[Order of Scribes] Does the Wizardly Quill really NOT remove the gold cost for copying spells? (RAW vs RAI vs common sense)

Quote from Winxalenelcielo >>

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >>

You’re assuming the only thing you need to write out at any point is the spell- logically if learning the spell for yourself requires experimentation you would need to document your experiments, ergo requiring additional ink. However, this is all irrelevant anyways. RAW and RAI both say there is no crunch of specific numbers hidden behind the totals for this; they’re simply flat rates that exist, and are only modified by features that expressly say they modify them. Wizardly Quill does not say that, so it does not. The endless ink is very clearly a ribbon, not a massive hack for spell scribing. Extrapolating an active feature from the negative space of what something doesn’t specifically prohibit is not how the rules work, you need outright proof positive.

 

I see your point and I appreciate the clarity in your reasoning. That said, I’m curious — if one of your players brought this question to your table and made a case based on subclass flavor, and the broader logic around how the subclass functions… how would you handle it?

Would you simply say “the cost stands as written” and leave it at that, or would you be open to adjusting it if the player made a compelling narrative and mechanical argument? Just genuinely interested in how you'd rule it in practice. And if you don't actually play as a DM, would you really make a case against a player that actually thinks the subclass works in the RAI interpretation I presented in my previous summary post? 

 
If I was DM I would absolutely shoot this kind of exploit down. There objectively is not a compelling mechanical argument for this interpretation- the existence of ink is not mechanically relevant, the mechanic is you spend gold and time at X and Y rates to scribe a spell. The feature addresses Y, but it has absolutely no language addressing X as compared both to a later feature in the subclass and to the existing features that do clearly reduce the costs under certain circumstances.

Regarding the narrative, there’s two major points- firstly, the narrative does not exist to cover points like this- fixed costs like these are overt game mechanics dressed up with a bit of fluff. In the abstract worldbuilding sense, there’s no more narrative sense to a specific cost rate being applied to scribing spells than there is to Chromatic Orb requiring a diamond worth a fair bit of gold as the material component with no room for substitution while most other spells require fairly ordinary materials and a single focus can substitute for all of them. That’s just the way things are in D&D, ostensibly because magic just works that way but really because it’s mechanical throttling of performance.

Which segues into the second point- letting players bend or ignore core rules to this degree because they came up with an explanation that sounds good to them is not a genie I care to let out of the bottle at a table. It potentially opens the door to even more arguments for exploits down the line. “Can I try this?” with skills, spells, magic items, etc for a given obstacle or in a primarily cosmetic way is one thing, but rewriting one of the core rules on a permanent basis for one special case that- again- is not at all supported by the overt text of underlying paradigms of D&D is another.

Quote from Winxalenelcielo >>

Quote from Xalthu >>

I agree with ace. Rules do what they say. They do not imply, infer or open themselves to deductions. 
The money and time spent is there as a balancing mechanic. They’re not trying to track how much ink you use. There’s no in-game logic to the rules; there doesn’t have to be. It just is. To me it seems like people are kind of over-analyzing this to invent a rules exploit.

Scribes wizards can put a spell in their spellbook faster, because the subclass description says they can. It doesn’t say anything about cost, so the cost remains the same. 
Then at 10th level, they can make a scroll both faster and cheaper than normal, because that’s what the subclass says they can do. 

 

I get where you’re coming from — and yes, I agree it could be interpreted as an exploit if someone tries to twist it for major advantage. But personally, I don’t see it as a particularly game-breaking one.

The only “advantage” would be saving some gold over time and gaining flexibility in dungeon scenarios — something that feels thematically appropriate for a subclass designed around transcription and magical study. So even if the intent was to leave the cost untouched, the fact that this doubt keeps surfacing suggests the design could’ve been more explicit. It’s not about exploiting a loophole — just about trying to understand how far the subclass flavor was meant to go mechanically.

Just because it’s not game breaking doesn’t mean it’s not an exploit. Yes, PCs usually have more money than they need, and saving a few gp isn’t likely to matter on the long run. Nor is paying the full cost likely to matter very much, as PCs often have more gold than they know what to do with. And also, wizards are the only class that really has to pay a gp cost to use one of their core class abilities, which is kind of strange.

But I disagree with the idea it “keeps surfacing” as an issue. It’s very, very clear and simple. The only reason I see it surfacing is this thread. It seems kind of strange to start a discussion then say, look, people are talking about it and use that as evidence that it’s unclear.

