We have different interpretation i see it as auto-producing or self-sufficient.
It's not merely an interpretation though; if you don't require something it doesn't mean you can't still have/use it, that would be an assumption beyond what the text says. A creature with a mouth can put food into it, but some creatures simply gain no benefit from doing so, but that doesn't mean they can't do it, only that they don't need to.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
In this case, however, the item doesn't just say that it doesn't need the outside ink. It also says that it always produces ink in any color so if you also dip the quill into an inkwell it would be detrimental since you'd be writing with 2 inks at the same time.
Then, the next bullet of the feature talks about using the quill to transcribe spells. The entire feature quite clearly functions by using the quill's own ink to scribe spells. Arguing against this honestly just seems ridiculous but that's where we are in this thread I guess.
In this case, however, the item doesn't just say that it doesn't need the outside ink. It also says that it always produces ink in any color so if you also dip the quill into an inkwell it would be detrimental since you'd be writing with 2 inks at the same time.
This is another assumption; it only says it produces ink, which is also what it would be doing when using ink from an inkwell.
It may well be able to change the colour of inks you provide, but there is no reason to assume that the quill is somehow incapable of using provided ink, as no part of the feature says anything to that effect.
Then, the next bullet of the feature talks about using the quill to transcribe spells.
Nobody is arguing that you can't copy spells with the quill, but it is again an assumption to decide that the bullet point which literally only talks about the time taken would also somehow override the costed component of copying spells; if it was intended to do that, it would say so, just like it did in the UA before they specifically removed that part.
Arguing against this honestly just seems ridiculous
Calling others ridiculous for not sharing your view only undermines your own argument.
If this is a discussion of Rules As Written then simplest argument usually always wins; if you need to make assumptions in order for something to work, then you're diverging from Rules As Written into inventing something that isn't stated.
But another related question is; why are people so desperate to get something for nothing? Order of Scribes is already a fantastic Wizard sub-class, and the quill already enables them to copy spells faster than any other sub-class, so why do you feel like you are somehow being cheated by not also being able to do it this for free? If the more complicated interpretation is also clearly unbalanced then that's just another reason against it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To be clear, I have not called anyone ridiculous -- that would be a ridiculous thing to do! I have simply noted that looking at a fact that is written down and then arguing the opposite is a ridiculous activity. Is this a bad word around here or something? I could use a synonym instead such as absurd or preposterous if that's more acceptable. For example, if we read a science textbook which says "The Sun is yellow" and then I argue "No, the sun is blue" then that would be a ridiculous thing to say even though it does not mean that I am a ridiculous person. The text in question clearly says that it is yellow and the thing in question is indeed yellow.
I've noticed lately that you like to use the word "assumption" to bolster your arguments. When someone directly quotes the text and then points to it and says that it says what it says, no assumptions are being made. The text says what it says and features do what they say.
When we are talking about a class feature that allows a character to magically create a magic quill that has the listed properties that it doesn't require ink -- when you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice and that you can quickly copy a spell into your spellbook if you use the quill for the transcription . . . and then you read that and say "No! To scribe a spell with this quill you must insert some other ink into it!" ??? Come on, man.
but there is no reason to assume that the quill is somehow incapable of using provided ink, as no part of the feature says anything to that effect.
Actually, there is a reason which has been explained a few times now. At best what would happen is that you'd be writing with two different inks at the same time which would likely lead to undesirable outcomes.
it is again an assumption to decide that the bullet point which literally only talks about the time taken would also somehow override the costed component of copying spells;
Nothing is being overridden. The rules are what they are. It is up to the DM to apply the rules to the given situation.
The rules say that there is a cost of 50 gp to complete this process which represents the cost of Things A and Thing B. Now, as DM, we are coming across a situation where purchasing Things A and Thing B are not required. The most correct ruling from the DM at that point is to apply the rule to the situation and declare that the cost in this case is 0, which leads to my Interpretation #3 above. If instead the DM decides that even though the entire process now takes only 2 minutes we still need to buy Things A for some reason, then the DM should apply the rule to that situation and declare that the cost in that case is 40 gp, which leads to my Interpretation #2 above. I reject any interpretation that also requires the purchase of the ink since this is a main feature and benefit of using the quill in the first place.
Personally, I would not even be making a distinction between "fine ink" and the ink that is purchased from the General Store that costs 10 gp for 1 ounce beyond just saying that it's only "fine" when the bottle is first opened, so you'd essentially use up the entire bottle on that one task. For example, if a Wizard (not necessarily an Order of Scribes Wizard) had gone to a General Store a few weeks ago and purchased one 1 ounce bottle of ink for 10 gp and added that to their inventory in their character sheet and then just now we are in this situation where this rule will be applied -- I would allow that character to dig into his backpack and use that bottle of ink for the scribing of a spell and would then charge only 40 gp and 2 hours to scribe that spell. Why would we charge 50 gp? The cost of the ink was paid for previously and is now being used. We need to be able to do things like this as a DM -- you don't arbitrarily apply rules that do not fit the situation.
But another related question is; why are people so desperate to get something for nothing?
And yet, why are some others so desperate to nerf a core class feature that so obviously provides this benefit? Let characters use their nice things. It's fun!
I have simply noted that looking at a fact that is written down and then arguing the opposite is a ridiculous activity.
That's not what Quar1on, myself and others are doing – we're basing statements entirely on what the rules say, and only what they say.
I've noticed lately that you like to use the word "assumption" to bolster your arguments. When someone directly quotes the text and then points to it and says that it says what it says, no assumptions are being made. The text says what it says and features do what they say.
Assumptions are additions to what is stated in order to arrive at some additional or different conclusion; the argument that a Wizardly Quill can only use ink that it creates is based on the assumption that it can't use any other, but the text of the feature never tells you that, therefore it is an assumption that this is the case.
The text only tells you that it produces ink, but producing ink is exactly what an ordinary quill does too. The feature does not state that the quill uncontrollably creates ink and that it is therefore impossible to ever use anything else with it.
It may well be able to change the colour of inks you provide
No. The feature does not say that it can do this, so it cannot.
It says it produces ink in your choice of colour, but producing ink is exactly what a mundane quill does after you put ink into it, so the only differences with the Wizardly Quill are that a) any ink it produces could be of a colour of your choosing, and b) you don't need to put ink into it in order for it to produce ink.
But at no point does it state that you can't put ink into it; it is after all described as a quill, and we're never told that is incapable of functioning in the same way as an ordinary quill.
but there is no reason to assume that the quill is somehow incapable of using provided ink, as no part of the feature says anything to that effect.
Actually, there is a reason which has been explained a few times now. At best what would happen is that you'd be writing with two different inks at the same time which would likely lead to undesirable outcomes.
And that is another assumption; an ordinary quill when you put ink into it produces that ink as you write with it. Nothing in the Wizardly Quill feature tells you that that isn't the case for a Wizardly Quill, so it is again an assumption that the quill would somehow produce two types of ink at once, because the feature doesn't tell you that.
Logically, since the quill always produces ink, if you don't put any into it it must therefore create ink as necessary, but that doesn't mean it is incapable of not creating ink if you did put some in. The key word is that it produces ink, which can do in both cases, therefore they are not mutually exclusive.
Once again, we have ample precedent in the rules for this in the form of weapons that can create their own ammunition; it remains possible to load other ammunition into them, because there is no need for them create their own when you do so, yet they remain capable of firing in both cases.
We also know that features only normally do what they say they do; the Wizardly Quill doesn't say that it reduces or eliminates the cost of copying spells, and so it doesn't. As has been stated multiple times now, the feature actually did reduce the cost in the UA version of the sub-class, but that was specifically removed from the final version we have now. While the UA text isn't RAW, the absence of the feature is a pretty clear indication that that is not a feature of the Wizardly Quill.
This is the Rules and Game Mechanics forum, conclusions should be based on what the rules state and nothing else; the moment you have to pore through other sections inferring and assuming things, the argument is no longer Rules As Written. You might argue that the rules are intended to function the way that you claim, but to my knowledge there is no evidence of this either way.
But another related question is; why are people so desperate to get something for nothing?
And yet, why are some others so desperate to nerf a core class feature that so obviously provides this benefit? Let characters use their nice things. It's fun!
