Copying and scribing are optional in the practical sense, particularly scribing. Players have no control over what spell formulae they find, it’s purely up to the DM to choose to award them. And, again, my point is that scribing is not something you do in the middle of an active adventure, it’s something you do in the downtime between arcs. Your 89 hours are less than 6 16 hour days of behind the black work, which is a pretty reasonable amount of downtime if you’re not in the middle of a “save the kingdom/world” plot. And the gold doesn’t seem that extreme for tier 3.
Copying was even more niche when it was written, because unless your DM actively chooses to go after your spellbook then it did absolutely nothing. The magic books have made it a bit more relevant for people who want to consolidate everything, but again the time and cost are not actually severe in a larger scale campaign, and in the short term the benefit of consolidation is minimal- the pre-loaded spells in the book are all of the relevant school for the swapping feature, and nothing else is dependent on actually having the spells in the book, making consolidation a matter of personal aesthetic preference more than mechanical value.
Well the rules are a fairly broad set designed to impart a flexible standard for the majority of games.
DM/GM’s have great latitude in adjusting and adapting the rules to suit their tastes of game they wish to present.
For spellbook backup and for switching to a new better book, if I’m running a short adventure, previous spells known and prepared take 10min per spell level, and 1Gp worth of fine ink to manage the work of backups, and preparing the new found spellbook for personal use.
if players are slick, looting for fine ink off dead wizard types, buying it bulk at discount when possible, and other such things that reduce the gold-2-power curve, depending on the game mode, who am I as a DM IMHO to punish the player for creative thinking.
but that’s my two copper on this, and ultimately it’s the discussion between player and DM/Gm as to specifics that can be improved for better gameplay.
I mean, like I said there’s very little reason to transfer your entire repertoire to a new book, mechanically speaking; really the only things worth transferring are spells of the relevant school for the books that let you swap them in mid-day. Honestly if you’re doing a one-shot or similarly brief adventure, I’d suggest spell scrolls as loot over ordinary spellbooks; lets the players get a bit more punch and has fewer hoops.
Copying and scribing are optional in the practical sense, particularly scribing. Players have no control over what spell formulae they find, it’s purely up to the DM to choose to award them. And, again, my point is that scribing is not something you do in the middle of an active adventure, it’s something you do in the downtime between arcs. Your 89 hours are less than 6 16 hour days of behind the black work, which is a pretty reasonable amount of downtime if you’re not in the middle of a “save the kingdom/world” plot. And the gold doesn’t seem that extreme for tier 3.
Copying was even more niche when it was written, because unless your DM actively chooses to go after your spellbook then it did absolutely nothing. The magic books have made it a bit more relevant for people who want to consolidate everything, but again the time and cost are not actually severe in a larger scale campaign, and in the short term the benefit of consolidation is minimal- the pre-loaded spells in the book are all of the relevant school for the swapping feature, and nothing else is dependent on actually having the spells in the book, making consolidation a matter of personal aesthetic preference more than mechanical value.
Are you saying that Wizards preparing from multiple spellbooks is supported by RAW? If not, then consolidation is definitely needed for many magic spellbooks if you go by RAW.
I get that it's fairly easy to ask your GM to be lenient in these cases - but I feel like the RAW interpretation is that you can only prepare spells from "your spellbook", meaning singular. This has not changed in the UA7 version, where they could easily have accounted for magic spellbooks and/or the use of multiple spellbooks. I still hope they will for PHB 2024.
It seems like a lot of this discussion is mixing flavor and mechanics. Mechanically, there are a list of spells that a wizard can prepare that is made up of 6 spells at 1st level plus two more for each wizard level above that plus whatever spells you find and spend money and time to add to your list. That is what the rules refer to as your spellbook.
Then there is the actual flavor book thing, the place your character keeps those spells. That can take any form, be it a star chart, a pile of pages, a stack of books, a stick with some markings carved into it, or whatever. Outside of the game, that is that page of the character sheet where you write down the spells you've learned and then mark off which you have prepared.
But the spells you prepare have to come from that list of found and added spells or spells gained on leveling. So finding a spell book doesn't do anything to that list except give the opportunity to spend money and time.
Additional note: Even the spellbook magic items don't tell you that the spells found inside are automatically added to your list, implying that you still have to spend money and time to learn them.