But the question I was trying to answer is does it cost less by RAW. It does not cost less by RAW. Anyone is free to ignore that, of course. And I agree it probably wouldn’t be a game-breaking house rule. I just think it’s important to clarify that it would be a house rule, (especially in the rules forum) so people don’t pester their DMs with “I saw someone on the internet say this so it must be true.”

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >>

If I was DM I would absolutely shoot this kind of exploit down. There objectively is not a compelling mechanical argument for this interpretation- the existence of ink is not mechanically relevant, the mechanic is you spend gold and time at X and Y rates to scribe a spell. The feature addresses Y, but it has absolutely no language addressing X as compared both to a later feature in the subclass and to the existing features that do clearly reduce the costs under certain circumstances. 

Regarding the narrative, there’s two major points- firstly, the narrative does not exist to cover points like this- fixed costs like these are overt game mechanics dressed up with a bit of fluff. In the abstract worldbuilding sense, there’s no more narrative sense to a specific cost rate being applied to scribing spells than there is to Chromatic Orb requiring a diamond worth a fair bit of gold as the material component with no room for substitution while most other spells require fairly ordinary materials and a single focus can substitute for all of them. That’s just the way things are in D&D, ostensibly because magic just works that way but really because it’s mechanical throttling of performance.

Thank you for that. I completely understand why, it just makes sense. And I completely agree. That's the RAW interpretation and you clearly just showed that this is how you like to play D&D. Nothing wrong about that, I personally tend to prefer RAW over RAI too.

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >> 

Which segues into the second point- letting players bend or ignore core rules to this degree because they came up with an explanation that sounds good to them is not a genie I care to let out of the bottle at a table. It potentially opens the door to even more arguments for exploits down the line. “Can I try this?” with skills, spells, magic items, etc for a given obstacle or in a primarily cosmetic way is one thing, but rewriting one of the core rules on a permanent basis for one special case that- again- is not at all supported by the overt text of underlying paradigms of D&D is another.

I understand your concern about maintaining consistency at the table and avoiding slippery slopes — truly, I do. But this isn’t about releasing some chaotic genie from a bottle. It’s about acknowledging that some mechanics, even in official materials, carry ambiguity that DMs and players have to address with logic, theme, and shared intent.

Take for example Speak with Animals. RAW, it only allows you to speak with Beasts. An owlbear, by creature type, is a monstrosity. So technically, RAW, you can’t talk to it with that spell. Yet in practice, RAI is overwhelmingly accepted: most DMs allow it, because the spirit of the spell and the flavor of the owlbear (a hybrid of owl and bear) make the ruling intuitive. There are countless threads, videos, and even official adventures where this is assumed.

So here’s the thing: if most players accept RAI when it comes to the owlbear and the Speak with Animals spell, where RAW is 100% clear, why reject it outright for Wizardly Quill, where the RAW is clearly incomplete and unclear?

This isn’t about players inventing exploits. It’s about navigating rules that are sometimes imprecise or inconsistently applied — and acknowledging that interpretation and table agreement are part of the system. I’m not the only one who sees ambiguity in the Scribes Wizard’s features — a quick search shows this topic has generated discussion for years.

So if RAW is your preference, that’s completely fine. But insisting that no ambiguity exists, and dismissing those who raise questions as looking for exploits, isn't constructive. I’m trying to build a thoughtful dialogue. I do respect one's opinions, I am free not to share them, but that doesn't mean my word counts more than yours and viceversa. 

I really do not understand the fear that players might go to their DMs with questions like this — isn’t that a normal, healthy part of the game? Players bring up a point, the DM considers it, maybe says yes or no, and the story moves forward. What’s the harm in asking? Every doubt is valid, and ultimately it’s the DM’s ruling that decides. Opening a respectful discussion harms no one — but dismissing it outright with a “no, that’s just how it is” can actually do more damage to the spirit of collaborative storytelling. Respect is the basis, of course. 

Once again, I do understand that following RAW, the cost still stands. Please, don't make me write this again, it's getting exhausting. I am just trying to consider everyone's opinion on the matter.

There is no right or wrong, we aren't  D&D designers. We are DMs and players. 