Nobody is telling anybody they can't use their nice things; you can use your Wizardly Quill to write with as much as you want, that's what a quill is for, and you are almost literally incapable of being without one (only an antimagic field or similar could stop you). But what you are asking is for it to provide a benefit that the feature doesn't state, on top of the features that it does.
Again, Wizardly Quill already enables an Order of Scribes Wizard to copy spells 15-30 times faster than any other Wizard and with zero restriction on the schools of magic that can be copied. This is already a substantial benefit when compared to the similar "half cost, half price, single school of magic" feature that most Wizard sub-classes get. If you find a spell scroll you can literally (and literarily) have it copied into your spellbook two minutes later, long before everyone else finishes searching the room. Meanwhile another Wizard needs to wait for a short or long rest, or some other downtime/travel period when they can maybe get it done.
And that's on top of the Awakened Spellbook, which is a great feature; being able to swap damage types means you don't need to prepare extra spells to cope with immunity/resistance/weakness, it means you can pick all your damage dealing spells on the basis of which ones have the area/duration/effects etc. that you like the best, because with the right spells known, any spell you prepare can be a physic damage spell etc. It also lets you express cast a ritual spell (which many Wizards will have lots of since they can cast them without preparing them), it's also a spellcasting focus.
Order of Scribes is one of my favourite Wizard sub-classes, I have a current Order of Scribes Wizard in a Strixhaven campaign who's loads of fun to play as, and he is constantly using his Wizardly Quill (making a point of summoning it whenever he needs to/wants to write anything), usually to mess with his hated enemy Quentillius, but also sometimes for classwork. Most recently he got trapped in Halaster Blackcloak's Dwemercore (evil magic academy) in the Undermountain in Waterdeep and was gleefully sending confusing (and confusingly coloured) messages through every message tube he could find in an effort to prevent himself from being caught. A previous time he had his hands cuffed behind his back and summoned his quill to try and pick the lock – naturally he failed and opted to run headfirst through a window and into a bush first chance he got, but the point is he uses his Wizardly Quill constantly with no need for me to try and convince my DM I should also be allowed to copy as many spells as I want for free.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Since the ink is a color of your choice, it specifically is NOT talking about ink from a bottle
"I want ink of the colour I put in" is as valid a choice as any other.
It is impossible to write with this quill and not have it produce its own ink
That's not what it says; what it says is that it doesn't require ink, not that it only produces its own, or can't use inks that you provide. Either of these would be another additional assumption required; bows that produce their own ammunition are still capable of using ammunition you provide, an Artificer's Repeating Shot doesn't prevent you from using existing ammunition etc., so there's ample precedent for using your own.
All entirely false. It will produce its own ink because it literally says that's what happens when you write with it. It isn't even ambiguous. So there is no reason this point keeps coming up. It says it very clearly:
"When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice on the writing surface."
When you write, it makes ink on the surface. So you can't write with it without that happening. It always makes ink onto the writing surface when you write with it.
There are plenty of points of debate here. This isn't one of them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
but nothing says that the quill can't produce its ink from a reservoir, so it could just be filled with fine ink.
It kind of does though. The quill will always produce ink of any color. In addition to this I suppose you could try to put your own ink into it but you would end up writing with 2 inks at once which probably will not yield very good results regardless of how fine each ink is individually.
The quill will always produce ink of any color. I know this. My point is that the location it is producing this ink from could be a physical reservoir. That would still be following all the rules.
If it's producing ink (from a physical reservoir) onto a writing surface, it seems weird to believe that it would also produce another ink at the same time. It doesn't say that it produces two inks, it just says that it produces ink, which is what it would already be doing.
It produces the ink: on the writing surface.
Not: in a reservoir.
It says as much right in the text of the ability.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Since the ink is a color of your choice, it specifically is NOT talking about ink from a bottle
"I want ink of the colour I put in" is as valid a choice as any other.
It is impossible to write with this quill and not have it produce its own ink
That's not what it says; what it says is that it doesn't require ink, not that it only produces its own, or can't use inks that you provide. Either of these would be another additional assumption required; bows that produce their own ammunition are still capable of using ammunition you provide, an Artificer's Repeating Shot doesn't prevent you from using existing ammunition etc., so there's ample precedent for using your own.
All entirely false. It will produce its own ink because it literally says that's what happens when you write with it. It isn't even ambiguous. So there is no reason this point keeps coming up. It says it very clearly:
"When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice on the writing surface."
When you write, it makes ink on the surface. So you can't write with it without that happening. It always makes ink onto the writing surface when you write with it.
There are plenty of points of debate here. This isn't one of them.
You're right. Nobody has argued that. The quill always produces ink on the writing surface. What's being debated is whether or not the quill can produce this ink from a physical reservoir if it has a one with ink in it (it can).
but nothing says that the quill can't produce its ink from a reservoir, so it could just be filled with fine ink.
It kind of does though. The quill will always produce ink of any color. In addition to this I suppose you could try to put your own ink into it but you would end up writing with 2 inks at once which probably will not yield very good results regardless of how fine each ink is individually.
The quill will always produce ink of any color. I know this. My point is that the location it is producing this ink from could be a physical reservoir. That would still be following all the rules.
If it's producing ink (from a physical reservoir) onto a writing surface, it seems weird to believe that it would also produce another ink at the same time. It doesn't say that it produces two inks, it just says that it produces ink, which is what it would already be doing.
It produces the ink: on the writing surface.
Not: in a reservoir.
It says as much right in the text of the ability.
I never said that it produces ink in a reservoir. In fact, if it said that, it would pretty much invalidate my point.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Since the ink is a color of your choice, it specifically is NOT talking about ink from a bottle
"I want ink of the colour I put in" is as valid a choice as any other.
It is impossible to write with this quill and not have it produce its own ink
That's not what it says; what it says is that it doesn't require ink, not that it only produces its own, or can't use inks that you provide. Either of these would be another additional assumption required; bows that produce their own ammunition are still capable of using ammunition you provide, an Artificer's Repeating Shot doesn't prevent you from using existing ammunition etc., so there's ample precedent for using your own.
All entirely false. It will produce its own ink because it literally says that's what happens when you write with it. It isn't even ambiguous. So there is no reason this point keeps coming up. It says it very clearly:
"When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice on the writing surface."
When you write, it makes ink on the surface. So you can't write with it without that happening. It always makes ink onto the writing surface when you write with it.
There are plenty of points of debate here. This isn't one of them.
You're right. Nobody has argued that. The quill always produces ink on the writing surface. What's being debated is whether or not the quill can produce this ink from a physical reservoir if it has a one with ink in it (it can).
but nothing says that the quill can't produce its ink from a reservoir, so it could just be filled with fine ink.
It kind of does though. The quill will always produce ink of any color. In addition to this I suppose you could try to put your own ink into it but you would end up writing with 2 inks at once which probably will not yield very good results regardless of how fine each ink is individually.
The quill will always produce ink of any color. I know this. My point is that the location it is producing this ink from could be a physical reservoir. That would still be following all the rules.
If it's producing ink (from a physical reservoir) onto a writing surface, it seems weird to believe that it would also produce another ink at the same time. It doesn't say that it produces two inks, it just says that it produces ink, which is what it would already be doing.
It produces the ink: on the writing surface.
Not: in a reservoir.
It says as much right in the text of the ability.
I never said that it produces ink in a reservoir. In fact, if it said that, it would pretty much invalidate my point.
A subclass ability only does what it says. If you want the quill to have a secondary reservoir at your tables for adding some other type of ink you can hombrew that ability. The default ability has no such wording.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
A Wizardly Quill doesn't require ink because it produce some by itself, reading anything else from it is a stretch.
All quills produce ink, Wizardly or mundane, that's what happens when you press the tip to a page when a quill contains ink. The difference with a Wizardly Quill is that it doesn't require you to supply it with ink in order for it to do this; that's what the feature says. The feature says it doesn't require ink, not that you can't provide any, these are not the same.
If this is supposed to be a discussion of Rules as Written then assuming anything beyond what the text says means no longer following RAW. Just because the quill doesn't require ink doesn't mean it can't produce ink you provide it with, because that not only is not what the feature says, it also does not logically follow from what it does say, it requires an additional assumption to be made.
The Wizardly Quill is a quill, quills can be provided with ink, and the Wizardly Quill does not state that it cannot be provided with ink, only that it doesn't require it. Not requiring something is not the same as being unable to have/use it.