@Wolf: So what is your interpretation to my question: Is it supported by RAW that a Wizard can prepare spells from multiple spellbooks?
I think I get your point that "your spellbook" is intended to mean your sheet of spells that you know on your character sheet - however the game specifically have spellbooks as an item (even the regular, not just magical), it can be destroyed, the rules suggest the wisdom in keeping a backup - so there's a mix of terms if you interpret it as two different things.
Additionally items specifically states if you can use it as a spellbook - like the Crystalline Chronicle. So there's very distinct requirements for an item to be your spellbook - as per RAW.
If your spellbook is destroyed or you lose it - through a gust of wind, confiscated when jailed, or just plain old stolen - you lose the ability to prepare spells from that spellbook. Thus it is important to keep track of which spells are in there if you happen to have multiple spellbook items. The confusing part is that the rules in the PHB 2014 AND in the UA7 for PHB 2024 both only notes you prepare spells from "your spellbook" while the devs could easily have chosen to clarify that you can utilize multiple sources or specify singular in the UA7. The lack of clarification is either a sign that it wasn't a major concern (likely) or that they consider the wording sufficient (also quite possible).
As for found spellbooks with a set list of spells: I agree, you have to learn those spells unless the item specifically says you know them (often while attuned to the item).
"The Book’s Appearance. Your spellbook is a unique compilation of spells, with its own decorative flourishes and margin notes. It might be a plain, functional leather volume that you received as a gift from your master, a finely bound gilt-edged tome you found in an ancient library, or even a loose collection of notes scrounged together after you lost your previous spellbook in a mishap."
The sidebar on your spellbook certainly says that it doesn't need to be a single item. How your group deals with losing parts of it would be highly group dependent, I think. Then again, any group who actually thinks taking a wizard's spellbook away is OK is probably a group I wouldn't want to play in, even though the rules say it can happen. Without a spellbook, a wizard is practically just a worse sorcerer.
It’s an interesting challenge, narratively speaking, and you should still have an array roughly equal to a sorcerer’s in terms of spells known. Probably best for the DM to get a greenlight if it’s not part of a general “your party has been captured” scenario.
Quick note, rules in regards to spellbooks refer to a wizards spell book, for purposes of balance, in the singular.
How that tome of knowledge is represented by the DM is of course their prerogative.
A wizard can have multiple spell books, but only one at a time can be classified as the wizards main book, and others as backups.
DM’s could also rule the method a wizard uses to encode their spells in a book that is cracked by a different wizard stays the same, and the new wizard improves or retains the same mechanics of encoding so as to make the possibility that the book, if passed around like a hot potato and possibly end up back in the hands of it’s original owner, isn’t immediately a very bad idea.
When characters are in the field, what wizard wouldn’t want to lug a library around, but when in a life or death situation less is better.
See, it happened again. Your spellbook is your collection of recorded spells, yet people confuse a singular book in the game world with that collection. Even though the rules literally tell you that the collection doesn't need to be in a singular book within the game..
There’s no mechanical classification difference between a “main” spellbook and a “backup”; the only question relevant to the class features is whether or not you have the book at hand at the moment when a feature refers to it. If you have two separate spellbooks in your possession, you may prepare any spells from them that you have acquired, either through class progression or through expending the time and materials required to scribe a spell found during the campaign.
There’s no mechanical classification difference between a “main” spellbook and a “backup”; the only question relevant to the class features is whether or not you have the book at hand at the moment when a feature refers to it. If you have two separate spellbooks in your possession, you may prepare any spells from them that you have acquired, either through class progression or through expending the time and materials required to scribe a spell found during the campaign.
Ah, so if a wizard has say three different TCoE wizard spell books all attuned and several such spells prepared from the former books, which book is used when casting the spell? If your wizard is holding all three books, how can they complete any of the somantic components of spells? ( sure quick object interaction allows swaps, but that makes for more possibilities of grabbing the wrong book unless one is well aware during a critical moment )
Sure, pulling spells from multiple sources in preparation is possible ( DM fiat of course ), but rules say “You prepare the list of wizard spells that are available for you to cast. To do so, choose a number of wizard spells from your spellbook” ( note spellbook is singular, no s attached, and a good chunk of the rules refer to a single book. Thus the implied mechanics simplify that should something happen to that primary book, the wizard was smart enough to have a quick backup, tucked away till needed and hopefully kept updated and ready to use. )
Nothing in the rules say all those spellbooks a wizard ether finds, or takes ( howerever the means ) could not be used to make several backups, only that one copy of those backups can be use at any given time.