Quote from Xalthu >

Just because it’s not game breaking doesn’t mean it’s not an exploit. Yes, PCs usually have more money than they need, and saving a few gp isn’t likely to matter on the long run. Nor is paying the full cost likely to matter very much, as PCs often have more gold than they know what to do with. And also, wizards are the only class that really has to pay a gp cost to use one of their core class abilities, which is kind of strange.

But I disagree with the idea it “keeps surfacing” as an issue. It’s very, very clear and simple. The only reason I see it surfacing is this thread. It seems kind of strange to start a discussion then say, look, people are talking about it and use that as evidence that it’s unclear.

But the question I was trying to answer is does it cost less by RAW. It does not cost less by RAW. Anyone is free to ignore that, of course. And I agree it probably wouldn’t be a game-breaking house rule. I just think it’s important to clarify that it would be a house rule, (especially in the rules forum) so people don’t pester their DMs with “I saw someone on the internet say this so it must be true.”

 
Please, just do a quick Google search.

I’m just going to reiterate, the RAW is not unclear for the vast majority of players. There’s a small segment who seem to either just fixate on the concept of ink and ignore or believe it supersedes everything else about how the game works or are deliberately cherry picking which parts of the rules they acknowledge to justify their exploit. The RAW is clear- a feature does what it says it does and nothing more. The quill does not say it interacts with the gold cost, ergo it does not. This is not the new Hide rules where pretty much no one can actually wrap their head around RAW in a way that creates a rational outcome. An overwhelming majority of people who’ve participated in this thread have a consensus on the RAW and RAI here. If you prefer another interpretation that’s your prerogative, but insisting that the rules are ambiguous feels a lot like bad faith at this juncture.

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >>

I’m just going to reiterate, the RAW is not unclear for the vast majority of players. There’s a small segment who seem to either just fixate on the concept of ink and ignore or believe it supersedes everything else about how the game works or are deliberately cherry picking which parts of the rules they acknowledge to justify their exploit. The RAW is clear- a feature does what it says it does and nothing more. The quill does not say it interacts with the gold cost, ergo it does not. This is not the new Hide rules where pretty much no one can actually wrap their head around RAW in a way that creates a rational outcome. An overwhelming majority of people who’ve participated in this thread have a consensus on the RAW and RAI here. If you prefer another interpretation that’s your prerogative, but insisting that the rules are ambiguous feels a lot like bad faith at this juncture.

Hey, I think we’ve reached a point where this is no longer a productive discussion. I brought up a rule that players find ambiguous — and I did so in good faith, to explore the topic, not to “exploit” anything. You’ve made your stance very clear, and that’s fine. But at this point, it feels like your replies have shifted from discussion to condescension.

We agree on the RAW. Where we differ is interpretation, and that’s normal — it’s what the RAI discussion is for. Just because someone doesn’t share your view doesn’t mean they’re bending the rules or looking for loopholes. 

That said, I won’t be responding to your posts anymore. I’m genuinely sorry if this thread upset you so much.
We’re all here to play the same game. Let’s try not to turn rules debates into moral crusades. 

Here I was, hoping that this newish thread on this topic would give me some more information and insight on "What does it costs to scribe a spell into an OoS Wizard's spell book with their Wizardly Quill and why?" Silly me!

I agree with those who said that this debate (or war if you prefer) will continue ad nauseam unless WotC publishes some clarification. Which may never happen.

I also completely agree with Winxalenelielo on all points. I think I am correctly summarizing some of Win's views shown in this post by saying:

1. The cost being 50gp per level is a defendable interpretation of RAW as there is no mention of a reduced cost
2. The cost being nothing is a defendable interpretation of RAI based on the internal consistent logic of how "stuff" works in a fantasy world created in our minds
3. The cost being nothing might even be a defendable interpretation of RAW depending on how you look at the various pertinent rules and how you apply them. Though there is room for a lot of debate which is why threads like this one exist.

The question I would really like answered by other players of the game in order to make the game more fun for me (because I can then imagine what my OoS Wizard character is doing) is: If, at your table, you go with option 1, what is happening with the gold being spent? What is the Wizard actually doing?

Most of the responses to this question I see basically gloss over this and seem to imply that it doesn't matter or "who cares"; It costs what it costs because that's what the rules say. Which is frustrating to some (including me) because we want to know what is happening and how it works. It's not that we NEED the cost be be free necessarily, we just want to have logic consistency within the fantasy world.

Which brings me to another thing which I agree with Winx. Simply having the Wizardly Quill "eat" the gold and turn it into whatever is needed to scribe the spell into the book does work well. But, this is literally the only answer that I have seen that makes any sense to me.