And for what feels like the millionth time now; several magical weapons don't require ammunition because they can produce their own, but you can still put ammunition into them, there is no reason to assume that a magical quill that can create its own ink should function any differently, especially when it doesn't say so.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Since the ink is a color of your choice, it specifically is NOT talking about ink from a bottle
"I want ink of the colour I put in" is as valid a choice as any other.
It is impossible to write with this quill and not have it produce its own ink
That's not what it says; what it says is that it doesn't require ink, not that it only produces its own, or can't use inks that you provide. Either of these would be another additional assumption required; bows that produce their own ammunition are still capable of using ammunition you provide, an Artificer's Repeating Shot doesn't prevent you from using existing ammunition etc., so there's ample precedent for using your own.
All entirely false. It will produce its own ink because it literally says that's what happens when you write with it. It isn't even ambiguous. So there is no reason this point keeps coming up. It says it very clearly:
"When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice on the writing surface."
When you write, it makes ink on the surface. So you can't write with it without that happening. It always makes ink onto the writing surface when you write with it.
There are plenty of points of debate here. This isn't one of them.
You're right. Nobody has argued that. The quill always produces ink on the writing surface. What's being debated is whether or not the quill can produce this ink from a physical reservoir if it has a one with ink in it (it can).
but nothing says that the quill can't produce its ink from a reservoir, so it could just be filled with fine ink.
It kind of does though. The quill will always produce ink of any color. In addition to this I suppose you could try to put your own ink into it but you would end up writing with 2 inks at once which probably will not yield very good results regardless of how fine each ink is individually.
The quill will always produce ink of any color. I know this. My point is that the location it is producing this ink from could be a physical reservoir. That would still be following all the rules.
If it's producing ink (from a physical reservoir) onto a writing surface, it seems weird to believe that it would also produce another ink at the same time. It doesn't say that it produces two inks, it just says that it produces ink, which is what it would already be doing.
It produces the ink: on the writing surface.
Not: in a reservoir.
It says as much right in the text of the ability.
I never said that it produces ink in a reservoir. In fact, if it said that, it would pretty much invalidate my point.
A subclass ability only does what it says. If you want the quill to have a secondary reservoir at your tables for adding some other type of ink you can hombrew that ability. The default ability has no such wording.
Secondary reservoir? I never said anything about a secondary reservoir. I'm talking about a primary reservoir, which is generally assumed to be a part of a quill.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Secondary reservoir? I never said anything about a secondary reservoir. I'm talking about a primary reservoir, which is generally assumed to be a part of a quill.
I wonder how much of this circular weirdness stems from people not knowing what a quill is or how it actually works? Pretty sure I did cover it already, but since it's kind of important to know what a quill is here, here goes again:
One of the reasons why feathers were used for quills is that the shaft of the feather (the actual "quill" part) is both bone-like (albeit very thin) and hollow, so it's already quite strong, and when treated and cut, you're able to dip the tip of the quill into an ink pot and this causes ink to be drawn up inside the hollow part of the feather, which acts as a reservoir. IIRC it's the surface tension of the ink that then holds it inside, and because you cut a slit into the sharpened writing tip, this breaks the surface tension and allows the ink to flow out again (producing ink from the tip and onto the page).
Granted, even a large feather doesn't hold a huge amount of ink (you'd still need to dip it again every five or six words, I think there's a limit to how far up the ink will go before weight overcomes surface tension) but that was still better than some of the more basic "dip pens" that came later, which were basically just wood with a metal nib, and were only a moderate improvement over scraping ink onto a page with a sharpened bit of wood (really the metal nib just made it a bit more consistent).
Manufacturing them with a hollow reservoir, or later a detachable one (basically an ink pot attached to the pen) was more complicated so didn't become common until later. It took quite a while to evolve into the fountain pen, and even those remained pretty rare; they didn't appear in many schools for example (except maybe for teachers), where it was more common for students to use cheap dip pens and ink pots, and then later pencils.
Part of the confusion may also stem from the fact that as metal nibs became common, people started making dip pens using feathers for the handle; but these weren't truly quills, and most wouldn't have used the hollow in the quill to store any useful amount of ink, because the nibs wouldn't have been made to fit properly, you'd just cut the end off and crimp the metal nib on and call it a day. It was more for the style, and proper quills would have become more of a luxury item made by specialists.
Pretty sure I already covered this, but I'm not convinced everyone fully understands what a quill is, which isn't much use in a discussion about a Wizardly Quill. But the only really important bit is that all (proper) quills produce ink, if they didn't you could just as easily use a wooden stick.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I have simply noted that looking at a fact that is written down and then arguing the opposite is a ridiculous activity.
That's not what Quar1on, myself and others are doing – we're basing statements entirely on what the rules say, and only what they say.
This is entirely false. I have continuously quoted and referred directly to what the feature actually says. YOU are both arguing for functionality that is NOT listed in the feature.
Assumptions are additions to what is stated in order to arrive at some additional or different conclusion; the argument that a Wizardly Quill can only use ink that it creates is based on the assumption that it can't use any other, but the text of the feature never tells you that, therefore it is an assumption that this is the case.
The text only tells you that it produces ink, but producing ink is exactly what an ordinary quill does too. The feature does not state that the quill uncontrollably creates ink therefore it is impossible to ever use anything else with it.
What?? LOL. That is not how logic works! It is exactly the opposite! It is YOU both who are making the large assumptions that this particular magic quill called a Tiny quill even has a reservoir at all and that you can put your own ink into it. The feature does NOT say this! You can't say that something which is not written is the default and that to instead only use the words that are written is the assumption! That's . . . preposterous?
First of all, this magic quill is NOT an ordinary quill so you are making an assumption that they have certain things in common. Second of all, an ordinary quill does NOT produce ink. In an ordinary quill, ink is loaded into the reservoir. From there, it flows to the tip by capillary action. This magic quill does not require ink. When you write with it, it produces ink in any color. Third, in fact the feature DOES state that the quill "uncontrollably" creates ink. WHEN you write with it, it [ ALWAYS ] produces ink in any color. Every time. Whether you want it to or not. It says so right there in the first bullet point of the feature:
The quill doesn't require ink. When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice
But at no point does it state that you can't put ink into it; it is after all described as a quill, and we're never told that is incapable of functioning in the same way as an ordinary quill.
That's not how the rules work. The feature tells you what it CAN do. It doesn't require ink -- it produces ink when you write with it. There are a ton of things that it can't do. It also can't fly and it can't shoot fireballs. It is not the feature's job to list all of the things that cannot be done. The rule of thumb is that things do what they say they do and only what they say they do.
Yes, the word "quill" is used in the feature. But this is very specifically a particular magic quill called a Tiny quill that may or may not function like an ordinary quill. We might also speak about a magic car that doesn't require gas. Can it still use gas? Maybe, or maybe not. Perhaps some can and some cannot. Assuming that it can is a bad assumption. We might also speak about a magic human that doesn't require food. Or a tire that doesn't require air. And so on.
YOU are making the poor assumption that the item CAN function in a way that is not specified. This is a poor assumption that is not supported by the text.
Nothing in the Wizardly Quill feature tells you that that isn't the case for a Wizardly Quill
Again, it's not the feature's job to list all of the things that cannot be done with it. But the feature does NOT say that it CAN operate this way. Features only do what they say. The feature says that the quill does not require ink. Assuming that it can function is some other way is not supported by the text.
so it is again an assumption that the quill would somehow produce two types of ink at once, because the feature doesn't tell you that.
I agree with this completely. This was your best case scenario. It is a much more correct interpretation that only one ink is produced -- the one that is mentioned in the text:
The quill doesn't require ink. When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice
This is the Rules and Game Mechanics forum, conclusions should be based on what the rules state and nothing else; the moment you have to pore through other sections inferring and assuming things, the argument is no longer Rules As Written.
This is 100% false. There are tons and tons of examples of rules in 5e that are incomplete or unclear or spread out across multiple portions of the text and that doesn't make these rules any less valid. To pick an example out of the air -- the Rules for Hiding. In order for anyone to really understand what is going on with the Rules for Hiding in D&D 5e they have to become familiar with many different game concepts located in at least 3 different Chapters and 6 or 7 unique sections within those Chapters of the PHB to even begin to put together a meaningful interpretation that follows the RAW. And that's not including what might be also mentioned in the DMG and other source books on that subject. If you told someone, "Ok, here is what the book says about the Hide action: 'Hide -- When you take the Hide action, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check in an attempt to hide, following the rules for hiding. If you succeed, you gain certain benefits, as described in the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section later in this section.' . . . but no! You cannot flip to any other pages! The moment you have to pore through other sections the argument is no longer Rules as Written!" Well, honestly such a statement would be mocked.
