You have quoted many rules that are not germane to the question.
What language are spellbooks written in?
I think the discussion has basically moved on by now. The answer to your question is "n/a." A character can be a Wizard and have a spellbook regardless of what languages he knows, and can use the spellbooks of other Wizards regardless of the languages those Wizards know. And it doesn't require him to know Comprehend Languages. As far as I'm aware, there's no way to make a character who doesn't know any languages -- every race gets Common by default, I'm pretty sure, so the easy demonstration of "I have no languages at all, but I have a spellbook" doesn't actually exist -- but there are NPC Wizards who don't know Common, like the drow mage. So spellbooks aren't written in Common.
Taking those points together (1. Wizards can understand each other's spellbooks even if they don't share a language, and 2. The Common tongue, usually used to bridge these gaps, doesn't explain the first point), I think we can say that spellbooks aren't written in any language.
I would like to know how a Ritual Book is substantially different from a Spellbook.
Do you assert that a player could read a Ritual Book and thereby have some chance at casting a ritual spell, but be unable to do the same spell from a spellbook?
I don't see this notation as anything other than a Ritual Book contains only spells that are able to be cast as rituals. It doesn't make the nature of the book substantively different from a spellbook in this regard.
It is different in the sense that they're different named game element that serve different purposes. Spellbooks are essential to wizards, which are used to record wizard spells you know that can also be cast as a ritual if it has the ritual tag and you have the spell in your spellbook. You don’t even need to have the spell prepared. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can also add it to your spellbook. You can copy a spell from your own spellbook into another spellbook as well. If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook.
As for ritual book used by Ritual Casters, it contains spells that you can cast as rituals as well, which you must have in hand while casting one of them, while a spellbook you don't have to. Also the ritual spells are not wizard spells necessarily, they can also be bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer or warlock.
Where they become more similar is when if you come across a spell in written form, such as a magical spell scroll or a wizard's spellbook, you might be able to add it to your ritual book. The spell must be on the spell list for the class you chose, the spell's level can be no higher than half your level (rounded up), and it must have the ritual tag.
Where the opposite might not be possible. If you're a wizard with a spellbook, and find a ritual book containing non-wizard spells, you will not be able to copy them in your spellbook.
Because ritual book and spellbook are two different things mechanically speaking.
We don't know whether the difference is in the ritual book or the ritual caster.
If a non-wizard character had the ritual caster feat then, yes, they can only cast the ritual from the book. If that character then became a wizard, could they then prepare the spell from their ritual book? The content of RAW does not tell us. Personally, I don't see a reason to say they couldn't. Others may rule differently.
Where is a ritual book referred to other than in Ritual Caster?
If a Ritual Caster multiclass Wizard, he'd have a ritual book, which he use to cast whatever rituals it contains while in hands, and a spellbook, which he can prepare spells from and cast ritual without even preparing them or needing the book in hand. He could also copy wizard spells contain in his ritual book into his spellbook in order to cast it normally as well.
Nowhere.
That's one interpretation and if you want to work it that way, you do you. For all I know. the differences between ritual spellbooks and other spellbooks may just cover inconsequential criteria such as size. The ritual caster has spells and "these spells are written in a ritual book" a book written with spells.
I guess the question is what changes if the ritual caster belatedly becomes a wizard. Does their notation change and develop or do they get better at using it. A standard spellbook as found in the equipment listings contains 100 pages while a ritual spellbook contains presumable enough space to contain, say, all 22 ritual spells on the wizard spell list. (A 12th level wizard can prepare 6th level spells while any 12 level ritual caster can write and use them). So what happens when a wizard finds a ritual spell and writes it in their ritual spellbook. Can she prepare that spell and commit it to memory? I'd adjudicate that she could.
I would like to know how a Ritual Book is substantially different from a Spellbook.
Do you assert that a player could read a Ritual Book and thereby have some chance at casting a ritual spell, but be unable to do the same spell from a spellbook?
I don't see this notation as anything other than a Ritual Book contains only spells that are able to be cast as rituals. It doesn't make the nature of the book substantively different from a spellbook in this regard.
It is different in the sense that they're different named game element that serve different purposes. Spellbooks are essential to wizards, which are used to record wizard spells you know that can also be cast as a ritual if it has the ritual tag and you have the spell in your spellbook. You don’t even need to have the spell prepared. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can also add it to your spellbook. You can copy a spell from your own spellbook into another spellbook as well. If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook.
As for ritual book used by Ritual Casters, it contains spells that you can cast as rituals as well, which you must have in hand while casting one of them, while a spellbook you don't have to. Also the ritual spells are not wizard spells necessarily, they can also be bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer or warlock.
Where they become more similar is when if you come across a spell in written form, such as a magical spell scroll or a wizard's spellbook, you might be able to add it to your ritual book. The spell must be on the spell list for the class you chose, the spell's level can be no higher than half your level (rounded up), and it must have the ritual tag.
Where the opposite might not be possible. If you're a wizard with a spellbook, and find a ritual book containing non-wizard spells, you will not be able to copy them in your spellbook.
Because ritual book and spellbook are two different things mechanically speaking.