However, I am curious if other folks could come with other possibilities that work well because while that one is good, it is a bit "boring".

Quote from Dwayden >>

It costs what it costs because that's what the rules say. Which is frustrating to some (including me) because we want to know what is happening and how it works. It's not that we NEED the cost be be free necessarily, we just want to have logic consistency within the fantasy world.

If you play a Scribes wizard, it costs 50 gp per level for the various materials that go into transcribing a spell into your spellbook. How you want to flavor those materials, and "how internally consistent" you want it to be, is entirely your business -- see, for example, the Phantasm/Hellraiser riff on a "spellbook" I posted earlier in the thread. The cost isn't going to change regardless of the flavor, but in that concept's case the materials would be rare metals and perhaps powdered gemstones as I add new rings to the sphere

Maybe you decide you don't do any transcription at all, and your awakened spellbook takes care of it for you while you dictate. Maybe you decide the "ink" required is the blood of rare creatures, because your spellbook is actually a bound demon or fiend. Maybe it's a magical sticker book. It doesn't matter. The cost doesn't change

Quote from Winxalenelcielo >>

 

Order of Scribes is a subclass built around the fantasy of a wizard-scholar who collects, manages, and manipulates spells through written knowledge. They can copy a spell in 2 minutes per level, a feature that strongly suggests a unique in-field utility: finding a scroll or spellbook in the middle of an adventure — a dungeon, a ruined tower, a battlefield — and being able to immediately copy that spell into their spellbook.

But here’s the problem: that scenario doesn’t work unless you have access to 50 gp worth of “rare inks and materials” on the spot.

You can't hand over coins to the cave walls and get special ink.
You can't visit a merchant in the middle of an extraplanar ruin.
You can't fulfill the class fantasy of being a prepared, agile spell archivist without infrastructure that simply isn’t available in most adventuring contexts.

So what’s the point of copying a spell in 2 minutes if you still need to wait until you get back to town anyway? There's really no difference between 2 minutes and 2 hours if the whole process has to be conducted off-game!

 I have an potential solution.  You can copy spells in the field if you have the "rare inks and materials" in your backpack.  Makes sense to me that Order of Scribes character would always have a supply of that on hand right?

How scribing components are acquired versus a character's actual physical position in the setting has always been something that's left to the DM and player to sort out or handwave away.

Also, plenty of campaigns do indeed have spaces of time where characters can either go out and spend time on roleplay scenes to advance the plot between dungeon crawls, so this kind of compression can still be relevant outside of a dungeon.

At the end of the day, the quill was always a ribbon feature to the meat of the Awakened Spellbook, so trying to squeeze utility on the level of erasing or discounting scribing costs is really pushing beyond the pale, imo.

If it both removed the cost and reduced the time, I'd never take another subclass. Even if you removed all the other sub class features. What makes a wizard is their extensive spell book and ability to swap daily. They have the best spell list and are the only arcane class that can swap daily. Removing the cost would be a massive boon in any campaign where you are not showered in money, one so big I can not comprehend them not explicitly mentioning it if that was the RAI. 

Quote from AntonSirius >>

Maybe you decide you don't do any transcription at all, and your awakened spellbook takes care of it for you while you dictate. Maybe you decide the "ink" required is the blood of rare creatures, because your spellbook is actually a bound demon or fiend. Maybe it's a magical sticker book. It doesn't matter. The cost doesn't change

Those are fun flavors, but they do not address the core problem of how in the middle of a dungeon are you going to exchange the 100 pieces of gold you found in the chest along side the scroll of invisibility for "the blood of a rare creature" or whatever other materials you need. Having the quill eat the gold directly makes more logical sense, its just a tad boring.

Quote from MyDudeicus >>

If it both removed the cost and reduced the time, I'd never take another subclass. Even if you removed all the other sub class features. What makes a wizard is their extensive spell book and ability to swap daily. They have the best spell list and are the only arcane class that can swap daily. Removing the cost would be a massive boon in any campaign where you are not showered in money, one so big I can not comprehend them not explicitly mentioning it if that was the RAI. 