All of those TCoE spellbooks require you to hold them to gain the benefits (including the arcane grimiore and the scribes wizard's awakened spellbook - which can be transferred to a magic spellbook).... so.... whichever you are holding?
There’s no mechanical classification difference between a “main” spellbook and a “backup”; the only question relevant to the class features is whether or not you have the book at hand at the moment when a feature refers to it. If you have two separate spellbooks in your possession, you may prepare any spells from them that you have acquired, either through class progression or through expending the time and materials required to scribe a spell found during the campaign.
Ah, so if a wizard has say three different TCoE wizard spell books all attuned and several such spells prepared from the former books, which book is used when casting the spell? If your wizard is holding all three books, how can they complete any of the somantic components of spells? ( sure quick object interaction allows swaps, but that makes for more possibilities of grabbing the wrong book unless one is well aware during a critical moment )
Sure, pulling spells from multiple sources in preparation is possible ( DM fiat of course ), but rules say “You prepare the list of wizard spells that are available for you to cast. To do so, choose a number of wizard spells from your spellbook” ( note spellbook is singular, no s attached, and a good chunk of the rules refer to a single book. Thus the implied mechanics simplify that should something happen to that primary book, the wizard was smart enough to have a quick backup, tucked away till needed and hopefully kept updated and ready to use. )
Nothing in the rules say all those spellbooks a wizard ether finds, or takes ( howerever the means ) could not be used to make several backups, only that one copy of those backups can be use at any given time.
What rule specifies that a single book must be used, particularly when we keep in mind that at the time of writing the feature there were no items like the Tasha’s books to tie features to a specific item? And, regarding the Tasha’s books, technically you can make S components if the spell also has an M, since they can all be used as foci. There’s no restriction on what spell you can cast using any of them as the focus, only what secondary features inherent to the book can be used. Granted, you would be restricted in what spells you could swap in with their feature, but with the school restriction you can easily get by with just the preloads.
If nothing else, the lack of any language involving the designation of a “main” spellbook and the fact that various points describing potential spellbook appearances allow for the existence of extremely varied forms including leather strips wound around a staff or runestones seems to clearly indicate that the RAI does not confine one to a single contiguous item as the only source a Wizard can prepare spells from.
There’s no mechanical classification difference between a “main” spellbook and a “backup”; the only question relevant to the class features is whether or not you have the book at hand at the moment when a feature refers to it. If you have two separate spellbooks in your possession, you may prepare any spells from them that you have acquired, either through class progression or through expending the time and materials required to scribe a spell found during the campaign.
Ah, so if a wizard has say three different TCoE wizard spell books all attuned and several such spells prepared from the former books, which book is used when casting the spell? If your wizard is holding all three books, how can they complete any of the somantic components of spells? ( sure quick object interaction allows swaps, but that makes for more possibilities of grabbing the wrong book unless one is well aware during a critical moment )
Sure, pulling spells from multiple sources in preparation is possible ( DM fiat of course ), but rules say “You prepare the list of wizard spells that are available for you to cast. To do so, choose a number of wizard spells from your spellbook” ( note spellbook is singular, no s attached, and a good chunk of the rules refer to a single book. Thus the implied mechanics simplify that should something happen to that primary book, the wizard was smart enough to have a quick backup, tucked away till needed and hopefully kept updated and ready to use. )
Nothing in the rules say all those spellbooks a wizard ether finds, or takes ( howerever the means ) could not be used to make several backups, only that one copy of those backups can be use at any given time.
What rule specifies that a single book must be used, particularly when we keep in mind that at the time of writing the feature there were no items like the Tasha’s books to tie features to a specific item? And, regarding the Tasha’s books, technically you can make S components if the spell also has an M, since they can all be used as foci. There’s no restriction on what spell you can cast using any of them as the focus, only what secondary features inherent to the book can be used. Granted, you would be restricted in what spells you could swap in with their feature, but with the school restriction you can easily get by with just the preloads.