We don't know whether the difference is in the ritual book or the ritual caster.
If a non-wizard character had the ritual caster feat then, yes, they can only cast the ritual from the book. If that character then became a wizard, could they then prepare the spell from their ritual book? The content of RAW does not tell us. Personally, I don't see a reason to say they couldn't. Others may rule differently.
Where is a ritual book referred to other than in Ritual Caster?
If a Ritual Caster multiclass Wizard, he'd have a ritual book, which he use to cast whatever rituals it contains while in hands, and a spellbook, which he can prepare spells from and cast ritual without even preparing them or needing the book in hand. He could also copy wizard spells contain in his ritual book into his spellbook in order to cast it normally as well.
Nowhere.
That's one interpretation and if you want to work it that way, you do you. For all I know. the differences between ritual spellbooks and other spellbooks may just cover inconsequential criteria such as size. The ritual caster has spells and "these spells are written in a ritual book" a book written with spells.
I guess the question is what changes if the ritual caster belatedly becomes a wizard. Does their notation change and develop or do they get better at using it. A standard spellbook as found in the equipment listings contains 100 pages while a ritual spellbook contains presumable enough space to contain, say, all 22 ritual spells on the wizard spell list. (A 12th level wizard can prepare 6th level spells while any 12 level ritual caster can write and use them). So what happens when a wizard finds a ritual spell and writes it in their ritual spellbook. Can she prepare that spell and commit it to memory? I'd adjudicate that she could.
As for what happens when a ritual caster becomes a Wizard... no joke, when my Arcane Trickster Rogue with Ritual Caster (Wizard) feat took a level of Wizard, I had her reading her book to cast Detect Magic, find it was oddly "making more sense", and finish the casting in 1 minute (the time it takes to prepare a 1st-level spell), which meant she had the spell prepared (and used a slot for the casting.)
After that, she was able to copy non-ritual 1st-level spells into her book. (Mind you, before that point I'd upgraded the ritual book to an Enduring Spellbook.) She could also still write new higher-level ritual spells into the book as per the feat. Very convenient. I had the 6 free spells Wizards get at first level come from a night school crash course at a wizard academy :D I could only Prepare spells based on my Wizard levels, so just 1st-level spells; I needed to ritual-cast anything higher level.
I would like to know how a Ritual Book is substantially different from a Spellbook.
Do you assert that a player could read a Ritual Book and thereby have some chance at casting a ritual spell, but be unable to do the same spell from a spellbook?
I don't see this notation as anything other than a Ritual Book contains only spells that are able to be cast as rituals. It doesn't make the nature of the book substantively different from a spellbook in this regard.
It is different in the sense that they're different named game element that serve different purposes. Spellbooks are essential to wizards, which are used to record wizard spells you know that can also be cast as a ritual if it has the ritual tag and you have the spell in your spellbook. You don’t even need to have the spell prepared. When you find a wizard spell of 1st level or higher, you can also add it to your spellbook. You can copy a spell from your own spellbook into another spellbook as well. If you lose your spellbook, you can use the same procedure to transcribe the spells that you have prepared into a new spellbook.
As for ritual book used by Ritual Casters, it contains spells that you can cast as rituals as well, which you must have in hand while casting one of them, while a spellbook you don't have to. Also the ritual spells are not wizard spells necessarily, they can also be bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer or warlock.
Where they become more similar is when if you come across a spell in written form, such as a magical spell scroll or a wizard's spellbook, you might be able to add it to your ritual book. The spell must be on the spell list for the class you chose, the spell's level can be no higher than half your level (rounded up), and it must have the ritual tag.
Where the opposite might not be possible. If you're a wizard with a spellbook, and find a ritual book containing non-wizard spells, you will not be able to copy them in your spellbook.
Because ritual book and spellbook are two different things mechanically speaking.
We don't know whether the difference is in the ritual book or the ritual caster.
If a non-wizard character had the ritual caster feat then, yes, they can only cast the ritual from the book. If that character then became a wizard, could they then prepare the spell from their ritual book? The content of RAW does not tell us. Personally, I don't see a reason to say they couldn't. Others may rule differently.
Where is a ritual book referred to other than in Ritual Caster?
If a Ritual Caster multiclass Wizard, he'd have a ritual book, which he use to cast whatever rituals it contains while in hands, and a spellbook, which he can prepare spells from and cast ritual without even preparing them or needing the book in hand. He could also copy wizard spells contain in his ritual book into his spellbook in order to cast it normally as well.
Nowhere.
That's one interpretation and if you want to work it that way, you do you. For all I know. the differences between ritual spellbooks and other spellbooks may just cover inconsequential criteria such as size. The ritual caster has spells and "these spells are written in a ritual book" a book written with spells.
I guess the question is what changes if the ritual caster belatedly becomes a wizard. Does their notation change and develop or do they get better at using it. A standard spellbook as found in the equipment listings contains 100 pages while a ritual spellbook contains presumable enough space to contain, say, all 22 ritual spells on the wizard spell list. (A 12th level wizard can prepare 6th level spells while any 12 level ritual caster can write and use them). So what happens when a wizard finds a ritual spell and writes it in their ritual spellbook. Can she prepare that spell and commit it to memory? I'd adjudicate that she could.