 I humbly disagree. All wizards, Scribes included, are limited to the spells they can prepare. So they cannot cast any spell from their book at any time. All wizards can only copy spells they can find. I've done entire homebrew campaigns where there were NO scrolls found or wizards killed so their spell book could be plagiarized. Furthermore, the new "Savant" rules give wizards extra free spells of their school. Scribes don't get this, they must rely on finding spells to scribe to keep up with Evokers or Illusionists with regards to total number of spells in their book.

Quote from Dwayden >>

Those are fun flavors, but they do not address the core problem of how in the middle of a dungeon are you going to exchange the 100 pieces of gold you found in the chest along side the scroll of invisibility for "the blood of a rare creature" or whatever other materials you need. Having the quill eat the gold directly makes more logical sense, its just a tad boring.

How are you going to find rare inks worth 50-plus GP to cast teleportation circle so you can get out of the dungeon? Where will you find a pearl of sufficient value to cast identify? Oh, right, you bring them with you into the dungeon

If any class should understand how important it is to stock up before you go into the dungeon, it's a wizard. (Unless it's a cleric, who's right there with them on the shopping trip looking for revivify diamonds)

Quote from AntonSirius >>

How are you going to find rare inks worth 50-plus GP to cast teleportation circle so you can get out of the dungeon? Where will you find a pearl of sufficient value to cast identify? Oh, right, you bring them with you into the dungeon

If any class should understand how important it is to stock up before you go into the dungeon, it's a wizard. (Unless it's a cleric, who's right there with them on the shopping trip looking for revivify diamonds)

 So, you would not to allow a wizard to scribe a scroll unless they already had the "stuff" or access to a shop? Having spell components be a "thing" is there in order to limit access to certain spells. For example, if a DM wants to limit the ability for folks to cast things like Revivify or Resurrection they can limit the availability of diamonds. Even Identify can be limited by the DM saying there are no pearls worth 100gp available if they so choose because that spell is pretty darn powerful. Are you saying OoS wizards should be limited to scribing any and all spells based on availability of materials? I find that unnecessarily restrictive. Pretend I am a level 1 wizard starting an adventure hoping to find a couple of scrolls to scribe (I dunno, for sake of argument let's say Burning Hands and Knock)? How can I buy the 150 gp worth of stuff at level 1 when I only start with about 50gp at most? So, I start my adventure with say 15 gp in my pocket. The party finds a Scroll of Burning Hands and 100 gp at some point. RAW says I need 2 minutes and 50 gp to scribe that scroll into my spell book. Unlike before I started, I now have the money needed. What I don't have is a shop to buy stuff from. I interpret RAW as simply saying I need a certain amount of time and gold, but not specific "stuff". Contrast that to the spells you mentioned, RAW specifically says you need a diamond worth 300 gp or ink worth 50gp. If RAW says a wizard cannot scribe a spell unless they had the money before the adventure started or access to a shop after they get the money, then as others have pointed out the fact that a Scribe wizard can copy a spell in minutes rather than hours is kind of useless. Again, the best flavor that makes logistical sense (to me) is to have the quill magically turn the gold into whatever is needed to scribe the spell. I just find that ... bland.

But, I think you may be misunderstanding why I posted on this thread. I don't what to argue about the topic anymore, that has been done to death on this thread already. I posted for 2 reasons:

1. I like what Winxalenelcielo said and how they said it
2. I am looking for ideas, suggestions, inspirations or what have you on how I personally could flavor a Scribe wizard scribing a spell in minutes using the gold needed. Ones that are more interesting than the quill "eating" the gold.

Quote from Dwayden >>

Are you saying OoS wizards should be limited to scribing any and all spells based on availability of materials?

Of course. Any wizard should be limited to scribing based on availability of materials -- unless you're playing in a campaign that just hand-waves those sorts of restrictions in general

The advantage that OoS wizards have when it comes to scribing is that they do it quicker. That's all

Quote from Dwayden >>

Pretend I am a level 1 wizard starting an adventure hoping to find a couple of scrolls to scribe (I dunno, for sake of argument let's say Burning Hands and Knock)? How can I buy the 150 gp worth of stuff at level 1 when I only start with about 50gp at most? So, I start my adventure with say 15 gp in my pocket. The party finds a Scroll of Burning Hands and 100 gp at some point. RAW says I need 2 minutes and 50 gp to scribe that scroll into my spell book. Unlike before I started, I now have the money needed. What I don't have is a shop to buy stuff from.