If nothing else, the lack of any language involving the designation of a “main” spellbook and the fact that various points describing potential spellbook appearances allow for the existence of extremely varied forms including leather strips wound around a staff or runestones seems to clearly indicate that the RAI does not confine one to a single contiguous item as the only source a Wizard can prepare spells from.
The DM creates a villain wizard for the players to beat and part of the treasure found is the defeated wizards spell books, several of them.
One book is charred to hell, but something says study this book and use it as a personal weapon.
For a spellbook to a wizard is like a weapon to a fighter.
There’s no mechanical classification difference between a “main” spellbook and a “backup”; the only question relevant to the class features is whether or not you have the book at hand at the moment when a feature refers to it. If you have two separate spellbooks in your possession, you may prepare any spells from them that you have acquired, either through class progression or through expending the time and materials required to scribe a spell found during the campaign.
Ah, so if a wizard has say three different TCoE wizard spell books all attuned and several such spells prepared from the former books, which book is used when casting the spell? If your wizard is holding all three books, how can they complete any of the somantic components of spells? ( sure quick object interaction allows swaps, but that makes for more possibilities of grabbing the wrong book unless one is well aware during a critical moment )
Sure, pulling spells from multiple sources in preparation is possible ( DM fiat of course ), but rules say “You prepare the list of wizard spells that are available for you to cast. To do so, choose a number of wizard spells from your spellbook” ( note spellbook is singular, no s attached, and a good chunk of the rules refer to a single book. Thus the implied mechanics simplify that should something happen to that primary book, the wizard was smart enough to have a quick backup, tucked away till needed and hopefully kept updated and ready to use. )
Nothing in the rules say all those spellbooks a wizard ether finds, or takes ( howerever the means ) could not be used to make several backups, only that one copy of those backups can be use at any given time.
What rule specifies that a single book must be used, particularly when we keep in mind that at the time of writing the feature there were no items like the Tasha’s books to tie features to a specific item? And, regarding the Tasha’s books, technically you can make S components if the spell also has an M, since they can all be used as foci. There’s no restriction on what spell you can cast using any of them as the focus, only what secondary features inherent to the book can be used. Granted, you would be restricted in what spells you could swap in with their feature, but with the school restriction you can easily get by with just the preloads.
If nothing else, the lack of any language involving the designation of a “main” spellbook and the fact that various points describing potential spellbook appearances allow for the existence of extremely varied forms including leather strips wound around a staff or runestones seems to clearly indicate that the RAI does not confine one to a single contiguous item as the only source a Wizard can prepare spells from.
The DM creates a villain wizard for the players to beat and part of the treasure found is the defeated wizards spell books, several of them.
One book is charred to hell, but something says study this book and use it as a personal weapon.
For a spellbook to a wizard is like a weapon to a fighter.
The point is ever since a “spellbook” became a thing ( however one wishes to describe the object classified as a “spellbook” ), DM’s have had means of wizards to have untold numbers of spell books all with varying levels of spells, but it takes time to learn it all.
But it shouldn’t take a lifetime to do so, small sections at a time, when possible, and before you know it, new spells to play with.
The point is ever since a “spellbook” became a thing ( however one wishes to describe the object classified as a “spellbook” ), DM’s have had means of wizards to have untold numbers of spell books all with varying levels of spells, but it takes time to learn it all.
But it shouldn’t take a lifetime to do so, small sections at a time, when possible, and before you know it, new spells to play with.
Which is literally what the current system allows for. It's easy to get a few spells a day in at the lower levels unless you're in some kind of breakneck campaign that never gives the characters downtime.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Copying and scribing are optional in the practical sense, particularly scribing. Players have no control over what spell formulae they find, it’s purely up to the DM to choose to award them. And, again, my point is that scribing is not something you do in the middle of an active adventure, it’s something you do in the downtime between arcs. Your 89 hours are less than 6 16 hour days of behind the black work, which is a pretty reasonable amount of downtime if you’re not in the middle of a “save the kingdom/world” plot. And the gold doesn’t seem that extreme for tier 3.
Copying was even more niche when it was written, because unless your DM actively chooses to go after your spellbook then it did absolutely nothing. The magic books have made it a bit more relevant for people who want to consolidate everything, but again the time and cost are not actually severe in a larger scale campaign, and in the short term the benefit of consolidation is minimal- the pre-loaded spells in the book are all of the relevant school for the swapping feature, and nothing else is dependent on actually having the spells in the book, making consolidation a matter of personal aesthetic preference more than mechanical value.