No. That's not how these forums work. You take a look at all of the relevant text and draw conclusions from the totality of the information available.
If you find a spell scroll you can literally (and literarily) have it copied into your spellbook two minutes later, long before everyone else finishes searching the room.
And how do you propose this Wizard accomplishes this within your game logistically speaking under your interpretation? If you are in a dungeon somewhere and "searching the room", to whom are you paying the 50 gp? Do you pause the game and hover your mouse over a menu and click the "Pay Now" button and have 50 gp removed from the character sheet with a little sound effect while your new spell is copied? How are you describing the experimentation that normally takes 1 hour to accomplish and now all of the same materials are expended in less than 2 minutes? Where and how is he even buying those materials that he is using for that experimentation? Apparently we need separate ink as well -- where is that coming from? What if that Wizard had enough gold for the first spell that he finds, copies that spell in 2 minutes, then immediately finds another spell and doesn't have enough money? Now he . . . can't do the thing that he just did while in this dungeon?
As a reminder, let's take a look at the description for this type of Wizard:
Among wizards, the Order of Scribes is the most bookish. It takes many forms in different worlds, but its primary mission is the same everywhere: recording magical discoveries so that wizardry can flourish.
and then right after this, in the first listed Class Feature, a method of accomplishing this mission is detailed:
you can magically create a Tiny quill in your free hand. The magic quill has the following properties:
The quill doesn't require ink. When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice on the writing surface.
The time you must spend to copy a spell into your spell book equals 2 minutes per spell level if you use the quill for the transcription.
This is THE primary mission for this type of Wizard and as you have said it is meant to be done quickly, on the fly, while exploring the dungeon while everybody else is still searching the rest of the room. So . . . who are we paying this money to again? You seem to be missing the whole point of this subclass.
But what you are asking is for it to provide a benefit that the feature doesn't state, on top of the features that it does.
Absolutely not. No one is asking for anything that isn't explicitly specified in the text.
A default rule exists and is unchanged.
The Feature provides certain benefits and creates a situation whereby the DM must arbitrate and provide a ruling given the situation and the rule.
If the DM determines that the Feature provides the ink and bypasses the experimentation based on the facts that the quill doesn't require ink and it produces ink when writing with it AND that the entire process of (1 hour) experimentation and (1 hour) transcription now takes only a total of 2 minutes -- then the most correct ruling that a DM can make for that given situation is that the material cost for this process in this situation is 0 gp and the total time spent is 2 minutes (per level).
It is YOU both who are making the large assumptions that this particular magic quill called a Tiny quill even has a reservoir at all and that you can put your own ink into it.
Maybe once we all understand what a quill is we can actually talk about the subject properly without going in further circles. Because all (actual) quills produce (bring forth) ink from a reservoir (hollow), if they didn't they'd be no better than using a sharpened stick to scrape ink onto the page.
Absolutely not. No one is asking for anything that isn't explicitly specified in the text.
Feel free to give a direct quote of where exactly it says in the Wizardly Quill rules that it reduces or eliminates the gold cost of copying spells; I'm sure somehow half a dozen people pointing that it doesn't say this have all somehow missed it, right? 🤔
You claim we agree that rules only normally do what they say they do, and yet you've been really struggling to show where it says what you claim it does without going off into entirely different parts of the rules. Either the Wizardly Quill rule tells us it reduces or eliminates the cost, or it doesn't.
Because another thing I've pointed out for what feels like the millionth time (and has been conspicuously ignored every time) is that the UA version of this sub-class specifically included a reduced cost for copying spells; that text is very noticeably absent from the final version of the feature.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Feel free to give a direct quote of where exactly it says in the Wizardly Quill rules that it reduces or eliminates the gold cost of copying spells; I'm sure somehow half a dozen people pointing that it doesn't say this have all somehow missed it, right? 🤔
You claim we agree that rules only normally do what they say they do, and yet you've been really struggling to show where it says what you claim it does without going off into entirely different parts of the rules. Either the Wizardly Quill rule tells us it reduces or eliminates the cost, or it doesn't.
I actually haven't struggled with that task at all. I'll try to quickly summarize with a Cliff's Notes style version:
The rule:
Copying a Spell into the Book.
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.
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.
you can magically create a Tiny quill in your free hand. The magic quill has the following properties:
The quill doesn't require ink. When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice on the writing surface.
The time you must spend to copy a spell into your spell book equals 2 minutes per spell level if you use the quill for the transcription.
Now, the entire process (Deciphering + practice / experimentation + transcribing) takes 2 minutes. The only way that this makes any sense is if the practice / experimentation is no longer required since that has nothing to do with the transcribing process and normally takes 1 hour. The Feature implicitly (but not explicitly) creates this situation. Also, the ink is provided by the Feature.
With all of this information, the DM now makes a ruling. Since there is no need to purchase "material components" or "fine inks" in this situation, the cost is 0 gp.
Whatever the UA version of the Feature may or may not have said is irrelevant.
Since there is no need to purchase "material components" or "fine inks" in this situation, the cost is 0 gp.
Two incredibly glaring assumptions there.
You're assuming that you no longer need to decipher/practice spells that you transcribe. You assume this purely off of the fact that "it doesn't make sense." You know what else doesn't make sense? Writing 30 times faster than a normal Wizard. A normal Wizard who probably spends a lot of time transcribing, anyways, on account of being a Wizard.
You're assuming that the ink produced by the quill qualifies as the "fine ink" needed for transcribing. You assume this based off of an arbitrary, unsupported, and nonsensical idea of what "fine ink" is. There's no reason to believe that fine ink is just ink that was uncorked recently. For one, ink simply doesn't work like that, for two, that would still leave you with most of a vial of ink when you're done, and for three, that would make it only cost marginally more than normal ink, since you could just get vials of ink small enough that you could use them each before they... spoil, or whatever you think happens to ink after 10 minutes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Rest assured that the folks who have made it this far into this discussion all have a basic understanding of how a mundane quill functions.
And yet part of your argument hinges on quills either not being able to contain ink, or not being able to produce ink, both of which they do.
Now, the entire process (Deciphering + practice / experimentation + transcribing) takes 2 minutes. The only way that this makes any sense is if the practice / experimentation is no longer required since that has nothing to do with the transcribing process and normally takes 1 hour.
And here we are back at assumption, speculation and invention, rather than what the rules say. Because I can't help but notice that your quote from the Wizardly Quill feature does not say that it reduces, let alone eliminates, the cost of copying a spell, it in fact says nothing to that effect. You've decided to try and cobble together an equation by which that is indirectly the case, but it's based on so many assumptions that it simply cannot be Rules As Written.
The Wizardly Quill feature says exactly nothing about how it accelerates the process of copying into a spellbook, yet you are choosing to declare that it must be impossible without being free of charge which is yet another flawed assumption for multiple reasons. Firstly, these are game mechanics not laws of physics, secondly these wouldn't be laws of physics anyway because it's magic, and thirdly, the assertion that it would be impossible simply isn't correct; I can easily give three ways it could be possible:
The quill literally accelerates time by either doing exactly that for you, or enabling you to do some or part of the process "virtually" through the Awakened Spellbook (which is also a required part of the process btw).
Experimentation only takes 2 minutes, the rest is all writing (118 minutes normally, 58 minutes if a specialist). This is entirely possible because there exist spells with casting times longer than the time it would take to both experiment with and copy them, therefore the experimentation time must be shorter than the time it takes to actually cast a spell. Plus the majority of spells are actions, bonus actions and reactions, which take place in six seconds or less.
The Awakened Spellbook does all of the actual work, and consumes the material components as part of doing so, with the quill writing out the result. Remember, copying a spell is actually a feature of the spellbook, the quill is just an implement you can use to do it with, so the Awakened Spellbook is also a required part of the process.
That's just three quick possibilities that prove that the assumption that experimentation and resource consumption must be impossible, is a false assumption. I'm pretty sure if I put my mind to it I can think of plenty more. And before you say it; no I'm not assuming any of these is how it works, what it comes down to is that the feature says it takes 2 minutes with the Wizardly Quill, and mechanically that's all we need to know, because that's the only part that it changes.