As for what happens when a ritual caster becomes a Wizard... no joke, when my Arcane Trickster Rogue with Ritual Caster (Wizard) feat took a level of Wizard, I had her reading her book to cast Detect Magic, find it was oddly "making more sense", and finish the casting in 1 minute (the time it takes to prepare a 1st-level spell), which meant she had the spell prepared (and used a slot for the casting.)
After that, she was able to copy non-ritual 1st-level spells into her book. (Mind you, before that point I'd upgraded the ritual book to an Enduring Spellbook.) She could also still write new higher-level ritual spells into the book as per the feat. Very convenient. I had the 6 free spells Wizards get at first level come from a night school crash course at a wizard academy :D I could only Prepare spells based on my Wizard levels, so just 1st-level spells; I needed to ritual-cast anything higher level.
You can cast a wizard spell as a ritual if that spell has the ritual tag and you have the spell in your spellbook. You don’t need to have the spell prepared.
It's not explicitly stated but, for me, the most sensible and thematic fit would be that a wizard might, at least, find it helpful to keep book reference handy for not memorised, unprepared spells.
Further, the way I handled the switch from "ritual book" to "spellbook" on DDB was by adding all the 1st-level ritual spells I had in my Ritual Caster feat to my Wizard class spellbook via Manage Spells, then removing all the 1st-level spells from the feat (including the 2 free ones) to get rid of the redundancy. If I'd gotten to the point where I had 3 Wizard levels, I'd have moved any Ritual Caster 2nd-level spells to my Wizard spellbook and removed them from the feat, and so on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think the discussion has basically moved on by now. The answer to your question is "n/a." A character can be a Wizard and have a spellbook regardless of what languages he knows, and can use the spellbooks of other Wizards regardless of the languages those Wizards know. And it doesn't require him to know Comprehend Languages. As far as I'm aware, there's no way to make a character who doesn't know any languages -- every race gets Common by default, I'm pretty sure, so the easy demonstration of "I have no languages at all, but I have a spellbook" doesn't actually exist -- but there are NPC Wizards who don't know Common, like the drow mage. So spellbooks aren't written in Common.
Taking those points together (1. Wizards can understand each other's spellbooks even if they don't share a language, and 2. The Common tongue, usually used to bridge these gaps, doesn't explain the first point), I think we can say that spellbooks aren't written in any language.
Your mileage may vary, but Bard's Spellcasting feature doesn't include the Spellbook feature like wizards use.
Nowhere.
That's one interpretation and if you want to work it that way, you do you. For all I know. the differences between ritual spellbooks and other spellbooks may just cover inconsequential criteria such as size. The ritual caster has spells and "these spells are written in a ritual book" a book written with spells.
I guess the question is what changes if the ritual caster belatedly becomes a wizard. Does their notation change and develop or do they get better at using it. A standard spellbook as found in the equipment listings contains 100 pages while a ritual spellbook contains presumable enough space to contain, say, all 22 ritual spells on the wizard spell list. (A 12th level wizard can prepare 6th level spells while any 12 level ritual caster can write and use them). So what happens when a wizard finds a ritual spell and writes it in their ritual spellbook. Can she prepare that spell and commit it to memory? I'd adjudicate that she could.
With the Warlock invocation Book of Ancient Secrets you essentially have a ritual book.
As for what happens when a ritual caster becomes a Wizard... no joke, when my Arcane Trickster Rogue with Ritual Caster (Wizard) feat took a level of Wizard, I had her reading her book to cast Detect Magic, find it was oddly "making more sense", and finish the casting in 1 minute (the time it takes to prepare a 1st-level spell), which meant she had the spell prepared (and used a slot for the casting.)
After that, she was able to copy non-ritual 1st-level spells into her book. (Mind you, before that point I'd upgraded the ritual book to an Enduring Spellbook.) She could also still write new higher-level ritual spells into the book as per the feat. Very convenient. I had the 6 free spells Wizards get at first level come from a night school crash course at a wizard academy :D I could only Prepare spells based on my Wizard levels, so just 1st-level spells; I needed to ritual-cast anything higher level.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
Awesome. That sounds perfect.
Perhaps similarly, wizard#ClassFeatures says:
Ritual Casting
You can cast a wizard spell as a ritual if that spell has the ritual tag and you have the spell in your spellbook. You don’t need to have the spell prepared.
It's not explicitly stated but, for me, the most sensible and thematic fit would be that a wizard might, at least, find it helpful to keep book reference handy for not memorised, unprepared spells.
Further, the way I handled the switch from "ritual book" to "spellbook" on DDB was by adding all the 1st-level ritual spells I had in my Ritual Caster feat to my Wizard class spellbook via Manage Spells, then removing all the 1st-level spells from the feat (including the 2 free ones) to get rid of the redundancy. If I'd gotten to the point where I had 3 Wizard levels, I'd have moved any Ritual Caster 2nd-level spells to my Wizard spellbook and removed them from the feat, and so on.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)