the scroll... I preffer the scroll to burn away once copied. This is like old times where the people of the group to make the choice of leaving the scroll for the wizard or use it for their own use.
The link. Click it. Read it.
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.
You know guys, speaking with you all... now i remember why i stopped playing 3E... because i had enough of being a rule lawyer who can only play by the rules as written... anyway, back to the original topic which is what homebrews you guys use. yeah most people i know do not even play that rule as many do not even know it even exists. based on my own way of playing... i'd say even if it exists, i wouldn'T even use it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I like that, mainly cause I tend to play against type, so if I play a rogue who's an archeologist that explores and investigates old ruins, than it doesn't make sense for them to dusk Thieves cant,
I always thought of Thieves cant as a street language and not necessarily a criminal language.
Demo_n: What if in your adventures as an archeologist you would have had dealings with the black market or thieves had stolen some items you were looking for before you could? There is a reason why thieves cant can be used by non-criminals.
I would say that if the player can come up with a plausible reason his non-criminal rogue knowing it, them let them.
Yeah like there's definitely reasons for them to have learned Thieves cant, but I don't want to have to fit that in to their backstory.
Perfectly reasonable. I don't know that I'd make that a house rule though, if I were DMing I'd probably just treat your situation as a special case and let you drop Thieves' Cant in exchange for another language of your choice.
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
Sorry. I misattrributed that house rule to Kobold Press when it was Sly Flourish. The exact text of the tweet was:
And I agree with it for the purpose of keeping players engaged at the table.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Yeah, it’s nice to keep players engaged but it makes control spells useless. If they players can do it then the bad guys can too. If I were to ever consider it, it would have to come with a massive amount of damage. Control Spells are a core part of the game, sure it’s disappointing but it’s something the player just has to get over and deal with.
DM of Amnian Nights: The Blackmore Saga
Homebrew Listings: A Fine Mustache (Magic Item), Icicle (magic item), Malice (magic item), Restore Undead (spell), Hex Bolt (spell), Healing Salve (consumable)
Me and my group have greatly enjoyed the rule of rolling a nat 20 on a save against a spell let's you take no damage but rolling a nat 1 causes you to take double damage.
Also we have the spell shatter deal double damage to constructs instead of disadvantage.
As DM, I don't require an arcana check from wizards who attempt to copy a spell scroll into their spell books. I figure I'm already effectively controlling the kinds of spell scrolls the story provides the player and it would be needlessly mean-spirited to have them attempt to copy a spell only to have the attempt fail and the scroll to be lost in the process.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
That may be a house rule in my campaign, or it may just be that the DM isn't aware of the rule, either way it benefits me,
from the rules, there is no arcana check to be made to begin with. it an optionnal rule from the DMG for those who want more mystics from magic !
the ruling in PHB only states...
it cost 2 hours and 50 gold pieces per level of the spell you are trying to copy.
so by saying there is no arcana check, he's actually playing the normal ruling.
the DMG optional ruling states... "INSTEAD of the 2 hours and 50 gold per level, you can make an arcana check to see if it succeed or not." the why this exists, is because in older d&d editions, there was no cost, the only cost was, make a check and if it succeed, you get the spell, if it doesn'T the scroll is lost and you fail. nowhere does it sdays both are there at the same time, you either pick one or the other.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
It's not an optional rule. The Player's Handbook presents the general rule for copying things into spellbook and the Spell Scroll makes an exception to that general rule by also requiring an ability check.
The DMG doesn't say that.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
My interpretation of Thieves' Cant is that it's slang terms that you can use to talk about a crime or heist or whatever right under someone else's nose, so it doesn't make any sense for anybody who isn't an outright career criminal to know a lick of it. It's actually kind of weird to call it a language, in a way, though, since you're still speaking English/Common/whatever, just waist-deep in jargon. I think the best comparison might be to Cockney Rhyming Slang, where 'Take a butchers up the apples' is all in English, but if you don't know the slang, you have no idea that I just said 'Look up the stairs'.
I don't think of classes like that. A class is just a metagame construct naming a collection of abilities under a convenient moniker. I mean, you can be a Barbarian (class) without being a barbarian (personality/attitude/background), you can be an Assassin (class/subclass) without being an assassin ('hire me to kill people'), you can be a Monk without being a monk (introspective navel-gazer). It's just a skill set, flavor it how you like. And no reason, in my mind, a rogue or wizard or anybody else can't be self-taught.
Y'know, thinking about it more, I'll just change it to 'bonus language, thieves' cant is an option' in a few places.
Tell me where it even say that it requires an arcana check ? Because i dont see it anywhere !
This from the wizard.
Nothing in spellcasting in the phb says it requires an arcana check.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
You're right. It's not there. That's the general rule for wizards copying things into a their spell books. A spell scroll has a specific rule (and we all know specific beats general when it comes to rules) that applies only to copying spell scrolls into your spell book.
(emphasis mine)
Anyway, my house rule is not to require it. It turns out a lot of people don't require it anyway, but I didn't know that when I posted this.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
You see that blue color on the words spell scroll? You can click on it and it'll take you to another page.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
To me i dont need it.
What i find ridiculous is that a wizard can copy the scroll then use the scroll... I preffer the scroll to burn away once copied. This is like old times where the people of the group to make the choice of leaving the scroll for the wizard or use it for their own use.
So yeah... No check for me unless you are not a caster with it on your spell list. And the scroll vanishes after copying.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
The link. Click it. Read it.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
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.
If you're gonna be a bear...be a Grizzly.
You know guys, speaking with you all... now i remember why i stopped playing 3E... because i had enough of being a rule lawyer who can only play by the rules as written...
anyway, back to the original topic which is what homebrews you guys use. yeah most people i know do not even play that rule as many do not even know it even exists. based on my own way of playing... i'd say even if it exists, i wouldn'T even use it.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)