So you hang onto the scroll until you get back into a town with a magic shop. Gosh, such a hardship

Also, what the heck kind of introductory first-level adventure are you on that you not only find a very useful spell scroll right out of the gate, but it's in loot you get prior to defeating the end boss and returning to town? Talk about a Monty Haul campaign. Sheesh

Alright, now you're just being condescending. So, I will no longer reply to you as my patience has worn thin.

Quote from Dwayden >>

Alright, now you're just being condescending. So, I will no longer reply to you as my patience has worn thin.

I have played plenty of wizards, going back to the red box/AD&D days when they were called magic-users. I cannot recall ever finding a spell scroll on my initial adventure at first level. So I admit I found your scenario a bit... far-fetched

Even if it did happen, I don't see what the big deal is about having to wait until the end of your very first adventure to scribe that scroll into your spellbook

Okay, I lied. I will respond because I want to point out to everyone that might read this thread that Death House (an official WotC publication designed to level you up from 1 to 3) has a spell book with a couple of level 1 or 2 spells (DM discretion). There is also some really valuable jewelry. I literally ran this a while back playing as a Cleric. The Wizard in the group had prepared Witch Bolt as her big damage spell. Once you're in Death House you cannot get out until you go through it. The DM felt bad for her because the end boss is immune to lightning damage. To help with this he had one of the jewelry items have a pearl worth 100gp. This allowed her to cast Identify on the spellbook as a ritual, thus not taking a spell slot and then learn Ray of Sickness from the book.

Quote from Dwayden >>

Quote from AntonSirius >>

How are you going to find rare inks worth 50-plus GP to cast teleportation circle so you can get out of the dungeon? Where will you find a pearl of sufficient value to cast identify? Oh, right, you bring them with you into the dungeon

If any class should understand how important it is to stock up before you go into the dungeon, it's a wizard. (Unless it's a cleric, who's right there with them on the shopping trip looking for revivify diamonds)

 So, you would not to allow a wizard to scribe a scroll unless they already had the "stuff" or access to a shop? Having spell components be a "thing" is there in order to limit access to certain spells. For example, if a DM wants to limit the ability for folks to cast things like Revivify or Resurrection they can limit the availability of diamonds. Even Identify can be limited by the DM saying there are no pearls worth 100gp available if they so choose because that spell is pretty darn powerful. Are you saying OoS wizards should be limited to scribing any and all spells based on availability of materials? I find that unnecessarily restrictive. Pretend I am a level 1 wizard starting an adventure hoping to find a couple of scrolls to scribe (I dunno, for sake of argument let's say Burning Hands and Knock)? How can I buy the 150 gp worth of stuff at level 1 when I only start with about 50gp at most? So, I start my adventure with say 15 gp in my pocket. The party finds a Scroll of Burning Hands and 100 gp at some point. RAW says I need 2 minutes and 50 gp to scribe that scroll into my spell book. Unlike before I started, I now have the money needed. What I don't have is a shop to buy stuff from. I interpret RAW as simply saying I need a certain amount of time and gold, but not specific "stuff". Contrast that to the spells you mentioned, RAW specifically says you need a diamond worth 300 gp or ink worth 50gp. If RAW says a wizard cannot scribe a spell unless they had the money before the adventure started or access to a shop after they get the money, then as others have pointed out the fact that a Scribe wizard can copy a spell in minutes rather than hours is kind of useless. Again, the best flavor that makes logistical sense (to me) is to have the quill magically turn the gold into whatever is needed to scribe the spell. I just find that ... bland.

But, I think you may be misunderstanding why I posted on this thread. I don't what to argue about the topic anymore, that has been done to death on this thread already. I posted for 2 reasons:

1. I like what Winxalenelcielo said and how they said it
2. I am looking for ideas, suggestions, inspirations or what have you on how I personally could flavor a Scribe wizard scribing a spell in minutes using the gold needed. Ones that are more interesting than the quill "eating" the gold.

 Your complaint about not having 150 gp at 1st level falls on deaf ears.  Instant gratification is not part of this game .  The struggle of not having enough money to buy what you want is a key motivator in D&D.  Since the invention of D&D, DMs have been advised to keep the PC's relatively cash poor, via such devices as having to pay money to a trainer to level up.  Dwayden's complaint is akin to a player with a 1st level fighter whining about how they don't have enough money to upgrade their starting armor of Chainmail to Splint Armor (200gp) when at first level they only have 60 gp to start.

Go adventure....get the 150gp from monsters you kill or whatever...then copy your spells!