Well the rules are a fairly broad set designed to impart a flexible standard for the majority of games.
DM/GM’s have great latitude in adjusting and adapting the rules to suit their tastes of game they wish to present.
For spellbook backup and for switching to a new better book, if I’m running a short adventure, previous spells known and prepared take 10min per spell level, and 1Gp worth of fine ink to manage the work of backups, and preparing the new found spellbook for personal use.
if players are slick, looting for fine ink off dead wizard types, buying it bulk at discount when possible, and other such things that reduce the gold-2-power curve, depending on the game mode, who am I as a DM IMHO to punish the player for creative thinking.
but that’s my two copper on this, and ultimately it’s the discussion between player and DM/Gm as to specifics that can be improved for better gameplay.
I mean, like I said there’s very little reason to transfer your entire repertoire to a new book, mechanically speaking; really the only things worth transferring are spells of the relevant school for the books that let you swap them in mid-day. Honestly if you’re doing a one-shot or similarly brief adventure, I’d suggest spell scrolls as loot over ordinary spellbooks; lets the players get a bit more punch and has fewer hoops.
Are you saying that Wizards preparing from multiple spellbooks is supported by RAW? If not, then consolidation is definitely needed for many magic spellbooks if you go by RAW.
I get that it's fairly easy to ask your GM to be lenient in these cases - but I feel like the RAW interpretation is that you can only prepare spells from "your spellbook", meaning singular. This has not changed in the UA7 version, where they could easily have accounted for magic spellbooks and/or the use of multiple spellbooks. I still hope they will for PHB 2024.
It seems like a lot of this discussion is mixing flavor and mechanics. Mechanically, there are a list of spells that a wizard can prepare that is made up of 6 spells at 1st level plus two more for each wizard level above that plus whatever spells you find and spend money and time to add to your list. That is what the rules refer to as your spellbook.
Then there is the actual flavor book thing, the place your character keeps those spells. That can take any form, be it a star chart, a pile of pages, a stack of books, a stick with some markings carved into it, or whatever. Outside of the game, that is that page of the character sheet where you write down the spells you've learned and then mark off which you have prepared.
But the spells you prepare have to come from that list of found and added spells or spells gained on leveling. So finding a spell book doesn't do anything to that list except give the opportunity to spend money and time.
Additional note: Even the spellbook magic items don't tell you that the spells found inside are automatically added to your list, implying that you still have to spend money and time to learn them.
@Wolf: So what is your interpretation to my question: Is it supported by RAW that a Wizard can prepare spells from multiple spellbooks?
I think I get your point that "your spellbook" is intended to mean your sheet of spells that you know on your character sheet - however the game specifically have spellbooks as an item (even the regular, not just magical), it can be destroyed, the rules suggest the wisdom in keeping a backup - so there's a mix of terms if you interpret it as two different things.
Additionally items specifically states if you can use it as a spellbook - like the Crystalline Chronicle. So there's very distinct requirements for an item to be your spellbook - as per RAW.
If your spellbook is destroyed or you lose it - through a gust of wind, confiscated when jailed, or just plain old stolen - you lose the ability to prepare spells from that spellbook. Thus it is important to keep track of which spells are in there if you happen to have multiple spellbook items. The confusing part is that the rules in the PHB 2014 AND in the UA7 for PHB 2024 both only notes you prepare spells from "your spellbook" while the devs could easily have chosen to clarify that you can utilize multiple sources or specify singular in the UA7. The lack of clarification is either a sign that it wasn't a major concern (likely) or that they consider the wording sufficient (also quite possible).
As for found spellbooks with a set list of spells: I agree, you have to learn those spells unless the item specifically says you know them (often while attuned to the item).
"The Book’s Appearance. Your spellbook is a unique compilation of spells, with its own decorative flourishes and margin notes. It might be a plain, functional leather volume that you received as a gift from your master, a finely bound gilt-edged tome you found in an ancient library, or even a loose collection of notes scrounged together after you lost your previous spellbook in a mishap."