And this still really doesn't take us away from the simple fact that if the quill made copying free, then it should say so, because all you've really succeeded in showing is that if, in the unlikely event it were the intention for copying to be free, that the rules for that are not nearly accessible or obvious enough for that to be the case without the feature explicitly saying so.
But again, in RAW the simplest interpretation is almost always the correct one, because adding more and more steps invariably means making assumptions, which means moving away from RAW.
Whatever the UA version of the Feature may or may not have said is irrelevant.
It's entirely relevant because what your conclusion requires is text that doesn't exist; actually worse, it did exist and now very specifically does not. This gives us clarity on Rules As Intended, because if they wanted a reduction in cost to be a feature in the final sub-class, then they would not have removed that part of the text.
The fact that they did remove it gives far more weight to the case that full cost is the intended behaviour over zero cost being the intended behaviour. That and the fact that zero cost is unbalanced, because if the time and gold cost of copying is supposed to limit how much of it you can do, then massively reducing the time for all schools of magic is already a big bonus, and eliminating the gold cost as well effectively makes it free to do, which is near infinitely better than any other comparable feature (of which we have eight).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Well, I wouldn't call these "glaring assumptions". These are just logical conclusions based on the information that we have to work with. Yes, some of it is implicit instead of fully spelled out in a redundant manner but it's all there if you just follow the thought process all the way through.
Your Point 1: Yes, in a sense this is a bit of an assumption. This is why I also originally offered a "second best" interpretation that assumes that we must still do all of the same deciphering, practicing and experimentation and use up all of the same material components while doing so, but that all of this now takes some fraction of 2 minutes instead of 1 hour. And yes, narratively that doesn't make any sense at all -- there's no other good way of saying that. But under that interpretation the entire process takes 2 minutes and costs 40 gp.
As for the idea of writing 30+ times faster than a normal Wizard -- that actually does make sense to me:
My own flavor for how this could be explained: Normally the Wizard sits in a safe laboratory setting during downtime. He opens the "source code" and begins to decipher it. After attempting to decipher some small portion of it, he performs some laboratory experiments and practices some vocal inflections and gestures that he thinks might be involved in the final spell. The results of these experiments will tell him if he has interpreted this portion of the code correctly. If so, he then begins to slowly and carefully write very precise and exact markings "in his own notation (code)" along with any necessary (encoded) notes. This type of writing is probably slow and laborious and detail oriented.
However, if we are holding onto a magic quill, we can just think in our mind what the final markings should look like and the quill flies across the page as fast as our hand is physically capable of moving.
In the case of my main interpretation where the experimentation is no longer needed -- again it's because we have a magic quill. We can simply look at the source code and without even deciphering it or experimenting to make sure that we've correctly deciphered it, the quill knows what it says and how to rewrite that code "into our own notation". Because it's magic. It's a magic quill, it's awesome. We are looking at the source and are mentally deciding to "write that spell in my own notation" and then the quill just pulls on our hand and carries it across the page.
Because the entire point and the primary mission of this subclass is to be able to do this on the fly while dungeon crawling -- this flavor fits. Otherwise, how would you do it?
If instead we still want to enforce the rule of buying the fine inks and buying the material components for experimentation, then we have to imagine that there will happen to be a peddler selling exactly what we need located in this dungeon at exactly the time and the place that we need him to be there. We purchase all of this stuff, then we set up a makeshift laboratory. We proceed to decipher the source, run the experiments and write down the spell. Then we break down the laboratory and stuff all of the components and equipment into our backpacks and wave good-bye to the friendly dungeon delving shop owner -- all in less than 2 minutes. To me, that is a lot more immersion breaking and makes a lot less sense.
Your Point 2: Yes, this is pretty much the entire point of this feature existing and is the primary mission of this subclass. The quill provides the ink. I wouldn't really call this an assumption either -- it's spelled out as well as could be expected in the text for the Feature.
As pointed out before, the Ink item in the list of Adventuring Gear items costs 10 gp. In my opinion there is almost no way that this is a coincidence -- you are meant to use this ink to scribe your spells. It's a shame that the author made the artistic decision to say "fine ink" instead of just "ink" in the rule, thus leading to somewhat silly debates like this, but in my opinion this Ink is good enough and the Ink produced by the quill is also good enough. If your games have yet another type of ink that you'd have to find at another type of store then that's great. The rules are just not detailed enough to determine which way is the "right" way.
Let's all keep in mind that every D&D game is different anyway and every DM is going to run things differently. Heck, there are a ton of DMs that simply will not allow anything from Tasha's to exist in their world -- which would make this entire discussion moot anyway.
If instead we still want to enforce the rule of buying the fine inks and buying the material components for experimentation, then we have to imagine that there will happen to be a peddler selling exactly what we need located in this dungeon at exactly the time and the place that we need him to be there. We purchase all of this stuff, then we set up a makeshift laboratory. We proceed to decipher the source, run the experiments and write down the spell. Then we break down the laboratory and stuff all of the components and equipment into our backpacks and wave good-bye to the friendly dungeon delving shop owner -- all in less than 2 minutes. To me, that is a lot more immersion breaking and makes a lot less sense.
Many DMs allow the purchase of generic "spell scribin' stuff" at shops. If you necessitate the possibility of scribing spells in dungeons, you could just make that available to your players. Otherwise, I suppose they're probably not going to be able to scribe things in dungeons.
Your Point 2: Yes, this is pretty much the entire point of this feature existing and is the primary mission of this subclass. The quill provides the ink. I wouldn't really call this an assumption either -- it's spelled out as well as could be expected in the text for the Feature.
As pointed out before, the Ink item in the list of Adventuring Gear items costs 10 gp. In my opinion there is almost no way that this is a coincidence -- you are meant to use this ink to scribe your spells. It's a shame that the author made the artistic decision to say "fine ink" instead of just "ink" in the rule, thus leading to somewhat silly debates like this, but in my opinion this Ink is good enough and the Ink produced by the quill is also good enough. If your games have yet another type of ink that you'd have to find at another type of store then that's great. The rules are just not detailed enough to determine which way is the "right" way.
Let's all keep in mind that every D&D game is different anyway and every DM is going to run things differently. Heck, there are a ton of DMs that simply will not allow anything from Tasha's to exist in their world -- which would make this entire discussion moot anyway.
If you're using an entire damn ounce of ink to scribe a first level spell, you're basically just covering your whole spellbook in the stuff. If it's so difficult for you to believe that the number 10 could possibly appear twice in the rules without a deliberate correlation decided on by the developers, then I have no idea what to tell you. You might as well just claim that you can use any of these to scribe spells. This is such a bizarre point, I'm genuinely not sure how to respond to it.
Your assumption that the phrase "fine ink" means absolutely any ink you can get your hands on is another big leap in logic. It wasn't an "artistic decision" to include the word "fine," it was done to separate the stuff that's 10 gp per level of a spell (a number which, I'll point out, comes from another assumption on your part) from the stuff that's 10 gp for basically a lifetime's supply. 1 ounce isn't just an amorphous game term, you know. It's an amount of ink that can actually be measured and used.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It's not merely an interpretation though; if you don't require something it doesn't mean you can't still have/use it, that would be an assumption beyond what the text says. A creature with a mouth can put food into it, but some creatures simply gain no benefit from doing so, but that doesn't mean they can't do it, only that they don't need to.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
In this case, however, the item doesn't just say that it doesn't need the outside ink. It also says that it always produces ink in any color so if you also dip the quill into an inkwell it would be detrimental since you'd be writing with 2 inks at the same time.
Then, the next bullet of the feature talks about using the quill to transcribe spells. The entire feature quite clearly functions by using the quill's own ink to scribe spells. Arguing against this honestly just seems ridiculous but that's where we are in this thread I guess.
This is another assumption; it only says it produces ink, which is also what it would be doing when using ink from an inkwell.
It may well be able to change the colour of inks you provide, but there is no reason to assume that the quill is somehow incapable of using provided ink, as no part of the feature says anything to that effect.
Nobody is arguing that you can't copy spells with the quill, but it is again an assumption to decide that the bullet point which literally only talks about the time taken would also somehow override the costed component of copying spells; if it was intended to do that, it would say so, just like it did in the UA before they specifically removed that part.
Calling others ridiculous for not sharing your view only undermines your own argument.
If this is a discussion of Rules As Written then simplest argument usually always wins; if you need to make assumptions in order for something to work, then you're diverging from Rules As Written into inventing something that isn't stated.
But another related question is; why are people so desperate to get something for nothing? Order of Scribes is already a fantastic Wizard sub-class, and the quill already enables them to copy spells faster than any other sub-class, so why do you feel like you are somehow being cheated by not also being able to do it this for free? If the more complicated interpretation is also clearly unbalanced then that's just another reason against it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To be clear, I have not called anyone ridiculous -- that would be a ridiculous thing to do! I have simply noted that looking at a fact that is written down and then arguing the opposite is a ridiculous activity. Is this a bad word around here or something? I could use a synonym instead such as absurd or preposterous if that's more acceptable. For example, if we read a science textbook which says "The Sun is yellow" and then I argue "No, the sun is blue" then that would be a ridiculous thing to say even though it does not mean that I am a ridiculous person. The text in question clearly says that it is yellow and the thing in question is indeed yellow.
I've noticed lately that you like to use the word "assumption" to bolster your arguments. When someone directly quotes the text and then points to it and says that it says what it says, no assumptions are being made. The text says what it says and features do what they say.
When we are talking about a class feature that allows a character to magically create a magic quill that has the listed properties that it doesn't require ink -- when you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice and that you can quickly copy a spell into your spellbook if you use the quill for the transcription . . . and then you read that and say "No! To scribe a spell with this quill you must insert some other ink into it!" ??? Come on, man.
No. The feature does not say that it can do this, so it cannot.
Actually, there is a reason which has been explained a few times now. At best what would happen is that you'd be writing with two different inks at the same time which would likely lead to undesirable outcomes.
Nothing is being overridden. The rules are what they are. It is up to the DM to apply the rules to the given situation.
The rules say that there is a cost of 50 gp to complete this process which represents the cost of Things A and Thing B. Now, as DM, we are coming across a situation where purchasing Things A and Thing B are not required. The most correct ruling from the DM at that point is to apply the rule to the situation and declare that the cost in this case is 0, which leads to my Interpretation #3 above. If instead the DM decides that even though the entire process now takes only 2 minutes we still need to buy Things A for some reason, then the DM should apply the rule to that situation and declare that the cost in that case is 40 gp, which leads to my Interpretation #2 above. I reject any interpretation that also requires the purchase of the ink since this is a main feature and benefit of using the quill in the first place.
Personally, I would not even be making a distinction between "fine ink" and the ink that is purchased from the General Store that costs 10 gp for 1 ounce beyond just saying that it's only "fine" when the bottle is first opened, so you'd essentially use up the entire bottle on that one task. For example, if a Wizard (not necessarily an Order of Scribes Wizard) had gone to a General Store a few weeks ago and purchased one 1 ounce bottle of ink for 10 gp and added that to their inventory in their character sheet and then just now we are in this situation where this rule will be applied -- I would allow that character to dig into his backpack and use that bottle of ink for the scribing of a spell and would then charge only 40 gp and 2 hours to scribe that spell. Why would we charge 50 gp? The cost of the ink was paid for previously and is now being used. We need to be able to do things like this as a DM -- you don't arbitrarily apply rules that do not fit the situation.
And yet, why are some others so desperate to nerf a core class feature that so obviously provides this benefit? Let characters use their nice things. It's fun!
That's not what Quar1on, myself and others are doing – we're basing statements entirely on what the rules say, and only what they say.
Assumptions are additions to what is stated in order to arrive at some additional or different conclusion; the argument that a Wizardly Quill can only use ink that it creates is based on the assumption that it can't use any other, but the text of the feature never tells you that, therefore it is an assumption that this is the case.
The text only tells you that it produces ink, but producing ink is exactly what an ordinary quill does too. The feature does not state that the quill uncontrollably creates ink and that it is therefore impossible to ever use anything else with it.
It says it produces ink in your choice of colour, but producing ink is exactly what a mundane quill does after you put ink into it, so the only differences with the Wizardly Quill are that a) any ink it produces could be of a colour of your choosing, and b) you don't need to put ink into it in order for it to produce ink.
But at no point does it state that you can't put ink into it; it is after all described as a quill, and we're never told that is incapable of functioning in the same way as an ordinary quill.
And that is another assumption; an ordinary quill when you put ink into it produces that ink as you write with it. Nothing in the Wizardly Quill feature tells you that that isn't the case for a Wizardly Quill, so it is again an assumption that the quill would somehow produce two types of ink at once, because the feature doesn't tell you that.
Logically, since the quill always produces ink, if you don't put any into it it must therefore create ink as necessary, but that doesn't mean it is incapable of not creating ink if you did put some in. The key word is that it produces ink, which can do in both cases, therefore they are not mutually exclusive.
Once again, we have ample precedent in the rules for this in the form of weapons that can create their own ammunition; it remains possible to load other ammunition into them, because there is no need for them create their own when you do so, yet they remain capable of firing in both cases.
We also know that features only normally do what they say they do; the Wizardly Quill doesn't say that it reduces or eliminates the cost of copying spells, and so it doesn't. As has been stated multiple times now, the feature actually did reduce the cost in the UA version of the sub-class, but that was specifically removed from the final version we have now. While the UA text isn't RAW, the absence of the feature is a pretty clear indication that that is not a feature of the Wizardly Quill.
This is the Rules and Game Mechanics forum, conclusions should be based on what the rules state and nothing else; the moment you have to pore through other sections inferring and assuming things, the argument is no longer Rules As Written. You might argue that the rules are intended to function the way that you claim, but to my knowledge there is no evidence of this either way.
Nobody is telling anybody they can't use their nice things; you can use your Wizardly Quill to write with as much as you want, that's what a quill is for, and you are almost literally incapable of being without one (only an antimagic field or similar could stop you). But what you are asking is for it to provide a benefit that the feature doesn't state, on top of the features that it does.
Again, Wizardly Quill already enables an Order of Scribes Wizard to copy spells 15-30 times faster than any other Wizard and with zero restriction on the schools of magic that can be copied. This is already a substantial benefit when compared to the similar "half cost, half price, single school of magic" feature that most Wizard sub-classes get. If you find a spell scroll you can literally (and literarily) have it copied into your spellbook two minutes later, long before everyone else finishes searching the room. Meanwhile another Wizard needs to wait for a short or long rest, or some other downtime/travel period when they can maybe get it done.
And that's on top of the Awakened Spellbook, which is a great feature; being able to swap damage types means you don't need to prepare extra spells to cope with immunity/resistance/weakness, it means you can pick all your damage dealing spells on the basis of which ones have the area/duration/effects etc. that you like the best, because with the right spells known, any spell you prepare can be a physic damage spell etc. It also lets you express cast a ritual spell (which many Wizards will have lots of since they can cast them without preparing them), it's also a spellcasting focus.
Order of Scribes is one of my favourite Wizard sub-classes, I have a current Order of Scribes Wizard in a Strixhaven campaign who's loads of fun to play as, and he is constantly using his Wizardly Quill (making a point of summoning it whenever he needs to/wants to write anything), usually to mess with his hated enemy Quentillius, but also sometimes for classwork. Most recently he got trapped in Halaster Blackcloak's Dwemercore (evil magic academy) in the Undermountain in Waterdeep and was gleefully sending confusing (and confusingly coloured) messages through every message tube he could find in an effort to prevent himself from being caught. A previous time he had his hands cuffed behind his back and summoned his quill to try and pick the lock – naturally he failed and opted to run headfirst through a window and into a bush first chance he got, but the point is he uses his Wizardly Quill constantly with no need for me to try and convince my DM I should also be allowed to copy as many spells as I want for free.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
All entirely false. It will produce its own ink because it literally says that's what happens when you write with it. It isn't even ambiguous. So there is no reason this point keeps coming up. It says it very clearly:
"When you write with it, it produces ink in a color of your choice on the writing surface."
When you write, it makes ink on the surface. So you can't write with it without that happening. It always makes ink onto the writing surface when you write with it.
There are plenty of points of debate here. This isn't one of them.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
It produces the ink: on the writing surface.
Not: in a reservoir.