The sidebar on your spellbook certainly says that it doesn't need to be a single item. How your group deals with losing parts of it would be highly group dependent, I think. Then again, any group who actually thinks taking a wizard's spellbook away is OK is probably a group I wouldn't want to play in, even though the rules say it can happen. Without a spellbook, a wizard is practically just a worse sorcerer.
It’s an interesting challenge, narratively speaking, and you should still have an array roughly equal to a sorcerer’s in terms of spells known. Probably best for the DM to get a greenlight if it’s not part of a general “your party has been captured” scenario.
Quick note, rules in regards to spellbooks refer to a wizards spell book, for purposes of balance, in the singular.
How that tome of knowledge is represented by the DM is of course their prerogative.
A wizard can have multiple spell books, but only one at a time can be classified as the wizards main book, and others as backups.
DM’s could also rule the method a wizard uses to encode their spells in a book that is cracked by a different wizard stays the same, and the new wizard improves or retains the same mechanics of encoding so as to make the possibility that the book, if passed around like a hot potato and possibly end up back in the hands of it’s original owner, isn’t immediately a very bad idea.
When characters are in the field, what wizard wouldn’t want to lug a library around, but when in a life or death situation less is better.
See, it happened again. Your spellbook is your collection of recorded spells, yet people confuse a singular book in the game world with that collection. Even though the rules literally tell you that the collection doesn't need to be in a singular book within the game..
There’s no mechanical classification difference between a “main” spellbook and a “backup”; the only question relevant to the class features is whether or not you have the book at hand at the moment when a feature refers to it. If you have two separate spellbooks in your possession, you may prepare any spells from them that you have acquired, either through class progression or through expending the time and materials required to scribe a spell found during the campaign.
Ah, so if a wizard has say three different TCoE wizard spell books all attuned and several such spells prepared from the former books, which book is used when casting the spell?
If your wizard is holding all three books, how can they complete any of the somantic components of spells?
( sure quick object interaction allows swaps, but that makes for more possibilities of grabbing the wrong book unless one is well aware during a critical moment )
Sure, pulling spells from multiple sources in preparation is possible ( DM fiat of course ), but rules say “You prepare the list of wizard spells that are available for you to cast. To do so, choose a number of wizard spells from your spellbook” ( note spellbook is singular, no s attached, and a good chunk of the rules refer to a single book. Thus the implied mechanics simplify that should something happen to that primary book, the wizard was smart enough to have a quick backup, tucked away till needed and hopefully kept updated and ready to use. )
Nothing in the rules say all those spellbooks a wizard ether finds, or takes ( howerever the means ) could not be used to make several backups, only that one copy of those backups can be use at any given time.
All of those TCoE spellbooks require you to hold them to gain the benefits (including the arcane grimiore and the scribes wizard's awakened spellbook - which can be transferred to a magic spellbook).... so.... whichever you are holding?
What rule specifies that a single book must be used, particularly when we keep in mind that at the time of writing the feature there were no items like the Tasha’s books to tie features to a specific item? And, regarding the Tasha’s books, technically you can make S components if the spell also has an M, since they can all be used as foci. There’s no restriction on what spell you can cast using any of them as the focus, only what secondary features inherent to the book can be used. Granted, you would be restricted in what spells you could swap in with their feature, but with the school restriction you can easily get by with just the preloads.
If nothing else, the lack of any language involving the designation of a “main” spellbook and the fact that various points describing potential spellbook appearances allow for the existence of extremely varied forms including leather strips wound around a staff or runestones seems to clearly indicate that the RAI does not confine one to a single contiguous item as the only source a Wizard can prepare spells from.
The DM creates a villain wizard for the players to beat and part of the treasure found is the defeated wizards spell books, several of them.
One book is charred to hell, but something says study this book and use it as a personal weapon.
For a spellbook to a wizard is like a weapon to a fighter.
I have no idea where you’re going with this.
The point is ever since a “spellbook” became a thing ( however one wishes to describe the object classified as a “spellbook” ), DM’s have had means of wizards to have untold numbers of spell books all with varying levels of spells, but it takes time to learn it all.
But it shouldn’t take a lifetime to do so, small sections at a time, when possible, and before you know it, new spells to play with.
Which is literally what the current system allows for. It's easy to get a few spells a day in at the lower levels unless you're in some kind of breakneck campaign that never gives the characters downtime.