It says as much right in the text of the ability.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
You're right. Nobody has argued that. The quill always produces ink on the writing surface. What's being debated is whether or not the quill can produce this ink from a physical reservoir if it has a one with ink in it (it can).
I never said that it produces ink in a reservoir. In fact, if it said that, it would pretty much invalidate my point.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
A subclass ability only does what it says. If you want the quill to have a secondary reservoir at your tables for adding some other type of ink you can hombrew that ability. The default ability has no such wording.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
A Wizardly Quill doesn't require ink because it produce some by itself, reading anything else from it is a stretch.
All quills produce ink, Wizardly or mundane, that's what happens when you press the tip to a page when a quill contains ink. The difference with a Wizardly Quill is that it doesn't require you to supply it with ink in order for it to do this; that's what the feature says. The feature says it doesn't require ink, not that you can't provide any, these are not the same.
If this is supposed to be a discussion of Rules as Written then assuming anything beyond what the text says means no longer following RAW. Just because the quill doesn't require ink doesn't mean it can't produce ink you provide it with, because that not only is not what the feature says, it also does not logically follow from what it does say, it requires an additional assumption to be made.
The Wizardly Quill is a quill, quills can be provided with ink, and the Wizardly Quill does not state that it cannot be provided with ink, only that it doesn't require it. Not requiring something is not the same as being unable to have/use it.
And for what feels like the millionth time now; several magical weapons don't require ammunition because they can produce their own, but you can still put ammunition into them, there is no reason to assume that a magical quill that can create its own ink should function any differently, especially when it doesn't say so.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Secondary reservoir? I never said anything about a secondary reservoir. I'm talking about a primary reservoir, which is generally assumed to be a part of a quill.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I wonder how much of this circular weirdness stems from people not knowing what a quill is or how it actually works? Pretty sure I did cover it already, but since it's kind of important to know what a quill is here, here goes again:
One of the reasons why feathers were used for quills is that the shaft of the feather (the actual "quill" part) is both bone-like (albeit very thin) and hollow, so it's already quite strong, and when treated and cut, you're able to dip the tip of the quill into an ink pot and this causes ink to be drawn up inside the hollow part of the feather, which acts as a reservoir. IIRC it's the surface tension of the ink that then holds it inside, and because you cut a slit into the sharpened writing tip, this breaks the surface tension and allows the ink to flow out again (producing ink from the tip and onto the page).
Granted, even a large feather doesn't hold a huge amount of ink (you'd still need to dip it again every five or six words, I think there's a limit to how far up the ink will go before weight overcomes surface tension) but that was still better than some of the more basic "dip pens" that came later, which were basically just wood with a metal nib, and were only a moderate improvement over scraping ink onto a page with a sharpened bit of wood (really the metal nib just made it a bit more consistent).
Manufacturing them with a hollow reservoir, or later a detachable one (basically an ink pot attached to the pen) was more complicated so didn't become common until later. It took quite a while to evolve into the fountain pen, and even those remained pretty rare; they didn't appear in many schools for example (except maybe for teachers), where it was more common for students to use cheap dip pens and ink pots, and then later pencils.
Part of the confusion may also stem from the fact that as metal nibs became common, people started making dip pens using feathers for the handle; but these weren't truly quills, and most wouldn't have used the hollow in the quill to store any useful amount of ink, because the nibs wouldn't have been made to fit properly, you'd just cut the end off and crimp the metal nib on and call it a day. It was more for the style, and proper quills would have become more of a luxury item made by specialists.
Pretty sure I already covered this, but I'm not convinced everyone fully understands what a quill is, which isn't much use in a discussion about a Wizardly Quill. But the only really important bit is that all (proper) quills produce ink, if they didn't you could just as easily use a wooden stick.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
This is entirely false. I have continuously quoted and referred directly to what the feature actually says. YOU are both arguing for functionality that is NOT listed in the feature.
What?? LOL. That is not how logic works! It is exactly the opposite! It is YOU both who are making the large assumptions that this particular magic quill called a Tiny quill even has a reservoir at all and that you can put your own ink into it. The feature does NOT say this! You can't say that something which is not written is the default and that to instead only use the words that are written is the assumption! That's . . . preposterous?
First of all, this magic quill is NOT an ordinary quill so you are making an assumption that they have certain things in common. Second of all, an ordinary quill does NOT produce ink. In an ordinary quill, ink is loaded into the reservoir. From there, it flows to the tip by capillary action. This magic quill does not require ink. When you write with it, it produces ink in any color. Third, in fact the feature DOES state that the quill "uncontrollably" creates ink. WHEN you write with it, it [ ALWAYS ] produces ink in any color. Every time. Whether you want it to or not. It says so right there in the first bullet point of the feature:
That's not how the rules work. The feature tells you what it CAN do. It doesn't require ink -- it produces ink when you write with it. There are a ton of things that it can't do. It also can't fly and it can't shoot fireballs. It is not the feature's job to list all of the things that cannot be done. The rule of thumb is that things do what they say they do and only what they say they do.
Yes, the word "quill" is used in the feature. But this is very specifically a particular magic quill called a Tiny quill that may or may not function like an ordinary quill. We might also speak about a magic car that doesn't require gas. Can it still use gas? Maybe, or maybe not. Perhaps some can and some cannot. Assuming that it can is a bad assumption. We might also speak about a magic human that doesn't require food. Or a tire that doesn't require air. And so on.
YOU are making the poor assumption that the item CAN function in a way that is not specified. This is a poor assumption that is not supported by the text.
False. When using an ordinary quill, ink is loaded into the reservoir from the outside. Then, from there, it flows to the tip by capillary action.
Again, it's not the feature's job to list all of the things that cannot be done with it. But the feature does NOT say that it CAN operate this way. Features only do what they say. The feature says that the quill does not require ink. Assuming that it can function is some other way is not supported by the text.
I agree with this completely. This was your best case scenario. It is a much more correct interpretation that only one ink is produced -- the one that is mentioned in the text:
Yes!! I agree!!! Yey, we agree on something!
This is 100% false. There are tons and tons of examples of rules in 5e that are incomplete or unclear or spread out across multiple portions of the text and that doesn't make these rules any less valid. To pick an example out of the air -- the Rules for Hiding. In order for anyone to really understand what is going on with the Rules for Hiding in D&D 5e they have to become familiar with many different game concepts located in at least 3 different Chapters and 6 or 7 unique sections within those Chapters of the PHB to even begin to put together a meaningful interpretation that follows the RAW. And that's not including what might be also mentioned in the DMG and other source books on that subject. If you told someone, "Ok, here is what the book says about the Hide action: 'Hide -- When you take the Hide action, you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check in an attempt to hide, following the rules for hiding. If you succeed, you gain certain benefits, as described in the "Unseen Attackers and Targets" section later in this section.' . . . but no! You cannot flip to any other pages! The moment you have to pore through other sections the argument is no longer Rules as Written!" Well, honestly such a statement would be mocked.
No. That's not how these forums work. You take a look at all of the relevant text and draw conclusions from the totality of the information available.
And how do you propose this Wizard accomplishes this within your game logistically speaking under your interpretation? If you are in a dungeon somewhere and "searching the room", to whom are you paying the 50 gp? Do you pause the game and hover your mouse over a menu and click the "Pay Now" button and have 50 gp removed from the character sheet with a little sound effect while your new spell is copied? How are you describing the experimentation that normally takes 1 hour to accomplish and now all of the same materials are expended in less than 2 minutes? Where and how is he even buying those materials that he is using for that experimentation? Apparently we need separate ink as well -- where is that coming from? What if that Wizard had enough gold for the first spell that he finds, copies that spell in 2 minutes, then immediately finds another spell and doesn't have enough money? Now he . . . can't do the thing that he just did while in this dungeon?
As a reminder, let's take a look at the description for this type of Wizard:
and then right after this, in the first listed Class Feature, a method of accomplishing this mission is detailed:
This is THE primary mission for this type of Wizard and as you have said it is meant to be done quickly, on the fly, while exploring the dungeon while everybody else is still searching the rest of the room. So . . . who are we paying this money to again? You seem to be missing the whole point of this subclass.
Absolutely not. No one is asking for anything that isn't explicitly specified in the text.
A default rule exists and is unchanged.
The Feature provides certain benefits and creates a situation whereby the DM must arbitrate and provide a ruling given the situation and the rule.
If the DM determines that the Feature provides the ink and bypasses the experimentation based on the facts that the quill doesn't require ink and it produces ink when writing with it AND that the entire process of (1 hour) experimentation and (1 hour) transcription now takes only a total of 2 minutes -- then the most correct ruling that a DM can make for that given situation is that the material cost for this process in this situation is 0 gp and the total time spent is 2 minutes (per level).
All quills have reservoirs in them, because they're hollow, that's why quills were used for writing. Please refer to the post I made half an hour before yours, and this earlier post I made two weeks previously (which you should remember, since you claim to have read the entire thread).
Maybe once we all understand what a quill is we can actually talk about the subject properly without going in further circles. Because all (actual) quills produce (bring forth) ink from a reservoir (hollow), if they didn't they'd be no better than using a sharpened stick to scrape ink onto the page.
Feel free to give a direct quote of where exactly it says in the Wizardly Quill rules that it reduces or eliminates the gold cost of copying spells; I'm sure somehow half a dozen people pointing that it doesn't say this have all somehow missed it, right? 🤔
You claim we agree that rules only normally do what they say they do, and yet you've been really struggling to show where it says what you claim it does without going off into entirely different parts of the rules. Either the Wizardly Quill rule tells us it reduces or eliminates the cost, or it doesn't.
Because another thing I've pointed out for what feels like the millionth time (and has been conspicuously ignored every time) is that the UA version of this sub-class specifically included a reduced cost for copying spells; that text is very noticeably absent from the final version of the feature.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Rest assured that the folks who have made it this far into this discussion all have a basic understanding of how a mundane quill functions.
I actually haven't struggled with that task at all. I'll try to quickly summarize with a Cliff's Notes style version:
The rule:
Key takeaways:
Deciphering + practice / experimentation requires "material components" = 1 hour, 40 gp.
Transcribing requires "fine inks" = 1 hour, 10 gp.
The Feature:
Now, the entire process (Deciphering + practice / experimentation + transcribing) takes 2 minutes. The only way that this makes any sense is if the practice / experimentation is no longer required since that has nothing to do with the transcribing process and normally takes 1 hour. The Feature implicitly (but not explicitly) creates this situation. Also, the ink is provided by the Feature.
With all of this information, the DM now makes a ruling. Since there is no need to purchase "material components" or "fine inks" in this situation, the cost is 0 gp.
Whatever the UA version of the Feature may or may not have said is irrelevant.
Two incredibly glaring assumptions there.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
And yet part of your argument hinges on quills either not being able to contain ink, or not being able to produce ink, both of which they do.
That's just three quick possibilities that prove that the assumption that experimentation and resource consumption must be impossible, is a false assumption. I'm pretty sure if I put my mind to it I can think of plenty more. And before you say it; no I'm not assuming any of these is how it works, what it comes down to is that the feature says it takes 2 minutes with the Wizardly Quill, and mechanically that's all we need to know, because that's the only part that it changes.
And this still really doesn't take us away from the simple fact that if the quill made copying free, then it should say so, because all you've really succeeded in showing is that if, in the unlikely event it were the intention for copying to be free, that the rules for that are not nearly accessible or obvious enough for that to be the case without the feature explicitly saying so.
But again, in RAW the simplest interpretation is almost always the correct one, because adding more and more steps invariably means making assumptions, which means moving away from RAW.
It's entirely relevant because what your conclusion requires is text that doesn't exist; actually worse, it did exist and now very specifically does not. This gives us clarity on Rules As Intended, because if they wanted a reduction in cost to be a feature in the final sub-class, then they would not have removed that part of the text.
The fact that they did remove it gives far more weight to the case that full cost is the intended behaviour over zero cost being the intended behaviour. That and the fact that zero cost is unbalanced, because if the time and gold cost of copying is supposed to limit how much of it you can do, then massively reducing the time for all schools of magic is already a big bonus, and eliminating the gold cost as well effectively makes it free to do, which is near infinitely better than any other comparable feature (of which we have eight).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Well, I wouldn't call these "glaring assumptions". These are just logical conclusions based on the information that we have to work with. Yes, some of it is implicit instead of fully spelled out in a redundant manner but it's all there if you just follow the thought process all the way through.
Your Point 1: Yes, in a sense this is a bit of an assumption. This is why I also originally offered a "second best" interpretation that assumes that we must still do all of the same deciphering, practicing and experimentation and use up all of the same material components while doing so, but that all of this now takes some fraction of 2 minutes instead of 1 hour. And yes, narratively that doesn't make any sense at all -- there's no other good way of saying that. But under that interpretation the entire process takes 2 minutes and costs 40 gp.
As for the idea of writing 30+ times faster than a normal Wizard -- that actually does make sense to me:
My own flavor for how this could be explained: Normally the Wizard sits in a safe laboratory setting during downtime. He opens the "source code" and begins to decipher it. After attempting to decipher some small portion of it, he performs some laboratory experiments and practices some vocal inflections and gestures that he thinks might be involved in the final spell. The results of these experiments will tell him if he has interpreted this portion of the code correctly. If so, he then begins to slowly and carefully write very precise and exact markings "in his own notation (code)" along with any necessary (encoded) notes. This type of writing is probably slow and laborious and detail oriented.
However, if we are holding onto a magic quill, we can just think in our mind what the final markings should look like and the quill flies across the page as fast as our hand is physically capable of moving.
In the case of my main interpretation where the experimentation is no longer needed -- again it's because we have a magic quill. We can simply look at the source code and without even deciphering it or experimenting to make sure that we've correctly deciphered it, the quill knows what it says and how to rewrite that code "into our own notation". Because it's magic. It's a magic quill, it's awesome. We are looking at the source and are mentally deciding to "write that spell in my own notation" and then the quill just pulls on our hand and carries it across the page.
Because the entire point and the primary mission of this subclass is to be able to do this on the fly while dungeon crawling -- this flavor fits. Otherwise, how would you do it?
If instead we still want to enforce the rule of buying the fine inks and buying the material components for experimentation, then we have to imagine that there will happen to be a peddler selling exactly what we need located in this dungeon at exactly the time and the place that we need him to be there. We purchase all of this stuff, then we set up a makeshift laboratory. We proceed to decipher the source, run the experiments and write down the spell. Then we break down the laboratory and stuff all of the components and equipment into our backpacks and wave good-bye to the friendly dungeon delving shop owner -- all in less than 2 minutes. To me, that is a lot more immersion breaking and makes a lot less sense.
Your Point 2: Yes, this is pretty much the entire point of this feature existing and is the primary mission of this subclass. The quill provides the ink. I wouldn't really call this an assumption either -- it's spelled out as well as could be expected in the text for the Feature.
As pointed out before, the Ink item in the list of Adventuring Gear items costs 10 gp. In my opinion there is almost no way that this is a coincidence -- you are meant to use this ink to scribe your spells. It's a shame that the author made the artistic decision to say "fine ink" instead of just "ink" in the rule, thus leading to somewhat silly debates like this, but in my opinion this Ink is good enough and the Ink produced by the quill is also good enough. If your games have yet another type of ink that you'd have to find at another type of store then that's great. The rules are just not detailed enough to determine which way is the "right" way.
Let's all keep in mind that every D&D game is different anyway and every DM is going to run things differently. Heck, there are a ton of DMs that simply will not allow anything from Tasha's to exist in their world -- which would make this entire discussion moot anyway.
Many DMs allow the purchase of generic "spell scribin' stuff" at shops. If you necessitate the possibility of scribing spells in dungeons, you could just make that available to your players. Otherwise, I suppose they're probably not going to be able to scribe things in dungeons.
If you're using an entire damn ounce of ink to scribe a first level spell, you're basically just covering your whole spellbook in the stuff. If it's so difficult for you to believe that the number 10 could possibly appear twice in the rules without a deliberate correlation decided on by the developers, then I have no idea what to tell you. You might as well just claim that you can use any of these to scribe spells. This is such a bizarre point, I'm genuinely not sure how to respond to it.
Your assumption that the phrase "fine ink" means absolutely any ink you can get your hands on is another big leap in logic. It wasn't an "artistic decision" to include the word "fine," it was done to separate the stuff that's 10 gp per level of a spell (a number which, I'll point out, comes from another assumption on your part) from the stuff that's 10 gp for basically a lifetime's supply. 1 ounce isn't just an amorphous game term, you know. It's an amount of ink that can actually be measured and used.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)